The Japan Foundation Language Center, Quarterly Newsletter
Number Four, September 1993

Textbooks for Pre-Collegiate Level (3) -TopicsWhat kinds of topics are covered in your textbooks?
This issue examines the topics which secondary level
textbooks cover. By studying these topics, teachers
can have a good idea as to what to expect from theirstudents after they finish a textbook. 15 topics arelisted below along with the basic items covered ineach category.

DISCUSSION(7) Are there any topics which are not listed here,
but which would benefit secondary school
students?
(8) Is it necessary to cover all 15 categories?
(9) What are the pros and cons of making a course
plan based on topics?

Breeze No. 4 (September)
1/13

Breeze No. 4 (September)
2/13

Special Contribution
The Meaning of Teaching Japanese in the United States
Senko K. Maynard
Rutgers UniversityFor the past 17 years I have taught Japanese at
several U.S. universities. During this period,
Japanese language education has undergone acomplete transformation from what was once a fringeor “exotic” language into that of a “mainstream” andsomewhat popular foreign language. Currently,
Japanese is studied by some 80,000 people in the U.S.
alone. 1 Although the world-wide “boom” inJapanese language study is cause for great optimism,
this positive trend alone does not assure a comparable
academic impact on (language) education as a whole.
To remedy this, in some small way, I have preparedthis short essay. In what follows, I would like to sharewith you some of my thoughts on what it means toteach Japanese, particularly as it relates to us,teachers of the Japanese language (and culture).
1. Why teachers should be students
To teach Japanese we must first be students of theJapanese language. By this I mean that each one of us
should constantly engage in rigorous study (research)of the Japanese language (and culture). The
production of research papers is not as significant as
the intellectual attitude we take toward the material
we teach, i.e., the Japanese language. Language
teachers must not be satisfied with and must fight thetendency of being complacent with an understandingof the language provided solely by others. (Howoften do we find ourselves embarrassed in theclassroom when know (grammatical) expressions fail
to convincingly explain to our students the particularcase in question?) Beyond the fact that active
engagement in research adds vitality and variety of
the routine of repeated teaching, academicallycurious teachers – by example – encourage students
to be intellectually inquiring an mentally stimulated.
The role model exemplification is perhaps the mostessential lesson any educator can instill in students.
2. Why discourses analysis?
I advocate the research framework of “discourse
analysis” (and other socio-culturally oriented
frameworks such a sociolinguistics, conversation
analysis and pragmatics of the language). Discourse
analysis in the broadest sense attempts to analyze
language not an abstract system (as traditional
theoretical linguistics does), but rather as something
created jointly by the actual participants ofcommunication in a given social context. For
example, how is persuasive discourse achieved inJapanese? How is turn-taking determined in Japaneseconversation? How do polite expressions reflect (andcreate) the social realities of contemporary Japan?
One may argue that since the answers to thesequestions are readily available in reference books,
and all one has to do is “look them up,” researching
the answers to these on one’s own is pointless. Let
me point out, however, that all the answers are NOT
readily available. And in fact, some of the “pat”
answers of the past are proving now to be inadequate
at best. Actually the task of clearly explained how theJapanese language works to non-native speakers has
only recently begun. Far too many areas remain
ambiguous and have yet to be comprehensively
understood, much less adequately explained.
For example, what is the difference between (1)wasureppoi seikaku and (2) wasureppoi to yuu
seikaku (both taken from Mirai Isoppu by Hoshi
Shin’ichi. Tokyo : Shinchosha, 1982)? 2 We must notresort to the sometimes used non-answer to some ofthe questions raised by students: “Well, Japanesepeople don’t say that,” “They (or, we) simply say itthat way, so…” or, “Oh, they both mean the samething…” and so on.
Of course, one must be careful when applying
research findings directly to actual classroom
teaching. Too much explanation is not only uselessbut often harmful. And yet, not being able to explainis also damaging; we need only to be reminded thatstudents often find it difficult to fully respect or trust
the teacher who fails to answer their questions
adequately.
(in this regard I am in the process of launching a newscholarly journal, Japanese Discourse: An
International Journal for the Study of Japanese Text
and Talk. Details will be announced in future issuesof The Breeze and elsewhere.)
3. Why and what do we teach?
When in the midst of our hectic and often chaotic
language classes, we neglect to ask ourselves thebasic question of why we teach Japanese in the firstplace. Is it to make a living? Perhaps. But is that all?
What attracts us to the field of (language) education?
Why Japanese language? Obviously Japan’s
economic and political rise is the world has
Breeze No. 4 (September)
3/13

