The JACET 4th Survey Committee on English Education in Japan(Summary)
The committee of the 4th JACET Jittaichosa (a status-quo survey) conducted the reported
survey for the purpose of examining a fundamental question regarding “who teaches English
for what purpose and how” at universities in this country. The targets of the survey were English
teachers who engage in English education or are currently teaching an English-related subject
or subjects at domestic higher educational institutions including universities, junior colleges,
and technical colleges.
Having produced a survey form with 34 questions both in Japanese and in English, thecommittee administered the survey from August 29th until October 16th of 2017, either in apaper format or an online format. As a result, 634 responses in Japanese and 231 responses inEnglish, 865 responses in total, were obtained. After eliminating invalid responses with
contradictory answers, a total of 853 responses were yielded to descriptive statistics and/or
cross-tabulation, using Microsoft EXCEL and IBM SPSS.
Respondent overview

1.

Questions 1 to 13 of the questionnaire asked the respondents about themselves: member of
JACET or not, age, gender, native language(s), highest educational qualification, specialization,
work experience, employment status, title of current position, and others. The major results arelisted in the table below.
Table 56. Respondent overview
Major results

Q
1
2

JACET member

Non-JACET member

68.9%

30.8%

Female

Male

51.3%

48.3%

In their 50s

In their 40s

37.2%

27.5%

Native language: Japanese

Native language:
English

73.0%

23.3%

3

4

Notes

Respondents in their 20s
and 30s account for only
14.4%.

5

6

7

8

Highest educational

Highest educational

qualification:
Master’s degree

qualification:
Doctor’s degree

61.2%

34.2%

Specialized field of study:
English teaching/
Applied linguistics

11

12

13

roughly 49:49 between
Japan and overseas where
respondents got their final
degrees.

Specialized field of study: Respondents specialized in
Linguistics
English literature accountfor only 8.6%.

62.8%

15.6%

Any full-time jobs that do
not involve teaching:

Any full-time jobs that do
not involve teaching:

27.2% of respondents havenever had any full-time

Teacher at elementary,junior high or high school

Teacher at language
school or
private tutoring school

jobs.

36.6%

31.5%

Full-timePart-time

55.2%

25.1%

No. of years as a teacher at
the tertiary level:

No. of years as a teacher
at the tertiary level:

910

Universities are split

0～19 years
16.3 years (average)

About 61%

No. of years as a tenured
full-time teacher:Mode:

9.9 years (average)

Zero（30.6%）

Title of current position:
Professor

Title of current position:
Part-time lecturer

28.6%

24.7%

Want to get a tenured

Do not want to get a

positiontenured position

67.4%

27.2%

Submitting an article to aninternal university
publication

Application to “Grants-inAid for Scientific
Research (KAKENHI)”

67.0%

12.8%

17.6% of respondents is
non-tenured full-time.
About 37% of respondents
have worked for more than
20 years.

It takes an average of five
years to get tenured
position.

Respondents in their 50s
tend to avoid getting
tenured position.

