Learning Learning『学習の学習』
Newsletter of the Learner Development SIG
Autumn 2019

LL 26(2)ISSN 1882-1103

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES | 挨拶と近況報告
In This Issue: Learning Learning, Volume 26, Issue 2 今号について….. Andy Barfield

1

Greetings and News Update 挨拶と近況報告 ….. Yoshi Nakai & Koki Tomita

6

Key Learner Development Events and Sessions at JALT2019 JALT2019 におけるLD SIG関連イベ
ント及びセッション一覧

8

MEMBERS’ VOICES | メンバーの声
Finding Myself in Self-Access セルフアクセス・センターで見つけた自分自身….. Elizabeth
Schlingman

14

Learning and Researching, a Journey 学習と研究、一つの旅….. Natacha Sakamoto

16

Active Learning in an Accepting Learner-centered Environment 学習者中心の環境の受容におけるアクティブラーニング….. Lorna Asami

17

Conducting Relevant Research with Effective Application in Elementary Schools 小学校での教育に効果的に適用できるような研究を行うということ….. Mike Kuziw

20

Facilitation of Motivation Among Non-English Major Students Through Practical Project-based
Learning 実践的なプロジェクトベースの学びを通し英語を専門としない学生のモチベー

21

ションをファシリテートする….. Olya Yazawa
STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING PRACTICES | 学習・教育実践の成功談・失敗談
Action Research with Junior High School Students: Creating a Supportive, Collaborative Learning
Environment 中学生を対象にしたアクションリサーチ：支えあい、協力し合う学習環境の創出について….. Jackie M. Talken

24

Helping Learners Develop Autonomous Reading Strategies 学習者の自律的なリーディングスト
ラテジー開発を支援する….. Logan McCarville29

Exploring Practitioner Research with Yoshitaka Kato 実践者によるリサーチを考えるー
Yoshitaka Katoを迎えて….. Hugh Nicoll & Yoshitaka Kato

36

SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES | 小論
Ensemble: Extended Reflections on Active Learning

42

Learning About the Active Element in Learner Development 学習者ディベロップメントにおけるアクティブ要因に関する学習….. Ken Ikeda

43

Conceptualizing the Degrees of Active Learning アクティブラーニングの程度の概念化…..
James Underwood

46

Active Learning – Some Observations Based on Interactionist Metaphors アクティブラーニン
グー相互作用説的メタファーに基づく観察….. Tim Ashwell49

Introducing Elements of a Four-dimensional Education into an EFL Classroom 4次元教育を導入したEFL教室作り….. Adrianne Verla Uchida

51

Applying Sociocultural Theory to the Writing Classroom in Instruction and Assessment 社会文化理 57
論を応用したライティングの指導法と評価 ….. Nicholas Carr & Paul Wicking
LD SIG GRANT AWARDEE REPORTS | LD SIG 研究助成金受給者レポート

65

What I Learned from Attending My First Conference 初参加のカンファレンスで私が学んだこと….. Miki Iwamoto
LOOKING BACK | 報告2019 PanSIG Learner Development SIG Forum Reflections 2019 PanSIG 学習者ディベロップメ
ント研究部会フォーラムを振り返って….. Robert Morel, Stacey Vye, Anita Aden
LOOKING FORWARD | 今後のイベント
JALT National Conference Preview: LDSIG Related Presentations
Creating Community Learning Together 5 Call for Proposals
SIG MATTERS | インフォメーション

67

Learner Development SIG Financial Report April 2019 to August 2019….. Patrick Kiernan76

Writing for Learning Learning『学習の学習』応定77

Cover photo © 2019 James Underwood

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

69
74

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATESIn this issue | 本号についてknowledge” research project with her students“It's refreshing to write in first person within an
involving photo elicitation and unstructured
academic paper, and it definitely sits much moreinterviews. Natacha is critically interested in
comfortably,” wrote one contributor in developing
developing greater inclusion, diversity and equality
their draft for this Autumn issue of Learningwith her learners, a theme that Lorna Asami
Learning. Another responded, in the midst of reweaves through her narrative reflection on thewriting, “I wish you were at my uni end of term
varied voices and cultural practices of both hermeeting! People might have fallen off of their chairs
formative years in Hawaii and of the Japanese,in shock at these questions. Thank you for making
Chinese, Malaysian, South American, andme think more about the meaning of reflection.”
Vietnamese students that she works with in her
Such genuinely enthusiastic writer perspectives takepresent university teaching. Based in elementary
us into the heart of writing as both about and forschools in Fukui, Mike Kuziw shares, with similar
learner development—and of responding as editors
passion, his ongoing research and teacher
to writers about their contributions for Learning
development activities with his colleagues toLearning. Since June we have been working withimprove the quality of the English classes that theydifferent writers, and it is our pleasure to bring toteach together. In the final Members’ Voices piece,
you with this issue of Learning Learning aOlya Yazawa recounts how she has confronted thestimulating range of reflective writing andloss of motivation that she sees students
practitioner research on learner development.
experiencing in their education both at university
We start with Yoshi Nakai and Koki Tomita’sand in high school. Here Olya has used both Selfwelcoming co-coordinators’ Greetings and News
Determination Theory (SDT) and the new theory ofUpdate ahead of the JALT2019 international
Directed Motivational Currents (DMC) to inform her
conference and of the somewhat smaller and more
research and to develop practical student projects
informal Creating Community: Learning Together 5in her university classes.
(CCLT5) taking place in December in Tokyo. For a
Stories of Learning and Teaching Practices
preview of major LD events at JALT2019, seefeatures three engaging narratives of developing
Getting Connected. Here you can find details of thelearner and teacher autonomy in exploratory ways.
Learner Development Forum and LD SIG Annual
Jackie Talken tells the story of recent action
General Meeting (AGM), as well as the LD Dinnerresearch about ideal classmates that she has been
and Party on the Saturday evening of thedoing to develop a more supportive learning
conference. A full listing of learner development
environment and greater cooperative, collaborative
sessions at JALT2019 will follow in October.
learning and interaction with her junior high school
In Members’ Voices—a space for members ofstudents. Reporting on a micro-teaching task, Logan
the SIG to introduce themselves to each other—five
McCarville explores different questions that camemembers of the SIG share their learner
up for him in designing a lesson that would nurturedevelopment interests and delve into significant
university students’ autonomous reading strategies.
learning experiences they have had. First is
Logan focuses in particular on attending to
Elizabeth Schlingman who explains the manyquestions of learner control over content, learning
different roles that she plays in a university selfmanagement, and cognitive processes, all key
access centre, sharing the satisfaction that she finds
principles for the development of learnerin working closely with students outside ofautonomy. In the third contribution Hugh Nicoll
conventional classroom learning. Natachainterviews Yoshitaka Kato about his journey of
Sakamoto recalls how she started to experimentlearning through to his ongoing engagement with
with a more learner-centred approach with her
Exploratory Practice (EP). Yoshitaka sees EP as asenior high school students after taking part incatalyst for empowering teachers and learners,
learner development get-togethers in 2013, andstimulating innovative research, and helping us
connects this to her decision to do “a funds ofNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>
1

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES
understand the centrality of process in learnerdeveloping their writing and finalising it fordevelopment, and in the field of education more
publication.
generally.
As a reader you are warmly invited to write for
These stories are followed by three shortfuture issues of Learning Learning and/or to stepreflective articles. The first is an ensemble piece of
forward and join the editorial team. So that you
extended reflections by Ken Ikeda, Jamesmay know a little more about how we work with
Underwood, and Tim Ashwell on active learning
writers, let me mention briefly what we do. In our(AL). They each look at AL from different practiceinteractions with writers, as editors, we workand theory vantage points, raising many interesting
collaboratively, inclusively, and transparently. Twoquestions ahead of the LD Forum on AL at
editors work together with each writer, and we
JALT2019. In the second reflective article Adrianne
rotate the pairings so that we keep learning about
Verla Uchida tells the story of applying a Fourand developing together our practices ofDimensional Education (FDE) framework to
responding to writers. For example, for this issue,
designing a course on grammar practice that she
Ken and Sean interacted with Beth on her writing,was unexpectedly required to teach when she took
while Andy and Tokiko responded to Natacha.
up a full-time position at a university in Tokyo.
Fumiko, Ken and Sean also interacted with Miki,
Then, drawing on their experiences of working inwhile Andy and Daniel worked with Logan, Jameshigh schools and universities in Japan, Nicholas Carrand Hugh with another writer, and so on! Thus, if
and Paul Wicking look at how sociocultural theory
you join the editorial team, you will always be
can be applied in collaborative writing andworking with at least one other editor, as well as
assessment activities to promote learner autonomy.
the writer, on helping each contributor tell their
Miki Iwamoto opens the final set ofstory of learner development in their own ways.
contributions by sharing with readers of Learning
In this work, we often make editorial requests
Learning what she learnt from attending her firstto writers. “Good to introduce your passion andconference. Miki was awarded an LD SIG conference
share more about it earlier in the text, as,grant last year to help cover her costs for JALT2018.
otherwise, readers won't know what you are
Her grant awardee essay reveals what a positivereferring to,” begins one of our comments. “This islearning experience attending the conference wasan intriguing observation and I hope you canfor her. Rounding things off, Robert Morel, Stacey
expand on this …”, starts another. We frequently ask
Vye, and Anita Aden share their reflections fromcontributors to write with an “I-voice” about theirtaking part in the Learner Development Forum atpractices and research. “Your story, however, seems
the 2019 PanSIG Conference in May in Nishinomiya,at heart a personal one, and the "I" voice—a firstKobe. They take up issues connected to secondary
person narrative voice is struggling to breakand post-secondary learners’ experiences of selfthrough those passive voice, ostensibly objective
directed learning curricula, including the extent toconventions of academic discourse...”, ventured anwhich learners are guided to follow their interests,
editor in encouraging a writer to take a more
set their own goals, use English outside of class, andpersonalised and voiced position. Perhaps morereflect on their performance and progress.
than anything, we find ourselves appealing to
In closing, Patrick Kiernan’s Financial Report lets
writers to approach their writing as personal stories
us all keep up to date with how the SIG is spendingin which they may re-create reflective, questioning
what it receives from JALT based on the number ofnarratives about their learner development work.
SIG members (currently around 220). Much of what
We know from experience that this helps writers to
LD spends is used for different grants to support LD
share their complex engagements with learner
members—see http://ld-sig.org/grants/ for moredevelopment “close-up”, so to speak, with readersdetails.
of Learning Learning. For us, as an editorial team, in
All in all, this issue includes contributions bymany ways then, the hallmark of writing for andover 20 different authors. We’d like to thank eachabout learner development is personal, narrative,and every writer for creating this issue of Learningreflexive. That’s what we value and focus on.
Learning together, and for working hard on
We believe this way of working with writers
helps to give voice to teachers and learners about
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>
2

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES
the different practices and puzzles that concern
感について報告します。Natacha Sakamoto
them about learner development. We trust that it
は、2013年のGet-Togethers ミーティングに参helps to create a wider sense of inclusion,
加した後に、高校学校レベルでの学習者主体のcommunity, and participation among SIG members
アプローチを模索しつづけ、映像的インタ
too. If this resonates with you and if you would likesimilarly to respond to writers as part of the
ビュー、非構造化インタビューを通して行う”aLearning Learning editorial team, you are warmly
funds of knowledge”というリサーチプロジェ
welcome to join us and develop further the
クトを立ち上げました。Natachaは生徒の内包
community-oriented and community-based
approach that we take in producing Learning
化、多様性、そして平等性に研究的興味があ
Learning. Just contact us at
り、それは、Lorna Asami が今回の物語的な<LLeditorialteam@googlegroups.com>. We’re
振り返りで紹介している、ハワイにおける人格
looking forward to hearing from you. Many thanksの形成期に、そして、彼女が現在教えている、
in advance!
日本、中国、マレーシア、南アメリカ、そしてAndy Barfield, lead editor for LL26(2), on behalf of
ベトナムの学生とのふれあいの中で得た、様々
the Learning Learning editorial team: Tokiko Hori
な知見と、文化的な慣習と合致するところがあ(editor, translator), Daniel Hougham (editor, digitalcontent), Ken Ikeda (editor, grant awardee essays),
ります。福井で教鞭をとるMike Kuziwは、現
Fumiko Murase (editor, grant awardee essays),
在進行中の研究、そして英語教員向けの研修資
Yoshio Nakai (editor, translator), Hugh Nicoll(editor, webmaster), Sean Toland (editor, grant
料を同僚と作成したエピソードを紹介します。
awardee essays), Koki Tomita (editor, translator), &メンバーの声最後の寄稿者はOlya YazawaでJames Underwood (editor, layout)
す。Olyaは、高校、そして大学において学習者
Tokyo, September 2019のモチベーションの低下を感じていました。そ
今号は、11月のJALT第45回年次国際大会と、こで、彼女は学生を対象にSelf-Determination
LD SIG 主催で12月に行われる「コミュニTheoryと、極めて新しいDirected
ティーの創造：共に学ぶ 5」カンファレンスにMotivational Currrents を応用した研究をおこ
先駆け、Yoshio Nakai と Koki Tomitaの挨拶
ない、クラス内でおこなったプロジェクトベー
と近況報告をまずお届けいたします。JALT年
スの実践を報告しています。
次大会でのLD SIG関連のイベントは、LD
学びと指導方法の物語では、物語的手法をForum、LD 年次大会、そしてカンファレンス
使って３人の寄稿者が学習者、そして指導者のの土曜日の夜には皆でテーブルを囲み夕食を共オートノミーを向上させる方法を模索します。
にする予定です。各イベントの内容は今号のつJackie Talkenは、理想のクラスメートは何かながりを求めてのセクションで紹介がありますという質問を、アクションリサーチを通して、が、年次大会でのイベントの時間や場所等の詳より協力的な環境、生徒間での相互作用や共同細は追って10月にお伝えします。
学習を促すクラスの形成を、中学生とのふれあメンバーの自己紹介を兼ねるメンバーの声
いの中で探求しました。Logan McCarville
では、今回５人のSIGメンバーが学習者の成長
は、マイクロティーチングの紹介、そして大学に関する興味や、学びの多かった経験を紹介ま生が読解ストラテジーを向上させる授業の作成す。まず、Elizabeth Schlingmanはいわゆる中に、思い当たった質問を探求していきます。
一般的な教室ではなく、セルフアクセスセン
Loganは、特にオートノミーを発展させるため
ターという、より学生とのかかわりが密接な場に必要な、学習者による「学習内容の選択」、
で求められる様々な役割を通して見つけた達成「学習の管理」、そして「学習認知」に関するNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

3

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES
質問に主題を置きました。第三の寄稿者のいは自分の成績や進度を振り返ったりする際
Hugh Nicollは、Yoshitaka Katoとのインタに、どの程度まで教員が指導すべきかといったビューを通してYoshitakaが専門とする探究実
問題を取り上げています。
践に関する報告を行った。Yoshitakaは探求実締めくくりに、Patrick Kiernanのファイ
践を、「教員と学習者を力づける方法であり、ナンシャルレポートではJALTからの助成金(会さらに革新的な研究分野となりえ、学習者ディ
員の数220名を元に算出)の用途を説明します。
ベロップメントを含むより広い意味での教育のLD SIGの支出は主に会員の助成金に当てられ根幹を認識することを助けてくれる」としていています。詳細は、 http://ld-sig.org/grants/る。
に掲載しています。
続いては、振り返り型の小論です。まず、今号の『学習の学習』では20名を超える寄Ken Ikeda、 James Underwood、と Tim
稿者が貢献してくれました。今号の『学習の学Ashwell が3人で執筆したアクティブラーニン
習』の作成に参加し、発刊までの道のりを共にグについての振り返りを紹介します。かれらしてくださった一人一人の著者に感謝の気持ち
は、アクティブラーニングを様々な視点そしてでいっぱいです。
理論から考察し、そこから湧き上がった疑問点『学習の学習』では編集チームに参加してを2019年のLD forumで発表します。次は、いただけるメンバーを募集しています。LD SIG
Adrianne Verla Uchida がある東京の大学のが行う編集に親しんでいただくために、編集工専任教員になった際に突然教鞭をとることに程について説明させていただきます。私たち編なったクラスで、４次元教育の概念を元に文法集者達が寄稿者との関わりの中で大切にしてい指導を主とする授業を作成した時のエピソード
るのが、共同性、包括性、透明性です。寄稿者
を振り返ります。 Nicholas Carr と Paul
一人一人に、二人の編集者が付き、フィード
Wicking の振り返りでは、彼らの高校と大学
バックが終わるたびに編集者は違う寄稿者にの教鞭をとった経験を元に、学習者オートノ
フィードバックを行います。編集者のローテー
ミーを向上させるための、社会文化論を使用しションの目的は、多方向からのフィードバック
た共同ライティングと評価の活動にフォーカスを寄稿者に提示すること、そして私たち編集者を当てました。
自身が寄稿者とのやり取りをとおして、新たな本号最後の寄稿者のMiki Iwamotoは初め学びを得るためです。例えば、今号では、Kenて参加したカンファレスのレポートをしましとSeanがBethと彼女とやり取りを行い、た。Miki は2018年年度のLD SIG補助金の受賞
Andy と TokikoはNatachaの論文にフィード者で、JALT年次大会に参加しました。彼女のバックを返しました。変わって、Fumiko、補助金受賞者の論文では、カンファレスで体験
Ken、SeanはMikiと、そして、AndyとDaniel
した経験をシェアしてくれています。締めくくはLogan、そして、JamesとHughは他の寄稿
りに、Robert Morel, Stacey Vye, and者と意見の交換を行いました。このように、Anita Adenは神戸の西宮市で行われたPan
フィードバックの際には、寄稿者とはもちろん
SIGカンファレスの振り返りをしてくれましのこと、少なくとも一人以上の編集者とやり取た。中でも、中等教育やそれ以降の学習者におりを行い、さらに、自身の学習者ディベロップ
ける自律的学習のカリキュラムに関する問題
メントの経験をシェアすることができます。
で、学習者が自身の興味を追求したり、目標を本号では、編集チームが以下のようなリク設定したり、教室の外で英語を使ったり、ある
エストを寄稿者たちに伝えました。ある編集者
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

4

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES
は「あなたの情熱を感じ取ることができてとてすことができると信じています。もし、私たちもうれしいですが、序盤でもう少しそれを伝えのこのような取り組みに賛同し、『学習の学たほうがいいですね。というのも、読者があな
習』の編集に参加していただけるなら、さらなたが伝えたいメッセージをここでは受け取るこるコミュニティー主導型、コミュニティーに根とができないかもしれません」と切り出し、他
ざしたアプローチを発展させているけるとおもの編集者は「これはとても面白い視点ですね。
います。もし私たちの編集チームに参加したい
このことについてもう少し膨らませてみましょ
方は<LLeditorialteam@googlegroups.com>にう」というフィードバックを残しています。
メッセージをお送りください。編集チームから
LD SIGでは第一人称である「I」を使って寄稿
心を込めて皆様の参加を楽しみにしています。
者の実践や研究内容を報告してもらっていま
ありがとうございます。
す。ある編集者は、寄稿者の著作をよりパーソ
Andy Barfield, 『学習の学習』26号(2) リード編
ナルなもの、そして自身の声に耳を傾けてもら集者よりうために「この物語は今、あなたの心の奥深く
Tokiko Hori (編集、翻訳), Daniel Hougham
を観察しているように感じます。そして、第一(編集、デジタル編集), Ken Ikeda (編集, 補助金受
人称 の「I」は、自己を客観視するために学術賞者エッセー), Fumiko Murase (編集, 補助金受の世界で当然のように使われている受け身形を賞者エッセー), Yoshio Nakai (編集、翻訳), Hugh
乗り越えようとしている」というフィードバッ
Nicoll (編集, ウェブ担当), Sean Toland (editor,
クを行いました。おそらく何よりも、私たちはgrant awardee essays), Koki Tomita (編集、翻訳),寄稿者達に自身の声を聞くこと、問題を個人の& James Underwood (編集、レイアウト)
ものとしてアプローチすることを伝えています。そうすることで、寄稿者たちは、学習者
東京, 2019年9月
ディベロップメントを発達させた経験談を深化させ、今までと異なった角度から問題を捉え、自身にさらに発展的な質問を与えることができると信じ問います。これまでの経験から、寄稿者たちは『学習の学習』の読者と共に、学習者
ディベロップメントという複雑な挑戦に真っ向から向き合うことができると思います。私たち、編集チームにとって学習者ディベロプメン
トの「ため」、そしてそれに「ついて」書くことに必要なことは、個人的、物語的、そして振り返りだと信じています。それが私たちの信じるものであり、大切にしていることです。
このように寄稿者との関わり合いの中で、学習者ディベロップメントに関する様々な活動や質問を声にする機会を与えることができ、このアプローチによってより多くのメンバーの声にふれることができ、さらなる包括的な環境の整備や、意識の向上、そしてさらなる参加を促
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

5

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATESGREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES | 挨拶と近況報告
Greetings! Welcome to Learning Learning! We hopethat this issue also will bring you a lot of meaningfulchances to gain fresh insights into learnerdevelopment.
First and foremost we would like to appreciate
SIG members’ collaborative support for the LD SIG
and say special thanks to SIG officers for theircontributions. Especially, now we would like toexpress our thanks to the contributors and editorsof this issue of Learning Learning. Speaking of
publications of the LD SIG, editing work on Volume
3 of The Learner Development Journal: Learner
Identities and Transitions is nearly complete. As oneof the editors I would like to thank the contributors,
the Review Network members (Thomas Bieri, Alice
Chik, Michelle Golledge, Sabine Little, FumikoMurase, Hugh Nicoll, Ted O’ Neill, Colin Rundle,
Akiko Takagi, and Katherine Thornton), my fellow
editors Christina Gkonou and Jim Ronald, and the
Journal Steering Group (Tim Ashwell, Darren Elliott,and Alison Stewart) for all their hard work. Volume
3 of the journal will be published soon.
Almost half of this academic year has alreadypassed, but we will have more exciting events in thenext 6 months. The biggest event, the 45th JALTInternational Conference, is about to take place in
Nagoya from Friday, November 1, to Monday,
November 4. The theme of this conference isteacher efficacy and learner agency. According to
the JALT website, learner agency is defined aslearners "having ownership over their learning" or"the power to act, " which can foster learners'
ability to learn throughout their lives—a key
characteristic of learner development. "Teacher
efficacy" is at least as difficult to define as "learner
agency”; but when teachers work together (aslearners) we are more likely to construct learning
environments in which learners develop theircapacity to take ownership of their learning. During

the conference, we will have our LD forum andAGM and we look forward to having you join us!
Speaking of conferences, the Tokyo get-together
team will organize another fascinating informal
event with teachers and students taking part:
Creating Community: Learning Together 5 (CCLT5)
on Sunday December 15 2018 at Otsuma Women’s
University. More details will follow soon. Moreover,the PanSIG & JALTCALL conferences will take placein May in 2020. Although these events will be held
next year, the deadline for the PanSIG will be inJanuary 2020 and in February 2020 for JALTCALL.
We hope you will consider participating in these
conferences and be encouraged to put in a proposal
about your interesting research and practices.
Last year, our SIG celebrated its 25th anniversary.
This would not have been possible without ourmembers’ and officers’ contributions over all those
years. For the sake of the continuing developmentof the SIG, as a member you are very welcome totake part in LD SIG activities and/or to step forward
and take part in the LD SIG committee. We
especially need people to help with publicity andmembership. We would like to have two or threepeople working together as a publicity team, so if
you are interested in this kind of work or in joining
other teams, please do let us know.
We close our greetings by hoping that we will
be able to meet you at the above conferences and
we are looking forward to your contributions for
future issues of Learning Learning.
Koki Tomita <tomita.koki@gmail.com> and Yoshio
Nakai <uminchufunto@gmail.com>
Learner Development SIG Co-coordinators

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

6

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATESGREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES | 挨拶と近況報告
ようこそ、みなさま。

大会のテーマは教師効力感と学習者主体でLearning Learning をご覧いただきありがとう

す。JALTのホームページによれば、学習者主ございます。今号も学習者ディベロップメント

体は自分の学習に対するオーナーシップ（自己に関する新たな発見のある有意義な機会がお届

所有感）、あるいは「行動する力を持つ」学習

けできることを願っています。

者のことであると定義されています。これは生まず初めに、LDSIGを支えてくださったメン

涯を通して学習していく能力を育てることにつバーの皆様の協働的なサポートに感謝申しあげ

ながり、ひいては学習者ディベロップメントのるとともに、SIGの委員の皆様の多大なるご貢

重要な要素の一つであるとも言えます。加え献にもお礼申し上げたいと思います。

て、協働を通して得られる集合的教師効力は私

また、特に、Learning Learningの今号にご論たち教師にいかなる学習者も発展を遂げること考をお寄せくださった執筆者のみなさま、ならができるという観点をもたらしてくれることにびに編集委員の皆様にも感謝したいと思いま

なるでしょう。この大会ではLD SIGもLD

す。LDSIGのジャーナルに関して言えば、The

フォーラムや年次委員会を開きますので、皆様

Learner Development Journalの第3号、にご参加いただければと思っています。SIGレ

Learner Identities and Transitionsが刊行に向

ベルでのカンファレンスについては、Tokyo

けて最後の編集作業に入っています。編集者のget-togetherグループが12月15日に大妻女子大一人として、この場をお借りして、執筆者のみにおいてCreating Community: Learning

なさま、査読委員のThomas Bieri, Alice

Together 5 (CCLT5)を開催する予定です。こちChik, Michelle Golledge, Sabine Little,

らは、教師と学生が集うインフォーマルなイベ

Fumiko Murase, Hugh Nicoll, Ted Oʼ Neill,ントです。詳細については後日お知らせしま

Colin Rundle, Akiko Takagi, and Katherine

す。

Thornton、そして編集委員仲間のChristina

さらに、2020年5月にはPanSIGとGkonou and Jim Ronald、そして最後になり

JALTCALL が開かれます。来年のイベントです

ましたが、ジャーナルの委員であるAlison

がPanSIGが年が2020年1月、 JALTCALL が

Stewart, Darren Elliott, and Tim Ashwellに2020年の2月が要旨提出の期限となっていま

感謝の意を表したいと思います。第3号はまもす。みなさまの研究と実践の成果の発信のためなく刊行の予定となっています。

にも、ふるってご応募ください。

今年度ももうすでに半年が過ぎてしまいま

昨年LD SIGは25周年を迎えました。ひとえしたが、残り半年に刺激的なイベントがいくつにメンバーと委員の方々のおかげであり、ご協か開催されます。まず最大のイベントとして力がなければ迎えることができなかったと思いは、第45回JALT国際大会が11月1日から4日まます。SIGの今後の益々の発展のためにも、メで名古屋で行われます。

ンバーとして、あるいは委員としてSIG活動にご参加いただきと思っています。
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

7

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES
現在、広報活動とメンバーシップに関する
Active Learning as a Policy forTransforming Lives

委員を募集しています。広報委員、メンバー
シップともに2、3名のチーム体制で活動を行なっております。ご関心のある方はぜひご連絡
いただけますようよろしくお願いします。
それでは、最後になりましたが、今年度に開催
予定の学会でお会いできること、また、
Learning Learningへのご投稿も楽しみにお待ちしております。
中井好男 <uminchufunto@gmail.com>、冨田
浩起 <tomita.koki@gmail.com>
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 コーディ
ネーター

Key Learner Development
Events and Sessions at
JALT2019(1) Learner Development SIG Annual Party and
Dinner: Taking place on the Saturday eveningof the conference, with more details to follow in
October.
(2) Learner Development Presentations: a fulllisting of LD sessions at JALT2019 are in the
Looking Forward section.
(3) Learner Development SIG Annual General
Meeting: Sun, Nov 3, 11:45 AM - 12:45 PM;
1103(4) Learner Development SIG Forum: Sat, Nov 2,
5:00 PM - 6:30 PM; 1002.

"Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involveme and I learn" (Xiang, 818). Presentations in the
Learner Development SIG Forum will critically explore
what happens to learners when participating in active
learning. In addition to considering active approaches inpractice, topics will examine active learning in policy,
online, through independent research, experience, andas a theoretical concept. Timed rounds of interactive
presentations will be followed by reflection for the SIG’snewsletter.

Adding Preparation Time to Active Learning
Activities for Increased Motivation andParticipation
Lorna S. Asami, Keisen University
In a typical EFL tertiary classroom, students havevarious tasks to complete to receive assessment
from their instructor. Even if all the tasks include
active learning activities which would help thelearner to be engaged and result in a higher level ofretention, some learners may balk at certain tasks if
it is not their preference for learning. In order toovercome this resistance, this instructor attempted
to provide more time to the preparation of eachtask with the hope to engage the learners andachieve increased participation in the tasks.
Explanation, discussion, and goal-making wereadded to the beginning of a course to improvelearner motivation for the active learning tasks. A
description of the tasks and results of this strategy
with approximately 80 students are reported onusing the data from a survey, and further
implications for research provided.
Active Learning through Bilingual Group Discussion
Tim Ashwell, Komazawa University
In my third- and fourth-year seminar classes thisyear, I have introduced a new way of working whichcentres on discussion of specialist material in both
Japanese and English. Thus far in my seminar

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

8

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATESclasses I have not expected students to discuss
Using Smartphones to Help Create a More Active
material but have simply required them to takeLearning Environment‘readiness’ tests and to engage in tasks connected
Blair Barr, Tamagawa University / Otsuma Women’sto the topic. This year, my hope is that by having the
University
students prepare a reading in advance, by reading
It is not uncommon for teachers to devise rules tothe material together in class, by then discussing
take phones away from their students. Thesethe material in Japanese and English, and by making
teachers typically feel that smartphones are a
individuals and pairs responsible for leading the
distraction from classroom activities and lectures.
discussions, students will become more actively
However, in this presentation, I will demonstrate
involved in understanding and asking questions
how these naturally distracting objects can also be
about the content of the material. In thisput to use as personal displays and sources ofpresentation, I will show how the students
accountability that can foster a more active learning
evaluated this new way of working and will assess
environment, even with larger classes of 30 or morewhether this new format has led to greater active
people. Examples will include learners using games,
learning.
study applications, websites, online forms,
recordings, and online flashcards to guide
Looking at Active Learning through the Lens ofindividuals and groups through their language
Student Fieldwork
learning and speaking activities at a faster pace. The
Andy Barfield, Chuo University
presentation will also critically explore theIn this poster presentation I look at active learning
challenges to successfully managing on-screen timewith a small group of undergraduates through theso that the phone is a tool rather than the focal
lens of student fieldwork. As preparation for later
point of the learning experience.
overseas fieldwork, in the Spring semester, thestudents did initial fieldwork observations at
Visualizing Active Learning with Legitimation Codedifferent sites in Tokyo. They also did interviews in
TheoryJapanese, reporting back in English and Japanese on
Dominic G. Edsall, Ritsumeikan University & UCL
what they had learnt. In the summer vacation theInstitute of Education
students visited Myanmar for two and a half weeks
Active Learning has become a popular buzzword into research individually a particular social justiceJapan and elsewhere. However, there is no agreed
issue that interested them. This included visits todefinition and many teachers are left to interpret
local organisations, fieldwork observations, andthis on a case by case basis. How do we know if ourstreet interviews, many conducted bilingually instudents will learn actively or have actively learned?
collaboration with students from a local university.
Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) offers a way to
Keeping notes and reflections, the students
visualize knowledge construction processes within aregularly documented their changing
lesson activity through the language used to give aunderstandings of fieldwork and their researchbetter insight into what active learning is and how
issues. In this presentation I look at how theiractivities might be used to encourage it. LCT
fieldwork developed over time and consider how
extends ideas from the work of Bourdieu and Basilthe lens of student fieldwork may re-focus ourBernstein developing theories and approaches fromviews of active learning.
general education and educational sociology, andLCT allows for the evaluation of active learning
within the second language classroom. Using the
LCT concept of Semantic density, several examples
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

9

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES
of real classroom activities will be discussed inwill show how this community-building has
relation to how they supported or failed to support
occurred in a class of university students of differing
active learning.
years and levels.
Introducing Peer-review: A Principled Approach
Ian Hurrell, Rikkyo University
It has often been stated that peer review activities
play an integral part of helping students to develop
their writing skills. However, it is also the case thatmany students, who have no experience ofcommenting on each other's work, can struggle togive meaningful feedback to their peers. In thisinteractive presentation, the presenter will reporton ongoing research focused on aiding freshmancollege students to take an active role in reviewing
and commenting on each other's written work in anadvanced reading and writing class. Particularattention will be paid to methods, principles andactivities that can be utilized to effectively
introduce peer review techniques to inexperienced
learners. The presenter would also like to engage
the audience in discussion and exchange ideas
about how we might better engage our students inpeer review in a more active and meaningful way.
Enabling Students to Express Opinions from Their
Core Values
Ken Ikeda, Otsuma Women's University
How can we get students to utter meaningful
opinions? Bonwell and Elson (1991) state their fifthfeature of students in active learning involves
exploring their own attitudes and values. I proposethat this desired outcome comes through having
students construct opinions based on the degree
they agree or disagree to a list of value statements.
Their opinions come from what they may believe
and think are important, but Lemke (2008) argues
are based on their fears and desires. After
examining their stances to these value statements,
students can build their views into organizedmanifestos or platforms. Through active dialogicalinteraction, students also engage in communitybuilding and create shared statements. My poster

How Dual Orientations Can Assist Understanding
Young Japanese Learners’ Learner Autonomy
Fumiko Ishinuki, Kumamoto Gakuen University
Learner autonomy involves an individual learner’s
goal-setting, monitoring and evaluation of theirown learning. Among those, goal-setting plays quitea significant role since the other two elements are
based on the goals set by the learner. While itappears that there is implicit shared understandingthat the goals are related to a learner’s becoming
an autonomous user of the target language forauthentic communicative purposes, young
Japanese learners often have other objectives
related to examinations and school grades (i.e.
often quoted as ‘dual orientations in studying
English’ (Yashima., et al (2004)). Based on data fromthe presenter’s current study, strength of each goal
orientation by an individual learner can affectdifferent elements of learner autonomy
development in the process of learning through acourse based on experiential learning. Thus, it issuggested that dual orientations perspective beincorporated in examining learner autonomy inJapanese educational contexts.
Toward More Effective Active Learning – Analyzing
Students’ Interaction in a Discussion Class
Kio Iwai, Rikkyo University
Active learning is defined by Bonwell and Eison(1991) as “instructional activities involving students
in doing things and thinking about what they are
doing.” In Japan, ever since the Central Council for
Education mentioned active learning in its report in2012, a variety of learning methods have been
explored in order to promote active learning. In theuniversity discussion class where I teach, various
ways to involve students such as pair-practice, pairopinion exchange, group-opinion exchange are
adopted. While in some discussions, students

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

10

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES
mechanically ask questions and answer them, intraditional arrangement where retention is believed
other discussions, students arrive at a deeper
to be as little as 5% that has led to a growing
understanding as a result of continuous efforts
interest in active learning approaches in Japan (Ito,trying to understand each other. I would like to2017). Small classes are often seen as a prerequisite
illustrate what is happening in a discussion where
for active learning. However, this poster willlearners think harder about what they are doing by
introduce an active approach to learning used withanalyzing students’ interaction. Further, I would likea class of over 100 students. The course introduced
to suggest a way to enhance effectiveness of active
began as a much smaller class of around 50
learning.
students but expanded over several years to almost
200. During this time, techniques were evolved to"Meccha active": Deep Active Learning,
promote active learning, including group discussion,
Collaborative Project-based learning, and Teacher
presentations, journal writing and use of a mobile
Education“clicker.” The poster will illustrate how these
Nick Kasparek, International Christian University
techniques have been implemented and modified,This presentation will unpack the revised official
student reactions to the activities and the kind of
buzzword “active learning” in its recent official
problems still faced.
meaning as “independent, dialogical, and deeplearning” (Matsushita 2018, p. 8), exploring the
Fostering Active Learning in Compulsory EAPClasses for Non-English Major Students
literature shaping and responding to official
Jenny Morgan, Sophia University
Japanese policies and addressing curriculum design
Teaching for the first time in a compulsory EAP
more broadly. As Matsushita notes, active learning
skills-driven syllabus, I was uncertain how to
was first explicitly contrasted with “one-sided
balance the institutional requirements with a morelectures” (p. 16), which rarely characterizebottom-up, learner-driven approach to learning andcommunicative English language courses. However,teaching. I had various concerns about how to makedrawing upon my experience teaching an English
academic English learning relevant and interesting
discussion course for teacher-trainees with
to first-year students with a wide range of linguistic
mandated active learning assignments, I suggest
and academic skills. Would an ‘active learning’that collaborative project-based learning provides aapproach which provides learners with many
helpful framework for English instructors not only
opportunities for ‘interaction, autonomy and deep
to fulfill such “active learning” requirements but
learning’ (MEXT guidelines in McMurray, 2018) bealso to use these assignments for meaningful
effective in engaging students from diverse“meccha active” learning. While ideally institutions
departments and developing their EAP skills? In
would provide teacher training for how to use
this poster presentation, I will share classroom“active learning,” I hope to present clear and simple
activities, puzzles and materials, and invite
structures that teachers can use independently andparticipants to comment and share theircollaboratively to create and scaffold “deep active
experiences in fostering active learning.
learning” worthy of its name.
Effects of Issue Logs on Learners’ Active Learning
and Speaking Skills Improvement Sakae Onoda,
Juntendo University
This presentation will show how issue log tasks, atype of pair work, can help learners engage inactively listening to each other’s stories andNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>
11
Active Learning in Large Classes
Patrick Kiernan, Meiji University
Large university classes are often the epitome ofpassive learning, where the teacher speaks and thestudents listen. Indeed, it is a reaction against thisLearning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES
responding to these with curiosity and critical
Autonomous Active Learning through Teletandem:
minds, thus helping them build rapport andOne Undergraduate’s Experience
ultimately improve their English interactional skills.
Clair Taylor, Gifu Shotoku Gakuen University
L2 literature indicates that the intensive use of such
Teletandem is an active learning practice where atasks, when finely tuned to learners’ proficiency
proficient speaker of one language pairs with aand intellectual and motivational levels, can help L2
proficient speaker of another, and through regularlearners achieve their linguistic, affective, and social
voice/text/video chat meetings (using angoals, all of which are critical to using English in
application such as Skype), each helps the othertoday's global society. The presenter will firstlearn their target language. The learners exercise
explain the features of issue log tasks along withand develop autonomy as they negotiate the timing
their theoretical underpinnings, the learners’ key
and content of the sessions, the tools used, andfeatures, and their feedback on their own issue log
approaches to correction and feedback. This
performance, including perceived pedagogicalnarrative study explores the tandem experiences ofbenefits. Finally, the presenter will show a DVD of
one undergraduate learner of English, studying at alearners’ performance so that members of theprivate university in Japan, who engaged in weekly
audience can witness how learners engaged in thetandem activity for 17 months with an Americantask.
learner of Japanese, organized through their
universities, which are partner institutions. The
Learners as Co-Researchers: Actively Learning
story illustrates the affordances of tandem activity
about Active Learning
for the maintenance or development of language
Joe Sykes, Akita International University
skills, for sustaining motivation to learn, and for
By engaging university students in inquiry into theirpersonal growth through the building of deep,
emplaced learning, I was able to gain deep insights
strong bonds with a teletandem partner.
into their experiences of active learning, while
simultaneously empowering them in a number of
Feeling Pressure or Comfort? Students’
ways. As co-researchers, they developed practical
Perceptions toward English only Classrooms
and intellectual skills of inquiry, the use of which led
Koki Tomita, Soka University
to greater awareness of factors influential over theirThis research attempts to find out connections
learning and identity formation, and gave them abetween students’ emotions toward speaking
voice in university policy. The project I present
English and English only policy implemented in fourinvolved three phases: an ‘auto-ethnographic’skill English courses. In particular, this study
phase, in which the co-researchers reflected on
examines how students’ willingness totheir learning journeys, presented them ascommunicate (WTC) in an environment where themultimodal narratives and conceptualised theuse of English is reinforced by the teacher changes
university as a place of active learning; anover time. Participants of the study are 93 freshmen‘ethnographic’ phase, where they extended theirstudents studying at a private university located in aunderstanding by inquiring into the perspectives ofsuburb of Tokyo. They belong to the faculty of law,other students in the university; and, an ‘action’education, or literature of the university and meetphase, in which we (the co-researchers and I) used
two times a week for the English course. This study
our findings to inform evidence-based policy
employs the paired samples T-test to measure to
recommendations, made to the university
what extent the level of WTC changes after taking
administration.
the courses held under an English only
environment. In semi-structured interviews, theNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

12

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES
researcher also follows up with participants to
identify further needs of participating classes
Learning Learning Editorial Teamtaught all in English.
Those working on Learning Learning share acommitment to working together in small teams. We
aim to learn together about writing, editing,Language Learner Autonomy and its Relation withresponding, and/or translating, for our shared personal
Motivation Beyond the Classroom
and professional development. Some areas where weFang-Ying Yang, National Chiao Tung University,
would like to encourage SIG members to take part and
Taiwanwork together on Learning Learning include:
This study aims to examine the nature of language• Layout and Design: working on the formatting andlearner autonomy in a self-directed English listening
preparation of finalised content for online
program and explore its relation with motivation
publication
beyond the classroom. A mixed-method design was• Members’ Voices (co-)coordinating: contacting
adopted. Thirty-seven EFL college students
news members of the SIG and working with themvoluntarily participated in a non-credit out-of-classto develop their writing in a variety of formats andself-directed English listening program. The
lengths as a first step to taking part in the SIG’s
program provided resources and support for two
publication activities;
forms of learning: self-directed listening practices• Looking Back (co-)coordinating: working withusing online materials and socially-mediatedcontributors writing on events related to learnerlearning through onsite and online interactions
development (conferences, forums, get-togethers,
workshops, both face to face and online) forwith teachers and peers. Participants were allowed
publication in Learning Learning;
to develop and implement their own study plans.
Quantitative data included TOEFL listening test
• Research and Reviews (co-)coordinating:encouraging potential contributors to send inscores, a motivation questionnaire, and an end-ofsummaries and accounts of research, as well as
program questionnaire. Qualitative data included
reviews (of books, journal articles, materials, orlearning diaries, end-of-program interviews, andweb resources relating to learner development),teacher/researcher’s field notes. Findings indicate
and working with them to develop their writing forthat participants who had higher levels of
publication in Learning Learning.Learning Learning
promotional instrumentality of learning English
If you are interested in any of these areas of working
showed higher levels of proactive autonomy; those
together (and/or you have other areas of interest) and
who had preventional instrumentality tended towould like to discuss your interest and ideas, pleaseemail the Learning Learning editorial team:demonstrate reactive autonomy. The theoretical<LLeditorialteam@googlegroups.com>
connection between autonomy and motivation will
be discussed.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

13

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Members’ Voices

MEMBERS’ VOICES | メンバーの声
Finding Myself in Self-AccessElizabeth Schlingman
Konan Women’s University
Email: <e.schlingman@gmail.com>
Two years have passed since I became an advisor ata self-access learning center (SALC) and, with a lot
more to learn about this field, I still find it a bit
challenging to explain this context and what I
actually do in an understandable way. Put simply,
SALCs are places where students are encouraged todevelop more autonomous learning skills (seeGardner and Miller, 1999, for the definitive look atthese spaces). In our center, like many others inJapan and abroad, we try to help students acquire
these skills by offering language learning advising,study resources, and social opportunities forlearners to collaborate with peers. Though myofficial title is “language learning advisor,” that is
only one facet of the work I do. It also includes
things like student staff development and running a
conversation program. Usually to casualacquaintances or relatives I keep it simple by saying“I teach at a university.” To those who are interested
I provide more details, but I sometimes feel lessthan eloquent in breaking down the related jargon.
I get caught off guard by reactions like surprise at
the fact that I am not a classroom-based teacher or
confusion about what self-access learning means. I
appreciate that these exchanges challenge me toreflect more deeply on what I do. While not always
easy to define, I’m thankful that I discovered a rolethat allows me to really get to know students andcollaborate with them to find ways to improve theirlearning and make our SALC better.
I’ve always had a natural curiosity about others’
lived experiences—an interest that deepened after I
took part in international exchange programs inhigh school and began to study cultural andlinguistic anthropology in college. Feeling inspiredby my courses and these experiences, I looked formore opportunities to get involved withinternational education. As an undergraduate
orientation leader for international students I was
asked questions that forced me to rethink myassumptions. I had to figure out how to explain
things to groups of people with different
backgrounds and levels of English fluency for the
first time. Through positions like these I learned tolove helping students, getting to know what
motivated them, and trying to understand where
they were coming from. As I was interested inlinguistics and wanted to continue working withinternational students, I decided to make a careerout of it and earned a master’s degree in TESOL.
Before becoming an advisor at my current
institution, I taught English part time at a university
in Japan. This reaffirmed my interest in teaching thisage group, but left me feeling somewhat frustrated.
With big class sizes, only meeting each group once aweek, and having almost no extra time after class tohelp students who were struggling or hadquestions, I felt that I wasn’t able to have much of apositive impact. I could get to know some of thestudents in courses that included interactive
speaking or writing exercises, but it felt like thesemester was over before I knew it and the next
would begin with a totally new batch of students.
When the opportunity came to accept a position
that took me out of the classroom, I jumped at it.
Now, every day, I directly interact with students
in more meaningful ways. I chat with students who
are using the center, catch up with frequent users
on how their studies and off-campus lives are going,
work with a team of domestic and international
student staff in facilitating an English conversation
program, lead one-on-one learning advisingsessions, help to supervise student staff who
contribute to make the center better, andcollaborate with other advisors and teachers. It has
been so rewarding to be able to explore thecomplexity of each student’s relationship withlanguage learning and observe them changing. One
student, initially such a reluctant SALC user that I
did not know her face, suddenly applied to be aconversation partner. After a lot of practice
speaking with other students and chances to

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

14

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Members’ Voices
explore her insecurities and set goals for herself
it was also being used, with good reason, for tasks
through reflective writing and discussions withlike registering for exams or discussing issues withfellow staff members and me, she has become acoursework, usually done in Japanese. With
role model for other students. She now radiates aprevious issues and student feedback in mind, we
totally different energy than she did before.
hope the improved SALC will enable more active
Another student who enjoyed using English, but
English use and feel more accessible and attractive
was not satisfied with her class placement started
to students from any department within theto make a habit of coming to the center regularly touniversity who want to improve their language
study, often asking questions and telling me andskills. Student staff will have a designated front
other teachers what she was working on. Just
desk, giving them more of a central role, and there
recently she excitedly updated me that she waswill be two main rooms: one for quiet study andable to test out of remedial grammar classes andone for more interactive activities like conversation,
eagerly shared what her next goal was. Seeing
cultural events, and short presentations fromachievements like these, big and small, has not only
students and teachers. The next challenge will bebeen gratifying, it has also made me reflect on mycommunicating how to use the new space, withown experiences and learning habits. For manydifferent features and policies, and supporting thestudents, coming to use the center and taking partcontinuing development of the community within it
in advising sessions provide some of the firstalong with our student staff. I look forward tochances they have ever had to actually think about
helping our students take the lead in making these
how they learn and to meaningfully use English
changes and to the opportunity to learn more
outside of the classroom. I am grateful to be a partabout self-access and reflect on what my role is inof those experiences and in a space that enables
this space.
them to happen.
Taking on this new position forced me toReferencereassess my place in relation to learners. While
Gardner, D., & Miller, L. (1999). Establishing selfadvisors like me have important tasks, theaccess: From theory to practice. Cambridge,
relationships students make with each other may
England: Cambridge University Press.
be the most crucial to an effective SALC, a dynamic I
did not consider as a classroom teacher. Students
supporting each other and sharing ideas, acting asrole models, and socializing peers into the cultureof the center have been for learners the greatest
impacts that I have observed in these two years. For
this to happen organically we as advisors must try
to step into supporting roles to give students thetools to create a better environment. What has
been especially challenging for me has been
becoming a better active listener, learning how tolead students in the right direction without beingprescriptive, and deciding when to give student
staff suggestions and when to let them decide anddiscover what works on their own.
As of writing this our SALC is in the middle ofmajor renovations. Previously containing theEnglish department’s main office, the new space
will be completely dedicated to learning and all
departmental administrative functions will be donein a totally separate room. It was difficult to keep
the expectation that the space be usedpredominantly for studying and using English while
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

15

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Members’ Voices
students?” and “How might this affect the power
Learning andrelationship at play, and promote inclusion, diversity
and equality in my own practice?” I chose the funds
Researching, aof knowledge approach in the same way as Moll,
Journey
Amanti, Neff, and Gonzalez (1992) describe it as theknowledge that has been historically and culturally
accumulated and evolved for individual use. In my
Natacha Sakamoto
context, funds of knowledge is the English that isNakamura Junior and Senior Girls’
either used by my students in their home context
High School(for instance, through text messages, social
Email: <nipiederriere@gmail.com>
media, ...) or that is around them (local signs, foodwrappers, songs, ...). I chose this particular“I should check my classmate’s work? Well, that’s
approach as I wanted to make a link between thethe teacher’s job.” This was what one of my seniorclassroom, and the knowledge and skills thathigh school students muttered under her breath
students have access to in their home context. I
after I asked my class to check each other’s work
found this approach useful as it builds on theand underline things that they were unsure of. I
partnership between the students and the teachers
joined the Learner Development SIG for the firstdescribed by Fielding (2004).
time back in 2013, after my friend and colleague,
In order to carry out this research, I used photo
Caroline, highly recommended it to me. When I
elicitation,
an unstructured interview, and field
heard this comment, I was only just starting tonotes for my methodology. I was inspired by how
experiment with learner development and I was aNind, Boorman, and Clarke (2012) used digital
little taken aback by it. I could very well understandtechnologies and focused on visual methods, rather
the feeling. My own journey as a learner (language
than textual, so that their young participants could
or otherwise) did not really equip me with mucheasily express themselves. As my students are notautonomy. I had never been asked to read what
native speakers of English, I had hoped that thisanything that my friends had just written. I had
photo elicitation method would help them tonever been asked to write any comments about aefficiently show how English is present in theirpresentation a classmate had just given, or to grade
everyday lives. I chose to give an unstructured
my own performance after watching a video of it.
interview, as I wanted my participants to be
Now I was asking my students to do so, andinvolved in the direction of the interview as muchnaturally, some of them were reluctant. Going toas possible (Costley, Elliott, & Gibbs, 2010). I also
the SIG get-togethers in Tokyo helped me greatly towanted to find out the reasons behind why theyrefine what, how and why I was asking my students
would choose particular pictures, and their views
to check each other’s work or write comments. I
on the English that is present in their everyday lives.
needed to be more specific about what I wanted
Tomson and Gunter (2007) point out thatthem to check for, and guide them, so that theyknowledge is linked to power. My expectations
would know what to look for. I also needed to fully
were that the photo elicitation would show me
understand myself why the process of reviewing
what my students recognized to be the English thatand reflecting is important for students.
they have available around them. McLaren
Between 2015 and 2019 I took a break from the(1989/2013) adds that critical theory questions the
Learner Development SIG after becoming a parent,
reasons behind the construction of knowledge andtwice, but my journey to improve my knowledge on
how some constructions are expected and notthis topic did not stop then. In 2013, I also started aothers. In this regard, I had hoped to find evidence
three-year-long part-time, online Masters degree inof my students’ knowledge through theireducation. During that time, I undertook an insiderphotographs. An interview would thenled transformative research into my own practice.
subsequently help me to discuss and further
My main research questions were “How would
understand my students’ knowledge, leading me tostudents as co-researchers and a funds ofconnect with them and transform my practice byknowledge approach help me connect with myrebalancing the power that I held with regards to
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

16

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Members’ Voices
my dominant position as a teacher and being
Moll, L.C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N.
regarded as holding the knowledge of English. I(1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: using
have certainly endeavoured to keep this status quo
a qualitative approach to connect homes andthrough requiring my students to only use English inclassrooms. Theory and Practice, 31(2), 132-41.
the classroom—which I would characterise as aNind, M., Boorman, G., & Clarke, G. (2012). Creating
personal choice as much as a perceived
spaces to belong: listening to the voice of girls
requirement from my colleagues and superiors.
with behavioural, emotional and social
During the research process, I experienced
difficulties through digital visual and narrative
several setbacks such as the difficulty of recruiting
methods. International Journal of Inclusive
participants, finding myself influencing the direction
Education, 16(7), 643–56.
of the interview the whole time rather than giving
Thomson, P., & Gunter, H. (2007). The methodology
my students the opportunity to take chargeof students-as-researchers: Valuing and using(Costley, et al., 2010). In addition, I did not have theexperience and expertise to develop methods.
time to include my students in the research process
Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics ofby transcribing the interviews and analysing them
Education, 28(3), 327-42.
together with my students. Now that I am backfrom the haze of parental leave and coming to
Active Learning in an Accepting“some” of the get-togethers in 2019, I would verymuch like to continue researching this topic. It is
Learner-centered Environment
quite clear that the setbacks described above are
related to the idea of power relationships, and I
would like to address this issue both in my research
Lorna Asami
and in the classroom. I hope that this study will help
Keisen University
my students become more involved in their own
Email: <lornaasami@ymail.com>
learning. I also hope to show that English is not theproperty of native speakers. Through my research I
Something I appreciate about the place that I grew
would like to find out more about what my students
up is the general acceptance of people of different
already know, how I can incorporate this diversity ofEnglish language use into my practice, andbackgrounds. Hawaii has the largest population ofsubsequently prepare lessons that are more
multi-ethnic people (people of two or more races)
relevant to my students’ everyday lives.
in the United States at 23.8%, far surpassing thesecond largest population in Alaska, which trails at
References
8.5% (United States Census Bureau, 2017).
Costley, C., Elliott, G., & Gibbs, P. (2010). Doing
Everyone is a minority in Hawaii. The largest group
work-based research: Approaches to enquiry forinsider-researchers. London, England: Sage.
at 38% is Asian but usually identified by locals withFielding, M. (2004). Transformative approaches totheir subgroup such as Japanese, Filipinos, Chinese,student voice: theoretical underpinnings,
and others. The next largest ethnic group is Whites
recalcitrant realities. British Educational
who make up 25.1%. Again, locals will often identify
Research Journal, 30(2), 295-311.
with their subgroup as German, Irish, or others,
McLaren, P. (1989). Life in schools: An introduction
further breaking up into smaller entities. Native
to critical pedagogy in the foundations of
Hawaiian or Pacific Islanders follow at 10% andeducation. New York, NY: Longmans.
McLaren, P. (2013). Critical pedagogy. In J. Soler, C.
other ethnic groups represented by even smaller
S. Walsh, A. Craft, A., J. Rix, & K. Simmonds
percentages. Seeing people from an array of(Eds.), Transforming practice: Critical issues inlanguage and cultural backgrounds communicating
equity, diversity and education (pp. 3-18). Stokewith each other cultivates tolerance,
on-Trent, England: Trentham Books/Open
understanding, and even a sense of humor, which
University. (Original work published in 1989)
Barack Obama referred to as the “Aloha
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

