Pan
SIG
Journal2022

PanSIG is an annual conference
held in May, and organized by manyof the Special Interest Groups(SIGs) of the Japan Association for
Language Teaching (JALT).
Edited by
Patrick Conaway and Duncan Iske
Patrick Conaway and Duncan Iske

MESSAGE FROM THE EDITOR
The 21st Annual PanSIG conference was held face to face at The University of Nagano in Nagano July 8th-10th, 2022. Our firstface to face conference in three years was a great success thanks to the tireless efforts of Conference Chair, Koki Tomita, Site
Chair, Jean-Pierre Richard, and the rest of the PanSIG Conference team. PanSIG 2022 featured nearly 200 presentations andforums ranging across teaching contexts, pedagogies, and SIG topics, and including several presentations specifically focusedupon teaching in an online context. The conference was a collaborative effort from the 30 Special Interest Groups (SIGs) with theJapan Association for Language Teaching (JALT). The conference enabled participants to attend presentations on a variety of
topics in a wide range of fields in language teaching and learning. In addition to stimulating and inspiring presentations, there
were a variety of social events where attendees could network and get to know each other in a more relaxed environment. Fromhiking in the mountains, to sampling craft beers on in a specially reserved train car, there was something for everybody.
This journal represents the eight edition of the annual PanSIG Journal in its latest form – following 14 years of proceedings
publications beginning with 2002 – which includes a selection of articles based on presentations from the 2022 conference.
With a detailed and supportive blind peer review process, authors were able to produce high quality articles. The articles finallyselected for publication in the 2022 PanSIG Journal effectively represent the diverse range of topics presented at the PanSIG
conference. Although the reader can only observe the final product of the selected articles, the effort and care of the authors andreviewers to help the submissions reach their full potential clearly show that the PanSIG Journal is just as much a place to growas a novice author as for the language teaching community to share new ideas. As editor, it has been a special priviledge to be apart of the review process and observe the development of the submissions develop as they went through the review process.
Being able to read submissions from dozens of authors and feedback from even more reviews has truly been an educational
experience for myself as a writer.
I would like to give my warmest thanks to the authors and reviewers of this publication. It was an opportunity for me to readand learn about topics that I may not have encountered if left to my own devices. Seeing the detailed and supportive reviews, aswell as the authors’ thoughtful and inventive responses was truly inspiring. In some cases, authors have submitted manuscripts
several years in a row and I have had the chance to see them grow as writers first hand. I would also like to thank Duncan Iske,the associate editor of the 2022 PanSIG Journal for his help and advice. Special thanks all the members of the PanSIG Committee.
Before being a part of the PanSIG Journal, I had no idea how much time, thought, and effort went into putting on such a
conference. We hope that you will enjoy reading the articles, and that they may stimulate productive thinking. Congratulations
to all the contributors to this edition of the PanSIG Journal.
May 07, 2023
Patrick Conaway
Editor-in-Chief, PanSIG Journal 2022

The PanSIG is an annual conference held in May, and organized by many of the Special Interest Groups (SIGs) of the Japan Association for
Language Teaching (JALT). The conference brings together leading scholars and practitioners in language education from Japan, Asia,and throughout the world. It is meant to be a smaller, more intimate conference than the annual international JALT conference (which isheld each fall), and is a place where SIG members can network with each other.

ii

Website: http://pansig.org/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/JALTpansig/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/JALT_PanSIG (Twitter handle: @JALT_PanSIG)

Artwork courtesy of James Dunn

ISBN# 978-4-901352-57-4
PanSIG 2022 Journal
Selected articles from the 2022 PanSIG Conference
JALT Central Office
Marunouchi Trust Tower Main Building, 20F, 1-8-3 Marunouchi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-0005 Japan

http://jalt.org/

http://www.pansig.org/

All materials in this publication are copyright © (2023) by JALT and their respective authors.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

iii

PanSIG 2022 Journal
PDF Version
Conference info
PanSIG 2022 was held July 08-10 face to face with hybrid presntations at The University of Nagano. Thank you to everyone
who helped make this conference a success!
Website: http://pansig.org/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/JALTpansig/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/JALT_PanSIG (Twitter handle: @JALT_PanSIG)

Edited by Patrick Conaway and Duncan Iske

PanSIG is the annual conference for Special Interest Groups of the Japan Association of Language Teachers