Compared with the results of the survey conducted in 2003, the background of the respondents
has significantly changed.
First, a change in the age of the respondents was observed. For respondents in their 50s, there
was a significant increase in the ratio from 28.0% in 2003 to 37.2% in 2017. On the other hand,
there was a considerable decrease in the proportions of respondents in their 20s and 30s from
21.3% in 2003 to 14.4% in 2017. Overall, the English teachers are aging and thus the number
and the ratio of younger teachers have declined.
From the response to Q5, one of the reasons is a trend toward higher educational qualifications
being required of English teachers. A significant increase from 10.1% in 2003 to 46.7% in 2017
was observed in the number of respondents with a doctoral degree or completion of doctoral
course work without the submission of a dissertation. This tendency has resulted in a severe
and protracted environment for English teachers hoping to obtain a tenured position. Anotherreason for the rise in teacher age is indicated by the response to Q7, which was asked about
their experiences with full-time jobs. The survey results show that about 55% of the respondents
had teaching experience(s) in elementary, junior high or high school as well as at language
school or private tutoring school*1 while 27.2% of the respondents reported having had no fulltime job. In most cases, English teachers start their carrier as a part-time teacher after finishing
their doctoral course, and try to find a full-time tenured position at the tertiary level. In otherwords, with many English teachers completing the doctoral course (the youngest being 27 years
old), the age of entering a full-time tenured position has become higher. Moreover, theresponses to Q9 and Q10 show that it takes some time for younger teachers to get a full-timetenured position at the tertiary level. In fact, the survey results also show that it takes an averageof five years for post-doctoral researchers to get a full-time tenured position. Thus, they are
already in their early or middle 30s if they are lucky enough to land a position as a full-timetenured teacher.
Second, significant change is evident from the responses to Q6, which reveals a change in thefields of specialty of the respondents. Of course, many researchers were in English teaching
and applied linguistics because the respondents were JACET member(s). However, a significant
increase was observed in the number and ratio of respondents in English teaching and applied
linguistics, compared to the ratio in the 2003 survey of 34.9%, rose to 62.8% in 2017. In contrast,
the number of respondents specializing in English literature and linguistics decreased by 18.8%(8.6% from 27.4%) and 7.9% (15.6% from 23.5%), respectively. These survey results agreewith the recent job openings for English teachers, showing the need for specialists in English
teaching.
While the committee members of the 4th JACET Jittaichosa (status-quo survey) expected that

there would be more English teachers with substantial practical working experience in thebusiness fields, for Q7 asking about their experience(s) in full-time jobs, only 4.0% of the
respondents answered that they had worked in corporations with overseas assignment. In
addition, the respondents accounted for less than 10% even with the inclusion of respondents
who had worked in corporations in Japan or in national or local government bodies. Since theprevious survey did not include the same question, the findings cannot be directly comparedwith those from 2003. The survey results in 2017 indicate that one out of ten or twenty English
teachers report no prior experience in teaching.
In conclusion, the purpose of the 2017 survey was to examine the fundamental question of “whoteaches English for what purpose and how” at universities in Japan. We have found that about
a half of the English teachers obtained their degrees or completed their doctoral course work atoverseas universities and that about 60% are in the fields of English teaching and applied
linguistics. The survey results also indicate that over 80% of the respondents are in the fields ofEnglish and its related studies and those who are not specialists in English teaching with noexperiences in teaching accounted for less than 10%. Moreover, the findings include the factthat the English teachers are aging and are required to have higher educational qualifications.
The survey results show that time is required to obtain a full-time tenured position at university;
candidates tend to be in their mid-30s on average when they become tenured and that many
post-doctoral researchers cannot attain this goal.
*1

Multiple answers were allowed for this question and 35.3% of the respondents (301/853
respondents) answered “Teaching position in an elementary, a junior high or a high school”
and/or “Teaching position in a language school or a private tutoring school.” In addition,
19.0% of the respondents (162/853 respondents) answered “others” including “Corporation(s).”Therefore, 54.3% of the respondents (463/853 respondents) reported having had full-timeteaching jobs at schools other than universities.

2.

Current working environment

Questions 14 to 17 of the questionnaire ask respondents their current working environment; thetype of the school they are working for, the location of the school, the number of students
enrolled there, and the type of academic entity they belong to. The major results are listed in
the table below.

Table 57. Current working environment
Q
14
15

16

17

Major results
School: Private

School: National

68.6%

18.7%

Location: Tokyo

Location: Kansai

20.4%

18.3%

No. of students:
70,000~10,000

No. of students:
1,000~2,000

13.6%

12.7%

Academic entity:

Academic entity:

Department(Language) Center

77.1%

20.3%

Notes
Junior College: only
2.9%
Chubu: 13.0%, Kansai(except for Tokyo);
10.8%
5,000~7,000: 10.7%
10,000~20,000: 10.4%
Graduate school: 15.3%