17

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Members’ Voices
spirit” (Obama, 2019; Velasquez-Manoff, 2019). I
course, and I’ll be able to use information on
never expected to find any similarity to this kind ofarticulation characteristics and common syntactic
environment in Japan. After living in Japan for overand morphological differences of Asian languages
25 years, I became used to teaching English
from Shipley and McAfee’s (2016) textbook called
primarily to Japanese students in exclusive schools.
“Assessment in Speech-Language Pathology.” In thisThis changed when I accepted a full-time position
last term, I could hardly understand some of myseveral years ago at a downtown Tokyo junior andstudents’ spoken English, so I anticipate doing somesenior high school and found the student body
articulation coaching.
included Korean, Chinese, and Filipino students. I
There are many things that Keisen University
hadn’t known that schools like this existed.
includes in its curriculum to foster learner-centeredNow, in my present position at a four-yearclasses. Teachers are encouraged to set weekly
women’s university, I am once again delighted togoals in our courses, so I will start off with a minifind my class roster with Vietnamese, Chinese,
needs analysis to discover what each student’s
South American, and Malaysian names. It hadn’t
thoughts are regarding their current pronunciation
occurred to me that the decreasing Japaneseability and have them set some feasible personal
population would prompt universities to accept
goals. Nunan’s (2003) “Nine Steps to Learnermore students from abroad. My students have
Autonomy” is one of my go-to papers when I am
responded to me with an “Aloha!” and a smile
setting up a course. Nunan discusses helping
when I tell them that our diverse class feels like astudents to form goals and raise their awareness oflittle piece of Hawaii. I grew up in middle classtheir learning styles and learning processes, as wellneighborhoods with Chinese, Japanese, Filipino,as have students teach each other and research
Hawaiian, German, and Portuguese families allwhat interests them. In order to encourage
living on the same street. From the time that I was areflection in a course, Keisen University requires
child, my friends and I were used to hearing that sostudents to keep a paper-based portfolio of theirand-so’s mother only spoke Japanese, or Korean, or
work to be able to review their learning and
we heard broken or pidgin (Creole) English andprogress. This portfolio is assessed at the end of the
responded accordingly. Of course the food fromterm as part of their course grade. My students
different cultures was fantastic and shared during
have also stored some of their work in their Google
various celebrations. It is my intention to cultivate
Classroom file. To increase the incentive to organizethat atmosphere of inclusion and warmth totheir paper-based portfolios, I had my students takeencourage students to be open and take risks toan open portfolio test where they could use
learn (Bonwell & Eison, 1991). I’ve noticed thatwhatever was in their file to answer both closed
when I take the time to personally talk withand open questions of the issues we covered in
students and show them that I accept their ideas
class. I gave out a list of topics and questions toand opinions, their attitude in class improves andthink about and prepare for and hoped thatthey participate more willingly in class.
students would review and synthesize ideas we
One of my present challenges will be to teachdiscussed in class. Some of those discussions
an elective pronunciation class this autumn. As my
include the 8 or 10% consumption tax increase
undergraduate degree from the University ofcoming on October 1, being forced to wear highHawaii is in speech pathology and audiology, I
heels to work, and social justice issues of
couldn’t be happier to be given this opportunity. I
utilitarianism and libertarianism. In the test, I again
have pulled out my old faithful Ladefoged’s (1982)
asked students to tell me what kind of society theyphonetics textbook to give myself a refresher
want to have in Japan. We had discussed this
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

18

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Members’ Voices
question many times in class with students often
how to pronounce something. It would be ideal if ascrambling for their portfolios to quote things they
student teaches us how to pronounce something in
had written earlier. As for my personal reflection ofanother language they speak besides English. Herethis term, I need to ask more metacognitiveis where the students who struggle in English butquestions to encourage students to evaluate theirspeak other languages can turn the tables on theirstudy methods and success at learning. I hope toteacher and classmates. I am looking forward to a
improve and take more advantage of this portfolio
great term and can’t wait to see how all thetask by creating reference materials to file in theirstudents in my class (myself included as I study
portfolio that will help them to become more aware
Japanese) personally develop as learners whileof how they can and are improving theirimproving our language ability.
pronunciation skills.
I also hope to inspire my class to think about
References
different ways they might be able to demonstrate
Bonwell, C., & Eison, J. (1991). Active learning:
their progress on their pronunciation. Keisen
Creating excitement in the classroom. 1991
University requires their first- and second-year
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report (pp. iv-v).
students to enroll in an online program to do
Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/
extensive listening as well as participate in a
ED336049.pdf
separate online program for extensive reading. I
Ladefoged, P. (1982). A course in phonetics. San
want students to come up with ways they can use
Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
these materials for their pronunciation. One easy
Nunan, D. (2003). Nine steps to learner autonomy.
way is that the online program has a built-in
Symposium, 2003. Retrieved from https://pronunciation practice for words the student
www.andrasprak.su.se/polopoly_fs/
selects from a short video they watch. The program
1.84007.1333707257!/menu/standard/file/judges the student’s pronunciation of each word
2003_11_Nunan_eng.pdf
and gives them a percentage of their accuracy. I
Obama, B. [BarackObama]. (2019, July 4). I’m
also want each student to pick a particular
admittedly biased, but this article gibes with myphoneme (the smallest unit of sound thatexperience about what all of us might take away
distinguishes one word from another) to focus on
from the “aloha spirit.” [Tweet]. Retrieved from
improving. They can find a book from the extensive
https://twitter.com/BarackObama/status/
reading section in our library, and identify the1146460662832541697
places where the phoneme appears in a short
Shipley, K., & McAfee, J. (2016). Assessment inreading selection. Then, after receiving coaching inspeech-language pathology: A resource manualclass, they can practice using the reading selection(4th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
of their choice. I want them to realize that the
To Hawaii.com Travel Guide. (n.d.). Hawaii ethnicity.
phoneme will generally be easier in an initial
Retrieved from https://www.to-hawaii.com/
position in a word, more difficult at the end, andethnicity.php
most difficult in the middle because of the soundUnited States Census Bureau. (2017). American
being sandwiched between two others, and so they
community survey demographic and housing
might be able to say it in one position, but not in
estimate for Hawaii. Retrieved from https://
another. I might break the students into groups
factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/
according to the phoneme they are working on andpages/productview.xhtml?src=CF
have them practice with each other. We will finish
Velasquez-Manoff, M. (2019, June 28). Want to be
off the course with students teaching each otherless racist? Move to Hawaii. The New York
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

19

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Members’ Voices
Times. Retrieved from https://Moving into my current role, it became clear to me
www.nytimes.com/2019/06/28/opinion/that Japanese elementary school teachers take onsunday/racism-hawaii.html
multiple roles and teach various disparate
disciplines besides managing English lessons andthe inclusion of English within the broader course of
Conducting Relevant Researchstudy. This is different from my home country basedon conversations I have had with elementary schoolwith Effective Application inteachers in Canada, who do not conduct foreign
Elementary Schools
language lessons. How teachers manage to fulfill
their duties is still unimaginable to me, something I
Mike Kuziw
truly respect. Is much of the work dependent on
Fukui City Board of Education
good time management? Or do teachers tend to
Email: <mike.kuziw@gmail.com>
focus this attention on aspects most appealing orpressing? Thus, my query of relevant research andThis past spring I conducted my first research
its implementation as it applies to the overallseminar for a local elementary school in Fukui City,
growth of teacher practice and school development
which brought together 13 teachers, including thebegan, in particular the impact it may have on HRTs
school’s principal and head of teachers. Before
when it comes to EFL teaching in elementary
conducting the seminar, which focused on ways toschools.
use English storybooks for children, the way to
While the HRTs are required to fulfill the
break into the world of research at elementary
requirement of teaching English, they do notschools felt like foreign territory. Unfortunately, no
necessarily have the training or experience to do so.
map or guide was provided to make clear what was
Frequent professional development can encourage
truly unfamiliar. Fellow elementary school teachers
new conversations about effective practices in the
who have an interest in pursuing research mayclassroom, in effect enabling them to see changeshare my sentiment. By sharing here some insights
and growth as teachers. I approached myinto my own experiences as a teacher-researcher, I
interactions with my colleagues with several goals. I
hope to unpack some of the realities of researchwanted to appreciate how talented they are as
conducted at public elementary schools with aprofessional elementary school teachers. I hoped
focus on the available opportunities for buddingthat I would be able to undertake with themEnglish as foreign language (EFL) practitionerrelevant research about teacher development
researchers.
within our shared elementary school work. I also
I work with Japanese homeroom teachers
wished to ease any tension or anxiety brought on(HRTs) on a daily basis conducting team-teaching
by English language teaching. Although I find it
lessons for students ages 8-12 across sevenchallenging to voice my exact thoughts about theelementary schools in Fukui City. The mainneed for the research that I feel passionately about,
responsibilities of my work include teaching skills in
I want to respect my colleagues and develop any
the four language areas, while also exposing
inquiries in close partnership with them, filling
students to natural and communicative English
potential gaps in the path towards successful
language. Beyond the classroom hours, I havelanguage acquisition.
fostered close relationships with the HRTs in an
When it comes to EFL, in my experience, I’ve
effort to better manage and execute lessons
noticed that HRTs are open to considering practicalthrough curriculum and instruction development.
methodologies that can be used in the English
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

20

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Members’ Voices
classroom. Aside from the disciplined observation
Facilitation of Motivation Amonglessons teachers frequently take part in, the Boards
Non-English Major Studentsof Education are adamant about creating better
teachers, ones that are more than simply familiar
Through Practical Project-basedwith the material of the EFL discipline. Recently,
Learning
development has focused on the building ofteachers’ repertoire of English language teaching
Olya Yazawa
skills, which has led to an ambitious move toShowa Women’s University
improve overall language proficiency and pedagogic
Email: <o-yazawa@swu.ac.jp>
versatility. Teachers are aware of the challenges
they may face, and their openness is certainly
I have been an EFL teacher in Japan for almost
refreshing. I have found this, for example, when I
two decades and clearly can see that English
have discussed with my colleagues my researchlanguage education here has failed to facilitate
project on English storybooks for children. Teachers
learner motivation and to cultivate sufficient
communicative English abilities in students. In mywere moved by the passion I spoke with regarding
current research on motivation, I rely on Selfthe benefits of including children’s books in the
Determination Theory (SDT). According to thisclassroom. In many ways, I believe my foresight wastheory, individuals are more internally motivatedshared among teachers who felt a connection towhen the following three basic psychological needs
children’s books in their own ways, either throughare satisfied: autonomy, competence, andtheir students’ interests or through other disciplines
relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2002). When these needs
in which children’s books appear.
are satisfied, students feel psychologically happier,Bringing this all together, I would like to leave
more autonomous, and more motivated to learn inyou with some words of wisdom when approaching
the classroom. There are many ways teachers canresearch in-house as a non-Japanese teacher. First,
provide support to satisfy psychological needs intake time to talk to your fellow co-workers on a
the English language classroom. Autonomyfrequent basis. You’ll find out their true passions;
supportive teachers facilitate students’ autonomy
what impacts their teaching on a daily basis andby providing students choices and opportunities to
how they want to make an impact on students. It
take responsibility and initiative for the learningoften leads one to find a niche in which research
process. An autonomy need is not a need forcan be applied. Second, you’ll notice that schools
independence as some may think, but rather athemselves have a lot of leeway when it comes todesire for personal internal acceptance, purpose,
learning a new skill or bringing effective measuresand endorsement of one’s own learning. If theinto the classroom. With the transition of thestudents’ need for autonomy is satisfied, they are
current curriculum and the introduction of English
more willing to participate actively in the classroom
as a subject for 5th and 6th graders in 2020, theand show higher achievement and lessprocrastination. I try to provide students with small
timing is favorable for conducting such research.
choices of additional activities they have to do in
While there may be some hurdles to overcome,class and their order, for example: playing Quizlet
good hard work will lead to rewarding connections(an online education platform) games, doing aand impacts that will serve both students andvideo quiz or working on a project with groups. I
teachers well. This should also lead to invaluable
also give them the chance to choose test dates andresearch results that will hopefully be included inproject themes.
future teaching. Give it a try!
I have conducted two studies addressing selfdetermined motivation in high school and college
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

21

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Members’ Voices
students in Japan (Yazawa, 2019). The first study
vocabulary by discovering and figuring out thewas conducted in a Tokyo metropolitan high school
meaning of new words. Discovery is a very
where the academic level is ranked just slightly
important process for self-determination. By notabove the national average. First- and second-year
giving out answers and allowing students to figure
students were asked to participate in this study atout the meanings by themselves positively reflects
the end of the academic year. The second study wason the autonomy need support. In the next stage,
conducted in a private middle rank women’s college
the new vocabulary is reviewed in content-basedin central Tokyo. The students in both studies
texts and videos of relevant marketing topics. In thecompleted a questionnaire adapted from a new SDTlast stage, the students are involved in role-playing
motivational scale created by Agawa and Takeuchi
games. The role-playing games are indispensable(2016). One of the most distinctive similarities
for satisfying student relatedness need and thus
between these two studies is that older students
enhancing their self-determination. An example ofdemonstrate a lower perceived autonomy needsuch a game is “Journey: Pros and Cons”, in which
fulfillment relative to first-year students. Secondstudents are actively involved in team work.
year high school students and third-year college
Students are divided into two groups: the firststudents had a higher proficiency level in English
group are tourists who love to travel, and therelated to the first-year students; but despite thissecond group are those who do not like traveling.
fact, they also reported a greater drop in
The first group has to persuade the second group ofsatisfaction with English teachers as facilitators ofstudents to go with them on a journey.
their autonomy in the classroom.
After preparation, students are finally embarked
One of the reasons why students lose
on a project, which allows them to do andmotivation over time to learn English, as they get
independent research and creates autonomy
older, is the change in goals and priorities for older
supportive atmosphere in the classroom. The goal
students. For example, college students do notof the project is to create an advertising travelneed to pass difficult entrance examinations
brochure using existing and accumulated
anymore; and memorization and grammar-basedknowledge. They present their final products in thelearning that they relied so heavily on to prepare
form of a presentation on behalf of imaginary travel
for the tests, are no longer useful in college. At thiscompanies. I allow students to choose their travel
point, some students fail to envision new goals fordestination by themselves, they also choose thelearning English altogether; others are notcategories which they want to include into theequipped with enough means to pursue them. Skillbrochure. The only requirement is the number ofbased classes replace grammar-based instructions
categories, which is usually limited to the number
during their first year, but students continue toof team members. Each group of students
grow more and more helpless in acquiring English.
represents independent experts who decide during
To satisfy the autonomy need better in thirdthe discussion which advertising techniques shouldyear students taking a Business English course, I
be used. The duration of the project and thehave started using a practical speciality-relatedpresentation is usually about four weeks. Groupproject-based teaching and learning approach.
work should be equally divided between all project
There are usually two creative and content-based
participants: someone is responsible forprojects that students enrolled in my Businessresearching, someone for the design and so on.
English classes must prepare each semester ofEach student takes active participation in the groupstudy. One such project is creating an
discussion and chooses the area of his or her
advertisement brochure. Preparation for theexpertise. In carrying out the project, students learn
project’s presentation is carried out in several
how to be responsible for their own learning,stages. In the first stage, students study new
evaluate their own work, give feedback to team
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

22

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Members’ Voices
members—in other words, how to act morelearning activities. And it is more likely thanautonomously in learning English.
anything else to trigger directed motivational
While SDT is still one of the most popularcurrents.
theoretical frameworks currently employed in the
I hope the results of my current and future
Japanese context, in the last few years, a newresearch and work will be useful for educators andtheory of Directed Motivational Currents (DMC) has
researchers in the learner development field to link
emerged in psycholinguistics, and has not yet been
the theory of English learning motivation with
sufficiently researched in Japanese educational
practice and further explore methods andsettings (Dörnyei, Ibrahim, & Muir, 2015). By
techniques to facilitate long-term motivation andconcentrating on this new theory in my further
create a more autonomy-supportive educational
studies, I hope to reach a better understanding ofenvironment in Japan.
what motivates Japanese English learners in tertiary
References
educational levels, and how teachers can influence
Agawa, T., & Takeuchi, O. (2016). A new
this motivation in group settings.
questionnaire to assess Japanese EFL learners’
One of the initial proposals of the DMC theory is
motivation: Development and validation.
that it is possible for teachers to facilitate directed
Annual Review of English Language Education in
motivational currents in the foreign language
Japan, 27, 1-16.
classroom. Project learning is considered to be theDeci, E., & Ryan, R. (2002). Handbook of selfbest framework to launch and maintain a long-term
determination. Rochester, NY: University ofEnglish learning motivation according to this theory.
Rochester Press.
It connects the real world with the classroom,
Dörnyei, Z., Ibrahim, Z., & Muir, C. (2015). Directedbrings authenticity, autonomy and relatedness tomotivational currents: Regulating complex
dynamic systems through motivational surges.
the learning environment. All of the students in the
In Z. Dörnyei, P. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.),
Business Design Department of the university I
Motivational dynamics in language learning
work for go on a long-term study abroad program at(pp. 95-105). Bristol, England: Multilingual
the end of their freshman year. A study-abroad
Matters.
period by definition can work as a trigger to launch
Roberts, C., Byram, M., Barro, A., Jordan, S., &group DMC, as students need to commit to this goal
Street, B. (2001). Language learners as
at the very beginning of their studies. I am currently
ethnographers. Clevedon, England: Multilingual
working on creating a suitable project framework,
Matters.
similar to the study-abroad preoperational program
Yazawa, O. (2019). Research report: Multiple casedeveloped by Roberts, Byram, Barro, Jordan, andstudy comparison of high school and university
students’ perceptions of motivational factors in
Street (2001) as a way to induce motivationalclasses with foreign and local English teachers.
currents in the classroom.
Gakuen, 941, 33-47.
English is a compulsory subject for the majority
of college students in Japan. Having an autonomy
supportive teacher to teach English adds positively
to the students’ motivation to learn the language.
Project work is one of the modern methods ofteaching a foreign language that supports students’autonomy needs and self-determined motivation.
The motivational value of the project-basedlearning lies in the fact that students can see theirreal work results, correct mistakes, supplement andevaluate outcome. It puts a new meaning inNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

23

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHINGSTORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING PRACTICES |学習・教育実践の成功談・失敗談
Action Research with Junior High School Students:
Creating a Supportive, Collaborative Learning Environment
Jackie M. Talken

Temple University Japan, Tokyo Campus, TESOL Master’s Program
Email: <jackie.talken@temple.edu>
The action research reported here was motivated by a desire to create a more positive and collaborativeclassroom environment for learning English. The junior high school where I teach is fairly typical, I believe, atleast with regard to Japanese classrooms. Many students try hard to do what is asked of them: they follow
along in class, doing activities as directed and practicing for speaking tests in order to do well. Others do justenough to get by, and there are others still who struggle for one reason or another. Despite this variability,
unless specifically directed to engage in pair or group work, I have found little student-initiated collaboration.
Students do not readily offer, or indeed request help from their peers. Mixed ability classrooms such as theseshould, however, provide a multitude of opportunities for engaging in this type of mutually beneficial
support.
Creating a more cooperative, collaborative environment, I hoped, would also lead to more enjoyment andmotivation among my students for learning English. It was with these aims in mind that I asked students tocomplete a survey, shared all of their anonymous responses with the class, and then asked them to form
groups based on what they hoped to achieve. Anecdotal findings thus far point to much greater teamwork,
more negotiation of meaning and increased enthusiasm.

Connecting to Theory and Practice in the Field
To better understand these issues, I looked to theorisations about how learner motivation can be understood.
The L2 Motivational Self System developed by Dörnyei (2009) is an attempt to explain the factors that play apart in a second language learner’s motivation for learning. There are three aspects of this system: the Ideal
L2 Self which describes the qualities the learner would like to one day have, the Ought-to Self which are theattributes that a learner thinks they should have, and the learning experience itself comprised of situationaland contextual characteristics of the learning environment. The use of these imagined possible selves is a
powerful tool for motivating a learner to take steps in order to reach their goal (Markus & Nurius, 1986).
Equally powerful is the learning environment with all that it entails, from the teacher and fellow classmates totextbooks, the physical location or the cultural surroundings (Dörnyei, 2009). Clearly, some of these factors
are more easily manipulated than others. My interest was in trying to enhance the beneficial effects thatclassmates’ behaviours and attitudes can have on a learner’s motivation.
Drawing on Dornyei’s (2009) theory, Fukada and associates (2017) set out to investigate the effect ofvisualising an ideal classmate rather than an ideal self, and to use that visualisation in order to affect theirown behaviours in class. They found that imagining and expressing in words what an ideal classmate meant tolearners led to changes in the learner’s own approach to and interactions with fellow classmates andtherefore to the classroom environment itself.
I found their approach interesting, so I decided to use their model in an effort to make positive
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

24

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
improvements in my junior high classroom. The specific research questions I hoped to answer were:
1. By using a survey prompting learners to consider their ideal classmates, can the overall learning
environment be made more supportive and conducive to learning?
2. Will students willingly engage in more collaboration and cooperative behaviour?

Methods
The methods I used in this action research were based on those used by Fukada, Fukuda, Falout and Murphey(2017). The entire sequence they utilised included a pre-survey, a mid-semester survey and a post-survey. As
detailed below, the first cycle of my action research used the first half of the pre-survey combined with otheractivities in an attempt to effect positive changes in our classroom.

Participants
The students are enrolled in the first, second and third years of a private girls’ junior high school in central
Tokyo. They are native speakers of Japanese with varying levels of English ability. They have four hours ofEnglish grammar each week, based on a government-approved textbook and geared towards passing
standardized entrance examinations, taught almost entirely in Japanese, and one hour of Communicative
English, aimed at improving their speaking and listening skills, taught almost entirely in English. Within all
three years, there are considerable differences in ability among students.

Pedagogical Materials
Materials used included an anonymous pre-survey given to students at the start of the academic year (seeFigure 1 below). In preparing survey materials for these classes, the Japanese co-teacher felt that students
would be able to more easily reply if the wording of the translation were changed slightly from the original.
The original English prompt used by Fukada et al. (2017), “Please describe a group of classmates that you
could learn English well with. What would you do to help each other learn better and more enjoyably?” (p.
78) was not changed, however the Japanese translation was altered somewhat.

Original:

Pre-Survey(English Education Research Team, 2016)
Revised:Classmates

Describe a group of classmates that you could learn English well with. What would you all do to help eachother learn better and more enjoyably? 英語を一緒に学ぶのに、どのようなクラスメイトやグループメ
ンバーが理想的でしょうか。より上手に楽しく助け合って学ぶにはどうすればいいでしょうか。
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Figure 1. Pre-survey administered at the start of the year
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

25

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
Survey responses were then photocopied and distributed to all members of the class. Students also madegroup cards on which they wrote a chosen group name, their goals for the term and rules for their groupmembers.

ProceduresPre-survey. On the first day of the new academic year, after an ice-breaker activity, students were given asurvey, which included a prompt written in English and Japanese (See Figure 1), and given 10 minutes toreflect on the question and write their response, in either English or Japanese. Students were asked toanswer as honestly and thoughtfully as possible and assured that their responses would in no way affect theirgrades.
Looping. Students’ anonymous responses were collected and photocopied onto a handout (see Figure 2
below for a sample) that was given to each class member the following week. Phrases commonly
encountered in student responses were highlighted by underlining them as well. Students were asked to readand reflect on the comments of their peers.

Figure 2. Looping handout
Choosing groups. Immediately following the looping procedure, students were asked to keep in mind allthat they had just read and told that they would be choosing groups. Students were asked to come to thefront of the class where they had space to move more freely and talk with each other. They were asked tochoose groups of three and tell me once they had decided. They then sat down together, and the processcontinued until all students were members of a group.
Group cards. After choosing their groups, I asked them to decide on a group name, three goals they had
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

26

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
with regard to English Conversation class and learning English, and three rules they agreed to follow as agroup. They wrote these goals and rules primarily in Japanese as I felt this would resonate more with students
and serve as a more accessible reminder in future. However, I did ask students to write a rough translation
into English of these items as well, with assistance provided as needed.

Discussion
The findings. I used a simple, open-ended survey to elicit learner views on what type of classmate would
most help them to learn English well. Responses followed some general themes across all classes. Learners
wanted someone who could help them. As one student wrote, “I can’t speak English, so please teach me.”
They also wanted classmates with whom they could laugh and have fun, as evidenced by the common
response, “I want friendly classmates who are funny. Let’s have fun!” Learners also wanted to learn withthose who shared similar beliefs such as, “We should listen carefully to the teacher” or “As much as we can,we should speak only English in class.”
The first research question I sought to answer was whether the survey and subsequent activities used
would result in a healthier, more supportive learning environment, and it has. I have observed much morepositivity and enthusiasm in class. Students are engaged and appear to enjoy activities more, helping eachother as needed and working together. I have also noticed fewer instances of sleeping, drawing or doingother coursework, and more instances of enthusiastic, active participation. Another interesting yet
unexpected effect of this process was that students appear much less distracted by disruptive students. They
simply continue working with their group on the task they have been given whereas before the sameoutburst would have affected and engaged nearly everyone.
My second research question asked about cooperative, collaborative behaviour among learners. In thisregard as well, I have noticed positive improvements. In every class, students sit in their groups, and these
logistical changes have provided more opportunities for conversation and working together. Therefore,
understandably we have more chatting than before. However, I have also noticed that this chatting hashelped them to build strong rapport with their group mates and create the bonds which facilitate
collaboration. More encouraging is how often their conversations involve some type of negotiation of
meaning or other form of assistance with classroom activities or content. In addition, with regard to groupformation, there were the expected groupings based solely on friendship or other shared interests. However,I also witnessed several pairs of stronger students who specifically sought out weaker ones to join them.
These collaborations appear to have proven beneficial for all involved. The weaker students are participating
more and speaking more confidently, while the stronger students appear less bored during easier activities
because they are engaged in helping someone rather than simply finishing quickly and having to wait.
The next steps. Based on my observations and findings thus far, my plan for the next cycle of this action
research consists of the following three components:● Post-survey● Self-selected new groupings for next term after silent reflection on classmate qualities● Mid-term 16-descriptor survey
Firstly, encouraged by these preliminary observations, I plan to administer another survey at theconclusion of the term, to ascertain student reactions to this process. I will be using the following wording, as
recommended by the research team in their “Ideal Classmates Procedures”:“Please describe any changes you have made during this semester in your behavior or attitudes
toward your classmates. What influences do you think these changes may have had on yourclassmates, relationships in and out of class, and your English learning?” (English Education Research
Team, 2016)
I hope to find out whether they have noticed changes in their own or others' behaviours or attitudes. I am
interested as well in any negative reactions or changes they have experienced that could be addressed in theNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

27

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
coming term or future cycles of this research.
During this end-of-term survey, however, I plan to start the class by silently distributing the survey, rather
than administering it after an ice-breaker activity. In future as well, when I do the pre-survey, I plan to let
students reflect on and answer the prompt before doing an activity aimed at creating a communicative
atmosphere. This year I found that some classes quietly wrote their answers while in others there wereseveral questions which turned into discussion. While I want learners to understand so that they can respondthoroughly, it is difficult to address their concerns without me or others possibly influencing their responses
through examples or other information.
Secondly, I would like to give students an opportunity to work with a variety of partners. As the students
are in the same class for the entire academic year, they will be choosing from the same pool of classmates.
However, over the course of the first term they will have had the opportunity to learn a lot about their fellow
classmates. Therefore, prior to choosing new groups, I will give learners time to think silently once again
about what characteristics they appreciate most in the classmates with whom they will be continuing to learn
English. Then I want learners to choose different group mates from the first term.
Lastly, I would like to use the 16-descriptor survey (Murphey, Falout, Fukuda, & Fukada, 2014) at midterm. The 16 descriptors refer to the common qualities of ideal classmates (e.g., respect for others or
willingness to take risks) that Murphey and his associates synthesised from the survey responses of various
groups of learners (English Education Research Team, 2016). Using Likert scale scoring for each of the 16
descriptors, learners indicate 1) whether they feel it is important, 2) whether their classmates are exhibitingthese behaviours, and 3) whether they themselves are doing these things.

