名古屋外国語大学論集第5号

2019年7月

ArticleDigital Literacy through Presentations
at the University Level in Japan
Etienne MARCEAU

ABSTRACTThis paper will explain how using student presentations can improve not only
language learning but also digital literacy in an English communication course
at the university level in Japan. Technology in the classroom can enhance traditional learning by providing access to authentic information since opportunities
are scarce in foreign language contexts (Sugino, 2010). In addition, although
every student has access to the Internet, few use it to learn information in English,
and many lack digital literacy skills (Cote & Milliner, 2016, p. 130). This canbe problematic considering the unavoidable automation of the workplace (andlife in general) in the near future. The solution lays in course structure, engaging
the students beyond the classroom (Benson, 2011), and requiring that students
experiment with technology as part of their studies. Results of the questionnaire
show that students use the Internet every day for their assignments, and thatmost perceive the presentations mentioned here as beneficial for both languageand digital literacy skills.
Keywords: presentations, EFL, digital literacy in Japan.
307

INTRODUCTION
Computers and the Internet have been transforming the society at an increasingly faster pace, engendering both a digital and an information revolutions.
Countless hours are spent staring at computer and smartphone screens daily,both for work and leisure. Computers are now normal components of farms andfactories where manual work was once the norm, so much that the McKinsey
Global Institute published a report estimating job loss, gain, and workforce
transitions caused by automation. In their midpoint adoption scenario, they
estimated that 15% of work hours around the world have a potential to become
automated by the year 2030 (McKinsey Global Institute, 2017). Moreover,according to data from the World Bank and Oxford Economics, Japan is thecountry where the impact of automation will be the strongest: “For advanced
economies, the share of the workforce that may need to learn new skills and findwork in new occupations is much higher: up to one-third of the 2030 workforce
in the United States and Germany, and nearly half in Japan.” (McKinsey Global
Institute, 2017, p. 11). In face of these changes, being technology-able is not
only a matter of popularity on social media; it can realistically be the difference
between being employed or not.
With this in mind, the education system in Japan should adapt to better
prepare students for their future. At the university level especially, the main
focus should not be memorising facts anymore; students need better interpersonal interactional skills, critical thinking skills, and autonomy (so-called 21st
century skills) to thrive in a changing workplace. In a world where knowledge
is accessible to anyone on the Internet, it is not so much what they know morethan what they can do. Consequently, curricula ought to be amended to address
digital literacy skills and to teach in a way that allows students to be part ofthe digital revolution. A way to do this is to include student-led presentations,which encourages students to research information in English and to experimentwith different computer programs without the need of explicit instruction. Other
308

Digital Literacy through Presentations at the University Level in Japan ■reasons to choose presentations include enabling students of any language levelto participate successfully, and connecting the classroom to students’ life since
they are responsible for gathering the information.
This paper will attempt to answer the following questions:
1. How can students improve their computer skills without explicit instruction?
2. To what extent can student presentations be beneficial for language learning
in foreign language courses?

LITERATURE REVIEW
Digital Literacy in Japan
Digital literacy does not have a universal definition and includes numerous
sub-categories that reflect the different ways of using technology: how to accessinformation, how to connect with people, how to collaborate on documents
online, to name only a few examples from our daily life. Jeong-Bae Son (2015),
after reviewing multiple studies, adopted this definition:
Digital literacy is the ability to use digital technologies at an adequatelevel for creation, communication, collaboration, and information
search and evaluation in a digital society. It involves the developmentof knowledge and skills for using digital devices and tools for specificpurposes. (2015, para. 1)
Additionally, implied in this definition and which should not be overlooked
is online safety, as stated by Ferrari (2013), Hague & Payton (2010), and Son(2015) himself. According to the news channel CNBC, online romance scams
alone cost Americans $143 million in 2018, and the number of scams has infact more than doubled since 2015. Inexperienced Internet users are the targetof diverse frauds that more experienced users would easily avoid: “People ages
40 to 69 […] are twice more likely to fall for the schemes than people in their
20s” (Bursztynsky, 2019, para. 9) reported the network.
309

