Promoting a Willingness to Communicate in Japanese Students

論

文

Promoting a Willingness to Communicate
in Japanese Students

Nicholas BRADLEY

要

旨

外国語指導で重要なことは、生徒自身の意欲と教師が生徒をやる気にさせることだと言われている。しかし言語習得の意欲はあるが、授業中にその言語で話そうとする熱意のない生徒がよくみられる。A Willingness tocommunicate（WTC）とは学習者が ʻコミュニケーションをとろうという意志ʼ を意味する。コミュニケーションの授業では WTC が不可欠で、それを欠く生徒のスピーキング力は伸びにくい。したがって授業で教師はできるだけ生徒の WTC を促進しなければならない。
この論文で私はコミュニケーションの授業で生徒のスピーキング力向上に必要な、WTC を日本の大学一年生を対象に調査するだけでなく、大学入学以前の語学学習環境についても考察が必要だと考える。
Keywords: student motivation（学生の動機）, willingness to communicate, university students（大学生）, English communication（英語のコミュニ, Japan（日本）
ケーション）

Abstract
Much has been written about language learner motivation, anddeveloping student motivation is regarded by most teachers as a

23

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 29vital part of foreign language instruction. However, it is quitepossible for students to be motivated to study a language but yet be
reluctant to employ it.
Whether or not a student uses language when free to do so has
been described as a student’s willingness to communicate (WTC).
WTC is vital to communication classes and its absence canpotentially slow a student’s speaking development.
Therefore, teachers in the communication classroom must
endeavour to develop WTC in students as much as possible. In thispaper I aim to examine the willingness to communicate (WTC) of
first-year Japanese university students with a view to finding waysthat facilitate speaking in the university communication classroom.
To this end, it is also necessary to examine the language learning
context of students prior to joining university.

The Japanese Context
Before entering university, most Japanese students will have studied English forat least six years. Preparations for the university entrance examination begin in earnest
many months before the first wave of tests are taken. The English requirement for the
first entrance examination is the same for all students with the individual universities
then demanding that further tests be taken as their course or prestige demands. Given
that the first entrance exam is taken by all, schools across Japan feverously prepare
their students for the test to such a degree that this extends far beyond the classroom
and has become a national obsession (Shimahara, 1991). As Hyland points out, “Written
examinations alone determine grades and future success” (Hyland 1993 p. 73).
These examinations are the final and most important stage of tests Japanese students
have been preparing for and working through since infancy. The impact they have on the
future lives of students cannot be overestimated as highlighted below;“The sad fact is that the salary and prestige that a Japanese executive has in his
sixties may have less to do with his job performance in his forties and fifties andmore to do with whether he went to cram school and was a good test taker as a24

Promoting a Willingness to Communicate in Japanese Students

four- or five-year old.” (Karan, 2005: 183).

With English as a compulsory element of the entrance examination it is unsurprisingthat it exerts an enormous impact on English teaching at high schools. This influenceon teaching is seen as being largely negative by many (Terauchi 1995, Shimahara 1991,
Fujimoto 1999, McVeigh, 2002) as English ceases to be a means of communication andbecomes a collection of rules and forms to be memorised to pass the examination, fromthis meaning is lost and the subject becomes dull:“Pupils study English for six years. However, this is with a teacher who gives
students facts and rules about English, with no discussion or opinion from thestudents. Even the asking of questions to clarify is generally frowned on in
Japanese schools. The language taught is almost totally grammar-based, using
reading, writing, and lots of exercises on paper. And oral work usually takes theform of the whole class repeating phrases in unison. Much of the English taught
in Japan is still formal, stilted and dated.” (O’Sullivan, 1996: 106)