Approximately 70% of the respondents belong to private universities. We obtained answers
from 865 English teachers around Japan, yet the largest number of the respondents work in
Tokyo. The numbers of students studying in the respondents' institutions are so varied that wecannot find any tendencies among them. These results may reflect the distribution ofuniversities in Japan.
One of the most conspicuous findings in this survey is the answers to Q17: the type of academic
entity they belong to. Since the legislative reforms concerning University Establishment
Standards in 1991, in which the regulations for units in general education and in academic
education were abolished, the so-called "departments of liberal arts" were also abolished, andtherefore the majority of the teachers working for a university came to belong to one of its
departments. This survey revealed that about 80% of the respondents belong to a department,
while about 20% of them belong to a (language) center, which did not exist in the previous
survey. If a teacher belongs to a center, he or she can be responsible for university-level tasks
such as organizing integrated syllabi, while their superiors or those responsible for personnel
affairs may not be English-education majors. Therefore, teachers belonging to this new type ofacademic entity face difficulties which are different from those in any other types of academic
entity, yet the reality has not yet been revealed.

3.

What kind of classes the respondents teach at their schools

Questions 18 to 23 of the current questionnaire are related to the classes the respondents teachat their schools. The major results are listed in the table below.

Table 58. What kind of classes the respondents teach at their schools
Q
18
19
20
21
22
23

Major results
Teaching general English
Teaching specialized English
82.6%

Notes

46.0%
Number of komas (90 min)6.2 komas /week (=9.3 hours / week)
Teaching four skills

Teaching test preparation

62.1%

40.1%

Not using CEFR

Using CEFR

70.0%
Using unified syllabus

16.9%
Not using unified syllabus

67.8%

28.3%

Proficiency-level classes

Courses for each skill area

61.6%

57.4%

Presentaion:34.2%
CLIL:15.2%
ESP:14.9%

E-learning: 49.5%
Outsourcing: 4.0%

Q18 asks what kind of classes they teach at their schools, and the results show that more than
80% of the respondents teach English courses offered in the general education curriculum, and
50% of them teach English courses offered in the specialized education curriculum.
Considering the high percentage of the latter, it seems that this percentage will be larger in the
future.
Q19 asks how many English classes (komas) they teach per week, and the results show thatthey teach 6.2 komas (90 min) on average. A further examination has revealed that full-timeteachers teach 5.2 komas on average and part-time teachers teach 7.6 komas at the school where
they mainly teach.
As for Q20, more than half of the respondents answered that they teach four skills combined or
separately, and more than 30% answered that they teach presentations. These results indicatethat contents related to oral skills have become more common than before. Furthermore, withrespect to Q22, nearly 70% of the respondents answered that their school has a unified syllabus.
The combined results of Qs 20 and 22 suggest that many schools are following the current
policies promoted by MEXT. For Q23, more than 60% of the respondents answered the school
where they teach provides proficiency-based classes, and nearly 60% answered their school
offers courses for each skill area. These results suggest that many schools offer scrupulously
designed learning settings for learners.
On the other hand, although CLIL, ESP, and EAP, are currently hot topics among English
teachers, it seems that their introduction into the English curriculum is still limited. Only over

10% of the respondents answered that their school had introduced them. Furthermore, as for
Q21, only nearly 20% of the respondents answered that their school uses CEFR to set a goal of
the English course. CEFR has been attracting attention in English education these days;
however, the results show that its use is still limited.
Finally, 4% of the respondents answered that their school outsources English classes to acompany/ language school/ organization. This percentage may seem to be rather small; however,it also cannot be disregarded considering the scale of the university which turns to outsourcing.
In current English education, class contents are often related to oral skills and test preparation,common syllabuses are widely introduced, and scrupulous instruction such as proficiencybased classes are required. Outsourcing of classes may be likely to occur in this situation.

4.

Duties and Request(s) related to English education from school teaching staff members

Questions 24 to 27 of the questionnaire asked the respondents about their duties andrequest(s) related to English education from school teaching staff members other than the
English teachers. The major results are listed in the table below.
Table 59. Duties and Request(s) related to English educationfrom school teaching staff members other than the English teachers
Q
24

25

26

27

Major results

Notes

Duties:End-of-semester exams

Duties:Committee work(s)Over 60%
Most important factor tohire new full-time teacher:Academic achievements(Publications andconference presentations)
68.5%
Request(s) related toEnglish education fromschool teaching staff
members other than the
English teachers: High
30.8%