Conclusion
At the time of writing in the early days of the 2019 school year, this initial cycle of action research hasprovided me with ample anecdotal evidence to support the use of a reflective survey such as that proposedby Fukada et al. (2017), along with self-directed group formation and the writing of shared goals.
Learners seem to have an increased willingness and desire to work together to ensure success, not only
for themselves but for their classmates as well. Their group interactions also more often include negotiationof meaning, showing their desire and willingness to learn. Their interest and enjoyment in accomplishing thegoals they set out for themselves also seems to have given them focus, therefore lessening the impact that
distractions have had for them in the past.
From my perspective, the classroom environment has certainly benefited from this action research. Ourclassroom has a far more constructive atmosphere, with learners participating and collaborating more with
their peers, resulting in a more positive, supportive and energetic space in which to learn.

References

Dornyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei, & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language
identity and the L2 self (pp. 9-42). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
English Education Research Team (2016). Ideal classmates resources [Research webpage]. Retrieved fromhttps://www3.hp-ez.com/hp/englisheducation/page3
Fukada, Y., Fukuda, T., Falout, J., & Murphey, T. (2017). Collaboratively visualizing possible others. Learner
Development Journal 1(1), 78-93. Retrieved from: https://ldjournalsite.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/
ldj-1-1-fukada-et-al.pdf
Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954-969.
Murphey, T., Falout, J., Fukuda, T., & Fukada, Y. (2014). Socio-dynamic motivating through idealizingclassmates. System, 45, 242-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.06.004.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

28

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING

Helping Learners Develop Autonomous Reading Strategies
Logan McCarville
MEd TESOL Program, University of Glasgow
Email: <mccarvltt@gmail.com>

I am originally from America and began developing interest in autonomy through my teaching experiences inVietnam and Taiwan. In Vietnam, I worked at a language center as well as a public school and primarily taught
young learners general English. While in Taiwan, I furthered my professional development by teachingbusiness English and General English Proficiency Test (GEPT) preparation courses. Much of the organization inboth teaching periods was strictly regimented and I began to wonder if the course designers’ perceptions ofwhat the students needed matched the actual needs of the learners. Continuing my studies in Scotland at the
University of Glasgow in a one-year MEd TESOL program, I began exploring theoretical and practical
approaches to developing learner autonomy and became interested in applying some of the principles
through designing a lesson plan for teaching reading strategies. In this reflective account I share with you
some of the main decisions that I made in designing the lesson, and reflect on the feedback that my peers
and teachers gave me in the microteaching which has helped me develop my understanding of nurturing
learner autonomy.

Microteaching Overview
The micro-teaching task was part of an assignment on lesson design, and each student was required topresent 10 minutes of their 60-minute lesson to the course tutors and students. Following the microteaching,verbal and written feedback focusing on areas of improvement was given. The lesson that I designed was for
B2 level Chinese university students studying at the University of Glasgow. They usually attend English classthree times a week for two hours each lesson. Such students are pursuing a variety of disciplines, so thelearning outcomes of the course focus on applying reading strategies appropriately in order to manage thehigh demand of out-of-class reading and to enhance reading comprehension for engagement in seminar
discussions. From my experience, Chinese learners are often overwhelmed by the university’s reading
demands and struggle to critically engage in their weekly seminars. The main cause is not only their weakreading comprehension, but also their lack of experience in reading strategically and reflectively the texts thatthey are assigned. The discussions are an integral part of the course as they allow for learning opportunities
on the theoretical material. For these seminars to be successful, learners must be able to critically engage
with texts by comprehending and critiquing the author’s stance as well as developing their own opinions. In
order to complete these tasks, learners need to apply various reading strategies autonomously. My aim wasto design a reading lesson that would help the students learn how to choose and apply certain reading
strategies in a self-directed way to overcome these obstacles and become more successful learners in theirundergraduate programs.

Rationale for the Lesson Design
I wanted the learners to be introduced to new reading strategies and to evaluate their current reading
strategies to see how appropriately and effectively they are applying them. During classroom reading
comprehension tasks, I have found difficulty in evaluating the approaches learners are taking to comprehenda text. Part of the reason is that many learners are unable to effectively articulate the reading processes theyNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>
29

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
have undertaken as Nassaji (2007) explains: “Any attempt to explain the processes whereby the text isunderstood entails a profound understanding of the cognitive processes in which knowledge is represented,
processed, and used in comprehension” (pp. 79-80). To help learners better understand their current reading
processes, I have them evaluate themselves and develop meta-cognitive knowledge to develop their abilities
in deciding which reading strategies are best for them to successfully complete various reading tasks. Not
only is this beneficial for the learner, but it also provides me with insight into the learner’s belief about thereading process and a greater understanding of the motivation behind the student’s behavior which allows
for more tailored guidance for improvement (Morrison & Navarro, 2014) and cyclical awareness raising. As
Victori and Lockhart (1995) propose: “self-directed programme[s]… should involve cyclic diagnosis of learners’
beliefs about language learning, preferred styles, learning needs and objectives in order to endow thelearners with criteria for choosing optimum strategies, resources and activities for their individualized
programmes” (p. 223). From my experiences at the University of Glasgow, many of the Chinese learners were
not familiar with choosing from different reading strategies and did not know how to appropriately
implement the ones they knew. In our seminars many of the learners raised questions regarding thecomprehension of the texts and the author’s stance rather than the ideas behind it. In addition, much of thecourse required learners to work autonomously by finding articles and evidence that supported their
theories. This proved troublesome as learners struggled to form their opinions of the text through lack ofcomprehension which made it more difficult to find readings that supported incomplete ideas. Due to theseissues, I decided it was important for learners to begin to develop more reading strategies that they can applyautonomously in their reading outside of the classroom.
To assist learners in becoming more successful, I designed a lesson that introduces students tocomprehension reading strategies that can be applied autonomously. The lesson begins with the introductionof the task (see the Plan/Introduce stage of Appendix A) and a series of questions for students to consider inorder to help direct them towards the purpose of their reading. Direction is used throughout the lesson to
help clarify expectations of tasks as I believe complete freedom may be overwhelming for some students(Morrison & Navarro, 2014). The overall purpose of the first task is for students to implement and monitor
their current reading strategies to help develop an understanding of the learning processes for text
comprehension. This was done so the learners can engage in meta-cognitive knowledge to help improve theirtask and strategy knowledge. Wenden (1998) supports this and states “In learning transfer, meta-cognitive
knowledge facilitates the appropriate choice of previously learned strategies to achieve learning goals and/or
to deal with problems encountered during learning” (p. 526). In Appendix A, other areas of direction areprovided in the stages of Group Discussion, Introduce Additional Reading Strategies, Implementation andMonitoring of New Strategy, and Goal-setting.
After the reading is finished, students are asked to reflect on their reading experience and evaluate theeffectiveness of the learning strategies they used through small group discussion (see the Reflect and
Evaluate stages of Appendix A). Thoughtful reflection is supported by Kohonen (1992) who states “Onlyexperience that is reflected upon seriously will yield its full measure of learning, and reflection must in turnbe followed by testing new hypotheses in order to obtain further experience” (p. 17). In this statement, thereflection stage is recognized as a key element in the learning process as it provides opportunities for learners
to gain metacognitive knowledge about the reading process through reflecting on experiences with thereading strategies that they try to use. Following reflection, Kohonen suggests learners test their new theories
or reading strategies to further their understanding of the reading process through practical experience. To
obtain further experience, the learners repeat the process with a different text to reflect and evaluate the
new learning strategy used (see the Implementation and Monitoring of New Strategy and Evaluate andDiscuss New Reading Strategy sections of Appendix A). By doing this, learners have the opportunity to explore
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

30

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
other tactics for comprehending a text which could be useful in their autonomous learning as part ofcontrolling one’s own learning is making connections between outcomes and reading strategies (Candy, 1991,
p. 389). Once finished, the students reflect further on their experiences in a reflective journal and set learning
goals for the week as well as plan for how they will achieve them in order to better focus their learning (seethe Goal-setting stage of Appendix A) (Benson, 2011, p. 106).
The idea of reflection stems from my own teaching experience. I believe learners need to take more
responsibility for their learning as too many students rely heavily on the teacher. Through reflection, learners
can evaluate not only the amount of effort they are putting forth but also how effective their learning
strategies are. Reflective discussions after reading comprehension tasks were something I originally began toimplement with Taiwanese GEPT preparation students as it provided opportunities for learners to be
introduced to other methods of tackling difficult tasks. As reading comprehension performance was
evaluated through multiple choice questions, learners had a better sense of the effectiveness of their reading
strategies which resulted in more thoughtful discussions. Through these discussions learners likely added totheir repertoire of strategies and further developed their meta-cognitive knowledge. I also found it important
for learners to keep a reflective journal of new items learned. This served as a source of learning strategies
and also a device to encourage autonomous learning by setting learning goals. By setting goals, learners may
be more motivated to engage in autonomous learning to achieve their desired objectives.
To encourage more autonomy within the lesson, students were not provided a text unless the student
had failed to bring their own. This was done to help encourage students to take ownership of their learningwhich may result in further pursuit of learning (Morrison & Navarro, 2014). In addition, I did not explicitly
teach any learning strategies; students explained these through interaction with each other. By taking thisapproach, students were less reliant on the teacher and it encouraged them to be more resourceful.

Reflection on Microteaching
In developing the lesson, I completed a microteaching task in which I taught 10 minutes of the lesson to theother students on the MEd TESOL program. After the teaching deomonstration, the tutors and other learners
on the program provided feedback for areas of improvement as well as positive aspects of the lesson. Manyof the comments from my peers focused on my selection of the text for the students as this contradicted
student control of the content of their learning, a significant principle of learner autonomy. My tutors wereconcerned with the lack of development of meta-cognitive knowledge of the reading process and notproviding enough explicit attention to reading strategies. By reflecting on these comments, I realized that mylesson plan was not as autonomous as it could be. Based on Candy’s (1991) spectrum of autonomy, where
one side represents student’s control and the other teacher’s control (p. 9), my original plan favored theteacher end of the spectrum. To shift the control, I further applied Benson’s (2011) three dimensions ofautonomy which are control over content, control over learning management, and control over cognitive
processes. I started with control over content and decided to have students choose their own reading basedon their discipline of study. This not only allowed for students to find a reading of interesting content, but also
provided further personalization of their learning needs as they were able to use a lab report, business plan,
academic journal article and so on. In addition, the revised lesson now focused on the development ofunderstanding the reading process along with the introduction of new reading strategies instead of a primary
focus on text comprehension. To further promote these developments and to shift the control over cognitive
processing, several reflection tasks were added. Without including these stages, opportunities for learnerplanning and further development of effective self-directed learning would have been lost.
The process of designing this lesson plan has helped me refine my own definition of learner autonomy
and has broadened my understanding of how autonomy can be supported to develop higher achieving
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

31

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
learners. The feedback received from my classmates and professors has inspired me to continue my pursuit ofshifting the control of learning to students to develop more self-directed and more autonomous learners.

References
Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and researching autonomy (2nd ed). Harlow, England: Pearson Education.
Candy, P. C. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kohonen, V. (1992). Experiential language learning: Second language learning as cooperative learnereducation. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Collaborative language learning and teaching (pp. 14-39). Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press.
Morrison, B., & Navarro, D. (2014). The autonomy approach: Language learning in the classroom and beyond.
Peaslake, England: Delta Publishing.
Nassaji, H. (2007). Schema theory and knowledge-based processes in second language reading
comprehension: A need for alternative perspectives. Language Learning, 57(1), 79–113.
Victori, M., & Lockhart, W. (1995). Enhancing metacognition in self-directed language learning. System, 23(2),223-34.
Wenden, A. L. (1998). Metacognitive knowledge and language learning. Applied Linguistics, 19(4), 515–37.

Type of lesson: Reading

Appendix A. Revised Lesson Plan

Level: B2 Age group: Chinese University Students No. of students: 12
Teaching context: University of Glasgow
Lesson aims for the students: By the end of the lesson the students will be better able to/have had theopportunity to…
! introduce and raise awareness of various learning strategies for reading! evaluate the overall effectiveness of selected reading strategies
Specific skills! General reading skills – skills may vary depending on what the learner chooses to practice (possible
skills: comprehension, skimming, scanning, etc.)! Speaking accuracy on the topic of reading strategies
Anticipated problems & solutions
Ss may have forgotten to bring a text, so T will bring various texts to the class.
Assumed knowledge! General understanding of reading strategies
Materials (include references)
The lesson plan was copied and distributed to tutors and peers for the micro-teaching. They could make notesin the Comments /Questions column. The format is adapted from Morrison & Navarro, 2014.
Revised lesson plan procedure (practice and micro-teaching)Type of lesson: Reading

Level: B2

Date & Length: 60 minutes

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

32

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
Stage, Timing,
Interaction

Aims (Why)To raise awarenessof the purpose of
the task and theactions to take toachieve it

Procedure (what)

1.

2.

3.

4.
5.

Comments/
Questions

T explains that Ss will read the text they have chosen and thatduring the reading, the Ss should focus on what they are doing
throughout the reading process in order to comprehend thereading. The Ss will give a brief summary about their reading insmall groups once finished.
T writes prompts on the board before reading to help them tothink about the strategies they are using in the reading process.
Possible prompts are:
! How do you feel before reading the text? Why?
! What are the first things you do when this reading tasks
starts?
! Which parts of the text are the easiest to understand?
Why?
! Which parts of the text are the most difficult tounderstand? Why?
T explains that the Ss should be as specific as possible whenidentifying the difficult part of the task (i.e. organisation, grammar,
main ideas, etc.)
T explains that students can use anything available to them tocomprehend the text
T asks Ss to take out their text, gives the learners Handout 1 1, andsets a time limit for task completion

Implement andmonitor readingtask
10 minutes
Ss work
individually

To raise awarenessof the strategies
the learners use
during the reading
process and help
develop metacognitive
knowledge

1. Ss read the text they have chosen and think about difficulties withthe task
2. T should monitor Ss and try to see what strategies Ss are using if
possible. T should not assist learners in comprehension of the text
in order for Ss to further develop self-directed learning.

Reflect
Individual readingreflection
5 minutes
T–S
S work individually

To reflect onreading andidentify difficulties
during the task inreadingcomprehension

1.

T asks Ss to reflect on their reading individually and to note down
any strategies they used. Ss should also note what was difficult.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

33

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
Evaluate
Group discussion
and reflection onreading task
10 minutes
Ss – Ss or S – S

Introduce
additional reading
strategies
8 minutes
T–S
S–T

For Ss to further
reflect on thereading strategies
used and toprovideopportunities for
Ss to beintroduced to newstrategies.
For Ss to evaluate
the current
reading strategies
they are using andto decide if theyneed to change
their reading
strategies and try
something new

1.

To raise Ss
awareness ofadditional reading
strategies

1.

2.

3.

2.

3.

Ss break up into pairs or small groups to discuss what they did
during the reading process and give a brief summary of theirreading.
T writes possible points of discussion on the board which could be:! What did you do when you were reading to help you
understand the ideas in the text?
! How effective were these strategies?
! What strategies did you use that were similar! What strategies did you use that were different?
! Were the strategies related to the type of text?
! Were they related to where the texts were found?
Ss should also consider if they need to change their strategies or if
a different strategy would have been more helpful

T shows Ss HO1 and asks them to compare their reading process to
the HOT asks Ss questions to help guide their use of the HO. Possible
questions could be:! Which ones did you use?
! Is there anything else you did that is not included?
T elicits strategies that were used by the Ss and writes them on theboard. Ss should write the new strategies on their HO

Implementationand monitoring of
new strategy
12 minutes
T–S
S individually

To provide Ss theopportunity to try
a new reading
strategy andevaluate its
effectiveness forpossible futureuse

1. T explains that Ss will choose a new strategy to use and a new text
to read to evaluate the effectiveness of the strategy. Ss will readand give a brief summary about the new reading and the newstrategy they used.
2. T writes questions on the board to help guide the learners:! What new strategy did you try to help you understand theideas in the text?
! How effective was the strategy! Is there anything you could do to make this strategy more
effective? If so, what?
3. T has Ss reads the texts

Evaluate anddiscuss new
reading strategy
8 minutes
Ss – Ss or S – S

Ss to evaluate the
new reading
strategy anddecide if it iseffective andsomething they
will utilize in the
future1. After the Ss have finished reading, they work in their small groups
again and discuss their experience.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

34

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
Goal-setting
4 minutes
S individually

Ss to plan theirlearning for the
week so they can
implement,
monitor, andevaluate theirreading and theircurrent use ofreading strategies

1. Ss take out a reflective journal to write down what they had learned
for the day and the new reading strategies they were introduced to.
2. Other possible points of reflection could be:! What did you learn about the reading strategies you use(and don’t use) for reading exercises?
! How can you find out about other reading strategies?
! Can you think of any similarities between reading strategies
and listening strategies?
3. Ss write a reading goal for the week and write what they will do tomeet the goal

Appendix B. Handout 1
1. Check the strategies you used.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

I read the whole article and tried to understand the general idea.
I took notes in English/my first language as I was reading.
I underlined the text as I was reading.
I took notes in English/my first language after I read.
As I was reading, I thought about the ideas and how true they are.
As I was reading, I thought about the ideas and how they relate to my experience.
I did something else: _________________________________.

2. If I didn’t understand a word:
•
•
•
•
•

I looked it up in my dictionary.
I asked someone.
I ignored it, and focused on the words I did know.
I guessed the meaning.
I did something else: __________________________________.

3. When I checked the meaning, using a dictionary or person:••••

I wrote the new word in my vocabulary notebook.
I wrote a translation on the text.
I just checked the meaning, and kept reading.
I did something else: ___________________________________.

4. If I didn’t understand a sentence:••••

I guessed the meaning.
I ignored it.
I read it again.
I did something else: ___________________________________.

5. Other:Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

35

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING

Exploring Practitioner Research with Yoshitaka Kato
Hugh Nicoll <hnicoll@gmail.com>,
Yoshitaka Kato <kato44taka@isc.chubu.ac.jp>

Introduction
The following text is an edited version of an email discussion with Yoshitaka Kato,
currently a visiting academic at the University of Leeds, UK. This past June, I wrote
asking if he would be interested in an email interview/conversation about his
experiences and perspectives on Exploratory Practice and practitioner research inrelation to learner and teacher development. I posed three questions that I hoped
would allow us to puzzle out these themes in a collaborative fashion.
Yoshitaka Kato Ph.D. is a lecturer in the Global Education Center at Chubu University, Japan. His researchinterests focus on the ownership of learning in English education. He is especially interested in practitioner
research through the application of frameworks in exploratory practice, team learning, and task-based
language education.
Hugh: How did you get involved with/interested in Exploratory Practice (EP) (and related researchquestions re: learner and teacher autonomy, practitioner research, etc.)
Yoshi: As a researcher-teacher/teacher-researcher, I have always been interested in how I can develop
myself as a language teacher and how I might possibly support the Continuing Professional Development(CPD) process of other teachers at any level. My first primary attempt to do so was through my research oninteraction in the language classroom. I wrote my PhD thesis titled as “The Nature of Interaction in the
Language Classroom: Towards Organic Collaboration Among Participants” in 2017, where I argued for the
potential of every class participant, including learners and teachers, learning from each other beyond their
fixed roles as "those who teach" and "those who learn/are taught." Throughout the research process, I
learned a lot from my supervisor Dr. Akira Tajino. I was sort of "immersed" in his idea of team learning (Tajino& Tajino, 2000; Tajino, Stewart, & Dalsky, 2016) where class participants make a team in a flexible manner sothat they can learn from each other based on curiosity and respect. He also set up a wonderful opportunity
for us to hear a talk by Dr. Judith Hanks about EP at Kyoto University in 2013, and in the same year, I attended
KOTESOL conference in Seoul where Dr. Dick Allwright, a former supervisor of both Dr. Tajino and Dr. Hanks,delivered his plenary talk. These experiences have naturally developed my interests in practitioner research,especially in EP. I have long wanted to take time to better understand EP, but last year, my colleagues at
Chubu University kindly gave me the precious opportunity to apply for research leave abroad, and then I
thought this would be a great timing to seek for insightful guidance from Dr. Hanks in Leeds. That is why I am
here now.
Hugh: How have you applied your research interests in EP to teaching and/or administrative or curriculum
development responsibilities in Japan?
Yoshi: I have tried to apply the framework of EP primarily in my own classroom context, though I
struggled to do it at the early stages as I was so used to the "problem-solution" paradigm in academia. Morespecifically, at an early stage, I would generate my own puzzles as "how" questions (not "why" questions) andnot share the puzzles with my students in a sufficient way. I felt a strong affinity for the ideas expressed in
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

36

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
EP’s seven principles, but even so, I was not doing EP at that time. The change occurred quite recently in fact
when Judith came to Kyoto as a plenary speaker for the JACET Joint Seminar in 2018 summer. Listening to her
talk and discussing with her and other participants, I realised that students (as well as teachers) can also
generate and investigate their own puzzles as "key developing practitioners" (Allwright and Hanks, 2009) inthe language classroom. Soon I invited my students to create and explore their own puzzles (as "why"questions) in classes, finding that they so much engaged in and enjoyed the process of EP more than I had
expected. I was convinced at that time that EP has a great potential to remind learners of curiosity in learning
and, at the same time, remind teachers they can/should learn from their students. That was the "Moments ofTransition" (Hanks, 1998) for me. I then came to Leeds with that impressive experience and, with thegenerous guidance of Judith, I am now also realising other potentials of EP as a catalyst for teacher/learnerempowerment, research innovation and process-oriented education …
At this stage, I have yet to apply EP into any administrative or curriculum development (except my own
classrooms), which I believe should initiate as a bottom-up approach. I just simply need more time to sharethe idea of EP with my colleagues and mutually deepen our understanding of its significance and process. Likeother forms of practitioner research, I believe EP should not be something which "forces" somebody toengage in it.
Hugh: What do you see as viable strategies for EP/practitioner research for professional development in
the Japanese education context?
Yoshi: As Prabhu (1990) once discussed in his paper, I agree that there is no best method for language
teaching. What practitioners can do is probably to constantly develop their own "sense of plausibility."
Teachers, especially after gaining experiences and when they are busy, are likely to stick to their own style ofteaching to make it efficient and minimise their burden (which is not always bad of course) but they need toreflect on their teaching in a continuous way. That may sound tough but it is in fact worthy and fun part ofteaching. Practitioner Research (PR), whatever form it may take (e.g., EP, Action Research, Reflective Practice,
Lesson Study), facilitates the CPD process of teachers, but EP can be a strong candidate in terms of its
sustainability as it can be integrated in their normal teaching. As far as I know, however, EP is still not widely
known in Japan with some exceptions such as, but not limited to, Tajino & Smith (2005), Stewart with Croker& Hanks (2014), Dalsky & Garant (2016), Hiratsuka (2016), Dawson with Ihara & Zhang (2017), and a couple ofvignettes encapsulated in Hanks (2017). These studies show that EP has the potential to make a greater
contribution to practitioner research in Japanese institutional settings. To realise this, teachers andresearchers will have to share and mutually develop these examples of EP with their colleagues througharticles, workshops, websites, and SNS platforms. As written above, I believe these movements need to bedone in a steadily bottom-up manner rather than a quick top-down one. In addition to explaining EP
philosophy such as seven principles, we may need to share more concrete examples (case studies) as well.
Personalizing the discussion
I responded to Yoshi’s answers to my starter questions with two follow-up questions. Yoshi’s responses(below) are the product of two cycles of me asking for further elaboration.
Hugh: First, I am curious about your identity as a language learner, from earlier periods in your life. I am
assuming, of course, that there must have been something—in your character, in early encounters withteachers and/or classmates or friends that led you to undertake advanced level studies as well as aspire to
becoming a teacher and researcher in the first place.
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

37

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
Yoshi: My parents were both public school teachers. My father was teaching science at junior high school
and my mother used to be an elementary school teacher. My father then decided to explore his interests in
educational technology and is now working at the tertiary level in Japan. He often asked me questions like
"Why do you think the sea is blue?" and waited for my immature answers without giving his thoughts
immediately. He would also let me in his office at the university and take a peek into his life as a researcher.
My mother, on the other hand, often told me how the life of teachers was like and gave me a sort of realistic
perspective on teaching. In Japan, for example, many teachers are now suffering from doing both work andhousework at the same time, but I was learning it from her life. I am sure my parents had a great influence onme shaping my career. Naturally, I got curious about their jobs and took the path to become a teacher.
After entering Hiroshima University, however, I met a lot of great friends in the School of Education (mostof them were going to be teachers in Japan) and thought I might want to contribute to education from adifferent angle. I knew that teaching at a university would allow me to do both teaching and doing research,which I thought is an ideal job for me.
Hugh: Why is research an ideal job for you? Something about your character? Research as a way ofachieving a satisfying kind of solitude?
Yoshi: After entering university, I was still interested in becoming an English teacher in Japan. At that time,
however, I noticed I could not draw a picture of my 40-year career as a teacher. Teaching was a reallyattractive job for me, but I knew it would be extremely busy (as my mother often told me) and I knew I was
the type of person who wants sufficient time to stop and think about things in education. I am sure greatteachers are doing both even though they are super busy, but I was not confident enough to do so. I was also
probably curious in exploring the different path from my friends, who are now up-and-coming teachers at
schools in Japan. Being familiar with the job of researcher (thanks to my father), I thought at around this timeteaching at university might allow me enough time to do both teaching and thinking (or doing research).
Becoming a researcher was thus an ideal job for me.
Hugh: Can you say more about this?
Yoshi: To be honest, when I decided to be a teacher, the subject (e.g., math, social studies, English ...)
could be anything. However, my decision to be a language teacher was very right because, by using English
which has now become an international language, I can communicate with millions of people and broaden
my perspectives. Fortunately, I was also able to find a space to do both teaching and researching at thetertiary level from my early career. I am now developing myself and (hopefully) helping my students to do so
as well, which was what I wanted to do for a long time.
Hugh: Second, I wonder if you can give more details about your struggles to develop pedagogies forlearner development, i.e., the learning together that students and teachers can do together if we are able totranscend standard institutional constraints, and the boxes that a "problem-solution" approach can imprison
us in.
Yoshi: This may be off topic, but I was not originally interested in interaction at all. I did not like pair orgroup work as a student and almost always preferred to learn by myself. I thought it was the most efficient
way to learn by myself although what I meant by "learning" was primarily for entrance exams and not for ourreal life in society. When I took a course provided by Dr. Yosuke Yanase (another mentor of mine) at theuniversity, however, I realised how much I could "learn" in a real sense from my classmates and gain different
perspectives in our discussion. Another striking experience occurred when I was a graduate student. I was ateaching assistant of an English class at that time and noticed that students would often show their smiles
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

38

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
and enjoy learning while they were talking with their classmates, not while listening to lectures. At this time, I
felt peer interaction has a great potential in (language) learning as it certainly makes the classroom
atmosphere brighter. These two critical incidents let me pursue the meaning of interaction in the (language)classroom.
I then decided to work on this topic as my PhD project. During the course, however, I faced with anotherturning point. When I presented my talk in an informal research meeting, a teacher-researcher I greatly
respect challenged me with two insightful questions. "Where are the teachers? What are their roles?" heasked. At that time, I focused primarily on students working together and almost forgot (or at least did notemphasize) the roles of teachers in the classroom. I then started reviewing the literature on the teacher rolein student-student interaction, but the role has often been described as a "facilitator,” which was somehow
not enough for me … or probably not interesting to me (because it is a cliche maybe). The word "facilitator"
has a nuance of "third-party" or "division of labour" point of view; students learn and their teacher teaches/facilitates. This state of so called "students dancing on the palm of teachers" through teachers' facilitation was
not the ideal form of collaboration for me. In a parent-child relationship, for example, parents often say, "I amlearning from my own child" or "Our children make us true parents.” This mutuality seemed essential to me
when people learn. I had this kind of idea naturally as I was literally “immersed” in my supervisor Dr. Tajino’s
way of thinking at that time, when I began to realise the potential of Team Learning (Tajino & Tajino, 2000;
Tajino et al., 2016) and Exploratory Practice (EP) (Allwright and Hanks, 2009; Hanks, 2017) where classparticipants learn from each other based on respect, trust and curiosity.
Trying to get back to your original question, I think a "problem-solution" approach is not necessarily a bad
approach. But the current (language) education worldwide tends to seek for quick outcomes in a relatively
short period, often pressured by outer sources or power such as private tests or the government. I do not likethe pressure on teaching at all. I do not believe that sort of approach functions in a healthy and sustainable
manner in education because every teacher and learner have their beliefs or values about their learning andteaching. Without respect for them, nothing will succeed.
In reality, however, it is true that teachers cannot escape from this "problem-solution" approach or
institutionally defined programs. Teaching thus can be done with every sort of negotiation among different
values. For me, for example, as one of the language program coordinators at the university, I always have tonegotiate teaching/learning values with my colleagues and find a compromised point we agree with.
Likewise, as a classroom teacher, I need to ensure sufficient time and space to listen to student voices/values
and actually reflect on them in teaching during the course. Teaching always involves a dilemma as everybody
is different in nature, but that is probably one of the reasons why we teachers need formal and informal
practitioner research such as EP to step back, become curious again, and seek better understandings of what
we are doing as practitioners with the help of all those involved (i.e., learners, colleagues, teacher educators,
researchers, etc.).
Hugh: … I suspect our readers could also benefit from hearing how your projects in the UK are going. I
wonder, for example, if any of the work you are doing with Judith has provoked reflections on similarities anddifferences between Japan and UK teaching/learning contexts. Are there approaches to either learning,
research, and teaching in the UK that you feel are transferable to Japan? If so, what limitations do you see inbringing those ideas/practices home? Any other puzzles your current experiences in the UK may provoke you
to wrestle with as a learner? Researcher? Teacher?
Yoshi: I am now very honoured to be working with Dr. Hanks on practitioner research, especially EP. Withher insightful guidance as well as constant support from advisers in the field, we are now making a platform
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

39

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING(e.g., homepage) of fully-inclusive practitioner research (FIPR) including EP, Action Research, Reflective
Practice and Lesson Study. Dr. Hanks and her colleagues will also host a symposium on FIPR at the AILA 2020
World Congress of Applied Linguistics in Groningen, the Netherlands. I believe practitioner research canbecome more meaningful by disseminating its concepts and frameworks and sharing empowering episodes inunique classrooms. I hope these opportunities help practitioners around the world to do so.
Also, what I realised when living in the UK is that we might have more similarities than differences in
education. Regarding the environments surrounding language teachers, for example, their overwork andburn-out is one of the common issues in both (and probably other) countries. These "problems" may not beable to be solved quickly but at least we can share these stories and work together to make our situations
better. It is at least empowering only to know that it is not just me/us who is/are suffering.
From an academic point of view, practitioner research including EP seems to face the difficulty/dilemmain the field of applied linguistics (more than I expected) as some people do not regard it as "research." In thatsense, we may need to enhance the presence of practitioner research in academia by redefining the meaningof "research" in language education and rethink about who creates knowledge in our field. Working at the
University of Leeds has let me notice the necessity to think about such an issue. I would love to (and have a
responsibility to) share what I am learning now after coming back to Japan.