contributed enormously in motivating vast numbersof students to study Japanese – the language gives
them leverage in their job search. Their interest inJapanese has thus created “jobs” for us. But should
we (especially in higher education) be satisfied byteaching our students merely hot to get around inTokyo (for example, ordering – in Japanese – that
infamously expensive cup of coffee)? Should we becontent with contextualizing Japanese “culture” withsushi and origami alone?
The answers, of course are “no.” Each of us bears the
responsibility for answering a series of questions
when organizing the curriculum, choosing materials
and when setting specific goals for classroom
teaching. But on what basis should we makedecision? The essential point here is our intellectual
integrity. What we know is the source for making
decisions when addressing these issues. Each of ourjudgements ought to be based on how each one of us– in our own terms – understands what the Japanese
language is an how it should be presented in its sociocultural context. In other words, once we areintellectually engaged with the material, we will, by
the very process of expanding our minds, continuallylearn and grow and, as a result, become more
effective educators.
It is also instructive to put our task in the perspectiveof the current international milieu. At present,difficulties and failures of communication between
Japan and other nations demand serious attention
from scholars and teachers worldwide. Our efforts are
essential in order to counteract, through positive
education, the unfair and often irresponsible
academic Japan-bashing and unfortunate stereotypingof Japan and the Japanese people. The images andmyths of Japan must be “de-orientalized” – i.e.,
viewing Japan as “exotic” and as an “other ”which is
impossible to understand must be alleviated. The
good news is that as language educators, we are given
access to large numbers of eager-to-learn students.
We CAN make a difference.

4. In sum
Language is not simply a tool for communication but
also, and more importantly, prism to shed light on theway of thinking (and feeling) of its culture. Throughforeign languages we lean to appreciate thephilosophy and nature of “being” in different cultures.
I think it important to make language kerning notsimply a skill course but to make it an intellectual
experience as well. (Assigning supplementary
readings in English on the Japan see language,
culture and society is one way to encourage students
to be intellectually stimulated.3) Indeed, we must
redouble our effort to avoid the pejorative label of“Military Kindergarten” – a regimented rote learning– as a few of our more creative students have dubbed
some of our Japanese language courses.
Overall, I believe that it is in the synergy of scholarly
exploration of language along with its pedagogicalapplication that we will find a constructive course
toward a meaningful and rewarding experience ofteaching Japanese. I personally believe that being
able to carry out both these tasks is requisite to
becoming true participants in the creation of ameaningful education (especially higher education).
I am aware that teaching requires a day-to-day
adjustment to the students’ progress and that we tend
to forget to ask the fundamental question of “why’and “for what purpose.” AS problematic as it may be,
however, at least every now and then we must ponder
the meaning of teaching Japanese.
Footnotes
1 The Figure is taken from The Breeze (December
1992 issue).
2 For those who are interested in reading about thisphenomenon, my recent work (Discourse Modality:
Subjectivity, Emotion and Voice in the Japanese
Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamin, 1993) may
be useful.
3 For example, Japanese Patterns of Behavior by
Takie Sugiyama Lebra (Honolulu: University of
Hawaii Press, 1976) provides a good introduction.

REPORTFirst Achievement Test in Japanese Attracts 1,804 Students from 224 HighSchools Nationwide
More than 1,800 students tackled the College Board’s
first Asian language Achievement Test – in Japanese– this spring. Nearly 50 percent of the 1,804 test
takers came from two states, California and Hawaii,with 443 and 437 respectively.

The states of Washington and New York had 100
students each taking the test. All in all, students from41 states and the District of Columbia, as well as 36
foreign students, were among the first-time test
takers.

