ISSN 2436-2204

多言 語 教 育
実践 ジャーナル

2

Vol.

MARCH 2022

JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGYAND PRACTICE目次 / Table of Contents【授業実践報告・Teaching Practice Report 】

Toward a Blueprint for Online Reading Classes: Reflections on Flipping the Classroom,
Collaboration, and Fluency
Alex Blumenstock1

La traduction de textes de sciences humaines japonais en français dans le cadre du coursde rédaction française de niveau avancépar Alexandre MANGIN

9The Best of Both: Adaptations of Classroom Practices and Lesson Design in the Transition
from an Online to an On-Campus Classroom Environment
Andrew Tyner

20

Andrew Warrick

26

Deborah Maxfield

33

Applying Course Design for Online Instruction to Face-to-Face Lessons

Unlocking Peer and Self-Assessment: A Guided Feedback Activity

The Effects of Reconstructing Reflection Journals According to Students’ Recommendations
Devon Arthurson

42

Heather Woodward

53

Why Should Students Reflect on the Purpose of Debate?

Designing a Technology-Enhanced Flipped Classroom Model Using Instructional Slideshows andComputer-Mediated Asynchronous Discussions
Ian Hart

65

Online Lessons During the COVID-19 Pandemic: What Technology Can We Continue to Utilise?
Jack Pudelek

78

Reflections on an unexpected presentation of turn-taking difficulties in an English discussion class
Jonathan Hennessy

94

Considerations in Content and Language Integrated Learning
John Paul White 101
Opening The Door: Using the IVEProject to Enrich Discussion Classes
Jon Mahoney 110
Classroom Management and Teacher Practice: Considerations Following the First Yearof a Remote e-Learning Course
Joshua Rappeneker, Satchie Haga 119
Students’ Perceptions of Reading Circles in the EFL Classroom
Kathryn Mabe 129

Debate Planning and Practice Using Argument Diagrams
Robert A. Smith 141
The Effects of Question Type on Student Discussions
Russell Minshull 150
Implementing Readers’ Theater for a Project-Based Advanced English course
Nfor Samuel 160
Quick and Effective Feedback on Writing During Online and Classroom Lessons
Tanya L. Erdelyi 171
Exploring the effectiveness of project-based learning: Teacher reflections
on a student-led seminar project
Ian Hurrell, Anna Belobrovy, Travis West 179

投稿規定・Manuscript Submission Guidelines

188

執筆者・Authors

193

【Teaching Practice Report】

Toward a Blueprint for Online Reading Classes: Reflections on
Flipping the Classroom, Collaboration, and Fluency
Alex Blumenstock
Abstract
The challenges of teaching online Reading classes to Japanese university students were met with a consideration of
how to best maximize the online context. To this end, a flipped classroom seemed to be a natural fit, as homework
allowed students to complete learning at their own pace outside of the classroom which could be assessed to ensure
concepts were correctly understood. Synchronous class time was then used to apply knowledge and skills
collaboratively in small groups. Establishing and maintaining a participatory classroom culture maximized thesuccess of such activities. In addition, although the online context presented challenges related to improving
reading fluency, in-class timed reading, extensive reading logs, and book reports were moderately successful
despite issues related to accountability. Furthermore, the wealth of communication and instructional tools available
to facilitate online learning needed to be pared down and carefully considered in order to maintain a focus onlearning language rather than learning technology.
Keywords: online classes, flipped learning, collaborative learning, reading

Introduction
Rikkyo University in Tokyo requires all freshmen to take a Reading course in the springsemester (followed by a closely related Writing course in the fall semester). Each semester isfourteen weeks, with classes meeting once per week and class sizes capped at 25 students. The goalsof the Reading course are to improve reading fluency and comprehension, improve vocabularyknowledge, and develop strategic reading skills (such as previewing, skimming, scanning, inferring,and recognizing organization patterns). In addition, students are required to write summaries andshort responses of reading texts (Reading and Writing Committee, 2020).
Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, Reading courses were conducted online for the spring 2021
semester. I taught two such classes, one with students whose TOEIC scores ranged between 280 and
479 and the other with students whose TOEIC scores ranged between 480 and 699. Furthermore,course goals were supported in my classes by Rikkyo’s in-house Reading textbook, Reading the
Future (Garside, et al., 2019), as well as a commercial textbook, Select Readings: Pre-Intermediate(Lee & Gunderson, 2011b) for the lower-proficiency group and Select Readings: Intermediate (Lee &Gunderson, 2011a) for the higher- proficiency group.
Online classes pose difficulties that face-to-face classes do not, such as connectivity issues,learning how to use various communication and instructional tools, and the lack of physicality, which
can make students more hesitant to communicate. Given the unique challenges of teaching online
reading classes, I cast my lessons into a principled blueprint I hoped would motivate student
engagement and achievement of course objectives while minimizing the challenges of the online
context for both student and instructor.

1多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Discussion
Maximizing the Online Context and Flipping the Classroom
Learning and using a variety of communication and instructional tools can be difficult for
students. Thus, as much as possible, I minimized the need to switch between different applications.
Zoom was the sole real-time communication tool, and email was the sole asynchronous communication
tool. I used Blackboard as the learning management system (LMS) for distributing course materials,
including posting homework assignments which students completed in Google Forms. Meanwhile,
Google Drive acted as the repository of regular student assignment submissions, with each student
given their own folder. However, as of this writing, there exist other, even more unified, LMSs (suchas Google Classroom) that can further reduce the number of tools students need to use. In general,I have found that the number of required communication and instructional tools should be minimized
as much as possible; students enrolled in language courses may view requirements to use technology
as a barrier rather than an aid to language studies, so it is important to consider the best ways to use
such tools.
In addition, students can become fatigued from sitting in front of their screens for long periods,
which could negatively influence engagement or even health. I mitigated these negative effects by
shortening class times, as university guidelines permitted assigning additional homework in lieu ofusing all the allotted time. As a result, a flipped classroom was a natural fit. As described by Bergmann(2012), the flipped classroom “allows the direct instruction to be asynchronous” so that “the pace ofthe class is appropriate for each student” (p. 62). The classroom then becomes a place in which topractice the skills and concepts that students learned outside of the classroom.
Following the flipped classroom model, each lesson’s homework provided an introduction of andpractice with skills and concepts later practiced in-class via collaborative activities. Each lesson’s
homework had two components: (1) a reading text accompanied by comprehension questions and(2) an explanation of a reading skill accompanied by comprehension questions about the skill itself
and a practice activity. Although flipped classrooms are typically accomplished with video recordings,
this is not always the case; in this course, Google Forms were used to guide students throughrelevant textbook activities. Furthermore, I prepared these Forms to give feedback on student
answers; if students answered a question incorrectly, they received an explanation of the correct
answer and/or were notified of where to find relevant information that could have helped themanswer correctly. For example, after reading information about the skill of skimming, students wereasked to answer a true/false question: “When skimming, you should read everything slowly andcarefully.” If students answered the question incorrectly, they would receive this feedback: “Whenskimming, you should NOT read everything. You want to QUICKLY learn basic information about
the reading, such as the main ideas. Read the title, the first paragraph, the first sentences of someparagraphs, and the last paragraph.” Likewise, if a student answered a comprehension question
about the reading text incorrectly, they received feedback that instructed them to review specificlines in the text to locate the answer. This kind of assessment-centered feedback encourages students
to reevaluate their misunderstandings of course materials. In sum, this homework provided students
with foundational knowledge that could be acquired at their own pace and applied later in class,without requiring a substantial amount of class time to introduce a reading text or reading skill.

2

TOWARD A BLUEPRINT FOR ONLINE READING CLASSES:
REFLECTIONS ON FLIPPING THE CLASSROOM, COLLABORATION, AND FLUENCY

Encouraging Participation and Collaborative Learning
Online communication can feel impersonal when one cannot see who is speaking or who islistening, so it is important to avoid this situation in a communicative classroom. In addition, Japanesepeople, especially Japanese learners of English, have often been regarded as shy or unwilling to
speak (Doyon, 2000; Osterman, 2014). When cameras are off, students might be even more hesitantto communicate than usual. Furthermore, students are more likely to remain motivated if they startwith motivation than they are if they do not begin with it (Ushioda 2013). Because of these factors, it
was important to establish a classroom culture which supported communication from the first lesson;
one key focus was setting the expectation that students turn on their cameras when in small groups.
This was accomplished in the first lesson by having students turn on their cameras in small groups(in some cases, with some coaxing from me), introduce themselves to a few classmates, and discuss
their general reading experiences using guided discussion questions. In addition, at the end of class,they again entered small groups with their cameras on and confirmed their understanding of thecontents of the first lesson together, including where to find homework and what to do for homework.
In order to maintain clear expectations of a participatory, collaborative classroom culture, eachlesson began with a brief reminder for students to be prepared to turn on their cameras andmicrophones and have their textbooks ready. As Hrastinski (2009) argues, “If we want to enhance
online learning, we need to enhance online learner participation” (p. 78). In addition, every lesson
had a consistent structure that made it easier for students to focus on the content of lessons rather
than the structure of lessons. First, I provided a very brief review of the reading skill from their
homework to ensure that students understood the skill they were about to practice, and this review
also provided enough information that students could complete the practice activity even if they had
neglected to do the homework. Then students completed a collaborative practice activity to apply thereading skill in small groups. Given the burdens of taking online classes in a foreign language, it isimportant to maximize the outcomes of students’ cognitive processing when practicing and mastering
L2 skills. Flipping the classroom can achieve this by giving students opportunities to apply, rather
than learn, skills in class. For example, students completed homework which introduced them to andgave them practice paraphrasing. In class, each group was given a short paragraph to paraphrase.
After a few minutes, each group was responsible for presenting their paraphrase to the rest of theclass. Rather than working to understand the skill and how to apply it during class time, they wereable to focus largely on the application of the skill.
In the next stage of the lesson, students collaborated to improve their understanding of thereading text they had answered comprehension questions about for homework. First, students
connected the topic to their prior knowledge using general discussion questions. For example, in one
lesson, students had completed a reading text about a man who predicts that technology will allow
him to live forever (Lee & Gunderson, 2011b, p. 73-74). Using a textbook activity, students firstconnected their experiences to the topic by discussing things they do to be healthy (p. 72). After that,they used a collaborative comprehension activity that stimulated critical thinking about the reading;they agreed or disagreed with the man’s predictions about the future and then discussed their own
opinions about the future (p. 76). In most cases, textbook activities fulfilled these criteria of helping
students to connect to the topic and promoting critical analysis of the text, but I occasionally madesubstitutions when the textbook’s activities did not meet these criteria.
Having been introduced to reading skills at a pace of one per week during lessons two throughtwelve, students completed homework to review reading skills before lesson thirteen, the penultimate3

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

lesson. Using the results of this homework to target feedback, I then provided a brief review of all theskills before students participated in a collaborative review activity where they applied the skills tocomplete a practice final exam. Afterward, I was able to use this assessment to provide feedback onareas for improvement before the end of class. Before lesson fourteen, the final lesson, students
again completed homework to review reading skills. Then, in the final lesson, I used the results of thehomework to provide a final brief review before students individually completed a final exam that
required using all the reading skills. The frequent and instantaneous assessment provided by thissystem, as well as peer collaboration and teacher feedback, ensured that students had a clear
understanding of the reading skills before their final assessment.
Overall, these strategies of flipping learning and encouraging participation resulted in a highlevel of student participation. While students were collaborating on completing their tasks (in their
Zoom breakout rooms), I would check in on each group, and I rarely found students disengaged. My
formal and informal course assessments support what other studies have found—that collaborative
learning in online courses benefits learning outcomes (Fredericksen et al., 2000; Hiltz et al., 2000).
Working together in groups with clear task-oriented goals meant that learners had many opportunities
to apply skills, synthesize knowledge, and think critically. Furthermore, given the amount ofsynchronous collaboration, students had opportunities to develop learner communities. Despite thecourse’s lack of physicality, I noticed that students often held one another socially accountable for
their learning; they asked each other for help when needed and checked that everyone in their group
had achieved the same level of understanding when completing a task.

Promoting Reading Fluency
Another aim of the course was to improve reading fluency. Timed reading was one activity used
for this purpose. Having had many opportunities to understand the lesson’s reading text, bothindividually before the lesson and collaboratively during the lesson, a timed reading exercise
concluded each lesson. During this phase of the lesson, students were encouraged to re-read the text
as quickly as possible to improve reading speed. Nation (2005) suggests that effective speed reading
texts should have easy content but that repeated reading “can be used with material that has somedifficulties for the reader” (p. 28). As the reading texts in our textbooks sometimes included difficultcontent, the before-class and during-class comprehension activities attempted to compensate forthese difficulties. By the time students completed the timed reading activity, they had read the text
at least twice for meaning. Nation (2005) also notes that a focus on meaning is important in fluency
activities, and he suggests having students answer comprehension questions afterward to ensure
this focus. However, as this exercise was implemented, the activities preceding the timed readingwere meaning-focused, but there were no additional comprehension tests after the timed reading;this may be a weakness of this exercise’s implementation. In addition, Nation (2005) further suggests
noting reading times on a chart to track reading speed and develop goals of reading faster each time.
In our course, times were tracked on a chart for each text, but each text was only timed once. Thus,
after students inputted their reading time into a spreadsheet, a graph was automatically updated thatshowed their progression of reading speed across texts. A weakness of this approach was thatstudents could not see a clear increase in reading speed for each text despite typically seeing a clear
increase in reading speed across texts. Finally, I reviewed these charts regularly so that when
students had very low reading speeds or were not improving their reading speeds, I had theopportunity to intervene.
4

TOWARD A BLUEPRINT FOR ONLINE READING CLASSES:
REFLECTIONS ON FLIPPING THE CLASSROOM, COLLABORATION, AND FLUENCY

Another fluency aspect of the course was extensive reading, which helps students improve theirreading speed and “gain meaning-focused input,” such as new vocabulary items from context(Nation, 2005, p. 31). It might also help students find enjoyment in learning English and improvetheir cultural knowledge of English-speaking countries and literature. The approach I took towardextensive reading was based on Day and Bamford’s (2002) ten principles for teaching extensive
reading. In sum, learners should choose from various easy and enjoyable reading materials and try
to read as much as possible as quickly as possible. Day and Bamford also note that it is important toorient students to the concept of extensive reading by showing students how to access appropriatelyleveled reading materials, encouraging them to choose materials they are interested in, andemphasizing that they read quickly without using a dictionary, even if they achieve less than 100%
understanding. Thus, in the first lesson, I explained the concepts of extensive reading, instructed
students to complete an online test to determine which level of graded reader they should choose,and guided students through the process of checking out appropriate books from the University’s
online e-book library.
These extensive reading concepts were then reiterated throughout the semester throughregular check-ins on extensive reading progress. To ensure that students were on track withextensive reading goals and to encourage accountability, students were required to track theirapproximate word count in a reading log and write very short (a minimum of 60 words for the lowerproficiency group and 80 words for the higher-proficiency group) weekly entries about theirextensive reading experiences. When students lacked entries, I initiated an email exchange to ensure
they understood what to do and where to find reading materials. In some cases, students found theirchosen books to be too difficult, and I encouraged them to seek easier graded readers. In othercases, students were uncertain whether they should continue reading a book that they foundunenjoyable, and I assured them that they should discontinue reading it and find another book—one
that was enjoyable. These journal entries were intended to be easy writing assignments thatencouraged both reading and reflecting on the experience of reading. However, journal entries did
not guarantee that students did the required reading; it was possible to write entries after merely
skimming or reading a summary elsewhere. In addition, in course evaluations, some students
commented that they did not enjoy writing these journal entries, thus putting accountability at odds
with enjoyability and undermining the purpose of extensive reading. It might be possible to betterbalance the benefits of the reading journal with the work it requires by reducing the required lengthof each entry.
Another method of ensuring accountability was also employed in the form of regular written
book reports in which students summarized their extensive reading experiences and gave opinions
about what they had read. After completing each book report, students had small group discussions
in class to share their opinions about the books they had read and make recommendations to eachother based on their experiences. Book reports alone might be enough to extrinsically motivate
students to complete extensive reading, and additionally, book reports and subsequent in-classdiscussions may also help students perceive extensive reading “as its own reward” (Day & Bamford,
2002, p. 138) because they can fully complete an experience of reading a book before writing about
it, rather than being concerned with pressures of writing weekly journal entries.
Ensuring that students complete extensive reading assignments is always a challenge. Without
a way to accurately track whether students completed the required amount of reading, it is impossible
to know for certain whether students actually completed the reading. In a face-to-face course,
students could be monitored during a designated period of in-class extensive reading, but such
5

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

monitoring would be difficult online. Despite issues with accountability, extensive reading is avaluable activity for students, so instructors should strive to minimize any barriers which prevent
students from doing it.

Conclusion
Overall, I believe this lesson style to be conducive to achieving the intended goals of the course.
Based on my experience evaluating their homework and in-class interactions, students were engaged
in the course. In terms of the reading skills and texts, the time they spent preparing for class clearlycomplemented the time they spent working together in class. Outside of class, assessments provided
automatic feedback to help students reevaluate most misunderstandings at their own pace. In
addition, I was able to use the wealth of assessment data to judge when and how to make effective
interventions.
Although my online Reading course was based on principled approaches, there remains room
for improvement. One downside of this style is that students needed to be somewhat autonomouswith goal setting, homework task completion, and time management. There were instances ofstudents who failed to complete preparation tasks or who failed to adequately manage their time
when completing long-term extensive reading tasks. In addition, although I integrated as manyaccountability checks as I could reasonably conceive of without overburdening students, accountability
remained an issue in some cases, such as with extensive reading. However, many of these difficulties
are not unique to online contexts.
In terms of the online context specifically, if I were to teach this course again in a similar way, I
would make a few alterations. First, as educational technology continues to improve, I would attempt
to reduce the number of communication tools, instructional tools, and LMSs used, with the intentionof reducing students’ burden of learning how to use these tools instead of learning the language
itself. For instance, I would replace Blackboard and Google Drive with Google Classroom, as itlargely combines the features of these two tools into a single LMS. Second, in terms of promoting
reading speed, it might be worth having students read the same texts multiple times across longer
spans of time, such as in a subsequent class. This would have the additional benefit of allowing better
progress tracking for intervention purposes. In terms of extensive reading, I would attempt toimprove accountability methods to make them both more reliable and less cumbersome for students;
given the online context, one especially suitable option would be to use an LMS designed specificallyfor extensive reading, such as XReading. Finally, I would attempt to foster a greater sense ofcommunity and metacognitive reflection by providing students with more time for open-ended
discussion questions about their overall course progress and goals during small group warm-up or
closing discussions.
Given the increase in the number of online classes due to COVID-19, as well as a general trendof technology increasingly being used in education, it is important to consider how to best design
courses to maximize student learning outcomes without burdening students with the technology
itself. Online classes will likely continue to play an important role in education, and by carefully
considering how they are structured and how technology is implemented, I believe that they caneffectively motivate students to learn for themselves and to learn collaboratively.

6

TOWARD A BLUEPRINT FOR ONLINE READING CLASSES:
REFLECTIONS ON FLIPPING THE CLASSROOM, COLLABORATION, AND FLUENCY

References
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day.
International Society for Technology in Education.
Day, R., & Bamford, J. Top ten principles for teaching extensive reading (2002). Reading in a Foreign
Language, 14(2). https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/66761/1/14_2_101
25_66761_day.pdf
Doyon, P. (2000). Shyness in the Japanese EFL class: Why it is a problem, what it is, what causes it,
and what to do about it. The Language Teacher, 24(1), 11-16. https://jalt-publications.org/
articles/24571-shyness-japanese-efl-class-why-it-problem-what-it-iswhat-causes-it-and-what-doabout
Fredericksen, E., Picket, A., Shea, P., Pelz, W., & Swan, K. (2000). Student satisfaction and perceived
learning with on-line courses: Principles and examples from the SUNY learning network.
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(2), 7–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.
v4i2.1899
Garside, P. Beck, D. Hammond, C., Shrosbree, M., Truxal, D., & Wakasugi, L (2019). Reading thefuture (4th ed.). Rikkyo University.
Hiltz, S. R., Coppola, N., Rotter, N., Turoff, M., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2000). Measuring theimportance of collaborative learning for the effectiveness of ALN: A multi-measure, multimethod approach. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(2), 103–125. http://dx.doi.
org/10.24059/olj.v4i2.1904
Hrastinski, S. (2009). A theory of online learning as online participation. Computers & Education,
52(1), 78–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.009
Lee, L., & Gundersen, E. (2011a). Select readings: Intermediate (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Lee, L., & Gundersen, E. (2011b). Select readings: Pre-intermediate (2nd ed.). Oxford University
Press.
Nation, P. (2005). Reading faster. PASAA, 36, 21-37. https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/lals/resources/paulnations-resources/paul-nations-publications/publications/documents/2005-Reading-faster.pdf
Osterman, G. L. (2014). Experiences of Japanese university students’ willingness to speak English inclass: A multiple case study. SAGE Open, 4(3), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014543779
Reading and Writing Committee. (2020). 2020 reading & writing guidelines. Center for Foreign
Language Education & Research, Rikkyo University.
Ushioda, E. (2013). Foreign language motivation research in Japan: An ‘insider’ perspective fromoutside Japan. In Apple, M.T., Da Silva, D., Fellner, T (Eds.), Language Learning Motivation in
Japan (pp. 1-14). Bristol, U.K.: Multilingual Matters. http://dx.doi.org/10.21832/9781783090518003

7

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Appendix 1: Over view of Online Reading Course Classroom Procedures
Lesson 1• Establish Participatory Classroom Culture• Small Groups: Discuss General Reading Experiences• How to Use Online Instructional Tools• How to Do Extensive Reading• Small Groups: Confirm Understanding of Online Instructional Tools and Homework
Lessons 2-12
• Reminder to Maintain Participatory Classroom Culture• Check-in about Classroom Matters (As Needed–Extensive Reading, etc.)• Brief Homework Feedback: Reading Skills• Brief Reading Skill Introduction• Small Groups: Reading Skill Practice• Wrap-up & Feedback• Small Groups: Connect Prior Knowledge to the Reading Text
• Wrap-up & Feedback• Small Groups: Analysis and Discussion of the Reading Text
• Wrap-up & Feedback• Individual: Timed Reading of the Reading Text
Lesson 13• Reminder to Maintain Participatory Classroom Culture• Homework Feedback: Reading Skills• Reading Skills Review• Small Groups: Reading Skills Review• Feedback
Lesson 14• Homework Feedback: Reading Skills• Final Exam8

【Teaching Practice Report】

La traduction de textes de sciences humaines japonais enfrançais dans le cadre du cours de rédaction française
de niveau avancépar Alexandre MANGIN
要

旨

筆者は、担当する授業「フランス語上級ライティング」の演習課題として日本の人文科学系作品の仏語訳を課している。本論の第一部は概観として、日本における翻訳（特に和訳）の歴史と現状、日本の大学での和訳の演習について述べる。和訳の政治的な側面に触れ、著者の感情の伝達については重要視されていないことに焦点を当てた。また、翻訳の具体的な規則性（情報の順番を守ることや文章の区切り方等）について触れる。第二部では、授業で用いる文章（著作物）の選定についてその重要性を述べている。専攻や将来の職業など、受講生にとって有益であるものを選ぶこと（文学部・社会学部・法学部・観光学部などの場合、人文学系のものを採用）により、学生の仏語文章の作成がその過程とともに改善される。著者の思想や感情に共感しながら翻訳することで、学生自身の言葉も仏語で表現できるようになるのである。様々な人文学系分野を専攻する学生
共通の演習課題として、民俗学者である宮本常一の著作を仏語訳させるメリットは大きいが、方言の翻訳という独特な難点も含む。人文学系専攻学生共通の仏語ライティングの演習教材としては、日本の人文学系著作－
特に民俗学のもの－が効果的であることを本論で論証している。

キーワード：フランス語教授法・上級ライティング・翻訳・人文科学・宮本常一

Le présent article a pour objet de présenter quelques réflexions qui nous sont venues à l’occasion
de l’introduction dans notre cours de français écrit en classe de niveau avancé (フランス語上級ライティング) de l’exercice de traduction du japonais au français, pendant un an (2015-2016) à l’Université
pour jeunes filles d’Ochanomizu et deux ans (2020-2022) à l’Université Rikkyô, auprès d’apprenantsévidemment japonais, à un moment relativement tardif dans notre carrière. L’expérience a porté surdes classes de petit effectif (de deux à huit étudiant(e)s), de niveau élevé et très motivées, endernière partie de séance. L’usage du dictionnaire électronique et papier était autorisé.
Ces réflexions ne sauraient prétendre être une étude de portée significative permettant d’avancer
des propositions de réforme de quelque système éducatif que ce soit, pas plus qu’une étude deréférence émanant d’un spécialiste de la traduction. Tout au plus nous permettons-nous, en tant que
praticien « de terrain » du français langue étrangère (FLE) et chercheur en ethnologie comparée deposer quelques modestes questions et de proposer quelques pistes à la sagacité des confrères.
L’exercice de traduction ne représente en aucun cas l’essentiel de notre cours, celui-ci n’étant
pas un cours de traduction stricto sensu mais un cours de rédaction. C’est une activité parmi d’autres
dont la durée ne devait pas excéder un tiers de celle du cours, soit approximativement trente minutes
sur quatre-vingt-dix ou cent minutes selon l’université. Cela étant posé, on comprendra aisément
dans quelles limites cet exercice a pu se dérouler et ce qu’on pouvait raisonnablement en attendre.
Avant d’entrer plus avant dans le sujet, précisons les mots : lorsque l’on traduit d’une langueétrangère (langue source) dans sa langue maternelle (langue de destination), on parle de « version »,et dans le cas inverse, de « thème ». Afin d’éviter toute ambiguïté ici, nous n’emploierons pas ces
thèmes car il s’agit de FLE et la langue enseignée est notre langue maternelle : les thèmes et versions
de l’enseignant seront donc des versions et thèmes pour l’étudiant. Nous nous en tiendrons à des9

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

périphrases plus longues, mais univoques.
On peut dès à présent se poser les questions rhétoriques suivantes : quelle est la situation dedépart ? Comment introduire la traduction ? Pourquoi traduire du japonais au français ? Quel est
l’intérêt de proposer des textes de sciences humaines japonais ? Quels sont les problèmes qui se sontposés lors de la mise en place de cette activité ? En d’autres termes, quel est l’intérêt de cet exercice
en classe de langue ?
Pour tenter de répondre à ces questions, nous présenterons dans un premier temps quelques
réflexions générales sur la traduction en français en cours de rédaction française et dans un second
temps, nous nous pencherons sur le cas particulier de la traduction de textes de sciences humaines
japonais.

I R éflexions générales sur la traduction en français en cours de rédaction
française
Il nous semble important de faire le point sur la situation au Japon à l’heure où nous écrivons ces
lignes avant d’énoncer nos propres considérations et principes en matière de traduction.
A/ Le constat
La traduction japonaise de textes en langue étrangère s’inscrit dans une longue tradition ets’appuie sur des principes. Nous ne prétendons pas ici non plus révolutionner les études de didactiquedes langues, mais il nous semble important de faire le point.
1) la traduction du français au japonais très pratiquée dans le cadre de la didactique deslangues
Il ne fait aucun doute que la traduction du français au japonais est un des exercices les plus
utilisés dans les cours de français assurés par des professeurs japonais. Bien que l’introduction deméthodes nouvelles par les professeurs étrangers ait pu attirer des enseignants japonais (notammentla méthode immédiate dans le Kansai), il n’en demeure pas moins que la méthode traditionnelled’enseignement des langues au Japon repose sur deux piliers : 1° l’enseignement de la grammaire
avec des exercices écrits (compréhension écrite et vocabulaire : textes à trous, mots à remettre dansle bon ordre, sons à identifier ; discrimination lexicale et grammaticale : intrus ou verbe conjugué
correctement à trouver parmi une petite liste) le plus souvent sous forme de questionnaires à choix
multiples et 2° la traduction de textes français, préexistants (extraits de textes littéraires ou d’articles
de journaux) ou écrits spécialement pour le manuel. L’exercice de traduction est pratiqué depuis dessiècles, avec la transcription de textes chinois de la langue originale, le chinois classique, vers lekambun 漢文1. Ensuite et/ou parallèlement, les traductions se sont faites vers le japonais classique(bungo 文語), puis vers le japonais vernaculaire (kôgo 口語 ou gendaigo 現代語)2. Après le chinois, cesont au XVIème siècle l’espagnol, puis le portugais, ensuite le néerlandais au XVIIème siècle, enfin à
partir du Bakumatsu (1854-1867) puis de Meiji (1868), toutes les autres langues, à commencer par les
langues européennes (au premier rang desquelles l’allemand, le français, l’anglais et le russe) qui ont
1 Langue inventée au Japon, s’écrivant essentiellement comme le chinois classique, mais avec de petits caractères (kaeriten 返り
点 ou kunten 訓点) faisant office de numéros servant à lire les groupes de mots dans l’ordre du japonais (kundoku 訓読), et avec
une prononciation « à la japonaise »2 Longtemps, et parfois même encore de nos jours, les textes chinois classiques sont traduits ou plutôt transcrits d’une manière
qui n’a rien de naturel en japonais contemporain, avec des expressions qui n’existent quasiment plus que dans les traductionsde textes chinois, comme par exemple « sujet + iwaku 曰く » (en début de phrase) pour traduire le « dit » chinois. En un mot :les textes chinois anciens sont aujourd’hui transcrits dans un « pseudo-kambun » (avec kundoku) avant d’être ensuite traduits
en japonais vernaculaire, d’où ces livres avec triples textes.

10

LA TRADUCTION DE TEXTES DE SCIENCES HUMAINES JAPONAIS EN FRANÇAIS DANS LECADRE DU COURS DU RÉDACTION FRANÇAISE DE NIVEAU AVANCÉété enseignées à plus ou moins grande échelle dans des buts politiques, afin de conserver au Japon
sa position particulière de pays moderne non occidental 3. L’apprentissage visait à comprendre (lestextes de) l’autre pour en tirer ce qui pouvait être profitable au pays4, en particulier les connaissances
technologiques et la présentation des idéologies et systèmes de valeurs régissant les rapports deforce entre Etats, en aucun cas à permettre d’établir entre l’apprenant et les « natifs » une relation
humaine faite d’émotions, de partage et d’empathie, d’expression de soi etc. Après 1945 et laprévalence écrasante, presque monopolistique de l’anglais au détriment des langues asiatiques ou durusse, langues de voisins plus ou moins proches du Japon, les motivations d’apprentissage se sontdiversifiées – langue de travail à l’international, langue destinée à un examen d’entrée ou un concours,
outils d’un cursus d’enseignant-chercheur (le plus souvent littérature francophone ou grammairefrançaise), bonus prestigieux d’un cursus éducatif, verni culturel, passe-temps plus ou moins sérieux– ainsi que les approches pédagogiques, mais la « norme » d’enseignement est restée la même.
Pour ce qui est de la traduction du japonais au français, à part de courtes phrases en cours degrammaire de première année par des enseignants japonais5, elle est laissée à la discrétion desenseignants « natifs ».
2) les « tendances » observées dans le rapport à la traduction de textes étrangers en japonais
Au départ, la traduction est du mot à mot remis dans l’ordre du japonais. Dès lors, va se poser leproblème du glissement de sens des mots chinois (aujourd’hui des mots de n’importe quelle langue)
ayant donné un mot japonais repris pour le traduire. Prenons un exemple simple : raisu ライス pourl’anglais rice, ne désigne plus le riz de façon générale, mais seulement le riz cuit sur assiette6. Ce
problème se pose pour toutes les langues ayant suivi des apports de mots étrangers dont le sens a
glissé, et dont le français offre de nombreux exemples7, mais il est particulièrement accentué enlangue japonaise8. Afin d’éviter les contresens, les retraductions de textes anciens vont voir
heureusement s’éloigner la tendance de la reprise telle quelle du mot par son équivalent japonais au
profit du mot japonais ayant la même signification.
Le japonais est avec l’anglais, le chinois, le français9, l’espagnol, l’arabe, l’allemand mais aussi lecatalan, l’une des langues dans lesquelles quantitativement on traduit le plus10. C’est aussi pour cela
qu’il est impossible de parler de la traduction japonaise comme un tout indivisible et qu’il faut se
3 Ce que Claude Lévi-Strauss a très bien résumé dans les textes repris dans l’ouvrage L’autre face de la lune : Ecrits sur le Japon,
Paris, Le Seuil, 2011.
4 Ce qu’a très bien montré notamment Jean-Luc Azra (Enseigner l’écrit au Japon, Kyôto, Alma langues, 2019, chapitre 1).
5 Le manuel de la méthode immédiate, Moi, je… Grammaire, de Bruno Vannieuwenhuyse, (Kyôto, Alma Langues, éd. revue etcorrigée 2018) comprend des exercices de traduction du français au japonais mais surtout du japonais au français. Les seconds
sont les plus nombreux et reprennent les éléments de la leçon alors que les premiers sont destinés à apporter du vocabulaire
nouveau et sont basés sur des textes préexistants plus difficiles.
6 Le riz cru se disant bien sûr o-kome お米 et le riz cuit dans un bol, go-han ご飯［御飯］.
7 Par exemple « wagon », du néerlandais wagen qui désignait un charriot (alors qu’en allemand, Wagen désigne une voiture en
général).
8 Avec la présence notamment du wasei eigo 和製英語, l’anglais fabriqué au Japon à partir de mots anglais dont la juxtaposition
et/ou le sens a/ont été modifié(e)(s). Par exemple, bebîkâ ベビーカー, juxtaposition de l’anglais baby (bébé) et car (voiture) qui
désigne une poussette, au lieu du pushchair britannique ou du stroller américain.
9 « L’édition française est très certainement celle qui traduit le plus largement l’ensemble des langues écrites et propose la plus
grande diversité des littératures du monde » (Pelletier, Geoffroy : « Les chiffres de la traduction », Société des Gens de Lettres,
https://www.sgdl.org/sgdl-accueil/presse/presse-acte-des-forums/la-traduction-litteraire/1519-les-chiffres-de-la-traductionpar-geoffroy-pelletier, article consulté pour la dernière fois le 4 mars 2021.
10 Obtenir des informations chiffrées sur ce point nous est apparu extrêmement difficile. Alors qu’on trouve aisément le nombre
et la provenance des textes traduits pour chaque langue ou pays, savoir quel pays traduit le plus de langues est une tout autre
affaire.

11

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

limiter aux tendances les plus générales. Parmi celles-ci, nous avons remarqué par exemple l’emploi
abusif et antinaturel des pronoms japonais de thème (wata(ku)shi ha, anata ha, kare ha…) pourtraduire littéralement les pronoms sujets du français (je, vous, il), alors que selon nous, ils traduiraient
davantage les pronoms toniques (avec sujet) « moi, je », « vous, vous », « lui, il » etc.. Une autre
erreur, selon nous, commise très fréquemment par les traducteurs de romans et surtout par les
traducteurs de localisation de films (sous-titres et doublages), qu’ils soient français, américains ou
chinois par exemple – et qui n’est donc pas propre à la traduction du français au japonais – estl’affaiblissement, la réduction voire la suppression des formes de politesse des langues étrangères.
Des personnes se parlant très poliment dans leur langue voient leur dialogue traduit en japonais
familier11, alors que s’il y a bien une langue à même de rendre grammaticalement les nuances depolitesse, c’est bien le japonais. Nous tirons de cet écueil deux hypothèses. La première, c’est une
possible volonté idéologique de réserver la politesse, l’échelon le plus élevé d’une civilisation« avancée » aux Japonais. Les étrangers qui se parleraient par conséquent systématiquement defaçon familière se montreraient ainsi incapables de ce raffinement réservé aux Japonais, et doiventparaître « cool », c’est-à-dire à la fois décontractés, informels, et stylés. Le but n’est pas tant de blesser
les étrangers que de donner confiance aux spectateurs japonais. Le problème est que ce genre deconditionnement impacte forcément la communication en langue étrangère. Certains Japonais, sortis
du cadre de la société japonaise, ont énormément de mal à se situer dans l’écheveau tout aussi
compliqué d’une société étrangère, qu’elle soit française, américaine ou chinoise par exemple. D’où
une tendance à rester soit trop effacé, soit trop familier. Ainsi avons-nous plusieurs fois observé desJaponais s’adresser familièrement à des Français dans une situation formelle parce qu’ils avaient
entendu ces personnes parler familièrement avec des amis. Le Japonais qui agit de la sorte n’aura pas
intégré à sa grille de communication le fait que la notion de registre existe aussi dans la langueétrangère en situation de communication ainsi qu’en narration.
Ainsi, la traduction en japonais vise-t-elle comme dans l’Antiquité, à transmettre avant tout desinformations et, rarement et très accessoirement, une partie du contenu social (hiérarchie) etémotionnel. La dimension empathique de la traduction n’est présente que chez certains traducteurscontemporains. Cette nouvelle Ecole de traducteurs, que nous appellerions l’« Ecole de la subtilité »,est amenée à se développer du fait de la présence croissante d’étrangers et d’immigrés ayant lanationalité japonaise sur le sol japonais, travaillant notamment dans l’enseignement et parfois mêmeles médias, ainsi que des futures études qui seront menées sur le processus de traduction. Le 26
février 2021, le Pr Kasama Naoko12 a organisé un événement qui, alors qu’il n’aurait rien eu denouveau dans le contexte américain ou français, placé dans le contexte japonais, est historique :réunir trois traductrices de haut vol, deux Japonaises13 et une Française14 et leur faire traduire etcommenter le même texte écrit en français, le tout filmé et diffusé sur Internet. Cela n’est ni plus ni
moins que la naissance pleinement actée de la traductologie médiatisée au Japon15.
Partant de ce constat, et particulièrement du fait que la traduction du japonais au français était
laissée de côté, nous nous sommes fixé des principes pour cet exercice de traduction en français dansle cadre de notre enseignement de la langue écrite.
11 Ceci est particulièrement flagrant dans les scènes par excellence formelles : discussions politiques, de savants, subordonnéss’adressant à leur supérieur etc.. Un étranger parlant japonais sera toujours étonné de découvrir ce traitement.
12 Kasama Naoko 笠間直穂子, Kokugakuin daigaku 國學院大学, https://www.kokugakuin.ac.jp/event/215897.
13 Takubo Mari 田久保麻理 et Taniguchi Asako 谷口亜沙子 (également maître de conférence à Meiji daigaku 明治大学).
14 Myriam d’Artois-Akô 赤穂.
15 On signalera également les travaux indispensables de Julie Brock de la Kyôto Kôgei sen’i daigaku 京都工芸繊維大学, mais
c’est une Française.

12

LA TRADUCTION DE TEXTES DE SCIENCES HUMAINES JAPONAIS EN FRANÇAIS DANS LECADRE DU COURS DU RÉDACTION FRANÇAISE DE NIVEAU AVANCÉ

B/ Les principes de la traduction en français
Nous venons de voir que la traduction en japonais visait surtout à transmettre des informations.
La traduction du japonais en français doit aussi servir à transmettre des informations, mais également
mettre en pratique ce que l’étudiant a appris de manière théorique. En traduisant en français, il écriraen français, ce qui est l’étape supérieure après le recopiage d’un texte français et le texte à trous. En
cherchant dans son dictionnaire, son manuel ou sur Internet des réponses aux questions qui seposeront au fur et à mesure du processus de traduction, l’apprenant aura de plus grandes chances deretenir du vocabulaire et des expressions, ou encore d’assimiler un point de grammaire, que le tout
se sera présenté dans un cadre plus vaste, et avec plus de contexte, qu’une phrase de manuel souvent
courte. Le contexte, le défi et parfois la frustration créent l’intérêt et l’envie de vaincre la difficulté.
L’intérêt est un affect. Et les points de langue, liés à des affects, se retiennent considérablement
mieux16, ce que nous, enseignants de terrain, avons parfois tendance à oublier. Ce passage duthéorique au pratique est fondamental dans l’apprentissage d’une langue, c’est une évidence.
Par ailleurs, le fait de partir d’un texte japonais préétabli met l’apprenant en confiance. Il n’aurapas, pour cette fois du moins, à partir de rien (pas d’angoisse de la page blanche), ni à se « mettre àdécouvert » en exprimant ses pensées et émotions profondes17. Nous sommes ici très proches de « laméthode des modèles » prônée au sein de la méthode immédiate18. Il pourra se couler dans le rôle del’auteur et essayer de transmettre le maximum d’informations, mais aussi rendre les nuances desémotions et des rapports humains représentés ou implicites dans le texte à traduire.
Mais avant de procéder à cet exercice que l’étudiant croit bien connaître, il peut être judicieuxde lui en présenter les principes directeurs et les principales problématiques. Dans le cadre de cetteétude, nous donnerons ensuite quelques exemples de conseils face à une question précise.
		1) la détermination du type de texte, du type de lectorat et la nécessité d’un appareil critique
Pour la première séance de traduction, l’enseignant serait bien avisé de procéder à une petiteprésentation de l’exercice de traduction, en rappelant quelques principes :- qu’il n’existe pas de traduction parfaite ;- que les traductions diffèrent selon les lieux (français standard, français du Québec par exemple)
et varient selon les époques (on ne traduit plus de la même façon Shakespeare ou Cervantes de nos
jours qu’aux cours des siècles précédents) et la sensibilité des traducteurs ;- qu’il faut préalablement comprendre à quel texte de départ on a à faire (article de journal
généraliste, article académique, roman, publicité etc.) et par conséquent à quel type de public ils’adresse19 ;- qu’il existe plusieurs « Ecoles » et approches de traduction, notamment celle qui privilégie laconservation de la longueur des phrases et celle qui privilégie l’ordre des informations, celle qui
affectionne les archaïsmes20 et celle qui les proscrit etc..
16 La méthode neurolinguistique est loin d’avoir été la première à le dire. De nombreux enseignants de terrain, à commencer parceux d’école maternelle, savent très bien que c’est en suscitant l’émotion (joie, amusement, compassion etc.) chez l’enfant queles connaissances qu’on cherche à lui transmettre à ce moment-là seront les mieux assimilées.
17 Ce à quoi ne le prépare pas le système éducatif japonais, d’où ce qui est perçu comme de la « timidité » par les professeursétrangers.
18 Azra, op. cit., chapitre 4, p. 91.
19 Dans un texte sur la culture japonaise traditionnelle, par exemple, il s’agira de décider préalablement si l’on conserve des motsjaponais. Par exemple dans un texte sur la maison une approche académique parlera d’engawa 縁側 et de fusuma 襖 avec lemot en japonais suivant la transcription, une approche grand public et/ou sérieuse supprimera les mots en japonais pour negarder que les transcriptions, alors qu’une approche très grand public (revue de divertissement par exemple) traduira ces motsen faisant au mieux : « véranda », « closions mobiles (opaques) ».
20 Dans un style parfois qualifié de « troubadour ».

13

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Ces principes généraux étant posés, on s’attachera à fournir des règles concrètes.
2) quelques exemples de règles à suivre
Concrètement les règles à suivre sont peu nombreuses.
L’exercice de traduction, à l’heure d’Internet, suppose d’établir préalablement une relation deconfiance entre l’enseignant et les apprenants, afin de leur faire accepter le principe de l’exercice :produire par eux-mêmes, sans recourir à un service de traduction automatisée pour l’ensemble dutexte21, le texte étant structuré selon leur idée.
Certains enseignants aiment les traductions plus littéraires, les « belles infidèles », d’autres les
traductions plus proches du texte sans être littérales. Là encore, tout dépend du positionnement dutraducteur et du type de texte traduit. Il va de soi qu’une traduction d’article de journal ou d’article
académique n’obéira pas à la même exigence esthétique qu’une traduction littéraire, de poésie enparticulier.
Ce que nous demandons en priorité aux apprenants, c’est de transmettre le maximum
d’informations, de conserver le registre de langue (poli, formel, familier etc.), de limiter lesrépétitions de mots et de faire la concordance des temps selon les règles du français.
Une fois toutes ces informations assimilées par les apprenants, c’est dans la pratique quel’enseignement commencera vraiment.
Pendant la correction en cours, on interrogera un élève par phrase et, en cas de petit effectif,
tous les étudiants pour chaque phrase, en faisant un roulement afin que chacun passe en premiersuccessivement. Si la phrase est trop longue, on pourra la couper et traduire chaque segment l’unaprès l’autre avec interrogation de tous les apprenants.
Ce qui donne donc, dans une classe de quatre inscrits, A étant l’apprenant et E l’enseignant :Pour une phrase courte :A1, A2, A3, A4, E
et pour une phrase longue :Segment 1 : A1, A2, A3, A4, E ; Segment 2 : A1, A2, A3, A4, E ; Segment 3 : A1, A2, A3, A4, E.
La phrase de l’enseignant sera présentée comme le corrigé, mais en veillant bien à ne pas laprétendre parfaite, la perfection n’étant pas de ce monde, à plus forte raison pour une traduction.
L’enseignant pourra reprendre certaines trouvailles des apprenants et les intégrer à son texte, sous
forme alternative avec le signe « / » et/ou entre parenthèses, ou substituer cette solution à la sienne,
si elle n’est pas trop longue. Le dire et le demander à l’étudiant est alors un devoir de courtoisie.

II L
 e cas particulier de la traduction de textes de sciences humaines
japonais
Il est toujours préférable que l’enseignant choisisse un texte d’un domaine en rapport avec leparcours professionnel ou de loisirs de l’étudiant. Dans une classe où tous les étudiants ont la mêmespécialité, ou une spécialité proche, l’enseignant aura moins de mal à trouver un dénominateur
commun. Par exemple dans une classe de juristes, on aura évidemment tout intérêt à choisir un texte
juridique à traduire et dans une classe d’informaticiens, un texte sur l’informatique. Lorsque l’onenseigne dans une université généraliste auprès d’étudiants d’un bon niveau, il est néanmoins
fréquent que les classes soient panachées avec des étudiants venant de spécialités différentes. Aussi,
21 Pour un mot ou une courte expression, nous tolérons cet usage.

14

LA TRADUCTION DE TEXTES DE SCIENCES HUMAINES JAPONAIS EN FRANÇAIS DANS LECADRE DU COURS DU RÉDACTION FRANÇAISE DE NIVEAU AVANCÉ

l’enseignant a peu de chances de trouver un domaine ou un sujet qui convienne à tous les étudiants
sans exception. Dans une classe de petit effectif, il est toujours plus aisé de prendre en compte lesspécialités de chacun, surtout si l’on traite un texte par spécialisation (un texte sur l’Histoire, un texte
sur les villes, un texte sur les enfants etc.). Dans une classe de quatre ou cinq étudiants ayant tous
des spécialités très différentes, mais un niveau avancé, nous avons choisi souverainement des textes
de sciences humaines, notamment ceux de Miyamoto Tsuneichi. Pourquoi le choix des sciences
humaines ? (A) Et que pouvons-nous tirer de l’exemple de Miyamoto ? (B)A/ Les textes de sciences humaines japonais
Après avoir exposé quelques raisons à ce choix, nous donnerons des exemples de problèmes
concrets qui se sont posés lors de notre expérience de cours.
1) pourquoi des textes de sciences humaines ?
Nous faisons nôtre le credo de la méthode immédiate (Azra, Vannieuwenhuyse, Benoît), selon
lequel le cours doit proposer des outils « formatifs » et être tourné vers la production, sortantl’étudiant de sa « zone de confort » et n’être en aucun cas un « cours de grammaire bis ». Dans lecadre d’une classe mélangée, comme nous l’avons dit plus haut, le plus petit dénominateur commun
est une catégorie à tiroirs : la notion de sciences humaines, de sciences dures, de technologie etc.
Dans le cas des sciences humaines, l’Histoire, la sociologie, l’ethnologie rurale et les arts et traditions
populaires (*minzokugaku *民俗学) offrent des champs d’étude considérablement variés qui
peuvent en tout ou en partie interpeller les apprenants et accroître leur motivation, que ce soit pourleur curiosité personnelle, mais aussi pour présenter à des amis étrangers francophones, actuels ou
futurs, des points intéressants de la société ou de l’Histoire de leur pays. Le texte fait donc à la fois
office de motivation que l’on s’approprie par la réécriture intrinsèque au processus de traduction,
mais aussi d’instrument de médiation dans une communication future ou éventuelle.
Comme tout exercice, la traduction en langue étrangère n’est évidemment pas sans poser
quelques problèmes.
2) les problèmes concrets posésLoin de nous l’intention de lister tous les problèmes. Nous nous en tiendrons à quelques
exemples qui nous ont paru intéressants. La confrontation à un problème lié à l’exercice de traduction
peut être l’occasion de plusieurs attitudes de la part de l’enseignant. À lui de décider s’il souhaite ou
non imposer son opinion, dissimuler ou reconnaitre sa perplexité, mettre les idées de tous encommun et préparer à l’avance sa version utilisée comme « corrigé d’exercice ».
Dans un texte sur le Japon, se pose la question des mots « difficilement traduisibles »22. Commenous le disions plus tôt en note, le choix de la transcription ou non de certains termes se pose trèsvite. D’abord, quels termes doit-on transcrire ? Doit-on les faire suivre des mots en japonais et de la
traduction entre parenthèses, ou au contraire place-t-on la traduction du mot d’abord, suivi entre
parenthèses de la transcription et de la traduction ? Et le fera-t-on à la première occurrence ou
systématiquement ? Il faut établir un règlement personnel afin que le traducteur en herbe dispose de

22 Nous n’acceptons pas l’idée de texte « intraduisibles ». Tout est traduisible : certes, un mot n’est pas forcément rendu par un
mot ; il peut l’être par une périphrase, et s’il s’avère nécessaire dans la langue de destination, l’usage intègrera ce mot d’origineétrangère dans la langue (geisha, shogoun etc.). Dans le cas d’une expression, elle sera rendue par une expression de la langue
de destination de sens équivalent. Dans le domaine de la technologie qui voit apparaître de nouveaux mots très régulièrement,
il faut souvent un temps pour créer des traductions. Enfin, au niveau du sens et de l’effet sur le lecteur, en revanche, les jeuxde mots (et les références culturelles censées être connues du lecteur natif) peuvent perdre leur effet comique en passant d’une
langue à l’autre et la poésie, sa musique originelle et son côté « poétique ».

15

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

rails sûrs à suivre. Ce sera son kata (forme-manière23) de l’exercice. Dans ce cas précis, nous avons
posé comme règle que le texte s’adressait à des passionnés du Japon, et que donc l’usage descaractères japonais et chinois était autorisé à la seule première occurrence, mais seulement dans lesnotes, pas dans le corps du texte. En revanche, dans le cas rarissime d’une explication étymologique,en particulier concernant un toponyme, l’usage des caractères de la langue japonaise était autorisé àla première occurrence dans le corps du texte. Afin de ne pas trop alourdir le texte, l’usage du motdans sa seule transcription, accompagné d’une définition en note, est parfois préférable à une
périphrase trop lourde. Paradoxe de la traduction en sciences humaines : il faut parfois ne pas
traduire un mot plutôt que de le traduire par une périphrase longue et lourde pouvant être utilisée àla première occurrence dans le texte ou en note. Il s’agit de déterminer le degré d’importance du mot
original en question, sans considérer par exemple tous les noms communs importants comme desconcepts fondamentaux à garder tels quels24.
A l’égard des concepts importants, il s’agira de dresser pour soi une liste de ces termes avec les
traductions retenues afin d’unifier le texte. Cette règle est aussi valable, à plus forte raison, dans lecadre d’un projet de traduction collective. Donnons un court exemple avec un texte25 de Miyamoto.
Les traductions sont des conventions arbitraires que nous avons fixées. Nous ne prétendons en aucuncas fournir des traductions parfaites :1. Liste des termes à garder en transcription (mot en japonais en note à la première occurrence
et périphrase ou traduction entre parenthèses ou en note à la première occurrence) :- dango 団子 : boulette de pâte de riz gluant ;- matsuri 祭り : fête traditionnelle ;- mi-koshi 神輿・御輿 : tabernacle portatif ;
etc.
2. 
Liste des termes à traduire (transcription et mot en japonais en note à la première
occurrence) :- gyôji 行事 : fête cérémonielle ;- sairei 祭礼 : fête rituelle ;- shûraku 集落 : agglomération ;etc.
Penchons-nous à présent sur le choix de Miyamoto Tsuneichi parmi la multitude d’auteurs desciences humaines japonais à notre disposition.
B/ Le cas particulier de Miyamoto Tsuneichi
Le panachage d’auteurs est toujours possible et Miyamoto Tsuneichi 宮本常一 (1907-1981) n’est
qu’un exemple, mais c’est notre choix pour nos classes de sciences humaines (littérature, Histoire,langues, sociologie, Droit etc.). Comme tout texte, il a posé des problèmes spécifiques dont nous
donnerons les exemples les plus significatifs.

23 Kata かた［型・形］ : pour une analyse poussée de ce concept, nous renvoyons au classique de Boyé Lafayette de Menthe :Kata : The Key to Understanding and dealing with the Japanese, North Clarendon, Tuttle, 2003, 184 p..
24 Concernant la traduction d’un texte de sciences humaines, le Nihon jômin seikatsu ebiki『日本常民生活絵引』 de Shibusawa
Keizô 渋澤敬三 en l’occurrence, nous avions rédigé en japonais un court texte qui pourrait éventuellement être suggéré aulecteur s’intéressant aux questions de traduction : 「穿袖の謎－フランス語圏で絵引をどう使うか－」（研究会報告）, 神奈
川大学非文字資料研究センター, 非文字資料研究, 24号, juill. 2010, pp. 4-5.
25 Minzokugaku no furusato 『民俗学のふるさと』, Tôkyô, Kawade bunko, 2012, chap. 1, section 5.

16

LA TRADUCTION DE TEXTES DE SCIENCES HUMAINES JAPONAIS EN FRANÇAIS DANS LECADRE DU COURS DU RÉDACTION FRANÇAISE DE NIVEAU AVANCÉ

1) pourquoi Miyamoto Tsuneichi ?
L’ethnographe et folkloriste Miyamoto cumule les avantages pour un lecteur japonais qui
apprend le français. D’abord, son style, très limpide, est parfaitement explicite et déjoue l’image
généralement véhiculée de flou artistique ou d’ambiguïté accolée à la langue japonaise. Il va sans direque pour un lecteur étranger apprenant le japonais, cette lecture est particulièrement agréable etfluide. À la lecture de Miyamoto, l’apprenant ne pourra pas arguer le prétexte d’une incompréhension
pour justifier un travail non fait. Si Miyamoto est compréhensible pour un étranger, à plus forte raison
l’est-il pour un Japonais.
Ensuite, Miyamoto fournit un ensemble d’informations de tous ordres fort intéressant à la fois
pour l’étranger qui souhaite découvrir la société japonaise en profondeur, mais aussi pour le lecteur
japonais, qu’il étudie la minzokugaku ou non. Il pourra ensuite les réutiliser pour présenter le paysauprès d’étrangers à un niveau plus élevé que les fondamentaux de la culture japonaise que soninterlocuteur connaît certainement déjà (manger avec des baguettes, enlever ses chaussures chezl’habitant etc.).
En outre, Miyamoto ayant traité une variété de sujets, il y en aura forcément un susceptible deplaire au plus grand nombre. Par exemple l’éducation des enfants, les matsuri, les auberges, lepèlerinage d’Ise, la formation des villes nouvelles, le Japon vu du ciel, les femmes, la jeunesse, lapauvreté, les techniques…
Enfin, pour ce qui est de l’enseignant, le fait de choisir un auteur qu’il a étudié et qu’il connaît
bien peut apparaître comme une solution de facilité, mais cette facilité est au service du cours. Sans
faire de longs laïus saugrenus sur son auteur préféré, l’enseignant pourra le présenter en quelques
phrases et le remettre en contexte. Cela permettra aux étudiants de se sentir plus proches de l’auteur,de s’intéresser un tant soit peu à sa vie et de mieux comprendre ce qu’il avait à nous dire. Une remise
en contexte n’est jamais superflue.
2) Miyamoto pose-t-il des problèmes concrets ?
Contre toute attente, mentionnons par acquit de conscience les rares plaintes sur la difficulté del’exercice : quel que soit l’exercice donné en cours de langue, les apprenants japonais se plaindrontde sa difficulté, plutôt ressentie que réelle. Il s’agit pour l’enseignant de faire la part des choses entre
les tentatives des étudiants visant à faire simplifier le cours pour obtenir des unités d’enseignement(tan’i) sans trop de peine, la difficulté normalement ressentie mais inhérente à tout apprentissage et
une difficulté excessive qui ne correspond ni au niveau de départ, ni au niveau « réaliste » à atteindre
au terme du semestre. Dans ce dernier cas seulement, l’enseignant devra modifier l’exercice ou lesupprimer pour revenir à des exigences raisonnables. Dans l’exemple de Miyamoto, on pourra
choisir un autre texte ou réduire la taille du texte et au sein de celui-ci, le nombre de phrases données
en devoir à la maison. Traduire trois phrases plutôt qu’une page entière sera perçu comme « moinsdifficile » alors qu’en fait le travail demandé sera juste moins abondant et moins fatigant.
Le principal problème pour nous fut la présence de parties de dialogues transcrits d’après
entretiens et comportant des tournures dialectales26. Tout comme la présence de tournures oralesfamilières, ces expressions locales posent le problème de leur équivalent en français. Bien sûr, on neles traduira pas en un des dialectes ou langues de la francophonie ou de la France (il serait ridiculede traduire le parler d’Iwate, par exemple, par celui du Nord, voire même par un dialecte Wallon ou
par le joual québécois). On optera donc pour des tournures orales en français standard en évitant
26 Dans notre cours de l’année 2020-2021, nous avions à faire à des phrases de style oral parlé dans le Kantô. Minzoku no fursato,
op cit. pp. 41-42.