57.2%
Most important factor tohire new full-timeteacher:
Qualification for the
subjects to be taught
56.8%
Request(s) related toEnglish education fromschool teaching staff
members other than the
English teachers: Never
27.7%

Nature of the request:
Effects of teaching

Nature of the request:
Curriculum/Contents

59.0%

46.4%

Curriculum building: 55.3%
Employment of full-timeteacher(s): 38.3%。
English proficiency: 54.6%
Academic career/degree:
52.2%，
Personality: 47.5%。

The responses to Q24 show that over 60% of the respondents are responsible for end-ofsemester exams and perform committee work. This finding agrees with the results of the openended question, showing that college English teachers have to bear a heavy burden because
there is an increasing demand on handling non-teaching tasks such as administrative andclerical work.
Q25 asked the respondents about the most important factor in hiring new full-time teacher(s).
About 70% of the respondents answered that an applicant’s academic achievement, including
his/her publications and conference presentations, is the most important factor. Since college
English teachers and candidates are going on to higher levels of education and they are required
to achieve superior performance to show that s/he is good qualified for his/her prospective
position, it is understandable that it takes time to secure a tenured position at university. Such ahighly skilled professional is required and s/he is expected to be an agreeable person having
proficiency in English. Thus, it must be difficult to find a candidate with good qualifications
for the subjects to be taught with classes of general English and four skills being offered to
students. The survey results reveal that well-qualified teachers with a wide range of skills areneeded in Japan.
As many English teachers belong to an undergraduate faculty/school or a language center, Q26
and Q27 asked the respondents whether or not they had received request(s) related to English
education from school teaching staff members other than the English teachers. About 30%
answered “yes.” The top three requests were related to the effects of teaching, curriculum, andthe content of instruction. Many people believe that there is a need for practical English andappropriate evaluation. Therefore, judging from the social environment and the survey results,
it seems that school teaching staff members do not place too many demands on English teachersand education.

Ideal goals of English education in Japan

5.

Questions 28 to 33 of the questionnaire ask respondents their ideas for English education in
Japan. The major results are listed in the table below.

Table 60. Ideal goals of English education in JapanQ
28

Major results
Current levels:
Current levels:
STEP pre-level 2/CEFR A2 STEP level 2/CEFR B1
38.3%

25.6%

Notes
STEP level 3/CEFR A1
22.6%
STEP pre-level 1/CEFR B2
25.3%

29

30

Target levels:
STEP pre-level 1
CEFR B2

Target levels:
STEP level 2
CEFR B1

50.2%

32.0%
A course taught inEnglish is notpreferable.
28.4%

A course taught in English ispreferable.
41.4%

31

32

33

Purpose:acquiring English basics

4.4 (5-point scale)Required backgrounds:
knowledge of English
education orapplied linguistics
4.27 (5-point scale)
Items necessary to reform
entrance examinations:admission policies
53.2%

Purpose:acquiring skills ofcollecting ortransmitting data at a
global scale
4.3 (5-point scale)Required backgrounds:
English proficiency
for Japanese English
teachers
3.89 (5-point scale)
Items necessary toreform entrance
examinations:
4 skills
48.8%

STEP level 1/CEFR C1
5.3%
Targets are unnecessary.
4.9%

Diversity
4.2 (5-point scale)
Professional or cultivatedcapacity
4.1 (5-point scale)
Leadership
3.6 (5-point scale)

Experiences of using
English on the job
3.02 (5-point scale)Specialty
34.5%
Making use of external
examinations
30.7%

Fifty percent of respondents to Q29 put the goals of English education at CEFR B2 level(STEP pre-level 1). On the other hand, as is shown in Q28, the current levels remain at CEFR
A2 level (STEP level 2), and there is deviation with the two scales from the targets. Q31 asks
the purpose of English education, among which "to train students in basic English skills"
shows the highest ratings of 83.5%. This result offers us many important issues to discuss.
The deviation of the current level from the target one could be caused by the fact that many
respondents feel their students lack English basic skills.
General approaches to training students in the four skills are adopted, among which remedial
lessons are conducted for that purpose only at 10%. The results that collecting or transmitting
data or responding to intercultural issues in the global society comes after attaining basic
proficiency reflect the current social situations. The relatively low importance put on liberalarts and expertise is consistent with the fact that CLIL, EAP or ESP is not penetrated. The
importance of leadership remains at only 3.0 on a 5-point scale, which indicates that while
importance is attached to basic proficiency, collecting or transmitting data, responding tointercultural issues or attaining global leadership is not emphasized in English education.