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a liv

Thanks to our 2022 Journal reviewers
Zoe Barber

Brian Cullen

Konan University

Nagoya Institute of Technology

Merissa Braza Ocampo

Richard Sparrow

Fukushima Gakuin College

Kyoto Sangyo University

James D. Dunn

Martyn McGettigan

Meiji University

Hiroshima City University

Michael Griffiths

Shzh-chen Nancy Lee

Konan University

Osaka University

Stephen McNamara

Anthony Brian Gallagher

Konan University

Meijo Univeristy

Edward Escobar

John McCarthy

Kyoto Gaidai NIshi High SchoolShowa Women's University

Matthew Cotter

Kayoko Yamauchi

Hokusei Gakuen University Junior College

Toyo Gakuen University

Davey Young

Szabina Ádámku

Sophia University

Meisei University

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a lv

Anthony Diaz

POON Yin Ting, Louisa

Miyazaki International College

Mita International School, British Council

Chie Kawashima

Kevin Crowley

Tochigi Technical High School

Ritsumeikan APUDavid James Townsend

James Owens

Shujitsu University

Kanda University of International Studies

Mark Brierley
Shinshu University

Edo Forsythe
Hirosaki Gakuin University

Steven G. B. MacWhinnie
Hirosaki Gakuin University

Craig Armstrong
Kumamoto University, Kumamoto Health Science
University

Joshua Antle
Tsuda University

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a lvi(Re)conceptualizing Classroom Silence and Participation in the Japanese EFL Classroom
Zoe Barber

8

A Laughter Mindfulness Intervention (LMI) in the Language Classroom
Merissa Braza Ocampo

17

A Method for Evaluating EFL Textbook Units for Supplemental Printout/Activity Creation
James D. Dunn

25

A Tale of Two Syllabi: Towards Theory Driven CLIL Courses
Stephen McNamara
Michael Joshua Griffiths

35

Adapting a Model UN for High School EFL Students of Various Levels
Edward Escobar

47

Ainu Language Learning Through Synchronous and Asynchronous Online Methods
Matthew James Cotter
Takayuki Okazaki
Jennifer Louise Teeter
Adam Jenkins

56

Applying the UDL Design Cycle to Online English Medium Instruction: A Case Study
Davey Young

66

Considering Some of the Practical Issues of Materials Development
Brian Cullen
Niall Walsh75

Corpus Linguistics: What is it and what can it do for you?
Richard Sparrow

84

Corrective Feedback: Investigating Japanese Learners’ Perceptions
Martyn McGettigan

95

Effects of Weekly Explicit Grammar Instruction on L2 speaking Development
Shzh-chen Nancy Lee

108

Horizontal and Vertical Alignment in Discussion Book Design and Direct Publication
Anthony Brian Gallagher

118

Improving Argumentative Essays with the Toulmin Model and Fallacy Repair
John E. McCarthy

130Interdisciplinary Teacher Collaboration for an ESP Course: A Case Study
Kayoko Yamauchi

141

Japanese Students’ Views of Self-regulated EFL Learning: An Interview Study
Szabina Ádámku

151

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a lvii

Phonological Clustering: A different approach to L2 vocabulary instruction

164

Pragmatic Markers Used in Textbook Dialogues
Chie Kawashima

173

Preparing Students for Academic Writing: A First-Year University Writing Class

184

Anthony M. DiazDavid James Townsend

Proposal of a Difficulty Estimation Method for Extensive Reading of General Books in English 190
Riho Sakaguchi
Masaaki NiimuraMark Brierley		
Reflections on the Effects of Free Writing in an EFL Writing Class
Edo Forsythe
Steven G. B. MacWhinnie

198

Effect of Illustrations on Engagement & Phrase Retention
Craig Armstrong

207

Teacher Trainees’ Opinions of the Viability of TBLT in Japanese High Schools
Joshua Brook Antle

218

The Genre and Discovery Learning Approach to Teaching and Assessing Writing
Louisa POON Yin Ting

226

University Students’ Impressions about the Use of Jokes in the EFL Classroom
Kevin Crowley
Kent Jones235

Class Democracy: Allowing Students to Have Input in Class Decisions
James Emmet Owens

244

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l8(Re)conceptualizing Classroom Silence and Participation in the Japanese EFLClassroom
Zoe Barber

Konan University
Abstract

Silence in the English as a foreign language (EFL) context is a well-documented source of frustration for both language teachers
and additional language (L2) learners. Despite decades of research on the purported problem of classroom silence, the reported
frequency and quality of spontaneous L2 oral production and active participation by students in Japanese EFL classrooms has
not significantly changed. Furthermore, the heavy emphasis placed on L2 oral production by communicative language teachingpedagogies has led to the conflation of L2 oral participation with active participation in EFL settings. This paper aims to develop
the understanding of sociocultural and functional aspects of silence in the Japanese EFL context and explores diverse ways of
being and learning to question what constitutes “valid” participation in the L2 classroom. Lastly, it suggests potentially beneficial
pedagogical approaches for maximizing the benefits of silence and silent learning behaviors in Japanese EFL classrooms.