Breeze No. 4 (September)
4/13

“the number of high school students studying Asian
Languages is increasing at a rapid rate, although still
small compared to those studying traditional
European languages, “ said Brian O’Reilly, directorof the College Board’s SAT Program.
Mr. O’Reilly noted that, in California, the number ofhigh school students taking Japanese in 1982-83 was
416 in 18 classes; in 1990-91 it was 2,583 in 101

classes. Like other language Achievement Tests, theJapanese Language Test with Listening requires atleast two years of study or equivalent and reflects
current trends in secondary school curricula.
The next Japanese test is scheduled for Monday
November 8, 1993 and will be held in November
every year.
-- Press release by The College Board

Japan Foundation Language Center
Workshop for Secondary Teachers of Japanese
Session I
June 21 – July 2, 1993
Thoshio Tatsuta
Senior Specialist
The Japan Foundation Language Center
Introduction
The Japan Foundation Language Center, which has
been engaged in gathering information pertinent toJapanese language education particularly for thesecondary school level, along with offering guidance
for teaching instruction problem areas andnetworking services since its founding in August
1992, decided to host two summer workshops, one in
June and one in August.
As you know, the academic year for secondary
schools which runs from September to June of thefollowing year is broken down in to 2, 3 or 4 parts
with 35—38 weeks of actual teaching instruction andapproximately one week of vacation per each part.
However, there is, of course no uniform scheduleeven within state, and the yearly schedule differs foreach school district throughout the United States. For
example, some of the eight instructors who
participated in this workshop finished teaching theweek directly before the commencement of theworkshop, while others finished two weeks earlier.
Furthermore, whereas in higher education, theinstructor’s absence from class is allowed, and makeup lessons are possible, in secondary schools, sinceteachers are in charge of 25 hours per week (this is
the minimum number of hours for a full time
instructor), it is impossible to have make-up classes,
and being absent from class means the teacher mustallot a substitute teacher.
At present, within the higher education system,
expense for attending a workshop are, on the whole,granted but practically no such consideration is given
to expenses a the secondary education level.
Under the physical constrains arising from the vast
ness of the United States, in addition to thecircumstances listed above, it appears impossible tohave a workshop targeting the entire U.S. during theperiod when schools are in session.
On The Selection of Participants
Due to these circumstances, the Japan Foundation
Language Center informed the country through its
newsletter, The Breeze, at the beginning of this year,that the workshop for secondary teachers would beheld during the summer. (Generally speaking, forthings like workshops held during the summer, it isusual for an announcement to go out at the end of theprevious year so the instructors can set up at the endof the previous year so the instructors can set up theirsummer schedule six months in advance.) As for thenumber of applicants, there were 38 instructors fromsecondary school, and on top of this, more than 10from higher education were immediately screened out.
As for the 38 high school instructor applications,
there was a discussion at the beginning of April
directly after the deadline. As we specified one of thequalifications to be experience of three years of less,
12 applicants were selected as qualified for Session I,
and 14 for Session II.
In the first session, three people were unable toparticipate, another one was suddenly asked to lead a
study trip to Japan, and switched his participation to
Breeze No. 4 (September)
5/13

