No. 9 (September 1994)

On Articulation Between Pre-Collegiate Level and Postseconary Level (2)The Comparison of Course Contents and Objectives Between High Schools andColleges: The Survey of Teachers and Students
Takuo Kinoshita, Nobuko Chikamatsu, Miyuki Chikamatsu, Waunita Kinoshita
Urbana High School, Urbana, Illinois
This is an extract from the paper presented by Ms Nobuko Chikamatsu at the Sixth Annual Lake Erie Teachers ofJapanese Conference at Purdue University, April 1994. The proceedings are available at Yukiko Abe Hatasa,
Department of Asian Languages and Literature, University of Iowa, 653 Philips Hall, Iowa City, IA 52242 or
Kazumi Hatasa, Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures, Purdue University, Stanley Coulter Hall, West
Lafayette, IN 47907.

O

ften as high school teachers talk with former
students or with colleagues on theuniversity/college level we hear about someof the concerns that students have who havecontinued to study Japanese at the college level. As
the number of high schools which offer Japanese
language courses continues to grow so does ourconcern for the successful transition of our students.
Some of the concerns we hear about include students
who took Japanese in high school but do not continue
on the college level. We are concerned about the
number of students who drop out of Japanese
language courses during their studies on the college
level. We also hear that some university colleagues
feel that some students have not been well preparedfor continued study at the college level. We
sometimes hear of students who took some Japaneseon the high school level and then were required toenroll in beginning Japanese on the college level. We
felt the limited information on the transition between
high school and college and some lack ofcommunication between teachers on both levels may
result in misunderstanding and, as there are
increasing numbers of students in Japanese language
courses, we undertook this survey to help focus on
the transition situation that exists. This survey was
conducted by the staff of the Japanese language
program at Urbana High School, Urbana, Illinois,from January through March 1994.

The survey consisted of two questionnaires: a teacher
questionnaire and a student questionnaire. The
teacher questionnaires were distributed to seventeen
high schools and twenty-one universities/colleges inthe state of Illinois which offer Japanese language
classes. The student questionnaires were sent to fortyfour college students who had taken Japanesepreviously in high school and who were taking
Japanese in the 1994 spring semester at the college
level. The questionnaires contained questions aboutteaching materials, class enrollments, course objectives, and the emphasis given in class, the teaching ofkana and kanji, and culture. Seven high school
teachers and thirteen college professors returned thequestionnaires. Responses were received fromtwenty-one students.
Information Gained from the Survey
Transition: Table 1 shows the number of years ofJapanese language study students had completed
during high school and their placement in college
level classes. No one was placed in the second year
Japanese at the college level even after they hadstudied for two years in high school. After three years
of Japanese at the high school level, half of them
could go to the second year level. After four years ofJapanese only one student could skip the first year ofJapanese but two of those who had completed four
years were placed in the basic elementary course at
the college level.

Design of Survey

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
1/17

Table 2: Years of Study at the High School Leveland the First Course at College (Yes/No)

Preparation: The students were also asked what they
thought would have helped in preparing for thecollege classes. The results are indicated in Figure 2.
Many students indicated that they felt they could
have learned more kanji.

In order to look more closely at this issue we asked
the students if they thought the Japanese language
program at the high school level prepared them foradvanced Japanese at the college level. Interestingly
half of them answered "yes" and the other half
answered "no" as indicated in Figure 1. Anotherquestion here is whether the students who could not
go to the second year level at college tended toanswer "no" or if they felt that their high school
program was insufficient. Because of the limited
number of subjects inferential statistical analysis was
not conducted but students who answered "yes" didnot seem to skip the elementary course more often
than those who answered "no" as indicated in Table
2:
Preparation:
The students were also asked what
they thought would have helped in preparing for thecollege classes. The results are indicated in Figure 2.
Many students indicated that they felt they could
have learned more kanji.

Figure 3 indicates the average number of kanji
characters introduced in each institution as indicatedby the teacher’s questionnaires. As the level becomes
higher, more kanji characters are introduced withsome major universities requiring as many as 395

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
2/17

during the second year. Two high schools do notteach kanji at all during the first year and some highschools indicated 'lust recognition" as compared tocolleges which usually require recognition andproduction. Comments on the survey indicated thatcollege students think they did not learn enough kanji
in high school.

Japanese program is more demanding and requires
them to study more. The graph showing enjoymentshows that about half of the students enjoy theuniversity Japanese more and they stated that themain reason is that the college courses are much
more demanding and challenging. They also
indicated that the college Japanese seems to fit theirgoals better than high school Japanese. However, thefeeling towards the teachers shows a little differencein that about 80% of the students think that the highschool teachers were more helpful. This might bebecause of the intimacy due to the smaller size ofclasses or more personal involvement at the highschool level. However, it may also be possible thatcollege instructors' expectations for the students fromhigh school or misunderstanding of the purpose of the
program of the high school Japanese courses might
give the students a negative impression of the college
instructors and make them feel that college
instructors are less approachable.

Students Feelings/Attitudes: In the student's questionnaire students were asked to compare the Japanese
programs at their former high school and at theirpresent college as shown in Table 3.

The results are summarized in the following pie
graphs (Figure 4). The first three pie graphs showthat about 90% of the students think that their college
The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
3/17

they did indicate that they included cultural study intheir courses. When asked how they included cultural
studies in their classrooms all stated that except foroccasional viewing of Japanese videos and movies,
they did not include any special "cultural activity" intheir courses but all answered that their students werereceiving appropriate information on the culture in
the context of language lessons. Culture is introduced
to explain the use of Japanese language and facilitate
the understanding of the language in culture, forexample, new grammar features or vocabulary are
introduced in the contexts of Japanese culture.