17

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

scrupuleusement les anachronismes et en tenant compte de l’âge du locuteur en question.
Le deuxième problème qui s’est posé fut celui de la concordance des temps. Toute traduction enfrançais pose ce problème, toutefois dans le cas particulier de Miyamoto, écrivain voyageur, lanarration d’expérience vécue côtoie l’essai et il arrive parfois que l’ethnographe se mette en scène,
aussi faut-il toujours se demander quand a lieu chaque action et quand elle est rapportée. La
traduction des temps est donc, ici en particulier, rétive à toute transposition automatique telle que« forme du dictionnaire (non passé) japonaise → présent français » ou « forme achevée japonaise →passé français ». Les règles d’emploi des temps en japonais sont plus souples qu’en français et ilarrive souvent que l’auteur passe d’une forme achevée à un non-passé d’une phrase à l’autre. La
traduction en français est ici l’occasion d’une révision bienvenue des règles de la concordance destemps et une mise en pratique sur le long terme, difficulté du français que même les meilleursapprenants (japonais) ne maîtrisent que très rarement.
Enfin, dernière difficulté, qui se pose peut-être davantage pour l’enseignant en position decorrecteur que pour l’apprenant-traducteur, c’est la traduction ou non des termes désignant les
machines et les outils. Dans ce cas, nous avons privilégié le cas par cas et, comme si le texte allait êtrepublié, nous avons pris la liberté d’insérer des photos ou gravures représentant lesdits outils (parexemple un kine 杵, pilon à manche utilisé pour le mochi-tsuki 餅搗き). L’insertion de photographies
représentant des scènes de matsuri a également plu aux étudiants qui voyaient alors dans le texte
traduit autant un extrait de livre au propos concret et visualisable qu’un exercice de cours.
Nous n’avons pour le moment pas rencontré de difficulté infranchissable dans la traduction
française de Miyamoto. Le choix de cet auteur fut donc profitable pour tous et moins frustrant qu’untexte littéraire, qu’il soit japonais ou français.
Pour conclure, nous avons pu valider le point selon lequel la traduction en français, exercice
pourtant d’une difficulté réelle pour les étudiants et l’enseignant lui-même, était un exercice à la fois
formateur et un peu ludique, dont les étudiants eux-mêmes reconnaissaient l’apport dans leurapprentissage du français. Tout comme E. Kourdis, « nous pouvons affirmer que le couple langue/
traduction est un outil didactique privilégié dans l’enseignement/apprentissage d’un français à visée
professionnelle » (Kourdis, 2011)
Sans conseiller à tout le monde le choix exclusif de Miyamoto qui n’aurait pas forcément de sens
dans certains cas, nous conseillons à chaque enseignant d’ajuster sa position en fonction deparamètres multiples : convenance personnelle, adéquation au public des apprenants, formation duraisonnement ou encore préparation au monde du travail dans lequel le futur diplômé cherchera às’insérer à court terme.
En outre, cet exercice permet, tout comme le travail sur des textes d’actualité, d’être renouveléchaque année, au bénéfice de l’enseignant-chercheur qui peut réutiliser les morceaux traduits par lui
pour la correction dans ses travaux personnels. C’est, si l’on peut dire, faire d’une pierre deux coups.
Procéder à l’exercice de traduction en français fut pour nous une expérience entièrement
positive, ainsi que pour les étudiants qui ressentaient un sentiment d’achèvement après ce travail
nouveau et exigeant accompli. La rédaction de cet article ne laisse de nous inciter à poursuivre notre
découverte du monde non seulement de la traduction en cours de langue, mais de la traduction en
général et de la traductologie en particulier.

18

LA TRADUCTION DE TEXTES DE SCIENCES HUMAINES JAPONAIS EN FRANÇAIS DANS LECADRE DU COURS DU RÉDACTION FRANÇAISE DE NIVEAU AVANCÉ

Références
AZRA, Jean-Luc : Enseigner l’écrit au Japon : La méthode des modèles, Kyôto, Alma shuppan, 262 p. ;BOGLE, Desrine : « La place de la traduction en classe de langues : apprentissage de langues ou
formation de traducteurs professionnels ? », Le français à l’université, 19 avril 2014, mise en
ligne le 11 décembre 2014, consulté pour la dernière fois le 5 février 2021 : http://www.bulletin.
auf.org/index.php?id=1920# ;BROCK, Julie : « Trajectivité, littérature et traduction », Journal : Mésologiques - Etudes des milieux,
Bulletin of Institute of Technology, 12, décembre 2018, pp. 1-5 ;KOURDIS, Evangelos : « La traduction dans un cours de français à visée professionnelle en Grèce.
Une approche sémiotique du technolecte de la coiffure », Dia stauró seis, jan. 2011 : https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233382538_La_traduction_dans_un_cours_de_francais_a_visee_professionnelle_en_Grece_Une_approche_semiotique_du_technolecte_de_la_coiffuresite consulté pour la dernière fois le 5 février 2021 ;LEVI-STRAUSS, Claude : L’autre face de la lune : Ecrits sur le Japon, Paris, Le Seuil 2011 ;MANESSE, Danièle : « Interroger la langue et la littérature par la traduction (université) », dans Le
français aujourd’hui 2003/3 (n° 142), pages 87 à 95 : https://www.cairn.info/revue-le-francaisaujourd-hui-2003-3-page-87.htm, site consulté pour la dernière fois le 5 février 2021 ;MANGIN, Alexandre :「穿袖の謎－フランス語圏で絵引をどう使うか－」（研究会報告）, 神奈川
大学非文字資料研究センター, 非文字資料研究, 24号, juill. 2010, pp. 4-5 ;de MENTHE, Boyé Lafayette : Kata : The Key to Understanding and dealing with the Japanese, North
Clarendon, Tuttle, 2003, 184 p. ;MIYAMOTO Tsuneichi 宮本常一 :『民俗のふるさと』, Tôkyô, Kawade shobô shinsha 河出書房新社, 2012, 268 p. ;VANNIEUWENHUYSE, Bruno : Enseigner l’oral au Japon, Kyôto, Alma Langues, mars 2017, rééd.
fév. 2019, 195 p..

19

【Teaching Practice Report】

The Best of Both: Adaptations of Classroom Practices andLesson Design in the Transition from an Online to an
On-Campus Classroom Environment
Andrew Tyner
Abstract
In this paper, I examine the changes I have made to classroom practices and lesson design as I transition from afully online classroom environment utilized during the COVID-19 pandemic to an on-campus classroom
environment. I find that there are several beneficial technologies, particularly online teaching tools, which could be
carried over from one learning environment to the other. These elements include the use of the Zoom platform
within the classroom, the Blackboard learning management service, and multimedia lesson components. While theuse of these tools has sometimes meant changes to my previously established classroom practices, I find that thesetools help make my classes more immediately interactive, overcome some practical limitations of a physicalclassroom, provide additional learning opportunities, and, in some cases, help facilitate measures that might help
prevent the spread of COVID-19.
Keywords: technology in the classroom, classroom practices, lesson design

Introduction
The role of technology in the classroom has been extensively explored in both academic andpopular literature, particularly over the past two decades. The fact that technology is becoming
increasingly prevalent both inside and outside of the classroom is undeniable. In particular, the useof Zoom and other similar platforms has proliferated widely over the past year and a half during the
global COVID-19 pandemic. As more and more educational institutions transition back to face-to-faceclasses in the wake of the pandemic, questions emerge regarding what might be adapted from online
lessons to benefit face-to-face lessons. In other words, how might the best parts of the virtual learning
environment be carried over into the classroom?
I teach at Rikkyo University in Tokyo, Japan in the department of Foreign Language Education
and Research. All my classes were online during the 2020 academic year. In 2021, most of the springsemester was online. The classes taught during this period, English discussion, debate, andpresentation,1 were all taught using a combination of Zoom as a classroom environment, e-mail forcommunication outside of class or virtual office hours,2 and Blackboard3 to deliver documents,
announcements, and assignment instructions, as well as for students to turn in completed
assignments and receive written feedback.
Now, in the fall 2021 academic term, as my university largely returns to face-to-face lessons, and123

My debate and presentation courses are conducted in English and have the dual purpose of teaching skills relevant topresentation and debate and improving English language proficiency.
Conducted on Zoom.
Blackboard is an online teaching tool, often referred to as a learning management system, which incorporates many elements.
These include the ability to conduct quizzes or tests online; provide announcements, homework assignments, and otherdocuments to students; receive assignment submissions from students and provide the teacher with a means to give feedbackon those submissions; and provide grade management tools, among several other features.

20

THE BEST OF BOTH: ADAPTATIONS OF CLASSROOM PRACTICES AND LESSON DESIGN IN THE TRANSITIONFROM AN ONLINE TO AN ON-CAMPUS CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT

as I teach presentation and debate courses, I am reflecting on my attempts to integrate the beneficial
components of the online classes, particularly the technologies used during online lessons, with myon-campus lessons. Chief among my concerns in this process has been that the adaptations will
benefit the students in clear, definable ways. In short, I have attempted to enhance my existing
on-campus lesson designs with technologies that each offer some specific and immediate benefits.
In this study, I shall focus on on-campus integration of the main technologies used to facilitate
my online lessons during the COVID-19 pandemic, namely, Zoom and Blackboard, as well as
multimedia lesson components. As I have discussed previously4, the objectives of, and in large part,the basic methodology for, planning and conducting an online class are in close alignment with thoseof on-campus classes. The primary difference, in the case of online lessons, is the use of technology
to overcome the limitations imposed by the literal distance between the students and their teacher
and classmates, yet the physical classroom is not perfect; it has its limitations as well. Presently I
wish to explore the use of technology, on one hand, to enhance and improve a given class, while on
the other, to overcome various limitations of the physical classroom setting.

Discussion
During the first couple of weeks of the Fall 2021 semester, as most courses at the university
returned to face-to-face lessons, I taught my classes largely as I had prior to the pandemic. I used the
textbooks and whiteboard or chalkboard as my primary in-class teaching tools. This was notineffective. However, having used a wider variety of technology during online lessons in the
pandemic, I had the feeling that something was missing. Many of my colleagues indicated that they
were continuing to use the online tools that they had integrated into their classes over the previous
few semesters. Even though, in hindsight, this idea was rather straightforward, I had not fully
considered the possibility of carrying over a significant portion of class design and methodology
from the online lessons.
Now, my on-campus classes mirror my recent online classes in several ways. When my students
enter the classroom, I ask that they sign in to Zoom. The students do not turn on their cameras or
microphones, but even by simply signing in to zoom, attendance recordkeeping is made easier. Thisis a not insignificant help in an environment where all students must wear masks and sit well apartfrom one another in a large classroom. Problems of teachers and students not seeing or hearing one
another clearly during attendance check may be averted. Still a greater benefit is to be had throughsharing information with the students using the Zoom platform.
If a given activity has comparatively complex instructions, rather than simply writing the
instructions on the whiteboard or chalkboard or displaying them on a single screen as I explainthem, I can put the instructions directly in front of each student through the chat feature. Thisobviates difficulty for the students in seeing instructions clearly in a large, socially distanced
classroom. I can also send useful online links or other information to students using the class chatfunction, enhancing their note-taking ability without drawing their attention away from the device
whereon they keep their notes. Rather than having the students wait for me to write something on
the board, I can give students information much more quickly as I can quickly type or copy and paste
information directly into the chat.
Yet another benefit of having this chat feature available during class is that students can ask
4Tyner, A. (2021) Finding Time: Reflections on English Discussion Lesson and Activity Timing in the Shift to Online Lessons
During the COVID-19 Pandemic, Journal of Multilingual Pedagogy and Practice 1, 16-22.

21

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

questions during activities and receive answers. Certainly, students are always welcome to ask
questions aloud, but this method is helpful for students who are shy or embarrassed to ask aquestion. Further, questions and answers exchanged this way to not disturb students who are
actively participating in an activity.
Khan and Iqbal (2020) note that taking feedback from students regularly is one means to“ensure quality of the [class] sessions” (p. 1) when using online classroom tools. Regarding this,students are able to not only ask questions but also give immediate feedback to me using Zoom chat.
If something is difficult to understand or if more examples are required—in short, there is somethinga student wishes to express about the immediate circumstances of their learning—they can offer thisusing the Zoom chat function quickly and unobtrusively. Even something as simple as asking for themeaning of a word, requesting to hear something again, or seeking further examples, can make thedifference between understanding and not understanding.
Zoom, as I have already mentioned, helps to facilitate the use of multimedia lesson components.
Though the use of video and audio in the classroom is long established, generally, in any given class,
my use of audio and video is limited. The main reason for this limited use of multimedia is to give thestudents more time to speak and use the skills being learned. However, a further consideration has
been that, in the past, the use of video or audio often meant some break in the flow of the lesson, aslow-down, or attention transitioned from notebooks and textbooks to a screen or audio device andback.
Now, with concerns about the spread of COVID-19, there are further difficulties. I havementioned some already. Students are spaced apart from one another in large classrooms, forinstance. This makes the use of a single screen difficult, logistically. Additionally, classroom doors
and windows are kept open to provide ventilation. This often causes sound disturbances. Playing avideo or audio segment loudly enough for students at the back of the room to hear clearly necessarilymeans disturbing neighboring classes. In addition, the various sources of noise one encounters with
open doors and windows means that even relatively loud audio may be suddenly drowned out by thesiren of an emergency vehicle or some such other random sound. These concerns must be weighedagainst the potential benefits of multimedia use.
When considering the benefits of multimedia use in the classroom, first there is the informational
content of a given video or audio segment, and then, of notable importance in the language classroom,
there is the potential for video and audio segments to provide high-quality examples in real-world or
realistic scenarios. Multimedia has the capacity to offer something beyond the immediate classroom
experience. Khan & Iqbal (2020) note that a video is, itself, a potential source of student engagement(p. 1). Hall & Dougherty Stahl highlight the “Dual Coding Theory” which holds that “our brains
process and remember more effectively when we are actively taking information in through both ourverbal and nonverbal channels” (p. 404).
There are numerous reasons to integrate multimedia components into on-campus classes.
Indeed, teachers around the world have done this for years. The difference of note in the present
situation is that in carrying over the use of Zoom from online classes, the integration of multimedia
components can now be almost seamless. Now, short video or audio examples can be used at
virtually any point in the lesson with minimal disturbance to lesson flow or to student concentration.
PowerPoint presentations as well as video and audio segments that might have been difficult to seeor hear for students in the back of a large room are now directly in front of each student on their

22

THE BEST OF BOTH: ADAPTATIONS OF CLASSROOM PRACTICES AND LESSON DESIGN IN THE TRANSITIONFROM AN ONLINE TO AN ON-CAMPUS CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT

preferred screen5. Students can also use earphones for greater audio clarity when using Zoom on
their Internet-enabled device, which is of particular importance in a language classroom. Students,
spaced widely apart from one another as a means of social distancing, need not move close to thefront of the room to see or hear clearly.
If the benefits of using Zoom in the classroom are evident, are there any drawbacks? One
potential drawback is the much discussed ‘Zoom fatigue.’ While I am in no way an expert on thephysical and psychological effects of technology use, literature on the topic of Zoom fatigue seems tosuggest that it may not be likely under the circumstances of my classes as I have described them.
McWhirter (2020) notes regarding Zoom fatigue, “The constant eye contact with numerous
individuals at once compounded by the awareness of one’s own facial expressions can be exhausting
in itself… Additionally, fatigue comes from nonstop hours at the computer” (p. 41). Regarding theformer concern, the students do not use their cameras while signed-on to Zoom in the classroom. As
for the latter, while the students do use internet capable devices, whether a computer, tablet, or
smartphone, they do not use these devices constantly throughout the class. Rather, students
complete a wide variety of tasks, many of which require them to look away from their screens.
Hence, while Zoom fatigue is a serious concern in the realm of online classes, with Zoom integrated
as I have described, it seems Zoom fatigue might be unlikely.
One of the other major technologies I am currently using for my classes is Blackboard. While
Blackboard is a long-established tool for instructors, I had not, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, used
it extensively. I do not wish to explain how the use of Blackboard streamlines many of the processes
related to instruction. Rather, I wish to consider how the use of Blackboard has altered my classroom
practices6.
One measure suggested by the university as a COVID-19 prevention measure is not to distributeor collect physical copies of documents. As sensible as this measure is, in classes that involve a fairamount of writing or research, such as presentations or debates in my case, it does make things
somewhat difficult. One solution is the use of Blackboard by students to turn in homeworkassignments and for me to provide feedback and supplementary materials to students.
Prior to the pandemic, most homework was turned in to me either on paper or by email. This
was, logistically, difficult to manage. I had to physically manage the documents, keep them safe, write
feedback by hand on each one (at least in the case of assignments turned in on paper) even if someelements were repeated, and promptly return the assignments to the students.
Paperless assignments on Blackboard are much easier to manage. For one thing, the student
does not run the risk of either losing the instructions for an assignment or misplacing the assignment
once it is completed. Another advantage of digitally submitted homework assignments, particularly
writing assignments, is that either the student or the instructor can access them at any time. This isparticularly helpful to students in cases such that reference to one assignment may help in the
preparation of another assignment. Still another advantage is that feedback can be given to studentsin
writing at any time and subsequently referred to by either the instructor or student. Concerning the
5 Students are allowed to use laptop computers, tablets, or smartphones. It should also be noted that the university allows
students to borrow laptops should they need to do so. Thus, the potential problem of the unavailability of technology forstudents is sidestepped.
6 I should note that both presentation and debate, as presently delivered, are being taught in-person at Rikkyo University for the
first time in the Fall 2021 semester. When I refer to differences between my current and former practices, I refer to either myformer practices in various courses at Rikkyo and other institutions or between my planned and actual practices.

23

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

submission of assignments through a learning management system, Amirul Islam (2017) notes,“Students will…feel more comfortable to write to their teacher as it can be only one to one
communication” (p. 82). While students may work in-class with the words ideas they have submitted
electronically, they know that the first person to see the writing will be their instructor. If there issome major problem, they will be informed. It takes away some of the pressure, and possibly someof the feeling of vulnerability that comes with sharing one’s writing with classmates.
Additionally, accountability is clear when assignment submission is managed electronically. A
student can be immediately aware of their past work, and may be cognizant of their overall
performance, at least in terms of homework writing, at little more than a glance. This allows students
to visualize what is expected of them and how they have responded to those expectations, to be both
responsible and responsive when it comes to homework assignments and, as Khan and Iqbal (2020)
note, “Responsiveness is the crux of learning” (p. 1).

Conclusion
Technology has a useful role to play in the classroom. My primary concern, as noted in the
introduction, was that any technology integrated into the classroom should be of actual, concrete
benefit to the students. The technologies I have integrated thus far certainly meet that criterion.
The transition from online classes during the COVID-19 pandemic to face-to-face classes
presents both challenges and opportunities. Many of the same online tools used during the pandemic
can continue to perform largely the same function in face-to-face lessons. Going paper-free, forinstance, potentially allows a measure of safety7 while also offering the benefits of easy submissionof assignments at any time and a means to provide written feedback to students quickly and simply.
The use of Zoom or similar platforms in the classroom can allow students to interact with classmaterials and their instructors more easily. Further, the integration of multimedia elements throughZoom or similar platforms might allow students to engage in different modes of learning than mightotherwise be possible, given the typical limitations of the physical classroom and the specificrestrictions connected to the prevention of the spread of COVID-19.
In researching the technologies discussed in this paper, I find that one area of future interest to
instructors as they integrate online technologies into their classroom practices might be the further
development of learning management systems, such as Blackboard. As these systems develop, thepotential that the integration of AI and deep learning systems might be able to further tailor thesesystems to suit the needs of teachers and students. While such AI and deep learning systems are still
being developed, Dias et al. (2020) note that in such a system, “knowledge can be extracted
concerning the student’s preferred learning patterns while interacting with leaning resources, and/or while collaborating in groups” (p. 2). Such feedback would provide the instructor with additional
information with which to tailor their lessons to best suit their students. Beyond this, Dias et al.
(2020) note the potential of such a system “to provide behavioral information in terms of learning andattention deficits” (p. 2). If such a system were available, it could start to bridge the gap between thetreatment of learning difficulties and actual classroom instruction, which is an encouraging thought.
The fact that technology of potential benefit to the classroom will continue to emerge anddevelop is virtually undeniable. It seems the way forward is to find a balance between both online andin-class tools available to the instructor to best benefit the students. For my part, I will continue toevaluate the effectiveness and usefulness of online technologies as they become available. I am
certain that my classroom will continue to evolve.
24THE BEST OF BOTH: ADAPTATIONS OF CLASSROOM PRACTICES AND LESSON DESIGN IN THE TRANSITIONFROM AN ONLINE TO AN ON-CAMPUS CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT

References
Amirul Islam, K.M. (2017). Using Learning Management System (LMS) to introduce Collaborative
Language Learning at Tertiary Level in Bangladesh. ASA University Review, 11(2), 77-83.
Dias, S.B., Hadjileontiadou, S.J., Diniz1, J. & Hadjileontiadis, L.J. (2020). DeepLMS: a deep learning
predictive model for supporting online learning in the Covid‑19 era. Scientific Reports,
10(19888), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-76740-9
Hall, M. & Dougherty Stahl, K.A. (2012). Devillainizing Video in Support of Comprehension andVocabulary Instruction. The Reading Teacher, 65(6), 403-406.
Khan, U.A. & Iqbal, K. (2020). Transition from on campus to online classroom in COVID 19:
Preparedness on part of university students and faculty. Isra Med Journal, 12(1), 1-2.
McWhirter, J.L. (2020). Are You Zoomed Out? Dealing With Zoom Fatigue in the Virtual Classroom.
Choral Journal, 61(2). 41-43.

25

【Teaching Practice Report】

Applying Course Design for Online Instruction to Face-to-Face
Lessons
Andrew Warrick
Abstract
After a year and a half, many courses at Rikkyo University moved from the online format that had been adopted dueto the COVID-19 pandemic back to regular face-to-face classes during the Fall 2021 semester. Online teaching had
forced teachers to rethink the way classes were conducted and to rapidly learn to utilize technology for instruction.
As a result, courses were redesigned and innovative solutions emerged in order to allow for the instruction ofcourses that were previously intended to be conducted in physical classrooms. At Rikkyo University, two suchclasses were English Debate and English Presentation, both mandatory fall semester classes for first year students.
However, once face-to-face instruction resumed, there was concern not only about health issues and teaching with
infection countermeasures, but also about the loss of effective course design and practices that had been born outof the transition to online classes. This paper discusses some of the positive teaching approaches used for online
instruction for English Debate and English Presentation, and how those were implemented once classes returned
to face-to-face instruction in order to reduce the risk of infection or maintain the quality of classes that had beenpossible online.
Keywords: face-to-face instruction, course design, technology

Introduction
The global coronavirus pandemic that began in 2020 forced many educational institutions
around the world to switch to online classes. Teachers everywhere had to quickly adapt to online
teaching in order to protect the health of staff and students. It was a challenging time for educators
who were required to learn new technology, rethink their teaching styles, and adapt lessons to a
web-based format. With the help of virtual meeting software, cloud technology, and online tools
teachers explored new ways to deliver the best education possible under the circumstances. As
teachers became accustomed to conducting courses online, it became easier to take advantage of themedium to do things that would not have been possible otherwise, such as teach students new
software and partition classes into different breakout rooms to run various activities simultaneously.
At Rikkyo University, classes had largely been online since the spring semester of 2020. Face-toface classes had briefly resumed for a short period of time at the beginning of the 2021 springsemester, but as the number of COVID-19 infections in Tokyo increased and the prefecture
implemented a continuation of restrictions intended to reduce the risk of infection, classes once again
returned online. However, with daily infection numbers falling a few weeks into the fall semester of2021, these restrictions were lifted and Rikkyo University soon returned many of its classes to theface-to-face teaching format, including two mandatory first year English courses: English Debate andEnglish Presentation, both of which have about 20 students per class. While at first it had beenchallenging to transition to online teaching as both educators and students had to learn newtechnologies and get accustomed to the format, a new set of issues presented themselves with therecommencement of teaching in physical classrooms.
Even though both English Debate and English Presentation returned to being taught on
26

THE BEST OF BOTH: ADAPTATIONS OF CLASSROOM PRACTICES AND LESSON DESIGN IN THE TRANSITIONFROM AN ONLINE TO AN ON-CAMPUS CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT

campus, teachers and students still had to follow a strict set of rules in order to minimize the risk ofinfection during classes. First among these was of course that wearing facial masks was mandatory
while on campus. While this rule did not directly interfere with the usual way either of these classes
were conducted, many of the other restrictions made the typical way classes were managed somewhat
problematic. English Debate and English Presentation are designed around having students shareideas with each other. However, since the threat of COVID-19 infection remained with face-to-faceclasses, teachers were asked to follow a set of guidelines to reduce the risk of the disease spreading.
These included limiting the amount of students who were talking at once, limiting the overall amountof time students talked during a lesson, and limiting the number of people a student interacted withduring a lesson. Students also had to sit at a distance from one another, and teachers were asked tostay at the front of the classroom and not walk around to students. All of these restrictions madeconducting face-to-face classes very different from what would have been possible had there been nocoronavirus pandemic, but also very different from what had become the standard for online classes.
As a consequence of these restrictions, students were limited to the number of people with whomthey could share ideas during a single English Debate class, or the number of people who could offer
them feedback during a single Presentation class. With online classes using Zoom this had not beena concern, and it had been possible to frequently arrange students into various groups so that they
could gain further perspectives. Previously in online classes, students had been able to freely interact
with one another, but a limit on the number of students in a group speaking at once meant that theirinteractions had to be more regulated once we returned to the physical classroom. As a teacher, I
also could not engage with students as closely as I had been able to with online classes, since I was
not supposed to directly approach groups in the classroom, whereas before I had been able to visit
individual breakout rooms in Zoom and so could speak with students much more easily.

Discussion
All these guidelines meant to reduce the potential spread of COVID-19 presented new challenges
for teachers of English Debate and English Presentation once these courses returned to campus.
Conversely, the online format of instruction had given teachers and students many useful tools forthe classroom and brought about creative course design measures. This paper considers theapplication of some online classroom innovations to overcome these challenges and improve theoverall quality of instruction with regards to creating a “partitioned” classroom, putting moreemphasis on students, and giving feedback to students.

Maintaining a Partitioned Classroom
During online lessons over Zoom, it is possible to partition a class into separate breakout rooms
where students can work on different activities. When conducting my English Presentation andEnglish Debate classes online, I found this useful in allowing my students to make full use of the classtime to be productive. For example, in English Debate classes, a group of students who finishedpreparing their team speech more quickly than other groups could rehearse their delivery without
disrupting other students. And in English Presentation classes, students in one group could givepresentations while students in another group worked on another activity. I believed there would bediminishing returns for students to watch too many presentations, so instead I had students givepresentations in breakout rooms while I was present. I would then give feedback before moving onto27

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

the next group to listen to their presentations. After I left, the group that had given me theirpresentations would do a peer feedback and discussion activity. Meanwhile, the groups that were
waiting for me to arrive could do activities from the textbook and prepare for a future presentation.
In this way, students could use the class time effectively and be productive throughout the lesson.
Had I asked students to present in front of the class in a single Zoom meeting room, I would haveworried about students disengaging from online lessons either before or after their presentation, so
I also felt this approach kept students honest.
When classes resumed on campus, I still wanted students to give frequent practice presentations,as they had done online, but I did not want them to watch 19 other presentations while having
nothing else to do, as I thought this would not be a good use of class time. I wanted students to utilize
class time productively by practicing presentations with each other, learning new presentation skills
by doing exercises from the textbook, discussing with each other questions related to the theme of
the upcoming presentation and then commencing work on it, all while I gave feedback on the content
or delivery of other students’ presentations. However, the social distancing guidelines made thissomewhat difficult, as I was not supposed to leave from the front of the class. To overcome this, I had
students do all tasks that required pair or group work at the beginning of class, and then use theremainder of the time to work quietly on a future presentation by writing the script, creating the slide
show, and memorizing their presentation for the remainder of the class. And while the class worked
quietly, I could ask students from one group at a time to give me their presentations, with othermembers of the same group listening in to provide feedback afterwards. In this way, I maintained thesame level of productivity in my presentation classes that had benefited my students in our online
lessons.

Greater Emphasis on Students
When classes were online, I employed active learning approaches as much as possible. Waluyo(2020) reported that active learning strategies increased student outcomes when combined withe-learning approaches, so by using various online tools and involving students in the learning process
it is possible to improve student results. The nature of online courses using video conferencing
software can make it very easy for students to disengage from a lesson by doing other things on their
computer or phone instead of paying attention to a lecture. To avoid this problem, I had tried to limit
the amount of time I lectured during online lessons. Instead, I gave students activities to do in small
groups using their textbooks. Al-Shalibi (2015) reported that student engagement was crucial tolearning outcomes, and that careful lesson planning and varying teaching strategies helped improvestudent engagement.
For my English Presentation classes, I used Ready to Present (Bartelen & Kostiuk, 2019) as a
textbook, which contains many exercises students can do in pairs or small groups that introduce
students to various presentation skills such as gesturing, making eye-contact, and emphasizing
words. I combined these exercises with questions I had made that required students to reflect on theimportance of these skills so that students would both understand how and why they were important
to use in presentations. Previously, with classes online and students using computers, they could
check the answers to the textbook exercises online by watching videos or listening to audio tracks
from the textbook’s website. Following this, we would check the answers to the questions I had
created together in the main Zoom meeting room.
When classes returned to campus, not all students brought their laptops, so using the textbook’s
28THE BEST OF BOTH: ADAPTATIONS OF CLASSROOM PRACTICES AND LESSON DESIGN IN THE TRANSITIONFROM AN ONLINE TO AN ON-CAMPUS CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT

website to check the answers to activities may have proven difficult. Furthermore, I felt that having
students watch videos on gestures or listen to audio tracks of sentences with word emphasis to checktheir answers using the media available on the textbook’s website would be problematic if all students
did not finish at the same time. Just as I had tried to have students take on more active roles in myonline classes, I realized that the same could be done in the physical classroom. Therefore, insteadof having the students rely on the textbook’s webpage to check their answers or me giving them theanswer, I had students provide the answers themselves to activities that required matching sentences
to appropriate gestures, or read a sentence aloud while emphasising the necessary words.
I employed similar methods in my English Debate classes. I felt the Up for Debate (Mishima etal., 2021) textbook had many sections that were teacher centered, and so to counteract this, I again
made questions for students to answer in groups during our online lessons. Using the textbook,
students would find the answers and we would take them up together as a class. In this way, students
would explain key elements from the debate textbook, such as the structure of a debate or thefunction of various expressions. These same approaches to teaching students which I had devised toprevent students from disengaging during online lessons worked well once we returned to campus.

Giving Feedback
Monitoring students and providing feedback that is personalized is a central part of English
Presentation and English Debate. Hattie and Timperley (2007) go over ways feedback can beeffective, and note that feedback on student tasks in relation to overall goals is important to improving
student outcomes. In English presentation classes, how a student delivers their presentation, such as
the volume of their voice, the way they emphasize words and use hand gestures, and their eye-contact,is of great importance and one of the central focusses of the class. With online classes, it was possible
to watch students closely using video conferencing software, and in turn provide constructive advice
students could use to improve with each practice presentation. However, the ability to monitor
students so closely was reduced once classes returned to face-to-face because teachers could not
move freely around classrooms due the anti-infection guidelines requiring teachers to remain at thefront of the classroom. These same guidelines also made it more difficult to check in with groups
during debate class as they prepared for various parts of their debates. During online classes, ateacher could visit each group and hear their ideas. If students were struggling to make reasons orfind evidence, the teacher could offer hints and advice. Again though, this level of monitoring became
difficult once lessons returned to the classroom. This inability to give immediate feedback easily waspotentially damaging to student productivity, especially among lower-level students who perhaps
need more guidance from instructors.
As a way around this, I asked students to submit their written scripts for presentations anddebate classes electronically. When classes were held online, this was the norm for checking student
work, since it was not possible for students to submit physical copies of assignments. Both theEnglish Debate textbook and the English Presentation textbook I used had spaces for writing
segments of debates or presentation scripts, so in a normal teaching environment, it is likely that I
would have been checking physical versions of student work that they completed during class.
However, Rikkyo University’s guidelines for reducing the risk of infection limited the sharing ofphysical papers and handouts between students and teachers, so once we returned to teaching on
campus, I could not check students’ work in the textbooks as I would have if there had been no
pandemic.
29

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Using Blackboard, I made forums where students could submit relevant work for me to check.
By using Blackboard or shared Google Documents, it is possible for instructors to check the contents
and structure of debate speeches and presentations. In debate classes, this can enable instructors toensure that student ideas are relevant to the topic and that they have supported their ideas well.
Teachers can also verify that team speeches and other parts of a debate follow the proper format,
reference sources correctly, and so on. For presentation classes, teachers can make sure students
have a proper introduction, body, and conclusion to their presentations and that each is developed
adequately and the presentation looks to be the appropriate length. And by annotating comments
directly into shared Google documents, teachers can provide feedback to students that they can use
to make adjustments to the contents of their presentations and debate speeches. I found this a usefulway to check student work, since due to the anti-infection measures we were asked to follow, I was
not supposed to take and return physical papers to students. Using email submissions would havemade organizing things difficult as well due to the number of students per class, so it was very
convenient to be able to upload shared Google documents to Blackboard for students to write theirdebate speeches, or ask English Presentation classes to submit their material to a forum onBlackboard. To ensure that students knew how to enable sharing and editing on Google Documents,
I demonstrated in class using my own computer and the class projector. If teachers want to makesure that students are able to use a technology or application in the intended way, it is important towalk them through the necessary steps.
In addition to focusing on content and structure, presentation classes also focused on thedelivery of the presentation. When classes had been online, I had watched students take turns giving
their practice presentations, and the same was possible once we returned to teaching on campus dueto the way I partitioned the class. This allowed me to give direct feedback to students during practicepresentations. To supplement this, I also asked group members to watch each others’ presentations
and complete an online Google form checksheet and then use it to give each other feedback. I had
used the same approach in online lessons, because peer feedback has positive learning outcomes forlearners (Saito, 2013) and wanted to bring the same system into the physical classroom. By creatinga check-sheet in google forms that focussed on five to six aspects of a presentations delivery at atime, students could give partners or practice group members advice on items such as eye-contact,
voice volume, use of gestures, and word emphasis during practice rounds for their presentations.
This type of feedback on the delivery of presentations could be used immediately by students toimprove their delivery between presentations. In addition to this, I could also give comments on theoverall class results of the anonymously submitted Google form checksheets, telling the class that as
a whole certain aspects of their delivery were good, while others needed improvement before
suggesting ways to improve.

Conclusion
The COVID-19 global pandemic disrupted education institutions around the world and requiredteachers to adapt to online instruction. Online instruction itself brought creative approaches tolesson design and a greater incorporation of technology into the classroom. For teachers, manythings became easier due to video conferencing software, such as making groups, checking
attendance, and quickly sharing digital information with students. For students, researching things
for a presentation or a debate was easier than it otherwise would have been on campus in a classroom
without computers. So while the transition to online teaching certainly presented many challenges
30

THE BEST OF BOTH: ADAPTATIONS OF CLASSROOM PRACTICES AND LESSON DESIGN IN THE TRANSITIONFROM AN ONLINE TO AN ON-CAMPUS CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT

initially, it was also found to have various benefits.
Teaching online made it easier to design lessons so that students could be productive throughout
the class, because separate breakout rooms meant that groups did not disrupt each other and could
be doing different things simultaneously. Though impossible to make separate rooms in an actualclassroom, the principle of having groups of students work on different activities at the same time
was still beneficial to apply to teaching in a physical classroom, as it allows students to use the classtime productively without disrupting others.
By designing activities to keep students engaged in online lessons and prevent them frombecoming detached from the lesson, I could make sure that students were staying on task. Thesesame activities were still useful once we returned to campus, and I was able to further emphasize
student agency in the learning process by having them provide model answers to certain activities inplace of a textbook’s videos.
Finally, the methods for providing feedback to students when classes were online still proved
useful when classes resumed on campus. Asking students to submit assignments digitally allowed
me to write comments onto their digital documents and avoid problems of assignments being
forgotten or misplaced by students between classes. And creating Google form checksheets was ameaningful way for students to give feedback to each other and also a useful tool for me in providing
advice to the whole class.
Necessity is said to lead to invention, and the coronavirus pandemic certainly required teachers
to learn to teach online and make adjustments to their lesson plans. However, from these difficult
times, many innovative ideas were born and many of those could translate back to the physicalclassroom well. This paper outlined some of the beneficial innovations that were products of online
instruction, and how they were later ported over to the physical classroom once classes at Rikkyo
University returned to campus. Some of these elements of course design helped overcome thedifficulties posed by guidelines designed to reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection, but all were usefulin improving the quality of instruction and student learning.

31

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

References
Al-Shalabi, N. (2015). Keeping students engaged: A prerequisite for learning. Mediterranean Journalof Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n5p576
Bartelen, H., & Kostiuk, M. (2019). Ready to present: A guide to better presentations. Cengage
Learning.
Hattie, J. & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research. 77 (1), 81- 112. DOI: 10.3102/003465430298487
Mishima, M., Kita, S., Donnelly, M., Hartley, M., Iwai, K., Vaughan, R. (2021). Up for Debate. Rikkyo
University.
Saito, Y. (2013). The value of peer feedback in English discussion classes. In N. Sonda & A. Krause(Eds.), JALT2012 Conference Proceedings. Tokyo: JALT.
Waluyo, B. (2020). Learning outcomes of a general English course implementing multiple e-learningtechnologies and active learning concepts. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 17 (1), 160 - 181. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2020.17.1.10.160

32

【Teaching Practice Report】

Unlocking Peer and Self-Assessment: A Guided Feedback
Activity
Deborah Maxfield
Abstract
Recent EFL research has indicated the advantages of providing students with opportunities for self-assessment or
peer feedback in addition to teacher feedback (Choi, 2013; Rodriguez-Gonzalez & Castaneda, 2018; Al Jahromi,2020). This practical teaching report will cover use of a classroom activity designed to encourage interactive peer
feedback and productive self-assessments via Google Forms. This activity was developed in line with relevant
literature on peer feedback and self-assessment,

which suggests several benefits of offering students theopportunity for these alternative forms of feedback. In line with recommendations from previous research, theactivity utilizes both closed and open questions geared towards setting specific goals and developing reflective andevaluative skills; this combination can guide students towards producing more meaningful and constructive
feedback, hence boosting their future performance. This tool allows either real-time or asynchronous feedback to
be provided in online or face-to-face lessons, which might be particularly useful for teachers working in various
environments. Although the example questions provided were designed for use within a first-year university
English Presentation course, the basic structure of the activity could be readily adapted to suit a range of speaking
or writing courses.
Keywords: peer feedback, L2 feedback, self-assessment, self-assessment online

Introduction
Formative feedback
Feedback is essential within the classroom: it provides information to students on aspects ofperformance that can be improved upon in the future, and reciprocal feedback between teachers andstudents can significantly improve both learner and teacher performance (Klimova, 2015). Feedback
can be summative or formative; summative feedback evaluates learning and tends to occur at the endof a course or class, whereas formative feedback occurs during the course and aims to set learning
targets to improve performance efficiently and expediently(Taras, 2005; Conzemius & O’Neill, 2009).
In their seminal meta-analysis on feedback and goal setting, Black and Wiliam (1998) state thatformative feedback has three essential elements: “recognition of the desired goal, evidence about
present position, and some understanding of a way to close the gap between the two” (p. 6). Formative
feedback is therefore constructive and future-focused, as to make improvements in the future,
students need to know both how they are progressing (Sadler, 1989) and gain specific advice on ways
to ‘close the gap’ by improving particular aspects of their work (Black & Wiliam, 2010). This process
can be motivating, as well as sustain or develop performance (Klimova, 2015). In contrast to
summative feedback, formative feedback provides more frequent opportunities to comment on
progress by sampling a wider variety of student work, and may reduce learner anxiety (Sadler, 1989,
p. 141). Formative feedback can be delivered via teachers or peers, or come from students themselves
via self-assessment (Al Jahromi, 2020). This paper will further explore each type of formative
feedback before detailing an activity designed in accordance with these principles.
33

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Teacher feedback
Traditionally, feedback on how to close the gap has passed from teachers to students in what
could be termed a teacher-centred approach. Several studies indicate that students in L2 learning
environments show a preference for feedback from teachers over that of peers (Tsui & Ng, 2000;
Yang et al., 2006; Choi, 2013), and that teacher-centred feedback is more often incorporated into
student work (Yang et al., 2006)I In line with these findings, feedback from teachers arguably has animportant role to play in the classroom as they possess greater tacit evaluative knowledge (Sadler,1989), for instance for assigning grades.
However, it can be hard for teachers to assess examples of work in isolation, and hence, there isa “tendency to use a normative rather than a criterion approach, which emphasizes competition
between pupils rather than the personal improvement of each” (Black & Wiliam, 1998, p. 18). This isbecause teachers might struggle to provide personalized feedback to each student, particularly inlarger classes. Further problems with teacher feedback could include students failing to grasp how
to close the gap because of difficulties with L2 comprehension, and it presents fewer opportunities
for student autonomy in goal setting (Yang et al., 2006). However, teachers can open two alternative
avenues for feedback, which offer benefits to learners by developing students’ evaluative capacities
via self- assessment and by encouraging classmates to collaborate via peer feedback (Black &Wiliam, 1998).

Peer feedback
Regardless of the type of feedback received, Sadler (1989) writes that before students canimprove upon their previous performance, the first step they must make is to“develop the capacity to monitor the quality of their own work during actual production. This inturn requires that students possess an appreciation of what high quality work is... and that they
develop a store of tactics or moves which can be drawn upon to modify their own work... theseskills can be developed by providing direct authentic evaluative experience for students” (p.
119).
Giving opportunities for students to engage in peer feedback provides the ”direct and authentic”
experience needed for students to develop their evaluative knowledge, and therefore, through theprocess of peer feedback, students can both gain and apply strategies or tactics to improve their own
work in future by helping other students to improve theirs (Sadler, 1989, p. 140). In the same article,
Sadler provides further advantages, such that students can see more examples of work on the sametask they had undertaken, can observe multiple designs or solutions to problems, and can besomewhat more objective when evaluating others’ work than they would be of their own.
In their in-depth study on peer feedback in L2 writing classes, Tsui and Ng (2002) noted
numerous benefits for students, including greater collaborative learning, an increased sense ofaudience and authenticity regarding their own work, better understanding of what contributes to“success” on a task, and higher awareness of problems that reviewers could not previously spot intheir own work. The authors concluded that this awareness was gained “not only through getting
feedback but by giving feedback to peers as well” (p. 166), underlining the importance of peer
feedback for future success. Black and Wiliams (2010) found that peer feedback best improved
learning when specific strengths and weaknesses were listed and when this advice was offeredwithout marks or scores from peers. Yang et al. (2006) concluded that in most cases where peer
34

UNLOCKING PEER AND SELF-ASSESSMENT: A GUIDED FEEDBACK ACTIVITY

feedback was offered, students could receive more feedback than they would have if only teacher
feedback had been provided, and that the process of peer reviewing appeared to boost both criticalthinking skills and student autonomy. Finally, peer feedback has been shown to reduce L2 anxiety(Choi, 2013; Rodriguez-Gonzalez & Castaneda, 2018) and encourage or motivate learners (Rollinson,2005).
However, peer feedback could be vulnerable to issues with L2 language competence that may
result in vague comments (Rodriguez-Gonzalez & Castaneda, 2018). Students may also lack taskbased knowledge needed for effective peer response (Zhu, 1995) and might require guidance on
what constitutes appropriate peer feedback. Zhu (1995) described successful peer response groups
as being “task-focused” and providing specific and accurate feedback; however, when training wasprovided for students in feedback skills, it significantly enhanced the quality of peer response. One
method of training students recommended by Rollinson (2005) is to pre-teach the purpose andmethods of effective peer feedback and to emphasize that peers should focus on being collaborators
rather than correctors.
Other guidelines for generating effective peer feedback include creating a comfortable learning
environment, preparing appropriate peer response tasks that guide students towards providing better
responses, modeling the process and instructions, and allowing students to discuss the activity
afterwards (Hansen & Liu, 2005). Cho and Cho (2011) suggest that providing a combination ofstrengths and weaknesses (i.e., praise and constructive feedback) has been found to help both thereviewer and reviewee to improve their work in future and that reviewers offering positive comments
alone did not improve the quality of work (p. 639). Students in some cultures which particularly
emphasize the value of harmony in relationships might feel anxious about criticizing others’
performance; however, within a Japanese EFL context, Kamimura (2006) found harmony promoted
rather than hindered peer feedback.

Self-assessment
Sadler (1989) argues that formative assessment on how learners can “close the gap” can include
both feedback provided externally to the learner (such as that from teachers or peers) and selfmonitoring, by which the learner generates the relevant information themselves (p. 122). Selfassessment refers to learners making judgements about their own abilities (Brantmeier, 2006), suchas independently evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of their own work. Self-assessment was
found by Black and Wiliams (1998) to significantly increase students’ commitment to their own work,and this statement was taken further in a later paper that claimed “self-assessment by pupils, far frombeing a luxury, is in fact an essential component of formative assessment” (Black & Wiliams, 2010,
p.6).
However, students cannot assess their own work without evaluative knowledge or guidelines on
how to do so effectively. For self-monitoring to be successful, students need criteria, standards, orgoals (Taras, 2005) which allow them to adequately judge the quality of their own work, and theyshould be able to choose various strategies on how to improve their performance in future (Sadler,1989). By allowing students the opportunity to self-monitor, setting criteria to judge themselves by,
and offering various strategies for improvement, teachers are effectively downloading their evaluativeknowledge so that students can “eventually become independent of the teacher and intelligently
engage in and monitor their own development” (Sadler, 1989, p. 141), which enables students tocontinue learning and utilizing the taught skills beyond and after the course. A further benefit of self35

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

assessment is that it can develop critical thinking skills as students evaluate their own learning andexperiences (Klimova, 2015).
In sum, while teacher feedback is valued by students and is arguably the most suitable forassigning grades or offering summative assessments (Sadler, 1989), alternative forms of formative
feedback can offer numerous advantages to learners. These include gaining awareness of what isrequired for successful achievement of a task and assembling a range of strategies to close the gap,
as well as increased autonomy and reduced L2 anxiety. However, students require some guidance ortraining for either peer feedback or self-assessment to be successful. With these principals andarguments in mind, an activity was designed to guide students toward producing effective peer
feedback and self-assessment.

MethodThe activity has been trialed in several English Presentation classes in two semesters at Rikkyo
University, Tokyo, and has been undertaken in online and face-to-face L2 learning environments.
Students were provided with a Google Form, on which a series of questions invited them to consider
both their own and other team members’ presentations.
First, students were shown a preview of the Google Form. This ensured they knew where to findit (for instance, on the class Google Drive folder) and allowed them to see what topics they would
need to write about after delivering and watching presentations. Short instructions or prompts suchas “What did you / your team do well? What can you / your team improve? Take notes” were written on
the whiteboard while the students watched presentations..” These acted as reminders for students tofocus on their own and others’ work, to include both positive and negative aspects, and to take notes
to enable students to recall these in detail later. Students performed the activity as soon as theyfinished giving presentations and aimed to complete it during class time in order to better remember
the presentations they had seen; however, this could easily be adapted as a homework task depending
on teacher preference and time limitations.
As written peer feedback is more effective when supplemented by discussions between
reviewers (Tsui & Ng, 2000), students were often given time afterward to read classmates’ responses
and discuss their ideas. These discussions could take place in the same class; a possible alternative
for students is to read the comments as a homework task, then discuss them during the following
lesson. Discussion of peer comments allowed students to collaboratively ascertain meaning if
language use was unclear or to gather more details. For lower-proficiency groups, allowing this
discussion to take place in their L1 might also benefit them.
Alternatively, or in addition to peer review discussions, instructors could show the results to theclass as a whole and highlight interesting examples or recurring patterns, for instance ‘many people
mentioned they had found making eye contact difficult in their own presentations’. This could
provide a good opportunity to teach extra skills or to review previously learned information in order
to benefit students that had found these aspects difficult.

Discussion
Open and closed questions
The activity used a series of questions that invited students to evaluate both their own and other36

UNLOCKING PEER AND SELF-ASSESSMENT: A GUIDED FEEDBACK ACTIVITY

team members’ presentations. Various question types were utilized, including short answer, multiple
choice, and scales. Closed questions guided students towards providing feedback on specific points,
and open questions allowed for greater self-expression or explanation of their choices. A few
examples of these designed for use in an English Presentation course will be provided as follows,
although it may be worth noting that these can be adapted for use in other courses, including L1
writing courses, and could be offered in either students’ L1 or L2.
Table 1
Some commonly used questions and instructions

OpenquestionsThink about a team member’s presentation. What was the most interesting part?
Which person in your team gave the best presentation today? Why did you think it was good ? ..
Your answer will be more helpful if you give detailed information (not “it was great!”... explain why)
Give one piece of advice to someone in your team - what can they improve? (For example: “Yuka - I
liked your topic, but it was sometimes difficult to understand because you spoke too quickly. Try to
speak slower next time”)
What do you think was good about your presentation?

Closedquestions

Did your team members...
Use phrases from p. 19? Use gestures? Look at the audience? Speak loud and clear? Show
research? Give interesting information?
What do you think is difficult about giving a presentation?
Choose 1–3 of the following:
Making eye contact, remembering my speech, making slides on PowerPoint, choosing a topic,planning and research, speaking clearly, using gestures
Figure 1
Example of a ‘checkbox grid’ (closed) question using
a difficulty scale37

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Figure 2
Examples of a multiple choice (closed) and short answer(open) question types

As students might benefit from training to gain the evaluative skills necessary for successful
peer- or self-assessment (Hansen & Liu, 2005), closed questions aimed to draw students’ attention tocogent, specific features of the presentations, which were listed as various options in multiple choice,ranking, or checkbox questions. Fixed criteria were used here to “narrow the choices of specificitems which are considered important and relevant for any specific judgement” (Taras, 2005, p. 467),
and they were often used before open questions that offered opportunities to expand upon theseselections or decide on the specific items to be used in goal setting.

Praise and points to work on
As providing praise alone does not lead to effective improvements in student work (Cho & Cho,2011), it was expected that a balance of positive and constructive comments would be more effective.
Therefore, questions were structured to encourage both complimentary and critical feedback, suchas “what did your team member/s do well?” and “what can they improve?”.
It is conceivable that some students may feel nervous about criticizing another’s work, so an
example of a politely phrased comment that started on a positive note but then gave a specificrecommendation for improvement (for instance, “Yuka- I liked your topic, but it was sometimes difficult
to understand because you spoke too quickly. Try to speak slower next time”) was provided to model how
to phrase feedback without being cruel or overly negative. Based on recommendations by Rollinson(2005) on peers being collaborators rather than correctors, this question aimed to elicit advice rather
than baldly stating what was “bad”. This should be emphasized in oral or written instructions to theclass, such as by suggesting “write a comment to help others improve in the future, and remember to bekind but clear”.

Self-reflection and goal setting
After choosing from a set of options such as those in the first question of Figure 2, all feedback
forms contained some variation on self-reflective questions encouraging students to consider theirstrengths and weaknesses in their own words, such as “what do you want to improve next time?”. As
38

UNLOCKING PEER AND SELF-ASSESSMENT: A GUIDED FEEDBACK ACTIVITY

above, the focus was to consider how to improve in future rather than to be excessively negative
regarding their own performance. Having previously decided some weaknesses in the closed
question provided before this one, this open question type had the advantages of allowing students toexpress themselves more freely or justify why they had found certain aspects of the task challenging,as well as to autonomously select a goal on how to improve.
One principal that can guide students in generating productive goals for future improvement is
the SMART method, which recommends that goals be Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic,
and Timely: students who used these perimeters to set goals were found to better achieve learning
outcomes, such as delivering more professional presentations (Lawlor, 2012). Asking students toconsider one to three weaknesses narrows their focus to become more specific, and all of the options
provided are realistic and attainable with some practice or focus. Furthermore, the options also allow
timely goals to be chosen as they set the duration of the goal as “your next presentation”.

Insights for teachers
Klimova (2015) suggests that this form of goal setting question could not only assist students
with selecting goals autonomously, but might also benefit teachers reviewing these answers, as
through self-reflection:“Students can critically think about what they have learned during the course and also convey
some of their personal experience, experiences and feelings... teachers can then draw
conclusions about their teaching practices and reconsider some of their teaching approaches
and strategies” (p. 174)
By reviewing student responses, either with the class to highlight interesting or important
examples, or outside of class contact hours, teachers can gain real-time insights into anxieties ordifficulties students are facing. In the English Presentation classes discussed so far, difficulties faced
by students may include looking at the audience, remembering their speech, or making gestures
while speaking. The act of reviewing and reflecting on student goals or problems can enable teachers
to offer strategies targeting these. One such example could be that if students commonly reported
difficulties with remembering their speech, teachers could recommend that they practice three times
before class: once with a full set of notes or complete speech, a second time with shorter notes, anda third time with brief bullet points. While the problems reported by students will vary on different
courses, a review of responses to these types of questions might provide useful insights for educators
seeking to combat common issues and improve their own teaching practice.

Effects of group cohesion
The most effective peer feedback offers both strengths and weaknesses (Cho & Cho, 2011),
which might be challenging for some students. Although Kamimura (2006) found that harmony
promoted rather than hindered peer feedback in a Japanese EFL context, students may feel anxious
about criticizing others’ performance. Previous research indicates that establishing a comfortablelearning environment improves the quality of peer feedback (Hansen & Liu, 2005), and therefore,
more cohesive groups might be better able to provide constructive feedback.
Students in the Presentation classes that undertook this activity had previously been divided into
teams that had already worked closely together for several lessons, and icebreaker activities wererun at the start of both semesters, which explicitly aimed to build cohesive teams by selecting shared39

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

goals (Maxfield, 2021, in press). Students were asked to review only their team members’
performances, rather than those of other classmates whom they might not have interacted with prior
to the feedback activity. Peer review was not initiated until Lesson 5, by which time students had
made a team presentation together, given two mini-presentations to their team, and participated inseveral discussions together. It was hoped that doing these tasks together before the feedback
activity helped improve group cohesion and thereby reduced anxiety on giving constructive feedback
as well as praise.

Classroom usage and potential adaptations
This activity has been tested in both online and face-to-face teaching formats. When instructions
were clear and students could see a brief model or explanation of the task before attempting it, they
were able to complete this activity in both environments with seemingly minimal difficulty, and later
iterations in the same course required less explanation as the activity became more familiar. As thisactivity has been successfully used both online and face-to-face, it seems likely that it could also be
used in hybrid learning environments. However, this should perhaps be further researched or trialed
before being implemented on a major scale because the combination of written and oral feedback
might be more difficult to achieve in hybrid environments.
The examples and questions listed above were used in the context of teaching a first-year
university English Presentation class but could be altered to suit a range of other courses, including
L2 writing classes or even those taught in the students’ L1. While questions can be adapted to suit avariety of courses and tasks, previous research has indicated that it is best to offer a combination ofclosed questions to guide students towards providing specific feedback and open questions toencourage reflection. A good starting point could be to consider what would be needed for successful
task performance, perhaps with reference to a rubric, and then to design questions leading students
toward those goals.

Conclusion
Both peer feedback and self-assessment can lead students toward closing the gap between theircurrent level and an ideal future performance. When applied with proper guidance, peer feedback
and self-assessment can increase the evaluative knowledge essential for successful task performance,
assist with judicious and autonomous goal selection, and indicate various strategies on how to getthere. The benefits might extend after this activity has been completed as teacher review of selfassessments can improve their own teaching practices. Moreover, learning how to independently set
and achieve course-relevant goals enables students to continue building on the taught skills beyond
the end of the course.