In Japan, Gobel and Kano (2014) surveyed 337 first-year Japanese university students to understand their use of technology both in academic andnon-academic settings. Students reported weaknesses in computer skills, alongwith a surprising preference for traditional forms of learning and studying (i.e.,
paper-based) over online learning. The authors concluded that many students
are not ready for digital learning yet (see also Mehran et al., 2017), and labeled
them as mobile natives rather than the more usual terms digital natives, as thestudents were especially competent in communication-related activities using
their mobile phones (Gobel & Kano, 2014). Cote and Milliner (2016) revealed
that most university students could not correctly answer a majority of questions
about computer knowledge; in six out of ten items, more than 50% of students
chose “I don’t know” as an answer (p. 129). These results might be surprisingconsidering that Japan is often seen as a world leader in technology. However,the school system is still conservative, not only for the use of technology in theclassroom, but also for the low number of online courses offered at the university
level. Businesses and the government are also surprisingly stuck in the 20th
century, explains Motoko Rich, Tokyo bureau chief for The New York Times:
The fax machine is still a cherished piece of technology in Japan. Many
sources demand that we send requests for interviews and sample questions via fax and will simply not accept an email. I can’t remember thelast time I sent or received a fax in the United States. (Rich, 2017, para. 9)
Although the Ministry of Education, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)
in Japan has ordered to include computing technology in high school curricula(MEXT, 2011), Cote and Milliner (2016) discovered that high schools have
yet to complete this demand (p. 127). The MEXT (2011) itself admitted thatthe implementation of computing technology in Japanese schools has not been
moving forwards as much as in other industrialised countries (p. 1). In my
experience, many university students require assistance to retrieve informationfrom a USB key, to modify printing properties, or to access information on the310

Digital Literacy through Presentations at the University Level in Japan ■Internet, even though none of these tasks can be considered new or complex.
While being anecdotal, the same is routinely heard from colleagues, and illustrates an existing issue.
The problem in Japan is not due to a lack of access to the technology or
to limited infrastructures. Most if not all Japanese university students own asmartphone or a computer; however, they used them as entertainment and communication devices rather than research tools (Lockley & Promnitz-Hayashi,2012) and show poor skills and lack of confidence with technology (Cote &Milliner, 2016; Gobel & Kano, 2014; Lockley & Promnitz-Hayashi, 2012;
Murray & Blyth, 2011). Moreover, it has been observed on repeated occasions
that Japanese students assess their own digital literacy skills lower than what they
are in reality, and this, regardless of their actual level of competence (Cote &Milliner, 2016; Iwamoto, 2007; Lockley & Promnitz-Hayashi, 2012; Murray &Blyth, 2011). Fruitless experiences and perhaps their cultural background seemto influence students’ self-assessment negatively (Murray & Blyth, 2011; Sonet al., 2011; Son et al., 2017). Students therefore need to gain some confidence
through series of positive experiences using technology.
In the classroom, teachers might take for granted that students are familiar
with technology and assign homework that requires researching information
online or creating PowerPoint presentations; however, the literature shows that
not all young Japanese people are versed in technology. This adds an additional
layer of difficulty on top of understanding the content and, in some cases, theforeign language with which students have to deal. Another reason to address
the technological gap in students’ knowledge is that it can improve their life ingeneral, especially for students who choose to study (or live) abroad. Information
and Communication Technology (ICT) skills were identified by Jarman-Walsh(2015) as important for students who study abroad because many have to findsolutions for academic and personal problems by themselves. Since Japan
already has the technology, only a small step further is needed to integrate it as311

an autonomous tool of learning into students’ life.

METHOD
ParticipantsThis study was conducted in a compulsory English Communication course(English as a Foreign Language) for second-year university students in Japan.
Participants were a convenience sample of 25 students, 6 males and 19 females,
and were all aged 20 years old at the time of the questionnaire. Since all participants had Japanese as their first language and were non-English majors, questions were formulated using language that would not hinder their comprehension.
Data Collection
The two objectives of this paper are to understand whether using student presentations can be beneficial both for improving computer and foreign language
skills. Information found in the literature gives quite a negative overview ofJapanese students’ usage and understanding of the technology. In addition, as
the teacher, my personal goal was to evaluate how effective the current course
format was. An anonymous questionnaire was administered at the end of the lastclass of the year to survey students’ perceptions qualitatively. The questionnaire
took place before students received feedback on the final assessment or their final
grade, to ensure that their own perception would not be altered by the teacher’s
evaluation.
In my experience surveying Japanese students, some tend to choose a neutral
answer repeatedly such as “average” or “neither agree nor disagree”, in otherwords the central answer in a five-point scale (Marceau, 2017, p. 204). For
these reasons, students’ perception of their own abilities were collected using
a four-point scale. Moreover, the central choice of answer was not “average”,
as this might have influenced the participants to choose positively, having only
one option, “not at all”, below “average”. This way, while keeping the neutral
312