日本語概要
外国語としての英語教育（EFL）のコンテクストでの学習者の沈黙はよく研究されているが教育者と第二言語（L2）の学習者の双方にス
トレスの原因になっている。何十年の研究にも関わらず、授業での生徒からのL2発言回数、質に改善点は見られないと言える。さらにコ
ミュニケーションを中心にしている語教授法でのL2発言が重要視されているため発言することが授業への参加と考えられている。本研
究の目的は日本でのEFLコンテクストにおける沈黙の社会文化的および機能的側面の理解を探求することである。そしてL2授業の積極的な参加方法とは何か、各学習者の参加の仕方、各学習タスクの参加の仕方 について考察する。最後に日本のEFL授業でL2学習者の沈黙やサイレント学習行動をより効果的で有益と考えられる語教授法を提案する。

Classroom silence and the resulting frustration experienced by English as a foreign language (EFL) teachersand English language (L2) learners alike have received
significant attention by EFL and second language
acquisition (SLA) researchers for almost 50 years (e.g.,
Bao, 2014; Bao & Nyugen, 2020; Hanh, 2020; Harumi,
2011; King 2013a; 2013b; Nakane, 2007; Shao & Gao,
2016; Tsou, 2005; Zhou, 2015). The Japanese EFL context in particular is notorious for classroom silence andperceived learner reticence, with a substantial amountof research being generated in this area (Ellwood &Nakane, 2009; Fadilah et al., 2019; Shao & Gao, 2016).
Despite the considerable effort made by educators andresearchers in the wider EFL and SLA communities tofind the answer to unlocking the figurative communicative floodgates, there has been relatively little practical‘improvement’ reported in the frequency and quality ofstudents’ spontaneous L2 oral production or levels of‘active classroom participation’ seen in the vast major-

ity of Japanese EFL classrooms during this time (e.g.,
Bao, 2014; Bao & Nguyen, 2020; Fushino, 2010; Hanh,
2020; Kim et al., 2016; King, 2013a; 2013b; Ollin, 2008;
Shao & Gao, 2016; Takahashi, 2019; Zhou, 2015). Modern pedagogical approaches that have emerged amid
the focus on stimulating and assessing L2 oral production strongly link L2 oral production to improved L2
learning outcomes. This has led to L2 oral production
playing a central role in many L2 classroom learning
tasks, and to its use as a primary method for quantifying and measuring ‘active classroom participation’ forthe purposes of both research and grading (Delaney,
2012; Zhou, 2015). As result, the perceived ‘failure to
improve’ on the part of Japanese L2 learners often provokes educators (and especially native English-speakerteachers) into an ever-stronger push toward communicative language activities and pressure for L2 oral production in the Japanese EFL classroom. While much ofmainstream SLA and EFL literature makes reference to

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

9the silent period in L2 acquisition, it rarely discusses thephenomenon of silence as a communicative aspect, oraddresses the significance of silent learning behaviors
and silent (or “mental”) participation modes in the L2classroom and L2 acquisition process (Bao, 2014; Bao &Nyugen, 2020; Bernales, 2016; Delaney, 2012; Kim et al.,2016; Nakane, 2007; Ollin, 2008).
This failure can be seen to be a consequence of Western academia and educators ignoring the socioculturalcontext and functional aspects of silence in which theL2 is being taught and learned (Bao, 2014; Bao & Nyugen, 2020; Hanh, 2020; Harumi, 2011; Kim et al., 2016;
King, 2013a; 2013b; King & Aono, 2017; Zhou, 2015).
The voluminous research problematizing the silencein East Asian classrooms as presented by Western
researchers has resulted in the silent learning behaviors of Japanese EFL learners being overwhelminglyinterpreted through a Eurocentric, deficit-based lens.
Consequently, a range of negative cultural stereotypes have been strongly associated with Japanese L2
learners, such as reticence, obedience and deference
to authority, passivity, and a lack of critical thinking
skills; a portrayal that has recently been rebutted by aslowly increasing number of researchers outside thepredominant Western perspective (e.g. Bao, 2014; Bao& Nyugen, 2020; Choi, 2015; Ellwood & Nakane, 2009;
Fadilah et al., 2019; Ghavamnia & Ketabi, 2015; Hanh,
2020; Harumi, 2011; Kim et al., 2016; King, 2013a; 2013b;
Nakane, 2007; Shao & Gao, 2016; Takahashi, 2019; Tsou,
2005; Zhou, 2015; Zhou et al., 2005).
Furthermore, although the phenomenon of silence
has gained some academic attention (particularly inthe realm of sociolinguistics), there continues to be
little discourse in EFL teacher training programs andprofessional development acknowledging silence asa participation mode or discussing how to maximise
its effectiveness as a teaching and learning strategy(Bao, 2014). This omission has led to a critical lack ofawareness among language teachers, and especiallynative English-speaker teachers regarding the beneficial functions of silence in the L2 classroom (Bao, 2014).
This further compounds the impact of cultural andsocial differences between native English-speaker EFL
teachers’ and Japanese L2 learners’ constructions anduses of silence, as well as negatively influencing theselection of pedagogical strategies and interpretationsof classroom behaviors. Consequently, many native