40

UNLOCKING PEER AND SELF-ASSESSMENT: A GUIDED FEEDBACK ACTIVITY

References
Al Jahromi, D. (2020). Can Teacher and Peer Formative Feedback Enhance L2 University Students’
Oral Presentation Skills?. Changing Language Assessment (pp. 95-131).
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education:
principles, policy & practice, 5(1), 7-74.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2010). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment.
Phi Delta Kappa, 92(1), 1 - 13.
Brantmeier, C. (2006). Advanced L2 learners and reading placement: Self-assessment, CBT, andsubsequent performance. System, 34(1), 15-35.
Cho, Y.H., & Cho, K. (2011). Peer reviewers learn from giving comments. Instructional Science 39,
629–643
Choi, J. (2013). Does peer feedback affect L2 writers’ L2 learning, composition skills, metacognitive
knowledge, and L2 writing anxiety?. English Teaching, 68(3), 187-213.
Conzemius, A., & O’Neill, J. (2009). The power of SMART goals: Using goals to improve student
learning. Solution Tree Press.
Hansen, J. G., & Liu, J. (2005). Guiding principles for effective peer response. ELT journal, 59(1),31-38.
Kamimura, T. (2006). Effects of peer feedback on EFL student writers at different levels of English
proficiency: A Japanese context. TESL Canada Journal, 12-39.
Klimova, B. (2015). The role of feedback in EFL classes. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,
199, 172-177
Lawlor, K. B. (2012). Smart goals: How the application of smart goals can contribute to achievementof student learning outcomes. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning:
Proceedings of the annual ABSEL conference, 39
Rodríguez-González, E., & Castañeda, M. E. (2018). The effects and perceptions of trained peer
feedback in L2 speaking: Impact on revision and speaking quality. Innovation in Language
Learning and Teaching, 12(2), 120-136.
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT journal, 59(1), 23-30.
Sadler, D. R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional
science, 18(2), 119-144.
Taras, M. (2005). Assessment–summative and formative–some theoretical reflections. British Journalof Educational Studies, 53(4), 466-478
Tsui, A. B., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments?. Journal of
Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147-170.
Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese
EFL writing class. Journal of second language writing, 15(3), 179-200.
Zhu, W. (1995). Effects of training for peer response on students’ comments and interaction. Written
communication, 12(4), 492-528.

41

【Teaching Practice Report】

The Effects of Reconstructing Reflection Journals According toStudents’ Recommendations
Devon Arthurson
Abstract
In a fall 2020 study to gather data from first-year university students about the instructor’s preliminary implementationof reflection journals, their feedback shaped the instructor’s secondary and tertiary implementations of the activity
in the proceeding two semesters. In the process of examining and re-examining what students voiced on numerous
occasions in preparation for publications and presentations, the instructor reflected on and scrutinized her teachingpractices, while also tailoring the activity according to students’ needs. These needs were extending the due date of
the activity, sharing the activity’s goals with the learners, including a prompt for general comments, and allowing forstudents to review the previous lesson’s journal at the start of class as well as share their journals with otherclassmates. In the sharing of data consisting of the student voices, with peers in professional development settings,
the instructor was required to assess how she teaches and responds to learner feedback. This process also aided
the instructor with the aim to listen to learners’ voices more actively to guide teaching practice.
Keywords: journal writing, reflection, reflective teaching, student feedback, student voices

Introduction
In fall 2020, a research study was administered to gather data about the opinions and feedback
from first-year university students regarding reflection journals. As this was the preliminary
implementation of reflection journals for the instructor, it was vital to learn more about the students’
perceptions of the activity. As student opinions were the focus of a previous article (Arthurson, 2021)
this article is based on the data and a further exploration of students’ feedback and advice on thejournals. A comparison of the original journal format as well as the revised journals implemented inboth spring and fall 2021 semesters will be shared as a potential source for other educators in EFL
who may be interested in using this activity with their students. Ways the student voices guided thesecond and third implementation of the activity will be presented. In addition, the instructor
reflections of what was gleaned from the first, second, and third implementations of the activity will
be explored.

Literature Review
Reflection is a process necessary for both students and teachers to develop their skills in
educational settings (Hussein, Al Jamal, & Sadi, 2020, p. 3486). According to Gupta, Mishra, andShree (2019): “Reflective practice can be seen as both a structure to support critical thinking andenhance existing understanding and a method for facilitating independent and in-depth learning
through inquiry” (p. 41). For instructors, it may manifest in taking time to examine their practice,thereby discovering new ways to improve their lessons (Gupta et al, 2019, pp. 39-40). One form ofreflection can be in performing research about their practice to improve their teaching proficiency(Al-Baiz, 2012, p. 325). In a study by Rahimi and Weisi about EFL teachers and the effect of researchon their practice, participating in research positively contributed to these teachers’ professional
42

THE EFFECTS OF RECONSTRUCTING REFLECTION JOURNALS ACCORDING TO STUDENTSʼ RECOMMENDATIONS

development; through sharing research, it allowed for new connections with other educators allowing
for a deeper knowledge about English language teaching (2018, p. 9).
Student voices need to be incorporated into educational practice and policy. Many educators
dedicated to improving their practice may seek out feedback from their learners. Bloemert, Paran
and Jansen state “excluding the voice of students from research leads to an incomplete picture of theeducational system” (2020, p. 429). It is vital that once feedback from students is collected, it needs
to be examined with time and care (EPFL, n.d., para 4). Once this feedback has been thoughtfully
processed by the teacher, it needs to be responded to (Paige, 2017, para. 2). Borg (2010, as cited by
Rahimi & Weis, 2018, p. 2), states that teachers who conduct classroom-based research not only
ameliorate their own individual practice, but may influence systematic improvement. Teachers who
actively engage in reflective practice may find feedback from their learners as a beneficial process forreflection on and improvement of their teaching.
Educators involved in reflection may also want to create opportunities for their students topractice reflection. Reflection journals can aid in this development. Reflection journals are tools forstudents to not only improve their writing skills but may also be used for processing the lesson
content, performing self-assessment and, goal setting. Writing reflection journals can allow forlearners to reflect on a past event and share about how they might respond to such anotherrecurrence of that event (Hashemia & Mirzaeib, 2015, p. 104). There are two recent studies aboutreflection journals in EFL classes at Japanese universities. In Self-regulated Learning Processes Outside
the Classroom: Insights from a Case Study of Japanese EFL Students, Yabukoshi (2020) has the learners
journals about their goals for TOEIC tests. With Developing Self-Regulated Learners in Discussion
Class by Morita (2020), students not only write about the lesson’s activities but their emotions andthoughts in that lesson. Nonetheless, research related to student voices shaping the structure ofreflective activities in Japanese EFL settings appears to be quite limited.

Objective
With a shift from in-person to online classes, reflection journals were also a tool to create andmaintain student-teacher interactions in a new setting with unique challenges, wherein all members
were learning to navigate. As a result of what seemed to be a scarcity in research done aboutreflection journals in Japanese EFL settings and this instructor’s inexperience with the activity, data
was collected from students to learn more about their opinions about the activity, and for future
adaptations to make it more meaningful for learners. Students were required to do the activity in thefall 2020 semester, examining the student voices through the research project shaped the second andthird implementation of the activity and assisted the instructor in her teaching practice.

Setting and Participants
The setting was at a liberal arts university in Tokyo with first-year students from two mandatory
writing classes and two mandatory debate classes. The lessons were once a week for 100 minutes.
Students were required to submit reflection journals by 23:59 of each lesson for week 2 to week 13 of
the fall 2020 semester. The journals were submitted through a learning platform. The students had
lower to higher intermediate English proficiency with TOEIC scores varying from 280 to 699. All had
the ability to write their journals in English; they were given a list of prompts and a template. The
final reflection journal in week 13 was used to gather data about their opinions, experience and advice43

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

about the activity. Though all students needed to submit the final journal for class participation
points, 55 students or approximately 75% of the total taught, gave their consent that data from theirjournals be used in the study. The final journal used as an instrument for data collection containednine prompts related to the following areas: a) writing journals in relation to improving English skills,b) previous experiences with journals, c) if the current experience was positive or negative, d) if theactivity helped with remembering the class, e) goal writing and goal-achievement, f) interest in
repeating the activity, and g) advice about the activity. In a latter section, data about their advice will
be examined, in addition to how it shaped the second and third implementation.

Preliminar y Implementation
The first implementation occurred in the fall semester of 2020, the second semester of online
learning. Guided by the literature, the journals had the main prompts which remained unchanged
from lesson 2 to 13, focusing on processing the content through reflecting, self-evaluation, and goal
setting. According to Bray and Harsch (1996) “limiting the number of items, the teacher is more
likely to get quality reflection from students” (para. 29). In addition, the journals also implemented
report formatting guidelines including a word count. As all learners were in a mandatory writingclass, even if it was not being taught by the instructor, those guidelines were required and it was apractical way to develop students’ proficiency with report writing. Appendix A is the lesson 3 journal
activity for the writing class.
Before the final lesson’s journal, which was the tool to gather data, for the instructor reading thelesson 2 to 12 journals provided direct and indirect feedback about the activity. For the writing class,it soon became evident that in comparison to the debate class, more meaningful topics and more
prompts related to the textbook topics needed to be explicitly added to give the students in thewriting class more meaningful content to write about. Please see Table 1 for the change in prompts.
The debate class prompts remained more or less the same as can be seen in Table 2.
Table 1
Writing Class Prompts for Lessons 2 and 8 in Fall 2020
Lesson 2
1. Summarize the main points learned in class.
2. Information you already knew before class and when
you learned about it.
3. Information that you just learned about in the class.
4. Surprising or interesting things you learned in theclass.
5. Something surprising or interesting a classmate orclassmates said in the class.
6. Ways the information will help you in university and/or in the future.
7. Any points that you do not know or understand about
the topic.
8. Anything else you would like to share about.

9. A goal for the next class.
10. Include the word count.

Lesson 8
1. Summarize the main points learned in class.
2. Surprising or interesting things you learned in theclass.
3. Any points that you do not know or understand about
the topic.
4. What are two activities that you like to do in your freetime?
5. How long have you been doing these activities?
6. What advice would you give about getting better atthese activities?
7. Which English skill or skills did you use the most inclass (reading, writing, listening or speaking)?
8. For your graded reader, did you know anything about
your graded reader 2 before reading it?
9. For your graded reader, who are the main characters?
(Write about at least 3) Describe their personalities.
10. 
For your graded reader, What is the relationshipbetween them?
11. A goal for the next class.
12. Include the word count. Write over 150 words.

44

THE EFFECTS OF RECONSTRUCTING REFLECTION JOURNALS ACCORDING TO STUDENTSʼ RECOMMENDATIONS​​ able 2T
Debate Class Prompts for Lessons 2 and 8 in Fall 2020
Lesson 2

Lesson 8

1. What did your team do well in the debate?
2. What did the other team do well in the debate?
3. What can your team do to improve the debate?

4. What is a good system for taking notes in debate?
5. What is important when stating propositions?
6. What is important when constructing arguments?
7. What is important when making a summar y?
8. A goal for the next class.
9. Include the word count.

1. Summarize the main points learned in class.
2. How did your team members share work in preparing
for the debate? (Please give reasons and examples)
3. What are some sources you found? Why did you
choose them? Do you think the sources are strong?
Why or why not?
4. What are your team’s three arguments? (Please givereasons and examples)
5. What advice did the other team give you about yourarguments?
6. Whose debate style or technique did you like? Why?
7. What are ways your team can work well together in
Lesson 9’s Debate test?
8. A goal for the next class.
9. Include the word count. (Write over 175 words in yourparagraphs).

Students’ Recommendations
One of the later prompts used in the data collection method of the final reflection journal was:“Do you have any advice about writing reflection journals?” To whom the advice was directed, theinstructor or other students doing the activity, was not specified. Of the 55 students, all but one
commented. Eight students gave no advice, five gave comments about their own experience, 22 gave
advice to other students and 19 gave advice to the instructor. The data focusing only on instructor
directed advice to improve the activity will be explored.
The themes that most commonly appeared were about the prompts appearing five times, sharing
with other students appearing four times, an extension of the deadline appearing four times, more
flexibility with the word count appearing three times, a review of the journal after submission
appearing three times, and decreasing the frequency of the activity appearing twice. Below is aselection of student responses:
I think, if this journal have more option[s] such as [to] include the content of class, it will be better.
It is hard to write it, so I want you to extend the submission time or reduce the number of words.
Writing it is useful, but I think it doesn’t have to be every lesson. Sometimes I have to give similaranswers, so reduce the [number of] question[s] a little more.
I want to read this for others because I can find good perspectives that I can’t find on my own.
My advice on it is to write in collaboration with friends at the beginning. The reason is that I was
confused at the beginning because I didn’t know how to write it correctly.
I think if we could add our comments at the end of the journals, it will be more useful.
The above data guided the secondary and tertiary implementation as well as prompting the
instructor to reflect about her teaching practice.

45

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Secondar y Implementation
The spring 2021, the third semester almost fully online, was the second implementation of thereflection journals. Though different classes and students were taught, the above data was utilized.
And according to the themes, adjusted for the reflection journals. First, the deadline was extended to
23:59 the day after the class. Originally, there was a reluctance that some students may forget theclass contents the day after the class. However, if students felt too much pressure and the deadlinecaused stress, an extension may make the activity more meaningful to them. Of course students wereable to submit the journals earlier on the learning platform, so those who felt writing the day of thelesson did so, while others submitted on the following day. Second, more prompts related to the classcontexts were included related to the class material taught and it was suggested, but not requiredthat students answer all the prompts. With this adjustment, the instructor hoped that it made writing
easier for the students. Third, instead of a required word count, students were asked to write at least
half a page. For those students who had trouble with that length, using the learning platform, theinstructor made comments about questions that could be further answered or expanded on to help
with their future journals. Furthermore, less attention was given to report-formatting guidelines as it
was most likely the first time for students to use report-writing guidelines. This is unlike the primary
implementation wherein students were studying about report formatting in the mandatory writingclass. The instructor gave feedback about formatting, but after the sixth or seventh journal, no longer
commented. Note that in fall semester students took the continuation class of spring semester’s
discussion class as a debate class, and the continuation class of spring semester’s reading as a writingclass. Fourth, to help students remember the contents of the journals, specifically their goals, at the
beginning of class, the instructor asked the students to review the previous lesson’s journals. Last,
the number of journals was decreased by two, as the lessons before the mid-term and final-term test
did not require journals as had been in the previous semester.
There was not a time for sharing journals, but in the third implementation for the first andsecond time the journals were used in class, time was given at the end of class for students to workin breakout rooms on the journals and then ask questions to the instructor. Appendix B is the lesson
3 journal activity for the reading class. See Table 3 and 4 for the reflection journal prompts for the
mandatory reading and debate classes.

Table 3
Reading Class Prompts for Lesson 2 and 8 in Spring 2021
Lesson 2

Lesson 8

1. S
 ummarize the main points you learned in class.
1. Summarize the main points you learned in class.
2. What did you do well in class? Why?
2. What did you do well in class? Why?
4. W
 hat do you want to do better next class? Why?
3. What do you want to do better next class? Why?/
5. A goal for the next class.
What is your goal for the next class?
6. Free writing:a. Why did you choose the graded reader?
4. Free writing:b. What graded reader did you choose? Why?
a. How would you define success?
c. Have you started reading it yet? How long do you b. 
Name some people that you think are successful?
think it will take to finish reading it?
Why do you think they are successful?
d. When is the best time for you to read, for example, inthe mornings, on the train, before bed, at lunch, etc.?
7. Text word count.
5. Text word count.

46

THE EFFECTS OF RECONSTRUCTING REFLECTION JOURNALS ACCORDING TO STUDENTSʼ RECOMMENDATIONS

Table 4
Discussion Class Prompts for Lessons 2 and 8 in Spring 2021
Lesson 2

Lesson 8

1. Summarize the main points you learned in class.
2. What did you do well in class? Why?
3. What do you want to do better next class? Why?
4. A goal for the next class.

1. Summarize the main points you learned in class.
2. What did you do well in class? Why?
3. What do you want to do better next class? Why?/Whatare your goals for the next class? Why?
4. 
Next lesson is Discussion Test 2. Review theDiscussion Test 1 Lesson 5 Reflection Journal. What
did you do well in Discussion Test 1? What are yourgoals for Discussion Test 2?
5. 
Review the Discussion Skills 1 to 6 on page 104.
Which are most difficult for you to use? Why? Review
the Communication Skills on page 105, 1-3. Which aremost difficult for you to use? Why?
5. A
 fter Reading - Please answer the following:
6. After Reading - Please answer the following:a. Do your friends or family give useful advice when you a. 
When should schools start teaching English tohave problems?
children? Why?
b. How does communication make people happy? Why? B. Should everyone in Japan study a foreign language?
For example?
Why or why not?
6. Text word count.
7. Text word count.

Feedback or data was not formally collected about the second implementation. In lesson 1,
students were clearly told the purpose of journals as a way to develop their English skills, and forsetting goals. It was not an activity to correct English mistakes, but it was noted that common
mistakes would be pointed out in the next lesson. As stated above, students were also told about
issues with length and formatting by the instructor via the learning platform where the journals were
submitted and graded. Another addition to the activity was that students were required to evaluate
their writing. One of the prompts for week 10’s journal is as follows:
Review the Reflection Journals for Week 2 and compare it with Reflection Journals for Week 9.
What differences do you notice? Do you think your writing has improved? Why or why not?
It was the instructor’s expectation that this prompt would give students the opportunity toanalyze their performance and hopefully most had improved somewhat, thus potentially giving themconfidence in their English proficiency.

Tertiar y Implementation
With the review of the data in summer 2021 in preparation for a presentation, it was evident thatsome advice from students was still not incorporated into the second implementation. These twopoints were in regards to sharing journals with other classmates and adding the prompt for additional
student comments about the lesson. Students were assigned a reflection journal in lesson 1 which
followed a similar format to the second implementation. For the first point, at the start of lesson 2 andin proceeding lessons, students were given a few minutes to share their journals with another student
in breakout rooms. They were asked to discuss any challenges they had with writing the journals in
addition to whatever journal content they were comfortable sharing. Since the classes still remained
online until the fifth lesson of fall semester, students were given the option to share screens with47

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）each other. After the sharing activity ended and the class reassembled, the instructor asked if there
were any questions about the journals. Though no questions were asked, it seemed like a worthwhile
activity for students to share their writing and solve any formatting or content issues with one
another.
The second point in this implementation was the addition of a final prompt, “Optional: If there isanything else that you would like to comment on about the class, feel free”. Since consent has notbeen requested from students, when the prompt was answered, informally their comments havebeen related to classroom management or general impressions of the class. If other instructors areinterested in using this activity, it might be helpful to keep these types of questions related to theclass as unexpected comments, perhaps personal comments unrelated to the lesson, may be sharedin the journals. The time for this article is during lesson 3 of fall 2021. Appendix C provides lesson 3journal activity for the writing class. In lessons 5 and 10, prompts to get feedback from learners about
the activity such as the level of difficulty and how meaningful they perceive it to be in remembering
the lessons, goal setting, self-evaluation and motivation will also be added to the journals. It is
expected with this implementation, student voices will continue to shape the activity.

Instructor Reflections
Gathering data from the learners in fall semester 2020 and then analyzing it was beneficial forthe instructor to better understand students’ opinions and gain insight into the effectiveness of theactivity. In writing the article Students’ Opinions about Reflection Journals (2021), it caused me torecognize that I am often inflexible in my teaching practice, for example, once a task is created thatis to be used repeatedly, it is rarely changed even though it may not be viewed as meaningful or
beneficial to the learners. Instead of only gathering comprehensive feedback at the end of thesemester, I should have asked for feedback in the journals starting from earlier lessons, such as thelevel of difficulty and relevance of prompts, and then followed up with more requests for feedback insucceeding lessons during the first implementation. However, based on the fall 2020 semester’s
lesson 13 journals, I am glad that I tried a new activity that incorporated reflection, self-assessment,
and goal setting with English writing practice. It gave me more confidence in utilizing the task withthe second and third implementations. I plan to continue to use this activity in my future teachingpractice, in addition to seeking student feedback more consistently to tailor it to meet their needs.
Furthermore, to those instructors who have not used reflection journals, or even for those currently
using them in their practice, it is hoped that the above sections, particularly Tables 1 to 4, can be
implemented or modified to meet the needs of their learners.

Conclusion
Student feedback is a valuable tool in reflective teaching practice. Using one reflective journal forstudents to provide their feedback to the initial implementation provided a guide to the instructor for
the future implementations of this activity. Furthermore, using the journal as a tool for data collection,
caused the instructor to closely analyze learner feedback. With learners’ consent, the data was thenshared in articles and presentations, deepening the instructors’ awareness of the effectiveness of theimplementations shaped by students’ voices. Data in the form of student voices is useful for reflective
practice and guiding teaching practice.

48

THE EFFECTS OF RECONSTRUCTING REFLECTION JOURNALS ACCORDING TO STUDENTSʼ RECOMMENDATIONS

References
Arthurson, D. (2021). Students’ opinions about reflection journals. Journal of Foreign Language
Education and Research, 2, 37-51. ISSN 2436-0325.
Al-Baiz, T. A. (2012). Effect of students’ feedback on teachers’ instructional practices of EFL student
teachers. Education 2(7): 324-332 DOI: 10.5923/j.edu.20120207.16
Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and researching autonomy (2nd ed.). Pearson Education Limited.
Bloemert, J., Paran, A. & Jansen, E. (2020). Connecting students and researchers: the secondary
school student’s voice in foreign language education research, Cambridge Journal of Education,
50(4), 429-449. DOI:10.1080/0305764X.2020.1720603
Bray, E. & Harsch, K. (1996). Using reflection/review journals in Japanese classrooms. The Language
Teacher, 12(12). Retrieved May 16, 2021 from https://jalt-publications.org/tlt/articles/2076using-reflectionreview-journals-japanese-classrooms
EPFL. (n.d). How to respond to student feedback. Retrieved October 9, 2021 from https://www.epfl.ch/education/teaching/teaching-guide-2/developing-my-teaching/student-feedback-on-teaching_1/respond-to-student-feedback_1/
Gupta, T., Mishra, L. & Shree, A. (2019). Reflective Teaching as a Strategy for Effective Instruction.
10. 37-43. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342330128_Reflective_
Teaching_as_a_Strategy_for_Effective_Instruction
Hashemia, Z. & Mirzaeib, M. (2015) Writing on enhancing EFL medical students’ reflections,attitudes, and sense of self. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 103 – 110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.493
Hussein, H. A. R. A, Al Jamal, H. D. A. H., & Sadi, I. (2020). Students’ reflective journals and creative
writing in EFL. Universal Journal of Educational Research 7(2), 3484-3495. Retrieved May 5,
2021 from https://www.hrpub.org/download/20200730/UJER23-19516265.pdf
Morita, S. (2020). Self-reflections for growth: Developing self-regulated learners in discussion class.
New Directions in Teaching and Learning English Discussion, 8, pp. 187-197. Rikkyo University:
Tokyo.
Paige, R. (2017). Responding to student feedback: An opportunity to make our teaching visible. Rice
University. Retrieved October 9, 2021 from https://cte.rice.edu/blogarchive/2017/10/10/
responding-to-student-feedback-an-opportunity-to-make-our-teaching-visible
Rahimi, M. & Weisi, H. (2018). The impact of research practice on professional teaching practice:
Exploring EFL teachers’ perception. Cogent Education, 5, 1-15. DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2018.
1480340.
Yabukoshi, T. (2020). Self-regulated learning processes outside the classroom: Insights from a casestudy of Japanese EFL students. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 17(3),758-777. Retrieved May 16,
2021 from http://journal.asiatefl.org/main/main.php?main=1&sub=2&submode=3&PageMode=JournalView&inx_journals=65&inx_contents=838&s_title=Self_Regulated_Learning_
Processes_Outside_the_Classroom_Insights_from_a_Case_Study_of_Japanese_EFL_Students
Yokomoto, K., Kato, C. T., Paydon, S., Saito Y., Togo, M. & , Yuka Yamamoto, Y. (Eds.). (2017).
Becoming a better writer: A guide to developing academic writing skills, (3rd ed.). Tokyo: Rikkyo
University.

49

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Appendix A
Writing Class, Fall 2020, Class Reflection Journal Lesson 3
After each class, you will write a class reflection journal due the day of the class before 23:59 as a
Self-Study Task. Please use the following prompts to help you:
1. Summarize the main points learned in class.
2. Information you already knew before class and when you learned about it.
3. Information that you just learned about in the class.
4. Surprising or interesting things you learned in the class.
5. Something surprising or interesting a classmate or classmates said in the class.
6. Ways the information will help you in university and/or in the future.
7. Any points that you do not know or understand about the topic.
8. Anything else you would like to share about.
9. A goal for the next class.
10. Include the word count.
**Remember to use page 8 and 9 of Becoming a Better Writer to format your journal correctly.
REFLECTION JOURNAL GRADING INFORMATION: 5 POINTS
Prompts 2
POINTS

Understandability 1
POINT

Formatting 2
POINTS

All prompts were answered

Ideas could be understandFormatted correctly(BBW page 8-9)50

THE EFFECTS OF RECONSTRUCTING REFLECTION JOURNALS ACCORDING TO STUDENTSʼ RECOMMENDATIONSAppendix B
Reading Class, Spring 2021, Class Reflection Journal Lesson 3
After each class, you will write a class reflection journal due the day after the class. Friday classes due
date is Saturday before 23:59. Page 2 has a template for you to use. Please use the following prompts
to help you:
1. Summarize the main points you learned in class.
2. What did you do well in class? Why?
3. What do you want to do better next class? Why?
4. A goal for the next class.
5. Free writing: Write about your exercise routine, for example, what activity or sport you do,where, when, etc. If you do not exercise, explain why or what you would like to do.
6. Text word count.
**Write at least half a page to receive full points. Formatting uses page 8 and 9 of “Becoming a Better
Writer”.
REFLECTION JOURNAL GRADING INFORMATION: 3 POINTS
Length 1
POINTS

Understandability 1
POINT

Due date 1
POINTS

Minimum length is written

Ideas could be understood

Submitted on time51

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Appendix C
Writing Class, Fall 2021, Class Reflection Journal Lesson 3
After each class, you will write a class reflection journal due the day after the class. The due date is
Saturday before 23:59. Page 2 has a template for you to use. Please use the following prompts to helpyou:
1. Summarize the main points you learned in class.
2. What did you do well in class? Why?
3. What do you want to do better next class? /A goal for the next class. Why?
4. Use “Reading the Future” page 41’s checklist and write of a summary of this text in one
sentence from “Longman Academic Writing” (Oshima & Hogue, 2017):
The topic sentence is usually the first or second sentence in a paragraph. Experienced writers
often put topic sentences at the end, but the best place is usually at the beginning. A topic
sentence at the beginning of a paragraph gives readers an idea of what they will be reading.
This helps them understand the paragraph more easily. (p. 55)
5. Free writing: As the seasons change from summer to fall, what is your favorite season? Why?
6. Optional: If there is anything else that you would like to comment on about the class, feel free.
7. Text word count.
**Write at least half a page to receive full points. Formatting uses page 8 and 9 of “Becoming a Better
Writer”.
REFLECTION JOURNAL GRADING INFORMATION: 3 POINTS
Length 1
POINTS

Formatting 1
POINT

Due date 1
POINTS

Minimum length is written

Ideas could be understood

Submitted on time52

【Teaching Practice Report】

Why Should Students Reflect on the Purpose of Debate?
Heather Woodward
Abstract
Debate teachers at Rikkyo University present the rationale for learning how to debate on a slide show, or they reada paragraph from the syllabus to justify the course’s requirement status. For the remaining lessons, they addressquestions concerning “what” and “how.” For example, “What is a rebuttal?” and “How do you create a proposition?”
In addition to addressing these types of questions, they also ask students to write self-reflections post-debate.
Although essential for improving debate performance, these questions and self-reflection activities can fail to help
students connect content and activities to the overall course goals and real-world contexts where they can use theirdebate skills. To make connections, students need tasks that treat debate as a means to an end. In this paper, I
explain the rationale for facilitating student reflection on debate course goals based on Japanese cultural norms andcognitive learning theory. Second, I define the twin sins of course design by Wiggins and McTighe (2008) andmaintain that teachers can avoid committing the twin sins by implementing activities that allow students to reflect
upon debate course goals. Third, I define and explain practicing- connections hypothesis by Fries et al. (2020). After,
I share classroom activities based on the hypothesis, and last, I discuss ideas for potential research studies.
Keywords: debate, practicing-connections, course design

Japanese Cultural Norms and Debate Tactics
Reasons for learning how to debate might be less apparent to Japanese students than foreignteachers realize. In The Japan Times article titled, ‘Ditch the debate tactics when it comes topersuading Japanese colleagues on a course of action,’ Kopp (2019) explains that most Japanese
students are not taught to debate in school, and in Japanese culture, debate tactics are seen as overly
aggressive. Kopp advises foreign expatriates, who work for or work with Japanese companies, towrite a report or create a slideshow with data and then let the data “do the talking” to persuadecolleagues of a specific course of action. This method is implicit and indirect—qualities compatible
with Japanese culture, language, and workplace. The method also has the additional benefit ofacknowledging the agency of fellow colleagues as it respects their ability to interpret the data andarrive at conclusions for themselves. In Japanese culture, showing this level of respect especially tosenior employers and colleagues is important for maintaining good relations.
In contrast to the method of allowing the data to speak for itself, one debate tactic called Label,
Explain, Evidence, and Tieback (LEET) entails presenting and explaining the position, interpreting
evidence for listeners, and discussing its importance (Saskatchewan Elocution and Debate
Association, 2019). Debate tactics such as LEET are widely accepted in Western cultures; however,their explicit and direct nature makes them inappropriate for certain formal Japanese situations (e.g.,presentations with senior colleagues). Additionally, debate tactics’ structured and organized nature
can make them awkward for informal contexts (e.g., dinner table conversations with family). Students
might realize that there are aspects of debate that they cannot transfer outside of the classroom
without the consequence of being ostracized by their colleagues or being given awkward side glancesfrom their family members. Consequently, they might wonder why they are learning such debate
tactics as some students do not envision themselves living or working abroad for an international53

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

company. So, they answer “Why LEET?” by replying, “The other team can understand my ideas moreclearly” or they say, “I can get a higher debate score.” These answers are correct, but they fail toconnect to the course goals or to real-world use cases outside of the debate classroom.
The Japanese cultural disposition for implicitness and indirectness stems in part from theconcept of saving face (mentsu wo tamotsu) and losing face (mentsu wo ushinau). Matsumoto (2018)
writes that the term “face” most closely translates to the consideration for the feelings of otherpeople. To save face means to avoid words or actions in public that might cause humiliation orembarrassment to others. For instance, disagreeing with or criticizing others publicly can cause
embarrassment, which in turn, causes a loss of face. An example that Kopp (2006) provides is an
American employee working for a Japanese company who challenges her boss in front of othercolleagues when she disagrees with him. For another example, Kopp (2006) writes that in businesssituations, Japanese expatriates working overseas often “avoid criticizing the parent company even
when, in the eyes of American employees, such criticism is clearly deserved.” The concepts of saving
face and losing face are difficult for westerners to understand because the feelings of others are notconsidered a priority in western business culture (Matsumoto, 2018). Japanese people are concernedwith the feelings of others (omoiyari) whereas western business culture instead prioritizes truth andfacts (Matsumoto, 2018).
Japanese students might associate certain debate tasks with feelings of discomfort orapprehension as their own cultural values of saving face and losing face can create conflict between
caring for their classmates’ feelings and fulfilling their debate course obligations. Debate teams
openly state opposing arguments (i.e., disagree), and summarize weaknesses of the other team’s
argument (i.e., criticize), and ask cross examination questions (i.e., challenge). Students might
privately question why they need these tasks for the future as they seem disconnected from realities
of Japanese etiquette. Some debate teachers might counter that their students can reflect on thequestions of “why openly disagree with others” or “why directly challenge others” by themselves.
These teachers might conclude that students are speaking in English so they should become
accustomed to Western cultural norms of explicitness and directness, and therefore, debate tactics
do not require any additional justification than the justification given at the beginning of the course.
As such, the “what” and “how” of debate are covered more extensively than the “why.” In defense ofthis approach, addressing “what” and “how” questions do improve students’ debate performancesand exposes them to western cultural norms, but addressing “why” questions can shift students’perspectives from viewing debate as the end goal to viewing debate as a tool that enables the
manifestation of their teamwork, critical thinking, and research skills, which are relevant to realworld contexts in Japan. Teachers can design activities and content that helps students make thisperspective shift.

Twin Sins of Design
Wiggins and McTighe (2008) state that the twin sins of course design are activity-focusedteaching and coverage-focused teaching. For activity-focused teaching, teachers give too many
activities and for coverage-focused teaching, teachers cover too much content. Both teaching focusescommit sin because they fail to make big picture ideas explicit to students (Wiggins & McTighe,2008). In other words, teachers tend to have what Wiggins and McTighe (2008) refer to as expert
blind spots, and so they assume that students can connect the many discrete activities and lectures(i.e., content) to the main ideas. To build a defense against expert blind spots and thus, the twin sins54

WHY SHOULD STUDENTS REFLECT ON THE PURPOSE OF DEBATE?

of course design, teachers can help students to connect activities and content to debate course goals.
To do so, teachers should encourage students to (a) reflect on the three core debate skills of criticalthinking, research, and team-building, (b) connect these three core debate skills to debate preparation
stages and debate performance stages, and lastly, (c) identify real-world contexts where students
need to use the three core skills. Teachers can determine the extent to which students have achieved
a level of expertise in critical thinking, research, and team-building when students have not only
performed well in debate, but have also made explicit connections between (a) – (c).

Practicing-Connections Hypothesis
To help student transfer knowledge, they must make connections between core domain
concepts, key representations, and real-world contexts (Fries et al., 2020). Fries et al. (2020) statethat core domain concepts are important skills or ideas that are central to the domain (e.g., in termsof debate, these are critical thinking, research, and team- building). Debate Committee (2020) cites
the goal of the debate course as the development of these three skills. Fries et al. (2020) write thatkey representations refer to relational domain structures (e.g., stages of debate preparation anddebate performance). Lastly, real-world contexts are situations that students can use the core domain
concepts (Fries et al., 2020). Students can make explicit connections between core domain concepts,
key representations and real-world contexts to deepen their understanding, and by doing so, thebelief is that their knowledge becomes flexible and transferable (Fries, et al., 2020). Transferringknowledge from one context to another similar, but different context, entails the ability to use
knowledge “creatively, flexibly, fluently in different settings or problems” (Wiggins & McTighe,2008).
For example, students can answer the question, “Why use LEET?” by explaining LEET’s connection
to critical thinking and research skills. They can also answer, “Why openly disagree with others?” or“Why openly challenge others?” by explaining their relationship to course goals. As debate tactics inJapan are rarely found outside of the classroom, teachers who use these practicing-connection
activities help students to transfer the three core debate skills to other contexts in Japan that do
require use of such skills. For instance, many professions require varying degrees of the debate
course goals so students can investigate the roles and responsibilities of a career that interests themto determine the extent to which these skills are necessary. In short, this hypothesis implies thatdebate performance, and self-reflection of debate performance, might not provide teachers with
sufficient evidence of students’ ability to transfer their critical thinking, research, and team-building
to other contexts because these skills are contextualized throughout the course in relation to debate,but debate is not such a common activity outside the classroom so teachers are assuming thatstudents can transfer these skills to other contexts without the need for assistance or guidance.
In addition, the core domain concepts of debate are complex skills as they comprise multiple
sub-skills. Practicing-connection activities deconstruct the core debate skills to help students connect
their different aspects to relevant key representations and real-world contexts. In other words, thesepracticing-coracticing-connection activities deconstruct the core debate skills to help students
connect their different aspects to relevant key representations and real-world contexts. In otherwords, these practicing-connections activities do not assume that students already know what good
research, critical thinking, and team building skills entail nor do they assume that students will, on
their own accord, connect all three skills, or relevant sub-skills, to their post-debate performancereflections. From my experience, without these activities, students forget to reflect on one or more of55

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

the core domain skills post-debate performances. They might reflect that they need to work with
their teammates by communicating more often and do more research on the topic, but they do notmention critical thinking skills. To avoid this issue, practicing-connections activities can help students
intentionally make explicit connections from their debate preparation and performance to all threecore domain skills by having students first reflect on the core debate use.

Practicing-Connections Activities’ Descriptions
The following activities below are based on the practicing-connections hypothesis. In thissection, I give a short description of each of the following practicing-connections activities presented.
For Activity I, students circle true or false about key assumptions of the debate course. In the next
activity, they match the debate skills (i.e., core domain concepts) to their definitions. Explicit
definitions of the three core debate skills can help students to connect the concepts to key
representations and real-world contexts. For Activities III, IV, and V students reflect on the qualitiesof good teamwork, then connect the qualities to their debate experiences (i.e., key representations)and real-world contexts. The concept of teamwork is deconstructed into its sub-skills, so that students
learn about different aspects that entail good teamwork. For Activities VI, VII, and VIII, students
reflect on the qualities and characteristics of good research skills, then connect them to debate
stages and activities (i.e., key representations) as well as real-world contexts1 These activities help
students to deconstruct core domain concepts to have students connect their different aspects
to their corresponding key debate representations and real-world contexts.
For Activities IX, X, and XI, students read a list of qualities, abilities, and knowledge that businessowners want from university graduates from a 2018 study by the Keidanren, a Japanese businessassociation (i.e., real-world context). Students circle the ones that relate to debate, and then discuss
their rationale with a partner. After, they connect these to the core domain concepts of debate. These
activities relate to real-world contexts as many students plan to work after graduation. For Activities
XII and XIII, students connect core domain concepts and key representations to their career
aspirations (i.e., real-world contexts). I give an example by Mintzberg (1973) regarding a possible
career as a manager. For Activities XIV, XV, XVI, and XVII, students complete these activities after adebate performance. They rank the debate skills according to their difficulty, discuss why the skills
they list are challenging, then search the debate textbook for activities that are designed to developthese skills (i.e., key representations). Students write a plan to help them to improve their weak
points, and in the last activity, they think of real-world contexts that they can use these skills (i.e.,
real-world contexts). Teachers can decide which lessons to give these types of activities. Some
activities might be more appropriate at the beginning of the course whereas others are more
appropriate after their mid-term debate.

1

Here is the link for the critical thinking activities not included in this paper. Research and team-building activities have also
been included: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qi62lkA9DDo9d3EWnf0A4hfPsJhnPFz9u2s6dU5om_4/edit?usp=sharing

56

WHY SHOULD STUDENTS REFLECT ON THE PURPOSE OF DEBATE?

Practicing-Connections Activities
I. Read the sentence and circle true or false.2
1. The purpose of this course is to develop the skills of critical thinking, research,and team-building.

T/F

2. People usually participate in formal debates outside of the classroom.

T/F

3. People can use the skills of critical thinking, research, and team-building inmany real-world situations.

T/F

4. “Up for Debate” textbook activities by Mishima et al., (2021) are designed todevelop skills of critical thinking, research, and team-building.3

T/F

234

II. Match the debate skills to the correct definition.4
1. Researcha. To work effectively with group of people to reach a shared goal

2. Critical thinking

b. T o search for, find, obtain, arrange, assess, and use relevant
information

3. Team-buildingc. T
 o analyze, evaluate, synthesize, interpret, infer, question, and solve
problems

III. Read Eri’s self-reflection. Which debate skill should she practice?
My last debate performance was bad. I prepared for the wrong
section. I was supposed to prepare the cross- examination questions,but I prepared the summary, so my group did not have any questions.
My teammate asked me for help with the affirmative speech, I said,“No way! Not my responsibility.” If any of the others ask me for help, I
will just pretend that I do not know the answer. I do not want to do
more work than I already do.

234

Answers are T, F, T, T
All “Up to Debate” textbook references refer to: Mishima, M., Kita, S., Donnelly, M., Hartley, M., Iwai, K., & Vaughan, R. (2021).
Up for Debate (2nd ed.). DTP Publishing.
4
Answers are 1 b, 2 c, 3 a57

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

IV. Read the qualities below of effective team players from Brady (2016). Whichqualities should Eri (Activity III) practice?
What does it mean to be a good team player?
Reliable

Good communicator

Assesses team’s strong points andweak points

Flexible

Good listenerCommits to team goals

HelpfulWilling to compromise

Solves problems

Note. From https://www.totalteambuilding.com.au

V. Using the table above (Activity IV), answer the following questions with a partner:• Think of an experience in debate class where you showed good teamwork skills. Explain theexperience to your partner.
• What steps will you take to improve these qualities?
• What situations outside of the debate classroom can you use teamwork skills?

VI. Read Aki’s self-reflection. Which debate skill should she practice?
My last debate performance was bad. When I searched for evidence
for the affirmative speech, I could not find anything. I tried using
keywords in Google; then I gave up. I was so frustrated. I could notthink of what to do. So, I just decided to write my opinion without
providing evidence because I feel like my idea is common sense, butthen during the debate, the other team cited evidence from a study
that contradicted my idea, so we lost the debate.

VII. Read the qualities below of good researchers from Study Lecture Notes(2013). Which qualities should Aki (Activity VI) practice?
What does it mean to be a good researcher?
Brainstorms relevant keywords

Articulates ideas

Open-minded to different
viewpoints

Patient when searching for
information

Evaluates sources of information
for reliability

Avoids plagiarism by citing
sources and paraphrasing

Searches for multiple sources of
information

Attends to small details of research

Defines terminology to be clear toothersNote. From http://studylecturenotes.com/qualities-of-a-good-researcher/.

58

WHY SHOULD STUDENTS REFLECT ON THE PURPOSE OF DEBATE?

VIII. Using the table above (Activity VII), answer the following questions with apartner:• Think of an experience in debate class where you showed good research skills. Explain theexperience to your partner.
• Which qualities of a good researcher do you want to improve?
• What steps will you take to improve these qualities?
• What situations outside of the debate classroom can you use research skills?

IX. In 2018, the Japanese Business Federation (Keidanren) sur veyed 443
companies on the qualities, abilities, and knowledge that business owners
expect from university students. Below are the most popular responses frombusiness owners. Circle those qualities that you develop from learning how todebate.
Initiative

Execution skills

Solve / Set problems

Teamwork

主体性

実行力

課題設定・解決能力

チームワークSocial skills

Cultural understanding

Creativity

Ethics

社会性

異文化理解力創造力

倫理観

Work ethic

Communication

Open-mindedness

職業観

自分の意見を発信する力 他人の意見を聴く力

Logical thinking
論理的思考力X. Discuss the reasons you circled these skills in Activity IX with a partner.

XI. List the qualities, abilities, and knowledge from Activity IX that relate to teambuilding, research, and critical thinking. You can use the same quality, ability,or knowledge more than once.
Team-building

Research

Teamwork

59

Critical Thinking

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

XII. Read Rena’s career goal. Does Rena need the skills of research, criticalthinking, or team-building for her career?

My career goal is to be a manager at a large company. I conducted
research, and according to Mintzberg (1973), a business professor in
Canada, there are three main managerial roles: interpersonal,
informational, and decisional. For interpersonal, I need tohave good communication skills to share information with employees.
I need to teach others good teamwork skills to help others work
cooperatively. For informational, I also need to do research andlearn a lot so that I can help employees if they have any questions. For
decisional, I need to solve problems and identify employees’
strengths and weaknesses to allocate work based on their abilities.

XIII. Think of a career that you would like to pursue post-graduation. How would
developing debate skills of critical thinking, research, and team-building help
you with your future career? You can do online research about the roles andresponsibilities of a potential future career.

XIV. W hen reflecting on your last debate performance, rank the debate skills of
research, critical thinking, and team-building from 1 the hardest for you to 3
the easiest for you.
1.
2.
3.

XV. W
 ith a partner, discuss the reasons for your answers to XIII, then write down
pages in the textbook that can help you. Write the page number and activity
name below.
Debate Skills
Research

Textbook Page / Activity Name
Example: page 20 / Where do we find sources?

Critical thinking
Team-building60

WHY SHOULD STUDENTS REFLECT ON THE PURPOSE OF DEBATE?

XVI. W rite your weak point, and then, create a plan to follow so that you can
improve these skills.
Example: I need to work on research skills because my sources of evidence were too old and so,
newer sources of information contradicted my evidence. This info is on Page 20 in the textbook. So,
I should review the textbook; then, I also need to… 

XVII. List two real-world contexts that you will be able to use the improved skills.
Example: If I improve my research skills, I can write better papers for other classes because mysources of information will not be contradicted by more recent studies… 





61

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Potential Research Studies
Researchers who are interested in the practicing-connections hypothesis can test assumptions.
For example, they can collect students’ self-reflections after debate performances to investigate theextent to which students connect core domain concepts, key representations, and real-world contexts.
The study can compare debate students who have been given these types of practicing-connection
activities to students who have not been given them. Students who have completed practicingconnections activities should show more evidence of treating debate as a means to an end. For
example, they would cite the three core domain skills and real-world contexts more often thanstudents who have not been given these types of activities. Researchers can also investigate theassumption that Japanese students feel uncomfortable with the aspects of debate that entail openly
criticizing and disagreeing. They can create a survey that can determine to what extent students feel
comfortable, then compare a pre-survey and post-survey results of students who have practiced
connections and those who students who have not. The survey might show that students who havepracticed connections might feel more comfortable with debate tactics than those who have not.
Alternatively, at the end of the semester, students can rate the effectiveness of classroom
activities for developing the core debate skills and then recommend ways to improve the activities.
Researchers can compare recommendations of students who have practiced connections to therecommendations of students who have not. The group who has practiced connections might be able
to show evidence of using knowledge of core domain skills more creatively and flexibly with theirrecommendations than the group who has not by stating more real-world contexts and key
representations in their recommendations. Additionally, researchers can collect student selfreflections throughout the semester on experiences using debate skills outside of the classroom.
Students can share the real-world contexts that students find useful for these debate skills. Lastly,
teachers of content-based language courses might contend that there should be two goals—contentbased goals and language-based goals (e.g., use of present perfect tense). As this paper only
discusses the treatment of content-based goals, teachers might want to investigate how to integrate
and assess language-based goals.

Conclusion
Some debate tactics are not appropriate for certain real-world contexts in Japan such as openly
disagreeing and openly challenging, but learning to debate can develop students’ critical thinking,research, and team-building skills as well as provide evidence of core debate skill development. On
the other hand, if transfer is an important process, then teachers need more evidence than debate
performance alone to assess students’ core domain skills because debate is one context to assess
such core domain concepts; yet, not such a popular or common activity outside of the classroom inJapan so debate performance should not be treated as an end in itself. One way to evaluate students’ability to transfer these core domain skills is to determine the extent to which students can makeconnections between core domain concepts, key representations, and real-world contexts. To do this,teachers can deconstruct core domain concepts into corresponding sub-skills to help students
understand what being effective researchers, team players, and critical thinkers entail. Additionally,teachers can help students to make explicit connections from core debate concepts to aspects ofdebate preparation and performance stages. Lastly, they can help students to reflect on the core
domain concept use in real-world contexts in relation to students’ goals and aspirations. By doing so,62

WHY SHOULD STUDENTS REFLECT ON THE PURPOSE OF DEBATE?

teachers can collect evidence of students’ expertise as well as help students understand thejustification for the debate course’s requirement status, which might help some students feel more atease with western debate tactics. During practicing-connection activities, teachers can address issues
such as “why openly disagree” and “why openly challenge others” to help students understand how
they connect to the overall course goals of improving their critical thinking, team-building, andresearch skills. I hope that teachers test Fries et al.’s (2020) hypothesis and consider creating similartasks for other their courses.

63

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

References
Brady, D. (2016, December 14). Qualities of a good team player versus a bad team player. Total Team
Building. Retrieved November 20, 2021, from https://www.totalteambuilding.com.au/qualitiesof-a-good-team-player-versus-a-bad-team-player/.
Debate Committee. (2020). Debate instructor handbook fall 2020. Center for Foreign Language
Education & Research. Rikkyo University.
Fries, L., Son, J. Y., Givvin, K. B., & Stigler, J. W. (2020). Practicing connections: A framework to
guide instructional design for developing understanding in complex domains. Educational
Psychology Review, 33(2), 739–762. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09561-x
Keidanren. (2018). Survey on Higher Education: Main Results. Keidanren: Policy & Action. Retrieved
November 20, 2021, from http://www.keidanren.or.jp/policy/2018/029_kekka.pdf.
Kopp, R. (2006, December 17). Japanese business culture: What makes it so unique? Asahi Weekly.
Retrieved November 20, 2021, from http://www.asahi.com/english/weekly/1217/06.html.
Kopp, R. (2019, November 16). Ditch the debate tactics when it comes to persuading Japanese colleagues
on a course of action. The Japan Times. Retrieved November 20, 2021, from https://www.
japantimes.co.jp/community/2019/11/14/how-tos/ditch-debate-tactics-comes-persuadingjapanese-colleagues-course-action/.
Matsumoto, K. (2018, May 2). Face is everything in Japan. TalkAbout Japan. Retrieved November 20,
2021, from https://talkaboutjapan.com/save-face-in-japanese-culture/.
Mintzberg, H. (1973). The nature of managerial work. Harper and Row.
Mishima, M., Kita, S., Donnelly, M., Hartley, M., Iwai, K., & Vaughan, R. (2021). Up for Debate (2nded.). Rikkyo University.
Saskatchewan Elocution and Debate Association. (2019, July 25). Basic argument construction.
SaskDebate. Retrieved November 20, 2021, from https://saskdebate.ca/resources/resourcesfor-students/basic-argument-construction.
Study Lecture Notes. (2013, June 8). Qualities of a good researcher. Study Lecture Notes. Retrieved
November 20, 2021, from http://studylecturenotes.com/qualities-of-a-good-researcher/.
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2008). Understanding by design. Association for Supervision andCurriculum Development.

64

【Teaching Practice Report】

Designing a Technology-Enhanced Flipped Classroom Model
Using Instructional Slideshows and Computer-MediatedAsynchronous Discussions
Ian Hart
Abstract
With flipped classroom pedagogy becoming increasingly popular with educators and the field of Computer-Assisted
Language Learning also seeing a rapid increase in popularity, sped up by the recent COVID-19 pandemic, this paper
explores the possibility of combining these methods of learning by using technology to provide out-of-class
instruction and practice-time to learners. After the discussion of existing frameworks and methodologies,
instructional PowerPoint slideshows were designed, and an online discussion forum was used to apply a blended
approach to several flipped classrooms. Observations were made, test scores were analyzed and learners’ opinions
were recorded via an online questionnaire. The study concludes with the belief that a blended approach to a flippedclassroom is effective in facilitating more meaningful knowledge creation through critical thinking at the learners’
own pace.
Keywords: flipped learning, CALL, forums, PowerPoint, instructional design

Introduction
Due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, teaching establishments worldwide have been
forced to provide online classes to their students. This has led to the introduction of new technologies
and online platforms that can be used both inside and outside of a classroom. In Japan, digital devices
have been provided to students in all schools, and Information and Communications Technology(ICT) classes are being conducted for students at a much younger age. This increased reliance on
ICT in the field of education means that ELT educators have had to adapt the way they conduct theirclasses and look at new methodologies based not only on synchronous but also asynchronous
learning and communication through digital platforms and materials (Levy & Stockwell, 2006).
One approach that has gained attention in recent years is the idea of flipped learning (Webb &Doman, 2016). While this approach existed before the pandemic, new demands from online teachingenvironments have increased its popularity, especially amongst ELT researchers (Turan & AkdagCimen, 2020). Flipped learning is an instructional approach where the presentation of course content
is introduced outside of the classroom. Common methods include the use of instructional slides orvideos that are viewed and studied outside of class time (Hockley, 2017). The purpose is to allow
more in-class time to be spent on production and reflection. The use of technology with a flipped
approach is a form of blended learning, which combines both face-to-face instruction and online
materials.
For a flipped approach to work in a digital environment, educators have been looking into new
ways of presenting content to their learners using computer-assisted methods. One such method isusing presentation slides via software such as PowerPoint, Keynote, or Google Slides. Slides can beused for initial teaching, practice and drilling, games, reviews, and tests (Fisher, 2003). They can be
published online, allowing them to be easily accessible to learners, and help learners attend to and65

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

retain much of what is presented (Roblyer & Hughes, 2018). While presentation slides can help
present target skills or language, online platforms have been designed that allow learners to practiceusing the taught content asynchronously before synchronous use in class.
Another computer-assisted method is via the use of CMC (Computer-Mediated Communication).
A popular example of this is the use of online forums that allow learners to communicate andcollaborate online. These forums provide learners with the opportunity to share content, knowledge,
and media while working synchronously or asynchronously and at their own pace. The popularity ofsuch forums has led to the development of websites that focus on specific functions such as forumbased discussion or content sharing.
This paper explores the use of technology to provide a flipped approach to a language classroom.
Research will be conducted via the use of slides and a newly developed online discussion site named
Kialo that describes itself as ‘the purpose-built tool for critical thinking, thoughtful discussion, andcollaborative decision-making’ (Kialo, 2017).

Discussion
Blended Learning – A Flipped Approach
The flipped learning model is becoming increasingly popular amongst educators, especiallywithin universities. The idea is that learners review the content of the course prior to the classsession and complete exercises that would usually be conducted together in a face-to-faceenvironment (Bishop & Vergleger, 2013). This pedagogical concept replaces the standard in-classpresentation of content with the opportunity for learners to discover their own concepts while also
reviewing materials from outside of the class. This removes the need for a lecture-style format
delivered within class time, and rather this information is given through homework assignments.
This explains the term ‘flipped’ as historically, the classroom is the usual place where content isdelivered. This approach is defined by Gerstein (2012) as a place for problem-solving, and to discoveradvanced concepts and engage in collaborative learning. Flipped learning can also include digital
integration and, in this case, can be considered a form of blended learning. Blended learning isdefined as being a student-centered, self-paced, flexible, and multi-modal approach to language
learning (Vaughan, 2007). It is considered to be an intersection of face-to-face settings, which
includes synchronous and human interactions, and computer-assisted synchronous or asychronous
situations in which the learner operates independently. Therefore, when ICT-based settings are used
in a flipped classroom, this instructional model can be considered to be both ‘flipped’ and ‘blended’.
The benefits of flipped learning are categorized by Kerr (2020) as: personalization, active
learning, and engagement. Kerr highlights the increase in learner personalization by a) supporting
learner difficulties; b) encouraging learners to work at their own pace; c) providing a range of study
materials for the learner to choose from, and d) delivering personalized support. Fulton (2012)provides additional benefits such as a) insights into students’ learning styles; b) ongoing customization
to meet learner needs; c) use of technology to boost learning; d) increased learner engagement, ande) support for students who are absent from the class. Kostka & Marshall’s (2017) research on theadvantages of a flipped classroom showed that if lower-order skills are accomplished before class,then more time can be spent focusing on higher-order skills such as analysing and creating(Woodward & Padfield, 2021). Strayer (2012) also found that students embraced the cooperative
learning and innovative teaching methods used in a flipped classroom. This led to increased
66

DESIGNING A TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED FLIPPED CLASSROOM MODEL USING INSTRUCTIONAL SLIDESHOWS AND COMPUTER-MEDIATED ASYNCHRONOUS DISCUSSIONS

engagement by facilitating the learners’ ownership of their learning process. As the learners havemore control over their learning, they feel more accountable for their contributions and performancein class (Johnson & Marsh, 2016).
While many benefits have been suggested, the flipped approach has potential drawbacks,
including a) a possible lack of learner participation; b) ineffective study habits; c) issues withtechnology or computer illiteracy; and d) resistance to the approach due to a preference for traditional
teaching styles (Kerr, 2020). For example, in Japan, many teachers conform to a teacher-fronted,
lecture-style approach to teaching, so students may initially be resistant to a new approach. In
addition, without knowing the benefits, students may question why they have to complete work athome and whether they are receiving the education that they deserve. Milman (2012) suggests thatlow proficiency students may struggle to remain engaged with the target material on their own forextended periods and also may have difficulty with various types of media such as online videos.
Both the advantages and disadvantages of a flipped classroom raise the question of how to flip
effectively. The learning materials presented outside of the classroom must be both engaging andeasy to use and follow. In addition, instructional learning should help the learners understand andtransfer what they have learned in in-class production. The successful transfer of knowledge isessential, allowing learners to use their knowledge ‘creatively, flexibly, and fluently in different
settings and problems’ (Wiggins & McTighe, 2006, p.26). In Fries et al.’s (2020) practisingconnections framework, they creating a three-step process that can be applied to instructional design.
These steps include 1) create a productive struggle (i.e., responsive teaching); 2) making connections
explicit, and 3) providing practice with variations. Using technology-assisted learning, I believe thisframework can be applied to a flipped classroom.