Teacher's Goals/Objectives: Following is the list ofcourse objectives for first year Japanese course asstated by teachers at their institutions. They areordered from high frequency to low frequency:
1st YearColleges- basic Japanese grammar- basic 4 skills- kana&kanji- functional use- pronunciation- vocabulary- simple conversation
High Schools- Japanese culture & society- simple everyday conversation- hiragana & katakana- (few) kanji- self introduction & description- greeting- basic grammar- vocabulary related to the daily life
In the above list, a clear difference is the emphasis on
culture in the high schools while college teachers do
not list the teaching of culture. Students, in theirquestionnaires, stated that this was one of the maindifferences between high school and college
programs. None of the college teachers consideredcultural study as one of their course objectives but

Another important difference indicated in the
responses was that a/the goal in a high school class isfor the students to be able to participate in daily
conversation, greeting, self-introduction, talking
about themselves, their friends and family anddiscussing daily activities. Therefore, grammaticalitems, topics, expressions, formality and vocabulary
are selected based on what the student wants to say.
In the college responses the four basic skills andbasic grammar are listed as the goals for the courses,
thus, the focus is on the development of linguistic
skill, i.e., grammar. The order of presentation ofgrammatical items is usually from simple tocomplicated in order to learn from basic to advanced
Japanese. One student stated, "At high school welearned what we wanted to say, but at college welearn what the book says."
Conclusion/implications: This survey/research islimited because of the small number of subjects and it
is simply a description of the situation they perceivein the transition from high school to college level
Japanese language classes. Students from high school
Japanese programs do not seem to get into the highlevels at college, despite the number of years they
have taken in high school and many of them areplaced at the beginning level. However, for thosestudents, high school Japanese was not always
insufficient nor college Japanese too tough. They
understand the differences in programs between highschool and college. They enjoyed high school
Japanese, focusing strongly on cultural aspects.
Although college Japanese is fast and demanding,they like the challenge. Students do not have a strong
negative attitude toward either college or high school
Japanese.
Teachers, however, may need to recognize the importance of teaching kanji at the high school level inorder to better prepare their students for the college
level. They must also understand the differences incourse objectives, emphasis, and the language taught
in each level. High School teachers need to give
The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
4/17

students appropriate guidance that college Japanese
may be different from what they have learned in highschool.

mean respecting them for what they have learned at
the high school level even though it may not bedirectly related to "linguistic skills".

College instructors should understand the high school
program, what the goals are, what the high school
students have learned, and should not expect the highschool programs to be designed for their own college
program. They should give the students credit forwhat they have done in high school. This does notmean placing the students in advanced levels but does

The present study cannot provide any straightforward answers or solutions, but it at least will
provide both college and high school teachers withsome helpful information in understanding what isgoing on in each level and how students feel about it.
It can be one stimulus for further research anddiscussion.

Making of Textbooks (1)On the Making of a Japanese Textbook
Seiichi Makino, Princeton UniversityIt appears that practically every serious,
experienced Japanese language instructor musthave felt at one point of his or her teaching career
the urge or desire to write a language textbook. If
everyone's urge becomes a reality there should be anenormous number of textbooks, but obviously theurge alone will not, and should not, qualify you towrite a textbook. So here we have a relatively limited
number of textbooks, albeit epoch-making
elementary
textbooks
aresurprisingly(or
understandably?) few.
I for one have had the urge to write a novel, of allthings, at one point or two, three points in my life,and I still have that urge in a moderate quantity at thesecret corner of my mind, but my sober mind keeps
telling me that I am not qualified to write a novel.
However, at one point, actually about ten years back,I had that urge to write a textbook and not only that, I
had the nerve to believe that I am qualified to write
an elementary Japanese textbook! And here I am
writing it with Yukiko & Kazumi Hatasa. We are stillwriting it hoping that some day it will take a boundbook form. Retroactively, I think I have to reflect
upon what sort of qualifications are required of me tobecome a textbook writer. Suppose you had that
insurmountable urge to write an elementary textbook
now. What do you think will cause the original urge
to transform to an actually process of writing a
textbook and to eventually grow into a tangible
textbook?

As far as I know, nobody has directly discussed a setof qualifications for writing an elementary Japanese
textbook. But A Framework for Introductory
Japanese Language Curricula in American HighSchools and Colleges, National Foreign Language
Center, Washington D.C., 1993, pp.38-42 is giving us
a very useful set of criteria for evaluating texts andsupplementary teaching materials. So, every textbook
writer can now refer to them to see if he or she isdoing the right kind of things. A Japanese language
instructor who can produce a textbook that will
satisfy the Framework's proposed criteria can becalled a qualified textbook writer. Instead of
reproducing here the entire set of criteria I willsummarize them here as a set of generalized issues
that should be clearly understood by any textbook
writer. (1) cultural and linguistic authenticity, (2)explanation or sequencing of linguistic structures, (3)socio-linguistic matters, (4) priority of speaking andlistening skills, (5) writing system - to use kanasystem or not to use it from the beginning, (6)spiraling and review of linguistic content, (7) apedagogical approach -structural or post-structural?,(8) a pedagogically correct syllabus-a grammarsyllabus, a task-syllabus, or a vocabulary-syllabus, asituation-syllabus, an integrative syllabus, among
many others. Each issue involves solved andunsolved problems and may lead to different
interpretations which in turn lead to different types oftextbooks, but it is indispensable for us to have our