Japanese students’ lack of global leadership often causes problems but English education atuniversities has not adapted a serious stance to the issue.
As for the item of conducting classes in English asked in Q30, 40% is in favor and 30% is in
opposition. EMI (English as a Medium of Instruction) is now a hot topic, but both pros andcons are divided equally. Question 32 that asks "academic experiences and language ability"
required for English faculty members of the university shows "English proficiency" forJapanese English teachers is required, preceded by "studies on English education / applied
linguistics". English proficiency is believed to be essential for English teachers as it is also in
the third priority for hiring in personnel affairs. Despite this emphasis on English proficiency,
the figures for "experience of actually using English on the job" are low. Although thiscommittee predicted that the number of people who had come from the commercial enterprises
and involved in English education for university was increasing, the percentage of respondents
who answered that they really transferred from "the commercial enterprises (other thanuniversities, overseas workers)" is only 4.0%. Furthermore the fact that it is about 10%, if thenumber of people who has experienced public government offices or commercial enterprises
are put together, shows the condition for accepting people from enterprises is not cultivated.
Question 33 concerns entrance examinations. The responses that put emphasis on the necessityof improving entrance examinations hold a large number. The opinion, “it is not necessary tochange” or "I want to get rid of English tests from entrance examinations", account for only
about 5% respectively.
In this section, we briefly summarized the entire questionnaire survey, listed major findings,
and discussed implications of notable issues. The results indicate that classroom situations that
we face every day are undergoing constant and significant changes, as the circumstances ofuniversity English education are. In particular, the realities of English education are changing
in various ways, compared to the previous survey. It was notably revealed that teachers, whose
profession is now highly specialized, are struggling with various challenges and limitations indiverse classrooms. In the next section, based upon such realities, we will reexamine the resultsof the current survey and further propose suggestions from the 4th Status Survey Committee.

6.

Open-Ended Questions

The final section of the questionnaire was an open-ended item, “Please write down about what
you think about your situation at school as an English teacher and your classes freely”. The
answers were analyzed using by NVivo Plus, a software. As a result of the analysis, thefollowing six key words and phrases were identified; (a) teachers, (b) classes, (c) students, (d)purpose of English education, (e) English education policy of Japan, and (f) opinions to JACET.
Opinions regarding teachers focused on teacher qualities, the necessity of knowing applied
linguistics, the lack of English proficiency, the lack of full-time English teachers, the limited
research budget, the increasingly demanding teaching environment, and the unstable positionof English teachers. There were also complaints about the treatment of the teachers because
they cannot get a position or income commensurate with the amount of money they spent on
their education abroad. Some teachers also pointed out that there is a lack of communication
between full-time and part-time teachers or non-native speaking teachers and native speaking
teachers. As a result, they are unable to discuss the management of the English program.
As for classes, there were diverse opinions concerning the kind of English skills and the typesof teaching methods to adopt. For example, regarding the teaching content, basic English,
grammar, oral English, English as a Lingua Franca, ESP, and English as a liberal art weresuggested. Some teachers pointed out that English as the preparation for achievement tests suchas TOEIC and TOEFL should not be taught and that it would be preferable to develop students’critical thinking through the teaching of English. In addition, there were opinions aboutmaterial’s selection, the use of ICT, the importance of appropriate evaluation, and the use ofsmall-sized classes.
Many teachers indicated that students had limited Japanese language ability and academic
ability as well as were demotivated. Some teachers stated that students had diverse abilities andthus it was difficult to accommodate their needs. On the other hand, other teachers were
enthusiastic about fostering autonomous learners, developing the English ability of motivatedstudents, and assisting learners to live in a globalized society.
With regard to the purpose of English education, some teachers maintained that universities
differ from language schools. Therefore, teachers should have a different purpose for English
education.
Referring to policy issues, the national education policy was criticized. For instance, teachers
were critical about the emphasis on oral English communication, the stress due to university
reforms, and the limited education budget.
Concerning JACET, some teachers claimed the association should state its views about thenational English education policy more decisively.
Finally, in the feedback about the questionnaire, some teachers indicated that there were anumber of difficult questions to answer.