Presentation Slideshows
The field of CALL (Computer-Assisted Language Learning) has seen a rapid increase inpopularity due to the demand for online classes brought on by the pandemic. This means the use oftechnological tools has become very common in the classroom. This has led teachers to look at new
ways of providing classroom instruction and to keep learners engaged. Presenting with software,such as Microsoft PowerPoint, has become the most popular method. Szaboa and Hastings (2000)
suggest that the use of PowerPoint can help learners focus attention and reduce distraction. This idea
is supported by Catherina (2006) and Wanner (2015) who feel that PowerPoint presentations are
more interesting than traditional lectures. In Wanner’s (2015) research, his university students statedthat pre-lecture PowerPoint presentations were helpful for their understanding of the lecture content.
Increased engagement can be explained by Cashman and Shelly’s (2002) research that foundstudents learn most effectively when using their five senses. PowerPoint presentations appeal tovarying learning styles, such as the use of visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and creative. In Oommen’s(2012), study, he found that out of 50 of his university students, 94% of them responded with a positive
attitude towards the use of PowerPoint, saying it was easy to follow, stimulated thinking, helped makebetter use of class time, and held their attention.
For slides to work in a flipped classroom, the slides must be accessible outside of class time.
This is possible through online publishing. Google Slides provides the function to publish slides
online as HTML. The coding can then be added to other clients and easily viewed by the learners. In
many universities, an online application named Blackboard (or Blackboard Learn) is used for online
teaching, where the slides can be uploaded and viewed before in-class lessons. In addition, the67

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

research and suggestions made so far imply that these slides should be both visually pleasing andinteractive. Presentation software allows the utilization of media such as videos, audio, and images.
Animations and timings can also be used to necessitate when content is presented to the learner,
simulating the instruction of an in-class instructor. This means that the common use of slides as atool to complement a class or as a communication aid (Levy, 1997) has developed into the ability to
act as a surrogate teacher or manager of tasks.

Online Discussion Forums
Discussion forums/boards are a form of CMC (Computer-Mediated Communication) (Levy &Stockwell, 2006). They are not a new tool in online learning and have been the focus of an abundanceof research (Beatty, 2010; Thomas, 2002). They provide many benefits such as allowing students tointerconnect at their own pace, participate in group discussions, share content and knowledge, andtake part in pre-task planning (Ortega, 1997; Biesenback-Lucas, 2003; Bradshaw & Hinton, 2004;
Levine, 2007). Another benefit of having asynchronous online discussions is that they prevent
dominant students from monopolising discussions, and students may feel more comfortable
expressing their honest ideas and speak freely. Biesenback-Lucas (2003) believes that online
discussion boards provide a platform that allows ESL students to achieve “new levels of linguisticcompetence” (Mahoney, 2021, p. 57) and provides the opportunity to express their opinions in theirown words.
Online discussion forums also promote more active participation in students. Research has
shown that the forums promote the use of a larger lexical range. Warschauer (1997) found thatstudents used language that was lexically and syntactically more complex in electronic discussions
compared with face-to-face environments. Students can learn from their peers’ entries while also
correcting their lexical mistakes by noticing differences in their usage (Fitze, 2006). This may enable
ESL learners to boost their pragmatic competence and give them more time to reflect on their ideas
and the language being used. This idea is echoed by Satar & Ozdener (2008) whose research showedthat computer-mediated communication offers learners a safe environment to practice what they
have learned and also evaluate themselves while also understanding the benefits of speaking skills.
The use of online discussion forums has also been met with some criticism, especially fromlearners. Recent studies of online discussion boards used in Japanese universities have suggested
that students find the discussion boards useful but also challenging, and some did not appreciate theextra time spent outside of the classroom completing discussion board tasks (Miyazoe & Anderson,
2010; Nielson, 2013). Other studies have also been less conclusive where it has been argued thatwhile quantity and attitudes improved, there were no significant increases lexically or syntactically inasynchronous CMC discussions (Gonzalez-Bueno & Perez, 2000; Abrams, 2003).
Regarding the use of discussion forums in a flipped classroom, they can provide a place topractice through pre-task planning. The practising-connections framework put forward by Fries et al(2020) explains the need for varied practice after explicit instruction. In-class discussions would
traditionally follow a Present, Practice, Produce (PPP) method, and after being presented with theclass content (e.g. slides), the discussion forum would allow the learner to practice what they havelearned in an asynchronous discussion. Levelt’s (1989) speech production model explains that
production starts with conceptualizing, then formulating, and finally articulating. For secondlanguage learners, focusing on both meaning (i.e. generating ideas) and form (i.e. selecting
grammatical and lexical forms) at the same time adds an additional cognitive load and may affect68

DESIGNING A TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED FLIPPED CLASSROOM MODEL USING INSTRUCTIONAL SLIDESHOWS AND COMPUTER-MEDIATED ASYNCHRONOUS DISCUSSIONS

production (Ellis, 2009). However, through pre-practice discussions online, the burden on working
memory can be reduced, allowing learners to focus on their L2 proficiency and in-class task
performance.

Research Study
MethodThe purpose of this study was to apply Fries et al.’s (2020) instructional design framework to aflipped classroom, allowing L2 learners in a university English Discussion class to discover lesson
content, make connections to the lesson topic, and practice using what they learned prior to in-classproduction. The participants were 109 first-year university students from 11 English Discussion
classes.
The Discussion Class is a mandatory course that students take once a week. For the first fourweeks, before their first discussion test, traditional methods of teaching were used. For their
homework, they had to read an article in their textbook to understand the next lesson’s topic. In
class, the discussion skills and target language were given through a lecture-style presentation,
which the students then used during in-class discussions.
After their first discussion test (Lesson 5), a flipped approach was applied to the classes using
technology-assisted tasks:
1.	Students were presented with discussion skills and target language that would usually bepresented in class. Slides were created, which were uploaded to their class Blackboard
website (Appendix, Image.1-4). The discussions skills and language were presented throughvarying methods such as a guided discovery task (e.g. gap fill activity) or dialogue
comparison (e.g., one dialogue containing the taught skill and the other without). Then,
using animated slides, the discussion skills were explicitly explained in more detail.
2.	The students took part in asynchronous, online discussions using a website named Kialo(Appendix, Image.5-6). A discussion question was taken from their textbook and added to thewebsite. The students then added their opinion by adding a “thesis”. Other students in theclass could then add opinions in agreement or disagreement. They were advised to add atleast four responses each and had to use the skills that they had learned from the slides.
They were also able the vote on how impactful others’ ideas were.
3.	The students’ entries were collated and added to slides that were reviewed before starting
the in-class discussions (Appendix, Image.7).
After their second discussion test (Lesson 10), the students were issued a Google Formquestionnaire requiring responses using five-point Likert scale-based answers, where students
provided their opinions related to the use of Kialo as a pre-task practice exercise. Qualitative data wascollected in the form of students’ reasons for whether they preferred the flipped or traditional
approach.
In addition, differences in their discussion test scores were observed through the collection ofquantitative data.
69

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Results
Out of 109 students, 100 completed the online survey (Appendix, Table.2). The first set ofquestions were related to learner outcomes. When asked whether Kialo was an easy-to-use tool, 90%
responded positively. This also implied that 10% of the students had difficulty with the website, whichhighlights the issues stated earlier by Milman (2012). The majority (86%) of students believed theonline discussions were helpful or very helpful in preparing them for the class, and most students feltthat it helped them practice/improve their critical thinking skills. While not an intention of theresearch, nearly every student believed the online discussions helped improve their English reading
and writing skills. In addition, every student believed it was a useful tool to practice the discussion
skills that they had learned from the slides. When asked whether their ideas from the online
discussions were used in class, 24.2% of students chose ‘Always’, and only 8.1% chose negative
responses. Instead of using ideas from a textbook article, students were able to research and present
their own ideas which were later used in class. This may imply that their cognitive load was lessened
as they had already generated ideas prior to in-class production. Finally, 97% of the students said thatthey had used other class members’ ideas during in-class discussions which supports earlier research
regarding the sharing of content and knowledge.
Part 2 asked the students whether the use of Kialo motivated them to research or think about
the textbook’s topics before class. Only 19% chose ‘Always’, which may indicate that the students did
not wish to spend out-of-class time researching. Although, 77% of the students chose options 3 or 4
(i.e., Sometimes and Often), which shows high levels of positive motivation.
Part 3 was a general assessment. 82% felt that using Kialo prepared them better for in-classdiscussions, while 18% chose the textbook reading. Reasons were given such as the examples below:• We can see other answers and expand our perspective using Kialo• Reading textbooks takes time, but Kialo doesn’t need long time. So, We can do it in our free time.
I think Kialo is efficient.
• It is because we can write freely what we thought of the question. It’s very good tool to prepare to
discussion, and practice to say own opinion. It has more uniqueness than reading textbook.
• I can research and get some information about the topic. If I have them, the discussion is goingsmoothly.
• Kialo is interesting but many people write Kialo late. So, I hard to coment three person. I usually
write coment at the very limit.
• I think Kialo is difficult to use. I couldn’t log in or anything to Kialo
In the comments, many of the students liked the collaborative aspect of online discussions, as
they could share ideas and understand each other better. This helped them clarify their own opinions
and prepare them when presented with ideas in class. Also, many students found it easy to use, andthe use of technology (e.g., smartphone) made it an efficient process for them. From a negative
perspective, the less computer literate students were not able to access the website. These students
never addressed this issue during the course.
Out of the 100 responses, 92% of the students said that Kialo should be used in future classes,
and on a scale of 1-10, all students chose 5 or over as an overall assessment, with 20% giving a perfectscore of 10.

70

DESIGNING A TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED FLIPPED CLASSROOM MODEL USING INSTRUCTIONAL SLIDESHOWS AND COMPUTER-MEDIATED ASYNCHRONOUS DISCUSSIONS

Test Scores
The Discussion Test is a skill-based test that has five categories. Each category is scored out of
5, with a total test score of 25 points. Points are gained through the utterance of taught skills,
questions, or new content.
The results (Table 1) showed a slight increase in test scores from nine of the groups after four
lessons of flipped teaching. This increase varied from 1.2% to 14%, with two classes scoring slightly
lower than their previous test. It’s important to note that the students were given the test questions
prior to both tests, which may have affected the results. This was done for ethical reasons. Also,
other factors may have affected the results, such as the students being more familiar with the test
structure, the students being more comfortable after completing half of the course, and motivation to
improve on their previous scores. The use of a control group (that only uses the traditional methods)
was considered but was thought to be ethically questionable in an education setting where all
students should be treated equally.
Therefore, while the increase in test scores may be attributed to the flipped approach, I feel the
results are inconclusive.
Table 1
Test scoresGroup

Traditional
Teaching Method

Computer-Assisted
Flipped Method

PointsDifference%
Difference

1

14.4

17.9

+3.5

+14

2

23.6

24.8

+1.2

+4.8

3

20.2

23.8

+3.6

+14.4

4

19.1

22.6

+3.5

+14

5

22.3

23.5

+1.2

+4.8

6

23.4

23.1

-0.3

-1.2

7

21.8

22.8

+1

+4

8

23.4

24.4

+1

+4

9

21.2

20.6

-0.6

-2.4

10

22.4

22.7

+0.3

+1.2

11

22.5

23.1

+0.6

+2.4

Mean Average

21.3

22.7

+1.4

+5.6

Conclusion
The study provided support to existing research regarding the use of both “blended” and“flipped” learning, allowing students to work at their own pace to prepare ideas and better understandcourse content before their in-class lessons. With the use of technology, the presentation stage ofcontent can be simulated outside of the classroom, giving students more time to process andunderstand it and creating more time during the class to be spent on production and reflection. In
addition, the use of online discussion forums (or in this case an online discussion website) can aid
students in preparing and practicing course content by allowing them to asynchronously research,
formulate, and develop ideas that can be later presented face-to-face. As explained by Ellis (2009),
this can reduce the learners’ cognitive load, allowing them to focus more on form.
71

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

The research survey results provided evidence in support of such methods, as most students
favored the flipped ‘blended’ approach to the use of traditional methods. An added benefit was
highlighted regarding improved reading and writing skills, which adds plausibility to ideas by
Biesenbach-Lucas (2003), who stated that discussion forums help with grammar and vocabulary.
A blended approach to a flipped classroom should be considered by ESL educators, as
advancements in technology have made it possible for content to be presented and practised in newand more effective ways. Most importantly, it allows learners to have more control over their learningand facilitates more meaningful knowledge creation through critical thinking at their own pace.

72

DESIGNING A TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED FLIPPED CLASSROOM MODEL USING INSTRUCTIONAL SLIDESHOWS AND COMPUTER-MEDIATED ASYNCHRONOUS DISCUSSIONS

References
Abrams, Z. I. (2003). The effect of synchronous and asynchronous CMC on oral performance inGerman. The Modern Language Journal, 87(2), 157-167.
Beatty, K. (2010). Teaching and Researching: Computer-Assisted Language Learning (Vol. 2). London:
Pearson Education Limited.
Biesenback-Lucas, S. (2003). Asychronous discussion groups in teacher training classes: Perceptionsof native and no-native students. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 24-46.
Bishop , J. L., & Vergleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. ASEE
National Conference Proceedings. Atlanta, GA.
Bradshaw, J., & Hinton, L. (2004). Benefits of an online discussion list in a traditional distancelearning course. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 5(3), 8-16.
Cashman, T. J., & Shelly, G. B. (2002). Microsoft PowerPoint 2002 Introductoy Concepts and Techniques.
Boston, Massachusetts, US: Cengage Learning, Inc .
Catherina, F. (2006). Beyond presntation: Using PowerPoint as an effective instructional tool. GiftedChild Today, 4.
Ellis, R. (2009). The differential effects of three types of task planning on the fluency, complexity, andaccuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 474-509.
Fisher, D. L. (2003). Motivation as a contributing factor is second language aquisition. The Internet
TESOL Journal, 9(4).
Fitze, M. (2006). Discourse and participation in ESL face-to-face and written electronic conferences.
Language Learning & Technology, 10(1), 67-86.
Fries, L., Son , J. Y., Givvin, K. B., & Stigler, J. W. (2020). Practicing connections: A framework to
guide instructional design for developing understanding in complex domains. Educational
Psychology Review, 33(2), 739-762.
Fulton , K. (2012). Upside down and inside out: Flip your classroom to improve student learning.
Learning & Leading with Technology, 39(8), 12-17.
Gerstein , J. (2012). Flipped classroom: The full picture for higher education. Retrieved from Education
Blog: http://usergeneratededucation.wordpress.com/2012/05/15/flipped- classroom-the-fullpicture-for-higher-education/
Gonzalez-Bueno , M., & Perez, L. C. (2000). Electronic mail in foreign language writing: A studt ofgrammatical accuracy, and quality of language. Foreign Language Annals, 33(2), 7-12.
Hockley, N. (2017). Researching with technology in ELT. ELT Journal, 71(3), 364-372.
Johnson, C., & Marsh , D. (2016). The flipped classroom . The Cambridge Guide to Blended Learning
for Language Teaching, 55-67.
Kerr, P. (2020). Flipped learning (Cambridge Papers in ELT). (C. U. Press, Producer) Retrieved fromwww.cambridge.org/gb/files/9115/9438/9974/CambridgePapers_in_ELT-Flipped_Learning_
minipaper_ONLINE.pdf. Last accessed 5th Novemeber 2021.
Kialo. (2017). Kialo: Hello, world! . Retrieved from Kialo Blog: http://blog.kialo.com/kialo-helloworld-d12ac78a320a. Last accessed 26th August 2021.
Kostka, I., & Marshall , H. W. (2017). Flipped learning in TESOL: Past, present, amnd future.
Language Learning and Literacy: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice, 124-144.
Levelt, W. J. (1989). Speaking from intention to articultion. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Levine, S. J. (2007). The online discussion board. New directions for adults and continuing education,
113, 67-74.
73

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Levy, M. (1997). Computer-Assisted Language Learning. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
Levy, M., & Stockwell, G. (2006). CALL Dimensions: Options and Issues in Computer-Assisted Language
Learning. New Yorl: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mahoney, J. (2021). Using Asynchronous Discussion Board Forums to Complement Online
Discussion Classes. Journal of Multilingual Pedagogy and Practice, 1, 56-64.
Milman, N. B. (2012). The flipped classroom strategy: What is it and how can it best be
used? Distance learning, 9(3), 85-87.
Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2010). Learning outcomes and students’ perceptions of online writing:
Simultaneous implementation of a forum, blog, and wiki in an ELF blended learning setting.
System, 32(2), 185-189.
Nielson, B. (2013). Students’ perceptions and learning outcomes of online writing using discussion
boards. JALT CALL Journal, 9(2), 131-147.
Oommen, A. (2012). Teaching English as a Global Language in Smart Classrooms with PowerPoint
Presentation. English Language Teaching, 5(12), 54-61.
Ortega, L. (1997). Processes and outcomes in networking classroom interaction: Defining the
research agenda for L2 computer-assisted classroom discussion. Language Learning andTechnology, 1(1).
Roblyer, M. D., & Hughes, J. E. (2018). Intergrating educational technology into teaching. West
Georgia: Pearson.
Satar, H. M., & Ozdener, N. (2008). The effects of synchronous CMC on speaking proficiency andanxiety: Text versus voice chat. The Modern Language Journal, 92(4), 595-613.
Strayer, J. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task
orientation. Learning Environments Research, 15, 171-193.
Szaboa, A., & Hastings, N. (2000). Using IT in the unergraduate classroom: Should we replace theblackboard wth PowerPoint? Computers & Education, 32.
Thomas, M. J. (2002). Learning with incoherant structures: The space of online discussion forums.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(3), 351-366.
Turan, Z., & Akdag-Cimen, B. (2020). Flipped classroomin English language teaching: A systematic
review. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33((5-6)), 590-606.
Vaughan, N. (2007). Perspectives on blended learning in higher education. International Journal on
ELearning, 6(1), 81-94.
Wanner, T. (2015). Enhancing Student Engagement and Active Learning through Just-in-Time
Teaching and the use of PowerPoint. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher
Education, 154-161.
Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning. The Modern Language Journal,81(4), 470-481.
Webb, M., & Doman, E. (2016). Does the flipped classroom lead to increased gains on learning
outcomes in ESL/EFL contexts? The CATESOL Journal, 28(1), 39-67.
Wiggins , G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Examining the teaching life. Educational Leadership, 63(6),26-29.
Woodward, H., & Padfield, L. (2021). A Blended Approach to Flipped Learning for
Teaching Debate. Journal of Multilingual Pedagogy and Practice, 1, 44-55.

74

DESIGNING A TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED FLIPPED CLASSROOM MODEL USING INSTRUCTIONAL SLIDESHOWS AND COMPUTER-MEDIATED ASYNCHRONOUS DISCUSSIONSAppendix
Image 1-4
PowerPoint Slide Examples

Image 5-6
Kialo Entries

Image 7
Presentation of Kialo Debate75

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Table 2
Questionnaire Results
Number of
students

Percentage %1. Do you think Kialo is an easy-to-use tool?

Strongly agree
Agree
NeutralDisagreeStrongly Disagree

29
40
21
8
2

29
40
21
8
2

2. Do you think Kialo helped you prepare ideas
for your in-class discussions?

Strongly agree
Agree
NeutralDisagreeStrongly Disagree

43
43
11
2
1

43
43
11
2
1

3. Do you think Kialo was a useful tool topractice and improve your critical thinking
skills?

Strongly agree
Agree
NeutralDisagreeStrongly Disagree

29
42
22
7
0

29
42
22
7
0

Strongly agree
Agree
4. Do you think Kialo was a useful tool to
Neutralpractice an improve you English writing skills?
DisagreeStrongly Disagree

36
39
22
0
2

36.4
39.4
22
0
2

5. D
 o you think Kialo was a useful tool topractice and improve your English reading
skills?

Strongly agree
Agree
NeutralDisagreeStrongly Disagree

34
39
22
5
0

34
39
22
5
0

6. D
 o you think Kialo was a useful tool topractice using Discussion Skills?

Strongly agree
Agree
NeutralDisagreeStrongly Disagree

35
42
23
0
0

35
42
23
0
0

7. H
 ow often did you use your ideas from theKialo discussions during n-class discussions?

Strongly agree
Agree
NeutralDisagreeStrongly Disagree

24
38
29
7
1

24.2
38.4
29.3
7.1
1

8. How often did you use other class members’
ideas from the Kialo discussions during in-classdiscussions?

Strongly agree
Agree
NeutralDisagreeStrongly Disagree

18
37
32
10
3

16.3
37.8
32.7
10.2
3.1

9. Do you think Kialo motivated you to researchor think about the textbook’s topics before
each class?

Strongly agree
Agree
NeutralDisagreeStrongly Disagree

19
46
31
3
1

19
46
31
3
1

Using Kialo

82

82

Completing the
textbooj reading

18

18

Question

10. W
 hich Discussion class homework better
prepared you for your in-class discussions?

Choices76

DESIGNING A TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED FLIPPED CLASSROOM MODEL USING INSTRUCTIONAL SLIDESHOWS AND COMPUTER-MEDIATED ASYNCHRONOUS DISCUSSIONS

Question

ChoicesNumber of
students

Percentage %11. P
 lease give reasons for your Question 9
answer.

Examples from 68 responses:• Because we can see other people’s answers and expand ourperspectives using Kialo.
• Writing my ideas is good for preparing for class.
• Discussions became smooth after using Kialo.
• I think Kialo is difficult to use.

12. D
 o you think Kialo should be used in the
Discussion course next year?

Yes
No

92
8

92
8

13. W
 hat is your overall assessment for Kialo asa tool to prepare students for Discussion
classes?

Great
Good
NeutralBad
Very Bad

32
57
11
0
0

32
57
11
0
0

77

【Teaching Practice Report】

Online Lessons During the COVID-19 Pandemic:
What Technology Can We Continue to Utilise?
Jack Pudelek
Abstract
This paper focuses on what can be learned about utilizing technology from the abrupt change to online teaching in2020 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. It uses teacher observations and the results of a student questionnaire
to give evidence to support any positive changes that can be made. The paper focuses on teaching methods andpractices involving the use of new technology, such as Learning Management Systems (LMSs). During the 2020
COVID-19 crisis lecturers were suddenly forced to switch from face-to -face classes to online teaching and learning
platforms. To circumvent the challenges of not meeting students face to face, innovative new methods of teaching
and technological advances were used for presentation, interaction and communication. After analysis of the resultsof the student questionnaire the use of Google Classroom, as an LMS, was shown to be beneficial for students.
Finally, the paper discusses whether the technology and practices could continue to be adopted and used to improvelearning even after the COVID-19 situation allows us to return to the classroom and face-to-face classes.
Keywords: LMS, online teaching, technology.

Introduction
The education sector, like many industry sectors, faced severe disruption due to the outbreakof COVID-19. In April 2020, 90.7% of the Japanese higher education institutions (HEIs) postponed thestart of spring semester classes (MEXT, 2020). Most of these HEIs made the decision to switch fromface-to-face classes to online learning. By July 2020, 83.8% of Japanese Universities were employing
distance learning (MEXT, 2020). Many educators felt anxious, confused and unprepared due to a lackof the pedagogical knowledge or experience necessary for online teaching (Bao, 2020; UNESCO,2020). They found themselves facing new challenges such as the digital delivery of content,
conducting real time interactive online lessons, testing, presentations and other forms of assessment
using online platforms. In addition, other issues arose such as ensuring students could participate inbeneficial interactive communicative activities, facilitating practical and efficient means ofcommunication between students and teachers, collection of assignments and providing feedback
both verbal and written.
It was not only the faculty alone that felt untrained, inexperienced and unprepared by thissudden move to online learning and the use of new technology; many students were also unpreparedin terms of technological experience, knowledge and skill. The MEXT prioritized increasing thedigital literacy of Japanese learners in 2010 and created an extensive policy to achieve this goal
(MEXT, 2010). However, the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD)’sskills outlook report for 2015 rated the information and communication technology (ICT) skills
among secondary level Japanese learners to be the lowest of all developed nations and only three outof five students claimed they had used computers at school (OECD, 2015). Murakami (2016)concluded that numerous institutions at the secondary and higher education levels were not
implementing the actions needed to realize the goal of increased computer skills. As a result, many
students were in an unfavorable position to deal with the e-learning systems, which became vital
78

ONLINE LESSONS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: WHAT TECHNOLOGY CAN WE CONTINUE TO UTILIZE?

because of the COVID-19 situation (Rentner & Apple, 2020).
Facing these challenges, HEI lecturers, such as the author of this paper, had to adapt theirsyllabi and teaching methods. Through research and the sharing of knowledge with colleagues,
pedagogical practices were adapted, and new technology was employed such as the use of LMS,
online testing platforms, video conference platforms and presentation software to meet therequirements of the courses and the learning needs and goals of the students and the subsequent
instruction objectives. This paper will attempt to analyze data from a student questionnaire, alongwith teacher observations, to answer these research questions:
1. Which technological applications, software or LMS were most effective in an online learning
situation?
2. Could this technology also be used to improve the efficiency of face-to-face classes in the
future, in terms of pedagogical and administrative augmentation?

Literature Review
Whilst it is far from possible for Computer Assisted Language Learning systems to replaceteachers/Human Assisted Language Learning, the development of new computer technology,
software and applications within the field of language study has led to a rethinking of the roles of andrelationship between technology, educators and learners (Reinoos et al., 2010).
One interesting metaphor for the introduction of new technology to a language teachingenvironment is the ecological perspective (Zhao and Frank, 2003). In this perspective, the school or
HEI could be described as a biological ecosystem such as a lake. The lake has an internal equilibrium
created through the harmony of unchanging or inorganic entities, such as the number of and locationof computers on campus, the grading system or the subjects being taught and organic species, which
would include the students, the teachers and the administrative staff (Zhao and Frank, 2003, p.812;
Colpitts et al., 2020). The use of a new piece of technology, such as an LMS, software or an application
is like a new species invading the ecosystem (Zhao and Frank, 2003, p.812). For an exotic invasive
species to prosper it must be able to work in alliance with the existing species and interact to create
a new equilibrium. Colpitts et al. (2020) describe the situation with a Darwinian standpoint: A certain
number of technologies will flourish and create new variant generations due to their perceived value.
However, those decided to be of little or no use will not survive. Faculties are viewed as being
resolute and logical deciding authorities, their ultimate decision about the new species (e.g.,innovations in technology) is related to their perceived synergy and their interaction with otherspecies (Zhao and Frank, 2003, p. 817; Frank, 2002; Colpitts et al., 2020) such as the learning
environment of the classroom, their students, grades and the learning goals.
One tool that allowed teachers to make and continue to keep in contact with their students
during the COVID-19 crisis was an LMS. Szabo and Flesher (2002) describe LMS as the underlying
system that steers every facet of the learning process. One example of an LMS system used in
education is Google Classroom, which is the LMS used by the researcher and focused on in thisstudy. LMS are administrative online platforms used by teachers to create and manage a course.
They can allow the administrator (teacher) to perform operations such as sharing materials (text,
audio and visual) with students, communication, giving and returning assignments, testing,assessment, instant feedback and calculation of grades. The administrator invites students to enroll
in the class, so unapproved users cannot access it. Therefore, LMS provides a secure and reliablemedium for communication with students.
79

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

LMSs have been rapidly growing in popularity since their emergence in the 1990s and havebecome a prevalent component of HEIs around the globe. Whilst estimates in a paper by Dahlstrom
et al. (2014) claim 99% of American HEIs provide some form of LMS, only 85% of faculty claim to usethem and only 56% state they use them daily. The same study referring to students stated that 83%
said that they use LMS and only 56% said they use one in all their courses. However, according to
Murakami (2016), despite moves by MEXT to assimilate ICT more into higher education, utilizationof LMS in Japanese universities continues to be low and a significant number of students are unawareof what an LMS was at the time of matriculation.
During the COVID pandemic, LMS provided teachers with the technology necessary to
distribute materials necessary for students to take part in both synchronous and asynchronousclasses when meeting face-to-face had become an impossibility. In the same circumstances, videoconferencing services such as Zoom allowed synchronous interaction to take place between theteacher and the class and between the students themselves. The use of a synchronous element inclasses, such as Zoom can help facilitate a feeling of community and social interaction and reduce
feelings of isolation (Lowenthal et al., 2017). During the pandemic, Nishikawa (2020, as cited in
Maekawa, 2021) noted that students, especially freshmen felt increased isolation due to not having
peers to ask for advice since they could not meet and make friends with classmates after the move toonline classes. Thus, one can see how the use of Zoom could directly combat these issues.
Most of the research into technology in relation to language study in Japan has focused primarilyon the teacher’s perceived usefulness of the technology rather than the viewpoint of students(Toland, White, Mills & Bolliger, 2014; Murakami, 2016). One study by Rentler and Apple (2020)
showed that students felt positively about the use of LMSs to submit homework assignments andreceive assessment and found the system beneficial in preparation for tests. However, there seems to
be a lack of research regarding other benefits of LMSs, it’s perceived ease of use by students andmore detailed qualitative data regarding their opinions about it. Therefore, this study will attempt to
examine the student’s perceptions of LMS and other technology such as Zoom during the 2020
school year whilst classes were conducted online.

Methodology
ParticipantsThis study took place in the second (autumn) semester of the 2020 school year at a large,
prestigious, private university in Japan. The institute is a co-educational facility offering manydifferent disciplines among its undergraduate programs. It is included in the Japanese government’s
Top Global University project, allowing it to receive funding with the goal of promoting globalizationand internationalizing Japanese higher education.
The participants of this study were 38 Japanese students from 4 different courses. 20 participants
were taking an intensive integrated skills course, meeting for 90 minutes three times per week. The
students were all first-year students aged 18–19 and had a TOEIC score between 530 and 570.
Nine participants were taking a content based elective course. This is an advanced level course, andthe students must have a TOEIC level of 600 and above as a prerequisite for enrolling. The course
had one 90-minute class scheduled once a week over the 14-week semester. The students were in
their 1st – 4th year of university so between 19 and 23 years old.
5 participants were taking a reading focused elective class. This course meets twice a week for
80

ONLINE LESSONS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: WHAT TECHNOLOGY CAN WE CONTINUE TO UTILIZE?

90 minutes. The students were in their 1st–3rd year and between the ages of 18 and 22. There was nolevel requirement for this class, so their English level was mixed.
Finally, 4 participants were taking an elective class aimed at students who desire low-level
English practice. The course meets once a week for 90 minutes. The students in the class were in
their second year and thus between the ages of 19 and 20.

Instrumentation
In the final class of the courses, students were given an optional and anonymous questionnaire
to complete relating to their experiences of online study during the semester. The research purpose
was explained to them, and they were asked for consent. The questionnaire was given as a google
form and asked a set of 15 questions to collect both quantitative and qualitative data regarding theirexperience of studying online and using different technology such as Zoom and Google Classroom.

Questionnaire Questions
1. How many of your classes were online in the spring semester 2020?
2. How many of your classes were online in the autumn semester 2020?
3. How easy did you find taking classes in the spring semester 2020?
4. How easy did you find taking classes in the autumn semester 2020?
5. How useful did you find Google Classroom as a tool for receiving instructions?
6. How useful did you find Google Classroom as a tool for receiving materials?
7. How useful did you find Google Classroom as a tool for submitting assignments?
8. How useful did you find Google Classroom as a tool for communicating with your teacher?
9. How useful did you find Zoom for taking part in group discussions?
10. What other online platforms, applications and technology did you use in your courses thisacademic year?
11. What online platforms, applications and technology had you used before April 2020?
12. What online platforms, applications or technology would you like to keep using even if yourclasses return to campus?
13. What positive experiences did you have involving taking classes online?
14. What negative experiences did you have involving taking classes online?
15. Which do you prefer (taking classes online, classes on campus, a mixture of both)?
The first two questions were asked to ascertain how much experience they had of studying
online due to the pandemic. There were 3 possible answers to choose from: some, most and all. The
third and fourth questions investigated whether they had become more used to studying online in
the second semester and if it had become easier for them. The answers were given using a Likert
scale from 1: very easy to 5: very difficult.
Questions 5-8 were about how useful they found google classroom as a tool for receiving
instruction, receiving materials (e.g. worksheets, reading/listening texts, videos), submitting
assignments and contacting their teacher. The answers were given using a Likert scale of 1: ‘notuseful at all’ to 5: ‘extremely useful’. The purpose was to gauge the functionality of this LMS.
Question 9 asked about how useful they found Zoom as a tool for taking part in group
instructions, to assess its usability for interaction in place of discussion in the classroom. It used the81

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

same Likert scale for usefulness. Question 10 asked the students to name any other forms oftechnology they had used during their online classes over the year and as a follow up Question 11
asked what if any technology they had experienced using before the COVID-19 outbreak. Question
12 then asked if they would like to keep using any online platforms, LMS, applications or othertechnology if their classes returned to regular on campus lessons. To gather more qualitative data
about what students liked and disliked about studying online, especially related to technology, thestudents were then asked in Questions 13 and 14 what positive and negative experiences they had oftaking classes online and the final question, 15 asked which they preferred taking classes online,
taking regular classes in a classroom or a mixture of both.

Results
Figure 1
How many of the courses taken by the students were
online in the first semester 2020?

Figure 2
How many of the courses taken by the students were
online in the second semester 2020?

How many of the students’ courses were online
in the first semester 2020?

How many of the students’ courses were online
in the autumn semester 2020?

A few ofthem
13%

A few ofthem
18%
All of them53%

All of them
26%

Most of them
29%

Most of them
61%

Figures 1 and 2 show that the percentage of students taking all their classes online seemed todecrease between the first and second semester. However, it is clear to see in Figure 2 that most of
the students’ classes were still online.
Figure 3
How easy did the students find taking classes online in the first semester 2020?
How easy did the students find taking classes online spring semester 2020?

Number of students

12
10
8
6
4
2
0

Very easy

Quite easy

NeutralQuite difficult Very difficult
Level of difficulty

82

ONLINE LESSONS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: WHAT TECHNOLOGY CAN WE CONTINUE TO UTILIZE?

Figure 4
How easy did the students find taking classes online in the second semester 2020
How easy did the students find taking classes online autumn semester of 2020?

Number of students

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

Very easy

Quite easy

NuetralQuite difficult Very difficult
Level of difficulty

Figures 3 and 4 show that students found online study far easier during the second semesterwith Figure 3 showing 7 students found it very difficult in the first semester and Figure 4 showing
zero students found it very difficult in the second semester. The number of students who found it
quite difficult was reduced from 11 to 8 and the number who found it very easy or quite easy
increased. However, a significant number of 14 students remained neutral and said they neither
found it easy nor difficult.
Figure 5
How useful did the students find Google Classroom as a tool for receiving instructions?

Number of students

How useful did the students find Google Classroom as a tool for receiving instructions?

20
15
10
5
0

Not usefulat allSlightlyusefulModerately Very useful Extremely
usefulusefulUsefulness

Figure 5 shows that the majority of students perceived Google Classroom as a useful tool forreceiving instructions–18 students said they found it extremely useful, 11 said it was very useful, 7
moderately useful and only 2 said it was not useful at all.

83

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Figure 6
How useful did the students find Google Classroom as a tool for receiving materials?

Number of students

How useful did students find Google Classroom as a tool for receiving materials?

20
15
10
5
0

Not usefulat allSlightlyusefulModerately Very useful Extremely
usefulusefulUsefulness

Figure 6 indicates that most students found Google Classroom a useful tool for receiving
materials–16 students said extremely Useful,14 said very useful and 4 said moderately useful.
However, one student said it was slightly useful and three said it was not useful at all.
Figure 7
How useful did the students find Google Classroom as a tool for submitting assignments?

Number of students

How useful did the students find Google Classroom as a tool for submitting assignments?

20
15
10
5
0

Not usefulat allSlightlyusefulModerately Very useful Extremely
usefulusefulUsefulness

Figure 7 shows that Google Classroom was considered extremely useful by 19 students, very
useful by 11 and moderately useful by 4 for submitting assignments.
Figure 8
How useful did the students find Google Classroom as a tool for communicating with their teacher?

Number of students

How useful did the students find Google Classroom as a tool for communicating with their teacher?

15
10
5
0

Not usefulat allSlightlyusefulModerately Very useful Extremely
usefulusefulUsefulness

84

ONLINE LESSONS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: WHAT TECHNOLOGY CAN WE CONTINUE TO UTILIZE?

The graph in Figure 8 shows that the majority of students found Google Classroom a useful toolfor communicating with the teacher–11 students said it was extremely useful, 10 said it was very
useful and 12 moderately useful, with only 2 students saying it was slightly useful and 3 students
saying it was not useful at all.
Figure 9
How useful did the students find Zoom as a tool for taking part in group discussions?

Number of students

How useful did the students find Zoom for taking part in group discussions?
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

Not useful at all Slightly useful

Moderately
usefulVery useful

Extremely
usefulUsefulness

The results in Figure 9 present the case that Zoom was very useful as a tool to create synchronousinteraction among students when they could not convene together–16 regarded it as extremely
useful, 12 said very useful, 6 moderately useful, only 1 said slightly useful and 2 not useful at all.
Figure 10
What other online platforms, applications and technology did the students use
in their courses over the 2020 academic year?

Number of students

What other online platforms, applications and technology did the students use in
their courses this academic year?

18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

Online platforms, applications and technology

Figure 10 presents that by far, the two most popular other types of technology used by students
were Luna, used by 17 students and Loom, used by 15.

85

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Figure 11
What online platforms, applications and technology had the students used before April 2020?

Number of students

What online platforms, applications and technology had the students used prior to April 2020?

1

0

Luna

Skype

GoogleStack
Classroom
Online platforms, applications and technology

Figure 11 conveys that only 4 of the 38 students had used any of this technology prior to the 2020
academic year–1 student each had used Luna, Skype, Google Classroom and Stack respectively.
Figure 12
What online platforms, applications or technology would you like to continue
using after we return to regular on campus lessons?

Number of students

What online platforms, applications and technology do the students want tocontinue using after returning to face to face study?

20

15
10
5
0

Google Classroom
Zoom
Loom
Online platforms, applications and technology

Twenty students (51%) stated they wished to continue using the LMS Google Classroom
displaying a clearly positive view of its usefulness as a tool to assist their learning (Figure 12). A
considerable proportion of the students, 12 (31%) stated that they wished to continue using Zoom
even after the return to face to face classes. Loom was the third most popular application with 5
students (13%) advocating for its continued use after the return to regular classroom-based lessons.

86

ONLINE LESSONS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: WHAT TECHNOLOGY CAN WE CONTINUE TO UTILIZE?

Figure 13
The positive experiences students had related to online study
What positive experiences did you have involving taking classes online?
Could turn my camera off (1)Related to
COVID-19 (2)Feel free, 1
Related totechnology (3)Related tosocial interaction (4)Related totravel/time (18)The answers to Question 13 regarding the students’ positive experiences from studying online
were quite varied, but the graph above has grouped together some of the answers that shared an
overall topic or theme. The most common answers were related to time or travel with 18 answers.
Some examples include, “I didn’t have to wake up early; My house is far from the university” and “I
had more time to prepare.” Another student said, “I used the commute time to study.” One of thestudents talked about being able to return to their hometown without missing classes.
The second most popular theme was related to social interaction with four answers in this group.
Answers were related to being able to talk with classmates and “making friends”. One student said
that this course had given them “more opportunity for discussion” than her courses in the previous
semester. The third most popular group of answers related to technology. One student stated apositive experience was “gaining the knowledge of technology”. Another talked especially about
giving “online presentations” and finally one stated that through “watching presentations recorded
on Loom again and again, it was easier to be objective and find my development by myself”. This
clearly shows the student found this particular technology useful for self-study and improvement.
Two answers related to COVID-19 and being able to avoid the virus or crowded trains. Two
answers were quite miscellaneous and difficult to fully comprehend without being able to ask thestudents for clarification. One said simply, “I could take the class to feel free”, possibly this was
related to the social interaction relieving them from isolation or possibly related to freedom of moretime. Finally, one student stated, “I can do my camera off”. Perhaps, meaning they felt more confident
when speaking anonymously although the teacher did tell them to try to keep their cameras on to
help assist communication and social connection.

87

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Figure 14
The negative experiences students had related to online study
What negative experiences did you have that involved taking classes online?
Submitting
HW, 1Communication, 2General study
issues, 3

Related to wi-fi/internet
connection, 11

Askingquestions inclass, 2

Related tosocial interaction, 11

Figure 14 shows the negative experiences students had when studying online. Once more they
have been grouped based on a shared theme or topic. The two most common themes were wi-fi/
internet connection and issues related to social interaction with 11 answers in each. The answers
related to connection issues were that students either had problems with their own connection or
wi-fi or that their classmates did, causing a breakdown in communication. One student also
complained about having to “borrow a wi-fi router from the university”.
Equally common were issues with social interaction. Some answers were related to being unable
to “meet friends” or “students” and it being “harder to get along with friends”. This difficulty ininteracting online was mirrored in other answers like “discussing projects online” being “inconvenient”
and “Discussion online becoming silent because no one speaks”. Others talked about feeling “alone”
or missing “face-to-face” and the “precious conversation with teachers or friends” that happen inclassroom lectures.
Besides these two main issues, there were three other answers. Three students talked about
general study issues including forgetting classes, missing assignments and difficulty in concentrating.
Two answers stated they found it difficult to contact the teacher or class. Finally, one student had“problems submitting homework”

Figure 15
Which medium for taking lessons do the students prefer: face to face, online or a mixture of both?
Which do you prefer face-to-face classes, online classes or a mixture of both?

Number of students

19
14
9
4
-1

Face to face

OnlineMethod of study

88

A mix of both

ONLINE LESSONS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: WHAT TECHNOLOGY CAN WE CONTINUE TO UTILIZE?

Although the results are quite close, Figure 13 shows that the majority of students would choose
face to face classes as their preferred method of study. This option was selected by 19 (49%)
participants. The next most popular was a combination of online and face to face study chosen by 16
students (41%). Finally, only three students (8%) of the participants preferred online classes.
Figure 16
Reliability statistics of questions 5-8 regarding usefulness of Google Classroom

Since questions 5–8 were regarding the same theme and the possible answers were the same,
Chronbach’s Alpha was used to measure internal consistency and the result was 0.886 (Figure 15).
The result showed good internal consistency for this set of questions.

Discussion
Regarding the increase in face-to-face classes in the second semester seen in Figures 1 and 2,
due to a reduction in the number of COVID cases, the university gave the option to more teachers(including language teachers) to offer some courses face to face at the beginning of the second
semester. The teacher of the classes used for this study chose not to teach those courses face to face
due to the difficulty of having to teach a mix of hybrid classes on campus and other classes online.
Some other faculties were holding classes face to face on campus in the first semester with 18%
saying they only had a few classes online and 29% saying most of their classes were online. Given that
this university offers undergraduate degrees in disciplines such as science, it is likely that theseclasses required some practical elements. Since the university relaxed the rules allowing teachers toteach more of certain courses face-to-face in the second semester this explains why the number ofstudents taking face to face courses increases.
Figures 3 and 4 suggest that most students will adapt to and become comfortable with online
study, as they found it much easier after one semester. However, this is not the case for all students,and many were still not completely acclimatized to this way of study despite having taken online
classes for the full academic year.
Figure 5 is evidence that Google Classroom can be an effective means for giving instructions tostudents. Google Classroom offers an efficient, instant and easily accessible method of sharing
instructions with a whole class of students in a clear and permanent way. If we consider the teacher
giving instructions in class or even writing them on the board, students may mishear the teachers or
miss read the teacher’s handwriting or students may be out of the room or absent and the instructions
may be miscommunicated later by classmates. This is far less likely with Google Classroom. Looking
at Figure 14 possible reasons for the two outliers could be their difficulty in or reluctance towards
using technology or perhaps their limited access to computers at home or a strong internet
connection.
89

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Figure 6 conveys that the students found Google Classroom very useful as a tool for receiving
materials. During the pandemic the use of LMS such as Google Classroom was an easy way to
instantly share the materials with a whole class of students in a secure and practical manner. Teachers
also had the ability to attach the materials to classwork or homework assignments to make
instructions clear for the students, and most students could access them with comfort and ease.
Regarding the negative responses, it’s possible these four students may have had connection,
computer access or technology issues, despite the teacher explaining and sharing guides on how toaccess materials using Google Classroom. Students were also told to ask classmates for help with any
technological issues they were facing. The instructor did his best to address issues students faced.
Another reason for their response might be that they prefer receiving paper worksheets and disliked
reading from a screen. Consequently, one environmental benefit of the COVID pandemic and theshift to online classes has been the reduction in the use of paper used in the education sector aroundthe globe.
Figure 7 presents Google Classroom as an efficient and popular method for students to submit
their assignments. The assignments section on Google Classroom allows the teacher to set up clear
instructions, share any necessary materials and set a deadline, which students can clearly see. This
makes it far more difficult for a student to forget their assignments or miss deadlines. Submission isextremely simple; with the click of a button, they can then choose to type directly into a Google
Document or upload any work from files on their computer such as a Word or PowerPoint file or evenan audio or video file. Clear instructions were given in the form of Loom videos, which showed an
instructor explaining the process using screen shots and this was uploaded to Google Classroom in
the first week. At least one student clearly had technical issues or connection issues causing them tohave difficulty to submit as shown in Figure 14.
Most students found Google Classroom a very useful system for communicating with theirteacher (figure 8). In Google Classroom, students can very easily comment or ask questions on anassignment and Google Classroom will then email the teacher to notify them so that they can reply.
The teacher can make their comments visible to one student or the whole class so answers that may
be applicable to the questions of others can be made visible to everyone. In opposition, a small
number did have issues as also seen in Figure 14, and the reasons may be similar to those alreadygiven for other issues above.
Zoom can be a means for group discussions and interactions (Figure 9). However, Zoom, orother teleconference applications can never replace the interaction that takes place face-to-face in aclassroom and there are certainly several limitations. One obvious limitation of Zoom is that theteacher cannot monitor the class as easily when they are all in the same main room, and when put
into break-out rooms, the teacher can only monitor one room at a time so they cannot see or hear
what the other students are doing. It is also far more difficult to gauge other people’s facial
expressions, body-language and tone of voice and miscommunication is far more common whenusing Zoom as opposed to face-to-face communication. In addition, technical issues such as students’cameras or microphones not working, or their connection failing can severely stunt or halt aninteraction. However, during the pandemic when face-to-face interaction was impossible, applications
like Zoom offered the best tool to afford some synchronous interaction and it seems most students
would agree and found them to be very useful and usable.
Figure 10 shows a diverse selection of other examples of technology used to assist online study.
Luna is this institution’s LMS. However, the instructor of these classes found Google Classroom tohave a more easy-to-use interface and chose it instead. Loom is a video messaging tool that allows
90

ONLINE LESSONS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: WHAT TECHNOLOGY CAN WE CONTINUE TO UTILIZE?

users to share their screen whilst simultaneously sharing a video recording of themselves using thecomputer’s camera. It can be very useful for recording instructional videos of how to perform actions
such as submitting work using Google Classroom, and the teacher of this class used it for thispurpose. It can also be useful as a tool for students to record a presentation and show their slides inPower Point or Google Slides whilst also showing their face, adding a more personal feeling to thepresentation. The instructor also used Loom for this purpose at times during some of the courses.
The data in Figure 11 concretely presents the fact that almost no students had any priorexperience of using the technology discussed in this study before the 2020 academic year.
The data presented in figure 12 indicates a strong desire among a majority of students tocontinue using the LMS Google Classroom even after returning to face to face study. A substantial
31% stated they wished to continue using Zoom, which draws further questions about how theywould like its use implemented. The desire of 13% to continue using Loom is surprising; one might
expect students would prefer to give presentations in person in the classroom, but this result
suggests some would prefer to pre-record them at home using a computer. As one student mentioned
in question 14, she found it instrumental in allowing her to self-analyze and improve her English, so
perhaps this means of recording their own presentations is a useful and implementable strategy for
improvement.
Figure 13 shows many interesting findings of the study. It seems a popular benefit of thisdistance style of learning is the convenience of not having to travel to the university campus and theextra time that this saves students. Other results indicate that many students were pleased that
despite being forced to stay at home they could still interact with classmates using applications like
Zoom. Three specific answers here strengthen the previously discussed data in showing that
platforms such as Google Classroom, Zoom and Loom can be very useful tools for language study
students and online study or the use of these kind of applications is beneficial for assisting thestudents in learning useful technological skills as well as helping their language acquisition.
Even in a technologically and economically advanced country such as Japan all university
students do not have access to a computer at home with a stable wi-fi connection (figure 14).
The prevalence of answers relating to issues with social interaction or the lack of it in Figure 14
conveys that online study cannot fill the void left by lack of real-world contact and although Zoom canbe used to create synchronous group discussion and interaction, there are still issues and problems
that mean it cannot equate to classroom interaction. Regarding the other general issues mentioned
in figure 14, it seems difficult to see how these problems connect specifically to online study but
perhaps the students felt they would not have had these issues had classes been face-to-face. The
same seems true for the issues with contacting the teacher and submitting homework.
Figure 15 clearly shows that the majority of students would prefer to take classes face to face.
This is understandable as they have enrolled in face-to-face classes and are likely attending university
not only to learn but also for social experiences such as joining clubs and making new friends. Also,with regards to a communicative skill such as language the benefits of face-to-face study in terms ofopportunities for receiving varied input, testing output and receiving corrective feedback are clearly
greater than the opportunities when taking part in online study, suggesting face to face would besuperior in terms of facilitating language acquisition. This being said, a large number (16 students)
would prefer a mixture of face-to-face classes and online and 3 would prefer completely online. It
seems to be that having studied for one academic year online many students have adapted to thisstyle and can see the benefits especially in terms of time and convenience of not having to travel.

91

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Conclusion
In response to research question 1, the LMS Google Classroom was clearly the most effective
technological application utilized during the online teaching situation. Second, Zoom was also very
popular as video conferencing software, allowing interaction between the students and teachers inreal time. Finally, Loom was a popular application allowing students to record presentations showing
their face and slides simultaneously. The popularity of these mediums is shown by the results of thestudent questionnaire and the positive opinions about them are shared by the teacher.
Regarding the second research question, data obtained in the student survey may point towards
possible pedagogical implications about how to implement and utilize this technology to benefit
students and support their learning. The data supports the use of LMSs such as Google Classroom,
as a means of giving clear instructions to students, as well as an efficient way of sharing materials
with them. The current fear of COVID-19 and other current diseases and viruses means any methodof reducing contact such as circulating worksheets helps reduce the risk of transmission. Continued
reduction in the paper trail as a trend in the future could also lead to a reduction in deforestation thatwould be environmentally beneficial for the planet. Google Classroom is also an excellent tool forcommunication between students and teachers and a straightforward method for students to submit
their assignments.
The researcher and writer of this paper has continued to use Google Classroom as his preferred
LMS while teaching at Rikkyo University in the 2021 spring and autumn semesters, for classes
including Discussion, Reading and Writing, English Communication, Debate and Presentation.
Whether classes have been online or face-to-face, it has been a valuable tool for communicating withstudents, sharing materials, setting and collecting assignments.
Zoom has also been used effectively by the researcher at Rikkyo in 2021 to conduct synchronousclasses when the COVID-19 situation again made it impossible to teach face to face. Zoom can beused to create group discussions and interaction, especially in situations like a pandemic when
meeting face to face is impossible. However, video conferencing software such as Zoom is far frombeing able to replace the social interaction that takes place in the classroom and face to faceinteraction should always be the first choice wherever possible. Other technology that can assist
learning might be presentation recording software such as Loom to help students analyze their own
speech. Further research into how technology can assist language study and be utilized by bothteachers and students, through the COVID-19 crisis and beyond, would be hugely valuable to ourfield.

92

ONLINE LESSONS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: WHAT TECHNOLOGY CAN WE CONTINUE TO UTILIZE?

Reference
Baturay, M., & Daloglu, A. (2010) E-portfolio assessment in an online English course. Computer
Assisted Language Learning, 23 (5) 413-428.
Bao, W. (2020). COVID-19 and online teaching in higher education: A case study of Peking
University. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2(2), 113-115.
Colpitts, B. D., Smith, M. D., & McCurrach, D. P. (2020). Enhancing the digital capacity of EFL
programs in the age of COVID-19: the ecological perspective in Japanese higher
education. Interactive Technology and Smart Education.
Rentler, B. R., & Apple, D. (2020). Understanding the acceptance of e-learning in a Japanese university
English program using the technology acceptance model. APU Journal of Language Research, 5,22-37.
Lowenthal, P., Borup, J., West, R., & Archambault, L. (2020). Thinking beyond Zoom: Using
asynchronous video to maintain connection and engagement during the COVID-19
pandemic. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 28(2), 383-391.
MEXT (2010), “The concept of global human resource development focusing on the East Asian
region”, available at https://www.mext.go.jp/en/policy/education/highered/title02/detail02/
sdetail02/1373900.htm
MEXT (2020), “Education in Japan beyond the crisis of COVID-19: leave no one behind”, available athttps://www.mext.go.jp/en/content/20200904_mxt_kouhou01-000008961_1.pdf
Maekawa, Y. (2021). Creating an Interactive Zoom English Class for University Students During
COVID-19 and Students’ Reactions. LET Kansai Chapter Collected Papers, 19, 41-58.
Murakami, C.V.T. (2016). Japanese university students and learning management systems. Learning
Learning, 23(2), 26-36.
OECD (2015) Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection, PISA, OECD Publishing,
doi: 10.1787/9789264239555-en.
Reinoos, R. L., & Wild, J. A. S. (2010). How Much CALL and how Much HALL?: an Inquiry Into theComputer-learner-teacher Nexus in Foreign Language Learning: with Special Reference toTeacher Interventions in a CALL Application at Hiroshima University of Economics. 広島経済大
学地域経済研究所.
Szabo, Micheal; Flesher, K. (2002). “CMI Theory and Practice: Historical Roots of Learning
Management Systems”. Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate,
Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2002 (White Paper) (Montreal, Canada: In M.
Driscoll & T. Reeves.)
Toland, S., White, J., Mills, D., & Bolliger, D. U. (2014). EFL instructors’ perceptions of usefulness
and ease of use of the LMS Manaba. JALT CALL Journal, 10(3), 221-236.
UNESCO. Education Sector. (2020). Quality assurance and recognition of distance higher education
and TVET. UNESCO COVID-19 Education Response: Education Sector Issue Notes, 5.1.
Zhao, Y. and Frank, K.A. (2003), “Factors affecting technology uses in schools: an ecologicalperspective”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 807-840, doi: 10.3102/
00028312040004807.