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
5/17

sound understanding of the issues, and translate them
judiciously into a textbook. Every textbook is a bookof declaration of the author's pedagogical views. In
addition to the listed issues I would like to add thefollowing: (1) clear sense of the need of the learner,(2) highly contextualized task-oriented exercises, (3)goal-consciousness of the learner's proficiency level,(4) clear understanding of conspiratorial relationshipbetween the target language and culture, (5)knowledge of technological applications, (6)awareness of both language/culture-specific aspects
and universal aspects of Japanese linguistic andcultural structures, (7) understanding of pedagogicalimplications from research on second language
acquisition and from pedagogy-friendly general andJapanese linguistics, among others.
In view of the fact that the majority of the learners of
the Japanese language will never get to Japan, it
seems mandatory for the textbook to give them somesimulated experience of living in Japan. For that
purpose it is better to use a target cultural setting inwhich a realistically "con-textualized" and "intertextualized" story develops. (Here I am creating theterm "inter-textualized" in the technical sense ofinterconnectedness among texts in a textbook.) The

textbook is used not only by the learner but by the
instructor. I believe that a textbook should be written
by an experienced Japanese instructor whose
viewpoint is very empathetic with the instructor andthe learners at work in classroom.
It sounds as if I were out of my mind if I say this now,
but towards the 21st century the textbook writer,
native or nonnative, should have a clearer view ofJapanese as a "common language" (as distinct froman "international language") that can exist apart fromthe Japanese people. A textbook writer should be
prepared to reflect a socio-linguistic reality in Japanin which Japanese is now being spoken among people
whose native
languageis
not mutuallycomprehensible but for whom Japanese is a"commons language" for communication. In otherwords, the Japanese language is on the brink ofbecoming out of Japanese hands (or mouths?). A
foreigner's use of Japanese language with a native
Japanese may still be a prototypical use of Japanese
language in a textbook for the time being, but I
believe that before long in the 21st century, a textbook writer will start to reflect that socio-linguisticchange of Japanese language in his or her textbook.

TANABATA: THE STAR FESTIVAL
Voices from a Changing Japan
Shigeru Miyagawa
Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyIn response to the need for innovative instructional
materials for Japanese language and culture, MIT
has embarked on the production of an interactive
documentary about Japan for language and culture
instruction for college and secondary education.
Titled Tanabata: The Star Festival-Voices from a
Changing Japan, the interactive documentary
combines interviews with Japanese from all walks oflife in natural cultural settings with graphics andtextual information about the language and culture.
The video footage was filmed in the summer of 1992
in Hiratsuka, in Kanagawa Prefecture, by Shigeru
Miyagawa and Michael Roper, a professional
interactive documentary filmmaker trained at the
MIT Media Lab. The documentary is intended to givethe students an opportunity to experience Japanfirsthand through a multitude of spontaneous interviews with people about their lives. A wide variety ofpeople are interviewed, including:• a storeowner who explains the elaborate
decorations he is preparing for the Tanabata Star
Festival, for which Hiratsuka is renowned• a woman in her sixties who talks about her
experiences during World War IIa Shinto priest who takes the viewer on a tour of his
Shinto shrine• a woman at the fish market speaking about thedifficult life of a fishing family and her hopes for her
child• a family who run a fruit shop and observe changes
in the neighborhood and the kinds of customers whocome in
The video is different from a conventional, linear
documentary in that the learner may accessinformation in a variety of ways, often using the same
piece of information many times. The interviews are

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
6/17

accessed through a Macintosh computer interface
which links the video material with a rich database of
linguistics and cultural information. The computerinterface is based on software developed at theLaboratory for Advanced Technology in the
Humanities at MIT specifically for instruction inforeign language and culture. The students will heable to study the native speech of these contemporary
Japanese people with the help of a multitude ofcomputer-based linguistic aids, including:a Japanese script transcription of the interviews,
which runs in synchronization with the interviews
and can he shown or hidden on demand.
• an English/Japanese dictionary linked to thetranscription, so that words in the transcription can heselected and clicked on and their English definition
will appear.
• an English translation of the interviews that runs
like the Japanese transcription as a synchronized"subtitle" and that students may view as needed.
• a video controller that allows the student to stop theinterview at any time, and listen to a particularutterance as often as s/he wishes.
A multitude of important culture, social, andhistorical themes appear in the interviews, connecting
one person's observations with another's For example,
Japanese family structure is illustrated in theinterviews at the fish market and at the fruit shop,
including the crucial importance of the oldest son in a
family business In two separate interviews a woman
in her sixties and a male store owner in his fifties
describe the experiences during World War II. Manyinterviews include information on business, festivals,
transportation, education, and other cultural issues.
The computer interface will allow students to follow
these themes from one interview to another in orderto get a richer view of the topics. It will also provide
detailed textual and photographic information which
will explain Japanese history and culture to an
American student.

Students can also navigate through the information
by moving through a computer-generated, threedimensional map of Hiratsuka. In this way theyexperience the psychological feeling of immersion in
the place, as if they were not so much studying Japan
as visiting Japan. The learner can move through thespace, and select in which direction to proceed inorder to access the interviews. The access interfaces
for the interviews are placed within the 3-D model in
the actual locations where they took place.
The multiple access that the computer allows-by
interview, by place, by theme, and by time periodalso with the rich cultural notes and the linguistic aids
will allow Tanabata to be used at beginning,intermediate, and advanced levels of language
learning, as well as a tool for teaching Japaneseculture. A beta version is presently being tested at
MIT and a high school in Boston, Boston Latin
Academy. We will expand the test sites next year toinclude more secondary schools.
The Tanabata project has received support from the
MIT NEC Corporation Fund for Research in
Computers and Communications, MIT's Center for
Education Computing Initiative, U.S. Department of
Education, National Endowment for the Humanities,
the Consortium on Language Teaching and Learning,
and ASCII Corporation. We plan to make it available
as a CD-ROM program during 1996. It will run on alow-end Macintosh with a color monitor and a 2x
CD-ROM player. We hope to introduce an IBM
version immediately afterwards.
Tanabata is being produced by the member of the
MIT Japanese Language and Culture Program andthe Laboratory for Advanced Technology in the
Humanities. LATH has also developed multimedia
programs in French, Spanish, and Shakespeare, and is
now embarking on a project in German.

