Momoyama

GakuinUniversity

69

共同研究：文学部での効果的な英語教育

Curriculum Change : Working with Teachers’
Professional Knowledge Rather than Against it
Michael CARROLL*
Lynne DOUGLAS**
Marlen HARRISON**
Chie TSURII**
1. Introduction
The word ‘curriculum’ is often taken to refer to some sort of document concerning the content
of a course or courses. Curriculum documents may be written by the teacher in charge of acourse, or may be given to teachers by an institution. They may be no more than a few lines stating the overall content to be covered or they may be several pages giving detailed lists of topics,
materials, teaching methods, assessment processes and so on. Nevertheless, these kinds of documents, however detailed, are in fact only a small part of any curriculum, in the broad sense of theword. Lawrence Stenhouse saw curriculum not as such a document but as a set of understandings
shared by teachers of what they were doing (Stenhouse, 1977). More recently David Tripp has
depicted curriculum as ‘a systematic set of relations between particular people, objects, events,
and circumstances.’ (Tripp, 1987 p.7)
Similarly, curriculum change is not so simple as it might at first appear. A naive view has it that
all that is necessary to change a curriculum is to draw up a plan and instruct teachers to follow
it. This may involve specifying overall goals, more narrowly defined objectives, a required text,
an assessment procedure and so on, or it may involve just some of these things. But if we accept
the broad view of curriculum as residing in the social situation of the classroom, and think of‘curriculum’, as all those things that go on in and out of the classroom which have an influence on
student learning, then we can see that in order to change that situation we need to go beyond thiskind of prescriptive documentation (though it may still be a good starting point).
Perhaps the most important dimension along which curriculum changes vary is in the extent to*本学文学部**本学兼任講師

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

70

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要

第30巻第１号

which they are led from the top or the bottom of an organization. Markee (1997) describes fivemodels of curriculum change, and concludes that top-down approaches are the least effective andbottom-up ones the most effective. However, he points out that there is considerable variation
along the top-down, bottom-up continuum, and he recognizes that solely bottom-up developments
are not suitable for all situations. While it appears to be true that instances where groups ofteachers spontaneously develop new ways of working, through discussions arising out of theireveryday work, are indeed often the best models of enduring and highly evaluated change, it does
not necessarily follow that institutional initiatives have no role to play. First, such grass-rootsbased changes usually take place in institutions with strong support structures, and second, institutions themselves (as administrators and managers) are also participants in these social
situations, and thus have ‘rights’ to initiate changes. The crucial point for Markee is not where
the impetus for change comes from, but the level of consultation and shared decision making. In
cases where initiatives are top-driven there is a real danger, some would say a high probability,of them being rejected or subverted (Gibbons 1989). Sue Hood, one of the designers of theCertificate of Spoken and Written English widely implemented in Australia in the mid-1990s,
points out that to varying degrees, ‘in resilient and resourceful ways [teachers find] that they cancontinue to do what they have always done [ ... ] regardless of the impositions of policy.’ (Hood,
1995, p32) And it is not just a case of deliberate subversion. If teachers are not involved in thinking through the changes, and do not fully understand them, they may in fact be unable to implement them effectively. There is thus always a need for serious consideration of the ways changes
are communicated, especially to teachers, and the extent of the support mechanisms and feedback
responsiveness. In other words, curriculum design, even when it comes from the top down, if it
recognizes the crucial role of teachers in implementing it, must take responsibility for supporting
teachers through its implementation, listening to their concerns and acting on them. A new curriculum must have sufficient flexibility to allow teachers’ knowledge of the real situation at theclassroom level to have an influence-from the bottom-up. It is not too much to say, then, that curriculum innovations will succeed or fail according to the extent to which teachers in particular,
and to some extent students too, feel that they are meaningfully involved in the process ofchange. (Mackenzie 2000 ; Menges 1997, Claire and Adger 2000)
It follows, then, that before we can change anything in such a complex social situation as a curriculum, we need to understand what it is that we are changing. In other words we need to talkto teachers and students to find out how they perceive these objects events and circumstances in
the classrooms they share. This paper describes a project in which teachers and students weresurveyed using questionnaires, interviews, and structured discussions to find out what was happening in their classes.