93【Teachinng Practice Report】

Reflections on an unexpected presentation of turn-taking
difficulties in an English discussion class
Jonathan Hennessy
Abstract
In this paper, I reflect on a journal kept over the last six lessons with intermediate level Japanese learners of English
in Rikkyo University’s English Discussion Class. The class in question was observed to speak excessively withoutyielding the floor and then get stuck unsuccessfully trying to negotiate for meaning. Observations from otherteachers’ previous work and a review of the journal entries suggest that in addition to using language too far above
the group’s linguistic ability, problems with turn-taking and signaling comprehension are likely contributing factors
to the difficulties that were observed. Feedback and advice targeted at beginning with simple, easy to understandutterances led to a positive improvement toward the end of the semester, but without repeating the advice in a later
lesson, the improvements did not continue. It is suggested that identifying the problem earlier and repeating theadvice for multiple lessons may have helped create lasting change and hope to better identify and address similar
problems in the future.
Keywords: turn-taking, comprehension, teacher journal

Introduction
All incoming first-year students at Rikkyo University are required to take one semester of an
English Discussion Class (EDC). The goals for the class are based around building communicative
abilities with a specific focus on developing fluency and the ability to negotiate for meaning. Students
are also taught specific “Discussion Skill” phrases to help scaffold their communicative abilities,
helping to make themselves more easily understood and helping to take turns and share speaking
time in their discussion groups. During the semester, students are expected to develop the ability to
discuss contemporary issues with their classmates entirely in English (Hurling, 2012). In the spring
2021 semester, classes began in person for either two or three lessons, depending on the specificclass, before switching to an online format using the Zoom platform as a response to the ongoingcoronavirus pandemic. This paper will follow the challenges and progress of one intermediate level
discussion class that had three face-to-face lessons before continuing online for 11 out of the 14 total
EDC lessons.
For most students, this is their first class that focuses so heavily on communication, and manyof them have never tried to sustain a group discussion in English prior to starting in the EDC. As
such, it is normal for students to struggle with navigating their discussions. In previous semesters, it
was common for students to struggle to speak due to shyness or a self-perceived lack of language
ability. However, in the spring 2021 semester, one class exhibited a different problem with
communication. Some students would regularly hold the floor and speak for an excessively long
period of time while simultaneously being unable to clearly explain the ideas that they were trying toshare. It seemed that the speaker may have lacked the vocabulary to explain an idea clearly or thatthey may not have been able to simplify an idea to the level that their classmates could understand it.
As these students were speaking, their classmates usually waited patiently despite their lack ofunderstanding, without ever stopping the student during their turn to ask for clarification. In many
94

REFLECTIONS ON AN UNEXPECTED PRESENTATION OF TURN-TAKING DIFFICULTIESIN AN ENGLISH DISCUSSION CLASS

cases, this was followed up with failed attempts at negotiation for meaning as another student would
try to explain the first speaker’s ideas to the group and again often hold the floor despite theirclassmates not being able to understand this attempt at paraphrasing. In the end, students spent a lotof time frustrated and unable to move on their discussions because they were stuck trying to clarify
too many comprehension problems at the same time.
Early in the semester, with the first lessons being face-to-face and into the first few online
lessons, nothing stood out as particularly unusual. Some students struggled, using the new discussion
skills they were learning, and some students struggled in communicating whether they understoodtheir classmates, but the class did not seem to have any unique difficulties early on. In my experience,these challenges were not unusual in the EDC. Most classes will have some difficulty acquiring thenew phrases they are taught, and many classes will have some difficulty conveying theircomprehension or lack thereof. The early topics of discussion were concrete and relatable to thestudents’ own experiences which certainly made the discussions approachable. When these students
did possess the language ability to discuss a topic, they did fine.
However, in the seventh lesson, students were asked to discuss “The Globalization of Japanese
Culture” and the discussions seemed to run into problems that I had not expected. In that lesson, twoof the eight students present were marked for poor participation and six of the eight students weremarked low in their use of communication skills, a measure of their attempts to communicatecomprehension and solve communication problems. Initially, I just thought it was an off day or adifficult topic, but the class continued to have similar problems in the next two classes, including
their second discussion test in the ninth lesson. This was when I noticed that the groups would getstuck trying to understand each other on a more challenging idea and would derail their discussion
trying to solve that issue, failing to move the discussion forward and leaving the students to finish theactivity frustrated, without really having gotten to discuss the topic. After the second discussion test
lesson, I felt like I was starting to understand what was happening and began to keep a short journal
after classes to better understand the students’ behavior and to look for ways to help the students
navigate their discussions more successfully.
Looking at past articles from other teachers teaching the EDC gave me a starting point forevaluating my notes, diagnosing the problem, and helping the students to improve. Webster (2018)
wrote about working with shy or introverted students and noted that the students he observed were
often hesitant to speak and would even pass on taking a turn rather than offering their opinion. This
wouldn’t explain the tendency of some students to speak excessively but may have been part of thereason that their classmates were unwilling to stop them to clarify and instead waiting until they
stopped speaking on their own. Young (2014) suggested that students struggle with turn-taking andnoticed that a failure to signify the end of one’s turn and demonstrate that the floor was open led to
students struggling to identify the appropriate time to start speaking. This could explain why
students failed to speak up early and prevent the speaker from continuing when they were not being
understood. It could also suggest that the speaker may be unsure of how to finish their turn and may
keep talking waiting for some signal that another speaker is ready. Young (2015) also noted thatstudents seemed to follow a limited number of strategies for passing turns, meaning that if individual
students were not leaving a clear chance for one of these transitions, the group may not be able tochange speakers effectively. Hennessy (2020) found that more advanced students sometimes choseto give the entirety of their thoughts on a topic at once, only fully yielding the floor when their ideas
were completely explained. He also noted that students did not seem to naturally want to commenton the ideas of other students in a discussion and often struggled to interact with another student’s95

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

idea. This could be an explanation for the student who spoke excessively, that they intended to share
all of their thoughts at once but lacked the language ability to do so clearly. Kambe (2015) added
another useful observation, noting that students frequently found themselves limited by vocabulary
and were frustrated by their inability to express their ideas. This seemed to be a certainty in thisgroup, where they clearly had ideas that they wanted to share but were not able to do so clearly.
Combining this research with my own previous observations of students taking this course did giveme some insight into potential reasons for the students struggles. As topics became more abstract
and challenging students were likely struggling with a lack of vocabulary and their struggles with
turn-taking and potential hesitancy to interject may have created situations where they were unable
to find an appropriate time to begin negotiating for meaning. In the end, they were forced to try tosolve multiple communication breakdowns simultaneously. While this negotiation for meaning andsolving of communication problems should be an opportunity for language acquisition (Mackey,
1999; Toth & Davin, 2016), the attempt to solve the problem usually came too late for the students tobe able to fully fix their comprehension problems, inevitably leading to further frustration.
The question then became, how could this problem be addressed? Young (2015) suggested thatstudents needed to be taught strategies for signaling the end of their turn. Hennessy (2020)
suggested tailoring feedback to specifically focus on turn-taking. Hart (2019) noted the importanceof group dynamics for successful discussions and focused on how influential students have the ability
to improve or derail a discussion. Suzuki (2018) noted the value of feedback focused on how students’
own behavior was impacting their classroom and their discussions. Kean (2018) found that students
in the EDC seemed to respond best to positive feedback about their successes in a discussion. I also
referred to Krashen (2009) and the Input Hypothesis, emphasizing that for students to progress andsucceed in a target language, they needed comprehensible input that was close to their current level.
If students continued to fail to understand their discussions, it would be unlikely that they would
improve. It has also been found that despite the value in attempting to solve communication problems
and get to this comprehensible input, non-native speakers do sometimes pretend to understandrather than entering the process of negotiation of meaning (Zwaard & Bannink, 2016). This would
suggest that just asking them to work together when they fail to understand something would
certainly be insufficient.
In order to successfully navigate a discussion and see an improvement in English skills, it would
be necessary to help students have a discussion where they were able to successfully transition
between speakers and produce content that was comprehensible to their classmates. This paper will
review my teaching journal entries for the final six lessons and will explain how I attempted to help
the students work together more effectively.

Discussion
Journal Entries
I began keeping a journal for this class after the second discussion test in the ninth lesson. In
that first entry, I wrote that a few students seemed to be happy to volunteer to speak and share theiropinions but that they would often attempt to explain something that they either lacked the language
abilities to explain clearly or that was too much for their classmates to understand. This led toextended periods of negotiation for meaning and hurt the group’s ability to move their discussion
forward. One student in particular stood out as speaking excessively and I wrote a note for feedback
96

REFLECTIONS ON AN UNEXPECTED PRESENTATION OF TURN-TAKING DIFFICULTIESIN AN ENGLISH DISCUSSION CLASS

that they needed to relax and that just talking was more important than worrying about whether what
they said was “correct.” For a different group, I wrote that students needed to take shorter turns andyield the floor more readily to help the entire group have more chances to speak.
In the following lesson students were asked to discuss using English at work and work-lifebalance. Their new target language was meant to help them discuss different viewpoints to allow for
more perspectives in their discussion. I noted that students were hesitant to interrupt each other andthat they rarely asked questions. They also did very little to show whether they understood theirclassmates. In a few cases, students did hold the floor for a longer period of time, and as an observer,
it seemed to me that they were explaining more than they needed to. In this lesson, I tried to give thisclass advice that I had often given to classes that were quiet when listening in the past and encouraged
them to do more to show their classmates if they understood or not. A few students did take thisadvice in their second discussion, but most still continued to be quiet listeners. The behavior of
speakers did not change, and students continued to explain more than necessary.
The 11th lesson focused on social media and students discussed students and social media as
well as society and social media. The new target language was related to balancing their opinions bydiscussing the advantages and disadvantages of the topic. Students made good use of the target
language in the first discussion, and it helped to keep their discussion moving when compared to theprevious two lessons. I wrote that they were not discussing each other’s ideas but that using thetarget language did help them share their ideas and seemed to help them pass the turn to anotherspeaker. However, the second discussion again included long turns with excessive explanation thatwas difficult for the group to understand. Following the second discussion, I gave post-activity
feedback that they should start simple and then volunteer to speak again later if they still had
something to share for a given topic.
The 12th lesson was one of the most problematic of the semester. The students were expected totalk about punishments for petty and serious crimes and were given the discussion skill of asking forand giving sources for the information they used in their discussions. This topic and discussion skill
have been difficult for many classes in the past and students often have difficulty coming up with ananswer they are comfortable with. This class was no different. In the first discussion I wrote that,while some students did seem to remember to use the target language, they struggled with finding agood place to interject to ask their classmates about their ideas. Students also struggled to support
their opinions. After the discussion I reminded students that they needed to support their opinions
and gave them some examples of places in their discussions where it would have beneficial tointerject to ask their classmates for a source. In the second discussion students discussed thepunishment for serious crimes and most of the students struggled to clearly explain their thoughts.
It seemed like the listeners were often struggling to understand the speaker. I noticed multiple
occasions where a student provided a great opportunity for their classmates to ask them about theirideas, but the listeners would rarely pick up on this chance. I also saw few attempts to clarify andsolve communication issues. Students instead just let the turns pass without interacting with eachother’s ideas at all. With the final discussion test coming in the next class, I wrote a note to myselfthat I needed to emphasize simplicity to the students in the preparation activities they would do
before their test if they were to have a chance of having a successful discussion.
The final discussion test was administered in the 13th lesson. Students were given no new
language to use, and their topics were ways to reduce poverty and possible solutions to the aging
population problem in Japan. Based on my notes from the previous class, I decided that I wouldemphasize starting with short, simple answers from the beginning of the lesson. Students had two97

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

practice discussions on the topics with classmates who would not be in their group for the test, andbefore each practice, I asked the students to start with simple, easy to understand answers and told
them that they could speak a second time later if they felt they had something more to say. They
seemed to take my advice, and while they rarely took the opportunity to speak again on a topic, they
their speaking turns shorter and linguistically simpler, and they were able to understand each otherand move the discussion forward. After the practice, the students changed groups and had an
extended discussion. I observed the groups one at a time, and I reminded them once more before
starting their discussions to start simple and speak more than once on a topic if they felt they had
more to say. All three groups seemed to take this advice and I wrote in my journal that the class had
their best discussions of the semester. Students did still struggle to ask questions about theirclassmates’ ideas, but they did a better job of signaling comprehension, and they were able to buildon what their classmates said instead of answering the question from the beginning every time theychanged speaker. I wrote that one group quickly used many of the discussion skills they were
expected to and for another group I wrote that they were doing more follow-up and taking more
speaking turns compared to their usual behavior. I wrote that this lesson suggested to me that a key
part of being able to work as a group is ensuring that each student produces output that isunderstandable for the entire group.
The last lesson of the semester was a review and after the success of the previous lesson, I
thought it was unnecessary to emphasize simplicity and turn-taking again. I was quickly provenwrong as students reverted to their old habits. The topics for this lesson were how to have good
discussions and how to gain skills and personal qualities while at university. In both discussions, a
few students held the floor for an unnecessarily long period of time and talked themselves into a
corner where they were unsure whether their ideas were understood. Their classmates did notinterject to clarify and when the speaker yielded the floor the listeners didn’t have an easy way tocomment on what the previous speaker had said. Interestingly, their discussions on having a good
discussion did shed some light on the problems they had. Students said that when they were quiet
listeners the whole group was shy. They also stated that they thought asking questions waschallenging for their group. A few students said if they had more knowledge on a topic they could talkmore smoothly. This suggested to me that students were unsure of themselves with some of the
discussion topics and that they needed more help identifying the appropriate times to join into a
discussion to ask questions as well as when to yield the floor as a speaker.

Reflection
My first instinct when trying to help this class was to focus on how some students would try to
speak beyond their current abilities. Looking back at my journal does make me think that while thiswas likely part of the issue, it was certainly not the entire problem. In addition to the comments about
students struggling to understand each other when they did attempt to negotiate for meaning onthese difficult ideas, many of my notes were about listeners not demonstrating whether they
understood the speaker and speakers not yielding the floor until they had already said too much fortheir classmates to interact with. When thinking about my notes and considering the work of otherteachers in the program it seems reasonable to suggest that difficulties with signaling the end of a
speaking turn and a hesitation to interject while another student is speaking contributed to thestudents struggles with comprehension and interaction. This also means that there are more ways
for me to address this issue if it arises in future classes and lets me avoid simply telling students to98

REFLECTIONS ON AN UNEXPECTED PRESENTATION OF TURN-TAKING DIFFICULTIESIN AN ENGLISH DISCUSSION CLASS

limit themselves when speaking and not encouraging them to push their limits.
The success in the 13th lesson in emphasizing starting simple is something I need to remember
for future classes. In addition to helping in this situation, where students sometimes spoke beyond
their classmates’ ability to understand, it seemed to have very positive effects on turn-taking, aproblem that has been detailed quite a bit in the EDC (Hennessy, 2020; Young, 2014; Young, 2015). I
wish that I had emphasized this earlier with this class and I will remember for future classes how
effective it was when I repeated the advice multiple times in a single lesson. This may even be
beneficial for classes that struggle with turn-taking without the comprehension issues present in thisclass.
This experience also really solidified the importance of focusing on how different classes are
unique and the value of targeting the specific problems each class has with efficient feedback. It canbe easy as a teacher to focus on using the new target language and telling students to work together
more if they do not understand each other, but that is not enough if there is a different issue that isholding the class back. By looking more closely at a specific behavior that I had not seen before andby targeting the problems that were specific to this one class, I was able to help them make
improvements for an important discussion test and have a better discussion than they had previously
been able to. If I can improve at identifying problems like this and target them earlier and more
frequently, I should be able to help more students succeed.

Conclusion
Students can struggle for a variety of reasons when trying to have discussions in their second
language. One of the most important roles of the teacher is helping them identify their problems andgiving them strategies for improvement. While the students in my class did struggle for most of thelessons for which I kept a journal, they were able to have an effective and communicative discussion
in their discussion test lesson when given appropriate advice and feedback. This experience has leftme better prepared for classes that have similar problems in the future.
Keeping a journal helped me to understand the problem better than I would have otherwise as
well. The advice to start simple helped this class, but the problem was not simply that students were
trying to speak beyond their abilities as I first thought. They were also struggling to signal
comprehension and to effectively pass the turn. These struggles are something I have seen before,
and I was simply distracted by a new nuance. I believe in the future, I will be able to understand why
a class is struggling earlier in the semester.
This paper also provides more evidence to the necessity of appropriately targeted feedback andadvice. The difference in performance in their final discussion test when they were strongly
encouraged to start simple was very clear and it seems very likely that emphasizing this point early
and repeating it really could have helped this class. The fact that the improvement didn’t carry overto the next lesson does suggest that repetition will be important in making lasting changes, but alsosuggests that addressing problems with comprehension and turn-taking before beginning activities
may be more effective than only giving feedback after the fact.

99

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

References
Hart, I. (2019). The Importance of a Successful Group Dynamic: Identifying Influential Behaviors.
New Directions in Teaching and Learning English Discussion, 7, 31-37.
Hennessy, J. (2020). Teaching Journal: Reflections on Developing Interaction and Improving TurnTaking in High-Intermediate Students. New Directions in Teaching and Learning English
Discussion, 8, 23-29.
Hurling, S. (2012). Introduction to EDC. New Directions in Teaching and Learning English Discussion,
1(1), 1.2-1.10.
Kambe, Y. (2015). No Vocabulary, No Discussions. New Directions in Teaching and Learning English
Discussion, 3, 114-117.
Kean, A. (2018). Positive Feedback Within a Positive Atmosphere to Promote L2 Use. New Directionsin Teaching and Learning English Discussion, 6, 38-42.
Krashen, S. (2009). Principles and practice in second language acquisition (internet edition). Pergamon
Press Inc. http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/principles_and_practice.pdf
Mackey, A. (1999). Input, Interaction, and Second Language Development: An Empirical Study of
Question Formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), 557-587. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199004027
Suzuki, H. (2018). Building a Positive Environment: Reflecting on Interventions in the Classroom.
New Directions in Teaching and Learning English Discussion, 6, 63-69.
Toth, P. D., & Davin, K. J. (2016). The Sociocognitive Imperative of L2 Pedagogy. The Modern
Language Journal, 100, 148-168. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12306
Webster, M. (2018). Integrating Introverted Learners. New Directions in Teaching and Learning
English Discussion, 6, 75-78.
Young, D. (2014). Using Manipulatives to Promote Proper Floor Management in English Discussion.
New Directions in Teaching and Learning English Discussion, 2, 23-29.
Young, D. (2015). A Conversation Analysis of the Acquisition and Use of Turn-taking Practices in an
English Discussion Class. New Directions in Teaching and Learning English Discussion, 3,
320-330.
Zwaard, R. V. D, & Bannink, A. (2016). Nonoccurrence of Negotiation of Meaning in Task-Based
Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication. Modern Language Journal, 100(3). 625-640.
https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12341

100

【Teaching Practice Report】

Considerations in Content and Language Integrated Learning
John Paul White
Abstract
This paper outlines two forms of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) and outlines some of thetheoretical and practical considerations that need to be made when planning content-led and language-led lessons
that follow a CLIL approach to learning. It begins by defining CLIL and describing some of the key principals
behind this approach, as well as, the low-order and high-order thinking skills that students will need to employ forcertain activities. The author then recommends a three-dimensional approach towards planning and suggests
scaffolding strategies that could be used to teach both content and language simultaneously through exploration,
discovery, and peer interaction. The author gives examples of how he has used these methods in his own classes
and some of the considerations that go into the planning and execution of course design. Finally, the author reflects
upon his own experiences in teaching English debate and discusses the methodologies that already inform his
approach to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages.
Keywords: CLIL, theory, planning, low-order thinking skills, high-order thinking skills

Introduction
The CLIL Approach
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is an approach in which students learn a
subject in a foreign or second language (Marsh, 2002). As content and language are taught together,students gain exposure to both foreign language input and output as they study a subject of academicor personal interest. Using this approach, students are able to learn grammatical structures,vocabulary, and specialised terminology without the need for additional language lessons outside of
the course (Graddol, 2006). This allows students to learn the content of a subject while gaining
exposure to the syntax and lexis that make up a foreign language. For example, a native Japanese
student learning art in English would be exposed to new phrases and vocabulary in that target
language while learning the key concepts of the subject simultaneously. Therefore, students need to
improve in the foreign language in order to follow the content of the course and be successful in theirstudies (Marsh, Marsland, & Stenberg, 2001). This has huge implications as English increasingly
becomes a global language, and means that the world is beginning to view English not only as alanguage but also as a key skill (Graddol, 2006).

Types of CLIL
There are two types of CLIL: strong and weak. Strong CLIL is content-driven and focusses oncontent learning, while weak CLIL is language-driven and focusses on second language learning(Ball, 2009, and Bentley, 2010, as cited in Ikeda, 2013). In a strong CLIL class, content is given the
primary focus and concepts are presented in a foreign or second language (Cambridge Assessment
English, 2019). However, in a weak CLIL class, the second language is the focus of the course as thestudents learn about a specific or specialised subject in a second language. This means that101

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

educational bodies must consider whether to follow a content-led or language-led approach when
designing CLIL lessons and planning assessment.
CLIL differs from regular language lessons where the subject, topic, or theme of a lesson mayvary in order to promote a particular grammatical structure or communicative gambit with the hopethat students will employ these skills out in the field. A CLIL approach negates this issue and insteadallows students to gain exposure to foreign language as they learn the content without the need for
additional language lessons outside of the course. Target language exposure can be in the form ofeither input (reading and listening) or output (writing and speaking). Depending on the subject being
studied, output may or may not have a linguistic element. For example, in an art lesson, students
might learn about vanishing points and light sources in English but then produce a painting as output
with no linguistic element.

Advantages of CLIL
Since the year 2000, CLIL has gained popularity among educational bodies across Europe. Thishas been in response to the European Union’s goal of making students proficient in at least two
languages without the need for separate language lessons (Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D., 2010).
As students are able to learn content and a language simultaneously (Marsh, D. 2002), CLIL provides
exposure to the target language as content is learned. Students are therefore not required to have theEnglish language proficiency to cope with the subject before they begin their studies as the target
language is learned at the same time as the course content. Moreover, students are able to learn
vocabulary and grammatical structures related to subjects of personal or academic interest, which
provides opportunities for employment in specialised or professional fields (Casal & Moore, 2009),
essentially, killing two birds with one educational stone.
CLIL also motivates students to improve in the target language because the understanding of thesubject content is compulsory. Moreover, the students are not being asked to talk about vox pop
content (for example favourite movies, celebrities, things they like/dislike) where content is merely
used to illustrate certain language structures. Instead, they are focussing on a single subject (forinstance, history) and learning how to remember, understand, apply, analyse, evaluate, and create
content in a second language. This gives the students a sense of accomplishment as they engage withthe subject material and produce their own output.

Disadvantages of CLIL
One of the challenges that CLIL presents is that most learning materials and subject textbooks
have not been designed with CLIL in mind. This means that teachers have to alter or adapt existingmaterials into more CLIL-friendly forms, and this can take time. Moreover, as we will see later, CLIL
teachers need to have an awareness of grammar (Marsh, 2002) and the structural make-up of thetarget language, and this can be of some concern for teachers who are not well-versed in such
structures (Pérez Cañado, 2011).
There are also different models and practices of CLIL that overlap with other communicative
approaches. This makes it difficult to determine which model is superior as content and circumstances
can vary greatly in terms of context, curriculum, and educational body (Gabillon, 2020). Some
research into the benefits of CLIL maybe biased (Bruton, 2011), and that there is a need for moredisinterested research needs into the efficacy of CLIL within a curriculum, as well as, its shortcomings
102

CONSIDERATIONS IN CONTENT AND LANGUAGE INTEGRATED LEARNING (CLIL)(Bruton, 2013).

Discussion
Key Principals
The key principles of CLIL are Content, Communication, Cognition, and Culture — the 4Cs(Coyle, 1999). Content relates to the information, concepts, and content of a specific subject that is tobe learned by the students in a foreign language. Communication is the use of a second language toboth learn and express ideas on a given subject of study. It is the language in which students will
study the content. Cognition is the development and ability to understand abstract and concrete
concepts relating to both the content and language of a CLIL-based curriculum. This dimension isconcerned with the development of lower- and higher-order thinking skills with regard to the content
and language the students are learning. Finally, Culture exposes the students’ ability to reason
outside of their own perspectives. This helps them to deepen their understanding of a subject’s
content, others, and themselves. Together, the 4Cs form the basis for a Content and Integrated
Learning approach that relies on immersion, communication, exploration, and discovery to meet its
goals.

Thinking Skills
There are two types of thinking skills: lower-order thinking skills (LOTS) and higher-order
thinking skills (HOTS). LOTS are the students’ ability to remember, understand, and apply
knowledge, while higher-order thinking skills are defined by the students’ ability to analyse, evaluate,
and create their own output (Bloom, 1956).
For courses such as the language-led English Debate course at Rikkyo University where theauthor is a teacher, the students benefited from activities that first engaged their lower-order thinking
skills (LOTS) at the start of lessons before later progressing to higher-order thinking skills (HOTS)
to nurture a deeper understanding of the academic topics that were up for debate. During thewarm-up activities of the lesson, the students completed various activities that pre-taught difficult unit
vocabulary and scaffolded some of the functional language that would be used later in the lesson.
Then, as the lesson progressed, the activities moved more into the scope of higher-order thinking
skills.
An example of this would be when the students were discussing what a self-driving car should
do when presented with the dilemma of swerving to avoid some innocent people in the event of acatastrophic brake failure. The choice was to either protect the inhabitants of the car or the innocent
pedestrians on the street. As the students discussed each scenario, the individuals involved were
swapped out for people of varying age, class, gender, levels of health, and occupation or even animals.
It was observed that the students began to analyse and reflect on their prior answers to inform andformulate an ethical rule of what a self-driving car should do in such a paradoxical situation. They
also discussed whether their original choices had been fair and whether they should be reviewed orchanged. This pre-teaching of vocabulary, content, and concepts helped students progress from thereproduction of knowledge (LOTS) to the creation of knowledge (HOTS), which was the underlying
purpose of this progression of activities.

103

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Fat and Skinny Questions
To simplify this progression from lower-order thinking skills to higher-order thinking skills, ateacher should first consider the two types of questions — skinny and fat. Skinny questions focus on
the recollection and regurgitation of knowledge. Examples of skinny questions could be prefacedwith the following verbs: list, name, define, or describe. These types of questions encourage students
to either recall previously taught vocabulary or activate the students’ schemata to introduce a conceptthat will be explored more deeply as the lesson progressed (much like the artificial intelligenceexample above). Skinny questions can therefore be used as a warm-up to activate the students’ lowerorder thinking skills and introduce a concept in its most basic form.
Fat questions differ in that they require students to students to analyse, compare, contrast, andcriticise information. This requires a much deeper level of thinking, and time should be allocatedaccordingly to accommodate this. Examples of fat questions could be prefaced with the following
verbs: analyse, evaluate, construct, predict, hypothesise, reason, or reflect. These types of questions
are more open-ended than skinny questions and usually require an evaluation, hypothesis, selfreflection, or the formation of an opinion on behalf of the student. In essence, skinny questions
require lower-order thinking skills (LOTS) and fat questions require higher-order thinking skills(HOTS). Therefore, teachers should consider not only in which order they should introduce content
but also how to scaffold activities so that they can be completed in a communicative way together.

Lesson Planning
The Three Dimensions
When preparing to teach a lesson, a teacher should look at it through the three dimensions of
CLIL: concepts, procedures, and language. There also needs to be some type of input, process, andoutput. Materials should therefore be designed in such a way as to allow students to work together
to solve problems with minimal input from the teacher. To do this, the teacher should think about
which concepts the students will need to learn, how they will learn them, and which functional
language the students will require to meet all these expectations. These are outlined in more detailbelow.

Concepts (What?)
First, a teacher should look at what concepts their students are expected to learn. For example,
if they are learning art, what do they need to know? For instance, if they need to learn about primary
and tertiary colours, which content should come first? A teacher should organise these concepts intoa linear progression in which content builds upon prior content to deepen understanding. An artist
would know that the first thing to consider when drawing a picture is the vanishing point. Then, theymight consider where the light source is coming from. These progressions should be transferred tothe student, and first and foremost, a teacher should ask themselves “What do my students need tolearn and in what order should they learn it?”104

CONSIDERATIONS IN CONTENT AND LANGUAGE INTEGRATED LEARNING (CLIL)

Procedures (How?)
The next question should be “How?” How will the students learn these concepts? How can thematerials be adapted to make sure that non-native learners understand them? How can the teacher
ensure that the content has been understood? To answer this, the teacher should consider what input
they will use and what output they should expect. For input, should they use text, videos, images,
graphs, or realia? What are the benefits of each and which would be best? In the case of theaforementioned artificial intelligence debate, the teacher also used the image of a self-driving car
heading down the road towards danger beside another image of the same car swerving to crash.
Both options and their results were laid bare for the students to evaluate, consider, and weigh up the
options. For the most part, the human brain thinks in pictures, so images or diagrams should be usedwhenever possible to illustrate concepts in the most accessible format.

Language (Which?)
The final question a teacher should ask themselves is “Which language structures andvocabulary will the students encounter and be expected to use?” For example, if we return to ourlesson on artificial intelligence and the self-driving car, the students were pre-taught the vocabulary(‘swerve’) and grammatical structures (‘I think the [car] should [go straight]’) they would need touse before beginning the activity. This scaffold formed the basis for discussion in which students
could share opinions, reasons, examples, and predict the risks and rewards of their choices in acommunicative way.
Additionally, the students should be given scaffolds for functional language so that they candirect activities themselves. For example, a teacher might need to say things like ‘please get into
[pairs]’ and ‘please get into [a new pair]’ as part of their functional language, while the students
would use phrases like ‘let’s work together’ or ‘let’s swap chairs’ to find a new partner. In terms oflanguage, it should all be scaffolded to accommodate not only the content but the functions that willneed to be applied for students to work together and follow the teacher’s instructions.

Scaffolding Strategies
Showing rather than Telling
Students appreciate a scaffold of the language that they will need to accomplish a task. Moreover,
it is also beneficial to briefly demonstrate how an activity can approached using the second language.
Scaffolded language reduces the need for students to revert to their native language and allows themto engage with the content of the lesson in the second language. This encourages the students tothink in the same language as the content is being presented. What is to be avoided is telling students
to do something in a second language without showing them how it can be done as an example.

Modelling (Showing)
Teachers should demonstrate how to use the target language so that students can observe andunderstand how to complete activities in groups or pairs. When doing this, functional language
should be modelled with a student, and a language scaffold can be placed on the whiteboard or kept
105

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

somewhere consistent so that the students are familiar with it and it becomes habitual to use. For
example, the phrases ‘Let’s work together’ and ‘I think [X] is [Y]. What do you think?’ can be used to
set up and complete a variety of activities and also create a learner-centred environment. Students
benefit from language scaffolds as they show them not only what is required from an activity but also
how to do it.
On occasion, a teacher may inadvertently choose to model with a student who struggles with theactivity. In cases such as this, the teacher should first praise the student before swapping roles andrepeating the model. For instance, in its most basic form, if a teacher were to model an interaction
with a student such as asking their name, and the student was unable to answer, the teacher should
then take on the role of answering the question, having already demonstrated how to ask. The
participants would then swap back to their original roles so that the student can demonstrate themodel successfully.

Pre-Teach Vocabular y (Flashcards)
There are a few ways in which a teacher can pre-teach vocabulary for a lesson, but there are anumber of considerations to take into account. Vocabulary activities should be designed in a way thatencourages students to interact with each other to either organise, match, or infer the meaning ofwords together. The teacher should also consider the word class of the words and create individual
activities by word class. For example, one method that can be used is to have students organise
words into a Venn-diagram of positive, neutral, or negative words. In such cases, the use of flashcards
allows the teacher to share the flashcards between pairs and provide a scaffold of functional language
to help students discuss and organise the words into their respective section of the diagram.
Flashcards are also useful in that they can be swapped out and activities can be manipulated to be
more or less challenging.

Visual Aids (Images and Realia)
Visual aids, images, and realia are an incredibly fast and reliable way of introducing concepts.
For example, in the case of the self-driving car, it was pretty evident what was happening in each
picture, and this allowed students to visualise the hypothetical situation in a much more concreate
way than if I were to just explain it. First, I showed them the images and then explained what was
happening. Then, I left it up to the students to discuss the best course of action for the self-driving car
as the concept was clearly displayed in front of them.

Differentiation
Mixed Abilities
Another consideration to take into account is differentiation and the mixed abilities of students.
When planning a CLIL curriculum, the teacher or educational body needs to decide whether the
CLIL course will be content-led or language-led. They also need to consider how content or language
can be taught not only in tandem but also in a way that it is inclusive for students of varying or mixed
abilities. Using the flashcards from before as an example, these types of learning materials can becreated in such a way that allows teachers to manipulate, customise, and personalise activities for106

CONSIDERATIONS IN CONTENT AND LANGUAGE INTEGRATED LEARNING (CLIL)

different students during the lesson. For instance, if a student found the matching activity too easy,
they could be given more cards to organise and discuss with their partner, while a student who isstruggling could be given fewer cards and progress slowly from there. It is therefore wise for ateacher to anticipate and accommodate for potential challenges and design materials accordingly.
Moreover, activities should always be designed in such a way that they can be scaled in difficulty to
become either more challenging or forgiving, as required.

Assessment
Another consideration is whether the teacher is assessing content or language and whether thisassessment should be formative or summative (Richards & Schmidt, 1985). In strong CLIL, it would
be better to assess content, and in weak CLIL it would be better to assess the language. However,when assessing content, it is necessary to think about and avoid the pitfall of what is called the‘language-risk.’ Meaning, if a student makes a mistake, is that because of their language ability or
because they did not understand the content? A teacher would hope for the latter, as if they
understood the content but could not appropriately prove their understanding of it, then they are
inadvertently and erroneously being assessed on their language ability rather than their conceptual
knowledge, which would not only be unfair but it would also be an inaccurate summative assessmentof their true ability within a content-led CLIL course.
One way of negating this problem would be to offer multiple-choice or other closed forms ofassessment or even skinny questions. However, this introduces another issue when a teacher wants
to assess a student’s high order thinking skills (HOTS) as questions would generally need to be
open-ended.
Great care must be taken when planning a content-driven course to make sure that it is
meticulously planned backwards so that all the language of ‘Which?’ and grammatical structures
have been given adequate attention in activities so that students are well prepared for assessment andcan express themselves appropriately. This means that content-led assessment questions would need
to be either closed for lower-order thinking skills or written in such a way as to suggest a structure
for students to follow for high-order thinking skills assessment questions. Again, this goes back to
the three dimensions of planning (concepts, procedures, and language) that teachers should consider
when planning lessons or designing a course.

Conclusion
Teachers who adopt a CLIL approach need to focus on activities that allow students to work
together in a communicative and explorative way. Students need to be given the tools and guidance
to understand the subject of study’s content, and activities should be carefully designed by teachers
to accommodate a variety of learner types and abilities. When designing a course, teachers need toconsider the concepts, procedures, and language that need to taught to the students and how this canbe done effectively.
There are many parallels between my own method of teaching, the Communicative Approach,and Content and Language Integrated Learning in that all methods favour students learning throughan active approach towards communicating and completing activities among their peers. I feel that
this provides the most exposure to content and language, and through sharing ideas, students areable to gain a deeper understanding of the topics we discuss and debate in class. This helps to107

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

develop their thinking skills and express themselves as active learners rather than passive listeners.
I also prepare all my materials to facilitate such an approach.
Given the current lack of CLIL-dedicated content textbooks, it is often up to the teacher to adapt
textbook units and activities that have been designed for native speakers into something moreaccessible to second-language learners. Therefore, CLIL challenges teachers to be creative and thinkof the best possible ways to not only present concepts but also consider how to check that theseconcepts have been understood. This is what makes teaching fun and rewarding. With each lesson
taught, teachers will need to reflect upon not only their student’s development in class but also their
own.

108

CONSIDERATIONS IN CONTENT AND LANGUAGE INTEGRATED LEARNING (CLIL)

References
Ball, P. (2009). Does CLIL work? In D. Hill & P. Alan (eds.), The best of both worlds?: International
Perspectives on CLIL (p.32-43). Norwich Institute for Language Education, Norwich.
Bruton, A. (2011). Is CLIL so beneficial, or just selective? Re-evaluating some of the research. System,
39(4), 523–532.
Bruton, A. (2013). CLIL: Some of the reasons why … and why not. System, 41, 587-597.
Bentley, K. (2010). The TKT Course: CLIL Module. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives; the classification of educational goals. New
York: Longmans, Green.
Cambridge Assessment English. (2019). TKT: Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL):
Teaching Knowledge Test. Cambridge University Press.
Casal, S. & Moore, Pat. (2009). The Andalusian bilingual sections scheme: Evaluation and consultancy.
1. 36-46.
Coyle, D. (1999). Supporting students in content and language integrated learning contexts: planningfor effective classrooms. In J. Masih (ed.), Learning through a foreign language: models, methods
and outcomes (pp. 46-62). Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Gabillon, Z. (2020). Revisiting CLIL: Background, pedagogy, and theoretical underpinnings. Contextes
et Didactiques, 15, 88-116. https://doi.org/10.4000/ced.1711
Graddol, D. (2006). English Next. British Council Publications.
Ikeda, M. (2013). Does CLIL work for Japanese secondary school students? International CLIL
Research Journal, 2(1), 31-43.
Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE–The European Dimension: Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential.
Public Services Contract EG EAC, European Commission, Brussels.
Marsh, D., Marsland B. & Stenberg K. (2001). Integrating Competencies for Working Life. Jyväskylä:
University of Jyväskylä.
Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2011). The effects of CLIL within the APPP: Lessons learned and ways forward.
In R. Crespo, & M. García de Sola (Eds.), Studies in honour of Ángeles Linde López. (pp.
389-406). Granada: Universidad de Granada.
Richards, J., & Schmidt, R. (1985). Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. 3rd
Ed. Edinburgh: Pearson Education.

109

【Teaching Practice Report】

Opening the Door: Using the International Virtual Exchange
Project to Enrich Discussion Classes
Jon Mahoney
Abstract
This paper reflects on using The International Virtual Exchange Project (IVE) as a means of broadening students’perspectives and developing their intercultural competencies by allowing them to interact with other students indifferent countries around the world. In total, 85 students took part in the study. I utilized a mixed methods
approach to collect both qualitative and quantitative data in the form of class notes and a Google Form, respectively.
In general, students gave positive impressions about using IVE, stating that it helped improve the content of their
discussions, their motivation to study English and their written English. This paper closes out by suggesting that
integrating the IVE Project into the Discussion syllabus boosted students’ participation and satisfaction of thecourse.
Keywords: Virtual exchange, intercultural competency, global, online

Introduction
In the age of technology and information, it would seem inevitable that telecollaboration would
enter the education sphere. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the inception of suchprograms has quickened the calibration of platforms into language programs (Jager et al, 2020). In
fact, the Japanese business federation Keidanren recently placed the skill of intercultural
understanding as being on par in importance with English competency (Hagley, 2021). Virtual
exchange (VE) is a domain of online foreign language education that has experienced substantial
growth and change in the past number of years (O’Dowd & O’Rourke, 2019). It is a contemporary,economical and pedagogical approach for boosting global proficiency and intercultural competencies
through transboundary and multicultural learning environments via virtual platforms (Bijnens et al.,2006; Villar-Onrubia & Rajpal, 2016).
The participating students in this study were all enrolled in the English Discussion Class (EDC)
module, a 14-week course taken by all first-years students who are required to discuss contemporary
topics using a variety of marked language functions. The primary goal of the course is for students toacquire the ability to discuss topics fluently and to have balanced and interactive discussions about
current topics in English with their peers (Hurling, 2012). By frequently uttering these functions,learners gradually develop a stronger network of associations between these features while also
gaining a deeper understanding of the contexts in which they occur (Ellis, 2002).
Each class consists of nine or ten students, with each student placed into classes with otherstudents of a similar English competence. The semester began with conventional face-to-face classes
with each class being 100-minutes in duration. Due to COVID-19 protocols, all students were required
to wear masks and had to remain in the same seat for the entire lesson. I made seating charts foreach lesson beforehand to ensure that students were sat next to different classmates in the next
lesson. I would use the ready-made seating chart to guide students about who to speak to when
speaking practice was commencing, which was useful and efficient. Instructors were advised to keep
110

OPENING THE DOOR: USING THE IVEPROJECT TO ENRICH DISCUSSION CLASSES

a distance from students whilst they conversed, which made monitoring all the students effectively
in groups somewhat challenging. After each practice or discussion, I would give verbal feedback andwritten feedback via the whiteboard and facilitate student-to-student feedback. After three weeks ofteaching face-to-face, the classes were moved online. To scaffold the language functions that thestudents would use in each forthcoming class, I would add a Google Slide to depict the usage of thelanguage function. I would also embed relevant YouTube videos related to the topic of each chapter
in the textbook to help the students think more deeply about the topics beforehand.

The International Virtual Exchange ProjectIn the previous academic year, I had used asynchronous discussion board forums in each of mydiscussion classes. The main aim of these forums was to allow students the chance to practice using
the language skills of the forthcoming discussion lesson, as well as letting them share their ideas
about the topic that they would discuss in the next lesson. The results of using these forums werepositive. Students reported finding new ideas, thinking more deeply about the topics, and organizing
their discussion ideas before the lessons began (Mahoney, 2020). This year, I wanted to expand onthese forums by entering my students into the International Virtual Exchange Project (IVE fromhere onwards).
The genesis of IVE came from a need of connecting students studying English as a foreign
language (EFL) in Japan with students studying English in other countries and allowing them to use
the English that they are studying in class to communicate (Roarty & Hagley, 2021). IVE first began
in 2004, initially with one class from Japan and Colombia, and has now expanded to include 11
countries with around 5,000 students participating in the exchange (Roarty & Hagley, 2021). IVE has
been funded by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) Kaken grant and iscomplementary for participants (Hagley, 2020). IVE transpires on a Moodle platform where students
can exchange information in a variety of ways including text, pictures, audio and/or videos (Roarty& Hagley, 2021).
In the May-July 2021 IVE, 3885 students from a total of 18 different countries were selected andposted on the forum. The main participating countries were Japan with 2100 students (54%) and
Colombia with 1127 students (29%). The other most active countries included Indonesia with 211
students (5.4%), Mexico with 90 students (2.3%), India with 78 students (2%) and Turkey with 60
students (1.5%). A total of 5007 students signed up to participate in the project, but COVID-19 andother problems restricted many students from the different countries from participating fully.

ProcedureIn the first lesson of the semester, I introduced the students to the syllabus and the grading
system for the discussions class. The students were advised that 50% of their grade would be
evaluated on their general participation, which involves how much effort they make in each class, theamount of language functions that they use and their attitude towards their fellow classmates; 30%
would be from three speaking tests in which they are solely evaluated on their language forms usage
and 10% would depend on homework, which was a weekly quiz from weeks 2-13 about the reading
section of each topic in the textbook. IVE would run from weeks 4-12 in the semester, and I advised
students that this would be 10% of their final grade. During the 8-week duration of the project,
students were required to make a minimum of two posts per week. I reminded the students of this111

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

requirement when giving them feedback after each class via email and an announcement on the class
homepage on BlackBoard. I posted the link of the IVE website directly below the reminder toencourage the students. Further, I advised students that it was fine to talk about any topic and use
any English that they knew and that they should try to enjoy using the platform and use the language
functions that we would be using in class, such as opinions, examples, points of view, and follow-up
questions. My guidance was influenced by O’Dowd et al. (2020) who proposed that teachers need toprovide ‘pedagogical guidance’ when harmonizing VE into the classroom. Each student was placed
into a different group of around 25 other students participating in IVE. In this group, students wereencouraged to introduce themselves and share their culture with their group members. The Group
Forum was broken down into four main topics that would span the duration of the project. The topics
were as follows: Who we are (05/03-05/23); Student life in our cultures (05/24-06/05); The cultures
around us (06/06-06/19) and Gifts (06/20-07/03). Participants were also able to post in the Open
Forum, which was a place where all participants could post and interact with one another. The Open
Forum had 14 topics, including Art & Music; Your Future; Speaking; COVID-19; The News; Sports;
The Environment; Movies & TV; Travel; Food; Politics; Technology; Your Free Time and School Life.
Students were allowed to reply or post new threads on both the Group and Open Forum.
In week 7 of the semester, the topic of the lesson in the textbook was the globalization ofJapanese culture. Students were required to discuss which Japanese culture they thought was mostappropriate to share with the rest of the world and why. I gave the students a task that week to
specifically share their favourite Japanese culture on IVE. In this way, the lesson content directly
overlapped into their usage of the IVE. This strategy was founded from O’Dowd et al (2020), whosuggested that teachers integrate students’ own online interactions into class work. Since students
made a total of around 500 culture-related posts (including food, travel, music, favourites, gifts andmanga & anime), I believe that this was something that the students truly found interesting to chatabout.

Discussion and Findings
Student participation
A total of 1040 posts or replies were made by the 85 participating students, which is an averageof 12.2 entries per student. Twenty-eight students (33%) made 17-24 entries, whilst twenty-fivestudents (30%) made 8-16 entries. Five students (6%) made 25-32 entries and one student made 84
entries. Twenty-six students (30%) made 1-7 entries, which was less than the required amount for a
full participation score. These figures would seem to suggest that most students participatedspontaneously for their own recreation as opposed to participating only as it was a homework task.

Gender differences
Out of the fifty-six female students, thirty-six of them made a total of 84 posts (a post refers toinitiating a new topic on a forum). Twenty female students did not make any posts (36%). This
calculates an average of 1.5 posts per female student. The female students made a total of 700 replies(a reply refers to a student replying to another student’s post on a forum), which was an average of
12.5 replies per student. A total of 34,103 words were written by the female students, with an averageof 608 words written per student. Out of the twenty-nine male students, nineteen of them made a total
112

OPENING THE DOOR: USING THE IVEPROJECT TO ENRICH DISCUSSION CLASSES

of 56 posts, which was an average of 1.9 posts per male student. Ten male students did not make any
posts (38%). The male students made a total of 234 replies, which was an average of 8 replies per malestudent. A total of 12,219 words were written by the male students, with an average of 421 words
written per student. These figures would seem to suggest that the female students participated more
actively, by writing more words and posting more replies. However, the male students were more
likely to initiate new topics by making posts. This finding concurs with findings by Mahoney (2020)
that male students were more likely to initiate new topics on digital forum platforms.

TopicsThe most popular topics that students discussed on the forums included food (110 posts),favorites (90), travel (80), music (80), sport (63), culture (60), manga & anime (60), movies (56),
COVID-19 (56), and gifts (35). Students participated in around 50 different topics overall, ranging
from superstitions, politics, pets, love and being eco-friendly. This wide range would hint that thestudents appreciated the wide range of topics and the function of being able to create topics of theirchoice. One recurring theme was that the students would often compare the food of their local area
to that of other Japanese students. The vigorous participation of students in topics such as travel and
COVID-19 could be related to the current pandemic. Many students posted in forums such as“Where would you like to travel after the pandemic?” Students also posted often about how the
pandemic has affected their lives, whether it be studying or being unable to meet friends.

Advantages
In the final class of the semester, the students were poised with a discussion question: “What are
the advantages and disadvantages of using the IVE Project”. By the 83 students who were present in
the final class, 97 advantages were given. I will now cover some of these.

Usefulness to connect with foreign people and learn new perspectives
In total, 52 students indicated that the major advantage was connecting to foreign people:
It is useful to connect with people far away and share cultures from home.
It is great to communicate with foreign people who speak different languages for the first time.
It was a rare opportunity to exchange my opinion with people all over the world.
I could choose a topic I want to know about and discuss deeply.
Receiving replies from people around the world gave me new perspectives and ideas.
I could learn other viewpoints and broaden my horizons.
I could learn a different way of thinking.
Since students took lessons online from week 4 to week 12, they may have felt isolated fromtheir friends or society. Therefore, this digital platform provided them with a place to share theirideas and feelings whilst also practicing their English. Moreover, four students indicated that theyused pictures to illustrate their feelings and culture. The referral by one student that they used thewebsite as something akin to a diary would seem to suggest that the website served as a quasitherapeutic tool for some during the pandemic. This positive feedback has also been reported byJager et al (2021, p.22) who argue that VE offers “a more accessible, inclusive form of learning for all113

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

students.”
This positive feedback of authentic interaction supports findings by Hagley & Cotter (2016).
This result also correlates with the fact that 70% of students made the minimum of two posts per week
as I requested of them. In the Google Form survey (Figure 1), 71.4% of students agreed with thestatement that it was fun and interesting to chat to other students on IVE (see Figure 1).
Figure 1“It was interesting and fun to chat to other students on the IVE Project.”

Improving writing skills and learning new expressions   
Two other advantages that were prominently mentioned (7) were improving writing skills andlearning new expressions:
I could improve my writing skills, deepen my knowledge about topics and learn new expressions.
I could improve my reading and writing ability and get confidence and power in using English.
I could learn to express what I wanted to say in the discussion classes.
The main goal of this class was to furnish an environment in which students could converse in
English about subjects in that they are familiar with. These utterances suggest that not only did IVE
help students practice their ideas and learn expressions for their classes, but it also allowed them toimprove their writing skills by interacting in an authentic way. In the Google Form survey, 52.4% of
students agreed that IVE improved their English ability and motivation to study English. Although
29.8% indicated a neutral stance to this statement, 59.5% agreed that IVE improved their ideas and useof discussion skills in the classes.

COVID-19 news
A final advantage worth mentioning (6) was the license to discuss news, especially that which
was COVID-related:
It was an advantage to learn what is really happening in the world. We don’t really know when wewatch the news.
We could easily post and learn about the world. It was a good opportunity and a valuable source of
information during the COVID-19 disaster now.
Having the ability to get other sources of information was precious for the students. In theunparalleled times of COVID-19, different countries have been affected in different ways, and thenews is therefore reported through the lens of that nation’s government. Some 53.6% of students
114

OPENING THE DOOR: USING THE IVEPROJECT TO ENRICH DISCUSSION CLASSES

Figure 2“Seeing other people’s viewpoints changed my view of the world.”

agreed with the statement that seeing other people’s viewpoints changed their view of the world (seeFigure 2.)

Disadvantages
The 83 students in the final lesson expressed disadvantages of using IVE a total of 39 times.
There were two major disadvantages indicated by students. I will now discuss these.

Too many Japanese students  
The most prominent disadvantage mentioned by students (15) was that they were too many
Japanese students. Since the May-July 2021 project contained a total of 54% Japanese students, thiscomplaint was understandable:
There were too many Japanese students. It was strange discussing Japanese culture with them inEnglish. Talking to many Japanese students was not interesting.
There were limited countries. I would like to talk to European students.
Whilst this was mentioned as the biggest disadvantage in the final class, 74.5% of students
agreed that sharing their culture and learning about other cultures was interesting (see Figure 3).

Figure 3“Sharing Japanese culture and learning about other cultures on IVE was interesting.”

Therefore, although the students may have wanted more exposure to different nationalities
participating, it could be argued that they enjoyed learning some new aspects of Japanese culture115

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

from other Japanese students who lived in different areas of Japan. Since the topics of food andculture were very popular, this would seem likely to be the case. One student did specificallyhighlight this: It was fun to share food culture with different prefectures in Japan.

Website issues
The other main disadvantage expressed (14) was frustrations with the useability of the website.
Since IVE is still a relatively new project, this may be logical:
The web format was hard to use and interact.
It was hard to find replies to my posts.
It was hard to use. Twitter and Instagram are easier.
This concern has been highlighted by Hagley (2021), who voiced that some students may nothave adequate ICT skills to navigate the site smoothly. Despite this being mentioned as the second
biggest disadvantage, a total of 62% of students disagreed with the statement on the Google Formthat IVE was troublesome and not useful for learning English (see Figure 4). Only 15.5% agreed withsaid statement. Students were advised that they could use the website or the Moodle application on
their phones, but it is unclear if they heeded this advice.

Figure 4“Using the IVEProject was troublesome and not useful for learning English.”

Cultural differences and grammar worriesSome other notable disadvantages indicated by students included cultural differences andgrammar worries (3 and 4, respectively). Since IVE had students from over eighteen countries
participating, and this was sometimes the first time for some of my students to communicate withforeign students, this drawback would seem to have been inevitable:
There was a gap in value. We should read carefully what foreigners write and try to understandthem.
Chatting to foreigners was nuanced and hard to understand.
I was worried if I could accurately convey my feelings in English.
I could not check grammar, so I was nervous about making mistakes and posting.
The students’ concerns about making grammar mistakes concur with findings made by
Mahoney (2020) and Neilsen (2013). However, this drawback is mitigated by the fact that more
116

OPENING THE DOOR: USING THE IVEPROJECT TO ENRICH DISCUSSION CLASSES

students indicated that the platform improved their writing ability in the discussion in the final lessonof term.

Conclusion
In a time of great stress, uncertainty, and isolation, it has never been more important for teachers
to be flexible and to help their students achieve their study goals. The COVID-19 pandemic hasunderstandably caused a reaction in the education industry in exploring the delivery of online classes
and VE. With students taking classes at home and a constant flow of negative news from the media
about the ongoing pandemic, it may be difficult for teachers to produce inspiration and give students
motivation to try their best, especially in a language that they have been studying for over a decadealready. By entering my students into the program, which had some overlapping themes to the
textbook that they were using in the discussion class, I believe that this elevated motivation andpiqued students’ interest in the module. This quasi-recreational language usage would concur withEllis (2014, p.42), who argues that one of the most important principles any teacher should take into
consideration is to allow students to engage in “language play” and to form an “emotional identification
with the target language”. Overall, student participation in the project was active, and most students
did more than what was required of them to earn participation points in their score, suggesting thatthe platform went beyond studying and served as a place where students could make authentic
connections and express themselves during a time of great hardship.
Teachers who enter their students into VE programs must devise a means to provide students
for what Sauro & Chapelle (2017) refer to as ‘langua-technocultural competence’, which is where
linguistic and cultural abilities collide via VE platforms. Since no two VE platforms are the same andall interactions between users are unique, teachers must be ready to support students and scaffold
their interaction to make it meaningful. I would concur and suggest that teachers are obligated tooffer students pedagogical guidance, yet that they should also consider taking a step back to give
students the freedom to allow their language skills to grow organically in the VE setting, without too
much pressure of evaluation.
In the gloom of the pandemic, it has become necessary for teachers to find contemporary ways
to enliven their classes. Implementing VE could be a way in which they can attain the goals of
language retention, practice and cross-cultural interaction. From the findings of this study, it could beargued that IVE was a useful tool and is a project that will continue to grow organically in the age of
information.

117

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

References
Bijnens, H., Boussemaere, M., & Rajagopal, K. (Eds.). (2006). European Cooperation in Education
through virtual mobility: A best-practice manual. Europace.
Roarty, A., & Hagley, E. (2021). Analysis of Using Virtual Exchange to Develop Intercultural
Understanding in Students. Teaching English as a Second Language Electronic Journal (TESLEJ), 25 (3).
Ellis, N. C. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing: A review with implications for theoriesof implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in second language acquisition, 24(2),143-188.
Ellis, R. (2014). Principles of instructed second language learning. In Teaching English as a Second of
Foreign Language (pp. 31-45). Heinle Cengage Learning.
Hagley, E. (2021). Case Study 4, Japan: Incorporating Virtual Exchange into the English
Communication Classroom. In Language Learning with Technology (pp. 113-121). Springer,
Singapore.
Hagley, E., & Cotter, M. (2019). Virtual exchange supporting language and intercultural development:
students’ perceptions. In F. Meunier J. Van de Vyver, L. Bradley & S. Thouensy (Eds), CALL
and complexity- short papers from EUROCALL (pp. 163-168).
Hurling, S. (2012) Introduction to EDC. New Directions in Teaching and Learning English Discussion,
1 (1), 1.2-1.10.
Jager, S., Peng, H., Alba Duran, J., & Oggel, G. (2021). Virtual Exchange as Innovative Practice acrossEurope: Awareness and Use in Higher Education: EVOLVE Project Monitoring Study 2020.
Mahoney, J. (2021) Using Asynchronous Discussion Boards to Complement Online Discussion
Classes. Journal of Multilingual Pedagogy and Practice 1 (1), 56-64.
Nielsen, B. (2013). Students’ Perceptions and Learning Outcomes of Online Writing Using Discussion
Boards. JALT CALL Journal, 9 (2), 131-147.
O’Dowd, R., & O’Rourke, B. (2019). New developments in virtual exchange for foreign language
education. Language Learning & Technology, 23 (3), 1-7. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/44690
O’Dowd, R., Sauro, S., & Spector-Cohen, E. (2020). The role of pedagogical mentoring in virtual
exchange. Tesol Quarterly, 54(1), 146-172.
Sauro, S., & Chapelle, C. A. (2017). Toward langua-technocultural competences. In C. A. Chapelle &S. Sauro (Eds.), The handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning (pp.
459–472). Oxford, England: Wiley-Blackwell https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118914069.ch30
Villar-Onrubia, D., & Rajpal, B. (2016). Online international learning: Internationalising thecurriculum through virtual mobility at Coventry University. Perspectives: Policy and Practice inHigher Education, 20 (2-3), 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603108.2015.1067652

118

【Teaching Practice Report】

Classroom Management and Teacher Practice: Considerations
Following the First Year of a Remote e-Learning Course
Joshua Rappeneker, Satchie Haga
Abstract
This study examines student feedback and discusses the implications of classroom management practices on a
newly developed e-Learning course at a private university in Japan. The course was initially intended to be taught ina blended style: students would engage in autonomous language study online whilst also attending in-person group
lessons on campus. With the advent of COVID-19, however, and the concomitant restrictions of on-campus activities,
the course was rapidly modified to allow students to take the group lessons online. Student feedback on the course
was collected via an online questionnaire given to the students in the final week of the semester. This paper reports
on one component of the questionnaire: student feedback regarding possible improvements to classroom
management. The results show a positive attitude towards the course in general; however, there were five key areasin which students suggested improvements: explanations, speaking time, group work, task time and teacher
attention. Pedagogical implications and recommendations are discussed.
Keywords: computer-assisted language learning, blended learning, remote learning

Introduction
In the spring of 2020, Rikkyo University replaced its existing e-Learning course with a newly
designed programme. The previous course design required students to attend class in a computerlab once a week for 14 weeks, using the e-Learning software provided by the university. The teachers’
main task in the classroom was to help troubleshoot any problems the students had in using thesoftware. Whilst students were physically present in the classroom, they were entirely responsible
for their own learning.
The new course was designed to give students further autonomy whilst also providing them withmotivation and opportunities to use the language they were studying. Instead of meeting in theclassroom for all 14 weeks to study on a computer, students were now expected to study outside of
the classroom using commercial software on their own devices and attend three group lessons in theclassroom in which they would learn business English and practice the grammar and vocabulary
they had studied online.
The course objectives were as follows:a. To help students develop a practical communication ability essential to effectively function incross-cultural business contexts.
b. To help students become autonomous learners and establish good study habits via e-Learning(regular exposure to the English language).
c. To help students improve their TOEIC scores.
(Mishima, Rappeneker, Farmer, Machi & Paxton, 2020, p. 7)
In order to achieve these objectives, students were expected to:1) Complete 40 e-Learning lessons, and spend a minimum of 15 hours using the software2) Complete a diagnostic test and three practice TOEIC tests3) Attend the three group lessons and finish whatever homework the teacher assigns
119

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

4) Attend the first and final classes of the semester for orientation and review respectively
Almost every first-year student in Rikkyo University was required to take this course. The
majority of English teachers in the Center for Foreign Language Education and Research taught thecourse for the first time in Spring 2020.