Follow-up: Reflections and future steps
As we were juggling our schedules at the beginning of September—and trying to wrap up our collaborative
discussion, the latest issue of Language Teaching (Volume 52 part 2, April 2019) arrived in my mailbox. The"State-of-the-Art Article" is Judith Hanks's contribution of a "meta-analysis" of exploratory practice andpractitioner research: "From research-as-practice to exploratory-practice-as-research in language teaching
and beyond." Curious as to why the April issue had arrived in September, I asked Yoshi if there was abackstory. In short: yes, the publication of the journal was delayed. I also asked if there is a launch date for
the Fully-Inclusive Practitioner Research (FIPR) website mentioned above. Short answer here: "We areplanning to roll the FIPR website out this autumn (probably in October), but we are going to improve it
constantly after the launch, listening to the feedback and suggestions from everyone."
I am still in the re-reading/processing stage with Judith's recently published article, so also asked Yoshi if
he'd be interested in continuing our discussion in a future issue of Learning Learning. We conclude this starter
conversation with an open invitation to members of the SIG to join with us in responding to questions raised
here, in Judith's article, and in working together to explore ways in which practitioner research might befurther developed in Japanese learning and teaching contexts.

References
Allwright, D., & Hanks, J. (2009). The developing language learner: An introduction to Exploratory Practice.
Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Dalsky, D. & Garant, M. (2016). A 5,000 mile virtual collaboration. In A. Tajino, T. Stewart, & D. Dalsky (Eds.),
Team teaching and team learning in the language classroom: Collaboration for innovation in ELT (pp.
164-78). Abingdon, England: Routledge.
Dawson, S. J., Ihara, P., & Zhang, K. (2017). EAP learners exploring their own language learning lives throughExploratory Practice. In T. Stewart (Ed.), Voices from the TESOL classroom: Participant inquiries in Higher
Education classes (pp. 7–13). Alexandria, VA: TESOL Press.
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

40

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): STORIES OF LEARNING AND TEACHING
Hanks, J. (1998). “The thing that puzzled me was...”: Implications of teacher perspectives on ‘problems’ and‘puzzles’ for Exploratory Practice (Unpublished master’s thesis). Lancaster University, England.
Hanks, J. (2017). Exploratory Practice in language teaching: Puzzling about principles and practices. London:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Hanks, J. (2019). From research-as-practice to exploratory practice-as-research in language teaching andbeyond. Language Teaching, 52(2), 143-87.
Hiratsuka, T. (2016). Actualizing Exploratory Practice (EP) principles with team teachers in Japan. System, 57,
109-19.
Prabhu, N. S. (1990). There is no best method—Why? TESOL Quarterly, 24, 161–72.
Stewart, A., Croker, R., & Hanks, J. (2014). Exploring the principles of Exploratory Practice. In A. Barfield & A.
Minematsu (Eds.), Learner development working papers: Different cases, different interests (pp. 127-45).
Tokyo, Japan: JALT Learner Development SIG.
Tajino, A., & Tajino, Y. (2000). Native and non-native: What can they offer? Lessons from team teaching inJapan. ELT Journal, 54(1), 3-11.
Tajino, A., & Smith, C. (2005). Exploratory practice and soft systems methodology. Language Teaching
Research, 9(4), 448-69.
Tajino, A., Stewart, T., & Dalsky, D. (Eds.) (2016). Team teaching and team learning in the language classroom:
Collaboration for innovation in ELT. Abingdon, England: Routledge.

Call for Contributions
Deadline for the Spring issue: February 15th, 2020
Learning Learning is your space for continuing to make the connections that interest you. You are warmly
invited and encouraged to contribute to the next issue of Learning Learning in either English and/ orJapanese. In order to provide access and opportunities for Learner Development SIG members to take partin the SIG’s activities, we welcome writing in different formats and lengths about issues connected withlearner and teacher development.
『学習の学習』は会員の皆様に興味ある繋がりを築きつづけ るスペースです。次号の『学習の学習』への日本語（もしくは英語、及びニ言語で）の投稿を募集していま す。メンバーの皆様にSIGの活動にご参加いただきたく、形式や長さを問わず、学習者および教師の成長に関 する以下のような原稿をお待ちしております。 ターで、年に２回（春と秋）オンライン出版されています（ISSN 1882-1103）。学習者の成長、学習者と教員の自律に関するアイディア、省察、経験や興味に関連したさまざま形式の原稿を収録しています。SIGの多くのメンバーが『学習の学習』に寄稿し、共同体の意識を築き共に学習しています。どうぞ奮ってご投稿され、SIG内でのまたそれを超えた繋がりを築いてください

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

41

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLESSHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES | 小論
Ensemble: Extended Reflections on Active Learning
Abstract
This is an ensemble short article with extended reflections following a Tokyo get-together on active learning(AL). In the first piece, Ken Ikeda draws on different interpretations of AL from Japan, the United States andEurope to look at how students characterise their own learning within an academic skills course. He
furthermore explores possible connections between AL and foundational notions of learner developmentthat the LD SIG started with in the early 1990s. James Underwood next questions how active learning
practices vary according to context, situation, and the capabilities of the learners involved. What might strong
or weak versions of active learning involve, and what roles might learners be asked to play in the design anddevelopment of appropriate AL systems and curricula? In the final reflective piece, Tim Ashwell argues that itis helpful to understand the "active" quality of AL as grounded in what learners do through speech or writing
to negotiate with other learners as they act upon information they have heard or read. Tim concludes byinviting readers to consider to what extent such an interpretation of AL can be related to the Output
Hypothesis (Swain, 2000).
Keywords: Active Learning, academic skills, strong/weak versions of active learning, learner development,
learner negotiation, Output Hypothesis
要旨
このテーマ企画は、東京で行われたアクティブラーニング（AL）をテーマにしたLD SIGの会合で話題に上ったトピックについて、さらに深堀した小論をまとめたものになります。1本目の小論は、Ken Ikedaが日本、米国、ヨーロッパにおけるALの様々な解釈を描き出し、学生たちがアカデミッ
クスキルの授業の中で、どのように自らの学習を特徴づけているのかについて見ていきます。Ikeda
はさらに、ALと学習者ディベロップメントが1990年代初頭にスタートした当初の基礎的な概念とのつながりについても踏み込んでいきます。次にJames Underwoodは、アクティブラーニングの実践
が、コンテクストや場所、学習者の能力に応じて変化しているのだろうか、という点について疑問を投げかけています。本稿では、「アクティブラーニングの程度が強い、または弱いというのはどういうことか」、また「適切なアクティブラーニングのシステムとカリキュラム、それぞれの授業
設計の中において、学習者はどのような役割を求められるべきか」という質問に答えています。最後の小論では、Tim AshwellがALの”アクティブ”な要素は、学習者が聞いたり書かれたものから得たインプットを、スピーチやライティングを通して、他の学生と意味の相互理解を行うプロセスに根ざしており、そのプロセスを理解することはALのより深い理解に繋がるとしています。TimはこのようなALの解釈がどの程度Output Hypothesis (Swain, 2000)と関係しているのかを読者に考えてもらえる機会を提供しています。
キーワード: アクティブラーニング、アカデミックスキル、アクティブラーニングの程度、学習者ディベロップメント、学習者間の相互作用、アウトプット仮説

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

42

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES

Learning About the Active Element in Learner Development
Ken Ikeda
Email: <kodanuki@gmail.com>
My interest in active learning (AL) was sparked when my university asked me at the beginning of this year toteach a course as part of a license renewal program to Japanese teachers of English. I decided my course
would aim at strengthening students’ language motivation. A number of teacher responses included queries
on AL and how to bring it into being. I have often wondered if AL is just limited to being a pedagogical slogan
for educators to guide learners into seemingly interactive discussions. Aware that the teacher license renewal
course would end in August, I’ve aimed to maintain my interest in AL beyond that moment. I’ve been trying toactualize my insights gleaned through an academic English skills course this past semester, the results ofwhich I’ll report on at the upcoming LD Forum at JALT2019 in Nagoya.
I begin with an exploration of three views of AL, from the U.S., Japan, and Europe. I proceed to show how
I’ve incorporated these views into my teaching this year and close with musings on the interaction of AL andlearner development (LD).
In a pioneering report on AL, American educators Bonwell and Eison (1991) regard AL as basically“anything that involves students in doing things and thinking about the things they are doing” (p. 2). Theyobserve five characteristics that students perform in AL: (a) doing more than listening; (b) developing theirskills by themselves; (c) carrying out higher order thinking (analysis, synthesis, evaluation); (d) engaging inreading, discussing, writing activities; and (e) exploring their own attitudes and values (p. 2). They encourage
instructors to persuade their institutions that AL is effective (p. vi.) For Bonwell and Eison, the thrust of AL
here is not really on actualizing learners’ skills, rather, more on making instruction strategies active.
Building on this early conceptualization, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology(MEXT) has urged teachers in Japan to incorporate AL in their lessons (Tahira 2012), but in recent years has
reworded it into a slogan “shutaiteki, taiwateki de, fukai manabi” (2017), translated as “proactive, interactive,
deep learning” (Suzuki, 2007, p. 8). “Proactive” is best expressed by Ito (2017) to mean “taking action throughchanges” (p. 1). “Interactive” appears to involve active engagement between people, but “dialogic” may be abetter rendering, because “interactive” does not necessarily mean activity that involves dialogue (Hanten
Jugyo Kenkyukai, 2017). I would argue that “dialogic” fits well with the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)
in sociocultural theory, by which learners engage with others who assist them enough so that they can
perform at a higher level than which they might do without assistance (see Carr & Wicking, 2019, in this issue
for further discussion and references). Whether “taiwateki” ought to mean “interactive” or “dialogic,” MEXT’sreformulation of AL is an improvement on Bonwell and Eison, since it directs focus more on the learners’
activities than on teachers’ efforts.
The European University Association (EUA) goes further and explains AL as:“…(consisting) of a broad range of pedagogical processes that emphasises the importanceof student ownership and activation. It harnesses the benefits of curiosity-driven methods,
research-based/problem-based learning and diverse assessment practices, thus stimulating
the learner’s critical thinking skills. It is defined by a student-centred approach to learningand teaching, in which teachers are seen as facilitators of learning.” (EUA, 2018, p. 3)
Although critical thinking is present in both the American and European explanations, the EUA places
stress on “student ownership,” which is absent from the five characteristics of AL (Bonwell & Eison, 1991, p.
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

43

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
19). Ownership implies purposeful action to make learning one’s own. I agree with the EUA term of “student
ownership” as it involves “curiosity-driven” searching, which I regard as similar to Byram’s sub-skill ofdiscovery (savoir apprendre/faire) within his model of intercultural communicative competence (1997, p. 99).
The EUA paper states that AL is “iterative, dialogical and mostly collaborative; it is about the doing ofunderstanding and, hence, about the application of knowledge in new and authentic situations” (p. 3).
“Dialogical” certainly resounds with the “dialogic” interpretation raised earlier in this paper of MEXT’s
taiwateki; “dialogical and mostly collaborative” furthermore echoes the sociocultural approach to learning.
Not only does the EUA paper call for encouraging students to take ownership of their learning, but argues
that the roles of instructors and students be changed:“Active learning casts the teacher in the role of facilitator and coach and invites the student
to take responsibility for learning. Hence, they need to enter into a new contract andrelationship and negotiate new ways of working and learning. There needs to be a culturalshift to accommodate an active learning stance and this shift is possible only in the context
of nurturing and supporting learning communities for staff as well as students.” (p. 3)
I concur with this cultural re-positioning of AL. Instructors also need to regard their roles to be more
facilitators than evaluators in their local classrooms. I interpret “staff” to include instructors, who need to be
active learners themselves.
This semester, I implemented AL principles in a class to raise learners’ academic skills in English, but also todevelop their own sense of their selves, which is the fifth feature of active learning that Bonwell and Eison(1991) identify occurring in classrooms (p. 19). Values are not simply abstractions, they are “clearly groundedin fear and desire” (Lemke, 2008, p. 27). Trainor (2008) argues that if people become clearly aware of theirvalues, “the easier it is to put them into practice. Values provide the framework for decision-making” (para.
2). I would venture that I am treating "values" here in a broader context, to students coming to grips withwhat they hold important as members of society, not limited to being learners in a classroom.
My class consisted of seven students, five of them in their first year of university, the other two
respectively in their third year and fourth year. The instructional approach I carried out (Ikeda, in press) has
mirrored in significant ways with the EUA recommendations. Through curiosity-driven learning, students firststudied a list of statements on various topics to select their degree of agreement or disagreement on an 8point scale. They then polled each other in deep discussion to find those who agreed or disagreed to thesame degree on one or more value statements. Their interaction and analysis resulted in them being placed
into three groups in which they were tasked with constructing manifestos based on their shared values. These
group manifestos were presented in a public lesson attended by several colleagues from my department who
provided constructive feedback. This course ended with the students presenting proposals based on theirgroup values in another public lesson attended by visiting high school students.
As facilitator, I perceived at least two responsibilities: (a) to encourage students to probe their ideas andhone their manifestos, and (b) refrain from knowing their test placement scores that put them into levels. At
the end of the course, I gave them a questionnaire that asked them about initial barriers they perceived andthe extent they had found ways to overcome these barriers. I will interview the students who answered thequestionnaire and report these results at the LD Forum at JALT2019. I haven’t thoroughly analyzed theseresults yet, but I close my reflection by commenting on two students.
One of them is currently a fourth-year student who has received an offer for a job when she graduates inMarch next year. She transferred into this department from another college. I am interested in how she
regards herself as a student in her senior year and views English learning as part of her personal
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

44

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLESdevelopment. Despite the pressures of job hunting, she was absent only twice, freely advised and discussedwith others, including constructing her group manifesto.
Another student is in her first year of university. She wrote on the questionnaire that she feared if she
would do well in my class primarily due to her section level, which was lower than she expected. This firstyear student has excelled in this class, becoming one of the more influential motivators. For her groupmanifesto presentation, she conducted an Instagram poll on Japanese people’s awareness of refugees andpresented many graphs with professional-level citations. I learned from her that both of her parents
graduated from universities in the United States, but finances have prevented her from having an extended
study abroad. This student is now preparing her application for a long-term study abroad program next year.
This reflective piece is just a probing foray into various conceptions of AL to see how they could be actualized
in a class. I seek to find ways to carry out these understandings of AL in my academic skills class that has
equipped students through discovering their values. I close this exploration with this query: How does AL
relate to learner development (LD)? As Smith (1994) has put it:“…learner development as an aim could be construed as implying both or either of: (1)helping students “learn how to learn”, and deploy what they’ve learned, as a route towards
more effective language acquisition and use; and (2) weaning learners away from an attitudeof teacher-dependence and towards an assumption of greater responsibility for and controlof their own learning, as a means of more general empowerment.”
Smith’s second point of LD certainly relates to AL. “Weaning” is an apt word to encourage learners to
become autonomous users of the language, particularly in “control of their own learning” and“empowerment”. Too often instructors are overly influenced by the institutional constraints and expectationsof their teaching environments and lose sight of their actual roles as encouragers toward independent
learning. For Bonwell and Eison (1991), their “strategies promoting active learning” are primarily directed tofaculty, not the students themselves (p. 8). Reviewing the three conceptions of AL, the EUA (2018) stance on
student ownership and encouraging students to take responsibility for their own learning is the clearest viewof active learning that coincides with aims of LD.
AL and LD would seem to make good bedfellows, yet, a clear understanding of these has not beenentertained in my opinion. I hope my extended definition leads to further exploration into these seemingly
compatible ideas.

Acknowledgements

I credit Andy Barfield for alerting me to the EUA advocacy paper on active learning for universities.

References

Bonwell, C., & Eison, J. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE ERIC Higher
Education Report No. 1. Washington, DC: George Washington University.
Carr, N., & Wicking, P. (2019). Applying sociocultural theory to the writing classroom in instruction andassessment. Learning Learning, 26(2).
European University Association (2019, January). Promoting active learning in universities: Thematic peergroup report. Retrieved from https://eua.eu/resources/publications/814:promoting-active-learning-inuniversities-thematic-peer-group-report.html
反転授業研究会 [Hanten Jugyo Kenkyukai] (2017, December 17). 対話的な学び（その１）: interactive or
dialogic? 問学教育研究部 [Mongaku Kenkyubu]. Retrieved from https://mon-gaku.com
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

45

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
Ikeda, K. (in press). Encouraging students to express meaningful opinions based on their values. Accents Asia.
Ito, H. (2017). Rethinking active learning in the context of Japanese higher education. Cogent Education, 4(1),1-10. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1298187
Lemke, J. L. (2008). Identity, development, and desire: Critical questions. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard & R.
Iedema (Eds.), Identity trouble: Critical discourse and contested identities (pp. 17-42). New York, NY:
Palgrave Macmillan.
MEXT (2017, October 24). 主体的・対話的で深い学びの実現:（「アクティブ・ラーニング」の視点からの授業改善）ついて（イメージ）[Realization of proactive, interactive, deep learning: (Regardingclass improvement from the viewpoint of “active learning”)]. Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/
component/a_menu/education/micro_detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2017/10/24/1397727_001.pdf
Smith, R. (1994). Some thoughts on the formation of the JALT Learner Development N-SIG. Learning Learning,
1(1), 2-5. Retrieved from http://ld-sig.org/LL/1994a.pdf
Suzuki, K. N. (2017). Lessons from PISA 2015: The future of learning: Scientific literacy and proactive,
interactive and deep learning. 19th OECD/Japan Seminar (English version).
Tahira, M. (2012). Behind MEXT’s new course of study guidelines. The Language Teacher, 36(3), 3-8. Retrieved
from https://jalt-publications.org/files/pdf-article/36.3_art1.pdf
Trainor, N. (2008, December 30). Expressing your values. Covenant Group. Retrieved from https://www.covenantgroup.com/expressing-your-values

Conceptualizing the Degrees of Active Learning
James Underwood
Email: <jamesmichaelunderwood@gmail.com>
The more I read about active learning (AL) the more I noticed parallels with Everhard’s (2016) proposedmodel for the Assessment Autonomy Research Project (AARP). Her model graphically shows the degrees ofautonomy in foreign language learning. It outlines various characteristics that courses exhibit from no
autonomy through to high autonomy in the following four categories:● content knowledge and skills● motivation and context● strategies and process● feedback evaluation and assessment.
For no autonomy, she proposes that the language teacher controls the content of the course through thesyllabus that determines the material used and the skills that will be developed. The learners are extrinsicallymotivated by their desire to pass the assessment designed and evaluated by the teacher. Success in passing isbased on the learners' ability to reproduce the knowledge imparted by the teacher during the course. To doso, they complete tasks designed by the teacher in the order the teacher prescribes. In high autonomy, thelearners are in control. They decide the course content, materials used, and the skills that will be developed
based on their needs and objectives. The learners decide how they will realise their objectives through theselection of appropriate strategies. And as they learn, they monitor their performance and adjust these if
necessary. Throughout their learning, the learners are intrinsically motivated by their curiosity and interest. In
between these two extremes lie low and medium autonomy, which vary according to the degree that thelearner is in control and gradually bridge the gap between low and high autonomy.
As I tried to conceptualize what active learning involves through examining the literature, I started towonder if it would be possible to realize active learning not as a fixed or static concept but a process thatvaried according to the context, situation, and the capabilities of the learners involved. And furthermore,
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

46

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
could this variation be contextualized on a scale that described degrees of active learning from weak tostrong? After all, there seems to be a wide gap between the original description of active learning describedby Bonwell and Eison (1991), and that described by the European University Association (2019), especiallywhen it comes to student involvement in curriculum development and beyond.
In the interview with Katherine Isbell (1999) it seems that for Eison the teacher or “active learner
practitioner” is still very much in control of this process. In this interview he hypothesized that during theplanning stages the practitioner will ask themselves the following three questions:(1) What knowledge, skills, and attitudes do I want students to examine and employ?;(2) What exercises or assignments can I have students complete to demonstrate their understanding of,skills with, and beliefs about important course content?; and(3) What instructional materials might I prepare to help maximize student effectiveness and efficiency inachieving these important learning outcomes? (p. 4, emphasis added)
With the foci of these questions very clearly on the practitioner, it is clear that Eison believes the student is
not a part of this process (Isbell, 1999). In contrast, the EUA (2019) proposes that the students should be
involved “in all levels in redesigning higher education, i.e., academic strategies, the design of the learningspace and time, assessment practices and the use of technology” (p. 6). For many institutions, this level ofinvolvement may be unfeasible. Thus the EUA model of active learning could be seen as “strong” active
learning, with "no" active learning at the other end of the scale. Taking inspiration from Everhard’s (2016)
model, I wondered if there could be a low and medium version of active learning that will bridge the gap
between the two extremes.
At the start of the scale lies “no active learning” or as it is more commonly known “passive learning.” For
this type of learning the teacher is very much in control as the main source of information. They often requirethat the students reproduce an almost exact copy of the information that they provide through theassessment that they design. Often this assessment will take place at the end of the semester, meaning thatthe student is unable to use this assessment as an indicator of their strengths and weaknesses and work on
fine-tuning these so that they can improve in the short term. Following on from passive learning is low active
learning where the students are slightly more involved in the learning process. As the students gradually
become more involved, they are, as Chickering and Gamson (1987) claim, able to “make what they learn apart of themselves” (p. 5).
In low active learning, the students will be doing more than note-taking and will be actively processing
what they have learnt through reading or discussion. Although the teacher is still the main source of
information, the students will be more able to supplement this with their (and other students’) knowledge
and experience through working collaboratively with other students to understand the material. Throughout
this collaborative inquiry, the teacher would have some degree of control as they will be deciding not only
when it will happen, but often the form it will take. One example of this could be the “pause procedure”
described by Eison in the interview with Isbell (1999) where during a teacher-fronted lecture, the teacher
pauses the delivery to give the students time to discuss and share understanding every 12-18 minutes.
Another way the teacher would be able to control the sharing activity would be by preparing discussion
questions or writing tasks and essay questions, which would direct what is shared. In this low active learning
stage, the content would not all come from the teacher, and the teacher would assign readings for homeworkto add to the students' understanding. By assigning these readings for homework as preparation for thelecture and the sharing sessions, the teacher would be supporting the active learning process. Mori (2018)suggests that it takes at least one week for the learners to internalize the content so that they can effectively
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

47

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
share their understanding. In terms of assessment, the students’ performance in these activities will be still
assessed solely by the teacher. And in terms of reflection, the students will probably complete tasks designedby the teacher during the time allocated. Taking all these characteristics into account, the level of student
involvement is much like that in Everhard’s (2016) description of low autonomy where the students aredeveloping skills with the framework, and materials, designed by the teacher. In the next stage of active
learning, these responsibilities are shared.
In medium active learning, the teacher and students work together to negotiate a framework for thelearning that will take place. Unlike strong active learning, which I will describe later, this framework will be
put in place on a course level, not on a university-wide level. In terms of materials used, there will be morevariety, and the students would be free to choose those that are relevant and of interest them. This variety
would enrich the quality of the collaborative inquiry as the students would not all be reading or listening to
the same texts, and would thus be able to share more varied perspectives on the content. The impetus forthis sharing through presentation, discussion or writing assignments will come from the students themselves
as they create discussion questions or writing prompts with guidance from the teacher. Unlike low active
learning, these tasks will be assessed collaboratively through a combination of self, peer and teacher
assessment. There will also be more room for the reflection which would be in-depth, and could, for example,
include both a self-assessment of their performance and a section devoted to outlining their weakness andaddressing how they will plan to overcome these. Considering all the characteristics I have outlined above,
this quality of active learning could be seen as an interim or transition phase as the students take more andmore control in the learning process. As I have said above, exactly how much control the learners havedepends on the learning context and the institution’s readiness and willingness for the “cultural shift” that
the EUA report is advocating. For many institutions, the medium active learning I have described may be thebest they can do given the institutional constraints.
For the strong version of active learning, learners and instructors are not only co-creators of the course
content but are also co-creators of the curriculum and learning space itself as they both are redesigned torealize the full potential of active learning. The EUA (2019) report advises that when redesigning takes place itshould be done with design thinking principles and “include needs analysis, an experimentation andevaluation phase and enough flexibility to adjust if needed” (p. 6). When suggesting ways how this flexibility
could be introduced, the EUA report suggests using e-learning platforms to address the problem of limited
physical resources. Although these learning management systems are already in place in many universities inJapan, I found it interesting that in relation to the development of these the report suggests that theuniversities “acknowled(ge) the potential of students to provide smart, creative, functional and targeted
solutions for a better way of learning” (ibid.).
Already the institutions I work at acknowledge the students in the curriculum and course design process
to some degree when they collect feedback from the students through the course questionnaire. However as
this feedback is often closed in nature, with the learner evaluating the course by reading a pre-preparedstatement and signalling their level of agreement to this on a Likert scale, there is little room for the students
to "provide" their solutions. Added to the design of the course questionnaire, the timing of when theteachers see the results becomes important so that the teachers can adjust if necessary. Another aspect that
becomes important is whether or not the instructors can respond to the questionnaire. Furthermore, if theteacher and student are going to be true “co-creators,” there needs to be a channel of dialogue that is open
throughout the year and beyond.
Through this extended reflection I have attempted to conceptualize degrees of active learning from "no"active learning to "strong" active learning. When I reflect on the different contexts I have taught at throughthe lens of this scale, it appears to me that teachers at different levels of education are more able than others
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

48

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
to incorporate a higher degree of active learning. When examining my current context and universities I teachat, I realised I am more likely to implement a higher degree of active learning at those institutions that
support and encourage learner and teacher autonomy throughout their curriculum. By supporting andencouraging both, they facilitate the teachers' and learners' "potential ... to provide smart, creative,functional and targeted solutions for a better way of learning” (EUA, 2018, p. 6). With the 2019 autumn
semester about to start, I hope to allow a higher degree of active learning to take place by involving thelearners more in those classes where in the past I have been very much in control due to the culture of theinstitution. I hope the scale that I have proposed can help other SIG members to do so at a level applicable totheir contexts.
References
Chickering, A.W., & Gamson, Z.F. (1987, March). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate
education. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin. Retrieved from http://www.lonestar.edu/
multimedia/SevenPrinciples.pdf
Bonwell, C.C., & Eison, J.A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE–ERIC Higher
Education Report No. 1. Washington, DC: The George Washington University, School of Education and
Human Development. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED336049.pdf
European University Association (2019, January). Promoting active learning in universities: Thematic peergroup report. Retrieved from https://eua.eu/resources/publications/814:promoting-active-learning-inuniversities-thematic-peer-group-report.html
Everhard, C. (2016). What is this thing called autonomy? Finding a definition and a model. In M.
Mattheoudakis & K. Nicolaidis (Eds.), Selected Papers of the 21st International Symposium on Theoreticaland Applied Linguistics (ISTAL 21) (pp. 548-568). Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/16ee/
6727617245af0064d69979b832cf3e2cae04.pdf
Isbell, K. (1999). An Interview on active learning with Dr. James Eison. The Language Teacher, 23(5), 4-5, 9.
Retrieved from https://jalt-publications.org/tlt/articles/2504-interview-active-learning-dr-james-eison
Mori, T. (2018). The flipped classroom: An instructional framework for promotion for active learning. In
Matsushita, K. (Ed.) Deep active learning: Toward greater depth in university education. Singapore:
Springer Nature.