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

Curriculum Change : Working with Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Rather than Against it

71

2.1 A survey of teachers and students of Bungakubu English Courses
The Faculty of Letters at Momoyama Gakuin University has been redesigning its first and second year English curriculum over the last two years. In the first attempt at reform, a committee
chose a textbook and issued directives to teachers. No attempt was made to solicit teacher views,
or to provide support in the implementation of the change. At the end of the first year it became
clear that opposition to the text was nearly universal, and was expressed simply through noncompliance. The set text was withdrawn and this project was eventually set up to investigate current classroom practices. Teachers were invited to complete a questionnaire and take part in a
structured interview focusing on their course design processes, actual classroom activities, assessment systems and rationales and so on. Following this, students were surveyed and interviewed in focus groups to gain some understanding of their perceptions of needs and the extent
to which those needs were currently being met. This data is currently being collated, though thedata which is in to date indicates that in fact there is already considerable innovation, experimentation and serious consideration of curriculum issues going on, quite independently of any central
curriculum administration.
The questionnaire was carried out in the latter half of 2003, followed up by face to face interviews. Nine oral communication lecturers and five reading lecturers took part. In addition a questionnaire was administered to 251 first year students, and two structured interviews carried out
with fourteen of them. Both teachers and students were asked about their objectives, and the way
they realised these objectives through their course design and activities. They were also asked
about materials, homework, assessment of students, and course evaluation. In addition, teachers
were asked about the extent of their contact with other teachers, and students were asked about
their perceptions of the amounts of English and Japanese used in their classes.

2.2 Data from Teacher questionnaire and interviews
Learning Objectives
Q1. What are your objectives for this course?
Oral Communication : There was a wide range of answers to this question. There were broadly
four categories of objectives: practical listening and speaking skills and motivation, vocabularybuilding, building meta-linguistic knowledge, and learning skills. All the interviewees aimed to increase students’ fluency, and several (four out of nine) aimed to increase students’ confidence
and to broaden students’ vocabulary. Five out of the nine aimed to enable students to give opinions in English. Five interviewees also expected students to be able to work in groups by the endof the course. Three interviewees mentioned ‘speaking in front of the class’ as an objective, andNII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

72

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要

第30巻第１号

two mentioned ‘having positive experiences using English.’ In contrast with the universal objective of fluency, only three interviewees mentioned ‘accuracy’ as an objective. Other objectives
mentioned are listed in the table below.
Reading: There were three major groups of objectives: skills development, vocabulary building
and awareness of other cultures. The complete list is shown table 1
Course Design and Activities
Q2. How do you design your course, based on these objectives?
Q3. What activities do you do in this course? Are they the same each week? Do you dounits of work that continue over several classes? How do the activities contribute toyour objectives?
Most Oral communication teachers mentioned integrated skills activities : LSRW leading to oraltasks. The focus was clearly on creating opportunities for students to speak in class, and to build
confidence and fluency.
Reading teachers mentioned a wide range of activities, with the most popular being training inreading skills through explicit teaching and practice of skimming, scanning, guessing from context, and doing exercises to build understanding of structure. Also mentioned were speed reading, reading aloud along with a tape recording, silent reading, and vocabulary building homeworkand quizzes. In addition, some reading teachers mentioned activities based on using the issues
raised by texts for discussion or reflective writing. The Complete list is Shown in table 2.
Materials
Q4 : What materials do you use in your classroom? (For example, worksheets, materials
for games, materials from the internet, textbooks, realia, audio-visual material)
Oral Communication : Most interviewees (8 out of 9) used one or more textbooks either inclass or as the originals for photocopied worksheets. Similarly eight used audio-visual materials(textbook CDs, movies, textbook videos), and six created their own materials for games. Threeinterviewees used CDs as stimuli for oral activities, and two teachers used bi-lingual NHK educational programs for raising awareness of the importance of English.
Two interviewees used realia ( pamphlets, objects, booklets, visual materials from their own
country, materials for games), three used graded readers and other reading texts and articles, andfour used materials from the internet for vocabulary building and preparation for oral presentations. In addition three interviewees wrote their own texts.
Reading : Similarly, all interviewees used a textbook. A wide variety of other materials wereused including other textbooks, audiovisual materials, worksheets and handouts, materials fromthe internet and articles in magazines or newspapers.
Q5 : If you use commercially produced materials, why did you choose those particular

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

Curriculum Change : Working with Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Rather than Against it

73

Objectives. Oral Communication

Objectives, Reading

Listening and Speaking Skills
・ To improve listening skills.
・ To initiate a conversation.
・ To improve pronunciation.
・ To become a better speaker in front of a class.
・ To increase writing fluency as a means of improving speaking ability.

reading skills
・ To get the gist - skimming. [4]・ To retrieve information-scanning.
・ To read intensively for deep understanding.
・ To focus on main ideas.
・ To understand phrases and expressions.