Not only are grammar-based teaching methods favoured in Japan but speaking
activities are given a marginal role. Until recently the entrance examination was solely
reading and writing. A listening component was added in 2006 but speaking is still
absent resulting in it being skipped over by Japanese teachers preparing their students forthe university examination.
Acknowledging the imbalance that exists in English teaching in Japan, the Ministryof Education has attempted to promote a greater amount of speaking in English classes.
A press release from the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Scienceand Technology (MEXT, 2002) recommends that oral communication be taught much
more in Japanese schools. However, the release gives a preferred focus for schools,
merely suggesting rather than implementing. Recent writing (Karan, 2005) and personal
experience teaching at high school illustrates that Japanese teachers still concentrateon the university entrance examination, focusing on reading and writing at the expenseof speaking. Speaking activities do exist but usually serve the purpose of reinforcing agrammar point or supporting other teaching. Appendix 1 shows an example of the firstoral communication unit taken from a Japanese school text book (Kairyudo, 2004) usedby a colleague at an ‘academic’ high school. In this unit exercises focus on:● Reading (Focus 1)

25

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 29● Reading and writing - gap fill (Focus 2)● Writing about transport and picture based discussion (Focus 3)● Listening exercise (Focus 4)
Opportunities to speak are clearly at a minimum. When evaluated against a modelof speaking such as Thornbury’s AAA model, we can see evidence of some awarenessraising through introduction of how a discussion is organised and performed, andappropriation through writing and listening activities. However, there are no activities
promoting autonomy that require students to produce large amounts of real life language
in an interactive situation suggested as necessary for autonomy (Thornbury, 2005).
In addition to speaking activities receiving less attention than reading, writing andlistening, the students themselves have been described as possessing the characteristics
of poor language learners (O’Sullivan, 1996). Literature on the characteristics of Japanese
students (Karan, 2005, Dorji, 1997) suggests that Japanese students tend to be quiet
and reserved. Research conducted among foreign English teachers found that teachers
perceived that Japanese students do not like to take risks in the classroom (Dorji, 1997).
Japanese students have also been characterised as being unable to express their opinions,debate or even discuss issues (Allen, 1996). One frequently cited reason for this lackof personal expression in class is a strong group mentality and preoccupation withmaintaining group cohesion (O’Sullivan, 1996, Anderson, 1993). The Japanese saying of“The nail that sticks up gets hammered down” is often used to illustrate this phenomenon.
Personal experience has demonstrated that these characteristics are not as common
as suggested, though there is undoubtedly some truth in such generalisations. Despite
this characterisation, a number of studies suggest that students wish to move in anotherdirection. When asked why they studied English, 60% of university students answeredthat communication was most important (Terauchi, 1995). A desire for more semi-free tofree task types was also expressed by university students (Davies, 2006). Such findings
suggest that the stereotype of the Japanese student held by many (O’Sullivan, 1996;
Atkinson, 1997; Anderson, 1993; Nozaki, 1993) is flawed and it is no surprise that theseassumptions have been challenged as considered later.
From the context described above we see that students entering university English
classes will have studied English for a period of six years in an environment whichplaces little emphasis on speaking and is dominated by grammar study. With such little
experience of speaking in English and demonstrating a reserved classroom demeanour it

26

Promoting a Willingness to Communicate in Japanese Students

is perhaps no great surprise that a reluctance to speak has been described as the greatest
problem in teaching English in Japan (O’Sullivan, 1996).

Speaking and Willingness to Communicate
Bygate (1987) suggested that speaking is a skill which employs knowledge about
a language. Knowledge of the target language can increase through instruction though
the skill of speaking is different as it requires practice. The notion of practice as arequirement for speaking to improve is well supported (Thornbury, 2005; Harmer, 2007).
Yashima et al who wrote specifically on the Japanese context stated explicitly that “toimprove communication skills one needs to use language” (2004: 122). If improvementin speaking is dependent on practice as the literature and common sense suggest, ways
to break through the ‘wall of silence’ as Helgesen (1993) termed the Japanese university
communication class, and increase Japanese students’ WTC need to be found.
However, Dörnyei points out that simply providing opportunities for practice is notenough:“It is not uncommon to find people who tend to avoid entering L2 communication
situations even if they possess a high level of communicative competence. Thisimplies that there is a further layer of mediating factors between the competence
to communicate and putting this competence into practice” (2005: 207).