Background
The rise in the number of COVID-19 cases in Japan in early 2020 meant that the university
policies regarding on-campus activities changed significantly. Many classes were now to be conductedentirely online. This semester was also shortened from 14 weeks to 12 weeks. Furthermore, teachers
had to learn how to use new tools, such as Zoom and Blackboard.
Within this context, the syllabus and course requirements for e-learning needed to be modified.
Instead of 40 lessons, students were now expected to complete only 30 lessons. Instead of 15 hoursof study on the software, students now needed to study on it for 12 hours. Further, the example group
lessons were modified to work online. Finally, e-Learning classes typically have over 100 students andthe original 4-group plan would have around 25 students in each group, similar to other communication
classes; however, with the reduction in weeks, the same class size was split into 3 groups of students
instead of 4. This meant that each group was slightly larger than had been previously planned.
These changes to the syllabus and course expectations were relayed to teachers at the faculty
development conference. However, it seems likely that many teachers were overwhelmed by theabundant changes occurring to all their courses. It is within this context that the course wasconducted, and the data collected.

Data collection
Data were collected from 3673 e-Learning students via an online questionnaire conducted in thelast lesson of the 2020 spring semester. All but 9 of the respondents were first year students (99%, n= 3664). The survey was emailed to each teacher of the course, who then asked their students tocomplete it in the last class. All respondents consented to have their data collected.
The survey was conducted in Japanese, and the vast majority (99.9%) of written responses was
also in Japanese. The survey contained 17 questions:1) The name of the respondent’s teacher (this datum was ignored during the study)2) Four Likert scale questions regarding student attitudes towards the software
3) Two Likert scale questions about the respondent’s effort level and autonomous learning4) A question asking on which devices respondents used the software
5) Seven Likert scale questions regarding attitudes towards the course and its effectiveness.
6) T wo open ended questions asking which aspects of the course were useful, and which could
be improved.
7) Each of the Likert scale questions were statements with the following five options to choose
from: 1) strongly disagree, 2) disagree, 3) neither agree nor disagree, 4) agree, and 5)
strongly agree.
A complete analysis of the survey is beyond the scope of this paper. The purpose of this article
is to examine findings that emerged from student responses to question 17 of the survey which
asked “このコースのどのような点を改善した方がよいと思いますか。” [“What aspects of thiscourse do you think could be improved?”] As such, the method for data analysis introduced in the120

CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT AND TEACHER PRACTICE:CONSIDERATIONS FOLLOWING THE FIRST YEAR OF A REMOTE E-LEARNING COURSE

following section will only detail procedures used for that one question.

Data analysis
Of the 3674 responses to the questionnaire, 1546 contained a suggestion for improvement. Eachsuggestion was translated into English initially via machine learning tools (DeepL) and followed bymanual correction of poor translations. Each suggestion was then given a descriptive category. Usinga constant comparison method of iterative analysis of the data (Glaser & Strauss, 2017) After An
inductive analysis of the various categories, the suggestions were finally coded into 6 major themes

Table 1
Code descriptions.
Variable

Definition

Responses regarding the way theteacher runs the classroom. (e.g., howClassroom
students are interacted with, howmanagement
groups are assigned and how muchspent on tasks in class.)

Representative examples
授業内でブレイクアウトルームでペアワークに取り組
む機会があったが、そこに至るまでの一人用の課題が多く、ペアワークまでたどり着かない場合が多かった。なので、授業内課題の量を減らすか、課題にあてる時間を増やしてほしい。[There was an opportunity towork in pairs in the breakout rooms in the class, butthere were many tasks for one person to get to that point,
and there were many cases where the students did not
get to work in pairs. Therefore, I would like to see a
reduction in the amount of in-class assignments or moretime allocated to them.]

Responses regarding the e-Learning
software.

自分の苦手な文法のレッスンを選んで学習できるわけではないので、そこを改善すべきではないかと思う。[You can’t pick and choose which grammar lessons
you are weak in, so I think that should be improved.]

CoursedesignResponses regarding the syllabus, or
how the course is run over thesemester.

Really English についてですが、オンライン上でカンニ
ングなどは難しいと思いますし、むしろ調べている方
が時間がかかると思うので12時間というノルマは必要ないと感じました。TOEICは素早く解かなくてはならないので時間をかけるよりレッスン数で判断した方が良いのではと。[As for Really English, I think it isdifficult to cheat online and I think it is more time
consuming to look it up; thus, I felt the quota of 12 hours
not necessary. I think it’s better to judge by the numberof lessons rather than the time.]

Content

Responses regarding the
もう少しTOEICで点数をとるコツを知りたかったで
appropriateness and difficulty level ofす。[I wanted to know more about how to get a goodthe content presented via the e-Learningscore on TOEIC.]
software, and in group lessons.

PhysicalResponses regarding the physicalimpact of online learning.

課題をやるときに、パソコンやスマホを見ている時間が長いので、目や肩がとても疲れました。[Myeyesand shoulders were very tired because I spent a lot oftime looking at my computer and phone when doing myassignments.]

Technical

Responses regarding technical issues
the students experienced with online
learning platform (e.g., with internet
connections, problems with Zoom, thestudent portal).

チャットに文字を打つのが大変である点。[Thethat it is difficult to type text into the chat.]

Software

121

fact

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

students suggested for improvement, with 36 subcategories. Definitions and examples of each major
theme can be found in Table 1.
Figure 1
Students’ suggestions for improvement
Physical1%

Technical
3%
Classroom
management
27%

Content
17%

Software27%

Course design
25%

Note. This graph depicts the breakdown of the 1546 responses to this question.

As can be seen in Figure 1, the two most common aspects of the course that students felt could

Table 2
Classroom management code descriptions
Variable
Explanations

Speakingtime

Definition

Representative Examples

重要なところは日本語で話していただくか、あるいはチャットにRegarding explanations and
書き込んでくれると助かります。[It would be helpful if you could
instruction language.
speak the important parts in Japanese or write them in the chat.]
Responses regarding timespent on inter-student
communication in breakout
rooms.

もう少し、ブレイクアウトルームの時間があればお互い確認が取れて安心すると思いました。[I thought it would have beenreassuring to have a little more time in the breakout room to check inwith each other.]

Responses regarding issues
Group work completing tasks in
グループワークがやりにくい。[Group work is difficult to do.]breakout rooms.
授業内で扱う予定の資料が多く、目を通しきれないことがあった
ので、資料は授業内で取り扱える範囲にしてほしい。また、課題は授業内に提出すべきなのか、その日に提出すればよいのか、授業時間内に提出すれば加点なのか、という基準を明確に示してほしい。[There are many materials that are scheduled to be covered inclass, and there were times when I was unable to read them. Thus, I
would like the materials to be limited to what can be covered in class.
Also, I would like to see a clear standard for whether assignments
should be submitted in class, on the day of the class, or during classtime.]

Task time

Responses regarding theamount of time allocated totasks.

Teacher
attention

大人数の生徒を1人先生が受け持っているという負担は十分承知しているが、グループレッスンで提出した課題のフィードバックを
Responses to teacher
少しでもいただけたら、次の学習につながるのではないかと思っ
feedback or direct
た。[I am fully aware of the burden of one teacher taking on a large
one-on-one interaction fromgroup of students, but I thought that if I could get a little feedback on
the teacher.
the assignments I submitted in the group lessons, it would help me
learn better the next time.]

122

CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT AND TEACHER PRACTICE:CONSIDERATIONS FOLLOWING THE FIRST YEAR OF A REMOTE E-LEARNING COURSE

be improved were classroom management (approximately 27%) and the e-Learning software itself(approximately 27%), followed closely by the overall course design. The focus of this report is to
examine deeply the responses related to one theme that emerged from the coding—Classroom
Management.
We focused this report on the findings related to classroom management for two reasons. First,
this was the issue that students reported on the most. Second, although software issues were also
highly commented upon, as teachers, we have limited ability to mediate technological issues. Thus,
we felt that a deeper analysis of the issues related to teachers’ classroom management would help
others mediate their experience in teaching the course as we have more ability to control ourpractices than the technology being used.
The coding procedure for this theme consisted of broadly summarising the primary concern ofeach suggestion (Table 2).

Findings
This section introduces the findings regarding student suggestions for improved classroom
management. Following this report, a discussion about the practical implications and future
considerations will be examined.
Figure 2
Student suggestions for improvement of teacher classroom management.
Task time…
Teacher
attention
7%

Group work
11%

Explanati…

Speaking time
15%

Five themes emerged from the students’ suggestions regarding classroom management:
1. Explanations: Simple instructions that are posted in writing and can bereviewed later
The most significant suggestion reported by students at 57% (n = 237) was related to having
instructions or explanations that they could understand more easily. Some students struggled tounderstand the instructions and then, as a result could not do their assigned tasks. Also, students
reported feeling unsure about their understanding of English instructions, for example, “英語だけで説明されるので、自分がやってることが正しいのか確認することができないので、日本語での説明が欲しいと感じました。” [“Since the explanation is given only in English, I couldn’t confirm
whether what I was doing was correct or not, so I felt that I wanted an explanation in Japanese.”]123

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

2. Speaking time: Regular opportunities for students to practise speaking English
The next most requested improvement, at 15% (n = 62), was a request for more speaking time.
Some students felt the lessons were ‘one sided’: (“講師からの一方的な授業になっている点。”[“One-sided lessons from the instructor.”], whilst others seemed to miss the opportunity to interact
with peers (“もう少しほかの人と話す（意見交換、discussionなどをする）機会が欲しかった。”[“I wanted more opportunities to talk (exchange opinions, discuss, etc.) with other people.]”). Thus,
they indicated they didn’t just want to listen to the teacher, but more opportunities to speak withothers.
3. Scaffolded group work: Clear goals for group work, and regular monitoring of
breakout rooms
Students also offered suggestions for improving the way that group work (in breakout rooms onZoom) was handled (11%, n = 45). Some students felt difficulty in speaking up either due to thebreakout group size or unfamiliarity with group members. For example, “初めて会う人とのオンライ
ン上でのグループワークは少し難しかったです。” [“Working in a group online with people I’ve
never met before was a bit challenging.”], “人数が多かったので発言は緊張するなと感じました。”[“There were a lot of people, so I felt nervous about speaking up.”]). Other students noted that very
few, if any, participants in the group work sessions spoke at all (“沈黙の時間が長い” [“Long periodsof silence.”], “グループディスカッションが皆喋らず、ほぼ機能していなかった。” [“The group
discussion was almost non-functional because no one spoke.”]). Finally, several students felt that thegoals for the group work were unclear (“もう少しグループワークの内容を分かりやすく説明してほしい。” [“I would like the teacher to explain the contents of the group work more clearly.”], “グループワークのときにもう少し話す内容を明確にしてほしい。” [“I would like the teacher to clarify
what we should talk about more during group work.”]).
4. Task time: Sufficient time to complete tasks, considering the challenges of online
learning
Approximately 10% of student suggestions (n = 43) were for more time to complete tasks,
especially considering first year students’ unfamiliarity with Blackboard, the university’s maincontent management system (“授業内で終わらせなければならないタスクがあった時、真面目に取り組んでいるのにも関わらずブラックボードの掲示板のシステムが十分に理解できていなかったため完了できなかった。先生や友達に質問する時間もなかったので、よっぽど時間が余っていない限り授業時間を過ぎたらハイ終わり、というタスクは課してほしくなかった。” [“When I
had a task that I had to complete in class, I couldn’t complete it because I didn’t understand theBlackboard board system well enough, even though I was working diligently. I didn’t have time to ask
questions to the teacher or my friends, so I didn’t want them to assign me a task that I had to finish
after class time unless I had a lot of extra time.”]). More generally, students suggested that they begiven more time to complete tasks in class, or less tasks overall. For example, “授業スピードが速くて、ワークシートが終わらない。” [“The class moves ahead so fast that I can’t finish theworksheets.”], “授業が早く、課題が追い付かない。” [“Classes are fast, and I can’t keep up with myassignments.”].
5. Teacher attention: Personal feedback from the teacher, individual attention during
class
Overall, 7% of students (n = 27) felt a lack of attention from the teacher during class, and whilst
124

CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT AND TEACHER PRACTICE:CONSIDERATIONS FOLLOWING THE FIRST YEAR OF A REMOTE E-LEARNING COURSE

the difficulty of individual attention in a large class was recognised, students still felt as though they
could benefit from more teacher interaction (“人数が多いということもあるが、一人一人の様子とかをもう少し気にかけて欲しかったです。” [“There were a lot of people, but I would have liked
them to pay a little more attention to how each person was doing.”], “授業に対する生徒の量が多いのでひとりひとりへの対応は少ないのかなと感じた。” [“I felt that the number of students in theclass was too large and that there was not enough support for each student.”]). Additionally, students
desired feedback on classwork they had completed. Teachers graded classwork on Blackboard, but
in some cases, they did not offer feedback (“課題の欠点をコメントして欲しい。” [“I want theteacher to comment on the shortcomings of my assignments.”], “授業で行った課題について、満点でなかった場合どこが間違えだったのか知りたいと思いました。” [“If I didn’t get a perfect score
on an assignment I did in class, I wanted to know what I did wrong.]”).

Discussion
1. Explanations & Requests for Japanese Instruction
The overwhelming majority of respondents were first-year students, with presumably little-to-no
experience with online learning via Zoom or Blackboard. To help reduce the cognitive load thatstudents in a new technological environment face, some basic steps could be taken:•Teacher instructions given ‘live’ should also be available on the learning platform (e.g.,
Blackboard) for reference for the students. This allows students to reference instructions thatthey may not have correctly heard, and to look up unknown words. In large classes, such ase-Learning, this also allows students the option to correct their own misunderstandings
without interrupting the flow of the class.
•Reiterating key points and instructions in Japanese may help students feel more confident
about their own understanding of the instructions and should be considered an option forclasses that require it.

2. Speaking Time
Giving students regular opportunities to discuss the content of the online lectures allows
students to confirm with peers that they have understood the assigned tasks. Additionally, in a coursethat mostly focuses on listening and reading skills, discussion allows students the opportunity to use
their newly learnt language in practical ways. To achieve this, teachers could do the following:• Schedule brief but regular breakout rooms, giving students a speaking prompt and a shorttask to achieve every fifteen minutes or so.
• As students in the e-Learning course only meet for a third of the semester, designing in-classtasks that prioritise speaking opportunities and use language they are learning could be
beneficial.

3. Group Work
Orchestrating online group work can be convoluted in the best of circumstances. At the start ofthe 2020 academic year, when most students and teachers had little experience with online learning,
it was particularly difficult. With that in mind, here are some suggestions to streamline the process:125

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）• Provide students with language to facilitate turn taking•Endeavour to check on each breakout room at least once per lesson, making sure to encourage
speaking and checking for potential issue causing behaviour (e.g., students leaving both
cameras and microphones off)•After group work, ask students to report their breakout room partners’ answers, to provide
motivation for speaking during group work
•Start classes with group-based ice breaking activities designed to reduce breakout room
speaking reticence•Show students how to call you for help
•Show students how to view all group members on one screen (gallery view)

4. Task TimeAs with group work above, a lack of online teaching experience meant that teachers were lessable to accurately gauge the potential length of in class tasks. Even with experience, planning out
activities for online classes can be problematic. The following suggestions may prove helpful in doingso:• Allow students to complete tasks outside of class time without penalty• Use shared collaborative documents where you can see their progress or Zoom’s reaction or
polls features to determine when students have completed tasks and adjust the workload
appropriately• Plan your classes flexibly, allowing for certain tasks to be omitted if time does not permit• Plan for unexpected interruptions due to technical issues

5. Teacher Attention
e-Learning classes typically have over 100 students enrolled students, with weekly group lessonsof more than 30 students. It can be challenging for teachers to continuously grade and give feedback
to in-class assignments. However, students desire interaction with their teachers, especially when
they are given less than perfect grades for an assignment. Some possible methods to achieve this are
as follows:• Use Blackboard’s built-in rubric system to quickly grade and give feedback to students.
• Reserve a portion of time at the end of online classes for questions from the students. This
allows students who want specific feedback a time they know they can speak to you.
• Encourage student questions via chat, and provide example language for asking questions(e.g., “What does ‘X’ mean?”, “Can you explain the task again please?”)•
Use online questionnaires such as Google Forms to allow students to ask questions
anonymously• While students are doing group work quickly go into each group and ask them if they
understand the task and encourage them to ask any questions.

Conclusion
This study provides a detailed analysis of one finding that emerged as part of a larger survey ofstudent evaluations of a newly developed blended e-Learning course. The findings indicate that126

CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT AND TEACHER PRACTICE:CONSIDERATIONS FOLLOWING THE FIRST YEAR OF A REMOTE E-LEARNING COURSE

students’ e-Learning experience could be improved with enhanced attention to five areas of classroom
management: clear explanations they could reference after class, ample speaking opportunities,
scaffolded group interaction, more consideration of the task in relation to the students’ contextual
challenges, and enhanced opportunities for teacher-student interaction that enables individual
feedback and for students to ask questions. In addition, this paper suggests a variety of strategies tomitigate the issues raised. Considering the relative dearth of online teaching experience at the startof the COVID-19 pandemic, a future study could follow up and examine what, if any, changes in online
student experiences have occurred in the last two years.

127

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

References
Carifio, J., & Perla, R. (2008). Resolving the 50-year debate around using and misusing Likert scales.
Medical Education, 42(12), 1150-1152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03172.x
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research.
Routledge.
Jamieson, S. (2004). Likert scales: How to (ab)use them. Medical Education, 38(12), 1217-1218.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.02012.x
McNamara, A., & Horton, N. J. (2018). Wrangling Categorical Data in R. The American Statistician,72(1), 97–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2017.1356375
Mishima M. (2018). Japanese University Students’ Evaluations of Teacher-Guided E-Learning. The
Journal of Rikkyo University Language Center, 39, 15–24.
Mishima, M., Rappeneker, J., Farmer, J., Machi, S., & Paxton, S. (2020). e-Learning Instructor
Handbook Spring 2020. Center for Foreign Language Education and Research. Rikkyo University.
Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (4th ed). SAGE Publishing.
Sullivan, G. M., & Artino, A. R. (2013). Analyzing and Interpreting Data From Likert-Type Scales.
Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 5(4), 541–542. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-5-4-18

128

【Teaching Practice Report】

Students’ Perceptions of Reading Circles in the EFL Classroom
Kathryn Mabe
Abstract
Reading circles require students to engage in peer-led discussions on a chosen text. A key element of reading
circles is that the learners read the text and prepare for the discussion from the point of view of an assigned role
(Daniels, 2002). Reading circles can motivate students to read and participate in discussions (Elhess and Egbert,2015) and furthermore, encourage cooperation and peer learning in the classroom (Maher, 2018). Four classes
taking an English Reading & Writing Course (RW1) participated in reading circles on three occasions and provided
feedback in a questionnaire administered at the end of the semester. This study explores the benefits and drawbacksof utilizing reading circles based on the feedback from 68 students, and the instructor’s own observations of theprocedure. Suggestions regarding the implementation of reading circles are also proposed.
Keywords: reading circles, literature circles, discussion, extensive reading

Introduction
First-year students at Rikkyo University taking the mandatory RW1 course in the springsemester are required to read extensively in their own time. Since April 2020, this course has been
conducted entirely online due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Classes of approximately 20 students areheld once a week. One of the goals of the 14-week long course is to “develop reading fluency andvocabulary knowledge through reading graded readers” (English Reading & Writing Committee,2021). Students typically demonstrate their reading by writing brief book reports or summaries,
participating in class discussions or giving short presentations, with instructors having relativeautonomy as to how these activities are conducted. This research explores a possible alternative
method of fulfilling this part of the course through the use of reading circles.

Literature Review
Reading circles, also known as literature circles, were introduced in the United States in the
1990s in L1 literature lessons at primary and secondary schools. Based on the concept of book clubs,
they were created in an attempt to engage students’ interest in reading (Daniels, 2002). Daniels
describes how youngsters “shared responses with their peers, listening respectfully to one another,sometimes disagreeing vehemently, but dug back into the text to settle arguments or validate
different opinions” (p.1). According to Daniels’ initial guidelines, students make a consensual
decision about what they want to read in various groups, and each student takes notes according toa certain role to contribute to the frequent peer-led discussions with the instructor serving as a
facilitator.
As the popularity of reading circles grew, the benefits of their usage in ESL classrooms were also
widely investigated. Elhess and Egbert describe how the interactive nature of the discussions
engages and motivates students (2015). A key element of reading circles is the students’ individualassigned roles. Maher highlights the value of their use in terms of collective learning, “thecollaborative nature of role-work allows the students to scaffold what they don’t know, into what they129

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

collectively learn with their peers” (2018, p.104). In addition, reading the text from the point of viewof one role helps to break down various strategies needed for successful reading into manageableparts for second language learners (Furr, 2007).
Various adaptations of the roles in reading circles have been suggested over the years. However,research by Furr is considered to be influential in a Japanese university teaching context (2004,
2007). Furr clearly outlined five basic roles and prepared role sheet handouts (2007). These roles are
the discussion leader, summarizer, connector, word master and passage person. The discussion
leader is responsible for keeping the discussion flowing and acts as a facilitator in the group. The
summarizer uses their own words to give a brief summary of the plot. The connector tries to establish
connections between the text and the actual world, such as between characters or events and theirown lives or the environment around them. The word master chooses five words or short phrases
that they feel are the most crucial to the text and explains their meaning. The passage person selects
important, interesting, or puzzling passages from the text and asks the group to share opinions aboutthem.
As reading circles were initially conceptualized for usage in L1 literature classes, discussion has
also focused on selecting suitable texts for ESL lessons. Furr adapted the initial procedure suggested
by Daniels with ESL reading circles in Japanese universities, proposing that the instructor rather
than the students selects the text, which could be a graded reader rather than an original text, toensure it is acceptable for students (2004). Shelton-Strong also recommends using graded readers inreading circles as they can be read easily (2012).

Design and Procedure
This section will explain the rationale behind the version of reading circles I used in this study
and explain the procedure for instructors who are interested in incorporating reading circles into
their own lessons. It also includes my personal reflections on the procedure. The following tableshows the schedule for the implementation of reading circles.
In order to assimilate reading circles into the pre-existing course requirements, I made anumber of deviations from previous research. I chose to use only four roles in the reading circles
Table 1
Class Schedule for Reading Circles
Lesson 1

Course orientation. Students took the Macmillan Readers online level test for homework andinformed me of the result through a Google form. I made groups according to the levels.

Lesson 2(1) An input session introduced the concept of reading circles, the roles and assessment procedure.
PowerPoint slides were used as explanation and shared with students for their independent reference.
(Please see the Appendix).
(2) Following the explanation, students met their groups in Breakout Rooms on Zoom, chose a
graded reader at the correct level from Macmillan readers online library and decided the roles.
(3) Students read the text out of class, completed their role sheet (a Google form) and submitted it
by week 5.

Lesson 5

Reading Circle 1. Students discussed the book in a reading circle in Breakout rooms on Zoom. They
also decided the next book/different roles for Reading Circle 2. I acted as a facilitator and provided
feedback at the end on discussions and shared good examples from Google forms.

Lesson 8

Reading Circle 2.

Lesson 12

Reading Circle 3. Students were invited to fill out a voluntary, anonymous feedback survey using
Google forms at the end of the lesson.

130

STUDENTSʼ PERCEPTIONS OF READING CIRCLES IN THE EFL CLASSROOM

rather than the five suggested by Furr (2007). As extensive reading is only one of many aims on theRW1 course, I needed to simplify the reading circle procedure to reduce the potential burden on
students. In addition, fostering discussion skills is not an aim of this course. Therefore, I ensured thatthe emphasis remained on improving reading abilities. I selected the roles (discussion leader,connector, word master, and summarizer) as I felt they would be effective even if the students werereading a low-level graded reader. The explanation of the roles was based on Furr’s role sheets as
described in the literature review in a simplified manner (2007). They can be seen in the Appendix.
Furr recommends that all groups read the same book selected by the instructor, proposing thatit makes post-reading extension activities easier to be implemented (2007). On a different type ofcourse, I believe this would be effective. However, after consideration of the differentiation in
students’ reading ability levels and limitations on the online availability of graded readers, I opted foreach group to select a reader by themselves according to their level. This also meant that it was not
feasible to follow Furr’s suggestion of temporary groups as it would be too complicated to reform into
new reading circles and then find a new text that no member had previously read (2007).
In his study, Furr describes the optimum number of group members as about five or six (2007).
As I was using four roles, the ideal number of students in each group in my lessons would be four.
However, it was not possible for me to control the number of members in each group to this extent
as the students had to be grouped according to the result of the Macmillan reading level test thatthey took online. Generally, six to eight pupils in a class were classified as pre-intermediate andintermediate, with a few members classified as elementary level or upper intermediate. However,with a little flexibility regarding the number of roles within each group, this did not pose any serious
difficulties. After forming the groups, there were six groups consisting of the ideal number of four
members. Eleven groups had three members; in this scenario, the discussion leader’s mandatoryrole was fixed; however, there was a probability of either a connector, summarizer or word master tobe removed from each reading circle. Two groups had five members. I asked these groups to electtwo discussion leaders for each reading circle. There was one upper-intermediate reading level groupwith only two members who chose to remain together rather than moving to a lower-level group. Twogroups initially assigned as four and three member groups became a six-member circle as one
student from the group of three withdrew from the university. I based this decision on individual
dynamics within the pre-existing reading circles.
Students were required to submit a Google form with the notes they made for their individualrole before each of the three reading circles and these were used as the formal assessment of thissection of the course. Even within a regular, face-to-face classroom environment, I believe thatmonitoring all groups simultaneously and effectively evaluating each individual contribution would
be unfeasible. In each class, there were approximately five or six groups simultaneously holding
reading circles in Breakout Rooms.
A summary of the process of a typical reading circle in my classes and informal notes taken frommy observation of an initial reading circle are presented below, followed by my overall reflections of
the procedure.
The essence of reading circles is that they are peer-led while the teacher monitors the procedureand intervenes only when absolutely necessary (Daniels, 2002). In the first reading circle, one or twogroups in each class needed encouragement from me to begin answering the discussion leaders’questions. However, in subsequent lessons, the reading circles were largely managed effectively by
the group members without my intervention. Overall, my impression was that students, in general,
greatly enjoyed the opportunity to discuss and share ideas in small groups. I believe that this was a131

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Table 2
Summary of Reading Circle Process
Approximate
time frame

Description of activity in the reading circle process

10 minutes

The discussion leader asks the group their pre-prepared questions and facilitates the discussion,
encouraging reticent students to speak.

5-8 minutes

The connector explains how they thought the book connected to their own life or the world aroundthem. Depending on the group, members comment and share their own thoughts.

5-8 minutes

The word master shares five words or phrases from the book that they thought were important ordifficult. They explain why they thought they were important and teach their group the meaning.
Depending on the group, members comment and share their own thoughts.

2 minutes

The summarizer summarizes the book in about one minute.

10 minutes

Students choose the next book and assign new roles. In some groups, this stage was done out ofclass through the LINE groups they formed.

3 minutes

I share good examples from Google forms and student discussions in the main Zoom session.

Table 3
Informal Observation Notes from May 13th, 2021
One group using a lot of Japanese. Silence after discussion leader asked a question.
A couple of very effective connectors. In one group of all female students, members very active and able to relate
the story (about a romance) to their own lives, “would you like a boyfriend like X?”. By the end, they were sharing
boyfriend stories and having a laugh in English.
Helping each other to understand, for example “what is holy bread?” and the vocabulary master explains.
Summarizer role seems difficult as we have not studied summarizing in depth yet.
The discussion leader part seemed the most effective in terms of creating an active reading circle environment.
The majority of discussion was prompted by the discussion leader.
Word master and summarizer do not seem to hold very communicative roles and do not generate much discussion.
Some groups could continue for much longer than set time, other discussions dried up before the set time.

vital opportunity for students to communicate, especially because most of the spring semester washeld exclusively online, limiting students’ opportunities to interact with their peers. A key element ofreading circles is having fun. According to Furr, “a spirit of playfulness and fun pervades the room”(2007, p.17).
In terms of the use of role sheets, my perception was that these were effective in encouraging
students to actively participate and cooperate together to understand various elements of the book. I
observed in particular that the role sheets seemed to benefit students of a lower level of ability or
those more reticent to participate in reading circles in as the content was prepared in advance.
One challenging issue for an instructor was the varying lengths of discussion within the reading
circles. This was partly due to the varying group sizes in this study and also factors such as individual
motivation and group dynamics. Groups that finished before the allotted time often needed myassistance to prompt additional discussion. Other groups appeared to be able and willing to engage
in in-depth discussions for much longer than the set time. Overall, however, as discussion skills do
not form part of this course’s aims, I believe the time I allocated, i.e., approximately 30 minutes per
reading circle, was appropriate.

132

STUDENTSʼ PERCEPTIONS OF READING CIRCLES IN THE EFL CLASSROOM

Methodology
Participants
All four RW1 classes involved in the study were first years at Rikkyo University and on Level 2
courses (TOIEC scores above 480). A total of 75 students took part in the reading circles from fourcolleges; Arts, Sociology, Contemporary Psychology and Tourism in the spring semester, 2021.

Instruments
An anonymous Google form, written in both Japanese and English, was used to collect responses,
which could be written in either language. Responses that were written in Japanese were translatedby the author. Information about the research was written in both languages and explained verballyby the instructor. A total of 68 responses were received. Students were asked for their feedback
regarding reading circles for the following areas:• how much they enjoyed them
• if they felt their reading skills improved through participating in them
• whether or not the roles helped them when reading the book• which roles they liked or disliked• if they felt reading circles helped them to improve any skills other than reading.

Findings and Discussion
Prompts 1 and 2
Students were asked how much they had enjoyed the reading circles and to give reasons fortheir answers.
Figure 1
Participants’ Responses to Prompt 1

I enjoyed reading circle activities
45
40

Frequency

35
30
25
20

39

15
10
5
0

14

13
Strongly agree

Agree

I'm not sure

1
DisagreeStrongly disagree

Opinions

A total of 67 students answered this question. Over three quarters of the respondents strongly
agreed or agreed that reading circles were enjoyable. Most of the remaining students stated that they
were not sure, with just one student disagreeing. Sixty-four students provided reasons for their133

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

answers (prompt 2). The reasons given by those who enjoyed reading circles primarily fell into three
categories; enjoyment due to social reasons, pleasure gained from the material being interesting andin English, and enjoyment of the discussions. Below is a selection of student comments:• Because I read English book[s] in earnest for the first time.
• I needed a lot of time to read stories, but I like to read stories and it was fun to share opinions withfriends. Also, I could make friends through this activity.
• These activities w[e]re [a]good chance to read some books in English. I got new thing[s] about
old stor[ies] and life in foreign countr[ies], and it was very interesting for me.
• I can enjoy talking with our group members. The talking was exciting and the time is not enough!
• Because I can be friend[s] with my team members.
The comments appear to support my own observations that reading circles were not only
valuable from a pedagogical viewpoint but also formed an important chance for students tocommunicate with their classmates, in addition to some students benefitting from longer discussion
time. Reasons provided by students who did not feel positive about reading circles centered mainlyon the reason of reading in English being difficult and a time-consuming activity:• For me, it’s [to]o hard to read long sentence[s] in English.
• I need explanation sometimes.
• The number of words was too much.
• I enjoyed sharing my opinion with group members, but it was hard to find time to read books.
These comments are pertinent as in my view; the RW1 course has a fairly heavy workload interms of assignments. Reading circles could place an additional burden on weaker students and theemphasis on them being peer-led may be less effective for students who prefer more teachercentered instruction.

Prompt 3 and 4
Respondents were asked to what degree and how they felt reading circles improved theirreading skills.
Figure 2
Participants’ Responses to Prompt 3

Reading Circles improved my reading skills
40
35Frequency

30
25
20

36

15
10
5
0

16

13

3
Strongly agree

Agree

I'm not sure

DisagreeStrongly disagree

Opinions

Of the 68 respondents, 49 agreed that reading circles improved their reading skills to a certain
degree, 16 were unsure, and 3 perceived the activity as not improving their reading skills. Sixty-two
134

STUDENTSʼ PERCEPTIONS OF READING CIRCLES IN THE EFL CLASSROOM

responses were recorded for prompt 4; however, some students misunderstood the question.
Therefore, those answers were not included in this report. Fifteen of the comments received
pertained to a perceived improvement in reading speed. Nine students felt it improved their
vocabulary. From these positive comments, it can be deduced that students felt the act of reading
graded readers improved their reading skills. However, no student mentioned the reading circles
themselves as beneficial in terms of aspects discussed in the literature review, such as learning frompeers. Therefore, it is difficult to confirm that the reading circles themselves were of value in this
aspect. Only a few comments were received from students who did not feel reading circles improved
their reading skills and these focused on the difficulty level of the task. A section of the student
responses is listed below:• These books have some difficult words, so it improve[d] my vocabulary skills and helped me infer
their meaning.
• I honestly didn’t read everything but I read by skimming. This helped me to read faster.
• When I understood the gist of the story, it was interesting but because there were a lot of characters,
I was often confused.
• The story was interesting but because it takes time, it was a heavy burden.

Prompts 5 and 6
Respondents were asked to what degree they perceived their role as helpful whilst reading andfor reasons to explain their answer.
Figure 3
Participants’ Responses to Prompt 5

My role was helpful to me when reading the book
50
45
40

Frequency

35
30
25

47

20
15
10
5
0

11
Strongly agree

10
Agree

I'm not sure

DisagreeStrongly disagree

Opinions

The responses to this prompt provided the clearest evidence in the survey; 58 of the 68
respondents felt the role was helpful to some degree, while the remaining students stated that they
were unsure of the role’s value. This data supports both my own observations of the value of the rolesdetailed previously in this report and the findings of previous research described in the literature
review. Students felt that having a role helped them concentrate on the book, gave them a purpose toread and helped them to personalize the story and interact with it. However, one student felt that therole placed an additional burden on them.
• I could think the story as my thing.
• [I] co[u]ld make target when [I] read135

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）• We have to focus on the books, not just reading.
• These roles helped us not only read the story smoothly but also have my own opinions and ideas
about the story. For example, connector should think about the similar parts of our lives andexpress it in English. And also, discussion readers pay attention to find the important points,
which can improve our reading skills.
• While reading the story, I was aware of my rol[e] and thinking about it. So[,] it is useful to think
deeply.
• The story in English is not easy to understand. So[,] I [couldn’t] afford to think about my role.

Prompts 7 and 8
Students were asked which role they preferred and why.
Figure 4
Participants’ Responses to Prompt 7

Which role did you enjoy being the most?
40
35

Frequency

30
25
20

36

15
10

12

5
0

Discussion leader

Connector

865Word master

Summarizer

No role I disliked

Roles

The most popular role was discussion leader, chosen by 36 of the 67 respondents. The connector
the second favored role, was selected by 12 respondents. From the reasons provided in prompt 8, itappears that as highlighted by Daniels, reading circles can serve as a book club where readers canenjoy sharing their ideas (2002). In addition, it appears that the roles encouraged some students toengage in critical thinking too.
A selection of the reasons given is listed below:• We can interpret books just like reading in Japanese, and it’s interesting. (connector)• Because I often do this in my mind but I have not told other people. (connector)• Because I can share some idea about the book with friends. (discussion leader)• It is because I can hear other’s opinions and it is interesting and surprising. (discussion leader)

Prompts 9 and 10
Respondents were asked which role they disliked and why.
Over a third of the 68 respondents reported that there was no role they disliked. A quarter of thestudents selected the summarizer and all of their explanations highlighted the difficulty of that role.
Twelve respondents disliked being the connector or word master respectively. The data reflects my
136

STUDENTSʼ PERCEPTIONS OF READING CIRCLES IN THE EFL CLASSROOM

Figure 5
Participants’ Responses to Prompt 9Which role didn't you enjoy being?
30

Frequency

25
20
15
24

10

17
12

5

12

3

0

Discussion leader

Connector

Word master

Summarizer

No role I disliked

Roles

own perceptions of the summarizer role. During the course of observing the reading circles, I notedthat this appeared to be the most difficult role for students. However, the skill of summarizing is a
key component of the RW1 course, therefore I believe it was useful for students to focus upon this.
Some of the comments from prompt 10 reveal the personal anxiety that certain roles caused. Thiswas enlightening to me as I had been unaware of potential stress caused to the students by the roles.
A selection of comments provided is shown below:• Because I couldn’t concentrate on the book’s content. (word master)• I mind telling words which I thought difficult to other members because others maybe think thosewords [are] easy. (word master)• I read a sad book so I couldn’t connect to my life. [A]lso when I connect[,] I become sad.
(connector)• Because it is hard to summarize the story. (summarizer)

Prompt 11
Students were asked if they felt other skills improved through reading circles and if so, whichskills.
Figure 6
Participants’ Responses to Prompt 11

Did reading circles help you to improve other skills (notjust reading)? If so, what skills?
12Frequency

10
8
6
4

10
7

2
0

Speaking skills

Vocabulary6

4

Summarizing Thinking skills

Other skills

137

3

3

Wri�ng

Explaining

1
Makingsentences多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Fifty responses were recorded. However, 16 of the respondents misunderstood the question,
stating that their reading skills had improved, and therefore their answers were omitted from thisprompt. The majority of respondents selected speaking abilities, which is not unexpected consideringthat reading circles are discussion-based. The fact that the students believed their vocabulary andsummarizing abilities had improved matches my predictions for the possible advantages of the roles
associated with those areas. Four students answered “thinking skills,” defining this as being able tothink more in English or to be able to empathize more with characters in the books. Even for acourse such as this, which aims to develop reading and writing skills, I believe it is beneficial tostudents when other skills also are fostered during lessons. As Shelton-Strong comments, reading
circles can provide “a collaborative, multi-dimensional learning platform” (p.222, 2012). Selected
responses are listed below:• I found many words that I didn’t know. My vocabulary was enriched.
• I think my skill to think in English [has] improved.
• Thinking skill. For example, read English book and think the character`s feelings.
• I could express what I want to say in English.

Conclusion
Overall, based on the feedback received and my personal classroom observations, it can beconcluded that using reading circles in class was valuable in various ways. In particular, it seems thatthe using roles while conducting an extensive reading program was beneficial in helping students topersonalize the reading experience. Moreover, the majority of students reported that they enjoyed
the procedure, which I believe is an important facet as it could encourage students to persevere withextensive reading. However, I would urge caution if using reading circles with students of a lowerlevel reading ability. The feedback reveals that reading circles could potentially place an additionalburden on students who find reading in English difficult. The use of reading circles with lower-levelclasses is an area of further potential research.

138

STUDENTSʼ PERCEPTIONS OF READING CIRCLES IN THE EFL CLASSROOM

References
Daniels, H. (2002). Literature Circles: Voice and Choice in Book Clubs and Reading Groups. (2nd ed.).
Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Elhess, M. & Egbert, J. (2015). Literature circles as support for language development. English
Teaching Forum 53(3), 13-22. https://americanenglish.state.gov/files/ae/resource_files/03_
etf_53-3_3_elhess_egbert.pdf
English Reading & Writing Committee. (2021). Teaching guidelines: English Reading & Writing spring
2021. Center for Foreign Language Education & Research, Rikkyo University.
Furr, M. (2004). Literature circles for the EFL classroom. Proceedings of the 2003 TESOL Arabia
Conference, Dubai. United Arab Emirates: TESOL Arabia. https://www.academia.edu/1982840/
Literature_circles_for_the_EFL_classroom
Furr, M. (2007). Reading circles: Moving great stories from the periphery of the language classroom
to its centre. The Language Teacher, 31(7), 15–18. https://jalt-publications.org/files/pdf/the_language_teacher/05_2007tlt.pdf
Garside, P., Beck, D., Hammond, C., Shrosbree, M., Truxal D., & Wakasugi, L. (2019). Reading the
Future. (4th ed.). Rikkyo University.
Macmillan Education. (n.d.). Macmillan readers level test. https://www.macmillanreaders.com/leveltest/
Maher, K. (2018). Not losing the EFL plot: L2 engagement through literature (reading circles) andproducing short stories (creative writing circles). International Journal of Applied Linguistics &English Literature 7(5), 102-105 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327684790_Not_
Losing_the_EFL_Plot_L2_Engagement_through_Literature_Reading_Circles_and_
Producing_Short_Stories_Creative_Writing_Circles
Shelton-Strong, S. J. (2012). Literature circles in ELT. ELT Journal 66(2), 214-223. https://doi:10.1093/elt/ccr049

139

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Appendix
Explanation of the roles in reading circles (lesson 2)/prompts for the Google forms
Reading Circle Roles
Discussion Leader
You need to make the discussion interesting and make sure everyone speaks.
Make at least six discussion questions. You can use some questions from pages 10 and 11 in Reading
the Future if you want but you must also have your own questions too!
Summarizer
You need to make a short summary of the book. Only talk about the most important events/points/
themes in the story.
Write your summary and try to keep it to about 1 minute in length.
Word Master
Find at least five words or phrases that you think are difficult in the story and IMPORTANT. (Words
you didn’t know the meaning of and had to check).
Teach your group the meaning and why you think these words/phrases are important
Connector
You need to think about how the story can be connected to your life or the world around you.
Think about things like:-Something that happened in the story that is similar to something that happened to you-Something that happened in the book that is similar to something in the news recently- A character in the book similar to you or someone you know.
Talk for approximately 1 minute about it.

140【Teaching Practice Report】

Debate Planning and Practice Using Argument Diagrams
Robert A. Smith
Abstract
Effective debate is predicated on the debaters’ sound understanding of argumentation. When attempting to teachdebate in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes, students initially require instruction in the fundamental
skills of argumentation and opportunities to practice those skills repeatedly. This article describes how Stephen
Toulmin’s model of argumentation and the argument diagrams derived from it could assist students in practicing
essential debate skills such as argument creation, argument comprehension and argument analysis. The practiceactivities are designed to fit into a task-based language teaching (TLBT) framework and reference cognitive theory.
Practicing the basic concepts of argumentation using this diagram technique may provide EFL students with asimple, flexible and easily repeatable method for acquiring debate skills. Teachers and students could both benefit
from applying some or all of these debate practice techniques in their debate classes.
Keywords: EFL, Debate, Argumentation, Skill acquisition, Task-based Language Teaching

Introduction
Debate can be a useful task to assign students in EFL classrooms as there is a strong focus on
speaking and listening. Newman & Woolgar (2014) state that “…the point of [debate in a classroom
environment] will be to develop the students’ speaking and listening skills [but] can also be a usefulteaching tool for delivering content and understanding across the curriculum” (p.7). Debate offers
not only a communicative element, but also the opportunity for students to learn and think about
unfamiliar content or re-think familiar content in a more deliberate and critical manner. The
competitive nature of debate can also be a motivating factor that encourages students to be better
communicators and better researchers. Debate is essentially “The process of inquiry and advocacy;
the seeking of a reasoned judgement on a proposition” (Freely & Steinberg, 2008, p.2). This process
is driven by argumentation, “…reason giving in communicative situations by people whose purposeis the justification of acts, beliefs, attitudes, and values” (Freely & Steinberg, 2008, p.5). In an
academic debate, it is assumed that both debate teams have an equal understanding of what anargument is and how to justify arguments so that a reasoned judgement can be realised. To ensure afair debate, all debaters should be able to recognise an argument as opposed to an opinion, construct(strong) arguments, analyse arguments and discover weaknesses in them, listen to and comprehend
opposing arguments, and present their arguments and rebuttals in a comprehensible manner. The
common element in all of these competencies is the knowledge of argumentation. Winning thedebate is dependent on sound argumentation and both teams must feel confident in their ability toargue effectively. If the debating teams do not have an equal understanding of this basic concept, one
team will have an unfair advantage over the other. However, many EFL students need substantial
practice in argumentation before they will feel comfortable participating in a live academic debate.
Language ability and confidence can also vary significantly from student to student so that one
student may dominate a debate or do more work than is required in a team that is supposed to becooperating equally. Practicing argumentation in a debate class is therefore beneficial because it
raises awareness of the central concept of debate, ensures a fair debate, and can give students
141

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

confidence in their ability. To this end, Steven Toulmin’s model of argumentation and specifically the
diagrams in which he represents arguments presents itself as a convenient and useful pedagogicaltool in EFL debate classes. Argument diagrams formalise the structure of reasoning behind each andevery argument by separating and clarifying the essential elements. Existing arguments can be
deconstructed into the diagram so that students can practice analysing logical (or illogical)
connections between the elements of any argument. New arguments can be constructed by filling in
empty diagrams with relevant information. Repeated practice of deconstruction, analysis,reconstruction, and construction of new arguments could provide the solid grounding inargumentation that may lead to more coherent arguments and improved language skills. There may
also be the added benefit of students becoming better critical thinkers as many scholars recognise aclose connection between proficiency in the skill of argumentation and the ability to think critically
about a topic. (Diyanni; 2016 Egege; 2021 Freeley & Steinberg; 2008 Swatridge; 2014)

Literature Review
Freely and Steinberg (2008) highlight the significant cognitive load that is required for argument
construction and analysis. According to Freely and Steinberg (2008), when preparing arguments fora debate, students must research issues, organise and analyse data, synthesize data, and evaluate thequality of information they find. They must also understand how to reason, recognise and critiquedifferent methods of reasoning and comprehend the logic of decision making. Subsequently, students
must then acquire the skill of communicating their arguments with words and be able to process thearguments of others quickly. It is not surprising that, “The creation of an argument is one of the mostcomplex cognitive acts students can engage in” (Freely & Steinberg, 2008, p.38). Teachers can utilise
task-based language teaching methodology and cognitive theory to help students deal with thiscomplexity. In task-based language teaching methodology, tasks should always involve a “pre-task”(Ellis, 2003) or a “facilitating task” (Willis & Willis, 2007). Essentially, this is a planning andpreparation stage that enables students to become familiar with what the goals of the task are andhow to accomplish the goals. This step also functions as a way “…to ease processing load and to pushlearners to interpret tasks in more demanding ways” (Ellis, 2003, p.249). Ellis also presents researchbased evidence for a positive effect on fluency and complexity when strategic planning (planningcompleted before the commencement of the task itself) is employed (Ellis, 2003). A learning strategy
specific to argumentation can also be beneficial to debate skill acquisition. “In L2 learning, taskrelevant learning strategies increase the likelihood of task success [and] have a positive spill-overeffect onto other task outcomes: affective judgements about the task, the language, and the self”(Oxford, 2017, p.72). Therefore, practicing argumentation using a strategic plan before doing aformal debate should reduce the cognitive load of the task and instil more confidence in students’ability to successfully complete the task. Argument mapping is conducive to use as a strategic planfor debate because the key elements of an argument can easily be distinguished and checked forreasoning and logic. This familiarizes students with the goals of a debate and makes successful
completion of the debate more likely. Toulmin’s model of argumentation (Toulmin, 1958), also known
as “Toulmin’s Argument Pattern,” has been applied to academic English composition classes in the
United States (Kneupper 1978; Karbach 1987) and in EFL writing classes in Japan (Oi, 2005). These
writers concur that using the model results in improvements in the logical organisation andcoherence of essay writing and note benefits for students and teachers. For example, Locker &Keene (1983) as cited in Karbach (1987) acknowledge the benefits for both teachers and students by142

DEBATE PLANNING AND PRACTICE USING ARGUMENT DIAGRAMS

stating “Instructors can use this model to show students the faulty or inadequate logic in theirwriting, but best of all, students can use the model as a heuristic to check the logic in their own roughdrafts” (Karbach, 1987, p.90-91). Although the studies mentioned above concern the teaching ofwriting, I believe that Toulmin’s model of argumentation can provide similar benefits when applied tothe teaching of debate. Toulmin’s argument model consists of three main parts: claim, warrant andgrounds. The “claim” is the thesis of an argument, the “warrant” is an assumption that links the claim
to the grounds, and the “grounds” is the support/evidence for the claim. Toulmin also identified the“backing,” “qualifier,” “reservation,” and “rebuttal”. Of these, the “rebuttal” and the “qualifier” seemthe most useful to debate practice activities. “Rebuttals” are possible objections to the claim, warrant,
or grounds, and a “qualifier” is something that limits and restricts the range of a claim. In an EFL
class, these terms may be difficult for students to remember so adapting some of them to those in theright column of the table below may be of some assistance.
Toulmin Terminology

Debate Class Terminology

Claim

Position Statement

Warrant

ReasonGrounds

Support (Evidence/Example)

Rebuttal

Rebuttal (But /However /Unless)Qualifier

Point of view/Viewpoint

Using Toulmin’s diagrammatic style and the terminology for a debate class, an example
argument for the proposition ‘Universities in Japan should return to face-to-face classes in 2021’ canbe represented diagrammatically in the following way.
Figure1 1FigureExamplea Completed
Argument
Diagram
Exampleof aofCompleted
Argument
Diagram
Position Statement
Universities in Japan should return to face-to-face EFL classes in 2021
ReasonBecause students don’t
effectively online.

Support (Evidence/Example)
Students are easily distracted bysocial media when they takelessons online at home.

learn

Figure 2
Example of a Completed Argument Diagram Used for Practicing Reasons

Debate Practice
Position Statement

Universities
in Japanshould return
to face-to-faceclassesin 2021 argumentation in a
The style of argument
diagramdescribed
above
can be EFL
used
to practice
number of ways. I believe it is useful to use when practicing all elements of argument construction,
Reason In this section, I will describe Support
analysis, note-taking, and presentation.
how the diagrams could be(Evidence/Example)
used to practice eachof theseskills.
Students
are not debate
developing
social skills.

Students’ posture and eyesight are negatively
affected by extended hours in front of thecomputer.
Practicing
reasons
andonline.
support (argument construction)
Students don’t
learn effectively
It is difficult for teachers to manage and monitor
One way to practicereasons
could
be for the teacher to provide a list of supporting evidence andstudents during
onlineclasses.

have students brainstorm one reason based on each support. This activity is limited in possible
reasons that students could conceive of, however, it could be a useful alternative for lower-level
143

Figure 1
多言語教育実践ジャーナル
第2巻 Argument（ JOURNALOF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）
Example of a Completed
Diagram

Position Statement
Universities in Japan should return to face-to-face EFL classes in 2021

students.
Another more creative Reasonway (figure 2) for students to practice
could be to give them a position
Support (Evidence/Example)
Because students don’t learn
Students are easily distracted bystatement and then have them brainstorm as many reasons connected to the position statement as
effectively online.
social media when they takethey can think of.
lessons online at home.
Figure2 2FigureExamplea Completed
Argument
Diagram
Used
for Practicing
Reasons
Exampleof aofCompleted
Argument
DiagramUsed for
Practicing
Reasons
Position Statement
Universities in Japan should return to face-to-face EFL classes in 2021
ReasonSupport(Evidence/Example)

Students are not developing social skills.
Students’ posture and eyesight are negatively
affected by extended hours in front of thecomputer.
Students don’t learn effectively online.
It is difficult for teachers to manage and monitor
students during online classes.

In order to practice support, students could then be asked to search the internet for relevant
examples or evidence that matches the reasons they have brainstormed. Alternatively, the teacher
could provide a diagram with a position statement and a reason in addition to providing a newspaper
article or internet webpage relevant to the topic. Students would then be asked to search forsupporting evidence or examples from the article/webpage and to complete their argument
diagrams. A separate box or space for the source (author, year, etc.) could also be added to thediagram and practiced if deemed necessary.

Practicing position statements (argument construction)
The position statement is in fact the conclusion of the argument. If we take the argument weused in the diagram in the previous section, we can make this relationship clear by rearranging thethree elements of the argument in the following manner, “Students are easily distracted by social
media when they take lessons online at home so students don’t learn effectively online. Therefore,
universities should return to face-to-face EFL classes in the second semester of 2021.” As a result of
this relationship, students can practice developing position statements by being given reasons andsupport and then drawing a conclusion from them. For example, a student might be given a reason
and support such as those in figure 3 and then be asked to complete a third sentence starting with
“Therefore…” This conclusion, minus “Therefore”, would be the position statement.
Figure3 3
FigureExampleof Argument
an Argument
Diagramfor Practicing
Position
Statements
Exampleof an
DiagramUsed Used
for Practicing
Position
Statements
ReasonStudents don’t learn effectively
online.

Therefore,

Support (Evidence/Example)
Students are easily distracted
by social media when theytake lessons online at home.

Position Statement (Claim)

144

Figure 3
PLANNING AND PRACTICE USING ARGUMENT DIAGRAMS
Example ofDEBATE
an Argument
Diagram Used for Practicing Position Statements

ReasonSupport (Evidence/Example)
Students don’t learn effectively
Students are easily distracted
From the reason
and support in figure 3, students could
possibly deduce a position statement,
online.
by social media when theytakelearning
lessons online
at home.
such as “(Therefore) learning in the classroom is better than
online.”When creating andpracticing position statements, students may find it helpful to include a viewpoint such as, “From a
Position(Claim) in this manner, information that may
health/economic/safety point of view…”.
If Statement
not qualified
Therefore,
otherwise be implicit becomes explicit. An example and reasons for this will be described in the next
section on practicing rebuttals.

Practicing rebuttal (argument analysis)
Students need to understand that it is necessary to look at all three parts of the argument when
formulating a rebuttal and to attack the reason/claim connection and/or to attack the support if it isunreliable or untruthful. Rebuttals can be practiced by including another space to the three original
spaces. This rebuttal space can be labelled something along the lines of “but”, “however” or “unless”.
A completed rebuttal for the proposition “Universities in Japan should return to face-to-face EFL
classes in 2021” can be represented diagrammatically in the following manner.
Figure4 4FigureExamplea Completed
Argument
Diagram
Includinga Rebuttal
Exampleof aofCompleted
Argument
Diagram
Includinga Rebuttal
Position Statement (Claim)
Universities in Japan should return to face-to-face EFL classes in 2021
ReasonStudents don’t learn effectively
online.

Support (Evidence/Example)
Students are easily distracted
by social media when theytake lessons online.
BUT
Students get distracted inface-to-face classes also andare not concentrating on
studying all the time.

Students can practice analyzing and writing rebuttals to arguments by filling in a blank rebuttal
field after reviewing the previous three elements. Completed arguments could be supplied by theteacher or students could utilize previously completed diagrams from their own practice of creatingarguments. It is worthwhile spending quite a lot of time on practicing rebuttal as this skill is essential
to debate and can easily be practiced in the wrong way. For example, consider the argument andrebuttal in figure 5.
Figure 55
FigureExampleArgumentDiagram
DiagramIncluding
Including
Erroneous
Rebuttal
Exampleofofaa Completed
Completed Argument
an an
Erroneous
Rebuttal
Position Statement (Claim)
Universities in Japan should return to face-to-face EFL classes in 2021
ReasonStudents don’t learn effectively
online.

Support (Evidence/Example)
Students are easily distracted
by social media when they takelessons online.
BUT
Students can save money because
they don’t have to travel to andfrom university.

Figure 6

145
Example of a Completed Argument Diagram Including a Point of View
Position Statement (Claim)
From a learning point of view, Universities in Japan should return to face-to-face多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

When viewed simply as a rebuttal to the position statement, the rebuttal above seems to besatisfactory, however, the rebuttal does not address the reason of the argument and the implicationthat classroom learning is superior to online learning. The central idea of this argument concerns theeffect on learning. In the above example, the cost of travelling to and from university is irrelevant toFigure 5
whether or not learning improves in an online or face-to-face environment. However, many students
Example of a Completed Argument Diagram Including an Erroneous Rebuttal
may falsely believethat “students can save money” is an effective rebuttal to “universities should
Position
Statement (Claim)
return to face-to-face EFL classes.” Using
the diagram,teachers can easily exemplify such erroneous
Universities in Japan should return to face-to-face EFL classes in 2021
rebuttal suggestions and highlight inferences that may not be immediately clear to students.
Moreover, adding a viewpointof weak argumentation. When
Reason can help students avoid such examples
Support (Evidence/Example)
Students
don’t
learn
effectively
Students
areeasilydistracted
formulating rebuttals, students should keep this viewpoint in mind andadd
it to the beginning of
online.
by social media when they taketheir rebuttal so that connections to the reasoning of the argument
areexplicit.
Teachers can referlessons online.
students back to this viewpoint if/when students provide vague orBUT
irrelevant rebuttals during
Students
can savemoney because
practice. A completed rebuttal practice (including the revised
positionstatement)
would resemble
they don’t have to travel to andthat as represented in figure 6.
from university.
Figure6 6
FigureExamplea Completed
Argument
Diagram
Including
Example of aofCompleted
Argument
Diagram
Includinga PointaofPoint
View of View
Position Statement (Claim)
From a learning point of view, Universities in Japan should return to face-to-face
EFL classes in 2021
ReasonStudents don’t learn effectively
online.