Meta-linguistic knowledge
Meta-linguistic knowledge
・ To become aware of stress patterns in sen- ・ To understand structure.
tences.
・ To break down sentences into chunks (mean・ To learn the importance of chunks of language.
ing units).
・ To become aware of body language and gestures.
・ To become aware of communication styles.
Vocabulary
Vocabulary
・ To learn everyday topics, eg. “ time”.
・ To use learning strategies for enlargement of・ To become aware of NS English expressions.
vocabulary (synonyms, antonyms, prefixes,
・ To reinforce classroom language.
suffixes, etc.). [2]・ To become aware of appropriate responses. in ・ To guess the meanings of unknown words
simulated situations.
from the context.
・ To master the proper usage of key words bylearning them in the context.
・ To understand idiomatic phrases.
Learning skills

Learning Skills

・ To become a reflective learner.
・ To foster problem-solving skills in group activities.
・ To take responsibility for learning.
・ To be able to self-evaluate and self-correct.
・ To be able to evaluate oneself in relation toothers.
・ To increase frequency of asking questions.
・ To be able to use the teacher as a resource.
・ To increase motivation and confidence.

・ To use learning strategies for enlargement ofvocabulary (synonyms, antonyms, prefixes,
suffixes, etc.).
・ To use context for guessing.
・ To use a monolingual dictionary.

Awareness of other cultures
・ To introduce foreign language news articles ata beginner reading level.
・ To develop students’ understanding of international issues.
・ To increase students’ self-awareness throughforeign language learning and understanding
different cultures.
・ To understand foreign cultures throughEnglish learning and to heighten their interestin Japanese culture and language.
Table 1. Learning Objectives

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

74

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要

第30巻第１号

Oral Communication

Reading

All interviewees mentioned the following :The following were mentioned :Oral presentations
・ everyday topics which students can respond toin question and answer format or in oral presentations.
・ narratives, cultural issues, student-based interests and textbook-generated topics for oral

Skill building: explicit teaching of and practice in・ Skimming・ Scanning・ Guessing from context
・ ‘Chunking’-breaking sentences into meaning
units for more fluent reading

activities.
Project work leading to oral presentations
Pair work for listening and speaking

・ Summarizing (in English and Japanese)・ Sharing summaries with classmates
Extensive reading

Teacher feedback to students

・ Timed reading

Information exchange
Discussion

・ Reading aloud along with a tape・ Graded readersMore than half mentioned the following :Self assessment
Music
Storytelling

Intensive reading
Comprehension questions (in English andJapanese)
Explicit teaching of structure, genre, vocabulary,

Video and audio clips
Internet and email (penpals etc)
Warm-up activities

and background knowledge
Vocabulary

Acting and role play (e.g., realistic situations toincrease understanding of language appropriate to the situation)
Journals
Communication and word games

・ Quizzes
・ Home study (TOEFL practice)
Listening to texts read aloud on tape
Engaging with ideas
・ Commenting on texts
・ Discussing issues raised

Other activities mentioned :Timed conversations
Graded and extensive reading
Explicit teaching of useful phrases and Vocabulary
Drilling and recycling
Learning key sentences in question, answer, responses form
Writing and then role-playing a prepared conversation
Worksheets.
Self-assessment
Table 2. Course design and activities

ones? How do they fit in with your course objectives?
The range of textbook used is shown in table 3, and reasons for choice of textbook are shown intable 4.
Problems with Textbooks

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

Curriculum Change : Working with Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Rather than Against it

75

Course books Oral Communication

Course books Reading・ English First Hand 1
・ J-Talk
・ Nice talking with you
・ A trip to Britain
・ Talking together
・ Topic Talk -Issues
・ Communication Strategies (2nd year students)
・ Also materials taken from several coursebooks toallow for a topic based course

5.1.1 ReadingⅠ・ Cause and Effect (3rd ed.). P. Ackert.
Shohakusha.
・ Independent Reader. Kimura, S. and Shimizu,
Y. Macmillan Language House.
・ Insights Today. Shohakusha.
・ Inspiring English. Asakawa, K. Kinseido.
・ News Break. Takada, H. Ikubundo.
・ The Powerful Reader (2nd ed.). Beth M.
Pachecol and Joan Young Gregg. Macmillan
Language House.

Other Materials
Audio-visual materials (textbook CDs, movies,
textbook videos), own materials for games
CDs as stimuli for oral activities
Bi-lingual NHK educational programs

5.1.2 Reading
・ Clearly Britain, Clearly Japan. T. O’Brien
Nan’undo.
・ Reading Shukan ST. Someya, M. and Ferrasci,
F. Eihosha.
・ Skills for Better Reading. Ishitani, Y. Nan’
undo.
・ Words in Context. Miyake, M. and Miyake, C.
Macmillan Language House.
Other materials
Other textbook (s)Audiovisual materials (textbook tapes)
Worksheets / handouts
・ materials for practice in rapid reading
・ materials on reading skills and for practice inrapid reading with these skills
・ materials for checking students’ comprehension of texts in the textbook, Shukan ST・ (Q&A format)
・ worksheets to write in main ideas of eachparagraph of the texts in the textbook
Materials from the internet [3]・ Used as part of the background and expanded
information.
・ Related articles are used. [2]・ Info / materials on various fields (history, international news, etc.)
Articles in magazines or newspapers
・ Newsweek
・ The Daily Yomiuri
・ The Japan Times・ International Herald Tribune

Table 3. Textbook and other materials.