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
7/17

Japanese Language Textbook
Compilation for High SchoolStudents in America
John Young
Distinguished University Professor Emeritus
Seton Hall University

T

he Goals 2,000: Educate America Act deals
with what school children (k-12) ought to betaught in nine core subjects, including foreign
language. In seeking to develop content standards forthis purpose, the US Department of Education has
defined content standards as "What a student should
know and be able to do." They describe "theknowledge, skills, and understanding that students
should have in order to attain high levels ofcompetency in challenging subject matter."(Department of Education, 1994, p.2).
In order to define "what foreign language education
should be," and "establish its place in the curriculum",the following goals have been identified by the K- 12
Student Standards Task Force established in 1993 inconjunction with the Goals 2,000:
Educate America Act:
1. communicating across cultures;
2. developing insight into one's own language andculture;3. acquiring new knowledge and connecting withother disciplines;
4. participating more fully in the community andglobal marketplace; and,5. demonstrating knowledge of the artifacts,
expressions and traditions of the target cultures.
(Draper, 1994, p.7)
Draper also points out that these goals indicate a"shift from language as the content of instruction tolanguage as access to the content of instruction." (p.7)
Therefore foreign language instruction, including
those for Japanese language, must develop
communication-based instructional programs byemphasizing the importance of communicativecompetence, and at the same time, it must satisfy all
the five goals specified above, which "cover motor
skill, social and emotional development, learning
approaches, language usage and cognitive as well as
general knowledge." (California State Department of
Education, 1989) Through Japanese language
proficiency development, students need to acquire

civic, cultural, and intellectual benefits as specified
by the State of California. (California State
Department of Education, 1989, p.4)
Kawaijuku has commissioned this writer and Ms.
Yuriko Uchiyama Rollins to write a textbook entitledJapanese for Young English Speakers. We have taken
the following steps in compiling this textbook series,
a volume of which has been completed. National
Foreign Language Center's booklet on framework has
been very useful for us. (National Foreign Language
Center 1993, Chapter 1)
1. The philosophy of foreign language education isbased on the communicative approach. Practicalactivities are provided which fulfill the aspirations of
this philosophy.
2. All goals must be achieved throughcommunication-based instruction. Topics, functions,forms, and vocabulary will be introduced withincontexts and acquired through performance based
activities.
3. Everything must be learned in Japanese language
within a Japanese cultural context. Students will learn
to recognize differences in worldviews, customs,
beliefs, and social conventions. This leads to crosscultural communication and understand as well as
critical thinking.
4. Not only the threshold competence appropriate forhigh school students, but contents for other academic
subjects must be introduced as sheltered subject
matter.
5. Learning strategies, including learning styles will
be involved during the course of Japanese language
study.
6. Students must be helped in developing problem
solving skills.
7. All of the above will be learned through activities
that take place both in and out of the classroom.
In conclusion, Japanese language learning will not
only help students to acquire communicative skills,
but also through language proficiency activities
interest in studying other subjects, study skills,
problem solving competence and the critical thinking
The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
8/17

abilities will be acquired. Learners could become
more broad-minded, appreciative of other's cultures,less dogmatic, less egocentric and less ethnocentricand become more empathetic.
If we stick to our communicative-plus approach indealing with language learning problems, the study ofJapanese will be here to stay. It is the hope andexpectation of the authors that these efforts willcontribute to the search for mutual understanding andpeace in the community and the world.
Draper, J.B. (1994) "National standards in foreign

language education: Answering the questions", in
ERICICLL News Bulletin, Vol.17, No.2.
California Stare Board of Education. (1989). Foreign
Language Framework: for California Schools
Kindergarten Through Grate Twelve.
US Department of Education (1994), High Standards
for all: putting excellence in education.
National Foreign Language Center (1993),A
Framework for Introductory Japanese language
Curricula in American High Schools and Colleges

Report on the Second Princeton Japanese Pedagogy Workshop
Seiichi Makino
Princeton UniversityT

he 2nd Princeton Japanese Pedagogy
Workshop was held on May 14-15, 1994, The
workshop was organized by Professor Seiichi
Makino of Princeton University and was attended byseventy-two participants. We would like to express
our deep appreciation on for the funding from theJapan Foundation U.S. Office of Education and Ivy
League Consortium. The keynote speaker wasProfessor Ken'ichi Ujiie of Washington & Lee
University, who spoke on 'Modern Technology in theJapanese Language Classroom". The following is alist of papers read at the Workshop, all of which areincluded in the proceedings published in May, 1994.
Those of you who want to get a free copy of theProceedings, please send Seiichi Makino a check of$3.00, postage payable to Princeton University.
Fumiko Asari Nazikain (Princeton University)
Pragmatics of Japanese Particle yo ne
Yoshika Ueuo (Cornell University) Au Analysis ofJapanese Sentence-Final Particles-a preliminary casestudy
Satoru Ishikawa (Princeton University) An
Examination of 'Anoo' and 'Sonoo'
Hideo Tomita (Kenyon College) Range Delimiter(wa) and Speaker's Recognition Point (ga)Satoshi Koike (New York University) Pragmatics
and the No-Da/No-Desu Construction
Kiri Lee (Lehigh University) "So, when did you
really buy your camera?" How to explain the threeinterpretations of the toki 'when' clause
Hiroko Furuyama & Noriko Yokoyama (TheJapan Foundation Language Center) What isAuthenticity'? From Textbook Analysis to Classroom
Practices
Tomoharu Yanagimachi (University of Minnesota)
An Analysis of Narratives of Advanced Learners ofJapanese
Mayumi Oka (Columbia University) Curriculum
Design: Speed Reading in Japanese for Foreign
Students
Nobuko Kodama (Fashion Institute of Technology& New York University) Interactional Aspects ofConversations
Yoko Koike (Haverford University) Uses of Gesturesin Classrooms
Theresa Austin (New York University) The Role of
Humor in Japanese Language Classes: cases ofpragmatic failure.
Morio Hamada (Michigan Japan Center) &Kamada Osamu (Kyoto University of Foreign
Studies) Uchi and Soto of Teaching Japanese fromthe Perspectives of Roles of Teachers, Classrooms &Materials.
Makiko Funato (New York University & John
Dewey High School) Defense Mechanism inJapanese
Tomoko Graham & Atsuko Wasa (MIT) Personalized
Approach to Reading and Writing instructions forJapanese: The Power of Computers
Kazuo Tsuda (United Nations School & New York
University) Technology' yes, but Student- Centered
Ryuichi Uemura {Fukuoka Institute of Technology)& Masatoshi Tabuki (Kyushu Kyoritsu University)
Hypermedia Corpus and Japanese Conversational
Analysis-Interim Report