This ‘layer’ of mediating factors is the student’s WTC which has been defined as“the tendency of an individual to initiate communication when free to do so” (Yashima,
2002: 55) and seen as a reflection of the predisposition or readiness to talk in various
situations (MacIntyre et al, 1998). WTC is a prerequisite for speaking and is not speaking
itself. It is quite possible for WTC to exist without any communication occurring; forexample when a teacher asks a question, several students may raise their hands to answer
indicating WTC but only one will get to speak the answer (MacIntyre et al, 1998).
Students with low WTC may possess a great deal of language knowledge andgood communicative competence but not speak, resulting in a lack of practice which
can potentially slow their speaking development. This view of WTC being the major
prerequisite of language development is shared by Dörnyei who adds that WTC “draws
together a host of learner variables that have been well established as influences on

27

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 29second language acquisition and use” and leads him to conclude that WTC is “theultimate goal of L2 instruction” (2005: 210).

Willingness to Communicate
MacIntyre’s (1994) model of WTC highlights perceived communication competence
and communication anxiety as the two factors strongly influencing WTC. Recent work
confirms their importance (Yashima, 2004, 2009; MacIntyre et al 1998; Tsui, 2006;
Dörnyei, 2005). However, it is clear that other factors have the potential to influence
WTC, especially when you consider that English teaching brings together two or morecultures in a learning environment. MacIntyre et al (1998) conceptualised WTC in amodel (Figure 1) that considers multiple variables.

Figure 1
MacIntyre et al (1998: 547)

Here WTC sits directly next to L2 use indicating its vital importance to speaking
and other means of production. Below WTC are its influencing factors. MacIntyre et al
differentiated between immediate situation-specific influences on WTC, found in the first
three layers, and more enduring and stable influences in the last three layers. However, apyramid model suggests a top-down decrease in the importance of factors that constitute28

Promoting a Willingness to Communicate in Japanese Students

WTC. This is not the case in the model as no weighting is given to the individual
variables. In addition, the pyramid model does not indicate the interrelationship between
its components, a shortcoming acknowledged by one of its creators (Dörnyei, 2005).
The model seems to have been created specifically with English as a second
language in mind. Variables of experience with members of the L2 community (layer 5)
and the desire to interact with a specific person outside of the classroom (layer 3) seem
more geared to ESL, rather than a Japanese EFL context in which the student is very
unlikely to have spoken to a foreigner or experienced L2 culture beyond the classroom ormedia. However, a WTC study conducted among Japanese university students found thatthe results “demonstrated the applicability of MacIntyre et al’s (1998) conceptual modelin an EFL context” (Yashima, 2002: 62). As research suggests MacIntyre et al’s model
is valid in a Japanese EFL context, and because the model is widely accepted, I intend
to use the factors it suggests contribute to WTC as a guide in examining WTC in theJapanese context.

Factors Influencing Willingness to Communicate
The desire to communicate with a specific person is immediate and situational andmay be influenced by the attractiveness, proximity and repeated exposure to the person
in question (MacIntyre et al, 1998). In a Japanese EFL context, this would seem to focus
on the native English speaking teacher as contact with foreigners or English speakers
outside of the classroom is quite limited. In such a context the student has no choice in
who they speak to so WTC depends largely on the opinion and familiarity they have withthe teacher.
Within several areas of the model (such as Intergroup Attitudes and Intergroup
Climate) MacIntyre et al also highlight the broader, more stable and enduring desire tocommunicate and the relationship the student has with the L2 community suggesting; “Itseems a firm conclusion that the desire to affiliate with people who use another language,
and to participate in another culture, has a powerful influence on language learningand communication behaviour” (1998: 551). Yet in Japan English is often viewed as an
academic subject rather than a vehicle through which to communicate with people ofanother culture. Additionally, Yashima (2002) found that when it is viewed as a means ofcommunication, English in the minds of Japanese learners is something vague and larger