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

76

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要

第30巻第１号

Oral Communication

Reading・ student-related topics

・ author’s views and claims fit course objectives

・ attractive, engaging visual format, which encourage the students to use texts
・ easy to understand・ clear information that can be used for oral activities
・ flexible enough to allow students to work at・ covers reading skills systematically and comprehensively [2]・ good for practicing rapid reading, vocabularybuilding
・ current topics which stimulate learners’ interest ; appropriate for university students ;different levels

thought-provoking

・ Integrated activities (speaking, listening, read- ・ appropriate difficulty leveling and writing)・ variety of tasks
・ communicative games for pair work activities, ・ organization motivates students-sense of ac(for lower level students).
・ to provide a framework for the course

complishment
・ directions are written in Japanese (necessary
for all but the highest level)
・ empathy of author with Japan・ accompanying audiocassettes

Table 4. Reasons for choice of textbook

Several teachers noted that it was difficult to gauge the right level, particularly since teachers
were not informed of the level of their class prior to the textbook selection period.
Homework
Q6 : Do you give homework? What? How much? How often?
Most Oral Communication interviewees said they gave some homework (8 out of 9). The
amounts ranged from occasional tasks (TOEFL preparation, completion of classwork, reports,
reading or project-type work) (5 interviewees) to weekly assignments based on the textbook, orjournal writing (3 interviewees). One of the latter interviewees required students to write 75
journal entries (5 per week).
Reading interviewees only occasionally gave assignments, up to five times per semester, butmore often required students to prepare for class by doing prior reading, vocabulary study, revision for quizzes, or completion of unfinished classwork. As for the Oral communication teachers,
the amounts of this type of homework varied between occasionally and after every class. Readingteachers also required homework associated with graded readers: reading at least 180 pages, andwriting one or two book reports.
Assessment
Q7 : How do you assess student achievement? How do you award grades at the end ofeach semester? How is your assessment related to your objectives? (For example, written / oral achievement tests, written / oral quizzes, participation and performance in

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

Curriculum Change : Working with Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Rather than Against it
Oral Communication

77

Reading・ pairwork

・ tests

・ oral presentations
・ interviews (sometimes audio-or video-taped)
・ four to six units of work per semester, writing
tasks (journals, emails)
・ portfolio (project, weekly reports, notebooks,
self assessment)・ quizzes on text book items or TOEFL-type

・ quizzes (vocabulary, TOEFL, textbook, etc)
・ reading reports
・ reading amount・ attendance and participation
・ assignments (in one case only for borderline
students)

・ post quiz corrections
・ student self- evaluation
・ attendance and participation
・ pronunciation・ tests
Table 5. Assessmentclass, homework, reports, journals, portfolios, oral presentations)
All the oral communication teachers used some form of continuous or task-based assessment.
Most used a combination of attendance and participation, classwork and homework, and some inaddition used objective examination-like tasks (speaking tests for instance).
Reading teachers placed more reliance on tests (usually 65
80% of the final grade), but also
used attendance and participation, homework (including graded readers book reports), and quizzes.
Assessment tasks and methods are shown in table 5.
In both groups some teachers used a point system which they converted to grades, while others, especially oral communication teachers, awarded only grades. There was considerable variation in the way these scores were reported to students. In reading classes there was mostly aneven spread of grades from A to C, with some variation between 5% and 20% for D. There wasaround a 10% drop-out rate (X).
Q8 : How do you evaluate your course? (For example, questionnaires, comparing student
performance at the beginning and end of the course)
Interviewees used one of two methods of evaluating their courses: student feedback, or observation and assessment of students, or a combination of both. The range of methods is shown intable 6.
Q9 : Do you know what happens in students’ other English classes? (For example, if you
are teaching reading, do you know what happens in the students’ writing and oral communication classes?)If ‘yes’, how do you take this into account when designing your own course?