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
9/17

From the Participants of the 1993 JFLC
Summer Workshop for Secondary Japanese Teachers
Yuko Akamatsu
Ferris University and Central Valley High School
Spokane, Washington
Summer WorkshopI

was one of the participants of the summer
workshop for secondary Japanese teachers held at
the Japan Foundation last summer. I had justfinished my first year of teaching at Ferris HighSchool in Spokane when I found out about theworkshop. During the first year, I really did not havetime to examine my own teaching as I was hired at
the last minute without any formal previous
experience due to an emergency situation and there
was no textbook available to us. When I think about
it now, I was just going blindfolded. I survived thefirst year, actually found it very interesting to teachJapanese to high school students and to spend timewith them in the classroom. However, as I looked
back, I started to wonder if I was doing what I was"supposed" to do. There was no curriculum guideline,
and other teachers in the district were basicallyteaching what they believe in. Then I found out about
the workshop in Breeze. To tell the truth, I was
expecting to receive a guideline all written out for us,
stating every item and even words we are supposed tocover at each level of instruction. Although it turned
out to be a little different than what I (and probably
other participants) expected, the workshop was very
meaningful to all of us. We started out with analyzing
our own materials and that gave us a clearer sense ofwhat important points we are actually teaching.

Moreover, we found out that everybody was basicallyteaching similar things with some variations in topic
and vocabulary, which made (at least) me feelrelieved. The instructors were very informed in their
specialized area, and answered our questions andhelped us in every way. It was also nice to be able towork with other Japanese teachers because mostteachers were the only Japanese teacher at theirschool, and doing everything alone all the time issometimes hard, when you see Spanish and Frenchteachers always working cooperatively on something,helping each other and problem solving together. We
took our common frustrations out regarding the lackof materials and support for the Japanese class,problem with traveling between several high schools
and so on. We also shared activities that can be used
immediately in the class which was really invaluable.
Most participants stayed in the same youth hostel andspent a lot of time working on the assignments,talking about the class and life in general, cooking
dinner together and going shopping. After theworkshop we formed a participants' network and weare still in touch, sending materials and information
to each other. It was pleasantly surprising to see
every one of the participants at the following
workshop in February. I am really glad that the JFLC
gave me this opportunity to participate in theworkshop and would like to thank all the people thatorganized the workshop.

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
10/17

*1993 JFLC Summer Workshop Report
Hirofumi Nagaoka
Lathrop High School, Fairbanks, Alaska

S

ince my high school launched Japanese
program two years ago, it has been a learning
experience to me as well as a teaching experience. First year, there was nothing available; notextbooks and teaching materials, no guidelines, andno one to ask for help in the school district. I was on
my own. Second year, after the JFLC's Summer
Workshop, knowledge and resource of teaching
Japanese language and culture had been dramatically
improved. Now, moving onto the third year of the
program, I am excited to find increasing student's
interest toward the Japanese program at Lathrop.
First Year: Lack of Teaching Materials
Starting out a new program from scratch, I felt thatthe biggest problem was lack of teaching materials.
So, finding out what materials are available andwhere I can get them became the first priority of the
beginning year. I was searching for new resources
everyday after school. I made many phone calls forinquiry and visited other schools 350 miles away.
Meanwhile, I was creating visual aids for each lesson,
making worksheets, and putting cultural information
together. It was literally a trial and error.
JLFC: A Common Ground for Teachers
The 1993 JFLC's Summer Workshop had broadened
my horizon enormously. It provided me with acommon ground with other Japanese teachers in
different states. Besides each productive session
furnished by friendly and supportive language
specialists, I was fascinated by numerous innovativeideas shared by other teachers, ranging fromclassroom activities to special projects. We, theparticipants, also shared all kind of problems we faceat school, from discipline problems to school politics,
throughout the day for two weeks. These idea
exchanges were the best outcomes of the workshop.
We could build strong friendship and network, whichwere kept through the school year, via letter,
telephone, fax, and e-mail. They have been giving me

encouragement and advice whenever I need. JFLC is
where I met innovative and inspirational colleagues
from 7 different states. That is where I have collectedmost of the information on textbooks, supplements,
and audio-visuals. That is where I learned to be better
prepared by utilizing available resources, information,and knowledge of teaching Japanese language andculture, into the classroom; the real world where kids
are anticipating fun of learning Japanese.
Second Year: Building a Base
After the Summer Workshop, things started getting
better for me. It was time for me to build a base of the
program. With sufficient textbooks and teachingmaterials, I was able to make plans for the classes
ahead of time. Therefore, I could enjoy more relaxed
time with each student. The moments when I could
reach to individual student's need fulfilled my days. I
remember the first year that I could not feel satisfied
in teaching since my mind was always preoccupied
with impending frustration from the lack of teachingmaterials. As I began to be able to prepare eachlesson with better materials and sequence, positive
reactions often resulted from students and theirparents. Students initiated fun activities and showed
constructive attitudes in learning. Parents thanked towhat the program offered to their children. I was
pleased to hear from a parent, whose child started
taking Japanese reluctantly at the beginning became
one of the best students in the class and showing
much appreciation toward Japanese language andculture.
The enrollment of the Japanese classes grew from 30
to 50 last year. And, I will be teaching more than 100
students, next school year. It is fun to see the program
growing steadily. Thanks to the Japan Foundation
Language Center and Fairbanks North Star BoroughSchool District for their continuing warm support to
the Lathrop's Japanese program.