7.

Summary

In this section, we briefly summarized the entire questionnaire survey, listed major findings,
and discussed implications of notable issues. The results indicate that classroom situations that
we face every day are undergoing constant and significant changes, as the circumstances ofuniversity English education are. In particular, the realities of English education are changing
in various ways, compared to the previous survey. It was notably revealed that teachers, whose
profession is now highly specialized, are struggling with various challenges and limitations indiverse classrooms. In the next section, based upon such realities, we will reexamine the resultsof the current survey and further propose suggestions from the 4th Status Survey Committee.

Seven Proposals about the Future of English Education at University

Based on the results, we would like to make the following seven proposals about the future ofEnglish Education at university
1.

English Education to respond to social diversity

Entering the 21st century, we are faced with rapid progress of Information Communication
Technology (ICT), and our society has been changing dramatically. With the advent of Artificial
Intelligence (AI), the ways of using Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) and elearning are also expected to change. We should consider possibilities and limitations of ICT.
We also should consider English education, which can foster learners’ socialities such ascommunication abilities through dialogues, intercultural communications with people fromvarious backgrounds such as gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, social rank and religion.
2.

English Education to respond to borderlessness of people exchanges

Considering the present situations where exchanges between people have become borderless,and education and research activities across multiple areas have been conducted on a global
scale, beyond university frameworks, we should increase efforts to promote cooperation withteachers with different academic, nationality and language backgrounds, cooperation withprimary and secondary education, regional cooperation, industry-academia-government
cooperation, and international cooperation. We should enrich our view of English as a Lingua
Franca, as well as improve our English ability. We also should foster human resources who canprovide leadership in international situations.
3.

English Education to response to changes in educational environment

We are faced with various changes in English Education such as the introduction of external
English tests to university entrance exams and the outsourcing of skill-based English education.
In this situation, we should hold a comprehensive viewpoint for setting and managing
educational principles in university-wide English education, acquire the ability to manage
whole courses and programs, and to plan and develop curricula and syllabi at the university.
4.

English Education emphasizing specialty

Considering the situation where society is highly specialized and the level of expertise ofteachers involved in English education become high, we should examine what is necessary toaccomplish the ideal English level, the Grade Pre-1 Test in Practical English Proficiency(EIKEN), which is equivalent to B2 level in the Common European Framework of References
for languages (CEFR) at the university English education from an expertise viewpoint. We
should utilize our expertise in English education through Content and Language Integrated
Learning (CLIL), English as Medium of Instruction (EMI), English for Specific Purposes (ESP),
and English for Academic Purposes (EAP). We should consider, propose and practice the wayof instruction to improve motivation of learners who are not good at English or at low
proficiency levels of English from the expertise viewpoint.
5.

Environmental arrangement for young scholars being active and human resource
development

To respond to today’s social needs, we should focus on fostering young scholars. Considering
recruitment of young scholars who represent the next generation in changing the employment
system dramatically, we should arrange the educational and research environment as a working
place where the young scholars feel attractive and inviting.
6.

Providing references for university English teachers

Young researchers and teachers at universities need highly specialized knowledge toaccumulate achievements, at the same time they are expected to teach in the diversified
environments of English education and engage in various administration-related tasks. In orderfor young researchers and teachers to start jobs in English education at university smoothly, we
should provide them with comprehensive references to learn basic knowledge and skills toengage in English education.
7.

Arranging the research environment to solve problems in education

Reforms of the curriculum guidelines for English education and entrance examination systems
have been carried out continuously in response to globalization and falling birthrates. Education
at primary, junior high and senior high schools has been changing. These influence university
education. We should assess what problems these changes cause and improve the quality ofEnglish education through solving these problems. For this purpose, we should continue toexamine the changes in English education at university through fixed-point observation.