the second session. In the end, there were eightparticipants for the first workshop.
The Goal of the Workshop
The theme of this workshop is Curriculum Design.
The purpose is the vitalization of future teachingactivities by having the workshop participants grasp
the “big picture” of their Japanese language courses
by systematically organizing sentence patterns,
grammar items and language function at the
beginning levels.
As mentioned earlier, Japanese language instructors
in secondary schools are responsible for 25 classhours per week. It is the norm, in the case of full time
instructors, for them to handle other subjects
depending upon the number of Japanese language
classes s/he teaches, and in the case of part time
instructors, to teach at more than one school
simultaneously. Putting aside an extremely small
number of exceptions, since there is one instructor
per school, they are not fortunate enough to havesomeone to discuss things with when up again
various problems faced during the course of teaching
Japanese language, nor are they blessed with anopportunity to exchange new information, ideas andso forth. Although we call them all secondary schools,
there is a great diversity among them, including theirschool programs, and the number of students perclass, let alone the environment surrounding theschools. Of late, there has been some movement
toward standardization and unification as exemplified
by the publication of a framework for introductory
Japanese language curricula in American highschools and the implementation of the Japanese SAT
exam. However, since these standardization andunification attempts do not reflect the reality of thetype of high school Japanese language education
discussed here, in some areas, it tends to arouse
unnecessary anxiety on the part of the instructors.
What the instructors who teach under these types ofcircumstances need more than anything else is to se
the achievable objective at each school (underdifficult situations of various sorts) and have an
overall picture of how they can achieve these goals.
We believe that by participating in the workshop andleaning about the actual state of affairs at otherschools, one can develop self confidence by being
freed from the ever present threatening anxiety of “I
wonder if what I’m doing is really alright”. At thesame time, by the assimilation at one’s school ofpotentially fresh ideas from the other participantsfrom other schools, one can broaden the horizon ofteaching activities. We would like this to be an
opportunity for thinking about the “big picture” oftheir language programs and making their academic
yearly plan for the teachers doing all they can toprepare the lesson plan for the next day and who
often ending up simply following the course laid out
by the textbooks.
Contents of the Workshop
The workshop was divided into three main segments.
First, the texts used by the participants are analyzed
in terms of topic, sentence patterns and grammar
items (Lecturer Furuyama)
Next, the plan for the academic year is made, basedon consideration of participants’ surrounding
educational environment. (Lecture Tatsuta)
Finally, one lesson is selected and class plan made.
(Lecturer Kabutomori)The participants who probably had never created along tem plan, taking great pains in finishing one
textbook per year by the mechanical allocation ofclass hours, exchanged opinions over a similar lesson,
despite the use of a different text, and information
about teaching activities. This resulted in the
production of a teaching plan that was beyond theirformer “teach the text” way of instruction.
However, it seems that they were so preoccupied
with just making plans they tended to neglect theinitial goal of making concrete and practical plans
which should take into account the size of their own
class and the ability of their own students. We would
like the teachers to revise their plans adjusting themto their actual circumstances by using these plans in
actual classroom situations in the next academic year.
For I believe that through this workshop they learned
how important it is to solve problems on their own.
Evaluation, Miscellaneous
As for the evaluations by the workshop participants,
they were glad that they were able to grasp thegeneral organization of their textbooks, and that they
made yearly plans based on the textbooks they wereactually using. In addition, they highly evaluated thefact that teachers with similar levels of experiencegathered together and were able to exchange
information, and that they had first had exposure tovarious teaching materials and were able to obtain
them.
Regarding the youth hostel that housed theparticipants, only minor complaints were reported
such as “a little noisy”, “poor lighting”, “poor hot
water pressure in the shower”. They instead
commented favorably on the fact that they exchanged
information by living together, developed anddeepened friendships. One of the contributing factors
for this seems to be sharing their eating and living
quarters with Lecturer Toma.
The participants went home without any incident
after finishing the two-week workshop, with theircertificates of completion and commemorative items
Breeze No. 4 (September)
6/13

in had along with many teaching materials. I
sincerely hope that they will make good use of the
fruits they have gathered in the next academic year.
Participants
Ms. Yuko Akamatsu, Joel E. Ferris High School,
Spokene WA
Mr. Hirofumi Nagaoka, Lathrop High School,
Fairbanks AK
Mr. Todd Nishimura, Kalani High School, Honolulu
HI

Ms. Yuko Norton, McMicheal High School,
Mayordan NC
Ms. Takeko Sakakura, Fairview High School,
Boulder CO
Mr. Willard Staats, Dimond High School, Anchorage
AK
Ms. Eriko Uyesugi, Compers Secondary School, San
Diego CA
Ms. Cathleen Yonezawa, The Catlin Gable School,
Portland OR

PROGRESS REPORT
National In-Service Training
Program for Secondary
School Teachers of JapaneseA

few years ago, the American Council on
Teaching Foreign Languages (ACTFL) in
cooperation with the University of Oregon
undertook in-service program for secondary school
teachers in the United States. The original idea for the
program included training the teachers at the
University of Oregon for four weeks and at theJapanese Language institute in Urawa, Japan for thefollowing four weeks. This plan was to continue fortwo years; however the two organizations have had
difficulty since its inception in pursuing this plan
because of their inability to procure the appropriate
funding.

Nature and Purpose of the Program:
The primary purpose of this program is to enhance
the Japanese language proficiency of secondary
school teachers in the United States and to provide alevel of knowledge and understanding of Japaneseculture which forms the background of the language,
thereby improving the quality of Japanese Ianguage
education.

Early this year A CTFL contacted The JapanFoundation Language Center (JFLC) with an idea toestablish another program. As we have also been
trying to frame an in-service training program at The
Center we collaborated our two ideas and contacted
several other organizations to work together to create
one standardized national in-service training system.
By the combination of our respective efforts toward
one goal, we will be able to establish a true networkin the Japanese language education world.