Active Learning – Some Observations
Based on Interactionist Metaphors
Tim Ashwell
Email: <tashwell@komazawa-u.ac.jp>
Reading the interview with James Eison by Katharine Isbell in the “Special Active Learning Issue” of The
Language Teacher (1999) in which they discuss how active learning (AL) can be used at the tertiary level, I was
struck by how the AL activities mentioned involve learners in producing output in one form or another inspeech or writing. Unfortunately, this does not mean that so long as students are speaking or writing they are
involved in AL. They might appear to be active, but this may not be the “active” we are seeking. For AL tohappen, students need to be speaking or writing in order to process, interpret, translate, or transform
information they have heard or read. When they act on that information in some way and transform it so thatit becomes understandable and manageable for them, they are engaged in AL. Ultimately, the aim is forstudents to transform the information so that it is rendered in such a way that it can become part of theirown understanding. This requires making connections to previous knowledge and experiences and finding
ways to integrate new ideas into existing frameworks, a process that is negotiated through speech or writing.
Of course, it is highly likely that many students are active learners without the need to verbalize and it is clear
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

49

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLESthat much (most?) learning can occur implicitly and unconsciously. However, one way we as teachers canencourage students to be active learners is to require them to verbalize their understanding of the material
they encounter and thereby trigger processes, conscious or unconscious, that may lead to a reconfiguring of
their knowledge or skills.
The interview article also makes it clear that the information contained in course materials may not be theprimary focus for a teacher who wishes to promote AL. In promoting AL, the teacher is probably just, if not
more, concerned with the way activities can contribute to the development of particular skills, attitudes, anddispositions. Working through one’s understanding of material is an exercise in taking control of the learning
process. By seeking to engage with the material through speech or writing, the students are being
encouraged to take a critical stance and are being shown that individual understandings can be valid even if
they differ from one student to the next. They are being encouraged to take up a point of view and to accept
that there may not be a definitive answer. They are thus being shown that knowledge and understanding aremutable and that it is, in fact, sensible and mature to draw out tentative and temporary interpretations thatcan be refined and revised and even rejected through further rounds of negotiation.
There is a danger of making the learning process seem like a purely mechanical activity by using terms
such as “input” and “output,” but sometimes these information-processing metaphors can help us clarify
what we mean. In this case, I think it is useful to revisit Swain’s (2000) Output Hypothesis to gain a deeper
understanding of what we mean by AL. Swain has famously posited the need for learners to be pushed to
produce output as part of the second language acquisition process. Describing output, she writes: “Withoutput, the learner is in control. In speaking or writing, learners can ‘stretch’ their interlanguage to meet
communicative goals. To produce, learners need to do something. They need to create linguistic form andmeaning, and in so doing, discover what they can and cannot do” (p. 99). If I can take an almighty leap here
and extend the argument beyond second language acquisition to learning in general, Swain’s description
sounds very much like AL to me. By being pushed to respond to some form of input by speaking or writing
about it, learners are made to see what they do and do not understand. My feeling is that the input may not
be limited to second language grammar, vocabulary or pragmatics, but may extend to other forms of input.
I have chosen to dive into the debate from an interactionist viewpoint to see what light this can cast on
AL. I think the idea of output highlights the importance of speech and writing in AL and how these can help
push learners to work on the ideas they have been presented with to render them in a form which they can
integrate into their own framework of understanding. I have deliberately used the term “negotiation” above
because I think this is also a useful way of thinking about AL.

References
Isbell, K. (1999). An Interview on active learning with Dr. James Eison. The Language Teacher, 23(5), 4-5, 9.
Retrieved from https://jalt-publications.org/tlt/articles/2504-interview-active-learning-dr-james-eison
Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue.
In J.P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford, England:
Oxford University Press.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

50

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLESIntroducing Elements of a Four-dimensional Education
into an EFL Classroom
Adrianne Verla Uchida
Nihon University
Email: <averla@gmail.com>

Abstract

This short reflective article introduces two classroom activities that I implemented when I began a new fulltime teaching position last spring. The position allowed me the autonomy to design my semester-long course
using the required textbook, project-based learning, and the Center for Curriculum Redesign’s FourDimensional Education Framework (Fadel, Bialik, & Trilling, 2015). The framework addressed the need tofocus beyond just teaching English by focusing on the needs of a 21st century learner. As these activities
were implemented, I reflected on each activity critically to see if it achieved my desired purpose in theclassroom. I also documented how students responded to the activities. In this short reflective article, I will
introduce two of the activities that the students found particularly engaging, outlining the preparations,procedures, and student responses to the activities. I also evaluate how well these activities corresponded toprinciples of the Four-Dimensional Education Framework.
Keywords: Four-Dimensional Education Framework, reflective practice, tasked-based learning, project-basedlearning, flipped learning
概要
本稿は、今春から始まった専任教員の業務において筆者が試行した二つのアクティビティの内省に関する論文である。一学期完結型のコースの構想にあたり、大学からは多くの権限が与えられ、所定の教科書やプロ
ジェクトベース学習に加え、The Center for Curriculum RedesignがすすめるFour-Dimensional

Education Framework (Fadel, Bialik, & Trilling, 2015)を基に授業を構成した。このフレームワー
クは英語のニーズに焦点を置くだけではなく、21世紀で生きていくためのスキルを持った学習者の育成も同時に行うものである。これらの活動が授業に導入に伴い、筆者はそれぞれの活動が授業の目的を実際に達成できているのかについて、導入された活動に対しての学生の反応も書き留めながら、批判的に内省を行った。本稿では、学生が特に熱心に参加した二つの活動を取り上げ、学生のアクティビティへの反応も含め活動の導入から終わりまでを紹介する。さらに、これらの活動がどのようにFour-Dimensional Education Frameworkに関連しているかについての評価も行う。
キーワード: Four-Dimensional Education Framework、省察的実践、タスク型学習、プロジェク
ト型学習、反転学習

Introduction
Last spring, I transferred from a full-time position at a private university in Tokyo accept another full-time
position at a private university in Shizuoka. My new position required not only more face-time with students
but also more pressure to research and publish. The majority of my required teaching time was allotted toteaching required first-year English courses to non-English majors. English II, one of four required English
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

51

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
courses in the first-year curriculum is an integrated skills course with a focus on the development of reading
and writing skills. The students are streamed into leveled classes based on their score from a standardized
test taken during orientation. Moreover, each class has a mandatory textbook decided by the full-time English
faculty. The required textbook for my class was the Oxford English Grammar Course Intermediate (Swan &Walter, 2011). The textbook is divided into 22 sections each covering a specific grammar topic; for example,
section four provides explanations and drills reviewing past tense; section six places its focus on explanations
and drills using modal verbs. Each section is divided into two parts, “review” covering a review of the basic
grammar rules and a variety of grammar drills, followed by “level 2” which introduces more difficult grammar
patterns and drills to practice. Simon Borg (2016) laments that while in recent years various communicative
styles of language teaching have emerged, in many classrooms, “grammar remains the driving force and theway it is taught has changed very little over the years.” This mirrored my initial reaction when I learned that I
would be required to use a grammar textbook to teach the course. While I acknowledge that grammar
comprehension is essential for language acquisition, I feared the intense focus on grammar would have anegative effect on my students’ motivation and sense of autonomy. Borg (2017) further explains that focusing
on the completion of discrete-item exercises, similar to the exercises found in the required textbook, has thepotential to reduce English learning to the ability to answer and complete such styled questions which is quite
removed from my teaching beliefs and practices. To alleviate my discomfort with teaching a course focusedon the drilling of discrete grammar points, I set out to design a course that aligned more closely with myteaching beliefs as a TESOL professional (Farrell, 2015) by incorporating a communicative approach tolearning English through the implementation of task-based and project-based learning.

Course Design and Implementation
While I felt trepidation at using the grammar-focused textbook for the course, I recognized that the textbook
is a worthwhile resource for students to use as a review of the grammar they learned in secondary school aswell as a means to deepening their knowledge of grammar. To blend the textbook into the course, I assigned
each section of grammar as a homework assignment by flipping the classroom (Bergmann & Sams, 2012;2014). By assigning the grammar sections as homework, it allowed the students to review and prepare attheir own pace. As the answers were included in the back of the textbook, students could arrive to class with
their homework checked and the start of class could be reserved for discussion about the homework. It also
provided me time to meet with students individually as needed to answer questions. Bergmann and Sams
(2012) state that the time spent individually with a student is “very powerful because it requires all students
to interact with the teacher” (p. 98). This could be seen in the rapport my students and I developed
throughout the semester.
In addition to flipping the classroom, the Center for Curriculum Redesign’s (CCR) Four-Dimensional
Education (FDE) framework (Fadel, Bialik, & Trilling, 2015) provided the grounding for the course design.
While the FDE framework was new to me, I ran across it as an Amazon book recommendation after
purchasing 21st Century Skills Learning for Life in Our Times (Trilling & Fadel, 2009). It was originally designed
to be a cross-curriculum framework based on the United States education model, but there were strong
connections to my teaching philosophy and to the core skills that I was already attempting to foster in myclassroom (e.g., collaboration, creativity, and digital literacy). Additionally, in my previous teaching context, I
often required my students to reflect on their performance to develop their meta-cognitive skills, so including
the meta-learning dimension of the FDE framework seemed a good fit as well. Therefore, it was quite naturalto implement the framework in my new English course.
Fadel et al. (2015) explain that recently, the purpose of education has evolved to equip learners withstrong character skills and a vast breadth of knowledge to thrive professionally in today’s society. This shift in
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

52

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
educational focus aims to move the learner away from passive learning, such as memorizing facts andrepeating them on an examination, to learners who have an active investment in their learning who can takewhat they have learned and apply it toward a variety of different situations. This focus on the development of
the learner as a whole really spoke to my belief that teaching and using English is more than just an activity to
be carried out in the classroom and also connected with my belief that English is a tool that can be used invarious ways in a learners life. Moreover, the traits that the framework utilizes are adaptable to manydifferent situations and contexts and can evolve with the learner. For example, Fadel et al. (2015) incorporate
elements of the mind and body by emphasizing qualities such as motivation, leadership, and mindfulness.
Furthermore, they aim to “balance content knowledge and understanding with skills that apply thatknowledge to the real world; character qualities that build motivation, resilience, and social/emotional
intelligence; and meta-learning strategies that help students become reflective, self-directed, and expert
learners” (pp. 48-9). These themes matched the qualities that I hoped my students would develop throughtheir English studies and provided a framework for me to focus each of the tasks and projects I began creating
during the spring break and into the beginning of the spring semester.
Once I made the decision to base the course on the FDE framework, I began designing the tasks andprojects that would incorporate each of the 22 grammar units from the course textbook. The tasks were
designed to connect one grammar section to one class, whereas projects were designed to incorporate
multiple units of grammar over two to four classes. In this paper, I will introduce one of the tasks and one ofthe projects that students completed during the course. It is hoped by sharing these two activities, that other
English language teachers will be inspired to integrate similar activities and possibly the FDE framework intheir own classrooms and contexts.
Activity One: My First Date: A Story
I designed this activity to incorporate the past tense grammar unit. The class was held at the beginning of thesemester during the second week before students had a chance to bond with their classmates. The activity
was divided into three tasks. First, students were given an authentic story about a couple’s first date. The
story was about a first date between American college students and included cultural references to pique thestudent’s interest and make them want to read the story to the end. To make the story more interactive andto integrate critical thinking, communication, and collaboration skills, the story was divided into chunks, andstudents worked in groups to put the story in the correct order. This forced each group to not only scan eachsection for key words but also discuss and think critically about the story order while also comprehending theoverall narrative. As the instructor, I chose the topic because I felt that it would spark my students’ curiosity,and caution them to be mindful of their group members reading speeds and ideas, while also fostering asmall dose of resilience when I told them, often repeatedly, that the order was incorrect and they should try
again. Additionally, this activity allowed groups to have autonomy in executing the task. In some groups, aleader was chosen by the group members from the beginning, while in others, a leader came forward
naturally to help facilitate the task. All of these elements were target elements developed in relation to theframework.
While the main theme of the activity was a personal story written in the past tense, I didn't ask thestudents to write their own stories because time was limited and I felt this would be overly difficult for the
students to do so early in the semester. I decided instead to have the students use the story to design a living
graph based on the story’s timeline of events and the protagonist’s feelings. Students were asked to use thetime markers placed throughout the story and plot them along the x-axis on the graph. They then had to work
as a team to choose the most influential emotions the protagonist felt and plot them on the y-axis of thegraph. Finally, each group presented the graph that they created to their classmates using past tense verbs
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

53

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
they had studied for homework. Each group produced different living graphs based on the events andemotions they found to be most important to the story.
Activity Two: Advice Columns
The second activity I designed was a three-part project that was based on two sections from the textbook
that introduced modal verbs and relative pronouns. The project was designed around giving and receiving
advice and was carried out over two consecutive classes. In the first class the students were given a set ofadvice columns. To begin, they were only given the problems and were then divided into small groups basedon the problem each student found most interesting. Some of the topics included were about a jealous
boyfriend, a troubled grandmother, and a used gift card given as a present. Once students were in groups,
each group discussed the problem, worked together to check each other’s understanding, and then wrote a
response using the modal verbs from the unit assigned as homework. This drew on all 4Cs (communication,
collaboration, critical thinking, and creativity) in the skills section of the FDE framework. The students werethen given the original advice column written in the original post to read and compared their group’s
response with the original response.
For homework, each student was tasked with writing an original letter asking for advice. They wereencouraged to write about true situations as the letters would be shared and read anonymously. The students
prepared the assignment using Google Docs so that only I would know the author of each letter.
The following class was held in the computer room, and each advice column was assigned to threedifferent students. This required me to do some advance preparation to ensure that the students did notreceive their own advice column. Once the students received their assigned letters, they were given time inclass to read each letter and write a thoughtful response. This activity placed heavy emphasis on mindfulness,courage, and ethics as the students were reading about their classmates’ problems and giving advice thatwas, hopefully, meaningful, relevant, and useful. After each student submitted the completed assignment toGoogle Classroom, I copied each response and pasted it in the original student’s advice column file to protect
the anonymity of each student’s response. I then returned the completed document to each student. It must
be noted that while this activity was carried out using digital technology, it is not a necessity. The rationale forusing computers for this project was to promote digital literacy and student anonymity.

Discussion
Both activities were designed specifically for this course, connected to related grammar units in the textbook,and carried out in my classroom for the first time. To reflect and analyze each activity, I relied on my teaching
journal based on the definitions of reflection and reflective practice by Mann (2005) and Farrell (2013, 2018)
and class observations. Additionally, my students wrote reflections at the conclusion of each activity. Using
those data, I reviewed the activities to determine if they incorporated the desired traits from the FDE
framework and met the desired grammar needs of the students for the sections of the textbook that wereassigned.
Activity One: My First Date: A Story
Looking back, I believe that activity one provided students with the opportunity to read a long text written by
a fluent English speaker. Most students noted it was the first time for them to read such a long text.
Additionally, many students commented that putting the chunked text in order was challenging and that they
were thankful to work together. One student summarized the activity by writing, “I used my brain to read andthink about many sentences” (Student Reflections). Therefore, based on student opinions and my in-classobservations, I think this activity required not only critical thinking but also communication, collaboration,
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

54

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
and cooperation for each group to succeed. Quite a few students commented in their end of class reflections
that it was “fun” to work with their classmates. Moreover, through classroom observation, I could see thatthe students also exhibited various character traits including mindfulness (e.g., being respectful of classmatesreading speeds and comprehension ability) , leadership (e.g. some students naturally came forward as
leaders, others were chosen by means of rock-paper-scissors), and resilience (e.g., students being told, often
repeatedly, that the order of their chunked story was incorrect and they needed to try again) as they worked
together to complete the tasks and make decisions regarding the design and content of their living graphs. In
this regard, I conclude that the activity successfully integrated elements from the framework and achieved mydesired outcomes.
However, while the students enjoyed making and sharing their living graphs, the majority of theircommunication happened in Japanese. I attribute this to the activity being done in the second week of thesemester when students had not yet formed a classroom atmosphere where they felt comfortable speaking
in English together. Additionally, many students stuck with using simple emotional adjectives that they werefamiliar with such as happy, sad, and angry, instead of incorporating more descriptive adjectives that they had
come across in a previous homework section and the text itself. Despite these shortcomings from myperspective, the students wrote positively about the experience in their reflections with quite a few students
commenting that it was a good activity for communicating and working with people they didn’t know well.
Activity Two: English II Advice Columns
The second activity took place toward the end of the semester, roughly ten weeks after the first activity. I
planned for this in hopes that the classroom environment would be much more inclusive and conducive tostudents speaking in English and sharing personal information albeit anonymously. For this project to runsmoothly, I felt it necessary for students to feel safe and accepted. While giving advice, they also needed to
be able to think critically and objectively about their classmates’ problems and provide mindful advice whilesometimes thinking about problems that they had never experienced in a creative and critical manner. To
soften the sense of responsibility, I designed the entire activity to be kept anonymous to everyone except
myself. Overall, I felt that this project was very effective at getting students to include modals in their writingin addition to protecting students anonymity. Moreover, the students reported being very “thankful” and“happy” that their classmates gave them advice and took time to think about their problems. Some students
reported taking the advice they received from classmates and implementing it. One student even reported
about buying a book about pet care that a classmate recommended while another said they decided to calltheir mother and apologize for disparaging her cooking skills. Another mentioned that they were going tostart eating out less and trying to budget their money better. Overall, the students were very positive about
the experience, writing comments in their reflection logs such as “I really appreciate that everyone gave me
good advice;” “I could read the letter, think about the problem of that person in my group, and give advice;”and “I read my classmates (advice) columns. There were some unique stories, so I enjoyed readingthem” (Student Reflections). A few commented that writing advice columns to strangers was not common in
Japanese culture, but that they appreciated the new and challenging experience. One student said they
enjoyed the fact that the experience allowed them a chance to communicate with classmates through writing
rather than speaking because they had more time to think deeply about each response.

Conclusion
This practitioner research began as I felt misgivings and discomfort about being in a new teaching context andbeing required to use a grammar textbook as the course textbook, however after discovering the FDE
framework, I became motivated to design a variety of tasks and projects that I believe enabled my students toNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

55

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLESuse English in an authentic way. Looking back, while I personally would not choose the textbook for thecourse, I am satisfied with how I integrated the textbook into the course and the way in which my students
interacted with it. I strongly believe that the FDE framework became a touchstone for reflective practice that I
used during individual lesson planning as well as the overall course design. As noted in each individual activity
above, student reflections of the activities were quite positive. Overall reflections on the course were also
positive. Moreover, it can be said that the students exhibited and experienced various elements from theframework by participating in the classroom activities. Most notably, the students reflected that they learned
how to collaborate and communicate with their classmates through working together on tasks and projects.
Additionally, many students commented at the end of the course that they had gained the ability to reflect onthemselves and their performance through participating in this course. Moreover, despite the flippedclassroom requiring more homework compared to other English classes, the students wrote and spoke
positively of engaging in the activities during class with students writing comments such as, “I [will] miss thisclass. I enjoyed talking and doing anything. I'm so happy;” “All classes were very fun. Group work was difficultand hard, but I got confidence. Thank you so much;” and “I think that this class changed me into loving
English” (Student Reflections). Therefore, the framework appears to be an effective way to design tasks andprojects for EFL learners with varying English abilities. It should be noted that while these activities werecarried out at a tertiary level for students who were non-English majors, the framework and activities areversatile enough that they could be utilized in a variety of English language settings to develop well-rounded
21st century English learners, which is a goal I think many EFL educators desire for their learners.

References

Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Eugene,
OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2014). Flipped learning: Gateway to student engagement. Eugene, OR:International Society for Technology in Education.
Borg, S. (2016, October 19). Long live grammar teaching (or ‘It ain’t over till the fat lady sings’) [Blog post].
Retrieved from http://simon-borg.co.uk/long-live-grammar-teaching-or-it-aint-over-till-the-fat-lady-sings/
Borg, S. (2017, November 21). Why do teachers assess English the way they do? [Blog post]. Retrieved fromhttp://simon-borg.co.uk/why-do-teachers-assess-english-the-way-they-do/
Fadel, C., Bialik, M., & Trilling, B. (2015). Four-dimensional education: The competencies learners need tosucceed. Boston, MA: Center for Curriculum Redesign.
Farrell, T.C.S. (2013). Teacher self-awareness through journal writing. Reflective Practice, 14(4), 465-71.
Farrell, T.C.S. (2015). Promoting teacher reflection in second language education: A framework for TESOL
professionals. New York, NY: Routledge.
Farrell, T.C.S. (2018). Research on reflective practice in TESOL. New York, NY: Routledge.
Mann, S. (2005). The language teacher's development. Language Teaching, 38(3), 103-18.
Swan, M., & Walter, C. (2011). Oxford English grammar course: Intermediate. Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press.
Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

56

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLESApplying Sociocultural Theory to the Writing Classroom
in Instruction and Assessment
社会文化理論を応用したライティングの指導法と評価
Nicholas Carr (corresponding author), Deakin University
Email: <cnich@deakin.edu.au>
Paul Wicking, Meijo University

Abstract
Key tenets of sociocultural theory (SCT) currently shape many aspects of EFL education in Japan. While
practices such as university students collaborating to refine topics for graduation theses (see Ikeda, 2014) andcontent-based seminar classes (see Ashwell, 2014) have been reported on, we believe the regular writingclassroom is one area where SCT has been relatively ignored. In this short article we present the argument forincreased attention to be given to SCT in writing instruction in order to promote learner autonomy. We do
this by firstly reviewing the fundamentals of SCT. Following that, we look at how this theory can inform key
elements of the writing classroom. Finally, we address the issue of assessment and look at practical ways it
can be approached.
Keywords: sociocultural theory, writing, collaboration, interaction
概要
今日の日本の英語教育現場において、社会文化理論の影響が多々見受けられる。例えば、大学の卒業論文の主題選択のための共同学習（Ikeda, 2014）、コンテンツベースのセミナー（Ashwell, 2014）などの実践が報告されている。しかしながら、通常のライティングの授業においては、社会文化理論が用いられることはそれほどまでにはなかったであろう。本稿では、学習者の自主性を育むためには、ライティングの指導においても社会文化理論にもっと目を向ける必要があることを論じる。
そのためにまず、社会文化理論の基本事項について再考察する。次に、どのように本理論がライ
ティングの授業における重要な要素に影響を与えることができるかについて考察する。最後に、アセスメントに関する問題への解決策を探り、実用的な方法について検討する。
キーワード: 社会文化理論、ライティング、協力、相互作用
Writing is commonly considered an individual activity (Wigglesworth & Storch, 2009) despite there being
evidence that collaboration in writing is not only beneficial for learners (Storch, 2005; Swain & Lapkin, 1998)
but also reflective of real-life practice in the workplace (Ede & Lunsford, 1990). Furthermore, group work is
widely used as assessment in universities globally (Wigglesworth & Storch, 2009). Regardless of these real-life
practices, our experience within both universities and high schools in Japan has been that writing continues
to be practiced and assessed as an individual activity. An overview of common writing textbooks displays
some small shifts towards acknowledging the benefits of working collaboratively in the English language
writing classroom. However, these texts tend to limit collaboration to pre-writing activities, peer review ofindividually written texts, or include pair/group work as alternative activities rather than collaboration being
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

57

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
afforded a central role in the pedagogical approach—for example, Engaging Writing 2 (Fitzpatrick, 2011),
Focus on Writing 4 (Beaumont, 2011), and Longman Academic Writing Series 1 (Butler, 2014). In this shortarticle we outline the theoretical arguments in support of collaboration in the writing classroom and provide
a framework for its implementation in both classroom instruction and assessment.