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
11/17

Summer Workshop: Just Do It!
Trasey Hiroko Nomachi
Venice High School, Los Angeles, CAL

ast summer I was fortunate enough toparticipate in the Japanese workshop
sponsored by the Japan Foundation. For two
weeks, among the palm trees in Santa Monica, highschool teachers from all around the country learned,
shared, argued, networked, discovered, researched,
and conversed in the Japanese language! It was awonderful experience in which all teachers, new andexperienced, were able to take something back totheir schools. Just having the peace of mind knowingthat there are others all around the country having thesame joys and struggles that you are going throughwas worth the grueling schedule.
Let me tell you, "grueling schedule" is not an
overstatement. We listened to presentations andworked on our projects from 9:30 AM until 3:30 PM
everyday. Most everyone though, stayed and utilized
the excellent library facilities at the Japan Foundation
until 5 PM. It was definitely a hard day's work!
During this time, we learned about current ideas on
textbook analysis, creation of course goals and curricular design, and even current methodologies on
effective lesson planning. In effect, we tried to create
a whole years' program. we chose a text, decided
what students can do and accomplish with that text,
created supplemental materials to enhance the chosen
text, and learned effective methods of presenting thematerials to the students.
I must add in here for my own peace of mind that thepresentations by the staff were done in a manner toinform the teachers of ideas and methodologies thatare currently being taught in America (at least
California). It was great! I felt like I was back at theuniversity taking a methods course (class, can we say"communicative approach"). Many were frustrated at
first, including myself, that we were just being"presented" ideas and not being "told" what the "correct" way to teach or what materials to cover in highschool Japanese, I finally decided that it was "our"responsibility to decide for ourselves what is right.
There were many a discussion on what the"objective" of the workshop was, some being a little
past the point of being a "healthy" discussion.
Although I went in wanting to be "spoon fed"
information and guidelines, I'm glad that I was able to

make my own decisions. It has made this past school
year much more satisfying to me.
Being a new teacher, I'm always soaking up ideas,
new and old, like a sponge. The workshop turned out
to be a gold mine to me. Taking the course plan
outline that I developed during the workshop, myclasses went fairly smoothly for my second year ofteaching. I was able to take all the activities andlessons that were planned during the summer and use
them to enhance the students' learning. The students
really enjoyed the communicative activities that I
picked up from fellow participants in the workshop.
Thanks, guys!
During the follow-up workshop this spring,
Nakamoto san and I were able to meet withparticipants of the 1st session of last year's summer
workshop. I was so very glad to meet with them.
Here was another group of enthusiastic colleagues,
who were just as determined to put on a good
program as our group was. We talked of life after thesummer workshop and the idea of having a"framework". We viewed sample frameworks from
America and Australia and I believe the consensus
was that frameworks were just too general to be of
any use to us. This discussion eventually led to the
topic of standardization in order to help implement
articulation with the college and universities. It issuch a shame to have a student take 4 years ofJapanese and still be required to start at 1st year incollege!
Although the new workshop has been changed to 5days, I believe the whole program has beenstreamlined to be most efficient and to reach moreteachers. I highly recommend teachers from any
background: new, experienced, native, non-native, to
go to learn new ideas, share activities and just
network with other teachers. I find it is so rare thatJapanese teachers get together, especially in such ahospitable environment. It is something that justcannot be passed up. (Not to mention the friendships,
nice weather, salary points...) I'd just like to thank thestaff at the Japan Foundation and all my fellow
participants for making last summer such a rewarding
experience. Next goal...Articulation! We can do it!

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
12/17

Summer Workshop ‘93
Eriko Uyesugi
Scripps Ranch High School
San Diego, CAIt was such an honor for me to be able to attend
my first Secondary Teachers of JapaneseWorkshop that was held on June 21 through July
2 of 1993.1 was very excited. It was the first time toattend this kind of two-week workshop. I thought thatthe objectives of the course (Curriculum designingand to improve teaching skills) were very specificand timely topics for me.
The Workshop was held at the Japan Foundation
Language Center in Santa Monica, California. Even
though I am living in a similar place like San Diego,
Santa Monica had an attractive sound for me. There
were eight participants from all over the UnitedStates, including such states as Alaska, Hawaii, North
Carolina, Oregon, and Washington. It was quite
impressive to see the people who do the same kind ofwork have the same kind of experiences.
During the two weeks, we stayed at a youth hostel.
Even though we had some inconveniences, I reallyenjoyed cooking and studying together with otherparticipants. Also, the youth hostel is located one
block from a famous beach and is in the middle ofSanta Monica's downtown area. Although there aremany homeless people, it was a perfect location towalk around the town and to window shop.
There is no specific curriculum guideline forsecondary school Japanese in the area where I teach. I
was expecting to get information on what could beconsidered a clear guideline at the workshop. But, I
realized that we were the ones who must make up ourown curricula and the instructors were working as
facilitators. At first, we spent two days doing a text
book analysis. It was very helpful to grasp thecontents holistically and to get the overall idea for acurriculum. Also, we discussed the good and bad
points of each text book we used. By the end of theworkshop, I became very familiar with a textbook
that I have never used before.
After we completed the text analysis, we spent threedays designing a one-year curriculum. It was difficult