Digital Literacy through Presentations at the University Level in Japan ■symmetry of the Likert scale, the students had to take position.
Questions purposely included some elements that have not been covered inclass as distractors, such as ‘Google Drive’ and ‘MS Word’. The intention was
to have students answer some questions negatively, hopefully keeping them fromfalling into an “auto-pilot” mindset, thus creating a more reflective environment.
While the choice to include these distractors does not follow a precise rationale,
it was hoped that stimulating students to think deeply might only be beneficial
to the results.
The questionnaire begins with questions related to students’ usage of computers to complete homework and to access information in English. The questionnaire also includes questions related to the course itself to identify students’
perceptions of their improvement. The results of this questionnaire were used
to improve the format of this course (see Appendix 1).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The first question asked students how often a computer was necessary to complete homework during their studies in high school: 17 students out of 25 (68%)
answered either “never” or “not often” (see Table 1), revealing that computerswere not part of the students’ education in high school. The second question wasessentially the same, but about university this time. Twenty-four students (96%)
answered “often” or “every day” (see Table 1). These two answers demonstrate
the clear discrepancy between the kind of tasks in high school and university
and what is expected from students. Dealing with technology alone adds a layerof difficulty, meaning that students who are not proficient computer or Internet
users end up being penalised in their assessment, despite these skills not being
explicitly taught in class.

313

Table 1
Students’ experience using computers to complete homework (research on
the Internet, MS Word, etc.)never

not often

sometimes

often

every dayhigh school

8

9

6

2

0

university

0

0

1

13

11

Question five in the questionnaire was about the students’ perception of theirimprovement regarding computer skills. For each item one answer stood out,
indicating a consistent trait among students. A majority of students indicatedhaving improved using computer programs such as emails (18 students out of
25 (72%) answered “a little”), MS PowerPoint (19 students (76%) answered “alot”) and Internet search, where 14 students (56%) answered “a little” (Table2). For each question an obvious trend emerges, which goes in accordance withthe focus of the course, and seems to indicate that integrating technology as away for students to research meaningful and authentic information and present
it to their peers is successful. On the negative side, 10 students (40%) answered
not having improved their skills for MS Word at all, 15 (60%) for Prezi, and19 (76%) for Google Drive (see Table 2). Since MS Word and Google Drive
were distractors in the questionnaire (as mentioned earlier), these answers
were expected; however, it was disappointing to see a negative score for Prezi
after encouraging students to experiment with it. Students were free to choose
between MS PowerPoint and Prezi as a presentation platform, and admittedly,
not many students chose the latter. These results seem to indicate that even withsome basic instruction, students require a more extensive experience with a newcomputer program in order to be comfortable with it. Students might choose
the most familiar option in a context with a time constraint and where they areevaluated for their work. As mobile natives who might be more comfortablewith traditional ‘paper’ learning, not all students seem to possess the skills andautonomy to improve their digital skills without explicit instruction.
314

Digital Literacy through Presentations at the University Level in Japan ■Table 2Students’ perception of their improvement in this course, related to computer
programs.
not at all

not reallya little

a lot

Emails

1

5

18

1

MS PowerPoint

0

1

5

19

MS Word

10

5

5

5

Prezi

15

3

5

2

Internet search

0

3

14

8

Google Drive

9

4

5

7

Last in the questionnaire, question six asked “In this class, how much did you
improve your English skills?”. Once more, this question sought students’ own
perception of their improvement. The questionnaire received positive answers
for six out of seven items, namely ‘listening’, ‘speaking’, ‘reading’, ‘writing’,‘casual vs formal’ and ‘giving feedback’, with ‘speaking’ and ‘formal vs. casual’receiving the highest score, 16/25 (64%) (see Table 3). The focus of this course
being English communication, only listening and speaking skills were formallyassessed. While students certainly improved other language components of apresentation (register, verb tense, etc.), there was no formal test to measure
their improvement in vocabulary nor grammar. The only item in the questionnaire that received a negative score was “taking notes”, for which 15 students(60%) answered “not really” (see Table 3). This shows that the course should
be amended to include more explicit instruction and feedback on how to takeeffective notes since this skill will prove essential to attend lectures (or, in a
professional setting, meetings). Note-taking is a challenging task in second language because students have to listen and write at the same time without losing
track of the presentation, and should therefore be included in a communication
course. This questionnaire provided ample feedback and allowed the teacher
to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of this course. These results
315