A Brief Overview of Sociocultural Theory
Our scope here does not facilitate a complete discussion of SCT and as such only a brief overview ispresented. A key tenet of SCT is that the human mind is mediated (Vygotsky, 1934/2012). SCT advocates thatjust as we do not act on the physical world directly but instead use tools to mediate, or assist, our interactions
with our physical environs, so too we use symbolic tools—such as language—to mediate our higher mental
functions (Lantolf, 2000). This mediation takes three forms: object-, other-, and self-regulation (Lantolf &Appel, 1994). For language learners object-regulation depicts situations in which resources such as adictionary or translation tools mediate a learner's behaviour (Lantolf, Thorne & Poehner, 2014). Lantolf andcolleagues describe other-regulation as situations in which the learner receives assistance from anotherperson—assistance which Lantolf and Appel argue primarily takes the form of participating in dialogue(Lantolf & Appel, 1994). Self-regulation refers to a learner internalising such object- and other-regulation so as
to become able to perform the task without external assistance. Within a SCT framework, language learning
shifts the focus away from mastering linguistic items in an individual’s mind and emphasizes “dialectic
interaction” to create meaning (Lantolf & Pavlenko, 1995, p. 110).
The process of a learner reducing the amount of object- or other-regulation and shifting towards selfregulation is said to take place in the zone of proximal development (ZPD) (Lantolf & Appel, 1994). The
original translation of Vygotsky’s ZPD is as follows: “It is the distance between the actual developmental level
as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determinedthrough problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (Vygotsky,
1930-1934/1978, p. 86).
As Vygotsky only explicitly referred to the ZPD on a few occasions in his writings (Wertsch, 2010), there
are controversies over how the ZPD is to be conceptualised. For us as language teachers, we argue there is aneed to incorporate Ohta’s (2005) argument that assistance can come in the form of utilising literary
resources such as dictionaries or textbooks; that peers of varying levels can assist each other (Ohta, 2000);and Donato’s (1994) findings that peers can construct a collective expert when peers of a similar proficiency
level pool their resources together to perform at a higher level than they can individually. This leaves us witha working definition in the field of language education that conceptualises the ZPD as learners utilising theminimum amount of assistance required to perform at a level higher than which they could perform without
assistance—with the assistance being in the form of either object-regulation or other-regulation, or a
combination of both.
A final key concept of SCT is that development is said to have occurred when there is a reduction orchange in the quality of assistance required for a learner to perform at the higher level. For example, if theassistance becomes less explicit, then development has occurred. Therefore, when working within a SCT
framework, learning should not be limited to output only (Lantolf et al., 2014) but also consider the
mediation required to perform the task.
Framework of Implementation
Applying SCT to an English language writing class results in learners having additional resources, in the formof both object- and other-regulation, available to them when producing texts. Facilitating access to objectregulation can be achieved by simply ensuring learners have access to literary resources such as online
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

58

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
dictionaries and example texts while writing. The provision of other-regulation, however, requires a greater
shift from a traditional pedagogical approach.
It is impractical for one teacher to be available to provide other-regulation to all learners in class.
Therefore, by drawing on Donato’s (1994) notion that learners can create new knowledge throughcollaboration, other-regulation can be made available by making collaboratively written texts the locus of thepedagogical approach. For texts to be truly collaborative, learners need to work in pairs or groups throughout
the whole writing process, including planning, researching, writing, and revision.
After learners have pooled their resources to produce a text, further support, or other-regulation, can beprovided in the form of teacher feedback. This practice draws on the growing evidence of learners being able
to co-construct knowledge when collaboratively processing feedback (Storch & Wigglesworth, 2010; Swain &Lapkin, 1998). Furthermore, this feedback is best conceptualized as a continuous engagement in dialogue, inwhich all learners and teachers participate, rather than as an isolated uni-directional product (Price, Handley& Millar, 2011). Taking this idea one step further, Carless (2018) has argued for the amplification of theconcept of the ‘feedback loop’ into that of the ‘feedback spiral’ (see Figure 1 further below). Whereas a loop
suggests completion, a spiral recognises the ongoing and developmental nature of feedback in the learning
process. These spirals fit very neatly into an SCT assessment model, as students engage with object-, other-,and self-regulation in order to deepen their knowledge and develop their learning strategies.
We recommend that feedback maintain some level of implicitness; in other words, provide hints but not
the answer. Feedback which is too explicit will not allow learners to pool their resources and work within a
ZPD. The aforementioned pedagogical approach shifts the act of writing from testing what was learnt tobecoming learning itself. Furthermore, it reduces the marking load for teachers, with the provision of WCF
having been reported as very time consuming (Lee, 2014). Our experience with the reduced marking load is it
facilitated additional time to spend on each collaboratively written text, thus enabling feedback of a higher
quality to be provided. When time is limited, it is tempting to focus on the more surface level errors, such as
spelling, grammar and punctuation, as these are easy to point out. When more time is available, we felt we
could give feedback on deeper level structural issues, such as the way learners expressed their ideas,
supported their arguments, and wrote in a style appropriate for the genre.

Figure 1. SCT and the feedback spiral in a writing course.
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

59

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLESThe framework of implementation described allows learners to work as a team, which allows learners tofeel a sense of achievement, with discussions potentially leading to discovering new ideas (Ashwell, 2014) and
fostering learner autonomy (Fitzgerald & Mullen, 2014). We also believe that if learners become moreaccustomed to pair work in writing classes, it may help them to make better use of collaboration in othersubject areas. For example, Ikeda (2014) reported that learners were not able to fully utilize the benefits ofcollaboration in a project which investigated cross-institutional collaborative learning when developing
graduation thesis ideas. If learners have been exposed to and more fully understand the benefits ofcollaboration in other regular classes, they may collaborate more successfully when working together todevelop topics for their graduation theses.
Assessment
A number of models of assessment founded on SCT principles have been developed which can be used to
guide assessment in the writing classroom. Dynamic assessment (DA) is one such model, which seeks tointegrate instruction and assessment so seamlessly that an outside observer would be unable to distinguishwhere one finished and the other began, as instructional and evaluative functions would be embedded inevery interaction (Poehner, 2007). In this way, there is a fundamental difference between theconceptualization of assessment from a DA perspective as opposed to a traditional perspective. Assessment istypically understood in educational processes as being concerned with inferring learner abilities by recording
and measuring individual performance. DA, however, promotes a dialogic collaboration between learners andteacher-assessors so that learner abilities are grown and developed (Poehner, 2007). In this way, themediation of the examinee's performance is essential to assessment.
However, due to the intense involvement of the teacher, which often takes the form of one-on-one
interactions, DA is often considered unfeasible in large educational contexts. Even so, it is possible for the
principles to be adopted and used in larger classes (James, 2012). One such attempt at this is the branch of
DA known as Group Dynamic Assessment, or G-DA. While proponents of DA have favoured a dyadic mediatorlearner model, G-DA proposes a system for dealing with multiple learners at a time. When the group isconceived as a psychological entity in itself, it can be claimed that its own ZPD can emerge, within which
individual learning takes place. Poehner (2009) proposes two forms of G-DA, namely, concurrent G-DA (whenthe teacher dialogues with the entire group); and cumulative G-DA (when the teacher engages in a series of
one-to-one DA interactions as the group works together). In the writing classroom, this could conceivably
take the form of group conferencing at all stages of the writing process, or through written feedback on
collaboratively produced drafts.
As SCT advocates that knowledge is created and transformed through interactions, encouraging learners
to participate in diverse communities of practice is seen as beneficial. One of the most effective ways this canbe achieved is having learners perform the role of assessor, thereby enabling them to become part of anassessing community of practice as well as a producing community. Assessment practice guided by SCT would
work towards increasing student knowledge about assessment processes, criteria and standards, giving justas much attention to these as the course content (Rust, O'Donovan and Price, 2005). In practical terms, this
could best be accomplished through peer review and feedback, as taking on the role of evaluator would
necessarily entail learners having a deep understanding of these aspects of assessment. Peer assessment canbe done with collaboratively-produced work or with individual work. When learners engage in peer
assessment, they are able to see gradations in quality through viewing a number of different pieces of work,
then apply a standard rubric to identify strengths and weaknesses in the work. Thus, “peer assessment seems
to promote self-assessment by making otherwise invisible assessment processes more explicit andtransparent” (Reinholz, 2016, p. 303). In this way, the act of providing other-regulation to peers creates a
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

60

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
symbolic tool which can feed into processes of self-regulation. In the Japanese context, the benefits of peer
assessment in high school and post-secondary education have been supported by a number of studies. For
instance, Asaba and Marlowe (2011) argued that peer assessment increases student involvement,
responsibility and motivation, while Sato (2013) found that not only do Japanese learners have a positive
belief about peer feedback, but training in giving corrective feedback facilitates trust and boosts willingness
and confidence in providing feedback. (See also Matsuno, 2009; Saito, 2008; Taferner, 2008; Wakabayashi,
2008.)
An important issue that is bound to arise in the assessment of collaborative work concerns that offairness. Mulligan and Garofalo (2011) conducted a collaborative writing course with Japanese university
students, and overall received very positive comments from learners as to the benefits of that approach.
However, when considering the small number of negative comments, the main complaint was that grading
was unfair. In particular, some learners felt cheated because they had done most of the work, and yet theyreceived the same grade as their partner. We have not found this to be such a major problem, perhaps
because our students were in groups of three or more, rather than pairs, which creates a different dynamic.
However, any attempt to use collaborative work for assessment purposes will need to take this issue
seriously.
When considering all the above, there are a number of options for teachers wishing to implement a SCT
informed approach to writing assessment. Firstly, students could work in pairs or groups to produce a piece of
written work, rather than working on their own. Greater learning would be expected if collaboration occurredat all stages of the writing process, from brainstorming and planning, through to organising, drafting andediting. Although awarding a joint grade for the finished product would likely leave some students feelingcheated, this can be assuaged by having students choose their own partners and also by changing partners
with each new assignment. Students would then be able to pair up with someone they felt comfortableworking with, and yet if trouble did arise, they would have a chance to switch partners for the subsequentassignment.
When giving feedback on these group assessment tasks, effort should be made to keep the feedback
implicit (see Appendix A for an example). Doing so provides learners with the opportunity to engage with
their peers and pool their resources to identify the specifics of each error. While corrective feedback shouldbe implicit, the criteria and standards to be applied in assessment need to be clear and explicit. Rubrics areperhaps the most effective way of doing this. With a rubric, the often hidden goals of the curriculum are
made clearer, and students are able to evaluate their own progress and make plans to progress towards thenext learning goals (Jonsson & Panadero, 2017).
A final, perhaps radical, option is to allow the use of dictionaries and smartphones during exams. Having
access to these tools would facilitate opportunities for a ZPD to emerge as learners utilise object-regulation,
thus transforming a purely summative exam into opportunities for learning.
Conclusion
Since its introduction to the west in the 1960s, SCT has been informing and guiding much educational
research and practice, providing a clear paradigm through which teaching and learning can be understood.
The preponderance of communicative language teaching approaches in classrooms across Japan has its roots
in SCT. However, while SCT has undergirded the teaching of many language skills, its contribution to thewriting classroom has been relatively muted. Furthermore, from our extensive experience in Japanese highschools and universities, writing is, for the most part, taught and assessed as an individual activity. Aside fromthe prevailing educational tradition in which we work, there is no reason why this should be the case.
Collaborative writing and assessment is not only supported by theory which suggests there are many benefits
for learners, but it is also more reflective of real-life practice. It is not our aim in this short article to argue that
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

61

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLESsuch an approach is superior to others, but rather we hope that the ideas presented here will contribute topromoting the theoretical benefits of collaborative writing for language learners and assist in providing
teachers with a framework by which to implement such an approach.
References
Asaba, M., & Marlowe, J. (2011). Using peer assessment in the language classroom. The Language Teacher,35(1), 29-33.
Ashwell, T. (2014). Implementing a team-based learning approach in Japanese university seminar classes. In T.
Ashwell, S. Payden, M. Miyahara, & A. Stewart (Eds.), Collaborative learning in learner development (pp.
207-29). Tokyo, Japan: JALT Learner Development SIG. Retrieved from http://ld-sig.org/collaborativelearning-in-learner-development-clild/
Beaumont, J. (2011). Focus on Writing 4. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Butler, L. (2014). Longman academic writing series 1: Sentences to paragraphs (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY:
Pearson .
Carless, D. (2018). Feedback loops and the longer-term: Towards feedback spirals. Assessment & Evaluation inHigher Education, 44(5), 705-14.
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.),
Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 33-56). New Jersey, NJ: Ablex.
Ede, L.S., & Lunsford, A.A. (1990). Singular texts/plural authors: perspectives on collaborative writing.
Carbondale, CO: Southern Illinois University Press.
Fitzgerald, C., & Mullen, M. (2014). The role of collaboration in a learner autonomy program. In T. Ashwell, S.
Payden, M. Miyahara, & A. Stewart (Eds.), Collaborative learning in learner development (pp. 158-78).
Tokyo, Japan: JALT Learner Development SIG. Retrieved from http://ld-sig.org/collaborative-learning-inlearner-development-clild/
Fitzpatrick, M. (2011). Engaging Writing 2 (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Ikeda, K. (2014). Cross institutional collaboration: Lessons from an unsuccessful project. In T. Ashwell, S.
Payden, M. Miyahara, & A. Stewart (Eds.), Collaborative learning in learner development (pp. 230-247).
Tokyo, Japan: JALT Learner Development SIG. Retrieved from http://ld-sig.org/collaborative-learning-inlearner-development-clild/
Jonsson, A., & Panadero, E. (2017). The use and design of rubrics to support assessment for learning. In D.
Carless, S. Bridges, C. Ka Yuk Chan, & R. Glofcheski (Eds.), Scaling up assessment for learning in higher
education (pp. 99-111). Singapore: Springer.
Lantolf, J. (2000). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second
language learning (pp. 1-26). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Lantolf, J., & Appel, G. (1994). Theoretical framework: An introduction to Vygotskian perspectives on second
language research. In J. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research.
New Jersey, NJ: Ablex.
Lantolf, J., & Pavlenko, A. (1995). Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Annual Review ofApplied Linguistics, 15, 108-24.
Lantolf, J., Thorne, S., & Poehner, M. (2014). Sociocultural theory and second language development. In B.
VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 207-26). New
York, NY: Taylor and Francis.
Lee, I. (2014). Revisiting teacher feedback in EFL writing from sociocultural perspectives. TESOL Quarterly,
48(1), 201-213.
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to thereviewer's own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 30-43.
Matsuno, S. (2009). Self-, peer-, and teacher-assessments in Japanese university EFL writing classrooms.
Language Testing, 26(1), 75-100.
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

62

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLES
Mulligan, C., & Garofalo, R. (2011). A collaborative writing approach: Methodology and student assessment.
The Language Teacher, 35(3), 5-10.
Ohta, A. (2005). Interlanguage pragmatics in the zone of proximal development. System, 33(3), 503-517.
Ohta, A. (2000). Rethinking interaction in SLA: Developmentally appropriate assistance in the zone of proximal
development and the acquisition of L2 grammar. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second
language learning (pp. 51-78). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Poehner, M. (2009). Group dynamic assessment: Mediation for the L2 classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 43(3),471-91.
Poehner, M. (2007). Beyond the test: L2 dynamic assessment and the transcendence of mediated learning.
The Modern Language Journal, 91(3), 323-40.
Price, M., Handley, K. & Millar, J. (2011). Feedback: Focusing attention on engagement. Studies in Higher
Education, 36(8), 879-896.
Price, M., O'Donovan, B. & Rust, C. (2007). Putting a social-constructivist assessment process model into
practice: Building the feedback loop into the assessment process through peer review. Innovations in
Education and Teaching International, 44(2), 143-52.
Reinholz, D. (2016). The assessment cycle: A model for learning through peer assessment. Assessment &Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(2), 301-315.
Rust, C., O'Donovan, B. & Price, M. (2005). A social constructivist assessment process model: How the
research literature shows us this could be best practice. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education,30(3), 231-40
Saito, H. (2008). EFL classroom peer assessment: Training effects on rating and commenting. Language
Testing, 25(4), 553-581.
Sato, M. (2013). Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback: Efficacy of classroom
intervention. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 611-33.
Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second
Language Writing, 14(3), 153-73.
Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2010). Learners' processing, uptake, and retention of corrective feedback on
writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 303-34.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion
students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320-37.
Taferner, R. H. (2008). Toward effective EFL writing revision: Peer review. OnCUE Journal, 2(2), 76-91.
Vygotsky, L. (2012). Thought and language [Kindle]. (Rev. ed.) (E. Hanfmann, G. Vakar, and A. Kozulin, Trans.)
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original manuscript 1934)
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. JohnSteiner, S. Scribner & E. Souberman., Eds.) (A. R. Luria, M. Lopez-Morillas, & M. Cole [with J. V. Wertsch],
Trans.) Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. (Original manuscripts [ca. 1930-1934])
Wakabayashi, R. (2008). The effect of peer feedback on EFL writing: Focusing on Japanese university students.
OnCUE Journal, 2(2), 92-110.
Wertsch, J. V. (2010). Vygotsky and recent developments. In E. Baker & B. McGaw (Eds.), International
Encyclopedia of Education (3rd ed.) (pp. 231-36). Oxford, England: Elsevier.
Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2009). Pair versus individual writing: Effects on fluency, complexity andaccuracy. Language Testing, 26(3), 445-66.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

63

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): SHORT REFLECTIVE ARTICLESAppendix A
Implicit WCF
The sentence is highlighted, indicating that a grammatical error has occurred within the sentence. The correct
form of the error is not provided. The type of error and its location may, or may not be provided. In thefollowing example, it has not been provided.
I go to the bank yesterday.
In the following example, the type of error and location is provided:

Explicit WCF
The location and correct form of the error is provided.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

64

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): LD SIG GRANT AWARDEE REPORTS

LD SIG GRANT AWARDEE REPORTS | LD SIG 研究助成
What I Learned from Attending My First Conference
Miki Iwamoto

Email: <miki198611@gmail.com>
Master’s Program, Temple University, Japan Campus
Before attending my first conference, I had no idea about what a conference would be
like, and there were many things I wanted to know and do there, such as presenting at
the poster session, meeting new people, and learning about useful ideas for mylessons. The biggest thing I wanted to do was to learn useful and effective activities
for my lessons. As an English teacher in a public high school, I face some constraints,
such as not enough equipment in the classroom or a large number of students in one class. I have tried some
activities in my lessons, such as dictations or pair conversations, and these activities usually worked well at
first, but students were bored after several times because they wanted to try new things. Therefore, at thisconference, I wanted to find out about more activities that are especially useful for grammar or vocabulary
learning, and also I wanted to talk about effective learner-centered activities with other English language
teachers.
Overall, the most inspiring aspect of the conference was listening to the various presentations. Because of
my context, I usually share ideas for lessons only with other high school teachers. For example, even when I
join in-service training programs, which are usually organized by my Board of Education, only high school
teachers are present. That kind of training shows us useful classroom techniques, such as how to use
technology effectively or how to conduct lessons for presentations. These are also good opportunities toimprove my teaching skills, but what we discuss in the training is focused on only high school, and I wanted tohear different ideas or opinions from teachers outside of the high school system. Throughout the JALT2018
conference, I could not only meet people from various teaching contexts, but I could also listen to various
presentations from these people. Even though I was not sure what I was interested in specifically, there weremany different types of presentations, so I could learn a lot. There were many presentations conducted at thesame time, so it was difficult to choose one. Among the many presentations, I focused on the ones aboutclassroom activities. As a result, I could learn about useful activities for grammar practice and listening.
In terms of the activity for grammar practice, I listened to two interesting presentations. One was apresentation by Imogen Custance, Sentence Tennis: Pushing Complexity in Production, who explained an
activity in which students are divided into two groups and try to make longer sentences than the other group.
When we tried this activity during the presentation, I noticed that because people focus on different parts ofthe sentence to make it longer and more detailed, students can learn from each other. I thought this activity
could be effective for my students too if the first provided sentence is not too difficult, especially considering
my students' proficiency level. In addition, through this activity, students can notice that they have different
points of view and it can help them to understand the differences between each other.
In the other presentation, A Research-Based Approach to Teaching Grammar by Tomoko Nemoto andDavid Beglar, I learned a useful idea about checking students' answers. Because there are 40 students in mosthigh school classrooms, checking all the students' answers is not realistic. In this presentation, the presenter
explained how to conduct peer checking effectively even in a big class. Firstly, students work on the grammar
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

65

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): LD SIG GRANT AWARDEE REPORTS
questions from their textbooks. Secondly, students check their answers in pairs, and if there are differences,
students can ask the teacher for the correct answer. Therefore, the teacher can understand which questions
students cannot answer correctly and focus on explaining these answers.
In addition, I also learned an effective activity for listening. In the presentation, A Systematic Approach to
Teaching Listening, Andrew Blyth presented an activity with detailed procedures and many repetitions of thesame dialogue, so it would be easy to adapt it for my own students' proficiency level. Though we did not haveenough time to try this activity for ourselves, it was possible to conduct the same activity with handouts fromthe presentation, or we could download slides from the presenter website.
I was surprised at the openness of the presenters. I had an image that presenters would be distant fromme, but they were all friendly and many of them gave me their contact information, so communicating withthem or asking questions is much easier than I thought. Moreover, I could get useful materials for my own
teaching context.
During the poster presentations, I had an opportunity to listen to one poster presentation about usefulapps for classroom learning at the Apps 4 EFL website (https://www.apps4efl.com). One app on the website
shows a grammar or vocabulary question with four multiple answers on the screen, and students can use
their phones to answer the questions. With this particular app, many students can work on the samequestion together, and teachers can understand how many students get correct answers. Even though there
are some constraints such as no internet or no TV in most high school classrooms, I really want to try theseapps for grammar or vocabulary learning with my students if I have an opportunity. Because the poster
session was 90 minutes long, I could talk with the presenters more than at other presentations, which were
only 20 minutes each.
The other good experience that I had at the conference was meeting new people. For high school
teachers, because there are not many opportunities to talk with people who teach in different contexts, it
was a new experience for me and a good chance to create connections and deepen my knowledge about
language learning. In addition, the people I met at the conference were all friendly, and open-minded when
listening to other people's opinions. Therefore, it was easy for me to express my opinion.
Overall, I am really glad I could join the conference and I’d like to thank the LD SIG for giving me thisopportunity. During those two days at JALT2018, I was able to get some useful ideas for my high-school
lessons and meet people passionate about education. Next time, I would like to take part in the conference
more actively, listen to other interesting presentations, and try to do a presentation by myself, as well.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

66

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Looking Back

LOOKING BACK | 報告2019 PanSIG Learner
Development SIG Forum
Reflections
Robert Morel
LD SIG Programs Team
This year’s PanSIG Learner Development Forum at
Konan University in Nishinomiya had a selection ofthought-provoking presentations related tosecondary and post-secondary education. The
forum kicked off with Stacey Vye’s presentation“University Students Bring Us to Their Secondary
English Classrooms in Japan,” addressing student
perceptions of their secondary-school English
classes. Next, Anita Aden illustrated the importanceof giving students space for out-of-class English
communication in “Developing Communicative
Competence in Socio-Cultural Settings.” In the thirdand final presentation, “Draw Out Your Goal:
Autonomous Goal-setting in an English Self-directed
Course,” Ivan Lombardi and Christopher Hennessy
showed the potential of a structured, self-directed
learning course to increase student autonomy. The
forum ended with an open discussion of ideas andlearner-development issues related to thepresentations that continued well into lunchtime.
As a member of the LD SIG programs team, theonly downside was the small number of attendees.
It is somewhat frustrating to have a small crowd forsuch well-researched and put together
presentations. Drawing more attendees to the LD
SIG forums at PanSIG and JALTCALL conferences, atleast those outside of Tokyo, remains a challenge
we are trying to address.
On a personal note, the most interesting
experience for me was after the conference. Since
the three presentations seemed to flow into one
another so well we decided to write a paper basedon the forum. This, my first time working on a paperwith a team, has been a great learning experience—
juggling not just schedules, but (over the summer)
time zones. I am lucky to have had a great group ofpeople to do this paper with. It speaks to what I feelis one of the strengths of the LD SIG, and JALT ingeneral: the supportive and constructive ways inwhich people get involved and collaborate. It makes
me happy to be in a profession and field wherecollaboration and helping colleagues, as well as
students, is the norm.

Stacey Vye, University Students Bring Us to
Their Secondary English Classrooms inJapan
At the Kobe PanSIG Forum, I was interested in thecontrasts between the learners in my study who did
not experience a self-directed curriculum and thelearners described in the other two Forumworkshops who were provided supportive learnerdevelopment. Forum participants Chris Hennessey
and Ivan Lombardi, and Anita Aden both offeredscaffolded frameworks for university students to
explore their learner autonomy and engaged in
active measures to support learners tocommunicate in English at the learners’ specificinterest level. My mini-Forum workshop
retrospectively detailed eight learners’ perceptions
about their secondary school experiences in theirEnglish classrooms before they entered university.
These learners explained their classes were tightly
controlled by the teachers, were not learnercentered, and primarily taught in the Japanese withfew opportunities to communicate or use English in
English. Their perceptions about their secondary
English learning experiences to different degrees
negatively impacted their perceptions about theirEnglish proficiency.
When preparing for the LD SIG Forum, I
envisioned that I would bring out more theindividual voices of the participants. However, thequestions that came up in the forum discussions
related to the general concerns, the perceptions of
the learners in the study, and my recommendations
based on the research changed my focus.
Therefore, I provided more details first about how
the students and I identified independently that
their learning materials and classroom activities
were not, for the most part were aligned with

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

67

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (1): Looking Backlearner-focused communication. Second, I reported
Anita Aden, Developing Communicativethat the learners wanted more opportunities toCompetence in Socio-Cultural Settings
communicate in English, which would be in closer
keeping with the Ministry of Education in Japan’s
Among the positive takeaways that I experienced
2020 curriculum reforms. Third, I advocated forfrom taking part in the PanSIG LD forum weremore teacher-training in size and scope, with ample
insightful discussions with LD SIG colleagues andmaterials for teachers and students to facilitate
conference attendees on the theme of autonomous
active communication. More effort on alanguage learning. We discussed current conditions
considerable scale is needed by the Ministry to
related to university students’ needs for more
boost metacognitive learning, robust learner andlanguage output opportunities, citing specificteacher self-efficacy, and positive epistemic
applications of autonomous language learning inopportunities for students learning English to
Stacey Vye’s research findings on students’
reduce potential foreign language learning anxiety
perceptions of their language competency, andin secondary schools. Subsequently, I have been
Chris Hennessy and Ivan Lombardi’s emphasis on
working on papers and projects that highlight theactive learning tasks in a self-access setting. These
voices of the learners in the study because theypresentations combined well with my own
went at great lengths to communicate in English.
socioculturally informed project of creating an outAfter presenting, I learned about two invaluableof-class space during lunch breaks for university
frameworks where university students engage instudents to talk about their personal interests. I
learning English based on Anita’s, and then Chris’s
shared about the benefits of preparing a semiand Ivan’s Forum presentations. Anita has been
structured plan that can be easily adapted tofacilitating meaningful and authentic social
whoever participates in the lunch session. Feedback
interactions by promoting communicativefrom students through anonymous surveys at thecompetence via out-of-class lunch exchanges withend of each session strengthened their voice to
speakers of English. Speaking with international
express points for improvement and satisfaction
students and teachers by all indications has boosted
with the lunchtime format.
the learners’ efficacy and self-confidence throughFrom the professional development discussions
the experiences. Chris and Ivan detailed a selfduring the LD SIG forum, I walked away with new
directed learning course where the students have aideas of how to collaborate more with university
dedicated class to learn English that takes into
students, such as adding QR codes to lessons foraccount the learners’ preferences in a self-accessfeedback and linking follow-up activities tocenter. The well-thought-out activities Chris andassignments for further study. Specific toIvan suggested for their students were chosenautonomous language learning, the emphasis on
based on learner interest and were categorized byincreasing students’ opportunities to communicate
the four skills of listening, speaking, reading, andin English needs further discussion. I believe
writing. At the conclusion of the course, thestudents need more communicative competencestudents reflected on their learning goals andstyle chances to use English in their daily lives
created elaborate and colorful posters that detailed
during university. Encouraging students to find ways
their learning journey for further study. When I
to use language out-of-class helps them become
attended both presentations, I wished theautonomous learners.
university students in my research could havejoined Anita’s and Chris's and Ivan’s English courses.
to experience autonomous and authentic language
learning.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

68

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Looking Forward

LOOKING FORWARD | 今後のイベント
Learner Development Sessions at JALT2019

Validating the Language Mindsets Inventory

Collett, Paul - Shimonoseki City University; Berg, Michael - University of Liverpool
Sat, Nov 2, 11:00 AM - 11:25 AM; 1104 I Format: Research-Oriented Short Presentation
The presenters will provide an overview of the language mindset inventory (LMI) (Lou & Noels, 2017),
outlining the development and testing of a Japanese-language version. Factor analysis, validity, and reliability
outcomes suggest positive functional equivalence between the two versions. Results suggest this is aneffective measurement tool for learner agency and beliefs. We will discuss how the LMI can help provide a
better understanding of the applicability of the mindset construct to FLL in Japan.