because we had to divide it into five parts (topics,
objective, grammar, activity, and cultural notes).
Since I was using a very "sentence structure" based
textbook, it was a good exercise for me to put topics
and activities together on the same paper. For thethree years of teaching Japanese, I was always
wondering if my methodology was correct or not.
However, after completing the one and a half-year
curriculum, I felt much confidence that I controlled
the curriculum (not the textbook).
Secondary school teachers do not have the time to sit
down and think as compared to college professors.
Since we have to teach four or five periods every day
as well as doing other chores like contacting parents,
making worksheets and tests all the time, there may
be a tendency to get burned out before the spring
break comes. This workshop gave us time to create
our own curricula and many resource instructions.
The last thing we did was make lesson plans for the"not so good area," and made presentations. I wish
we spent more time for this activity. The kind ofactivities and how many you can present to your classeach day are very critical. We need to share ourhands-on activities and we all need to improve ourways apply them in the classroom.
In conclusion, I very much appreciated the JapanFoundation's effort in planning this workshop andmaking available other valuable assistance. I had
such a great time with the other participants. It
reminded me of old school times. During the two
weeks, we became very close and promised to keep
in touch. We agreed that the teacher is isolated in hisclassroom: Especially in the case of the Japaneseteacher. Since this area is new and hard to get fulltime work at one school, we need to support eachother. For these reasons, networking of Japaneseteachers is very important. Now I have such a strong
network thanks to the Japan Foundation. I hope it will
expand more throughout the United States in the
future.

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
13/17

Recipients of The Japan Foundation
Language Related Programs 1994/95
L Salary Assistance Program for Full-Time
Japanese Language Teachers(University)
1. Binghamton University, State University of New
York, Binghamton, NY
2. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC
3. Oglethorpe University, Atlanta, GA(High Schools)
1. Episcopal of Baton Rouge, Baton Rouge, LA
2. The Barstow School, Kansas City, MO
IL Training Program for Foreign Teachers of theJapanese Language
Short-Term (Spring Course)
1. Mary Jo Dougherty / River Falls Public Schools,
River Falls, WI
2. Margaret Hagmann / North High School, Eau
Claire, WI
3. Karen Klink / River Falls Public Schools, River
Falls, WI
Short-Tern (Summer Course)
1. Elizabeth Borstad
Greenfield High School, Greenfield, WI
2. Karen HendricksonWest High School, Madison, WI
3. Natalie Hoyer
Forest Park Middle School, Franklin, WI
4. Justin Miller
Aldo Leopold Alternative Program, Green Bay, WI
5. Cyrus Rolbin
Phillips Academy, Andover, MA
6. Adrianne Sheybani
Bettendof/Pleasant Valley High School, Bettendorf,
IA
7. Nanako M. Tani
Wauwatosa West High School, Wauwatosa, WI
8. Judith Vandenberg
Holy Name of Jesus School, Kimberly, WIFor Japanese Abroad
1. Yukie Aida / University of Texas at Austin, Austin,
TX
2. Nobuko Kochuba / Fox Mill Elementary School,
Herudon, VA

Long-Term
No Awardees
III. Japanese Language Study Program
Librariansfor

1. Gustavo Adolfo Caldas
Univ. of Calif., Northern Regional Library Facility,
Richmond, CA
IV Assistance Program for the Development ofJapanese Language Teaching Resources
1. The California Assoc. of Japanese Language
Schools, Inc. Los Angeles, CA"Nihongo" Elementary Japanese (1)V. Japanese Language Education Fellowship
Program
No Awardees
VI. Japanese Language Teaching Materials
Donation Program (University/ Colleges)
Northeastern States
1. Saint Michael's College, Colchester, VT
2. Boston University, Boston, MA
3. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
4. Simmons College, Boston MA
5. Tufts University, Medford, MA
6. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA
7. City College of New York, New York, NY
8. Columbia University, New York, NY
9. Fashion Institute of Technology, New York, NY
10. Lehman College, Bronx, NY
11. Queens College, Flushing, NY
12. Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, NY
13. Haverford College, Haverford, PA
14. Lincoln University, Lincoln, PA
15. Slippery Rock University, Slippery Rock, PA
16. Susquehanna University, Selinsgrove, PA
Southern States
17. George Washington University, Washington D.C.
18. Morgan State University, Baltimore, MD

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
14/17

19. The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD
20. Christopher Newport University, Newport News,
VA
21. Mary Baldwin College, Staunton, VA
22. Shenandoah University, Winchester, VA
23. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
24. Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA
25. Washington and Lee University, Lexington, VA
26. Salem-Teikyo University, Salem, WV
27. Duke University-Asian Pacific Institute, Durham,NC
28. Duke University-Fuqua School of Business,
Durham, NC
29. University of North Caroline-Charlotte, Charlotte,NC
30. College of Charleston, Charleston, SC
31. Clemson University, Clemson, SC
32. Kennesaw State University, Marietta, GA
33. Thomas More College, Crestview Hills, KY
34. Louisiana State University, Shreveport, LA
Midwestern States
35. Miami University, Oxford, OH
36. Wittenberg University, Springfield, OH
37. Lansing Community College, Lansing, MI
38. Oakland University, Rochester, MI
39. The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
40. Ball State University, Muncie, IN
41.
Indiana
University-Purdue
University,
Indianapolis, IN
42. Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN
43. St. Norbert College, De Pere, WI
44. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI
45. Augustana College, Rock Island, IL
46. College of DuPage, Glen Ellyn, IL
47. Illinois Benedictine College, Lisle, IL
48. Northern Illinois University, Dekalb, IL
49. St. Olaf College, Northfield, MN
50. The University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
51. Cornell College, Mount Vernon, IA
52. Teikyo Marycrest University, Davenport, IA
53. Missouri Southern State College, Joplin, MO
54. Park College, Parkville, MO
55. Washington University, St. Louis, MO
Southwestern States
56. Abilene Christian University, Abilene, TX
57. Austin Community College, Austin, TX
58. Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos,
TX
59. New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, MN
60. The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque,
MN