seem to demonstrate that students’ second language skills can benefit from using
student-led presentations, including interactional skills such as giving feedback
and understanding register.

Table 3Students’ perception of their improvement in this course, related to language
skills.
not at all

not reallya little

a lot

Listening

0

2

18

5

Speaking

0

1

8

16

Reading

0

10

13

2

Writing

0

6

13

6

Casual vs formal

0

4

5

16

Giving feedback

0

1

15

9

Taking notes

0

15

7

3

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION
This study was conducted in an English communication course and intended
to prove that integrating technology in university courses using student-led
presentations can improve students’ digital skills at the same time as being
beneficial to their second language skills. Most students own or have accessto a computer nowadays, so asking students to use technology gently pushes
them to experiment with those technological devices as tools. The questionnaire presented in this paper confirmed the crucial role that computers playin completing assignments at the university level, and surveyed the students’
perception of their improvement using presentations in class. Unsurprisingly,
computers are omnipresent and required to complete daily assignments. Students
predominantly felt that researching information online and creating presentations helped them to improve their knowledge of basic programs. However, theresults showed that as described in the literature, most students use their devices
316

Digital Literacy through Presentations at the University Level in Japan ■for communication and entertainment, and although they spend their life being
in contact with technology, they are not comfortable or autonomous enoughto learn new programs without any support. This can be an issue in the near
future for the Japanese society that will most likely face heavy automation andwill require its workforce to adapt to new situations. In order to palliate to thisdeficiency, the initial tasks of experimenting with technology should be simple,
for example sending a professional email, and more complex tasks should be
added progressively as students become comfortable, for example online collaboration on Google Docs.
The second aim of this study was to demonstrate that on top of improving
their computer skills, student presentations are also helpful to improve students’second language skills. The results confirmed the students’ positive perception;
however, a framework should be implemented to ensure that students improvesystematically. Teachers should also require that students research and accessinformation in the target language to expose students to considerable amounts,
resembling an extensive reading program.
That being said, since only the students’ perceptions were analysed, this study
offers a limited conclusion. Several factors can influence students’ perspective,
including cultural factors as stated above. Students’ skills should be measured
quantitatively next time through pre and post-tests to demonstrate less biased
evidence of improvement, and conducting individual interviews could help totriangulate the data qualitatively for a more powerful conclusion. Another factor
to consider is that students attend multiple courses, so their improvements aremost likely due to the influence of other courses and teachers as well. Further
research is needed, for example analysing courses across the entire curriculum
or experimenting with other platforms, to establish with more certainty how
presentations are responsible for students’ improvement. Lastly, a bigger sample
should be surveyed in order to draw a more reliable conclusion.
A necessary word of caution is that technology should not be used at all cost317

to the detriment of the content of a course. Using technology is not the goal ofa language course; it is merely a tool. It is about equipping students with skills
necessary for 21st century workplace and social life. The world is changing at an
exponential rate, and as educators, ignoring it would mean isolating our students
and denying them chances of success in the future. The school system needs toevolve to reflect the reality of the changing world outside the classroom.