English-speaker EFL teachers in Japan can be seen tointerpret classroom silence one-dimensionally andpush for L2 oral production as participation without
considering possible cross-cultural differences in thefunction of silence or acknowledgment of silence andsilent learning behaviors as a valid participation mode(e.g. Bao, 2014; Bernales, 2016; Delaney, 2012).
Against this backdrop, it is increasingly important for
EFL educators in Japan to develop a more nuanced
understanding of the functions and sources of silencein order to be able to react to, treat, and incorporateclassroom silence in a culturally appropriate way (Bao,2014; Kim et al., 2016; Nakane, 2007, 2020). This paper
endeavours to explore and promote awareness of thedifferences in sociocultural constructions of silence
between Japanese L2 learners and native Englishspeaker teachers and examine why Japanese learners
choose silence in the classroom. Secondly, it aims toidentify and discuss ways of being, participating, andlearning in the L2 classroom to propose a broader conceptualization of active L2 classroom participation.
Lastly, it provides suggestions for incorporating andmaximizing the benefits of silence and silent learning
behaviors in the Japanese EFL classroom.

Analysis
Sociocultural Context and Cultural
Constructions of Silence
Silence is an important part of communicative
behaviour that has received relatively little academic
attention in general (Bao, 2014; Ghavamnia & Ketabi,2015). Until recently, the field of linguistics viewed
silence as a non-communicative element of speech; aninverse or absence of speech and meaning (Jahdhami,2018). This conceptualisation wrongfully implies silence
is devoid of meaning or practical function, a flawed
concept that undermines the role of silence in communication and human interaction across all cultures andcommunicative contexts. As a result, many establishedlinguistic and SLA theories give inadequate consideration to the possible meanings and crucial functions ofsilence as a distinct element of communication in itself(Jahdhami, 2018). Moreover, silence is understood andperformed culturally (Nakane, 2007). Silent behaviors
can be used and interpreted in a variety of ways, including as a display of deference, respect, obedience, atten-