Non-native speakers of Japanese who have engaged
in teaching the Japanese for less than 3 years
Non-Native speakers of Japanese who have engaged
in teaching the Japanese language for less than 3
years
Native speakers of Japanese who have not taken any
Japanese language teacher-training programs orcourses in colleges, universities or graduate schools
Native speakers of Japanese, not under item (3)Japanese language teachers in Community Colleges

We will,-herewith, show the draft of this program andthe minutes of the May 29th meeting.
March 1, 1993

During the first year, the program will target only
teachers under priority (1). In the second year,
teachers from (1) and (2) will be targeted. For year 3,
the target will expand to teachers from (I), (2), and(3). After year 3, teachers under priority (4) and (5)may be added if possible.

Draft
March 1, 1993

Target:
The Program is designed for secondary school
teachers of Japanese language in the United States in
the following orders of priority:

Breeze No. 4 (September)
7/13

Number of Trainees:
20 teachers will be allocated for the 1st year, 40
teachers for the 2nd year, and thereafter 60 teachers
per year. After the first year, 20 of the teachers eachyear should be trainees for the summer training
program in Japan.
Duration/Location:
Each course consists of a 3-year program
1st year
6 week course (end of June - end of July) at The
Japan Foundation Language Center in Santa Monica.
Workshop for the program review will be held at theend of November (4-day workshop around ACTFL
annual conference)
2nd year
8 week course (July - August; including I-week fieldtrip) at the Japan Foundation Japanese Language
Institute in Urawa, Japan.
Workshop for the progress report will be held at theend of November (2-day workshop around ACTFL's
annual conference)
3rd year
6 week course (end of June - end of July) at The
Japan Foundation Language Center in Santa Monica.
Final workshop will be held at the end of November(4-day workshop around ACTFL's annual conference)
2nd yearThis plan will be implemented from 1994. The yearlyschedule for each course is attached.
Lecturers:
Advisory lecturers from The Japan Foundation
Language Center and lecturers from ATJ and NCSTJ
will undertake the task of teaching in the U.S.
In Japan, lecturers from the Japan Foundation
Japanese Language Institute will instruct. During thepreliminary stage of the program, teachers fromNCSTJ will also attend this program in order tomaintain program consistency.
Sponsorship:
U.S.: ACTFL/ATJ/NCSTJ
JAPAN: The Japan Foundation
Expenditures:
It would be desirable to collect the expenses (otherthan those expenses covered by The JapanFoundation and each trainee) mentioned below:(1)
Training courses in the United States:
Planning committee meetings
Honorarium toward College/University forcalculation of the credited classes
Registration fee (credit) by individual
trainees
Expenses for Summer Training Course•
travel cost for trainees, instructors from ATJ
and
NCSTJ
•
room and board for trainees, instructors from
ATJ and NCSTJ•
honorarium for lecturers from ATJ andNCSTJ•
materials•
weekend trips•
social gatherings•
honorarium for lecturers from JFLC by The
Japan Foundation•
facility by The Japan Foundation•
miscellaneous
Expenses for November workshops•
travel cost for trainees•
room and board for trainees and lecturers•
honorarium for lecturers from ATJ andNCSTJ•
materials•
social gathering•honorarium for lecturers from JFLC by The
Japan Foundation•
miscellaneous(2)
Training courses in Japan:
Round-trip air fareTransportation within Japan by The JapanFoundation
Room and Board in Japan by The JapanFoundation
Tuition-Training Courses by The JapanFoundation
Field Trips by The Japan Foundation
Materials by The Japan Foundation
Planning
Committee
Meetings
andAnnouncements:
A planning committee will be organized at the
beginning stage by representatives from ACTFL,
ATJ, NCSTJ, and The Japan Foundation. The
planning committee will discuss definite plans for the
program. ACTFL will be in charge of raising funds.
The program will be announced in January, and theapplication deadline will be the last day of March.