29

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 29than, for example, American community or culture, it is a way to communicate with theworld around Japan, particularly with Asian neighbours.
In the Japanese context, holding a positive view of, and desire to communicate with,foreign cultures or specific individuals is seen as a vital contributing factor towards WTC
by several scholars. Yashima (2002) and Yashima et al (2004) conducted research among
Japanese students and concluded that those students with an interest in international
affairs and conscious of how they relate themselves to the world were more motivatedto study English (Yashima et al, 2004). The students’ interest in foreign affairs andperception of themselves using English in the world was termed international posture(Yashima, 2002). According to Yashima, “international posture influences motivation,
which in turn, predicts proficiency and L2 communication confidence” (2002: 63). The
development of ‘international posture’ may further the belief of some (Wen & Clement,
2003) that MacIntyre et al’s model requires adaptation when it is applied to culturally
specific contexts. Wen and Clements (2003) study found factors influencing WTC in
China, such as emphasis on the collective, face concerns, notions of insider and out
groups, and the learning environment, all impacted on the desire to communicate andwere not adequately represented in the model. However, Yashima concluded that themodel did adequately fit the Japanese context and that the notion of international posturefits within the ‘Motivational Propensities’ of layer IV (Yashima, 2002).
Self-confidence is also seen by MacIntyre et al as a vital factor influencing WTC,
either in the immediate and momentary form of State Communicative Self-Confidence
or in the more enduring L2 Self-Confidence. Self-confidence depends on the two key
concepts of perceived competence and a lack of anxiety (MacIntyre et al, 1998). Anxiety
can increase due to reasons such as the number of listeners and previous bad experiences(MacIntyre et al, 1998). Self-confidence, like the desire to communicate is also seen as
including both immediate and enduring forms.
As we have seen, numerous writers point out that Asian/Japanese students exhibit
characteristics not well suited to L2 speaking (Tsui, 1996, O’Sullivan, 1996, Karan, 2005,
Zhang & Head, 2010). These characteristics such as passivity, a focus on group cohesion,
fear of mistakes and derision, fear of exposing low proficiency, reluctance to show or
discuss opinions or feelings all can contribute to reticence to speak and so negatively
impact WTC.
However, this view of Asian students is a contested one. Some academics argue

30Promoting a Willingness to Communicate in Japanese Students

that Asian students are not naturally obedient or passive and that “A homogeneous
body of Asian students who represent the stereotypes seems to exist more in theimagination of Western academia than in the actual classrooms of Asian societies”(Kumarvadivelu, 2003: 710). It is suggested that, if students display such characteristics
in class, it is a consequence of the wider educational context and the norms set by othersubjects (Littlewood, 2000, Holliday, 1994) rather than any cultural belief or disposition(Kumarvadivelu, 2003). This view not only introduces the wider educational context/
tradition as a variable of WTC but also suggests that, if other subjects set the norms towhich Japanese students are accustomed, imported methods of teaching English may not
be suitable.
This notion, first developed by Holliday (1994), suggests that communicative
methods developed in private British, Australian and North American (BANA) language
schools are not suitable for direct unadapted transplantation in to state run schools
within the rest of the world (TESEP). This notion, echoed by Liu (1998), highlights
the great divergence of classroom realities in BANA and TESEP contexts and that, asa consequence, adoption of methods unsuitable to the context may affect WTC. Sucha view would indicate that the push for greater communicative methods in English
classes within Japan by bodies such as MEXT, may actually result in a reduced WTC
as such methods are suitable to BANA classrooms rather than Japanese classrooms
populated by students of mixed ability, differing attitudes towards English and for whom
communicative methods may be culturally incongruent.