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

78

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要
Student feedback

第30巻第１号
Observation and assessment

Methods of student feedback included :Methods of observation and assessment of stu-・ University questionnaire (reading teachers
only ; oral communication teachers did not
mention this)・ Post-task evaluation questionnaires : rating activities according to set criteria
・ Motivation graphs

dent participation and progress included :・ Observation in class : participation and enthusiasm
・ Comparing student work at the beginning of
the course with work at the end
・ Interviews on video or cassette tape・ Quizzes

・ Self evaluation
・ Free-writing feedback through journals
・ Guided writing : “What did you learn? What・ Reading speed

was most useful?” etc.
Table 6. Course evaluation

If ‘no’, would you like to know? If you knew, would you take it into account in designing
your course?
All interviewees said that they would value communication with the teachers of other courses.
In reflecting on the aborted curriculum of 2002, most were positive about the possibility of communication between reading, writing and oral communication teachers (though not necessarily
about the message book method, and not at all about the shared text). 6 out of the 9 complainedthat this was not possible in the current system. Some noted that their main source of information was conversation with the students, but this did not give them a comprehensive picture.
It was suggested that the one kind of useful communication was general information about what
activities students did in class, and about what homework they were given. Another was information about students’ performance, especially where problems arose.
Several teachers also suggested that some kind of thematic connection between reading andoral communication classes would be beneficial.
Other Responses and Suggestions
Course objectives and materials
Eight teachers said that the Objectives (distributed by the Faculty) were achievable for students between upper beginner and advanced English levels, but it did not include levels below
this.
One teacher requested a community access file for teachers’ lesson plans and materials (contributed by teachers) with an indication of topic and application, as part of a lightly structured curriculum approach.
Organisation of Classes
Some teachers appeared to be unaware that Bungakubu students were streamed according to

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

Curriculum Change : Working with Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Rather than Against it

79

the results of the ITP test, while others complained that they were not informed of the results ofthe test for their students individually, nor even the level of the class they were teaching. Whilesome teachers used their own initial diagnostic test, one teacher suggested that a common test
(made available by the Faculty but not compulsory) would be useful.
Five teachers requested that oral English class sizes be restricted to between 20 to 25 students. Twenty students was the ideal number for oral activities.
Almost all teachers would welcome more information about students’ other classes, and especially reading teachers would like to see some thematic connection between reading and oral communication classes.
Content
There were several comments and suggestions about the kind of content that best suited oral
communication classes, shown in table 7.

Comments about content :・ Specific purposes course components (General English, business, study, travel, and so on)
・ A mini skills package with the theme of responsibility to be used as an introduction for very low
level first year students to be administered bilingually at the beginning of the course
・ Dictionary skills at upper beginner (+) level for first year students
・ Sequenced listening skills
・ Reading as an important part of oral communication : to provide material for talk・ Learning styles important when developing lessons and materials
Other :
・ Several teachers mentioned the importance of student input in evaluation, and requested teacher
input into the university student evaluation questionnaire.
・ One teacher suggested follow-up discussions.
Table 7. Coments

3. Student Questionnaire Results Question 1 (Figure 1) asked students “Which of thefollowing activities did you do in English classes? ( 英語の授業ではどのような活動をしますか。

次の各活動のうち，当てはまるものにマークして下さい)”
For Reading classes, reading activities ; translation activities ; writing activities ; reports ;TOEIC / TOEFL preparation ; and quizzes and tests were most commonly reported with morethan 50 students responding positively for each of these activities. For Oral Communication
classes, games ; drama / role play ; group and pair work ; self and peer evaluation ; oral presentations ; speaking tests ; parties and social activities ; and pronunciation activities were most commonly reported with more than 100 students responding positively for each of these activities. In
the “Other” (その他) category, students reported listening activities ; music ; and imagination

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

80

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要

第30巻第１号

Figure 1. How much English is spoken in Reading class
160
140
120
100
# of Student
Responses

80
60
40
20

Student (N＝250)
Classmate (N＝241)
Teacher (N＝246)

0100% Japanese

80% Japanese

50% J, 50% E

80% English

100% English

Amount of English Spoken

Figure 2. How much English is spoken in Oral-Communication class120
100# of Student
Responses

80
60
40

Student (N＝251)
Classmate (N＝245)
Teacher (N＝243)20
0100% Japanese

80% Japanese

50% J, 50% E

80% English

100% English

Amount of English Spoken

activities for Reading classes, and listening activities ; written journals ; and textbook use for Oral
Communication classes.
Questions 2 and 3 (Figures 1 and 2) asked students “How much English did you / your classmates/ your teacher speak in reading class? (READING の授業では，どれぐらい英語を話しましたか？

他の学生は？教師は？)” Students reported that both students and teachers spoke more English
on average in Oral Communication classes than Reading classes.
Questions 4, 5, and 6 all asked students about textbooks :Question 4 Did you use a textbook? (教科書は使われましたか？)Reading

96% YES (使った)

3% NO

1% No Response

Oral Communication

72% YES (使った)27% NO

1% No Response

Question 5 Is it effective to use a text book? (教科書を使うことは，効果的だと思いますか？)
Reading

89% YES (効果的だと思う)