Breeze No. 4 (September)
8/13

Minutes
DATE: May 29, 1993 (9:30am - 5:00pm)
PLACE: The Japan Foundation Language Center
ATTENDANCE:
Dr. Hiroshi Miyaji, Middlebury College
Dr. Marl Noda, The Ohio State University
Dr. Patricia Wetzel, Portland State University
Dr. Naomi McGloin, University of Wisconsin
Ms. Leslie Birkiand, Lake Washington High School
Mr. Norman Masuda, Palo Alto High School
Mr. Cliff Darnall, Elk Grove High School
Dr. C. Edward Scebold, ACTFL
Dr. Hiroko Kataoka, University of Oregon
Dr. June K. Phillips, USAF Academy
Dr. Ronald Walton, NFLC
Dr. Richard Brecht, NFLC
Mr. Satoshi Nakamura, The Japan Foundation L.A.
OfficeMr. Yasuaki Kaneda, The Japan Foundation L.A.
Lang. Ctr
Prof. Toshlo Tatsuta, The Japan Foundation L.A.
Lang. Ctr
Ms. Kimiko Kabutomori, The Japan Foundation L.A.
Lang. Ctr
Ms. Hiroko Furuyama, The Japan Foundation L.A.
Lang. Ctr
(1) Objectives
This is an in-service training for secondary school
teachers with primary focus on language
advancement.
Teachers of secondary schools are targeted(regardless of years of experience).
Teachers' language ability starts, for example, within
the intermediate level range determined by the
ACTEL proficiency scale, thereby aiming at the levelof intermediate+ or higher as the outcome.
(2) Planning/Operation
A Steering Committee was inaugurated consisting of
two members each from the NCSTJ, the ATJ and the
ACTFL and representatives from The Center.
Each organization appointed the following committee
members:
NCSTJ: Leslie Birkiand, Norman Masuda
ATJ:
Mari Noda, Pat Wetzel
ACTFL: Edward Scebold, Hiroko Kataoka
The Steering Committee will set the following threesubcommittees:

1.
2.
3.

Curriculum Design Committee
Evaluation Committee
Fund Raising Committee(3) Number of Trainees
20 trainees annually.
(4) Duration/Location of Training- 1st Year
Six-week training at The Japan Foundation Language
Center in Santa Monica-2nd Year
Six-to-seven-week training at The Japan Foundation
Language Institute in Urawa-3rd Year
One-week training at The Japan Foundation
Language Center in Santa Monica
It appears to be difficult to set up the training
program during the ACTEL annual meeting. In theview of the present teaching situation in secondary
schools, teachers would have difficulty in taking a
few days off from teaching as well as providing asource for wages for substitute teachers. Therefore,
we concluded that we only encourage participation at
the ACTFL annual meeting by way of offering a
discount registration fee, and related items.
It would be ideal to have the 2nd Year training in
Urawa slated for the end of June (or the beginning ofJuly) for six weeks rather than for it to begin
according to regular schedule at Urawa. This is due tothe fact that secondary schools in the United States
generally have summer vacation from the third or
fourth week of June through the third week of August,depending upon the school district.
The highly probable impossibility for secondary
teachers to participate in multi-week intensive
sessions for three consecutive years was discussed.
(5) Lecturers
Lecturers would consist of one university instructor,
one secondary school teacher, three advisorylecturers from The Japan Foundation Language
Center and one Japanese-language specialist fromThe Japan Foundation Japanese Language Institute in
Urawa. In addition to the instructional team, anevaluation team (probably consisting of one
secondary school and one university instructor)
would also serve.

Breeze No. 4 (September)
9/13

(6) Credit
The effort to grant credit is indispensable for thefollowing reasons:

The next deadline to send such proposals to NEH and
DOE is November. Other private foundations do not
set a certain deadline.

1.
2.
3.

Teaching credential certification.
Salary-scale (grade) improvement.
Advanced degrees.

The ACTFL will search for a funding source forapproximately $15,000.00 as a reserve start-up fund
for the Steering Committee.

The Steering Committee will examine whichorganization might issue credit.

In spite of all these efforts, however, inauguration in1994 would be difficult, and a 1995 inauguration
looks to be more realistic.

(7) Fund Raising
Proposal for fund raising will be drafted by ACTFL
by the middle of July with the NC STJ as its
applicant.

The fact that NEH does not fund airfare forparticipants should be noted.

Recipients of the JapanFoundation Language-Related
Programs 199311994
Salary Assistance Program for Full- Time Japanese
Language Teachers
Bates College, Lewiston
Boston Public Schools, Boston, MA
The College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA
Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA
Denison University, Granville, OH
California State University, Long Beach, CA
Institutional Support Program for Japanese
Language Education
1.
Titnity College, Hartford, CT"Seventh Annual New England Regional Workshop
on Japanese Language"2.
Association of Teachers of Japanese in
OregonWashington Association of Teachers of JapaneseSouth we stem Secondary Teachers of Japanese"Prepating Tomorrow's Leaders Today"
Short-Term Training Program for Foreign
Teachers of the Japanese Languge (Summer
Course)1. Jacquelynn Collins
Manitowoc Public Schools, Manitowoc, WI
2. Diane M. Guibronson
Riverside University High School, Milwaukee, WI 3.