Support (Evidence/Example)
Students are easily distracted
by social media when theytake lessons online.
BUT
From a learning point of view
students get distracted inface-to-face classes also andare not concentrating on
studying all the time.

Qualifying the position statement can also make it easier to analyse and adjust rebuttals thatmight otherwise be weak. For example, by considering the viewpoint more closely the rebuttal infigure 5 could be changed to the following. “But (from a learning point of view) students don’t haveto spend time travelling to and from university and therefore should be able to get more sleep and be
more alert when they are taking lessons online.” The rebuttal now has a relevant connection to theeffect of online classes on learning. Before a debate, students can perform this sort of analyticalpractice with their own arguments in an attempt to predict possible rebuttals and reinforce their own
arguments.

Practice speaking/fluency (argument presentation)
The practice activities that I have described so far have a clear focus on thinking and writing
down ideas. After having done some written argument practice, students also need opportunities topractice argumentation through speaking. Creating cards from argument diagrams can facilitate avariety of communicative interactions. As an initial starting point, (especially for lower-level students)
teachers could create practice cards with various arguments already written on them. For example,
146

DEBATE PLANNING AND PRACTICE USING ARGUMENT DIAGRAMS

10 simple arguments are printed onto argument diagrams. Three sets of cards could then be createdfrom those arguments; one set of position statements, one set of reasons, and one set of supporting
evidence/examples. Once the basic idea of arguments (the idea of having three parts) has been
introduced to the class, groups of students would then be asked to recreate the 10 arguments bycommunicating the information on the cards. After the groups have finished matching theirarguments, each group could move around and look over the other groups’ work to check forsimilarities or differences. Another idea is to create two sets of cards; one set of argument cards
containing a position statement, reason, and support and one set of cards containing rebuttals to
those arguments. In pairs, one student has argument cards and the other has rebuttal cards. The aim
is for the two students to match correctly the arguments and rebuttals by communicating the content
of their cards to each other. This activity could lead into a less structured ‘ping-pong debate’ activity
where students could use rebuttals they remember from the previous card game or come up with
their own ideas impromptu. Another slightly more advanced card idea could be to provide cards withvarious position statements related to level appropriate topics. One student in the group (preferably
a group of three) would start by reading the position statement and the student on their left would
then say a reason for or against the proposition. The next student on the left would give an example
to support the reason. In a group of four, the fourth student could give a rebuttal. Points could beawarded for contributions. Students can reinforce their knowledge of the basic elements ofargumentation while they practice presenting their arguments before a formal academic debate. As
preparation, diagrams can be used as note cards in the same way as note cards are used to give a
presentation. For example, completed argumentation cards could be used in conjunction with debatephrase cards (cards which include useful debate phrases) and practiced as a mock debate in teams.
Ultimately, the aim is to have students use the cards as a scaffold when they first begin speaking but
then to gradually introduce practice activities in which they rely less and less on the cards andconcentrate more on their speaking fluency.

Practicing listening for specific information and note-taking(argument comprehension)
It is necessary for students to take detailed notes when listening to other debaters either as an
opposing team member or as an audience member. To practice this skill, blank argument diagrams
can be given to the listeners and used as note-taking templates. Specific information related to the
proposition, reason, and support for each argument can then be easily recorded. While listening,some information may be incomprehensible and a blank or incomplete space will be left on theirnote-taking template. In this case, when the speaker concludes, it is easy for the listener to recognize
which piece of information is missing and then ask the speaker for repetition or clarification. Students
can also practice asking comprehension checking questions once all the template fields have been
filled, to ensure the information they recorded is as the speakers intended. Thus, through thisactivity, students can practice both note-taking and cross examination skills.

Summar y
In this paper, I have described the reasons why I believe Toulmin’s argument diagrams areuseful for practicing debate skills in EFL classes. I have also outlined how the diagrams could beapplied to the practice of argument construction, analysis, presentation, and comprehension. Debate
147

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

is an extremely complex task that requires many hours of practice. Incorporating this model ofargumentation into the planning and practice of debate could enable students to manage the taskcomplexity and provide them with a common springboard from which to learn effectively.

148

DEBATE PLANNING AND PRACTICE USING ARGUMENT DIAGRAMS

References
Diyanni, R. (2016). Critical and creative thinking: A brief guide for teachers. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell
Egege, S. (2021). Becoming a critical thinker. London: Red Globe Press
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Freeley, A. J. & Steinberg, D. L. (2008). Argumentation and debate: Critical thinking for reasoned
decision making. (12th ed.). Boston: Cengage Learning
Karbach, J. (1987). Using Toulmin’s Model of Argumentation. Journal of Teaching Writing, 6(1),81-91. Retrieved from https://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/teachingwriting/article/view/821
Kneupper, C. W. (1978). Teaching Argument: An Introduction to the Toulmin Model, College
Composition and Communication, 29(3), 237-241. Retrieved from https://publicdiscourse.unc.
edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/09/Toulmin-Model.pdf
Newman, D. & Woolgar, B. (Eds.). (2014). Pros and cons: A debater’s handbook. (19th ed.). London:
Routledge
Oi, K. (2005). Teaching Argumentative Writing to Japanese EFL Students Using the Toulmin Model,
JACET Bulletin, 41, 123-140 Retrieved from https://dl.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/10501483
Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching language learning strategies: Self-regulation in context.
(2nd ed.). New York: Routledge
Swatridge, C. (2014). Oxford guide to effective argument and critical thinking. Oxford: Oxford
University Press
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Willis, D. & Wills, J. (2007). Doing task-based teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press

149

【Teaching Practice Report】

The Effects of Question Type on Student Discussions
Russell Minshull
Abstract
As teachers, the questions we use play an important role in our practice. When teaching English conversations or
discussions, the questions we ask our students will strongly influence the content of their conversations. For
instance, it is often stated that open-ended questions will generate more dialogue than closed-ended questions.
Considering this significance, teachers should experiment with various question types to determine which ones
best suit their needs. Throughout this semester, I adapted my in-house textbook using different types of question,with the goal of eliciting nuanced discussions and observing the impact of different question types on criticalthinking and student talk-time.
Keywords: Open-questions, Closed-Questions, Nuance, Critical Thinking, Student Talk-Time

Introduction
This paper is a reflection on a semester of a private university in Japan. The purpose of the study
was to experiment with different types of discussion questions in order to investigate their impact on
student discussions, primarily in terms of critical thinking and how much dialogue is produced.
The course in question is mandatory for all first-year students. The main designated course
outcomes are building spoken fluency and communicative confidence in English, with faculty placinga high emphasis on student talk-time in order to gain practical experience in communicating in
English. There are also peripheral goals to the course, such as providing students with criticalthinking practice.
Teachers use a mandatory in-house textbook, which is structured to maximise student talk time
during lessons. This textbook is called What’s Your Opinion? (Fearn-Wannan, J. et al. 2021).
Throughout the paper I refer to this textbook.
Every week, students participate in two group discussions, which account for the majority of thetalk time, with each discussion lasting between 12 and 20 minutes depending on the size of the group.
Each discussion is generally structured in the manner, with a preparation activity leading to two
discussion questions.
In my previous experience teaching on the course, my feeling was that the questions used in the
textbook tend to give mixed results. Some questions are written in an open-ended way. In my opinion,
this type of question works well in a discussion. Students tend to produce a lot of dialogue, discuss
multiple lines of inquiry, and give the impression that they have thought quite deeply about the topic.
Table 1
Examples of open-questions from the What’s Your Opinion? Textbook“What are some good ways companies can provide a good work-life balance?”“When is a good time to study abroad?”“What are some good things to do after high school?”“How can student’s use social media more safely?”“What are some good solutions to the aging population problem”

150

THE EFFECTS OF QUESTION TYPE ON STUDENT DISCUSSIONS

There are a number of questions in the textbook that are not so open- ended. On several
occasions, questions are binary in nature, requiring only an either/or response. There are also a few
questions that are closed, requiring only a yes/no response.
Table 2
Examples of closed and binary questions in the What’s Your Opinion? textbook“Should all students get a part-time job?”“Should everyone study abroad?”“Is it important for everyone to experience living abroad?”“Is social media good or bad for university students?”“Should the Japanese government introduce other systems (apart from the exam and recommendation
system) for entering university?”“Is it easy or difficult for university students to be independent?”

While it could be stated that such questions give students an easy chance for rote-like practiceof target phrases, or could push them into expanding discussions on their own, I find that groups do
not usually take the initiative to do this. On the contrary, I find that this kind of question is often
counter- productive.
Students can only provide the either/or answer, a framework that limits discussions in terms ofideas. Groups often cover similar ground in discussions, and their answers are often similar or
repetitive. I believe such discussions are not particularly interesting for students, and that they areprobably not getting much out of them. While it is not a stated outcome of the course, I believe thatstudents learn things from each other about topics as they discuss them, and that binary questions
limit this learning. In turn, students probably find these questions unrewarding to discuss. As Rizzo,
Fairley and Nostas (2021:2) state, if we want students to learn something about the issues they are
discussing, then we might need to ask questions that encourage them to think in a more nuancedway.
Moreover, open questions make us think more deeply than binary questions. Teachers are often
advised to use open questions to enhance their students’ critical thinking skills (Sarwanto., Fajari, L.
E. W., & Chumdari: 2021). As stated by Dr Ken Beatty (2017, para 13) “with open-ended questions, a
simple binary answer is not possible, and the conversational expectation is that you will think moredeeply on the question.” Therefore, it follows that by asking open-ended rather than binary questions
to students, we can expect to enhance the level of critical thinking that goes into their discussions.
Furthermore, when there are limited angles to explore, the discussion tends to be brief. As aresult, student talk-time can be limited. In the main discussion each week, a group of four needs totalk for 16 minutes, and I have sometimes found that groups will fall short especially if one of thequestions does not generate enough content. It is often recommended that teachers use open
questions in the classroom when looking for a communicative classroom that is rich in dialogue (e.g.,Çakır, H. & Cengiz, Ö., 2016), because with more ideas to explore there tends to be more points todiscuss. This leads to more opportunities for interaction. Therefore, in student discussions, it is likelythat open questions generate more dialogue than binary questions, because there are more possiblelines of inquiry and more possible topics to discuss.
In my experience, even where questions suggest a more in-depth comparison between options,discussions are often quite limited. For example, the textbook question “Which is better – theentrance exam system or the recommendation system?” could be a chance for students to conduct anin-depth comparison between the two systems, but instead, each student tends to present anargument for the system they prefer, before passing the turn onto the next group member. In my151

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

opinion, this often leads to a lack of depth in discussions, as groups have no incentive to explore
topics beyond these initial answers. Moreover, many students, in my experience, prefer to answer
textbook questions as directly as possible, rarely seeking complexity in the subject. However, if we
consider our students’ age and educational experience, this is perhaps to be expected. As first-year
Japanese university students, many do not have any experience with group discussions in English,
and most evidence points toward a lack of confidence in this cohort when it comes to speaking
English (e.g., Templin, 1995). Because of their lack of experience and communicative confidence,
students may be hesitant to take chances in conversations and instead conform to the textbook’s
instructions.
Moreover, because students have limited experience in this kind of academic environment, it ishighly unlikely they have practiced the skill of analysing academic questions. Various English for
Academic Purposes textbooks and student/teacher resources, such as Uncovering EAP: How to
Teach Academic Reading and Writing (McCarter &Jakes, 2009) and Barron’s Writing for the IELTS(Lougheed, L, 2016), feature sections or even chapters on how to analyse academic questions. Thissuggests that understanding questions is a skill in its own right, and it follows that someone untrained
might not look to answer a question in a nuanced way. Therefore, as our students are inexperienced
in the academic environment, we should not expect them to discuss much beyond what is literally
asked in the question.
If this is the case, then it is understandable if students give short answers to binary questions.
Therefore, if we want them to discuss topics in more depth, then we have to write questions thatguide them in that direction.
In summary, the purpose of this project is to provide students with questions that would
encourage more nuanced discussions, critical thinking, and dialogue, which, in turn, would help
them achieve these goals despite their lack of experience in analyzing academic questions

Questions
While a systematic approach to rewriting the questions was considered, eventually I opted toadapt the discussions on a weekly basis. This was done to provide a flexible approach to the project
and to avoid having to completely redesign the textbook.
However, there were three question types that I favoured during the project. These wereadvantages and disadvantages questions, problem-solution questions, and hypothetical questions.
The reasons for using the nominated question types are explained, and examples of the adaptations
made are shown in tables.

Advantages and Disadvantages/Balanced questions
As mentioned, I have found that although textbook questions such as “should all students get apart-time job?” might vaguely imply that students discuss various sides of an issue, discussions will
rarely go into much depth. If we could ensure that students discuss both the pros and cons of parttime jobs before drawing conclusions, then this would probably leader to richer, more nuanced
discussions. One way to ensure that students could do this is by making in-depth discussions a
mandatory rather than an implied process.
Students tend to closely follow textbook instructions, so if we write questions that explicitly tellstudents to discuss both advantages and disadvantages, then it is highly likely that they will. In
152

THE EFFECTS OF QUESTION TYPE ON STUDENT DISCUSSIONS

theory, discussions should be richer for going into details about both sides, and this could lead tomore interesting and nuanced discussions.
I rewrote several questions to explicitly address the pros and cons of the relevant topical issues.
These were mostly advantages and disadvantages questions; however, there were one or two
exceptions. The notable example, which I discuss later, is the following question:
1. “Which Japanese cultures are good to export to foreign countries?”
To which I added the following question, in order to make it explicit that they discuss both sidesof the issue:
2. “Which Japanese cultures are not good to export to foreign countries?”
The following table shows some examples of advantages and disadvantages/balanced questions
that I added to the course this semester.
Table 3
Examples of Advantages and Disadvantages/Balanced Questions used this semester
Original Questions

Adapted Questions

1. Which is better — the entrance exam system or the 1. What are the advantages and disadvantages of therecommendation system?
entrance exam system?
2. Should the Japanese government introduce other 2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of thesystems for entering university?
recommendation system?
3. Which system is better?
1. When is a good time to study abroad?
2. Should everyone study abroad?

1. What are the advantages of studying abroad?
2. What are the disadvantages of studying abroad?
3. When is a good time to study abroad?

1. Is social media good or bad for university students? 1. What do you think about the following social media
2. 
Does social media make life easier for university
apps? What are the advantages and disadvantages ofstudents?
each?
- Twitter- Instagram- TikTok2. Which social media app is the most useful? (Think
about different points of view).
1. What types of Japanese pop culture are good to share 1. What types of Japanese pop culture are good to sharewith other countries?
with other countries?
2. Is it important to share culture with other countries? 2. What types of Japanese pop culture are not good toshare with other countries?
3. Is it important to share culture with other countries?

Problem-Solution questions
In the textbook, several discussions include questions asking for solutions to problems, but
without really discussing what is the actual cause of the problem. For example, in Lesson 2 ,thediscussion asks for suggestions on helping hikikomori without discussing why people become
hikikomori in the first place.
Problem solving is a valuable critical thinking skill, and therefore it is good that we ask students
to discuss solutions to difficult issues. However, in general, when asked to suggest solutions todifficult problems, it helps to analyse the problem in-depth first. In a group problem-solving scenario,
sharing information and reaching a mutual understanding of the reasons for the problem is highly
valuable, even crucial. It follows that getting students to discuss the problem in-depth before they
develop solutions should give them more experience with solving problems in a collaborative setting.
153

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Moreover, it could lead to more insightful and considered solutions.
Therefore, I occasionally added questions to prompt students to discuss the reasons for a
problem in-depth before discussing a solution.
Table 4
Examples of Problem-Solution Questions used this semester
Textbook Questions

Adapted Questions

1. 
What are some effective things that can help 1. Why do people become hikikomori?
hikikomori?
2. What are some effective things that can help
2. Which is more important for hikikomori —hikikomori?
communicating with family or making friends?
1. 
What are some good ways that companies can 1. Do Japanese people have a good work-life balance?
improve their employees’ work-life balance?
2. 
What are some good ways that companies can
2. Do Japanese people have a good work-life balance?
improve their employees’ work-life balance?
1. What is the best way to punish serious crimes?
2. Is it important to help criminals return to society?

1. Why do people commit serious crimes?
2. What is the best way to punish serious crime?
3. How can Japan reduce serious crime in the future?

Hypothetical Questions
A hypothetical question is one where students discuss an imaginary situation. For example— “ifyou were going to study abroad, where would you go?” These were used mainly as extra questions.
The textbook usually uses two questions per discussion, and these were added as a third or fourthquestion. The hypothetical questions were used because they offer a chance for students to thinkcreatively. Moreover, in my previous experience, this kind of question tends to be enjoyable forstudents.
Table 5
Examples of Hypothetical Questions used this semester
Topic

Question

Study Abroad

If you were going to study abroad, where would you go?

Work-Life Balance

Would you rather work very hard and have a lot of money, or have an easier work-life but
have less money?

Social MediaHow might social media change society in the future?

Reflection of the Results of the Adapted Questions
In this section, I will reflect on the discussions generated by the adapted questions, thereby
discussing the three types of questions individually.

Results of the Advantages and Disadvantages/Balanced Questions
Generally, I think using these questions worked well in bringing nuance to discussions. Because
the advantages and disadvantages were written into the questions, students were obliged to discussboth and this meant that when observing the discussions, there was clear evidence that students had
considered both sides of the question. In general, there was a wider range of ideas than those in154

THE EFFECTS OF QUESTION TYPE ON STUDENT DISCUSSIONS

previous courses. This gave me the impression that students were more engaged in discussions, andthat they were thinking more and consequently might be learning more than with closed-ended
questions.
Furthermore, this semester I had far fewer instances of groups finishing discussions before theallotted time limits, which implies that using this kind of question probably does generate more
student talk-time. In certain instances this was because adapting the questions meant they had morequestions to discuss; however, several discussions that were usually brief on previous courses wereelongated, such as the part-time job and university entrance system discussions from table three
above. Basically, ensuring they discussed various sides of a topic meant they had more to discuss.
The adapted discussion questions at times significantly changed the content of the student
discussions, with the adapted Globalization of Japanese Culture discussion probably being the best
example:Table 6
The adapted discussion for the Globalization of Japanese Culture topic
1. Which types of Japanese pop culture are good to share with foreign countries?
2. Which types of Japanese pop culture are not good to share with foreign countries?
3. Is it important for countries to share their culture with other countries?

On previous courses, students were only required to discuss which Japanese cultures are, or
would be, successful if exported abroad. Students almost always end up debating the features ofJapanese culture they enjoy while ignoring the cross-cultural similarities, which I feel is the true goalof this conversation. A typical student response could say that manga is popular outside of Japanbecause it is beautifully-drawn, but my sense has always been that they are expressing their own
tastes rather than a reason why non-Japanese people enjoy it as well.
Adding the question “Which types of Japanese pop culture are not good to share with foreigncountries?” pushed them to consider why certain types of culture are popular abroad as compared toothers. For example, students discussed how humour can be lost in translation and how westerncountries seem to prefer individual pop stars (e.g., Billie Eilish) rather than large pop groups (e.g.,
Nogizaka 46). My view is that propelling students toward this angle challenged them to think andcontributed to discussions that were more intellectually stimulating than original questions.
There was an issue with this type of question, which was that sometimes students did not haveenough ideas or require more time than normal to generate ideas. Early in the course, students wereusing the textbook preparation, which was not designed for the adapted questions, and therefore, notreally appropriate as scaffolding for the adapted discussions. This issue was improved by having
students brainstorm the pros and cons of both sides and making sure they had enough time to do so.
This is something to remember when changing the textbook questions —if you are adapting or using
new questions, you probably need to adapt the discussion preparation accordingly.

Results of the Problem-Solution Questions
Having students discuss the problems before discussing solutions added an interesting layer ofcontent to their discussions. For example, when discussing why people become hikikomori, students
discussed issues, such as bullying at school or family problems. When discussing why people commit
serious crimes, they discussed issues, such as how children raised in violent homes might go on to155

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

become troubled adults. Students were able to discuss these issues in a deep and insightful manner.
The adapted crime and punishment solution question three, “How can we help prevent serious
crime in the future?” also provoked some interesting ideas, such as how a more equal society could
help reduce crime. This discussion happened in the penultimate lesson and was the first time
students needed to discuss how fundamental changes to society could improve an issue. I think that
discussing such changes to society could have been beneficial in the other problem-solution
discussions, as it makes for a logical conclusion to the discussion. For example, to conclude thehikikomori discussion students could be asked “What can Japan do to reduce social isolation?” and asimilar question could be asked about how a shift in societal values or practices might help improve
work-life balance.

Results of the Hypothetical and Dilemmas Questions
From my observation of students, they seem to really enjoy this kind of question. They use thehypothetical situation to think of creative answers, share humour, and become slightly more casualin the discussion. This feels like a good change of pace, and they seem encouraged to speak more,probably because they are having fun. Moreover, I noted that more follow-up questions were asked
and that students would go on tangents sometimes. For example, “if you were to study abroad, wherewould you go?” would often lead to students discussing their travel experiences. In some classes, thiskind of conversation can be lacking and perhaps gave them a chance to bond.
The future hypothetical question “how will social media change society in the future?” seemed
difficult for students. They often remarked that the question was difficult and tended to hesitate
before answering. However, they were usually able to answer eventually, such as by saying thatpeople will have worse social skills in the future. This proved to be interesting to listen to.
In each instance, the hypothetical questions were used as a final question. I thought this would
be appropriate, as hypothetical questions can be quite abstract and tangential, so my theory was that
this would be better saved for after the main topics of discussion had been covered. However, it could
be interesting to develop a discussion based entirely around this kind of question and observe theresults.

Drawbacks to the Project
There were some difficulties and drawbacks to the project. As mentioned, occasionally students
did not seem to have a lot of ideas for the more challenging questions. I had to adapt to this by giving
them more time, and also by having them share their ideas during preparation time. It is highly
recommended that when introducing questions that are more challenging in terms of criticalthinking, they are given sufficient opportunity to generate and share ideas before starting thediscussion. Moreover, it was essential that I change the preparation activity in the book so that it was
suitable for the new discussion. Again, if you are going to adapt textbook questions, then you
probably need to adapt preparation activities to suit the adapted questions.
Furthermore, I tended to use three or more questions per discussion during this project, andalthough this likely generated more student talk-time, toward the end of the term it seemed thatstudents had difficulty continuing a discussion if there were just two questions in the discussion. On
previous courses, many groups seemed to become adept at continuing discussions using target
phrases and often could complete a full discussion with just two questions. I believe that providing
156

THE EFFECTS OF QUESTION TYPE ON STUDENT DISCUSSIONS

them with more questions may have hampered their practice of the target phrases, as the target
phrases were less important to continue the discussion when there were other discussion questions
available.

Conclusions
First, I would highly recommend rewriting binary and closed-ended questions into open-ended
questions. Judging from my observations this semester, open questions are more likely to develop
into a nuanced discussion. When listening to students discuss binary or closed-ended questions, I
find discussions to be predictable and repetitive. Throughout this semester, with the adapted
questions, students were discussing a wider range of ideas. In my view, the discussions were moreentertaining to listen to, which lead me to believe that they would have been more interesting toengage in.
Second, I think it is a good idea to use questions that will explicitly guide students to the kind ofcontent you want them to discuss. While a question such as “should all students study abroad?”might imply that students discuss the pros and cons of studying abroad, there is no guarantee thatthey will actually cover both sides in much depth. Alternatively, if you ask them “what are the pros
and cons of studying abroad”? or if you ask them to discuss both the pros and cons separately, thenyou are far more likely to get a balanced discussion. In other words, if you want students to discusscertain content, then it is better to use discussion questions that lead them directly to that content.
I attempted to create new questions in such a manner that they would inspire more criticalthinking exercise, and I believe I witnessed plenty of this throughout the semester.
I think that the question types used were conducive to this. With advantages/disadvantages
questions, students have to analyse an issue in depth. Problem/solution questions mean students
have to analyse a problem and then create a solution. Moreover, hypothetical questions allow
students to think creatively and offer an abstract change of pace. Alternatively, these are far from theonly types of question that could be used, and I will experiment with other types in the future.
On several occasions, some of the questions seemed difficult for students, but I welcomed thisas I believe that students were being propelled to think outside of their comfort zone. Moreover, it
felt more like they were learning something about the topic. While the discussions course is mainly
about fluency building, I believe that it is beneficial to challenge students intellectually sometimes
and while content learning is not a stated aim of the course, the students will find the course more
rewarding if they are learning about the topics they discuss.
Along with the discussions being more interesting to listen to, and students needing to think ina more nuanced manner, another major difference this semester was that I believe they were
producing more dialogue than those on previous courses. In previous courses, I have witnessed thatstudents, particularly those in lower ability classes, would conclude discussions quickly, and I would
have to intervene in some manner to continue the discussion. I found myself doing that rather lessthis semester, as a wide range of ideas seemed to produce more dialogue and opportunities forcommunication.
Despite the course being conducted online, I maintained contact with a few course colleagues,
and we would often share discussion questions on social media group chat.
This proved a great help to the project, and I would encourage teachers to discuss their approachto the discussion questions and share their experiences.
157

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Finally, another benefit of this project was that I felt that taking control of the questions from the
textbook gave me more control over the course. As this is a mandatory course, with an in-housetextbook, it can be easy to feel like you do not have much autonomy. The discussion questions dictate
the content the students discuss and much of what they learn during discussions, and thus, by taking
control of the questions I felt more ownership of the course. I recommend teachers to attempt torewrite the textbook questions to suit their own purposes.

158

THE EFFECTS OF QUESTION TYPE ON STUDENT DISCUSSIONS

References
Beatty, K. (2017). Q is for Questions. Pearson ELT USA. https://longmanhomeusa.com/blog/q-is-for-questions/Çakır, H. and Cengiz, Ö. (2016) The Use of Open Ended versus Closed Ended Questions in Turkish
Classrooms. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 6, 60-70.
Fearn-Wannan,J., Kita,S., Sturges,J., & Young,D. (2021). What’s Your Opinion? Rikkyo University.
Hurling, S. (2012). Introduction to EDC. New Directions in Teaching and Learning English Discussion,
1(1), 1.2-1.9.
Rizzo, Fairley and Nostas. (2021). “Arguing to Learn”: 4 Activities to Build Complex Arguments .
TESOL Connections: February 2021 (retrieved article on 25/11/2021 from http://newsmanager.
commpartners.com/tesolc/issues/2021-02-01/3.html).
Sarwanto., Fajari, L. E. W., & Chumdari. (2021). Open-Ended Questions to Assess Critical Thinking
Skills in Indonesian Elementary School. International Journal of Instruction, 14(1), 615-630.
Templin, S.A. (1995). Goal Setting to Raise Speaking Self-Confidence. JALT Journal Vol. 17, No.2,
November, 1995.

159

【Teaching Practice Report】

Implementing Readers’ Theater for a Project-Based Advanced
English course
Nfor Samuel
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of readers’ theatre-based instruction in an Advanced English
course involving 21 freshman at Rikkyo University. The students were enrolled on an advanced-level English classin the first semester focusing on reading and writing. In the second semester, the same students embarked on areaders’ theatre project to reinforce first semester skills. Walker’s (Walker, 2018) Her Own Worst Enemy was chosen
as the main text for the course. A background discussion of the play involved techniques of skimming, scanning,
and inferencing to further develop students’ reading skills. Three groups comprising seven students performed
different roles in the seven-member cast. The teacher facilitated rehearsal sessions by having students highlighttheir parts, add descriptions of action on their scripts, delete or add lines, practice movements, make notes ofdifferent emotional moments, and mark different levels of intonation. Dramatic reading rehearsals enabled students
to experience language use from within and think on how sentences, vocabulary words, and phrases can be used toachieve communication goals. Rehearsals culminated in readers’ theatre performances where students read aloudand only glanced at the script half the time. Rehearsals culminated in readers’ theatre performances where students
read aloud and only glanced at the script half the time. Finally, students wrote an alternative ending to the play andperformed it in groups. A questionnaire was administered after the project to gather data and student feedback. The
findings of the study indicate that implementing readers’ theatre as a project-based English class enabled positivechanges in enhancing students’ reading, writing, and presentation skills.
Keywords: reading, writing, presentation, rehearsals, readers’ theatre

Introduction
In view of Japanese university-level EFL learner needs regarding reading, writing, andpresentation skills, a drama-based approach to English language teaching can prove effective as
Göksel (2021) asserts that Drama in Education (DiE) is a well-recognized pedagogy in manyeducational systems. However, there seems to be some hesitance in experimenting with drama-based
pedagogy in EFL classes at the university level in Japan (Donnery, 2013) although the use of dramain teaching of foreign languages is not a novel approach and its beginnings can be traced back to the19th century. (Schewe 2007, cited in Giebert, 2014). Since the late 1970s, with the increasing popularityof the Communicative Approach, drama-based pedagogy has been an integral part of foreign
language teaching and is recognized and appreciated by some English language teachers although
the approaches to integrating them in classes vary. This paper outlines the production process of a
student-centered readers’ theatre project. Starting with a discussion of the playscript andcomprehension questions, the project progressed to theatrical readings, performing readers’ theatre,
adding a scene to an existing script, and presenting it in class. At the conclusion of the study, students
answered a survey, with the results indicating that readers’ theatre enhanced reading, writing, andpresentation skills.

160

IMPLEMENTING READERSʼ THEATRE FOR A PROJECT-BASED ADVANCED ENGLISH COURSEThe Teaching Context
A class of 21 first-year university students (aged 18–19 years), majoring in Business andInternational Business at Rikkyo University, participated in this project. The students had TOEIC
scores of 600 and over, which is equivalent to The Common European Framework of Reference for
languages (CEFR) level B1. Demographic information collected through a questionnaire showedthat the students have received six years. of English education at junior high school and high school.
Some had lived in English-speaking countries for a considerable amount of time, and a few others
had studied English outside of regular school curricula in Japan. Thus, they had acquired English
skills advanced enough to be able to enroll in the Advanced English course taught twice a week for
100 minutes each time.
The course ran for a year (28 weeks) and the aim was to nurture and encourage creativity andto develop reading, writing, speaking, and listening skills. In addition, the course aimed at developing
the ability for students to provide logical and reasoned explanation of their views and the ability toargue and convince their peers and develop independent learning, thereby enabling them to beautonomous, collaborative, and creative. The second semester of Advanced English course is projectbased and shifts the focus of the course from academic skills to content. By virtue of my interest in
Drama in Education and because the course was more focused on content, I speculated that areaders’ theatre project would help me work intimately with students, placing them at the center oflearning, while keeping them motivated to meet the course goals. With this in mind, the projectfocused on readers’ theatre that combines language and skills practice to help students develop
strategies for interacting with others and provides an opportunity to develop their imagination.
The choice of the participants was based on the fact that Business and International Businessmajor students are often highly motivated to study English. The motivation often arises from their
aspirations to work in global environments in Japan or abroad or obtain jobs with internationalorganizations. Because of the high aspirations that such students have to accomplish their future
career objectives, most are open and receptive to experimental project-based learning.

Motivation for the Project
Although drama as a process-oriented method is present in Japanese education through school
drama clubs, where students put on plays and performances, drama as a process-oriented approach
is mostly missing within classes (Kobayashi, 2004). Drama-based language instruction has been
defined by different scholars, but Holden’s (Holden, 1981) definition is widely cited:…any activity which asks the student to portray himself in an imaginary situation or anotherperson in an imaginary situation-a definition which can be applied to most formats of drama inlanguage teaching and includes role-play as a form of drama. However, vocal and physicalexercises that do not imply the creation of a fictional character or situation, such as articulation
exercises or movement games, should also be included (p.1).
Regardless of the drama-based instruction tasks implemented, they often require students to interact
in pairs or groups and are aimed at helping students acquire a language skill. According to Kember(1977), when language learners take charge of their own learning, they co-construct knowledge with
the instructor as a facilitator rather than becoming a class speaker. One such way students construct161

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

knowledge with the teacher as facilitator is through readers’ theatre of which Ødegaard (2003)
argues that its implementation in learning places students at the center of the learning process,offering them the chance to learn through experience, with teachers taking on a facilitator role
throughout the learning process.
The effectiveness of drama-based instruction for language learning was affirmed by Holden(Holden, 1981) who stated that “they help students have the opportunity to experiment with thelanguage they have learnt, and the teacher has a chance to see how each person operates in a
relatively unguided piece of interaction” (p.8). On a similar note, Via (1987) holds that drama-based
instruction tasks “enable students to use what they are learning with pragmatic intent, somethingthat is most difficult to learn through explanation” (p. 114). Drama-based tasks for language teaching
could involve full-fledged performances that run from casting to rehearsal to performance, or simple
ones like role plays, mime, simulation, or games. Some teachers choose to embark on moresophisticated drama-based tasks, such as process drama or readers’ theatre.
This study focuses on readers’ theatre, an activity in which students are not asked to memorize
their lines, but to read directly from scripts, while telling a story in an entertaining manner, without
props, costumes, or sets. It is an integrated teaching tool, involving students in communicative skills
that includes voice projection when reading, script writing, goal oriented performance, andcollaboration during group work. Although the students engaged in a readers’ theater activity are notasked to memorize their lines, they are encouraged to show facial expressions and to use intonationand gestures appropriate to their characters and their characters’ words. Moran (2006) summarizes
readers theatre stating that:
Readers’ theatre is different from traditional theatres and conventional plays as the readers (orperformers) do not have to memorize lines but read directly from the scripts…costumes,
scenery, props are rarely used and it can take place in any setting. Readers use their voices,
facial expressions and bodies to interpret the emotions, feelings and attitude (p. 318).
The pedagogical potentials of readers’ theatre for enhancing reading fluency, with appropriate tone
and proper expression has been affirmed by Worthy & Prater (2002, p.295) who state that “…reading
performance encourages students to read at an appropriate rate rather than to simply read fast
without attending to meaning…and that when students read and interpret texts regularly, they makeprogress in all aspects of reading.”
In the same light, Allignton, (2013) underscores the usefulness of readers theatre stating it is ateaching technique that exploits students’ thoughts and actions as they study a playscript to perform
it. Readers’ theatre parallels Vygotsky’s (Vygotsky, 1978) Sociocultural Theory, which argues that an
important learning by a child occurs through social interaction with a skillful tutor who models
behaviors and provides verbal instructions for the child, by so doing, developing cooperative or
collaborative dialogue necessary for effective communication. Readers theatre provides an authentic
chance for interaction with peers while practicing and performing a play script.

Literature Review
A review of literature found a few researchers who have covered aspects of drama-based
language instruction in their teaching in Japan and have written about their experiences. In (Yoshida,2007) Play Building in Japanese College EFL Classrooms, the author had students present an
162

IMPLEMENTING READERSʼ THEATRE FOR A PROJECT-BASED ADVANCED ENGLISH COURSE

adaptation of Louisa May Alcott’s Little Women. Her objective was to have her all-female class in a
women’s college create a play about a historical female figure in Japan who contributed to higher
education development for Japanese women. Although she tried to demonstrate how integrating playbuilding and performance promotes student competences in language learning, her main focus
seemed to be empowering her all-female class through the work of a female writer by having themempathize with the four female characters’ situations in the story.
In one study, Charles & Kusanagi (2007) led workshop sessions where participants discussed
activities to be performed with short feedback times between the activities. The workshop detailed
the purposes of the activities, how they tapped into learning, and possible outcomes in participants’
own teaching situations (Charles & Kusanagi, 2007). One activity in the workshop was role-playing
characters in scripts for students to guess the adjective matching the characters being played. Ingroups, the students discussed adjectives describing characters and then presented in front of classfor others to guess. The researchers concluded that drama-based learning were nonthreatening andclassroom environments affected students’ motivation toward learning. Greater self-confidence
created good classroom communities because students worked collaboratively to complete tasks,
thereby creating bonds between them (Charles & Kusanagi, 2007). Besides creating classroom
communities, as demonstrated by Charles and Kusanagi in their study, the current study will show
how working in groups on a readers’ theatre project impact students’ reading, writing, andpresentation skills.
In another study, Araki (2007) investigated Japanese primary school students through action
research and deduced that educational drama motivates Japanese students’ EFL learning by
providing them with opportunities for deep engagement and participation in learning. In the study,
students demonstrated improvement of communicative, linguistic, nonlinguistic, and problem-solving
skills necessary for learning.
Donnery (2009) described how drama-based pedagogy in the English language curriculum of aJapanese university increased student motivation and enthusiasm toward the target language. Her
students made role-plays in small groups to show their comprehension of a course textbook unit.
These role-plays helped the students as actors and audience engage with course content, dynamicallyleading them to take control of their own learning. The findings of her study suggest that students
emerged more confident in their oral communication abilities and developed more consciousness ofcultural issues. Friendships were also improved between Japanese students and other international
students in the same class.
Leong’s (2014) study was to examine whether readers’ theatre has any impact on Japanese
students’ writing skills. In a survey the author conducted on students reaction to readers’ theatre,
results showed that the students displayed a positive attitude towards readers’ theatre and theirwriting skills indicating that it lowers affective filters of Japanese learners in the EFL classroom.
The aim of the current study was to add to the literature related to drama and EFL learning inJapan by examining the impact of readers’ theatre on the reinforcement of reading, writing, andpresentation skills following a semester of regular textbook-based education. The aim of the current
study is to address the following research questions:• How does participating in a readers’ theatre project improve students’ reading, writing, andpresentation skills?
• Does participation in a readers’ theatre project show a shift from teacher-centered to studentcentred learning?
163

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Description of the Project
Before the start of the study, the methodology and aims were explained to the school
administration for administrative formalities, and the necessary permission to implement the study
was obtained. On the first day of the project, the importance of drama and language learning was
explained to the students, emphasizing the idea that the readers’ theatre project was not aimed totrain them to be actors but to be better language users. Students were instructed that, in readers’theatre, process was more important than the product (performance). In other words, the language
skills they develop in the process of participating in the readers’ theatre project is more important
than a successful performance. The readers’ theatre project was designed to meet the following
objectives:• prepare and perform a play to review presentation skills;• read and discuss a play script to review reading skills;• explore themes of a play to develop speaking skills;• practice reading aloud and reading dramatically to communicate emotional intentions;• develop creativity by appending a scene to a play and reviewing writing skills;• perform in groups in front of peers to enhance oratory skills.
Following a review of the project objectives, the students were led through some language
learning games to familiarize them with the concept of “acting,” as well as to introduce them to theconcept of “student-centered learning” and help them see the classroom as a place to play, explore,
have fun, and learn. On the importance of games in language learning and as a lead up to introducing
drama work, (Wright et al., 2008) state that games provide one way for the “learner to experiencelanguage rather than mere study it.” The games used in the project were “ice breakers” and “warmers”
to help learners feel comfortable with each other, confident in themselves, and focused on language
while developing at the same time the notion of rhythm, group cohesion, and voice projection, allnecessary for readers’ theatre. These games introduced some “playfulness” into the classroom as away of focusing the students minds on theatre as a medium of language learning.
A play by Walker (Walker, 2018) tilted Her Own Worst Enemy-A Serious Comedy About Choosing
a Career, primarily written for EFL learning, was selected as the play for the project. The choice of
this play was motivated by the fact that the protagonist Aida, 18, is preparing for university andstruggling with the choice of what to study and what to do as a future career. The students, all ofwhom are 18 or 19, had recently finished selecting on their institution and major, and thus, would
more likely identify with Aida, thereby increasing their enthusiasm to participate in the project.
Working in groups, students spent some lesson time discussing the title of the play, considering its
idiomatic nature and responding to questions leading up to the theme of the play. Because choosing
a career was the central theme of the play, students were required to conduct research on career
profiles by interviewing someone or watching a YouTube video of someone with an intriguing career
profile and presenting about it in class. The prompt read as follows:
Interview a person with an interesting job or watch one on YouTube and take notes considering thefollowing questions as a guide to develop your presentation:• How did you get interested in this field?
• Who influenced you?
• How did you prepare for this career?
• How did you get your first opportunity in this field?
• What do you like best about your work?
164

IMPLEMENTING READERSʼ THEATRE FOR A PROJECT-BASED ADVANCED ENGLISH COURSE• What skills do you have?
• What advice do you have for someone who wants to do this kind of work?
• Can you share a quote or person that shaped your thinking?
Students were guided through the process of preparing and presenting a slideshow about career
profiles. Following these in-class presentations, geared toward developing presentation skills, thenext task was to read the play script in groups. Students were placed in groups of seven, one personfor each character in the play. They read the script in groups so as to get a general idea of the plot
and themes in the play. The students then answered some comprehension questions to confirm theirunderstanding of the script. By responding to comprehension questions, the essential reading skillsof skimming, scanning, and inferencing were further developed. Students were then divided into
debate teams and debated the choices that the main characters made in the play. The act of debating,making arguments, and responding with counter arguments is a useful exercise to develop speaking
skills.
Next, the teacher led students in a dramatic reading exercise to help them develop vocabulary
through the technique of subtext. Intonation, gesture, voice projection, and facial expressions wereareas emphasized during the dramatic reading process. The teacher also facilitated the dramatic
reading sessions by having students highlight their parts, add descriptions of action on their scripts,
delete or add lines, practice motion, and noting emotions and intonations. Dramatic reading
rehearsals enabled students to “feel the language from the inside” and reflect on how sentences,words, and phrases are used to attain communication goals. Dramatic reading rehearsals culminatedin a readers’ theatre performance. In this performance, the students dramatically read the scripts
aloud and looked up from the script only half the time.
The next task involved the students, again working in groups, to append a new scene to the play.
The students had to be creative to extend the story in an interesting and unique way. This task was
designed to help with students’ writing, specifically writing that involves cause and effect essays. As
cause and effect development of plot is key to play writing, it proved an effective and creative way of
improving students’ cause and effect essay-writing skills. The teacher assisted the students indeveloping the plot of their new scenes during the writing process, ensuring that the ideas werestructured properly and logically. In addition, the teacher made sure students included transition
words to clarify the cause-and-effect relationships and encouraged students to provide supporting
information based on their personal observations, reflections, and common sense. After completionof the writing process, the students rehearsed and performed their appended scenes as skits.

Results and Discussion
A questionnaire survey was conducted at the end of the course to gauge students’ enthusiasm
and analyze their self-assessment. The questionnaire items asked students to rate on a 5-point Likert
scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly agree) the level ofagreement they had with statements regarding how they felt about the project; if they thought they
had improved their reading, writing, and presentation skills; and if they would like to try the samelearning method in the near future. The questionnaire items were selected to glean useful insights
toward the study’s research questions and were based on an overview of the wider Japanese English
education context so as to build a more comprehensive study (Rasinger, 2010) with readers’ theatre.
Feedback from students provided an emic perspective to add to the etic view to provide a morecomprehensive reflection on the project’s outcomes.
165多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Figure 1
shows the result of questionnaire survey conducted at the end of the readers’ theatre project

Questionnaire survey results
60
50
40
30
20

9
Agree

Attended almost all classes

8

Future plan to participate in a
drama project7
NeutralProject stimulated interest in
drama and English education

6
DisagreeGroup work fun, promoted
friendship and motivation

5

Felt a sense of accomplishment
and satisfaction

Writing activity encouraged
creativity

4Felt embarrassed performing
but developed confidence

Practiced reading withintonation and emotions

3

Strongly Disagree

Practiced skimming, scanningand inferencing

Each class had a clear purpose

2

Project helped reading, writing
and presentation skills

Instructions were clear anduseful1

Presenting helped withconfidence

Connection between projectand course

No.

Project aims were clear

0

Statements

10

10

11

12

13

14

15

Strongly agree

The data provided by the sample of 21 students through the questionnaire survey suggest that
there was a significant increase in self-perceived improvement in English communication skills so as
to determine the efficacy of the outcome of readers’ theatre. Potential patterns of the students’changed self-perceptions regarding their language skills following the readers’ theatre project could
be identified from questionnaire responses.
In response to the research question “Does readers theatre improve students reading, writing, andpresentation skills?” 31% agreed and 18% strongly agreed that they could practice reading withintonation and emotions (statement 5, whereas 37% agreed and 31% strongly agreed that the project
was useful for practicing skimming, scanning, and inferencing skills (statement 9), both important
techniques to enhance reading skills.
It can thus be inferred that students’ development of fluency. in reading correlates with thetheory of automaticity in reading (LaBerge & Samuels, 1974). Rasinski et al. (2009) define
automaticity as, “the ability of proficient readers to read the words in a text correctly and effortlessly
so that they may use their finite cognitive resources to attend the meaning while reading” (p. 4).
Reading correctly and effortlessly can be attributed to repeated reading rehearsal as is the case withreaders’ theatre, which increases reading rate, accuracy, and comprehension. Repeated reading has
been acknowledged by the National Reading Panel (2000) as a widely used instructional approach forbuilding reading fluency, while Dowhower (1991) witnesses repeated readings as effective to improvereading fluency among both adult learners and primary school-age children. By spending time toread the same play repeatedly during the 14 week-long period, Advanced English course students not
only made sense of different vocabulary words in the playscript but also understood the plot of theplay and read it enjoyably.
Although the formality of paper formatting and word choice were not stressed in the writing
166

IMPLEMENTING READERSʼ THEATRE FOR A PROJECT-BASED ADVANCED ENGLISH COURSE

challenge, cause and effect essays were prioritized in terms of form and content. At the end of the
project, 31% of students agreed and 18% strongly agreed appending a new scene to the play in groups,
which in turn, stimulated their creativity and logical presentation of ideas. This can be attributed to
the fact that cause and effect development of plot was central in writing an alternative ending of theplay (statement 6).
Half (50%) of the students agreed and 12.5% strongly agreed that conducting slideshow
presentations on career profiles, the central theme of the play, was helpful to enhance confidence
while delivering presentations. (statement 7). Although 43% of students were neutral about the
impact of readers’ theatre in helping with the three core skills of reading, writing, and presentation,
central to the Advanced English course, 12.5% agreed and 18% strongly agreed that the course
impacted the course objectives positively (statement 8). Regarding the second research question,“participation in a readers theatre project as a shift from teacher-centered learning to student-centeredlearning,” 43% of students strongly agreed and 18% agreed that working in groups was fun, which inturn, promoted friendship and enhanced motivation. In addition, 43% agreed and 18% strongly agreed
that they felt a sense of accomplishment and satisfaction completing a project in groups (statement11). About working in groups as part of student-centered learning, Wright et al. (2008) asserted thatwhile working together in English, students talk more, share their ideas, learn from each other, feel
more secure and less anxious, and use English in a meaningful manner.
From the instructor’s perspective, this readers’ theatre project reduced teacher talk-time anddramatically empowered students to develop as self-motivated learners through peer-to-peer
interactions and training. In response to statement 13, 31% agreed and 18% strongly agreed thatreaders’ theatre stimulated their interest in drama and language learning. This project employed only
one playscript and exploited various language skills for student learning. However, 14 weeks was along time to spend on a single script. Echoing this sentiment, one student gave the following reaction:“I think we could try one or two more stories because we kind of wasted a time for practicing the same
one again and again.” Therefore, in future, multiple scripts could be used to break the monotony,which is necessary for keeping student motivation high and would also allow for experimenting withvarying language skills and engaging with a vast body of literature.

Limitations and Future Pedagogical Directions
This study reported on a readers’ theatre project in a 14-week Advanced English course held at
Rikkyo University. Taken together, the results of the survey add weight to the argument that readers’theatre can be an effective pedagogical method for improving students’ reading, writing, andpresentation skills. There are a number of limitations.
In the current study, the sample, 21 students, is too small to extrapolate the results. Furthermore,data were gathered only through a questionnaire survey and relied on subjective self-reported
measures; thus, the data collection was limited and did not allow for triangulation (Angouri, 2010). A
larger study, involving a lager sample size and conducted over an extended period of time could
provide stronger evidence. The current study used classroom research conducted in 14 weeks;however, a longitudinal design would be useful to provide more analytical evidence through control
and experimental groups.
Limited information was found in the literature regarding readers’ theatre and EFL learning inJapan. This area needs to be explored in further studies; however, the findings of this study highlightthe potential of readers’ theatre-based teaching method for motivating students’ to study English and167

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

build their confidence as English communicators , in addition to enhancing reading, writing,speaking, and presentation skills. The readers’ theatre project, like other drama-based teaching
methods, could be a leverage to raise student interest in language study; however, it has a distinct
advantage over other forms of drama wherein it allows the actors (students) to read from a script andis not focused on memorization of lines. This not only makes it more accessible and less intimidating
for language learners of all levels but also has the potential to open access to a bigger corpus ofscripts, thereby allowing students to encounter different playwrights and learn more about the
fascinating world of theater.

168

IMPLEMENTING READERSʼ THEATRE FOR A PROJECT-BASED ADVANCED ENGLISH COURSE

References
Allignton, R. (2013). What really matters when working with struggling readers. The Reading
Teacher, 66(7), 520-530.
Angouri, J. (2010). Quantittaive, qualitative or both? Combining methods in linguistic research (L.
Litosseliti (ed.)). Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315758671
Charles, D., & Kusanagi, Y. (2007). Using drama to motivate EFL students: Building classroom
communities and student identities. JALT2006 Conference Proceedings, 606–613. http://www.
tlrp.org/dspace/retrieve/1521/Working+Paper+-+Student+Identities.pdf
Donnery, E. (2009). Testing the waters: Drama in the Japanese university EFL classroom. Scenario:
A Journal of Performative Teaching, Learning, Research, III(1), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.33178/
scenario.3.1.3
Donnery, E. (2013). Jo-Ha-Kyu Enticement — Crux — Consolidation from study to Learning : Process
drama projects in the Japanese English language university classroom.
Dowhower, S. (1991). Speaking of prosody: Fluency’s unattended bedfellow. Theory Into Practice,30(3), 165–175.
Giebert, S. (2014). Drama and theatre in teaching foreign languages for professional purposes ».
Recherche et Pratiques Pédagogiques En Langues de Spécialité, XXXIII(1), 138-150.
Göksel, E. (2021). Experiencing drama in a Swiss context: A tale of two student teachers. Research in
Drama Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569783.2021.1901567
Holden, S. (1981). Drama in language teaching. Longman.
Kember, D. (1977). A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics’ conceptions ofteaching. Learning and Instruction, 7(3), 225-275.
Kobayashi, Y. (2004). Drama and theatre for young people in Japan. Research in Drama Education:
The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 9(1), 93-95.
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading.
Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293-323.
Leong, P. (2014). The pedagogical relevance of readers theatre in the Japanese EFL classroom. JALTPIE SIG: Mask and Gavel, 3(1), 5-15. https://doi.org/10.37546/jaltsig.pie3.1-1
Metcalfe Araki, N. (2007). Introducing creative language learning in Japan through educational
drama. Drama Australia Journal, 31(2), 45-57.
Moran, K. J. K. (2006). Nurturing emergent readers through readers theater. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 33(5), 317-323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-006-0089-8
Ødegaard, M. (2003). Dramatic science. A critical review of drama in science education. Studies inScience Education, 39(1), 75-102. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260308560196
Panel, N. R. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-base assessment of scientific research
literature on reading and its implications for instruction. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of
Health. System. https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(79)90008-3
Rasinger, S. (2010). Quantitative methods: Concepts, frameworks and issues. In L. Litosselita (Ed.),
Research Methods in Linguistics. Bloomsbury Academic. http://marefateadyan.nashriyat.ir/
node/150
Rasinski, T., Rikli, A., & Johnston, S. (2009). Reading fluency: More than automaticity? more than aconcern for the primary grades? Literacy Research and Instruction, 48(4).
Via, R. (1987). The magic “If” of language learning through drama.pdf. In R. Wilga (Ed.), Interactive
Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press.
169

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard
University Press.
Walker, A. (2018). Her own worst enemy. Alphabet Publishing.
Worthy, J., & Prater, K. (2002). The intermediate grades: “I thought about it all night”: Readerstheatre for reading fluency and motivation. Reading, 56(3), 294-297.
Wright, A., Betterridge, D., & Buckby, M. (2008). Games for language learning. Cambridge University
Press.
Yoshida, M. (2007). Playbuilding in a Japanese college EFL classroom: Its advantages anddisadvantages. Caribbean Quarterly, 1(2), 231-240.

170

【Teaching Practice Report】

Quick and Effective Feedback on Writing During Online andClassroom Lessons
Tanya L. Erdelyi
Abstract
Feedback on writing is an essential part of process writing that supports drafting and revision. Yet some teachers
might have difficulty incorporating feedback into the writing course syllabus for various reasons, such as time
limitations or difficulties with changing online and classroom settings. The following is a report on a five-stepfeedback process or activity I developed during the COVID-19 pandemic for providing both peer and teacher
feedback on student writing quickly and during classroom time. With a few minor adjustments, the process can beused in both online and offline classes. The goals of this feedback process were to provide both peer and teacher
feedback regardless of the lesson setting, alleviate overtime work for the teacher outside the lessons, and promote
the development of good writing skills through collaboration. The key to success is to create and follow a rubric that
focuses on key elements of effective writing and reflects what has been taught during the lessons leading to
feedback sessions. First, I provide theoretical explanations to support my decisions, and later I offer a detailed
description of the five-step feedback process. After describing a few observations, I conclude by offering
troubleshooting tips and adjustments that can be implemented to suit different circumstances.
Keywords: feedback, writing, rubric, online, classroom

Introduction
Teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic has presented challenges, including a need to adjust
reliable teaching practices. One such practice is providing feedback on student writing. This feedback
can come in the form of suggestions from teachers, peers, or both.
Some teachers might forego the feedback step of writing altogether. A few possible reasons forthis decision might be time limitations during lessons because of a need to adhere strictly to asyllabus, excessive teacher workload outside of working hours (Gibson et al., 2015), problems withteacher and student feedback literacy (Carless, 2020), and difficulties adjusting to new settings, suchas online lessons (Cox et al., 2015).
However, feedback is a vital step in process writing that supports drafting and redrafting (Hyland& Hyland, 2006), and has numerous benefits, such as the promotion of learning through collaboration(Hyland & Hyland, 2006; Lin & Yang, 2011), strengthening of classroom relationships (Diab, 2011;
Zhao et al., 2014), and improvement of writing (Diab, 2011; Ge, 2011; Hyland & Hyland, 2006). Witha few adjustments to teaching practices, such as increasing student feedback literacy andopportunities for feedback uptake (Ducasse & Hill, 2019), students can benefit from feedback on
their writing. Therefore, it is worth considering devoting time to providing feedback on writing whendeveloping a writing course syllabus.
The following is a report on how I have been providing quick and effective feedback on writing
during lessons since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. I will begin by explaining my five-stepprocess. I will include tips on how to use this activity in online or face-to-face lessons to help alleviate
the burden of working overtime, and how office hour consultations can be used to support major
problems with student writing that require more time and attention. The paper is concluded with171

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

observations from my classes, and suggestions for making adjustments.

Procedure
In order to provide students with effective feedback on their writing in a timely manner,
preparation is required. The first three steps of this feedback activity will lay the groundwork for the
success of steps four and five, the feedback steps.

Step 1 – Decide on the Type of Feedback
The first step in this feedback activity is to determine what sort of feedback can be offered in thetime permitted and with the available resources. Along with self-checking, the two sources of
feedback are from peers and the teacher. Therefore, the teacher must decide whether they will havestudents provide peer feedback, and whether they will provide teacher feedback on the students’
writing. This step will depend on how much time can be made available on the syllabus for feedback.