9% NO

2% No Response

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

Curriculum Change : Working with Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Rather than Against it

Oral Communication

42% YES (効果的だと思う)

55% NO

81

3% No Response

Question 6 Do you think it would be effective to use a shared textbook? ( 共通教科書なら（例えばリーディング全部のクラスで同じ教科書を使うこと）効果的だと思いますか？)
Reading

44% YES (効果的だと思う)

52% NO

4% No Response

Oral Communication

33% YES (効果的だと思う)

63% NO

4% No Response

Question 7 (Figure 4) asked students “How many times did you have homework? What did you
think of the amount? (for Reading and Oral Communication combined) ( 週に何回宿題を出さな

ければなりませんか？（R, O 合わせて）また，量についての意見を選んでください)”
There was considerable variation, but the majority of students reported having homework about
six times per term, about the right amount. The responses are shown in Figure 3 and 4.
Question 8 asked students “Do you understand the assessment system? ( 評価方法を理解していますか｡)” The majority of students (66%) reported that they mostly understood the assessment system (ある制度は理解している) for both reading and oral communication (N=245).
Question 9 asked students “Do you understand how you were assessed and how your grades were
determined? (どのように評価されているのか，把握していますか.)” The majority of students(63%) reported that they mostly understood how their own individual grades were determined(ある制度は理解している) in their reading and oral communication classes (N=247).
Questions 10, 11 and 12 all asked students about Graded Readers :Question 10 “How many graded readers did you read this year? (今年度 Graded Readers を何冊読みましたか？)”Percentages of students reading graded readers (N=244):
2 readers or less :11%

3 readers :12%

4 readers :17%

5 readers :26%

6 or more :34%

Question 11 “Did you enjoy reading the graded readers? (Graded Readers を読むのは楽しかったですか？)” The majority of students enjoyed reading graded readers.
Percentages of student reactions to graded readers (N=247):
I enjoyed them very much (とても楽しかった):I enjoyed them (楽しかった):

5%
55.5%

I didn’t enjoy them much (あまり楽しくなかった):31%

I didn’t enjoy them at all (楽しくなかった):

8.5%

Question 12 “Are graded readers a good way to learn English? (Graded Readers は英語力をつけるのに効果的だと思いますか？)” The majority of students felt that graded readers wereNII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

82

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要

第30巻第１号

Figure 3.
N＝207
70
60
50
# of Responses

40
30
20
10
0

2

or m

or

s
me
e ti

aw

eek

Abo

ut

ea
o nc

we

ek

u
Abo

t

s
me
6 ti

a te

rm

m
5 ti

es

at

o
erm

r le

ss

No

t at

all

Frequency of Homework
Figure 4.
N＝204
80
70
60
# of Responses

50
40
30
20
10
0
Too

mu

ch

Ab

it m

,b
uch

ut

ok

t
Ju s

righ
On

t

ly a

e, b
ittl

l

ut o

k
To o

litt

le

Amount of Homework

somewhat effective in helping them to learn English.
Percentages of student feelings about graded readers (N=248):
I think they are very effective (非常に効果的と思う):9%

I think they are somewhat effective (効果的と思う):

69%

I don’t think they are very effective (あまり効果的ではない):

20%

I think they are very ineffective : (全然効果的ではない)

2%

Question 13 asked “What do you want to learn from English classes at Momoyama? Be as specific as possible. (桃山での英語の授業を受けることによって，どのような力がつくことを望みますか。(できるだけ詳しく説明してください。例))” More than 50 students reported

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

Curriculum Change : Working with Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Rather than Against it
International Conversation

Daily English Skills

General English Skills
Listening

Social English Skills
Reading

Pronunciation
Higher level classes
Conversation more than grammar

Decrease fear when speaking
More active participation
Opportunities to talk

Practical English
To speak fluently
Translation
TOEIC preparation

To be perfect in English
How to converse with foreigners
English-only classes
TOEFL preparation

Writing

Comprehension

To have fun
Thinking in English
Future Job Qualifications

Speaking
Express opinions
Understanding newspapers

Understanding TV
Grammar

Talk with native teachers
Understand other cultures

83

Table 8. “What do you want to learn from English class at Momoyama?”

wanting to learn English conversation. Reading and listening were also commonly listed. The
complete list is as shown in table 8.
Question 14 asked “Do you have any suggestions, requests or opinions concerning Bungakubu
English classes? (文学部の英語科目について, 提案, 要望等, 意見があれば書いてください.)”The complete list is shown in table 8.