Natalie Hoyer
Forest Park Middle School, Franklin, WI 4 Penny E.
Mertz
Newtec/CESA #7, Green Bay, WI
5. Gloria Rozmus
Hamilton High School, Menomonee Falls, WI 6.
Lynn M. Sessler
Eisenhower High School, New Berlin, WI
7. Ai Soucy
Memorial High School, Eau Claire, WI
8. Pamela J. Mastalski
Madison West High School, Madison, WI 9. Steven
L. Webb
Denmark High School, Denmark, WI
10. Gary St. Clair
Sheboygan Area Lutheran High School, Sheboygan,
WI
11.
Kitty ShekSan Joaquin Delta College, Stockton, CA
12.
Susan Hirate
University of Hawaii at Man oa, Honolulu, HI
Training Program for Teachers of theJapanese Language ()'or Japanese Abroad)
1. Kimiko Nakayama-Nordstrom
Career Enrichment Center, Albuquerque, NM 2.
Ejichi Eric Masuyama
Oregon State University, Eugene, ORJapanese-Language Teaching Materials Donation

Breeze No. 4 (September)
10/13

Program

3.

(UNIVERSITY/COLLEGES)

4.
5.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.

Brown University, Providence, RI
Miami-Dade Community College, Miami,
FL
Mary Baldwin College, Staunton, VA
Beloit College, Beloit, WI
Madonna University, Livonia, MI
New Mexico State University, Las Cruces,
NM
Boise State University, Boise, ID
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ
Shoreline Community College, Seattle, WA
Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR
Willamette University, Salem, OR
Cal Poly State Univ-San Luis Obispo, San
Luis Obispo, CA
California State University-Long Beach,Long Beach, CA
East Los Angeles College, Monterey Park,CA
Los Angeles Pierce College, Woodland Hills,
CA
MiraCost College, Oceanside, CA
Orange Coast College, Costa Mesa, CA
San Diego Mesa College, San Diego, CA
Santa Barbara City College, Santa Barbara,
CA
University of California-Los Angeles, Los
Angeles, CA
University of California-Riverside,
Riverside, CA
University of California-San Diego, La Jolla,
CA
University of San Diego, San Diego, CA(HIGH SCHOOLS)
1.
2.

6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.

Menomonee Falls High School, Menomonee
Falls, WI
Bonanza High School, Las Vegas, NV
Las Vegas Academy of Int'l Studies &Performing Art, Las Vegas, NV
Boulder High School, Boulder, CO
Mt. Edgecumbe High School, Sitka, AK
Tumwater High School, Tumwater, WA
Lindbergh High School, Renton, WA
Kelso High School, Kelso, WA
Juanita High School/Redmond High School,
Kirkland, WA
Bothell Senior High School, Bothell, WA
Annie Wright School, Tacoma, WAWest Albany High School, Albany, OR
St. Mary's School, Medford, ORSouth Medford High School, Medford, ORSouth Eugene High School, Eugene, OR
Sheldon High School, Eugene, OR
North Medford High School, Medford, OR
Torrey Pines High School, San Diego, CA
Long Beach Polytechnical High School,
Long Beach, CA
La Jolla Country Day School, La Jolla, CA
Don Bosco Technical Institute, Rosemead,CA
Brentwood School, Los Angeles, CA
Bell High School, Bell, CA
The Wo International Center, Honolulu, HI
Punahou/Academy High School, Honolulu,
HI
Punahou School-Bishop Hall Middle School,
Honolulu, HI
Mid-Pacific Institute, Honolulu, HI
Assets School, Honolulu, HI(OTHER INSTITUTIONS)
1.

East San Gabriel Valley JapaneseCommunity Center, Walnut. CA

Hamilton High School, Sussex, WI
Greenfield High School, Greenfield, WI

Breeze No. 4 (September)
11/13

BOOKS/PUBLICATIONS

I

ntroducing a new bibliography for foreign
language educators

Foreign Language Area and Other International
Studies is a new bibliography funded by the U.S.
Department of Education's International Researchand Studies Program, under Title VI of the Higher
Education Act. This cumulative bibliography should
be useful to all educators, administrators,organizations in the foreign language education
fields.