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

10tiveness, and modesty, as is typical in Japanese classroom dynamics (e.g. Nakane, 2007), as well as others
more commonly discussed in ‘traditional’ approaches
to classroom silence in SLA literature, such as perceived
low motivation, lack of understanding, low L2 competence, unwillingness to participate, spite, disobedience, and disrespect as highlighted by Asia-focusedresearchers such as Bao (2014). As such, the situations
and ways in which silent behaviors are performed,
interpreted, and responded to can be understood tobe significantly culturally dependent. Furthermore,silence tolerance has been found to be significantly
longer (up to several minutes for some participants)
for Japanese study participants than those from Western cultures, who typically showed a silence tolerance
period of only a few seconds (King & Aono, 2017). As
such, silence is a fundamental aspect of communication and talk across all cultures; it takes many forms andperforms a wide variety of functions across all levels ofhuman interaction (Ghavamnia & Ketabi, 2015). Accordingly, cultural differences in valuing, performing, andinterpreting silence mean that classroom silence cantake on vastly different meanings depending on theinterlocuters and context.
It has been widely suggested in both the SLA and linguistics fields that a dichotomy between collectivist
East Asian cultures and individualist ‘Western’ cultures
exists, with East Asian learners categorised as ‘reticent’and placing high value on silence and ‘Western’ learners as intolerant of silence and highly oriented towards
talk (King & Aono, 2017; Nakane, 2007). Such ill-definedand uncritical comparisons between ‘Western’ and‘Eastern’ cultures preferences for talk and silence areubiquitous in EFL and applied linguistics literature. This
has led to loose definitions of sociocultural groups inthe literature that reinforce and further perpetuate thestereotyping of entire racial or ethnic groups without
sufficient consideration for contextual factors, subcultures, or individuals’ social identities and personalities(King & Aono, 2017; Nakane, 2007; Shani, 2019). However, there is value in developing a basic understanding of key sociocultural differences in communicativeand classroom behaviors between the Western contexts experienced by native English-speaker teachers
and the ‘new’ Japanese context.
There are several key differences in the expected com-municative and classroom behaviors in the Westernand the Japanese context. Silence can be extremely
difficult to interpret in the classroom; even more sowhen teachers and students from different cultural
backgrounds come together (Harumi, 2011). In contexts
with a high cultural tolerance for silence, classroom
silence is prone to misinterpretation by cultural outsiders (Harumi, 2011; Kim et al., 2016). While silence may berecognised as a form of communication or participation
by Japanese EFL learners, it is less likely to be tolerated
or understood by teachers from Western backgrounds(Harumi, 2011; Kim et al., 2016). In the Japanese EFL
classroom, students who are silent may be perceived
by teachers from Western contexts as demonstrating
undesirable traits such as passivity, disrespectfulness,or a lack of critical thinking skills and impaired ability
for independent thinking (Bao, 2014; Nakane, 2007).
Western sociocultural and sociolinguistic communicative norms and participation structures set the stage
for students’ “dynamic verbal debate” (Bao, 2014, p.2)
and ample student questioning behaviors, in which
students are expected to discuss individual opinions,demonstrate critical thinking skills, and manage their
engagement by participating in the verbal mode
(Wajnryb & Crichton, 1997). Conversely, silence is often
interpreted as a positive indication of learner engagement and classroom participation in Japanese contexts. Japanese sociocultural and sociolinguistic norms
dictate the “attentive, cultivated silence” of students inthe classroom (Bao, 2014, p.2). In sociocultural contexts
where silence is highly valued, silence in the classroom
becomes a sign of respect, active listening, and reflection (Bao, 2014). The Japanese conceptualisation offace is also relevant, with verbal participation exceeding classroom norms likely to be regarded as lacking
self-control or modesty, as research suggests that in
cultures where there is a strong sociocultural emphasis on social harmony and group dynamics, learners’
choices about classroom participation are heavily
mediated by face-concerns during collaborative learning situations (Biria et al., 2017; Chen, 2017; Choi, 2015;
Hanh, 2020; Haugh & Bargiela-Chiappini, 2010; Huang,
2014; Kim et al., 2016; King, 2013a; 2013b; King & Aono,
2017; Nakane, 2006; 2007; Wajnryb & Crichton, 1997;
Zhao, 2010; Zhong, 2013).
In studies examining didactic turn-taking between

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l11participants from Western sociocultural contexts,
researchers have found little to no gap between interlocutor turns, with overlapping being a common feature of conversational turn-taking structures (King &Aono, 2017; Nakane, 2007). Conversely, it is generally
reported that the Japanese attach strong value andfunctionality to silence, and significantly longer tolerance for silence has been observed by researchers (seeKing & Aono, 2017 and Nakane, 2007). There is typicallya preference for the preservation of group harmony,and consensus is valued over individual opinions (Bao,2014; Nakane, 2007; Wajnyrb & Crichton, 1997). As such,classroom silence can be seen as a manifestation of theconflict between expectation and reality; “a gap occur[ring] between a teacher’s expectation of a response
and the time that the respondent takes to respond”(Bista, 2012, p.77). In the Japanese EFL classroom, thisoccurs when students are perceived to be reticent inclass; the amount of student talk does not match the
expectations of the teacher (Bao, 2014). As a communicative strategy, silence can be used to convey a rangeof messages, including displays of power or submission, defiance, rejection, disagreement, consideration,
attentiveness, acceptance, and respect, depending on
the situation and the cultural context of use (Bao, 2014).
Different cultural contexts have different functions andhierarchal values placed on silence and talk, with social
norms and expectations strongly linked to individuals’
use of silence and speech (Bao, 2014; King & Aono, 2017;
Nakane, 2007). Accordingly, interpretations of silencemust be contextualised by EFL educators within thehistorical, sociocultural, and educational domain inwhich it is being observed.

