Conference Review

PAC FEELTA – Vladivostok
John Campbell-Larsen
Kwansei Gakuin University School of International Studies
Those of us who attend the regular round of conferences in Japan or other East
Asian countries will perhaps have become accustomed to the ease with which
we can hop on a shinkansen or a plane, find information about the conference
venue or program at the click of a mouse and just “do” a conference. A cozysense of familiarity often pervades as we see presentations from teachers teachingin similar contexts to ourselves, with similar concerns, similar complaints andsimilar challenges.
The 18th Pan-Asian Consortium of Language Teaching Associations and Far
Eastern English Language Teachers’ Association (PAC FEELTA) international
conference held in Vladivostok from November 1 to 4, 2012 was a welcome
reminder that other contexts, other concerns, other challenges exist, and thatthe oh-so-familiar world of EFL education in Japan can color our attitudes andshape our outlook in ways that we often do not appreciate.
The process of actually getting to Russia involved a long and multi-layered
visa application process. Although I started the ball rolling in mid-July, I didn’t
actually receive my visa until late October. Previous travel to Russia had preparedme for this, but it was still frustrating for someone used to Schengen agreement
borderless travel in Europe or “visa-on-arrival” travel elsewhere. Likewise, getting
a flight for what should have been the short hop across the Sea of Japan was not
as easy as I would have thought, and I ended up overnighting in Seoul before
departing on a morning flight to Vladivostok. A few familiar faces were on theflight, and it turned out that there would be a sizeable contingent from Japan inattendance at the conference.
63Campbell-Larsen

The conference venue was the recently completed Russky Island campusof the Far Eastern Federal University, which hosted the APEC summit during
the summer. The venue provided state-of-the-art facilities and was impressivein scale and concept. Accommodation was available on site, but I opted to staydowntown. A free shuttle bus to and from downtown was available, and it wasalso possible to take a taxi, booked from the hotel front desk, at a reasonable
price. (It didn’t seem possible to flag taxis down in the street.)
It was clear from the first glance that the conference would offer a varied
and wide-ranging program of presentations, workshops and panels, and asusual, it was a tough job to decide what to see and how best to spend the time. A
subjective impression of the program was that there seemed to be less of some ofthe staples of conferences in Japan such as computer-assisted language learningor extensive reading, and more presentations focused on literary, social andpolitical aspects of language and language education.
Over the next three days, I attended a wide variety of presentations,workshops and plenary sessions covering a broad range of topic areas. Rod Ellis, afamiliar name to many, gave a plenary talk on designing and implementing taskbased courses. Although the topic was a familiar one and Professor Ellis covered
points that most teachers have dealt with at some point, it was still interesting
to see that the debate over the effectiveness of task-based learning was alive andwell.
Professor Ellis was followed by one of the Russian plenary speakers, Professor
Marina Kaul, who spoke on the issues surrounding compiling Russian-English,
English-Russian dictionaries. Professor Kaul’s extensive scholarship was clearlyin evidence, and she offered many thoughtful insights into the nuances of lexis
and usage. The talk was all the more interesting because the language interface
was not the familiar English-Japanese context, compelling me to think moredeeply about issues of vocabulary and usage beyond the particular concerns ofEnglish teaching in Japan.
Another familiar face was Tim Murphey. In several sessions he talked aroundthe basic theme of humanizing the classroom and the learning experienceand making (language) learning a thing that people can and want to do and64