You may obtain this bibliography without charge.
Copies may be acquired by writing to:International Research and Studies Program
Center for International Education
U.S. Department of Education
400 Maryland Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20202

SATORI: Network for Japanese
Language Teachers in
Elementary Schools
October 28-30, 1993.

I

f you are teaching or are interested in Japanese
language education at the elementary school level,
consider joining SATORI. It is a national network
providing communication and the exchange ofteaching ideas for elementary teachers of Japanese.
The organization will host a national meeting inconnection with the Foreign Language Association of
North Carolina's annual meeting in Greensboro, NC,

For membership and information, please write to:
Tim Hart
4601-304 Timbermill Court
Raleigh, NC 27612

Library ServiceT

he Japan Foundation Language Center Libraryoffers library services in order to provide
access for teachers of Japanese to teachingmaterials and resources.

Library Membership
Teachers who are affiliated with one or more of thefollowing associations are eligible for membership:
Association of Teachers of Japanese (ATJ)
National Council of Secondary Teachers of Japanese(NCSTJ)
Teachers of Japanese in Southern California (TJSC)Applicants for library membership are required toprovide the following:
1. Individual application form.
2. A copy of identification, such as a driver's license.
3. We may ask for proof of membership in the applicant's
affiliated association if we are not able to verify suchmembership from our lists.

Circulation Loan Period and Limits
Circulation books: 3 weeks, 3 items at a time
Audio-visual materials: 3 weeks, 1 set at a time
Items may be renewed one time only.

Circulation by Mail
The registered patrons are also allowed to borrow thelibrary materials by mail. Requests can be made by
telephone or by mail.
The borrowing period through the mail is three weeks
with an additional one week turnaround period.

Library Materials List
A list of our library holdings, including audio-visualmaterial, textbooks, teaching materials, magazinesand others, is available for members upon written
request.

Breeze No. 4 (September)
12/13

Library Hours and Holidays
Monday through Friday 10:00am - 5:00pm
The library is closed on the following days from
September through December 1993 to observe theseholidays:

Labor Day
Columbus Day
Veteran's Day
Thanksgiving Day
Japanese Holiday
Christmas Holiday
New Year Holiday

September 6, 1993
October 11, 1993
November 11, 1993
November 25, 1993
December 23, 1993
December 25, 1993
December 29 - January 3, 1994

Breeze Message

This summer we held two summer workshops
for secondary teachers of Japanese. At the firstworkshop, held in June, all eight participants
completed the course, and six out of ten completed
the second workshop in August. Some of the teachers
had to return for classes and conferences, and this leftthem unable to complete the course. From next year
on, we plan to modify the timing of the workshops sothat all participants can complete the course workwithout any difficulty. Another problem with theworkshops which caused some participants to leave
was the conditions at the hostel where we
accommodated the teachers for Session II. We all feel
deeply sorry for any inconvenience caused by this,and we will try to provide better facilities in the
future.
During the discussion in articulation between
universities and high schools, one of the teachers
mentioned that Japanese language education in highschools should not be merely a preparatory foruniversity study. She also mentioned that whenteaching foreign languages to high school students,
reference to other cultures should not be ignored.
Japanese language education should be significant for
all concerned as a part of a high school education, notjust an emphasis on developing skills to be continued
at the university level. Therefore, understanding
Japanese culture is one of the most important facetsof teaching Japanese language in high schools1j'

For this issue, we had a great deal of topics tocompile, and had to leave out some. We plan toprovide these in a supplement which will be issued
soon. It is going to include items about The JapanFoundation's language-related programs, Dr. Miyaj i's"Overview of Japanese Language Education in the
U.S.," current reports on Japanese language educationfrom several states, reports from award recipients,and many other topics. (YK)When we talk about "articulation," we tend to assume
teaching continuity from high schools to universities
and ignore the significant difference of the goals forhigh schools and universities. When I heard thisteacher's comment, I finally realized what the realarticulation should be. It is, of course, important thathigh school teachers understand and grasp university
education, however, at the same time, university
faculty should understand the current status of highschool education and the goals, thereby materializing
the real articulation between universities and highschools.

Breeze No. 4 (September)
13/13