The Impact of Tutoring on ESL Learners' Writing

Schaffer, Seneca - California State University, ChicoSat, Nov 2, 11:35 AM - 12:00 PM; 1104 I Format: Research-Oriented Short Presentation
To enhance ESL tutoring, this mixed-method research examined the impact one semester of one-on-one
tutoring had on linguistic errors present in the writing of three college-level ESL students. Data generally
showed that the employed tutoring approaches encouraged the acquisition of linguistic features anddecreased their error occurrence, especially with increased tutoring sessions. However, differing participant
outcomes prompted triangulation of quantitative and qualitative data which further illuminated variables
crucial to tutoring's language acquisition potential.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

69

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Forward

Re-Examining "Silence" in Multicultural Classrooms

Itoi, Kiyu - Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University
Sat, Nov 2, 12:10 PM - 12:35 PM; 904 I Format: Research-Oriented Short Presentation
This presentation reports the results of a qualitative study that used semi-structured interviews to examine
the oral and non-oral participation of a culturally diverse group of students in an international graduate
program in Canada. The various modes of participation employed by the students will be discussed, as well as
the pedagogical implications of these findings for multicultural classrooms.

Differentiated Instruction in the Phil. Classroom

Atendido, Editha - Department of Education, Gen. Trias City; Columna, Ma. Glecita - Department of Education,
Gen. Trias City
Sat, Nov 2, 12:10 PM - 12:35 PM; 1108 I Format: Practice-Oriented Short Workshop
This practice-oriented workshop is intended to share the practices of Filipino teachers in utilizing
differentiated instruction in teaching English. Its main goal is to provide an overview of how differentiation
may be done in a classroom with diverse learners and share the practice of Filipino teachers in using theapproach in a Philippines classroom.

A Newsletter Project for Self-Access Learning

Parsons, Andre - Hokkaido University of Education
Sat, Nov 2, 12:10 PM - 12:35 PM; 1110 I Format: Practice-Oriented Short Workshop
While self-access language learning is often associated with a physical space, it is not necessarily required.
This presentation will describe an external self-access language learning activity in the form of a newsletter
written and designed by students with the support of the presenter. Attendees will learn what is involved incarrying out such a project and be able to view sample newsletters.

Teachers and Learner Autonomy: A Metaphor Analysis

Elliott, Darren - Nanzan University
Sat, Nov 2, 12:45 PM - 1:10 PM; 1104 I Format: Research-Oriented Short Presentation
This mixed-methods study examines the connections between language teachers' metaphors for language
learning, and their beliefs and behaviours in fostering learner autonomy with two main research questions;
What are the personal and institutional factors which affect how language teachers foster autonomous
practices in their learners? How, if at all, do the metaphors teachers use corroborate their self-reported
beliefs and practices in regard to learner autonomy?

SMART Goals and Transfer of Presentation Skills

Haugh, Denise - Kyoto University of Foreign Studies
Sat, Nov 2, 12:45 PM - 1:10 PM; 1109 I Format: Research-Oriented Short Presentation
Specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time based (SMART) goals track and provide structure to goal
setting. They consist of the intermediary steps that underlie successful outcomes. This tool, in addition to
Dornyei's (2005, 2009a) L2 motivational self system is the basis of one course design on how presentation
skills could cultivate the "I can do this!" attitude for speaking English, not only in an academic context but inthe world at large.

Visible Thinking: Routines for Engaging Learners

Healy, Rhian - South Metropolitan TAFE; Atkinson, Antony - Lexis Perth
Sat, Nov 2, 1:20 PM - 1:45 PM; 1104 I Format: Practice-Oriented Short Workshop
Visible thinking routines provide ESL teachers with the tools to create a more engaging learning experiencefor students. These routines help to make learning more relevant, deepen understanding, and encourage
学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

70Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Looking Forward
students to engage with content in a more meaningful way. Making these routines a part of everyday
classroom activities will foster collaboration and increase student motivation. This workshop will demonstrate
useful routines that should be a part of every teacher's toolkit.

What We Know About Self-Assessment

Butler, Yuko Goto - University of Pennsylvania
Sat, Nov 2, 4:25 PM - 5:25 PM; 901 I Format: Research-Oriented Long Presentation
Self-assessment has received increasing attention among educators. Despite its popularity, concerns havebeen raised regarding its subjectivity and a perceived lack of accuracy. I discuss the status of ourunderstanding of self-assessment. I argue that commonly addressed concerns regarding subjectivity andaccuracy stem primarily from a measurement-oriented notion of assessment of learning. Drawing from myresearch among young learners, I discuss how self-assessment can be used to directly assist students'
learning. Sponsored by Tokyo JALT.

Active Learning as a Policy for Transforming Lives

Barr, Blair - Otsuma University/Tamagawa University; Asami, Lorna S. - Keisen University; Ashwell, Tim Komazawa University; Barfield, Andrew - Chuo University; Edsall, Dominic G. - Ritsumeikan University & UCL
Institute of Education; Hurrell, Ian - Rikkyo University; Ikeda, Ken - Otsuma Women's University; Ishinuki,
Fumiko - Kumamoto Gakuen University; Iwai, Kio - Rikkyo University; Kasparek, Nick - International Christian
University; Kiernan, Patrick - Meiji University; Kojima, Hideo - Bunkyo University; Morgan, Jenny - Sophia
University; Onoda, Sakae - Juntendo University; Sykes, Joe - Akita International University; Taylor, Clair - Gifu
Shotoku Gakuen University; Tomita, Koki - Soka University; Yang, Fang-Ying - National Chiao Tung University
Sat, Nov 2, 5:00 PM - 6:30 PM; 1002 I Learner Development (LD) SIG FORUM"Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn" (Xiang, 818). Presentations in the
Learner Development SIG Forum will critically explore what happens to learners when participating in active
learning. In addition to considering active approaches in practice, topics will examine active learning in policy,
online, through independent research, experiences, and as a theoretical concept. Timed rounds of interactive
presentations will be followed by reflection for the SIG's newsletter.

Practical Teaching Strategies: Academic Sources

Chambers, Jeremy - Temple University
Sun, Nov 3, 9:15 AM - 9:40 AM; 1104 I Format: Research-Oriented Short Presentation
When students are asked to find sources to support their writing, the process they go through to findsomething worthwhile will greatly differ between individuals. There is a difference between a simple"Googling" of something and the process of finding quality information. This presentation will highlight
practical teaching strategies to help students navigate online databases more effectively.

Peer-Modelled Video for Language Learning

Livingston, Matthew - Tokai University; Shrosbree, Mark - Tokai University
Sun, Nov 3, 9:50 AM - 10:15 AM; 1104 I Format: Practice-Oriented Short Workshop
Video featuring actual students performing language-learning activities can provide realistic and relatablepeer models of behavior. When students watch students performing well, they are likely to learn more andgain a greater sense of self-efficacy. This workshop will outline why and how videos featuring students havesupported learners in a Global Skills curriculum. In order to help teachers interested in making their own
videos, each step of the video creation process will also be explained.

Learner Development SIG AGM

Nakai, Yoshio - Doshisha University; Tomita, Koki - Soka University
Sun, Nov 3, 11:45 AM - 12:45 PM; 1103 I Format: Meeting
Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

71

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Forward

Accelerating Literacy Growth for ELL/EAL Students

Housley, Lee Anne - ACHIEVE 3000; Goodman, Harris - ACHIEVE 3000
Sun, Nov 3, 3:25 PM - 4:25 PM; 906 I Format: Practice-Oriented Long Workshop I Promotional Presentation
We explore how online, differentiated literacy instruction creates accelerated literacy growth while promoting
learner agency. We provide strategies to engage all students in their own learning process through provisionof personalized learning, engaging resources at their precise reading level, opportunities to reflect on what
they are learning, and independent practices driven by data. We discuss the importance of students reading avariety of texts, having collaborative discussions about content, and writing about connections they made.

Developing Writers and Their Metaphors

Head, Ellen - Miyazaki International College
Sun, Nov 3, 5:10 PM - 6:40 PM; 1002 I Format: Poster Session
This poster presentation describes a project designed to enhance first year students' creativity andengagement by teaching them a set of peer coaching questions related to uncovering their metaphors forlearning. The presenter asked students to peer coach each other in a small group and record the process inlearning journals. The class was encouraged to reflect on the implications of their metaphors. The process ofpeer influence will be analyzed as complex dynamic system.

Passion Project Journaling in the EFL Classroom

Kambara, Judith - Okayama University
Sun, Nov 3, 5:10 PM - 6:40 PM; 1002 I Format: Poster Session
After observing lackluster results with student journaling on prescribed topics, I introduced passion projectstyle journaling in my first-year university English classes for general listening and speaking. Students wereasked to journal for the entire term about a topic in which they are already interested or one they would liketo explore. Results showed marked increases in average words per entry and topic engagement. This has
implications for promoting literacy and learner autonomy in language development.

The SALC Series: Promoting Independent Learning

Kirchmeyer, Branden - Sojo University
Sun, Nov 3, 5:10 PM - 6:40 PM; 1002 I Format: Practice-Oriented Short Workshop
This poster provides an overview of a program called the "SALC Series" which was developed to strengthen
the connection between a university's English program and the self-access learning center by systematicallyincorporating explicit instruction of independent learning strategies and resources into the pre-existing
curriculum. The poster will graphically illustrate the program's developmental history, the series' structure,
key concepts and tasks, and student usage data.

Translanguaging Practice in EFL Classrooms

Sato, Manami - ECC Foreign Language InstituteSun, Nov 3, 5:10 PM - 5:35 PM; 1104 I Format: Research-Oriented Short Presentation
Translanguaging is the process where multilingual speakers use their languages as an integrated
communication system. In EFL classrooms in Japan, learners use English or Japanese when summarizing,
opinion-sharing or activities in all the four skills, which is quite different from translation or code switching.
Translanguaging can be more dynamic and fluid. With translanguaging practice, learners might acquire
deeper understanding and develop fluency.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

72

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Looking Forward

Effects of Anxiety on Engagement and Efficacy

Murrell, Hudson - Baiko University; Case, Stephen - Baiko University
Sun, Nov 3, 5:45 PM - 6:10 PM; 1104 I Format: Research-Oriented Short Presentation
This presentation examines the link between student anxiety levels regarding different aspects of a four-skills
language course and how their anxiety levels affect their engagement with and perceived efficacy of tasks.

A Closer Look at Language Learning Strategies

Wood, Joseph - Nanzan University
Mon, Nov 4, 9:15 AM - 9:40 AM; 1108 I Format: Research-Oriented Short Presentation
This presentation will discuss survey and interview data from an advanced-level English class of 18 secondyear Japanese university students concerning their use of Language Learning Strategies (LLSs). It will also
discuss data results from a lower-level class who were introduced to the LLSs that the advanced classreported to have used and recommended. It will end with a discussion concerning the importance of strategy
training and provide practical ideas on how to do it.

Lessons From Successful Learners

Kiernan, Patrick - Meiji University
Mon, Nov 4, 9:50 AM - 10:15 AM; 1108 I Format: Research-Oriented Short Presentation
This presentation introduces the attitudes of a class of advanced English learners at university to language
learning. The students conducted hour-long peer-peer learning history interviews. The interviews were
explored through a detailed qualitative multimodal analysis of the interviews that focused on community
values using a communities of practice framework. The findings suggest a position at odds with the typicalpriorities of language education at university but in support of study abroad.

Using Concept Maps to Facilitate EAP/EFL Speaking

Wang, Yu - Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University
Mon, Nov 4, 10:25 AM - 11:25 AM; 1108 I Format: Practice-Oriented Long Workshop
This study aims to report an attempt to investigate the correlation between reflective learning and EFL
learners' speaking proficiency from an empirical research on using concept map in EAP courses. The presenter
will firstly introduce how and why concept maps have been used from three aspects: L2 knowledge reflection
and consolidation, Confidence building, and Learner Autonomy Raising. Participants will also learn how todesign and develop a CM-related speaking activity/curriculum from a hands-on practice.

Autonomy and ICT: The Curriculum Reform in Finland

Yoshimuta, Satomi - Kwassui Women's College (April, 2019-); Sugihashi, Tomoko - Showa Women's University
Mon, Nov 4, 11:35 AM - 12:00 PM; 1108 I Format: Research-Oriented Short Presentation
This presentation will describe Finland's curriculum reform and classroom practice from August of 2016,
which endeavors to maximize learner autonomy. It will first outline the issues around the recent revisions,
next illustrate how high school teachers put them into practice with an emphasis on the use of ICT andflexible assessment, and lastly present practical implications to the Japanese educational settings, which willoffer new insights for teachers who value autonomy.

Using Word Cards to Foster Creative Thinking Skill

Davis , R. Alan - McGraw-Hill Education
Mon, Nov 4, 12:10 PM - 12:35 PM; 1108 I Format: Practice-Oriented Short Workshop
Creativity is critical for success in 21st century professional and academic environments. Due to this, teachers
are sometimes asked to incorporate creative thinking development into their lessons. This may be challenging
for teachers who don't see a natural link between creative thinking and their English lessons. In thisNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

73

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Forward
workshop, we will explore this link and learn some practical, easy-to-use activities to make vocabulary lessons
more focused on developing creative thinking skills.

Exploring Students' Learning Beyond the Classroom

Murase, Fumiko - Ryukoku University
Mon, Nov 4, 12:45 PM - 1:10 PM; 1108 I Format: Research-Oriented Short Presentation
Although language learning beyond the classroom and classroom learning are equally important. The former
can often be invisible to teachers as it literally takes place outside the classroom. This study aims to examine
the reality of students' English language learning beyond the classroom, which even takes place outside theinstitution, by administering an online questionnaire to first-year and second-year students at a university inJapan.

Creating Community: Learning Together 5 (CCLT5)
Sunday December 15th 2019
Call for Contributions (DEADLINE NOVEMBER 15th)
Creating Community: Learning Together 5” (CCLT5) is an informal, supportive conference, taking place on
Sunday, December 15, from 11:00-17:30 at Otsuma Women's University, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo.
この度の開催で５回目を数える「 コミュニティの創造：共に学ぶ (CCLT 5)」は12月15日 11:00-17:30に東京都千代田区にある大妻女子大学行われるカジュアルでサポーティブなカンファレンスです。

This year, we aim to have “learning actively” as our central theme and invite you to take part and explore
how this is linked to learner development.
今年のテーマを「アクティブに学ぶ」に設定しました。私たち主催者は、参加者の皆様が「どのようにLD SIGのテーマである『学習者の発達』と今年のテーマ『アクティブに学ぶ』を関連付けるのか」というワクワク
した心でカンファレンスの準備を行なっています。

We warmly invite proposals from students and Learner Development (LD SIG) members who are interested inreflecting on their teaching and learning experiences this year and sharing how they have developed throughthese experiences.
そして、今回のイベントを通して学生、そしてLD SIG のメンバーが、学習者の（としての）発達を行なってきたかという振り返りを行う機会を得ることができれば幸いです。

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

74

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (2): Looking Forward
We would like to hear from LD SIG members who have encouraged their learners to be more active in thelearning process and take greater responsibility in their learning. Presenters may focus on:-> How they encourage their learners to learn actively and/or take responsibility for their learning?
-> and any challenges they faced or insights they discovered?
プレゼンテーションの作成する際に、LD SIGのメンバーには、「学習の積極的な参加を促す方法」、そして、「学習者が自身の役割を認識してもらう方法」を以下の点から考えていただければと思います。
1.

学習者に積極的に学習に取り組んでもらう方法や、自身の学習者としての役割を認識してもらう方法

2.

上記を達成する過程で経験した困難や、知見等。

We would also like to hear from their learners who have been able to learn more actively. Presenters may
focus on:-> How they were able to learn actively and/or take responsibility for their learning?
-> and what they learnt from doing so?
学習者の皆様には、「より積極的に学習に取り組む方法」を聞くことができればと考えています。プレゼンテーションの中では以下の点を考慮に入れていただければ幸いです。
1. 学習者に積極的に学習に取り組む方法や、自身の学習者としての役割を認識する方法。
2. 上記を行なった過程で何を学んだか等。

Participants will be encouraged to take part, through commenting and asking questions actively, andpresenters will be able to gain new insights from this. After each round of presentations, there will bereflection circles and presenters and participants will have the opportunity to develop their understanding
together.
参加者の皆様にはプレゼンテーション中にコメントや質問を聞くなど積極的に参加し、このイベントを通して少しでも多くの新たな知見を得ていただくことができれば幸いです。プレゼンテーション終了時には、振り返りグループをその場で設け、プレゼンターと参加者が扱われた内容に対する相互理解を深める予定です。

Both student and teacher presenters will receive a certificate of participation, and there will be an
opportunity for both to share a written reflection of their experiences of participating in the conference in the
LDSIG’s newsletter Learning Learning.
参加者の皆様には参加証として証明書が授与され、最後には今回のイベント全体の振り返りを行なっていただきます。また、LD SIGが発刊するニュースレター Learning Learning でその振り返りをシェアしていただ
ければ光栄です。

To register as a presenter and to submit a proposal, please complete the following form <https://forms.gle/
idsS6CTkYkXBzNvw6> . If you have a question or wish to contact the organizers, please send an email to<ldsigtokyogettogethers@gmail.com>, and we will get back to you as soon as we can.
プレゼンターとしてご参加を希望の方、またはプロポーザル提出の方は次のリンクをご確認ください <https://forms.gle/idsS6CTkYkXBzNvw6>。疑問や主催者への質問がある際には、次のメール
アドレスにご連絡下さい<ldsigtokyogettogethers@gmail.com>。

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

75

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Sig Matters

SIG MATTERS | インフォメーション
Learner Development SIG Financial Report April 2019 to August 2019
The first part of this financial year from April 2019 to August 2019 has been pretty quiet financially, with themain financial transaction being the receipt of the payment from JALT National. This payment is slightly up on
last year’s payment by almost 20,000 yen (150, 269 -> 170,607).
Revenues: April, 2019 – August, 2019 /収入：2019年4月〜2019年8月
JALT National Payment

170,607

Total revenue / 収入合計

170,607

Expenses: April, 2019 – August, 2019 /支出：2019年4月〜2019年8月
PAN-SIG Postage
Bank fees
Total Expenses / 支出合計

5,908
108
6,016

SIG fund balance, August 31, 2019 / SIG資金残高2019年8月31日

Balance in bank account / 銀行口座残高

326,735

Reserve liabilities / JALT本部預け金

200,000

Cash in hand / 現金
Balance / 合計

4,804
531,539

The main outgoings are up and coming principally in the form of payments to this year’s five grant recipients,and expenses for the JALT national conference. Further details of these expenses will be reported at the SIG’s
Annual General Meeting at JALT2019 and in the next issue of Learning Learning.
Patrick Kiernan, SIG Treasurer
Email: <kiernan@meiji.ac.jp>

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

76

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (1): Sig Matters

Writing for Learning Learning『学習の学習』応募規定
Deadline for Contributions to the Spring issue: February 15th
Learning Learning is the Learner Development SIG newsletter and is published online bi-annually, in the
Spring and Autumn. It has a specific ISSN number (ISSN 1882-1103), and features cutting edge articles invarious formats that relate to people’s ideas, reflections, experiences, and interests to do with learnerdevelopment, learner autonomy, and teacher autonomy. Many different SIG members contribute to eachissue of Learning Learning, and, by doing so, create a sense of shared community and learning together.
Please feel free to contribute too and make connections within the SIG and beyond. 『学習の学習』はLD
SIGのニュースレターで、年に２回（春と秋）オンライン出版されています（ISSN 1882-1103）。学習者の成長、学習者と教員の自律に関するアイディア、省察、経験や興味に関連したさまざま形式の原稿を収録しています。SIGの多くのメンバーが『学習の学習』に寄稿し、共同体の意識を築き共に学習しています。どうぞ奮ってご投稿され、SIG内でのまたそれを超えた繋がりを築いてください。

Contributions / 寄稿
We encourage new writing and new writers and are happy to work with you in developing your writing.
We would be delighted to hear from you about your ideas, reflections, experiences, and interests to dowith learner development, learner autonomy, and teacher autonomy. これまでにない形式のもの、また新しい方々からのご投稿をお待ちしております。内容についてもぜひご相談ください。みなさまのご意見やお考え、ご経験、そして学習者の成長、学習者と教師の自律性に関することなど、ぜひお聞かせください。For
more details about formats and lengths (形式と長さ) of writing suitable for Learning Learning, please see
below. To upload your writing to the editorial team of Learning Learning, please use this link.

Formats and lengths / 形式と長さ
Learning Learning is your space for continuing to make the connections that interest you. You arewarmly invited and encouraged to contribute to the next issue of Learning Learning in either English and/or Japanese. In order to provide access and opportunities for Learner Development SIG members to takepart in the SIG’s activities, we welcome writing in different formats and lengths about issues connectedwith learner and teacher development, such as:『学習の学習』は会員の皆様に興味ある繋がりを築きつづけるスペースです。次号の『学習の学習』への日本語（もしくは英語、及びニ言語で）の投稿を募集しています。メンバーの皆様にSIGの活動にご参加いただきたく、形式や長さを問わず、学習者および教師の成長に関する以下のような原稿をお待ちしております。

Short articles on issues to do with learner/teacher development and autonomy /学習者と教師の成長・自律に関する小論#1: short individual articles (1,200 – 2,500 words)： 小論（単著） (約3,600-7,500字)

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

77

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (1): Sig Matters#2: short group-written articles (1,200 – 4,000 words)： 小論（共著）(約3,600-12,000字)

Reflective writing about learning for learner/teacher development and autonomy /学習に関する省察 ー 学習者と教師の成長・自律を目指して#1: particular puzzles that you and/or your learners have about their learning, practices, development,
autonomy, and so on, and inviting other Learning Learning readers to respond (1,000 words or more)：ご自身や学習者の悩み（学習、実践、成長、自律など）に関して、LL読者と一緒に考えましょう。(約4,000字)#2: dialogue with (an)other SIG member(s) (1,000 to 2,000 words)：SIGメンバー同士の対話 (約4,000
字-8,000字)#3: stories of learners becoming autonomous (about 500 to 1,000 words)： 自律・成長する学習者に関する話 (約2,000字-4,000字)#4: stories of your learning and teaching practices: success and failure (about 500 to 1,000 words)：学習・
教育実践の成功談・失敗談 (約2,000字-4,000字)

Members’ voices / メンバーの声#1: a short personal profile of yourself as a learner and teacher and your interest in learner development(about 500 to 1,000 words) ：学習者・教員としての自身のプロフィールと学習者の成長に関する興味 (約2,000字-4,000字)#2: a story of your ongoing interest in, and engagement with, particular learner development (and/or
learner autonomy) issues (about 500 to 1,000 words) ：学習者の成長や学習者の自律に関する興味や取り組
み (約2,000字-4,000字）#3: a short profile of your learner development research interests and how you hope to develop yourresearch (about 500 to 1,00 words) ：学習者の成長に関する研究内容と今後の研究の展望 (約2,000字-4,000
字）#4: a short profile of your working context and the focus on learner development/learner autonomy that a
particular institution takes and/or is trying to develop in a particular curriculum (about 500 to 1,000
words)：教育環境の紹介、所属機関やカリキュラムにおける学習者の成長や自律に関する取り組み (約2,000
字-4,000字）

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

78

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (1): Sig Matters
Research & reviews / 研究 & レビュー
#1: summaries and accounts of new graduate research (1,200 – 2,500 words) ：大学院での研究内容の要約
やその振り返り (約2,400字-5,000字）#2: proposals for a joint project/joint research (about 500 to 1,000 words)： 協働プロジェクト・リサーチの提案 (約2,000字-4,000字)#3: reports (of a conference presentation, research project, particular pedagogic practice, and so on, to dowith learner development) (about 500 to 1,000 words)： レポート（学習者の成長に関する学会発表、研究
プロジェクト、教育実践など）(約2,000-4,000字)#4: reports of research in progress (about 500 to 1,000 words)： 研究中間報告(約2,000字-4,000字)#5: book, website, article reviews (about 750 to 1,500 words)：書籍、ウェブサイト、論文の批評(約3,000
字-6,000字)

Free space / フリー・スペース#1: photographs, drawings, and/or other visual materials about learner development, and/or related tolearner autonomy：学習者の成長や自律に関する写真、絵、視覚資料#2: activities and tips for learner development/autonomy (about 500 to 1,000 words) ：学習者の成長・自律を促す活動やヒントの紹介 (約1,000字-2,000字)#3: some other piece of writing that you would like to contribute and that is related to learnerdevelopment ：その他の学習者の成長に関する執筆#4: poems… and much more： 詩、その他。

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

79

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 26 (1): Sig Matters

Learning Learning Editorial Team
<LLeditorialteam@googlegroups.com>
Those working on Learning Learning share a commitment to working together in small teams. We aim tolearn together about writing, editing, responding, and/or translating, for our shared personal andprofessional development. Some areas where we would like to encourage SIG members to take part andwork together on Learning Learning include:• Layout and Design: working on the formatting and preparation of finalised content for online
publication• Members’ Voices (co-)coordinating: contacting news members of the SIG and working with them todevelop their writing in a variety of formats and lengths as a first step to taking part in the SIG’s
publication activities;• Looking Back (co-)coordinating: working with contributors writing on events related to learnerdevelopment (conferences, forums, get-togethers, workshops, both face to face and online) for
publication in Learning Learning;• Research and Reviews (co-)coordinating: encouraging potential contributors to send in summaries
and accounts of research, as well as reviews (of books, journal articles, materials, or web resources
relating to learner development), and working with them to develop their writing for publication in
Learning Learning.Learning Learning
If you are interested in any of these areas of working together (and/or you have other areas of interest)
and would like to discuss your interest and ideas, please email any member of the Learning Learning
editorial team:Tokiko Hori: <thori@tsoka.ac.jp> (editor, translator)
Ken Ikeda: <kodanuki@gmail.com> (editor, grant awardee essays)
Fumiko Murase: <fumikomurase@gmail.com> (editor, grant awardee essays)
Yoshio Nakai: <uminchufunto@gmail.com> (editor, translator)
Hugh Nicoll: <hnicoll@gmail.com> (editor, webmaster)
Koki Tomita: <tomita.koki@gmail.com> (editor, translator)
James Underwood: <jamesmichaelunderwood@gmail.com> (editor, layout)
Many thanks!

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

80