PAC FEELTA – Vladivostok, OnCUE Journal, 7(1), pages 63-67

feel good about. I have seen Tim present on many occasions in Japan, and his
infectious enthusiasm and optimism about harnessing human potential always
communicate readily in his talks.
Among the many other sessions that I attended, I want to mention three that
I found particularly interesting. In a panel session hosted by Stephen Ryan, four
panelists discussed current trends in ELT in Japan, Korea, Russia and Thailand.
Representing JALT, Stephen Henneberry described the ongoing efforts ofMEXT to promote English proficiency through more initiatives, but it is still
not clear whether institutional resistance will once again impede real change inEnglish education in Japan. Michael Jones representing KOTESOL outlined themove by authorities in Seoul to promote teaching English by Korean teachersof English, and reduce the numbers of native English speakers in teachingpositions at schools in the Seoul area. By stark contrast, whether to use L1 orL2 teachers was not an option in the context of the Russian Far East. ElenaOnoprienko representing FEELTA reported on the lack of native speakers in theRussian context (although the excellent English skills of the student volunteers
at the conference showed that real results can indeed be achieved by non-nativespeaking teachers). The low numbers of English native speaking teachers wasattributed to financial concerns in the main, but in addition the visa system may
also play a role. Or, it may be the simple fact that Siberia is a less attractive venue
for “tourist teachers” than some other Asian destinations. That brings us toWalaiporn Chaya, who reported on the situation in Thailand, where ELT seems
to be booming, and there seems to be a strong consensus among authorities,
educators and learners of the very real importance of English language skills
in a dynamic and competitive 21st century economy. Overall, the panel served
as a good reminder that the field of ELT is in a state of constant flux and thatdifferent contexts have vastly different concerns and approaches. The best advice
for teachers seemed to be, “Don’t get too comfy. Be prepared for change.”
A short paper given by Aleksandra Eremenko dealt with learning activities
based on critical thinking. The presenter did not pull any punches and made it
clear that critical thinking is a weighty topic. Although her slides might havebeen a little bit too dense with text from a Powerpoint design perspective, they65

Campbell-Larsen

served to remind the audience that some things just can’t be simplified to a coupleof bullet points. Critical thinking is a multi-component, holistic and high-level
mental process which takes time and practice to develop. It was also refreshing tohear that critical thinking was problematical for students working in a European
context, which perhaps undercuts some of the unthinking assumptions we may
have about Asian students and Asian cultural/educational norms. Simply put,
critical thinking is not a natural intellectual endowment that tags along withgeneral learning, but a specific skill that needs to be nurtured, whatever thecultural background of the learners, or teachers for that matter.
Victoria Zhenchenko’s paper on “Gender identification of epithets inmodern commercials” was an engaging talk on the way commercials use language
to align to gender identities. The paper itself was very interesting, but the realtreat was the discussion afterwards. Even though the lunch hour had begun,
the attendees remained in the room discussing issues of gender and identity inmedia and talking over such issues as the extent to which commercials merelyreflect social reality or actually play a part in constructing it. The intelligent,
informed, civil and enlightening discussion was the very essence of the best kindof intellectual debate.
To sum up, the conference covered a wide variety of topics and issues,and provided a venue for speakers with extremely diverse backgrounds andexperiences to talk about issues of practical concern and intellectual interest.
What really struck me as distinct about the conference, in comparison to many of
the conferences I have attended in East Asia, was the way in which language andlearning were conceived. That is to say, in the Japanese context much time andenergy is given to the “what” and the “how” of language learning. Topics suchas computer-assisted language learning, extensive reading, testing, institutional
constraints and the like are the mainstay of many conference presentations. ThePAC FEELTA conference tended towards the “why” of language learning.
The getting of language knowledge was seen as non-problematical in itself,given a certain amount of application by learners. The focus was what to do withthe knowledge thus gained. Questions about language use in society, in media,
in politics and literature all featured heavily. The university, we were reminded, is66

PAC FEELTA – Vladivostok, OnCUE Journal, 7(1), pages 63-67

not a way station for young people between school and work, but a place whereseriousness of purpose combines with intellectual rigor to create a communitythat has the ability to find information and then, most importantly, analyze it.
The business of education in this worldview was rather like the trip to Russia;
it was not made particularly easy for you, but if you really wanted to go, the trip
was more than worthwhile.

Author’s bio

John Campbell-Larsen received his MA in TESOL from Birmingham University.
He currently teaches at Kwansei Gakuin University School of International
Studies and his main interests are conversation analysis and classroom interaction.
joncamlar@hotmail.com
Received: December 4, 2012
Accepted: January 14, 2013
Editor’s Note: In this issue, we welcome the conference review
written by John Campbell-Larsen. He is a recipient of the CUE
Member Support Conference Grant and consequently applied hisgrant to a conference trip. Here, he shares some of their experiences
attending the event.
One of the primary aims of the CUE SIG is to support and recognize the distinctive
work of our members through a variety of awards and grants. For outstanding
articles in the OnCUE Journal or excellent conference presentations we offer themember or attendee nominated Reader’s Choice and Best of CUE Awards. CUEalso supports our members’ interests in professional development through the New
Member Conference Grant, Member Support Conference Grant, and Member
Research Grant, which aim to help members with little or no institutional funding.
To find more information about CUE awards and grants and learn how to apply,
please see our website. http://jaltcue.org/content/cue-grants-and-awards-2014
67