Step 2 – The Syllabus
After the type of feedback has been decided, the teacher should develop, if possible, a syllabusthat allows enough time for their choice. Of course, this step might be impossible if a teacher is given
a fixed syllabus that must be strictly followed. If that is the case, and if the existing syllabus does notprovide in-class time for feedback, review the syllabus to determine if there are activities that can beshortened to free up the necessary time required for providing feedback. Fortunately, I have been
granted the luxury of creating a syllabus that will suit my students’ needs. As providing feedback isa vital part of process writing (Hyland & Hyland, 2006), I personally prefer providing both peer andteacher feedback, and thus, I devote two full lessons per essay for feedback. After the students havecompleted their first drafts, I ask them to check their own essays. In the same lesson, they provide

Figure 1
Example syllabus from an Academic Skills Writing course
Week

Topic

Homework Due

1

Course Intro; Paragraph Writing (sentences, unity, coherence)2

Paragraph & Essay Writing; Essay 1 Intro; Topic Choices

Paragraph Assignment

3

Thesis Statement; Writing an Outline

Essay 1 Topic

4

Finding & Evaluating Sources

Essay 1 Outline 1 (with ideas)

5

Cause & Effect Structures; APA Formatting; Common errors

Essay 1 Outline 2 (with sources)6

Peer Feedback

Essay 1 Draft 1

7

Revising and editing; Teacher consultations

Essay 1 Draft 2

8Intro to Argumentation; Compare & contrast; Persuasion

Essay 1 Final Draft

9

Reading Academic Journal Articles

Essay 2 Topic

10

Avoiding Plagiarism (paraphrasing, citations, reference)

Essay 2 Outline Part 1 (with ideas)

11

Academic Vocabulary and Tone

Outline Part 2 (with sources)

12Peer Feedback

Essay 2 Draft 1

13

Revising and editing; Teacher consultations

Essay 2 Draft 2

14

Essay 2 Group Discussions

Essay 2 Final Draft

172

QUICK AND EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK ON WRITING DURING ONLINE AND CLASSROOM LESSONS

peer feedback. After revisions are made to the second draft, in the following lesson, I provide teacher
feedback they can use to revise their final draft. Figure 1 shows an example of a 14-week syllabus I
developed for an Academic Skills Writing course.

Step 3 – The Rubric
Using rubrics as teaching tools for formative purposes is highly contested in the world of
education. Some researchers claim that asking students to learn from a rubric promotes instrumental
learning and criteria compliance (Sadler, 2014), or that using a rubric narrows the type of peer
feedback provided (Bouwer et al., 2018). However, an analysis of 27 articles discussing the use of
rubrics revealed that there was limited empirical support for the negative claims made against theuse of rubrics; most of these claims were based on theoretical speculations and anecdotal evidence(Panadero & Jonsson, 2020). If designed and implemented correctly, rubrics have been shown tohelp students improve their performance (Turgut & Kayaoğlu, 2015), take responsibility of their own
learning, and identify what should be done and how it should be executed. Despite the debate overwhether rubrics help or hinder student learning, and the need for more studies on whether the useof rubrics promotes long-term retention (Panadero & Jonsson, 2020), I have chosen to use rubrics as
writing tools in my writing courses to profit from some of the aforementioned benefits, in addition toproviding transparency to the students about what I expect in their writing and consistency while I
am grading their papers.
Therefore, the third step in the feedback process I am explaining is to develop a bespoke rubric
that incorporates and clearly indicates the aspects of good writing that will be graded for the written
assignment. Each descriptor on the rubric reflects a skill taught in the lessons leading to the first
feedback lesson (compare Figures 1 and 2). Because I am asking my students to use the rubric as atool for checking their own writing and that of their peers, I avoided overly complicated descriptors,
as clarity and ease of use of the rubric is preferred by students while using it as a peer feedback tool
Figure 2.
Cause and effect essay rubric
Does Your Essay Have:

No (0)

Some (1)

Yes (2)

Total:/25

4 paragraphs describing causes and/or effects
a hook & background information about the event, situation, or action in the
introduction
a clear thesis statement (stating the cause & effect and your opinion) at theend of the introduction
topic sentences (topic + controlling idea) for P2, P3, and P4
logical structure and organization of the C&Es
3 supporting ideas (evidence) in the supporting paragraphs
3 matching details (explanations) in the supporting paragraphs
a summary & a prediction or advice in the conclusion
paragraph unity (1 topic) & coherence (transitions; keywords)
in-text citations from at least 3 sourcesan APA-formatted Reference List of at least 3 sources
no common academic writing errors (from checklist)
correct essay formatting (e.g., font, indents, titles...)173

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）(Wang, 2014). Therefore, I opted for the clear question form of “Does your essay have…?” instructing
them to focus on and revise any questions from the rubric that were answered with a “No” or “Some.”
Figure 2 shows a rubric I developed for a cause and effect essay in the previously mentioned
Academic Skills Writing course.
Incidentally, as the grades are included on the rubric, this particular tool could also be used for
self- and peer-assessment of writing. These types of assessment, if shared with the teacher, can beused as a formal and collaborative approach between the teacher and students to provide the students
with a grade, or as a possibly insightful suggestion to the teacher while they are grading.

Step 4 – Peer Feedback (optional, but recommended)
In the first of my two scheduled feedback lessons, students focus on self-checking the first draftof their own papers and providing peer feedback while using the rubric. I introduce the rubric to mystudents simultaneously with the introduction of the writing assignment so they can become
familiarized with what they will be learning and what will be graded as they write their first draft.
During the peer feedback lesson, I explain that the rubric can be used as a tool for checking theirown papers, and for collaboratively working together to provide suggestions that might help improveeach other’s essays. During the scheduled peer feedback lesson, I demonstrate and model how to
use the rubric and provide appropriately polite comments by checking an example essay and thinking
aloud during the demonstration (Chang, 2015; Lam, 2010), which also help promote student feedback
literacy (Ducasse & Hill, 2019) by offering them possible feedback phrases and what they mean. I
then ask them to practice using the rubric by checking their own work to become accustomed tousing the rubric as a checking tool and strengthening their skills in identifying problems (Lam,2010). Self-checking also promotes the necessity of proofreading your own work and helps lighten
the load on the next person checking their paper. The peer feedback lesson ends with a few roundsof checking papers of different partners, writing comments, and explaining the comments that are
not understood by the feedback receiver to promote collaboration, clarification, and comment uptake(Ducasse & Hill, 2019; Zhao et al., 2014). To help facilitate easy access to each other’s work, mystudents write their assignments on Google Docs and set the share settings to “anyone with the link
can comment.” By asking my students to check the first draft, it is my hope that, at minimum, minor
problems will be eliminated during their revision homework, thus making teacher feedback on thesecond draft manageable in the available time.

Step 5 – Teacher Feedback
The lesson following the initial peer feedback lesson is the teacher feedback lesson. Before I
begin the consultations, I review the rubric to help focus my attention on what needs to be checked.
For teachers who are uncomfortable with examining students’ work rapidly, provided they haveenough time, I recommend a brief review of the students’ written assignments, making notes on the
major issues that will affect their grade. These prepared comments can be used by the teacher during
the actual individual consultations with the students. Please note that prior access to the students’assignments is required if pre-checking is to be performed. My students write their assignments on
Google Docs and add me as an editor in the share settings of their document.
During teacher consultations, I adhere strictly to the rubric when offering advice, as consultation
times are limited. I place the rubric adjacent to their writing, once again modeling by thinking aloud174

QUICK AND EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK ON WRITING DURING ONLINE AND CLASSROOM LESSONS

to help further their feedback and paper checking training. The key to quick feedback is to focus
solely on the problems that will affect the student’s grade. If the rubric reflects aspects of goodwriting, the students will be receiving feedback that will help improve their essays, not just theirgrades, and help bolster their writing skills. I always remind the students that I will not be
proofreading their papers; I will only be indicating major problems that will affect their grade, as
indicated on the rubric. Should there be other minor problems such as spelling and grammar errors,
I inform the student of their existence in general, and either offer them more time for consultation
during my office hours or recommend other tools (e.g., grammar and spelling checkers) to help
them find the minor problems. I provide further support after class or during my office hours tostudents who have clearly misunderstood important aspects of the skill building courses leading to
the feedback sessions and display serious issues in their writing.
Different preparations will be required depending on the setting of the teacher consultation
lesson. If the lesson is being conducted online, I would recommend a tool such as Zoom that allows
for easy separation of the students into private breakout rooms. During the lesson before teacher
consultations, I explain the procedure so as to save time during the following feedback lesson.
Moreover, I provide a detailed written description of teacher consultation procedures so that students
can review them prior to their lesson (see Figure 3). On the day of the consultation, I offer students
the option of joining whatever room they like and encourage them to switch rooms if their purposechanges. I then create five or six breakout rooms, labeling each room with a different purpose. The
purposes I choose are peer feedback (to give the students a chance to consult with each other for
additional collaborative assistance), silent writing (for students who want to use their feedback inrevisions immediately), chat (to promote a much-needed chance for socialization that some of our
Figure 3.
Teacher consultation instructions.
1. I will set up several Breakout rooms (online) or groups (classroom) with different purposes (e.g., peer
feedback, writing room, chat, and teacher consultation).
2. You can change rooms or groups throughout this lesson, so choose the group matching the purpose that you
would like to devote your time to.
3. One by one, I will meet each of you privately in the teacher consultation room (online) or at my desk(classroom).
4. To save time, I will automatically move you to my room (online) or call you to my desk (classroom). I
apologize in advance for interrupting your conversation with your group members.
5. (online only) Because this room change will happen suddenly, you must please remain at your computer
during this lesson.
6. (online only) If you are not at your computer when I move you to the consultation room, I will bring someone
else to the room and you might lose your chance to talk to me about your essay during the lesson. However,help will always be given during my office hours if you send me an email to arrange a meeting.
7. I will create a column next to your names on a Google Doc and mark an “O” next to your name when I talkto you, so if you want to follow my progress and possibly know when you will be moved to the consultation
room, you can watch the Google Doc.
8. W
 hen you are in the consultation room, I will speak very quickly. To save time, I will not write comments.
9. Y ou can record our conversation if you want (using Zoom or your smartphone’s audio recording function).
10. You
can also take written notes.
11. I will be checking your essay for any major/serious problems you might have. I will not have time toproofread and check all your grammar and small problems.
12. I f you are in a peer feedback room or group, please help each other by giving advice on your essays.
13. I f you are in the writing room or group, please work on your paper quietly.
14. If you do not need to work on your paper, or if you are feeling social and just want to get to know each other,please join the Chat room or group, and take the opportunity to talk to your classmates.

175

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

first- and second-year students have been deprived of during the COVID-19 pandemic), and teacher
consultation (the room I use for individual feedback sessions). After creating the breakout rooms andsetting the timer of the rooms to close at the end of the lesson, I tell the students to join the roomwith their desired purpose, and I begin the consultation process. I forewarn the students that I will
be pulling them out of their respective rooms and dropping them directly in the teacher consultation
room when it is their turn. I apologize in advance for any conversations I might interrupt during thisprocess. I also share a Google Doc with a list of their names, and I move down the list while placing
an “O” next to the students’ names that I have consulted with, so they know approximately when they
will be moved into the teacher consultation room next. Please note, in addition to the three semesters
that were conducted online during 2020 and spring 2021, I have used the same process in the fall2021 semester while conducting face-to-face interaction in the classroom. The only difference
between an online and classroom setting is that in the classroom, I ask the students to break up into
groups according to their desired purpose, rather than “join a breakout room.” The full set of teacher
consultation instructions offered to students has been included in Figure 3.

Obser vations and Recommendations
Regarding the rooms with different purposes, I have seen varying results. One class used thedifferent rooms fairly equally. Another group of students remained mostly in the silent writing room.
The final outcome was an online class where all the students eventually joined the same “chat”
breakout room, evidently enjoying the time to interact. At the end of the teacher consultations, I
joined that room and was relieved to find that they were actually talking to each other instead ofsilently waiting for the lesson to end.
Concerning class size, I have successfully performed the teacher consultation step with a classof 18 Advanced English students during a 100-minute lesson. I generally allocate four to five minutes
per student. Time is often saved with students whose writing exhibits a few problems, and thus, somestudents with more serious issues can occasionally be given more than five minutes. However, please
note that I have several years of experience checking student writing in a fast-paced environment, so
it is definitely a skill that needs to be developed over time. I would also not recommend this feedback
activity with a large number of students who have written papers longer than five paragraphs. Should
four to five minutes per student seem too daunting, an alternative to the method I described above
would be to conduct teacher consultations and peer feedback simultaneously during the two feedback
lessons, allowing the teacher to meet with half of the students during the first lesson and theremaining students during the second.

Further Troubleshooting and Adjustments
There are a few tricks that I learned while developing my skills checking student writing in a
fast-paced situation. To begin with, I encourage the student to voice record their feedback session.
Nowadays, most students have smartphones with built-in voice recording apps. If in a Zoom room, I
enable the participant record function in the settings prior to the lesson and encourage the students
to record their session. Recording the session saves the teacher from writing individual commentsthat will only slow down the consultation. With a voice recording, the students can listen to thecomments they received at their own pace.
Second, be aware of the role of a teacher. When I first started teaching writing, I acted like a
176

QUICK AND EFFECTIVE FEEDBACK ON WRITING DURING ONLINE AND CLASSROOM LESSONS

proof reader, marking every problem, large or small, that I could find. After reading articles that
focused on the negative effects of providing excessive corrective feedback resulting in the dread of
the red pen (Semke, 1984; Truscott & Yi-ping Hu, 2008), I found that this method might be more
harmful than helpful for some students, possibly leading to being discouraged and overwhelmed.
Now, I have a few personal rules that often guide me as I check student writing: 1) if it seems like I
am putting more time into checking their writing than they spent actually writing, I stop checking,and 2) I focus solely on the big issues (those that affect the comprehensibility of the piece and thatshould be, if possible, reflected by the descriptors in the rubric), and remind my students that I am
available for further consultation. Students eager to learn will seek out their teacher, whether it isafter class or during office hours.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the key to offering feedback quickly and effectively, as explained earlier, islimiting comments to those covered by the rubric. A carefully constructed rubric will allow students
to understand important requirements for academic writing, and free teachers from feeling like they
are only helping students “get a good grade.” Having their writing and the rubric side-by-side during
the consultation will show, through modeling, the importance of using the rubric as a writing tool.
Additionally, limiting comments will save time and help students avoid the dread of the red pen.
Many students will tune out if the teacher goes into too much detail because they just want toimprove their grade. Therefore, by constructing the rubric so that it reflects key writing aspects thathave already been taught, it is hoped that the students will improve their grade and learn how towrite.

177

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

References
Bouwer, R., Lesterhuis, M., Bonne, P., & De Maeyer, S. (2018). Applying criteria to examples orlearning by comparison: Effects on students’ evaluative judgment and performance in writing.
Frontiers in Education, 3(86). doi:10.3389/feduc.2018.00086
Carless, D. (2020). From teacher transmission of information to student feedback literacy: Activating
the learner role in feedback processes. Active Learning in Higher Education, 1469787420945845.
Chang, C. Y. H. (2015). Teacher modeling on EFL reviewers’ audience-aware feedbacka n daffectivity in L2 peer review. Assessing Writing, 25, 2-21. doi:10.1016/j.asw.2015.04.001
Cox, S., Black, J., Heney, J., & Keith, M. (2015). Promoting teacher presence: Strategies for effective
and efficient feedback to student writing online. Teaching English in the Two Year College, 42(4),376-391.
Diab, N. M. (2011). Assessing the relationship between different types of student feedback and thequality of revised writing. Assessing Writing, 16(4), 274-292. doi:10.1016/j.asw.2011.08.001
Ducasse, A. M., & Hill, K. (2019). Developing student feedback literacy using educational technology
and the reflective feedback conversation. Practitioner Research in Higher Education, 12(1),24-37.
Ge, Z. G. (2011). Exploring e-learners’ perceptions of net-based peer-reviewed English writing.
International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(1), 75-91.
Gibson, S., Oliver, L., & Dennison, M. (2015). Workload Challenge: Analysis of teacher consultation
responses (Vol. 355). London: Department for Education.
Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching,
39(02), 83-101.
Lam, R. (2010). A peer review training workshop: Coaching students to give and evaluate peer
feedback. TESL Canada Journal, 27(2), 114-127. doi:10.18806/tesl.v27i2.1052
Lin, W. C., & Yang, S. C. (2011). Exploring students’ perceptions of integrating Wiki technology andpeer feedback into English writing courses. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 10(2),88-103.
Panadero, E. & Jonsson, A. (2020). A critical review of the arguments against the use of rubrics.
Educational Research Review, 30 (online first), 1-112. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100329
Sadler, R.D. (2014). The futility of attempting to codify academic achievement standards. High
Education, 67, 273-288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9649-1
Semke, H. (1984). Effects of the red pen. Foreign Language Annals. 17(3), 195-202.
Truscott, J. & Yi-ping Hu, A. (2008). Error correction, revision, and learning. Journal of Second
Language Writing. 17, 292-305. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2008.05.003
Turgut, F., & Kayaoğlu, M. N. (2015). Using rubrics as an instructional tool in EFL writing courses.
Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 11(1), 47-58.
Wang, W. (2014). Students’ perceptions of rubric-referenced peer feedback on EFL writing: A
longitudinal inquiry. Assessing Writing, 19, 80-96. doi:10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.008
Zhao, H., Sullivan, K. P., & Mellenius, I. (2014). Participation, interaction and social presence: An
exploratory study of collaboration in online peer review groups. British Journal of Educational
Technology, 45(5), 807-819. doi:10.1111/bjet.12094

178

【Teaching Practice Report】

Exploring the effectiveness of project-based learning:
Teacher reflections on a student-led seminar project
Ian Hurrell, Anna Belobrovy, Travis West
Abstract
Research on project-based learning in second language acquisition has shown that this approach to teaching canhave benefits in terms of promoting 21st-century skills. This paper details a student-led seminar project which was
implemented by three instructors during the Fall semester of the Advanced English course at Rikkyo University.
After providing a complete description of each stage of the project, each instructor reports on unique aspects of how
the project was conducted in their class, the positive outcomes of the project, and ways in which the project could
be improved. In particular, this paper reflects on outcomes of the student-led seminar project in terms of learnerautonomy, motivation, group dynamics, and the development of academic skills.
Keywords: Project-based learning; Collaborative learning; Learner autonomy, 21st century skills

Background to Project-based Learning
Project-based learning (PBL) has long been lauded as a way to promote more meaningfullearning in language programs (Peterson & Myer, 1995; Skehan, 1998; Thomas, 2000; Beckett, 2002).
PBL has many similarities to other approaches to language learning, such as task-based learning,problem-based learning, also often confusingly abbreviated as PBL, action-based learning, etc.
However, PBL distinguishes itself in a number of ways. Firstly, under PBL, the projects should be thefocal point of the curriculum and not ancillary (Thomas, 2000). The projects should be complex, takeplace over many class periods, and result in a final tangible product (Stoller, 2006). Additionallyprojects should also be process-oriented and consist of many integrated, dynamic tasks that requirelearners to use real-life skills, such as, investigating real-life problems, utilizing authentic materials,
and reflection activities (Stoller, 2006). Finally, central to PBL is a shift away from teachercenteredness to a learner-centered, constructivist approach, where students work collaboratively andautonomously to complete their tasks (Kassem, 2018).
A multitude of research has suggested that the PBL approach has several benefits for helping
students to develop 21st-century skills that are valuable to functioning in the modern globalized
world. Firstly, through engaging with complex, real-life tasks, it has been noted that PBL stimulates
students to develop higher-order creative and critical thinking skills, such as; brainstorming ideas;
resourcefulness in finding materials; evaluating authentic sources of information; and showing
initiative in how to complete tasks (Roessingh & Chambers, 2011). Moreover, by working
collaboratively and autonomously in groups, students are encouraged to develop team-working andself-management skills, such as; assigning roles and jobs; resolving conflicts and reachingcompromises; and sharing and assimilating knowledge from each other’s research (Thuan, 2018).
Finally, completing these tasks in English requires students to develop many integrated language
skills. Students need to develop reading skills to deal with authentic sources through their research,
as well as writing skills by writing up the results of their projects in a report. Students also develop
practical listening and speaking skills through purposeful discussion and negotiation with their group179

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

mates, as well as presenting their reports (Kavlu, 2017).
Despite the abovementioned benefits, there are several considerations that need to be taken into
account when attempting to implement PBL. Firstly, if the project does not provide adequate
opportunities for the students to assign jobs for each other or engage in meaningful discussions, thestudents may face demotivation (Kavlu, 2017). Additionally, students who are not accustomed toworking in groups might face difficulties in negotiating tasks and reaching compromises with theirgroup mates, which can lead to breakdowns in communication and conflict (Grant, 2002).
Furthermore, as students are working autonomously, it can be a challenge for teachers to monitor
how much each group member is contributing to the project, and it can be easy for a small numberof members of the group to do the majority of the work with other members being pushed to theperiphery (Kavlu, 2017).
In order to alleviate some of the aforementioned issues, teachers must take a great deal of careprior to the start of the project-based learning program to prepare a framework for the project(s) thatwill allow students to utilize the skills outlined in earlier (Kassem, 2018). It is also important forteachers to make the goals and expectations of the project explicit to the students, and teachers may
also need to provide extensive training and scaffolding to facilitate the process of learning and allow
students to develop their skills (Roessingh & Chambers, 2011). Moreover, teachers need toincorporate systems to monitor each project group’s progress and be prepared to provide feedback
and assistance where necessary (Roessingh & Chambers, 2011). In fact, despite PBL’s focus onlearner autonomy, it has been reported that managing PBL programs often requires more effort on
the part of the teacher than traditional teaching methods (Fang & Warschauer, 2004). However, withthe right preparation and implementation, PBL can offer a rewarding experience for both students
and instructors.

Background to Rikkyo’s Advanced English Programme
The Advanced English (AE) program at Rikkyo University is a first-year student advanced skillsbased course that prepares students for transition into an international academic environment(Rikkyo ELP, 2021). To qualify for this course, students need to have achieved a TOEIC score greaterthan 680. As this is the only criterion for entry to the course, the advanced program often consists ofstudents with a mixture of communication skill levels.
The AE program is split into two courses; one in the spring semester, focusing on academic
reading and writing; and one in the fall semester, focusing on project-based learning. Each course
consists of 28, 100-minute classes held twice a week over 14 weeks. In the first semester of AE,
students are expected to become familiar with the process of writing an academic research paper andwrite at least one expository report. Students are also expected to learn skills to make basicpresentations of their reports in this semester (Rikkyo ELP, 2021). In addition to their AE classes, allfirst-year student take a discussion class where they learn how to hold clear and balanced discussions
on a range of academic topics, as well as critical thinking skills to consider those topics from a rangeof different perspectives. As a result, students come into the second semester with some skills, which
will be useful for the projects they will engage with.
In the second semester of AE, students use the academic skills from the first semester practicallythough PBL. Teachers have a great deal of flexibility in designing the projects for their classes.
However, the projects should be designed so that students gain knowledge of academic content inEnglish to become confident and proactive in communication with people of other countries and180

EXPLORING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PROJECT-BASED LEARNING

cultures. In addition, the projects should aim to develop independent learning skills so that students
can become more autonomous, collaborative, and creative (Rikkyo ELP, 2021).
This report will focus on a student-led seminar project which the three authors worked oncollaboratively in the second semester of their AE classes in the academic year of 2020/2021. First,
the procedure and rationale of the project as it relates to the literature outlined above will bepresented. Then, each author will share reflections of their experiences and thoughts on the project.

Procedure of the Student-led Seminar Project
The student-led seminar project was the first of two projects conducted by the authors during
the course, and took place over the first 15 of the 28 lessons in the semester. In line with the objectivesof the AE syllabus, the students work collaboratively in groups of 3 or 4 to create an informative
lecture on a controversial world topic. The purpose of the lecture is to inform the audience about themost common arguments given for and against their chosen topic. To give an example, if a groupchose to conduct a seminar on the death penalty, the students would present the most powerfularguments for having the death penalty and for abolishing it. After the lecture, the group members
lead group discussions on the arguments raised in the lectures which are recorded. After completingthe seminar, the students qualitatively analyze the group discussions and write up a summary of theirlectures and the results of their analyses in an academic report. Below, you can find an outline of thecontent of each period in the project:
Table 1Student-led seminar project lesson schedules
PeriodFocus

1Introduction to project work and the student-led seminar project2

Researching and plan lecture3

Creating the lecture slideshow

4

Presentation delivery advice

5

Leading a discussion and summarizing a discussion

6

Final preparations and seminar practice7, 8 & 9

Seminars

10

Qualitative analysis of the group discussions

11

Writing up the lecture

12

Writing the method & conclusion sections

13

Peer review

14

Feedback and Writing the second draft

15

Wrap-up and Mini presentations

As mentioned in the literature review, it is very important that learners clearly understand what
will be expected of them in the project. Therefore, the first period focuses on introducing the students
to PBL. The students are first given a thorough outline of the project. They are informed that theymust prepare a 40-minute seminar on a controversial world issue. The first 15-minute of the seminarconsist of a lecture informing their audience (their other classmates) of the background and thecommon arguments given for and against their chosen issue. The remainder of the seminar isdedicated to having the project groups discuss the ideas raised in the lecture with their audience.
181

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

The details of each part of the seminar will be discussed in more detail in the following paragraphs.
After introducing the seminar project, the students discuss the possible challenges they might facewhen working autonomously. The teacher then leads a discussion with the class, adding to thestudents’ ideas and providing advice about how to deal with issues, such as, resolving disputes,
reaching consensus, assigning jobs, ensuring that all group members participate equally, and how tocommunicate effectively with the teacher when they have questions. The students then form projectgroups and choose a topic for their seminar. To help students find a suitably interesting andcontroversial topic for their seminars, and to provide a start to their research, the students areadvised to access the procon.org website. This website is a useful resource providing information ona wide variety of current world issues, ranging from the regulation of social media to spacecolonization. For each issue, the website provides background information and a summary of someof the common arguments for and against the issue. After agreeing on a topic, the students review
the information on procon.org for homework ready to discuss the ideas in the next class.
From the second class onwards, each period follows a similar pattern. The first 15-20 -minutes
are spent introducing a new aspect of the project and the tasks the groups are expected to complete.
After this initial scaffolding period, the remainder of the class is given to the students to work
autonomously in their groups where they discuss and complete their tasks. To help the teacher
monitor progress, each group should give a short report on the tasks they have completed and thetasks that each member has been assigned at the end of each class. Additionally, the teacher createsa Google Drive folder for each group where the students work on their assignments using Google
Docs and Google Slides. This not only helps the group members to work collaboratively on theirtasks, it also allows the teacher to easily monitor the progress of each group and what each individual
member has contributed to the project.
In period 2, the students discuss the arguments they read for homework and collaboratively
decide the 3 arguments for and 3 arguments against their chosen topic. The groups are required toresearch detailed examples, statistics, and human stories to supplement the information they find on
Procon.org. In addition to researching the arguments for and against, the group is also expected toresearch background information, such as a definition of their topic, a basic history of the issue, andan outline of the current state of the issue.
In period 3, the students start working on designing the slide show for their lectures. In order
for all the groups to have the time to conduct their seminars, the students are instructed that theirlectures should be no more than 15-minutes long. The students are also given a Google Slides
document with a suggested slide structure and advice on how to find powerful images to support theexamples from their research.
The next three periods focus on giving the students time to complete the research andslideshows for their lectures. However, as each group member is expected to present equally, inperiod 4, the students are given advice and useful phrases to deliver their lectures and transitionsmoothly between speakers. In period 5, advice is given about how to conduct the post-lecture
discussions. The students are instructed to ensure that they focus on the discussions on the ideas
presented in the lecture and that each member of their discussion group has an equal amount of time
to express their thoughts and opinions. To help them gain an understanding of this, the students
watch and discuss two video examples of a ‘bad’ discussion and ‘good’ discussion prepared by theauthors. Period 6 is for the groups to make final touches to their lectures and practice before theseminars.
Periods 7, 8 and 9 are dedicated to the groups conducting their seminars. The seminars are
182

EXPLORING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PROJECT-BASED LEARNING

conducted using an adapted version of the Think-Pair-Share collaborative discussion strategy(Lyman, et al., 1981). In the lecture phase, the audience members are encouraged to listen to thearguments for and against the topic with an open mind and think carefully about how strong or weak
they feel the arguments are. To help the audience do this, the seminar members of each projectgroup prepare a simple hand out, outlining the main arguments given in the lecture, which theaudience is expected to study before the seminar. After the lecture is completed, the audience is split
into pairs to freely discuss the ideas in the lecture for 5 -minutes. This is to allow the audience toorganize their thoughts so that they may better express their ideas in the group discussion. During
this time, the teacher can give some feedback to the project group on their lecture and remind themembers of the key points they should focus on in the group discussion. After the pair phase, theaudience is split into 3 or 4 larger discussion groups each led by a member of that seminar’s projectgroup for about 10 -15 -minutes. The leaders first encourage their audience to share their feelings on
the topic and which arguments they found strongest. After this, the discussion leaders guide theirgroups to talk about the other ideas from the lecture that have yet to be discussed. These discussions
are recorded so that they can be qualitatively analyzed in the post seminar report. Finally, at the endof the seminar, the class rejoins as one group and the discussion leaders give a short summary of theideas from their discussions. This allows the class to see whether there were similarities ordifferences in thinking among the groups.
After the seminars are completed, the next three periods are dedicated to having the students
write up their seminars. Each group must produce a 2000 -3000 word academic report with abackground, method, results and discussion, conclusion, and a list of references. In period 10, thegroups perform a qualitative analysis of the discussions from their seminar. Each member listens to
the recording of their discussion and identifies the main themes, as well as any other interestingideas, with supporting quotes. Then, each member writes a paragraph reporting the results of theiranalyses (200-300 words each). In period 11, the students write up the background section of theirreport (800-1200 words), which consists of a summary of their lecture. In period 12, they write an
academic method section (200-300 words) where they describe their project group and outline theprocesses and procedures they used for designing their seminar and analyzing the discussions. They
also write a conclusion paragraph where they summarize their issue and summarize the results fromthe discussions of the audience as a whole (200-300 words).
In period 13, the groups do a peer review of their report with their other group members, where
they check each other’s paragraphs for structure, content and language using a checklist, and thencollaboratively discuss any possible improvements to complete their first draft. The teacher checks
their completed drafts, and in period 14, provides feedback and suggestions for their final draft toeach group. While the teacher is providing feedback, the other students prepare a simple presentationon the results of the discussions from their reports. In the final period, the students share theirpresentations with members of the other project groups and reflect on their experiences during the
project. The teacher can also use this opportunity to help the students appreciate the myriad ofcomplex tasks they have completed collaboratively with their group mates and reinforce the key
principles of PBL.

183

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Reflections(Ian) This was my fourth time to do this project with an AE class, so I had already had someexperience with student-led seminars. Based on experience, I did not give my students a free choiceof topics. I sometimes wonder whether it would be better to give the students a freer choice. However,
due to time constraints, I have found that it is better to give the students a limited choice of selected
topics that; 1) are major world controversies the they could learn more about; and 2) had effective
arguments on both sides that the students could research and generate good discussions.
Overall, the students worked very well together. They could assign jobs effectively, created
informative presentations, led their discussions well and could generate a 2000 -3000 word reportcollaboratively. It is always interesting to me that when I introduce what the students will be doingover effectively seven weeks of classes, the students often seem to feel that it will be an enormous
task. For example, there is often an audible gasp when I introduce the report and tell them that they
will have to complete it within 3 weeks. However, when they realize that 2-3000 words split between
4 students is effectively 500 -750 words each, they understand that the task is manageable if theywork together as a team. This for me is the greatest strength of this project. The project necessitatesthat they divide the work up between the members, set goals and collaborate; and when the students
look back at what they have accomplished at the end of project, the students often comment that they
have gained a good appreciation of the power of collaborative learning.
The biggest issue is that the time-frame for completing the project over 7 weeks is quite tight.
Therefore, one thing I have considered is expanding the project over all 14 weeks of the semester.
This would allow the groups to research the topics more thoroughly and create more informative
lectures. Each group could also have a whole class period for each of their seminars, which would
allow more time for things like, pre-lecture schema activation activities, post-lecture discussion
activities, and a more meaningful summary at the end of the seminar. Finally, a longer time-frame
would give more opportunities for project work training activities. The downsides to this idea are thatstudents would not have the opportunity to work with other students in the class throughout thesemester, and they would also not be able to do the second project, where students have the chance
to develop quantitative analysis skills. However, this is something that I might consider doing in the
future.
(Travis) In my context, the group seminar project was conducted in a class with 19 students, allof whom were Business majors. One aspect that sets this class apart from the other classes includedin this paper is that it was the highest level Advanced English class in the Business Department. This
meant that a large percentage of the students were returnees, i.e., had near native-level English
proficiency. This allowed for a more advanced level of difficulty in the implementation of the groupseminar project, and a larger affordance for autonomous learning. One example of this was topic
selection. Groups were given the opportunity to choose any topic from procon.org, which resulted insome groups selecting more challenging topics, such as Abortion, Universal Basic Income, andAnimal Testing. Students were also instructed to conduct thorough background research on their
topics, and were required to include many references in their project write-up (at least 10). This
increase in autonomy and required background research resulted in project write-ups that varied intheir level of complexity and thoroughness.
A number of positive outcomes were observed while conducting the student-led seminar projectwith the higher-level business students. The most salient outcome was the development of academic
skills. As Kavlu (2017) specifies, one goal of PBL is to foster the development of listening and184

EXPLORING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PROJECT-BASED LEARNING

speaking skills through presentations and group discussions. Students clearly improved their ability
to absorb and interpret information while listening to group lectures, as well as increasing theirability to convey both factual information and opinions during the group discussions. Students also
built upon the collaborative team-working skills developed in the Spring semester. I could observe,
as discussed in Thuan (2018), that the seminar project allowed students to develop these skills while
sharing and assimilating knowledge from each other’s research. In fact, I believe that the completely
student-led nature of the seminars resulted in student interactions that were more purposeful andauthentic, and this further facilitated learner collaboration. Finally, students were able to use
authentic sources and real-world examples to contextualize seminar topics more skillfully than in the
Spring semester.
Although the outcomes of the seminar project were mostly positive, a few issues arose which
may be considered typical in PBL. As discussed in Kavlu (2017), some students felt that the workload
was not balanced evenly between group members. This was particularly the case with one student
who wrote in the seminar reflection that the other members of this group conducted far less researchthan was fair. This particular group consisted of only three students, while all of the other groups had
four, which brings up another issue - unbalanced group sizes. The workload had to be distributed
between a smaller number of students, and this likely contributed to the reported feelings of
unfairness. Finally, many students reported that the most difficult aspect of the seminar project was
being a discussion leader. In future iterations of this project, I would devote more time to developing
skills for leading group discussions.
(Anna) Learning environment in my case could be considered favorable for project-basedlearning due to student number, their major, and educational background. As for the number ofparticipants, the total number of 13 students was divided into 4 seminar groups: 2 groups of 4 and 2groups of 3. The concise number allowed a more effective distribution of the instructor’s attention.
Students’ major- Liberal Arts-was another beneficial condition. It appeared that along with themandatory courses, the Liberal Arts students were offered additional electives in Japanese on someof the controversial topics featured in procon.org and appeared to have prior knowledge. As for thenature and educational background of the student population: around 50 percent of the students
either had experience of residing and studying overseas or were international students. In that way,
the majority of the seminar participants came with a certain number of communicative and academic
skills and a high level of language proficiency. That said, in order to guarantee equal conditions foranother 50 percent of the class with a lower level of communicative skills, the final choices of topics
and group mates was left to the instructor.
As for the learning outcomes, the major part can be confidentially determined as positive andbeneficial in terms of academic skills enhancement, collaboration, and autonomy. As for the academic
skills, I have noticed that seminar structure provided a rare opportunity for the students to gain anauthentic academic experience of a full research cycle starting with the preparation stages thatinvolved critical thinking of the for and against arguments, presenting, leading seminars’ discussions,and more advanced stages of data collection, analysis, and a full-length research paper as an outcome.
On a different note, producing a 3000 words-long academic paper can be considered an intellectual
challenge and bring a sense of accomplishment. As for the social and equally valuable aspect ofcollaboration, student-centered autonomous group work served as a motivation enhancer. The
students demonstrated a more positive attitude compared to the spring semester that was conductedin a teacher-centered way. Demotivated by the online classes during the spring semester, theparticipants demonstrated more willingness to communicate by actively resolving any communicative185

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

issues: addressing the instructor for support, openly reflecting on the working process, andnegotiating the workload with the group.
Although most of the feedback appeared to be generally satisfying, some considerations should
be made for the future projects. Difficulties of time management and inefficient communication
arose due to the fact that the class was offered online. As for the communication and collaboration,some participants were not as technically efficient and cooperative as a result. That led to fallingbehind the schedule of submissions, time constraints and extra pressure on more skilled groupmembers to meet the deadlines. In spite of an abundant amount of time dedicated in every session
for group assignments and planning, the online factor appears as a certain obstacle. Even if thecourse would not be offered in an online format, group dynamics and communication should beclosely monitored.

Conclusion and suggestions for future improvement
Project-based learning is a progressing development in education that suggests tremendous
benefits in terms of learner development: mastering 21st- century academic skills, autonomy,
collaboration is a valuable learning experience an educator can only dream of. In this paper, theauthors determined to investigate the accuracy of the statements above in an attempt to weigh up theeffectiveness of the project -based learning in our distinguished contexts using a student-led seminarformat. We observed that overall student-led seminars followed by a full-length research paper hadconspicuous benefits: sensible and autonomous development of public speaking, academic writing,critical listening and thinking, which also led to more inconspicuous enhancement of linguisticcompetence and confidence and team building skills. On the other hand, the students were forced tocooperate under unusual circumstances and some demonstrated a slight lack of social skills such as
negotiation and problem-solving. Another aspect for future improvement is a more balanced timeframe that might relieve the pressure of meeting relatively short deadlines and allow leeway for
problem-shooting if any group dynamic issues arise. We hope to continue this reflective practice by
examining and providing practical solutions for the issues above to make project-based learning
more meaningful and accessible in a wider range of elective and mandatory courses.

186

EXPLORING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF PROJECT-BASED LEARNING

References
Beckett, G. (2002). Teacher and Student Evaluations of Project-Based Instruction. TESL Canada
Journal, 19(2), 52–66
Fang, X., & Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and curricular reform in China: A
case study. TESOL Quarterly, 38(2), 301–323.
Grant, M. M. (2002). Getting a grip on PBL: Theory, cases andrecommendations. Meridian: A Middle
School Computer Technologies. Journal A Service Of NC State University, Raleigh, 5(1).
Retrieved from http://www.ncsu.edu/ meridian/win2002/514/project- based.pdf.
Kassem, M. (2018). Improving EFL Students’ Speaking Proficiency and Motivation: A Hybrid
Problem-based Learning Approach. Theory and Practice in Language Studies. 8 (7), 848-859.
Kavlu, A (2017) Implementation of Project Based Learning (PBL) in EFL (English as a Foreign
Language) Classrooms in Fezalar Educational Institutions (Iraq). International Journal ofSocial Sciences & Educational Studies. 4(2), 67-79.
Lyman, F. (1981). “The responsive classroom discussion.” In Anderson, A. S. (Ed.), Mainstreaming
Digest. College Park, MD: University of Maryland College of Education.
Peterson, S.E., & Myer, R.A. (1995). Innovative methods: The use of collaborative project-basedlearning in counselor education. Counselor Education and Supervision, 35, 151-158.
Rikkyo ELP (2021). Advanced English 2 (Project English) [Course syllabus]. English Language
Program, Rikkyo University.
Roessingh, H & Chambers, W. (2011) Project-Based Learning and Pedagogy in Teacher Preparation:
Staking out the Theoretical Mid-Ground. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in
Higher Education. 23(1). 60-71
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Stoller, F. (2006). Establishing a theoretical foundation for project-based learning in second andforeign language contexts. In Beckett, G., H. & P. C. Miller (Eds.), Project-Based Second andForeign Language education: past, present, and future (pp. 19-40). Greenwich, Connecticut:
Information Age Publishing.
Thuan, P. D. (2018). Project-based learning: From theory to EFL classroom practice.
Proceedings of the 6th International Open TESOL Conference, Vietnam.
Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. Retrieved October 2, 2021,
from http://www.bobpearlman.org/BestPractices/PBL_Research.pdf

187

多言語教育実践ジャーナル投稿規定
概要：センター内の言語科目における実践報告を年 1 回出版
Ⅰ．投稿資格1． 執筆者は（共著の場合はファーストオーサーのみ）、原則として現職の外国語教育研究センター所属
教員とする。特別号、特集号などの場合はこの限りではない。
2． 投稿論文はそのカテゴリーを問わず 1 教員につき 1 本までとする（共著による論文も一本と数える）。
ただし、投稿論文数によっては、ジャーナル＆リサーチ委員会による決定を経て掲載号・論文枚数等の調整を受ける場合がある。
3． 投稿論文は過去に出版されておらず、他のジャーナルに現在投稿されているものではないこと。
Ⅱ．使用言語原稿執筆にあたっては、センターに所属する教員が広く互いの教育実践及び知識の共有を活性化するにあたり、センター言語科目群に属する日本語、朝鮮語、中国語、フランス語、ドイツ語、スペイン語及び英語での投稿を認める。
Ⅲ．執筆要項
投稿原稿は未公版のものに限る。
1． 原稿の種類は下記の区分に属するものとする。
授業実践報告：外国語教育研究センター内における言語科目全般における授業実践の報告及び所感や、タスクやアクティビティ等、授業における体験や経験に基づいた報告を行う。可能であれば実践に関連する理論的枠組みと関連づける事。
2． 書式は以下の項目全てをできる限り厳守すること。
（1）原稿サイズ
A4 版を使用し、上下各 19mm、左右各 16mm ずつあける。
42 字×43 行、横書きで、フォントは MS 明朝、12 ポイントを使用。
（2）字数
授業実践報告：6000 － 8000 字程度
図表、参考資料、参考文献、注、Appendix など全て含める。なお、図表については、明瞭なもの
を当該個所へ貼りつける。貼り付けられない場合は、別ファイルを用意し、挿入個所を明示する。
（3）原稿タイトル
18 ポイントでセンタリングし、各文字を太字にしたスタイルに従う。フォントは上記書式に従う。
（4）氏名
右寄せ、ゴシック体で 12 ポイントとする。タイトルとの間は 1 行あける。
（5）要旨
全ての原稿に、要旨と 3 ～ 5 項目のキーワードをつけること。要旨は 500 字程度で執筆すること。
書式は、左右 15mm ずつ全行インデントし、フォントは MS 明朝、11 ポイントを使用する。尚要
旨の言語は執筆言語に関わらず英語あるいは日本語とする。
（6）本文への註釈は、対応する註記を各ページの下に 9 ポイントで表記する。
Ⅳ．原稿の提出
1． 原 稿は電子メールにて、ジャーナル＆リサーチ委員会宛（ fler_journal_submission ＠ ml.rikkyo.
ac.jp ）に送信すること。
2． 提出書類は、次の通りとする。

188

（1）投稿原稿

1 部（ A4 版）（2）カバーシート（以下の情報を記載の事）
a）著者名（日本語の場合は日本語とカタカナ読みを併記すること）
b）タイトル（日本語の場合はカタカナ読みも併記）
c）原稿区分d）担当言語Ⅴ．脚注および参考文献の形式
原則的に APA（第7版）スタイルを用いること。執筆者の責任において同一論文の中で齟齬のないよう確認すること。
Ⅵ．投稿開始及び締切日
投稿の受付は毎年 9 月秋学期の開始から行う。初稿の提出締め切り日は 11 月末日とする。
Ⅶ．査読に関して当該ジャーナルへの投稿に対する査読は行わない。但し基本的な内容及び体裁のチェックをジャーナル＆リサーチ委員会が行い、掲載可否を判断する。
Ⅷ．校正及び再提出
内容及び体裁のチェック後、当該ジャーナルのスコープから著しく逸脱する内容や体裁に問題がある場
合、投稿者に対し校正及び再提出の依頼を行う。校正依頼を受けた執筆者は、原稿の校正を行い、校正依頼を受けた日から起算して 2 週間以内に再提出を行うものとする。校正後の原稿はジャーナル＆リサ
ーチ委員会による最終確認を経て掲載可否の判断を行うものとし、執筆者に結果を通知する。尚出版社
より体裁等の追加の修正依頼があった場合は、再度の校正を執筆者に依頼する場合がある。
Ⅸ．出版
当該ジャーナルは毎年 3 月に出版される。
Ⅹ．CiNii 及び立教リポジトリへの登録掲載された論文は、立教大学を通して CiNii（国立情報学研究所論文情報ナビゲーター [ サイニィ ] ）及び立教大学学術リポジトリに登録される。
Ⅺ．その他の要件
1． 原稿料は支払わない。
2． 掲載された論文の著作権は、原則として立教大学外国語教育研究センターに帰属する。ただし、著者が著者自身の研究・教育活動に使用する際は、許可なく使用することができるものとする。
3． 万が一出版後、剽窃等の不正が発覚した場合は当該論文をジャーナルから削除する。

189

Journal of Multilingual Pedagogy & Practice
Manuscript Submission Guidelines
Scope: The journal annually publishes reports of teaching practice related to courses
taught in FLER.
I.

Eligibility
1. Contributions to the journal are primarily limited to individuals affiliated with Center for
Foreign Language Education & Research (FLER). In the case of co-authored papers, thisrequirement applies only to the first author. Exceptions may be made for special editions.
2. A maximum of one contribution per issue is accepted (co-authored papers are also counted as
one contribution). Due to space limitations, your submission may be considered for publication
in a later issue, or you may be asked to reduce the length of the submitted article.
3. Work submitted to the journal should not have been previously published and should not be
under consideration for potential publication by other journals.

II.

Language
In order to effectively share knowledge and research activity amongst FLER-affiliatedinstructors, we accept manuscripts written in one of the following languages: Japanese, Korean,Chinese, German, French, Spanish, and English.

III. Content and Formatting Guidelines
Contributions are limited to previously unpublished work.
1. We accept contributions in the following area:
Practical Teaching Reports: Reflective reports on your teaching practice in any language
courses at the Center for Foreign Language Education and Research. Reports should include areflection, and detailed descriptions of tasks and/or activities. Make sure to establish a clear
connection between your teaching practice and theoretical/pedagogical rationale where
possible.
2. Please ensure to follow all formatting guidelines listed below:(1) Size: Use A4-sized paper, leaving margins of 25mm at the top and bottom and of 25mm
on both sides of the text. The letters in the text should be Times New Roman 12 point,
single-spaced.
(2) Length: Teaching Practice Reports should be approximately 3000-5000 words in length
including graphs, charts, the reference list, and appendices. Graphs and charts should beembedded in the text. However, if it is difficult to do so, please submit as a separate file, but
leave space and indicate where they should go in the text.
(3) T itle: The title should be in 18 point and centered following the capitalization rules. Font
as above.
(4) Author’s name: The name of the author/s should be indented to the right side and written
in Times New Roman 12 point. Leave one line between the title and the name of theauthor/s.
(5) Abstract: Manuscripts should be accompanied by a 150-250 word abstract in either

190投稿規定・Manuscript Submission Guidelines

Japanese or English, which includes 3 to 5 keywords for the article at the bottom. For theabstract, the text should be indented 15mm from the left and right and written in Times
New Roman 11 point.
(6) Footnotes: Footnotes should be placed at the bottom of each page, in 9 point.
3. Manuscripts should be submitted electronically to the Journal & Research Committee atfler_journal_submission@ml.rikkyo.ac.jp
4. The following are required at the time of submission.
(1) An electronic copy of the manuscript.
(2) A cover sheet containing the following information(a) Author’s name: The name should be written in the same language as used in thearticle(b) Title: Use the same language as the article.
(c) Category: Select an appropriate category for your submission(d) Language: Indicate the language which the author teachers irrespective of thelanguage used in the manuscript.
IV. Footnotes and Referencing
The author is responsible for consistently adhering to APA (7th edition).
V.

Call and Deadline for Submission
Submissions begin at the beginning of every fall semester. The deadline for submission is thelast day of November.

VI. Peer Review
Submissions to the journal will not undergo peer review. However, the Journal & ResearchCommittee will check the basic contents and appearance and determine whether to accept it for
publication.
VII. Revision and Resubmission
After checking, if the content deviates significantly from the scope of the journal or there is aproblem with the format, the author will be requested to revise and resubmit. Authors who havereceived a revision request shall revise the manuscript and submit it again within two weeks fromthe date of receiving the request. A final review will be conducted by the Journal & ResearchCommittee to determine if the work is publishable. The author will be notified of the decision once
the final review is completed. The author may be asked to further revise the manuscript if there is
any stylistic/format issue.
VIII. Journal Publication
The journal is published annually in March.
IX. Registration on CiNii and Rikkyo Repositor yContributions to the FLER Journal will be registered on the national CiNii database and the
Rikkyo University Academic Repository.

191

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

X. Other conditions
1. No remuneration is offered to the author(s).
2. The copyright of articles published in the FLER Journal resides with Center for Foreign Language
Education & Research, Rikkyo University. However, the author(s) retains the right to use his/herwork for future research and/or educational purposes without permission.
3. If any plagiarism or misconduct is discovered after the work is published, the published work
will be removed from the journal.

192

【執筆者・Authors 】

Alex BlumenstockAlex Blumenstock is an adjunct lecturer at the Center for Foreign Language Education and Research at Rikkyo
University. He has also taught in the United States and Osaka. He holds an M.A. in English and a TESOL
certificate, both from East Tennessee State University. His current research interests are instructional
technology, peer feedback, collaborative learning, and flipped classrooms.
par Alexandre MANGINMaître de cours et de formation (kyôiku kôshi) au Centre d’études de didactique des langues étrangères(FLER) (Université Rikkyo), il enseigne le français avec la « méthode immédiate ». Dans ses cours, il utilise
aussi la méthodologie française et la traduction. Ses recherches portent sur l’ethnologie et la muséologie
comparées du Japon et de la France, ainsi que les identités locales (autochtonie, survivalisme), mais aussi
certains auteurs (Miyamoto Tsuneichi, Mizuki Yôko).
Andrew Tyner
Andrew Tyner is a lecturer at the Center for Foreign Language Education and Research at Rikkyo University
in Tokyo, Japan. He is interested in finding the most effective means to deliver, or otherwise facilitate,actionable, performance-based student feedback. He is also interested in optimization of lesson structures forlearners of English as a second language.
Andrew Warrick
Andrew Warrick is an English Teacher at Rikkyo University. He obtained his M.A. in Sociology from the
University of Hawaii at Manoa in 2010, but has been teaching English in Japan since 2007. His researchinterests include CALL, WTC, and curriculum design. He has been a member of the Japan Association of
Language Teaching since 2019.
Deborah Maxfield
Deborah Maxfield is currently serving as a Lecturer in English Education at Rikkyo University, Tokyo. While
gaining her MSc in Psychology, she became interested in how group dynamics can combine with cognitive andaffective states to affect learning outcomes, particularly in a second language environment. Her current
research focuses on how findings from social psychology, such as group cohesion, can be applied to boost
student motivation and reduce L2 state anxiety.
Devon Arthurson
Devon Arthurson earned her Bachelor of Social Work from the University of Manitoba and completed her
Master of Arts in Integrated Studies from Athabasca University. Devon taught in high schools in Osaka before
joining Rikkyo University first as an instructor and now as an adjunct lecturer. Her current teaching andresearch interests include fostering learner autonomy and providing a platform for students' voices. Her
volunteer activities include poverty alleviation and awareness-raising about human trafficking.

193

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Heather Woodward
Heather Woodward earned her M.S.Ed in TESOL from Temple University in 2018. Heather taught in China,
Vietnam, and Japan before joining Rikkyo University in 2019. Her academic interests include TBLT, CALL, andmaterial development.
Ian Hart
Ian Hart is currently a Lecturer in English Education at Rikkyo University’s Center for Foreign Language
Education and Research. He holds a master’s degree in Applied Linguistics and TESOL, a bachelor’s degreewith honours in Design, and has taught at universities such as Waseda University and Chuo University. His
research interests include Technology Enhanced Language Learning (TELL), Instructional Design Theory,and Learner Motivation.
Jack Pudelek
Jack Pudelek has lived in Japan and taught English for over 12 years. He has an M.S.Ed. in TESOL and Applied
Linguistics from Temple University, Japan. He has been teaching for over 6 years at renowned private
universities across Japan in both the Kansai and Kanto regions. He is now currently based at Rikkyo University
in Tokyo.
Jonathan Hennessy
Jonathan Hennessy has a master’s degree in TESOL from Central Connecticut State University and is a
Lecturer in English Education at Rikkyo University. He has taught English in Japan since 2012, working at
junior and senior high schools before joining Rikkyo in 2019. His research interests are centered aroundorganic use of language and turn taking and how activity design and teacher intervention can help students
understand how to better navigate their conversations and discussions.
John Paul WhiteJohn Paul White has been working as an English Language Professor at Rikkyo University’s Centre for Foreign
Language Education and Research (FLER) since 2017. Before joining Rikkyo University, he worked in both
England and Japan teaching English to speakers of other languages. His current research interests include thedevelopment of students’ critical thinking skills, content and language integrated learning, and strategic
teaching in English language learning.
Jon Mahoney
Jon Mahoney is a lecturer in English education at Rikkyo University. He has been teaching English in Japanfor over 12 years. He achieved a MEd in TESOL from Sheffield Hallam University in 2018. His main researchinterests include English as a lingua franca, CLIL and developing critical thinking skills.
Joshua Rappeneker
Joshua Rappeneker is an associate professor at Rikkyo University Centre for foreign language education andresearch. His work focuses on CALL and CLIL, and the interaction between technology and teaching practice.
The last two years of online teaching have provided significant opportunities and insight into these that hecontinues to study.

194執筆者・AUTHORSSatchie Haga
Satchie Haga is a full-time lecturer at Rikkyo University in their Center for Foreign Language and Education
Research. She has developed and taught higher education courses in the EFL context for over 10 years and iscurrently conducting doctoral research on Technology Enhanced Learning at Lancaster University. Her
research area examines intersectionality and sociocultural influence in technology mediated spaces.
Kathr yn Mabe
Kathryn (Kate) Mabe has worked as an adjunct lecturer at the Center for Foreign Language Education andResearch (FLER) at Rikkyo University since April 2020. Her research interests include special needs educationin ESL, using CLIL with lower-level classes and most recently, using reading circles in ESL lessons.
Robert A. Smith
Robert Andrew Smith is an adjunct lecturer at the Center for Foreign Language Education and Research.
Primarily guided by cognitive and socio-cultural theories of language acquisition, his research interests include
language learning/use strategies, skill acquisition, small group interaction and self-regulation/autonomy inlanguage learning. He is also interested in researching effective ways to foster critical thinking inside andoutside the classroom.
Russell Minshull
Russell Minshull is an English Teacher at Rikkyo University. He has been working in Japan for ten years, andhas also taught in South Korea and the UK. He gained his MA in Professional Development in Language
Education in 2021 from NILE College in the UK. He also holds the Trinity DipTESOL. His main researchinterests include Needs Analysis, CLIL and English for Academic Purposes.
Nfor Samuel
Samuel holds an M.A. (theatre arts), M.Ed. (applied linguistics) and is currently an external PhD candidate at
The Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany. Prior to moving to Japan to study Noh and Kyogen, he
practiced protest theatre and appeared in stage and television performances as an actor in his native
Cameroon. He has also performed in Tokyo, while simultaneously teaching English. His research interests
include Drama in Education (DiE), Intercultural Competence, and Model United Nations.
Tanya L. Erdelyi
Tanya Erdelyi is a Full Time Adjunct Lecturer in FLER at Rikkyo University. She was born in Canada and has
been living in Japan since 2006. She holds a Master’s Degree from Temple University. Her research interests
are in academic writing, peer feedback on writing, and student participation in the classroom.
Ian Hurrell
Ian Hurrell has been an adjunct lecturer at Rikkyo University's Center for Foreign Language Education andResearch since 2017. His research interests center around the implementation of learner development
concepts, such as learner autonomy and project based learning, to language teaching. He is also interested in
the development of world Englishes and the interplay between world Englishes and interculturalcommunication.

195

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻 （ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PR ACTICE, VOL. 2）

Travis West
Travis West has taught as an academic English instructor in South Korea, Japan, and the USA, and has held aposition as English lecturer at Rikkyo university in Tokyo for the last seven years. Travis has an M.A. in
Applied Linguistics and TESOL from the University of Leicester. His research interests include critical thinking
in a second language, project-based learning, corpus linguistics, and curriculum development in task-based
language teaching.
Anna Belobrovy
Anna Belobrovy is currently employed as an English lecturer in Rikkyo University. She has vast teachingexperience in tertiary English education and has taught in multiple academic institutions in Japan. She is a
graduate of a Master program in Tesol from Teachers’ College Columbia University. Her research interests arelearner development, learner autonomy, classroom discourse and engagement.

196

多言語教育実践ジャーナル

第2巻（ JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUAL PEDAGOGY AND PRACTICE, Vol. 2 ）
発行日

発行者

2022 年 3 月 1 日

立教大学 外国語教育研究センター（Center for Foreign Language Education and Research, Rikkyo University）〒 171-8501

製

作

東京都豊島区西池袋 3 －34 －1

株式会社 遊文舎〒 101-0061

ISSN 2436−2204

東京都千代田区神田三崎町 2 －20 －7

水道橋西口会館 8F©2022 立教大学 外国語教育研究センター

2

Vol.

MARCH 2022

JOURNAL OF
MULTILINGUALPEDAGOGYAND PRACTICE