4. Student Interviews
Fourteen students met with a researcher in two groups (eleven students in one group and 3
in the other), to discuss the questions from the questionnaire.
Oral Communication
Students felt that oral communication was the most important class for them to take ; they perceived that writing and reading were secondary, and likewise about skills : Speaking and conversation was the most important skill they hoped to learn, and they perceived oral communication
classes as a means to “get used to” listening to English and a chance to “use English [previously]
learned,” as well as to learn new words. A number of students believed that oral communication
classes were their opportunities to practice language learned in reading and writing classes.
Students reported greater satisfaction in classes where they were actually given opportunities for“chatting”, and “practicing” spoken English in the classroom.
Activities performed in the oral communication classes as reported by these students included :Watching English-language television programs ; drama games ; active games such as “FruitNII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

84

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要

第30巻第１号

Opinions

Suggestions

Too much English Spoken
Too low level

Want to speak fluently
More English skills

Too high level
Good level
School should separate students by skills

More TOEIC work
More opportunities to speak
More daily English

Don’t like quizzes
Didn’t understand class
Teacher was easy to understandEqual evaluation by teachers needed

More communication with teacher
More pronunciation practiceMore time for discussion
More conversation with foreigners

Good teacher

More study abroad options

Bad teacher
More conversation practice
No English-speaking students were present More writing practice
Liked English-only rule in class
Shared text would be goodClass was not interesting
Fun classLess homework
Smaller classes
More reading
Table 9. Student Suggestions

Basket” ; listening to music ; oral presentations, both small group and individual ; completing a variety of activities from textbooks ; pair and small group conversation ; singing songs ; parties ; pairwork involving dialogues, vocabulary, and translation ; vocabulary quizzes ; writing journals
including reflective writing ; emailing pen-pals ; using a TOEFL book ; practicing phone conversations in English ; and listening comprehension exercises ; and self-evaluation.
Suggestions from students on how to improve these classes included : Smaller class sizes(unanimous agreement) of ten students or less ; English only-the teacher should not speak
Japanese ; more opportunities for practicing spoken English with other students ; more opportunities for conversation with native speakers ; more enthusiastic, friendlier teachers ; “lighter” atmosphere ; younger teachers-about half the students felt that some of their teachers had difficulty“connecting” with the students due to their age ; and more information about slang, youth culture
and conversation, informal conversation techniques, both verbal and non-verbal.
Overall, students felt that the design of the classroom was very important to aiding rapportbuilding with other students, which in turn affected the students’ level of comfort. Students also
reported enjoying teachers who walked around the room while teaching, sat with them at their tables or desks, and who used humor. They hoped to have many opportunities to practice speaking
in future classes but were concerned that they would be spending too much time listening to theteacher speak or reading from textbooks.
When asked if they enjoyed their 1st year oral communication class, 4 students answered “no”
and 10 students answered “yes”.

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

Curriculum Change : Working with Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Rather than Against it

85

Reading
Students overall had less to say about the reading classes, but reported that they mostly enjoyed their graded readers, wanted opportunities to practice reading English from modern magazines and newspapers, and they all understood that they sometimes would have to read
information that may not be of interest but that it was good experience. In addition there weresome negative comments about reading classes.
Students said they studied reading, “to learn vocabulary and grammar.” ; “to practice English
words and to know the meanings.” ; “because it helps us learn how to make sentences.” ; “we canunderstand what we read more quickly.” ; “to help us know how to speak and what words touse.” Three of the students discussed wanting the ability to practice what they learned in theirreading classes during their oral communication classes. When asked if teachers from reading andoral communication classes should work together to help this process, only one student responded, and then it was to say, “No, it is the student’s responsibility to do it myself.” Two students reported feeling bored and disappointed in class because the only activities completed werethe use of graded readers for silent reading in the classroom, rapid reading practice and vocabulary practice from a textbook. One group noted that the teacher’s personality influences thestudents’ ability to feel comfortable in the classroom and therefore what and how the student
learns can be greatly affected by the teacher.
Activities performed in the reading classes as reported by these students included : Readingfrom textbooks ; practicing vocabulary ; using TOEFL books ; using graded Readers ; reading the
beginning of a story and imagining the end of the story and talking about it with other students ;pair presentations using the textbook ; listening tests ; rapid reading practice ; vocabulary tests ;listening to songs, pronunciation practice ; timed reading tests ; and individual oral reports.
Recommendations for improving reading classes focused on the teacher : Students hoped teachers would speak slowly ; take time to get to know the students ; offer students a chance to give
feedback about the class activities ; focus less on rapid reading and more on reading for enjoyment ; and provide a variety of activities for learning. Students also agreed that some teachers
seemed to be easier than others or gave higher grades, as reported by fellow students. They perceived grading practices in light of this as unfair and suggested that teachers all grade “the sameway”.
When asked if they enjoyed their 1st year reading class, 8 students answered “no” and 6 students answered “yes”.