Encouraging a Willingness to Communicate
From examining WTC we can see that perceived communicative competence, selfconfidence, low anxiety, a desire to interact with the L2 community/international postureand a methodology relevant to the students all play an important role. To increase WTC,
the prerequisite for speaking, we then need to employ ways that promote these factors andare relevant to the Japanese context.
A major way to improve WTC, identified by many academics, is consideration of
the teacher-student relationship (Zhang & Head, 2010; Tsui, 1996; Wen & Clement, 2003;
Dörnyei & Murphy, 2003; Xie, 2010). Increased teacher immediacy and involvementwith students through expressions of affection, having time for students, expressing

31

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 29interest in their work and so on, were found to reduce anxiety and increase WTC (Wen
& Clement, 2003). Such actions were found to increase group cohesion and improved theclassroom environment. Kenny (1994) echoes these finding in a study among Japanese
university students. Kenny found that just simply remembering and using students names
resulted in increased WTC and spoken production (Kenny, 1994 in Dörnyei & Murphy,2003).
Improvement of the teacher-student relationship goes beyond mere pleasantries
however. Involving students in the selection of classroom topics was found to generate
more opportunities for participation and increase WTC (Xie, 2010; Zhang & Head, 2010).
Discussion with students over course content could also potentially be a way to foster
the international posture that Yashima suggests is vital to WTC in the Japanese context.
Asking students for their input and preferences on content and topic choice requires thatthey consider how English can serve them and in what roles they envision themselves
employing English. Such discussions serve not only to make the content more relevant
to students and thereby increase WTC but also potentially make students aware of therelevance of English for them and increase their international posture.
Adopting certain teaching methods has also been suggested to improve WTC. For
example, methods such as allowing students to prepare prior to speaking (Harmer, 2007),
lengthening waiting times for answers (Tsui, 1996), and accepting and encouraging
all contributions (Xie, 2010) have all been offered as ways of reducing anxiety andincreasing confidence, therefore improving WTC.
The final suggestion I wish to highlight, and one that I feel is particularly relevant ina Japanese university context of large class sizes, is that of using peer support and group
work. Having peers discuss subjects in pairs or groups prior to a wider discussion was
found to have a positive impact on WTC as it gives “students a chance to rehearse theirthoughts to each other in a low risk, high gain situation” (Tsui, 1996: 148). Work withJapanese university students likewise found that pair and group work had a welcome
impact on motivation and WTC (Helgesen, 1993). My own teaching experience has
shown that students are much more likely to speak freely in smaller groups than in frontof the whole class.

32

Promoting a Willingness to Communicate in Japanese Students

Conclusion
The literature indicates that a wide range of factors influence WTC. However
the teacher in Japan, can take encouragement from the fact that a number of studies
conducted in East Asia and in Japan specifically have concluded that there are a numberof way in which to foster greater WTC. Generating an increased international posture or
motivation to speak by helping students realise the uses of English for them in a global
community, and forging greater bonds and respect between student and teacher seem tobe key ways to improve WTC relevant to the Japanese context. Through implementationof methods that promote these factors, speaking classes in Japan can benefit from a
livelier and more cohesive atmosphere and, ultimately, see students speaking out much
more.
References
ANDERSON, F. E. (1993) The Enigma of the College Classroom: Nails that Don’t Stick Up, IN
WADDEN, P. (Ed) A Handbook for Teaching English at Japanese Colleges and Universities.
Oxford, Oxford University Press.
ATKINSON, D. (1997) A Critical Approach to Critical Thinking in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1),
71–94.
BYGATE, M. (1987) Speaking. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
DAVIES, A. (2006) What do learners really want from their EFL course? ELT Journal, 60(1), 3–12.
DÖRNYEI, Z. & MURPHEY, T. (2003) Group Dynamics in the Language Classroom. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press.
DÖRNYEI, Z. (2005) The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second
Language Acquisition. Mahwah, LEA.
DORJI, L. (1997) A comparative analysis of Japanese students’ learning styles and British TEFL
teaching styles. The Japanese Learner, 11(1), 30–45.
FUJIMOTO, H. (1999) The examination backwash effect on English language education in Japan. The
Japanese Learner, 19(2), 115–132.
HARMER, J. (2007) The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow, Pearson Education.
HELGESEN, M. (1993) Dismantling a Wall of Silence: The “English Conversation” class. IN
WADDEN, P. (Ed) A Handbook for Teaching English at Japanese Colleges and Universities.
Oxford, Oxford University Press.
HOLLIDAY, A. (1994) The House of TESEP and the Communicative Approach: The Special Needsof State English Language Education. ELT Journal, 48(1), 3–11.
HYLAND, K. (1993) Culture and learning: A study of the learning style preferences of Japanese