Mountain States
61. University of Montana, Missoula, MT
62. University of Colorado, Boulder, COPacific States
63. Gonzaga University, Spokane, WA
64. Shoreline Community College, Seattle, WA
65. Saint Martin's College, Lacey, WA
66. Willamette University, Salem, OR
67. California State University-Long Beach, Long
Beach, CA
68. Chapman University, Orange, CA
69. University of California-Los Angeles, Los
Angeles, CA
70. El Camino College, Torrance, CA
71. San Joaquin Delta College, Stockton, CA
72. Santa Barbara City College, Santa Barbara, CA
73. Southwestern Community College, Chula Vista,CA
74. University of California-Berkeley, Berkeley, CA
75. University of California-Davis, Davis, CA
76. University of California-San Diego, San Diego,
CA(High Schools)
Northeastern States
1. Fort River School, Amherst, MA
2. Scarsdale High School, Scarsdale, NY
3. The Bronx High School of Science, Bronx, NY
4. Townsend Harris High School at Queens College,
Flushing, NY
5. Kearny High School, Kearny, NJSouthern States
6. Richmond Public Schools, Richmond, VA
7. Broughton High School, Raleigh, NC
8. Carnage Middle School, Raleigh, NC
9. John T. Hoggard High School, Wilmington, NC
10. McMichael High School, Mayodan, NC
11. Eastern Guiford High School, Gibsonville, NC
12. Lexington School District One, Lexington, NC
13. Riverwood High School, Atlanta, GA
14. Braddock Senior High School, Miami, FL
Midwestern States
15. Martin Luther King, Jr. Senior High School,
Detroit, MI
16. Harrison High School, Evansville, IN
17. Mt. Pleasant Township Community School,
Yorktown, IN
The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
15/17

18. Aldo Leopold/Allouez School, Green Bay, WI
19. Mayville High School, Mayville, WI
20. Denmark High School, Denmark, WI
21. Freedom High School, Freedom, WI
22. Greenfield High School, Greenfield, WI
23. Greendale High School, Greendale, WI
24. Kiel High School, Kiel, WI
25. Little Chute High School, Little Chute, WI
26. Madison West High School, Madison, WI
27. Memorial High School, Eau Claire, WI
28. Menasha Public Schools, Menasha, WI
29. Menomonie High School, Menornonie, WI
30. New Berlin West High School, New Berlin, WI
31. Newtec/Cesa #7, Green Bay, WI
32. North High School, Eau Claire, WI
33. Wisconsin Rapids School District, Wisconsin
Rapids, WI
34. Wrightstown Public Schools, Wrightstown, WI
35. Dwight Eisenhower High School, New Berlin,
WI
36. Murray Language Academy, Chicago, IL
37. Kenwood Academy, Chicago, IL
38. University of Illinois Laboratory High School,
Urbana, IL
39. Franklin Community High School, Franklin, IL
40. Springfield R- 12 School District, Springfield,
MOSouthwestern States
41. McCullough High School, The Woodlands, TX
42. Catalina Foothills High School, Tucson, AZ
Pacific States
43. Lewis and Clark High School, Spokane, WA
44. Lindbergh High School, Renton, WA
45. New Centry High School, Lacey, WA
46. Renton High School, Renton, WA
47. Stanwood High School, Stanwood, WA

48. Beaverton High School, Beaverton, OR
49. Central Catholic High School, Portland, OR
50. Ontario High School, Ontario, OR
51. Schools of Arts & Communication, Beaverton,OR
52. St. Mary's School, Medford, OR
53. West Albany High School, Albany, OR
54. Bell High School, Bell, CA
55. Brentwood High School, Los Angeles, CA
56. Cerritos High School, Cerritos, CA
57. Don Bosco Technical Institute, Rosernead, CA
58. Gompers Secondary School, San Diego CA
59. La Jolla Country Day School, La Jolla, CA
60. Marin Academy, San Rafael, CA
61. Scripps Ranch High School, San Diego, CA
62. Long Beach Polytechnic High School, Long
Beach, CA
63. Mt. Edgecumbe High School, Sitka, AK
64. Mid Pacific Institute, Honolulu, HI
VIL Japanese Language Research Grant Program
No Awardees
Vlll. Japanese Language
Conferences/Seminars/Workshop Grant Program
1. Illinois Council on the Teaching of Foreign
Language Springfield, W"Seminar on Applications in Japanese Language
Instruction"
2. Washington Association of Teachers of JapaneseWashington State Japanese Language Curriculum
Guidelines
Conarnittee, Redmond, WA"Washington State Japanese Language Curriculum
Guidelines
Teacher Training Workshops"

Recipients of The Japan Foundation Language Center Grant Programs
October-December 1994
Workshops and Conferences Grant Program
1. University of British Columbia
Dept. of Asian Studies"Workshop for Japanese Teachers
Columbia"
October 1, 1994
$1,020.00

in

British

2. University of California, Los Angeles
Dept. of East Asian Languages & Cultures"The Fifth Japanese/Korean Linguistic Conference"
November 4-6, 1994

$1,000.00
3. The Northeast Association of Secondary Teachers

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
16/17

of
Japanese (NEASTJ)"The NEASTJ Third Annual Conference"
November 5-6, 1994

1. Southwestern Secondary Teachers of Japanese(SWSTJ)$1,400.00$1,500.00

Travel Grant Program (Within the U.S.)

4.
Teachers of Japanese in Southern California(TJSC)"TJSC '94 Fall Workshop"
November 13, 1994
$500.00

1. National Council of Secondary Teachers of

Association Grant Program

Japanese(NCSTJ)"1994 ACTFL Conference"
November 18-21, 1994
$1,626.50

The Breeze, No. 8 (September 1994)
17/17