5. Summary of main points
At this stage only an initial analysis has been done. However some broad conclusions seem to

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

86

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要

第30巻第１号

be as follows :1.While there is some variation in objectives, both reading and oral communication teachers
have as their main goals skills building and vocabulary extension, and both groups teach acertain amount of meta-linguistic knowledge, and learning skills. Students appeared to agreewith this approach in that overwhelmingly they said they wanted improve their practicalcommunication ability.
2.Both groups, but especially the reading group, felt that some link between the two classes
would be advantageous. This could be in the form of sharing course outlines, using complementary themes and topics, or sharing information about student performance.
3.Both groups use textbooks, but also use a wide range of other materials and activities both
based on those texts and in addition to them. Students reported that both teachers and students used more English in oral communication classes than in reading classes. Several
teachers noted that textbook selection was difficult because they did not get sufficient information on their students before the beginning of classes.
4.Oral communication teachers seemed to give more written homework than reading teachers,
but reading teachers were more likely to require students to prepare for class by prereading. Students reported a wide range of amounts of homework, from occasionally to after
every class, but mostly they felt that the amount was more or less acceptable.
5.For assessment both groups used a holistic approach, incorporating attendance and participation, class and homework, and objective measures such as quizzes, and tests (including
speaking tests). Most students understood their assessment systems.
6.All teachers evaluated their own courses by a combination of student feedback from various
sources and observation of student progress.

Conclusions
The data collected from both teachers and students would seem to indicate that the process ofcollecting that data has been worthwhile. Although there is little that’s mandated by the faculty,
and teachers are relatively free to do as they please, this does not mean that there is no organization. There is clearly a lot of thought being put into the planning and implementation of individual courses by teachers, and by and large student perceptions of those courses agree with what
the teachers see themselves as trying to do. There are some suggestions that have been put forward by teachers, and others by students that may bear considering. Mostly, though, it would appear that there is a good case not for implementing any new kind of curriculum, but on thecontrary for building on the strengths of the current one by sharing between teachers information
about what they are doing, and why they are doing it. In this way, a responsive and flexible

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuinUniversity

Curriculum Change : Working with Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Rather than Against it

87

administration could support teachers and students in developing the curriculum they have in asustainable way.

References :Clair, N. and Adger, C. Sustainable strategies for professional development in educational reform. In Johnson,(2000). Pp2949
Coulson, E. 1972. Confessions of a forward looking educational conservationist. Inaugural Lecture. Chelsea
College, University of London. Pp956.
Gibbons J. 1989 The issue of the language of instruction in the lower forms of the secondary school. In Chris
Kennedy, (1989)
Hood, S. 1996. From Curriculum to Courses : why do teachers do what they do? In Anne Burns and Sue
Hood (1995)
Johnson K.E. 2000 Teacher Education. Alexandria, Va : TESOLMacKenzie, A. 2002 Changing Contexts : connecting teacher autonomy and institutional development. In A.
Mackenzie 2002 Developing Autonomy. Proceedings of the JALT CUE SIG conference.
Mackenzie, A. 2002 Developing Autonomy. Proceedings of the JALT CUE SIG conference.
Markee, I. 1997 Managing Curricula Innovation Cambridge : CUP
Stenhouse, L. 1977. ‘Defining the Curriculum Problem’ In D. Hamilton et al. Beyond the Numbers Game
Basingstoke : Macmillan
Tripp, D. 1987, Theorising Practice : The Teacher’s Professional Journal. Geelong : Deakin University Press.

NII‑Electronic

Library

ServiceMomoyamaGakuin88

University

桃山学院大学総合研究所紀要

第30巻第１号

Curriculum Change : Working with Teachers’
Professional Knowledge Rather than Against it

Michael CARROLL
Lynne DOUGLAS
Marlen HARRISON
Chie TSURIIThe word ‘curriculum’ does not simply mean a set of instructions, but a refers to all the things
that go on in and out of classrooms concerning student learning. Therefore when we think about
curriculum change we need to consider far more than prescribing textbooks, methods and course
outlines : we need to know in detail what the teachers and students are already doing, what theywant to do, and what they think about potential changes ; and we need to involve them in any
changes. This paper describes a investigation into the current ‘curriculum-in-action’ at this university. The authors conclude that although there is little in the way of formal curriculum requirements, in fact teachers are teaching broadly similar skills, though with a considerable variety
of methods and learning activities. Both teachers and students expressed general satisfaction
with current courses, though they also had some suggestions for improvements. The authors recommend that future curriculum change should build on the strengths of the current status quo by
encouraging and supporting exchange of ideas and materials between teachers.

NII‑Electronic

Library

Service