Silence as a Participation Mode and TeachingMode
In order to gain a more nuanced understanding of thereasons for learner silence in the Japanese EFL context,
it is important to understand how, why, and when Japanese EFL learners participate in L2 classroom activities. In contemporary Western-influenced, communication-oriented, learner-centred L2 teaching modes,
expectations for participation are very different to the
traditional teacher-centred methodologies still usedwidely in East Asian contexts in which silent learning behaviors are the norm. Multiple student surveys
of East Asian EFL learners have shown that students

often view their silence in the classroom positively,
and that it was used as an active learning strategy (e.g.
King & Aono, 2017; Nakane, 2006; 2007; Tatar, 2005).
The assumption that L2 oral production is a necessary
feature of both active classroom participation and themost important aspect of second language acquisition
has been criticised by a growing number of researchers who stress the value of silence in the teaching andlearning process (e.g. Bao, 2014; Bernales, 2014; 2016;
Iasevoli, 2018; Obenland et al., 2012; Ollin, 2008; Schultz,
2012; Takahashi, 2019; Tatar, 2005; Tsou, 2005). Close
examination of linguistics, general education, EFL, andSLA research suggests that silence is a crucial component of language and learning that can be employed asa productive strategy by both teachers and students. In
fact, there are several silent behaviors and silent learning behaviors that are required within L2 cultural, communicative and L2 learning skill sets that need to beacquired by L2 learners (Bao, 2014; King & Aono, 2017;
Ollin; 2008). In the L2 classroom, silence may indicate a
range of essential non-verbal participation behaviours
and mental engagement in classroom activities suchas active listening, L2 cognitive processing, rehearsal,
noticing, error repair, and self-monitoring. Studies in
East Asian context have found that L2 learner silenceis an important cognitive processing tool and L2 learning strategy for attentive listening, mental preparation,
rehearsal, self-monitoring, and inner speech (Bao, 2014;
King & Aono, 2017). Critically, the current focus on finding ‘causes’ and ‘cures’ for classroom silence dominating the body of literature in these fields overlooks thepossibility that L2 learners may “consider silence… tobe a valid form of participation” (Bernales, 2016, p.368).
These studies support the claim that EFL teachers inJapan must adjust their expectations for classroom
participation to better reflect the preferences and cultural norms for silent participation modes (e.g., Bao,
2014; Bao & Nyugen, 2020; Bernales 2014; 2016; Fadilah
et al., 2019; Takahashi, 2019; Tatar, 2005). As such, it isclear that notions regarding classroom participationmust be reconceptualized and broadened to not only
acknowledge silent or ‘mental’ forms of participationas valid forms of participation in classroom activities,
but also to consistently incorporate them as a learning
strategy available to students.
Silence is also important as a teaching strategy forallowing space for thought and facilitating reflective

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l12learning (Ingram & Elliot, 2014; Schultz, 2012). In particular, wait time is a pedagogical concept that is closely
related to classroom silence (King & Aono, 2017). In theL2 classroom, extended silences are unusual due to thestructure of classroom turn-taking; “obligation to takethe next turn always lies with the teacher if there is asilence” (Ingram & Elliot, 2014). Furthermore, the faceconcerns discussed above have been found to exert
significant influence on wait time and turn taking
dynamics even within group-mode activities (e.g., Biria
et al., 2017; Chen, 2017; Choi, 2015; Hanh, 2020; Haugh& Bargiela-Chiappini, 2010; Huang, 2014; Kim et al.,2016; King, 2013a; 2013b; King & Aono, 2017; Nakane,
2006; 2007; Wajnryb & Crichton, 1997; Zhao, 2010;
Zhong, 2013). In studies examining these phenomena, native English-speaker teachers appear to havedifficulty in making judgements about the function of
students’ long pauses, and often struggle to correctly
determine whether the pause represents cognitive
processing time, nervousness, refusal to answer thequestion, rejection of the turn, or refusal to participate
in the learning task (Harumi, 2011; King & Aono, 2017;
Nakane, 2007). Insights from current research indicatethat adequate wait time, in conjunction with the provision of appropriate background knowledge activation
and rehearsal, is a key factor influencing classroom
discourse patterns, and that extending the tolerated
silent wait time of teachers was effective for changing
response patterns, increasing students’ oral responsiveness, and improving the length, clarity, and qualityof student oral participation (Ingram & Elliot; 2014; King
& Aono, 2017). These studies also indicate a positive
relationship between rehearsal time and L2 output. As
such, it can be argued that developing an understanding of the ways silence and silent learning behaviors
may be used in the L2 classroom by both educators
and L2 learners is crucial to developing more effective
L2 teaching and learning methods.