REFERENCES
Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and Researching Autonomy, Second Edition. In C. N. Candlin & D. R.
Hall (Eds) Applied Linguistics in Action Series. London: Routledge.
Bursztynsky, J. (2019, February 13). Beware this Valentine’s Day: Romance scams cost Americans$143 million last year. CNBC. Retrieved from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/13/americans-lost143-million-in-2018-from-romance-scams.html
Cote, T., & Milliner, B. (2016). Japanese university students’ self-assessment and digital literacy test
results. In S. Papadima-Sophocleous, L. Bradley & S. Thouësny (Eds), CALL communities andculture – short papers from EUROCALL 2016, 125–131.
Ferrari, A. (2013). Digcomp: A framework for developing and understanding digital competence inEurope. Seville, Spain: jrc-ipts. Retrieved from http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC83167.pdf
Gobel, P., & Kano, M. (2014). Mobile natives: Japanese university students’ use of digital technology.
In J.-B. Son (Ed.), Computer-assisted language learning: Learners, teachers and tools. Newcastle
upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 21–46.
Hague, C., & Payton, S. (2010). Digital literacy across the curriculum: A Futurelab handbook. Bristol,
UK: Futurelab. Retrieved from http://www2.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/handbooks/
digital_literacy.pdf
Iwamoto, N. (2007). Is self-assessment possible? Japanese students’ self-assessment in their course
work. Studies in English Linguistics and Literature, 17, 65–79. Retrieved from http://www.jaell.
org/gakkaishi17th/Noriko%20IWAMOTO.pdf
Jarman-Walsh, J. (2015). Preparing students for study abroad programs: tasks, skill-building andself-reflection. 安田女子大学紀要, 44, 213–222.
Lockley, T., & Promnitz-Hayashi, L. (2012). Japanese university students’ CALL attitudes, aspirations, motivations. CALL-EJ, 13(1), 1–16.
Marceau, E. (2017). Teaching History through Music: A Practical Approach for Content Courses.
Bulletin of Nagoya University of Foreign Studies, 1, 191–210.
McKinsey Global Institute. (2017, December). Jobs lost, jobs gained: workforce transitions in a timeof automation. Retrieved from http://www.MGI-Jobs-Lost-Jobs-Gained-Executive-summaryDecember-6-2017.pdf
Mehran, P., Alizadeh, M., Koguchi, I., & Takemura, H. (2017). Are Japanese digital natives ready for318

Digital Literacy through Presentations at the University Level in Japan ■learning English online? A preliminary case study at Osaka University. International Journal of
Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(8).
MEXT. (2011). The vision for ICT in education: toward the creation of a learning system and schools
suitable for the 21st century. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology.
Murray, A., & Blyth, A. (2011). A survey of Japanese university students’ computer literacy levels.
The JALT CALL Journal, 7(3), 307–318.
Rich, M. (2017, November 1). Encountering Robots While Still Using Fax Machines in Japan. The
New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/technology/personaltech/robotsfax-machines-japan.html
Son, J.-B., Park, S.-S., & Park, M. (2017). Digital literacy of language learners in two different
contexts. The JALTCALL Journal, 13(2), 77–96.
Son, J.-B. (2015). Digital literacy. Retrieved from http://drjbson.com/projects/dl/
Son, J.-B., Robb, T., & Charismiadji, I. (2011). Computer literacy and competency: A survey ofIndonesian teachers of English as a foreign language. CALL-EJ, 12(1), 26–42. Retrieved fromhttp://callej.org/journal/12-1/Son_2011.pdf
Sugino, T. (2010). Teacher demotivational factors in the Japanese language teaching context. Procedia
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 3, 216–226.

APPENDIX 1
In-class survey (n = 25)
Please answer these questions honestly. Do not write your name.
1. When you were in high school, did you need a computer to complete homework (research on the Internet, Word, etc.)?
Never

not often

sometimes

often

every day

8

9

6

2

0

2. How often do you use a computer, smartphone, tablet, etc. to complete
university homework?
never

not often

sometimes

often

every day

0

0

1

13

11

3. How often do you research on the Internet in English?
never

not often

sometimes

often

every day

2

7

11

4

1

319

4. In this class, how much did you improve your English skills by watchingother students’ presentations?
not at all

not reallya little

a lot

0

1

17

7

5. In this class, how much did you improve your computer skills?
not at all

not reallya littlea lota) Emails

1

5

18

1

b) MS PowerPoint

0

1

5

19

c) MS Word

10

5

5

5

d) Prezi

15

3

5

2

e) Internet search

0

3

14

8

f) Google Drive

9

4

5

7

6. In this class, how much did you improve your English skills?
not at all

not reallya littlea lota) Listening

0

2

18

5

b) Speaking

0

1

8

16

c) Reading

0

10

13

2

d) Writing

0

6

13

6

e) Casual vs formal

0

4

5

16

f) Giving feedback

0

1

15

9

g) Taking notes

0

15

7

3

320