33

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 29students. RELC Journal, 24(2), 69–87.
KAIRYUDO (2004) Expressways: Oral Communication. Tokyo, Kairyudo.
KARAN, P. P. (2005) Japan in the Twenty-First Century: Environment, Economy and Society.
Lexington, The University of Kentucky Press.
KUMARAVADIVELU, B. (2003) Problematizing Cultural Stereotypes in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly,
37, 709–719.
LITTLEWOOD, W. (2000) Do Asian Students really want to Listen and Obey? ELT Journal, 54(1),31–36.
LIU, D. (1998) Ethnocentrism in TESOL: Teacher Education and Neglected Needs of International
TESOL Students. ELT Journal, 52(1), 3–10.
MACINTYRE, P. D., DÖRNYEI, Z., CLEMENT, R. & NOELS, K. A. (1998) Conceptualizing
Willingness to Communicate in a L2: A Situational Model of L2 Confidence and Affiliation. The
Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545–562.
MCVEIGH, B. J. (2002) Japanese Higher Education as Myth. Armonk, Eastgate.
MEXT (The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology), (2003) Developing astrategic plan to cultivate “Japanese With English Abilities” Retrieved on 13 January 2010 fromhttp://www.mext.go.jp/english/news/2002/07/020901.htm
NOZAKI, K. N. (1993) The Japanese Student and the Foreign Teacher, IN WADDEN, P. (Ed)A Handbook for Teaching English at Japanese Colleges and Universities. Oxford, Oxford
University Press.
O’SULLIVAN, J. (1996) Teaching English in Japan. Brighton, International House.
TERAUCHI, H. (1995) Issues in English language teaching in Japanese universities. The Japanese
Learner, 7(2), 95–112.
THORNBURY, S. (2005) How to Teach Speaking. Harlow, Longman.
TSUI, A. B. M. (1996) Reticence and Anxiety in Second Language Learning. IN BAILEY, K. &NUNAN, D. (Eds) Voices from the Language Classroom. Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press.
WEN, W. P. & CLEMENT, R. (2003) A Chinese Conception of Willingness to Communicate in ESL.
Language, Culture and Curriculum, 16(1), 18–38.
XIE, X. (2010) Why are Students Quiet? Looking at the Chinese Context and Beyond. ELT Journal,64(1), 10–20.
YASHIMA, T. (2002) Willingness to Communicate in a Second Language: The Japanese EFL
Context. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 54–66.
YASHIMA, T., ZENUK-NISHIDE, L. & SHIMIZU, K. (2004) The Influence of Attitudes and Affecton Willingness to Communicate and Second Language Communication. Language Learning,
54(1), 119–152.
ZHANG, X. & HEAD, K. (2010) Dealing with Learner Reticence in the Speaking Class. ELT Journal
64(1), 1–9.

34

Promoting a Willingness to Communicate in Japanese Students

Appendix 1
The following four pages comprise chapter 1 in the Japanese high school textbook Expressway:
Oral Communication published by Kairyudo in 2004.

35

愛知大学

言語と文化

36

No. 29

Promoting a Willingness to Communicate in Japanese Students

37

愛知大学

言語と文化

38

No. 29