Implications
The studies discussed in this paper demonstrate thatthe established portrayal of “reticent” Japanese EFL
learners and the “excessive” (Fadilah et al., 2019, p.184)
focus on cultural stereotypes in the discussion of East
Asian EFL classroom characteristics can be understood
to be the result of a mismatch between teachers’
expectations and learners’ ways of being and partici-

pating in the L2 classroom. The insights gained fromthese studies can be applied to develop culturally sensitive, evidence-based, and pedagogically-sound strategies for facilitating diverse forms of participation in
the Japanese EFL classroom. There are three key implications that can be drawn from this.
First, it is necessary for EFL researchers and educators
to learn to distinguish between learners’ strategic andcultural uses of silence and actual reticence or refusal
to participate (Bao, 2014; Fadilah et al., 2019). As thesetwo concepts overlap considerably in terms of visible
indicators, it is advisable for L2 educators, especiallynative English-speaker teachers, to receive preservice and/or ongoing cultural education and culturally
informed pedagogical training regarding in order tolearn how to recognise and incorporate silent learning
behaviors and mental participation modes in order toaccommodate Japanese EFL learners’ preference forand functional use of silence as an intentional learningor cultural strategy by students (Bao, 2014; Fadilah etal., 2019).
Second, it is appears that the relatively short tolerance
for silence and wait time of Western sociocultural contexts may create problems when teaching Japanese
EFL learners (Ingram & Elliot, 2014; King & Aono, 2017).
As such, it would likely be beneficial for teachers froma Western background to practice increased tolerance
for silence and extended wait time (in the classroom
context, ‘teacher silence’). As shown by King andAono’s (2017) study, teachers, especially native Englishspeaker teachers are likely to have a comparatively low
silence tolerance, and consequently a short wait time.
Feeling the need to keep the class moving and cover all
the necessary material within a short period also adds
to the pressure on wait time. The findings of the studies
reviewed in this paper suggest that EFL teachers should
consciously incorporate teacher silence through building in extended wait time, ideally of fifteen seconds
or more, into their lesson planning. Such efforts will
ensure that teachers do not feel time pressure andassist with the active practice of extending silence tolerance. Scheduled rehearsal time and increased wait
time when eliciting class-mode L2 oral production may
increase students’ sense of responsibility towards L2
oral participation, as well as lead to improved qualityof L2 competence by allowing time for L2 processing,rehearsal, expansion, noticing, and self-repair of errors

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

13(Ghavamnia & Ketabi, 2015; Ingram & Elliot, 2014). Considering the potential benefits related to overall L2
acquisition and eventual L2 output, adequate wait timeand extended silence tolerance can be understood tobe powerful tools for increasing both frequency oflearners’ L2 oral production, L2 confidence, and L2competence.
Third, empirical evidence shows that it is necessary tochange current ways of thinking regarding classroom
participation and engagement (Bao, 2014; Bernales,
2014; 2016; Ghavamnia & Ketabi, 2015; Harumi, 2011;
Iasevoli, 2018; Kim et al., 2016; Obenland et al., 2012;
Ollin, 2008; Schultz, 2012; Takahashi, 2019; Tatar, 2005;
Tsou, 2005). Silence is an important part of naturalcommunicative behavior and essential L2 learning
strategy. Importantly, silent learning behaviors provide
L2 learners with the opportunity to practice the L2 ina low-stakes way while providing additional opportunities for internalization. They also enable all learners
to participate by finding a participation mode they are
comfortable with regardless of L2 confidence, competence, or learning mode. As such, it is advisable for
EFL teachers from Western backgrounds in Japan tomake space for silence and silent learning behaviors
in their pedagogical practice; to allow for other waysof interacting, thinking, and being ‘present’ in the L2classroom. In particular, manipulation of certain environmental factors appears effective, such as ensuring
adequate planning and preparation time before activities, fostering a safe and non-confrontational learning environment, and providing a variety of practice
opportunities in different classroom modes, may beable to enhance learner initiative and responsibility,
mediate face-concerns, and encourage L2 oral participation. This can be achieved through careful planningand utilization of learning tasks that provide multiple
opportunities and modes for participation. For example, teachers may choose to scaffold class-mode L2 oral
production in much the same way as written tasks may
be presented, with brainstorming and L2 oral production-oriented sub-tasks building towards the productive goal. In this case, it is also important to consider
teacher facilitation of turn-taking and floor-holding
behaviors as it has been found that L2 learners often
also struggle with this aspect of L2 oral production
and class-mode participation (e.g., Hanh, 2020; Harumi,
2011; Kim et al., 2016; King, 2013; King & Aono, 2017).

Further reading regarding this topic is recommended
for a more in depth understanding of how these
dynamics interact with silence and silent behaviors in
the classroom.
Teachers may also choose to utilize group-mode discussion, research, or writing activities with a degreeof autonomy, such as assigned or self-assigned roles
including ‘researcher’, ‘writer’, ‘team leader’, ‘language
assistant’, ‘question manager’, and so on that play
to the strengths or preferred participation modes ofeach student. A more technology-focused approach
may utilize online sharable documents that can beaccessed and edited by students to facilitate smallgroup work allows EFL teachers to monitor groups
while providing real-time intervention, while also providing several roles and participation modes to groupmembers that facilitate student empowerment, peerinteraction, extended L2 oral and written production,and extended opportunity for self-repair and peer-facilitated error-repair during discussions.

Conclusion
Classroom silence is a common source of frustrationand conflict between educators and L2 learners in theJapanese EFL context that has generated a substantial
amount of research. The studies explored in this paper
indicate that the tendency for native English-speakereducators and Western researchers to interpret classroom silence through a Eurocentric lens has significantly contributed to the ongoing difficulties with thefrequency and quality of spontaneous L2 oral production and classroom participation in Japanese EFL classrooms.
Often conflated with reticence, classroom silence is ahighly context-dependant phenomenon with significant cultural, cognitive, and linguistic relevance. Consequently, it is advisable that Japanese EFL researchersand educators develop a nuanced understanding ofsilence and silent learning behaviors, and the functionaland cultural uses of silence in order to make culturally-appropriate, evidence-based pedagogical decisions
regarding the treatment of learner silence and incorporation of teacher and learner silence and silent learning
behaviors in the L2 classroom. Current research suggests that together with pedagogical changes targeting the environmental factors influencing Japaneselearners’ L2 oral production and increased opportuni-

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

14ties to engage with diverse participation modes in theclassroom, it would be beneficial for EFL educators toadapt their expectations regarding classroom participation and pedagogical style to better reflect the preferences and cultural norms for participation mode in
the Japanese EFL teaching context.

References
Bao, D. (2014). Understanding silence andreticence: Ways of participating in second
language acquisition. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Bernales, C. (2014). Exploring ‘willingness
to communicate’ in the FL classroom: A
qualitative and quantitative study. [Doctoral
dissertation, University of WisconsinMadison]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Bernales, C. (2016). Conflicting pathways toparticipation in the FL classroom: L2 speech
production vs. L2 thought processes. Foreign
Language Annals, 49(2), 367-383. https://doi.
org/10.1111/flan.12200
Biria, R., Pozveh, S., & Rajabi, B. (2017).
Improving oral fluency of EFL students withdifferent proficiency levels through explicit
instruction of face threatening strategies.
Theory and Practice in Language Studies,
7(10), 933-944. https://dx.doi.org/10.17507/
tpls.0710.16
Bista, K. (2012). Silence in teaching and learning:
Perspectives of a Nepalese graduate student.
College Teaching, 60(2), 76-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2011.633943
Chen, I. (2017). Face-threatening acts: Conflict
between a teacher and students in EFL
classroom. Open Journal of Modern
Linguistics, 7(2), 151-166. https://doi.
org/10.4236/ojml.2017.72012

Choi, J. (2015). Reasons for silence: A case studyof two Korean students at a U.S. graduate
school. TESOL Journal, 6(3), 579-596.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.209
Delaney, T. (2012). Quality and quantity oforal participation and English proficiency
gains. Language Teaching andResearch, 16(4), 467-482. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1362168812455586
Ellwood, C., & Nakane, I. (2009). Privileging ofspeech in EAP and mainstream classrooms:
A critical evaluation of participation. TESOL
Quarterly, 43(2), 203-230. https://doi.
org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00165.x
Fadilah, E., Widiati, U., & Latief, M. (2019).
Reading dynamic patterns of silence as acommunication strategy and impediment in
the EFL classroom interaction. International
Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 183-200. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12412a
Fushino, K. (2010). Casual relationships between
communication confidence, beliefs aboutgroup work, and willingness to communicate
in foreign language groupwork. TESOL
Quarterly, 44(4), 700-724. https://doi.
org/10.5054/tq.2010.235993
Ghavamnia, M., & Ketabi, S. (2015). Voices fromthe voiceless: Iranian EFL students’ attitudes
towards English. Innovation in Language
Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 102-114. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2013.849708
Hahn, N. (2020). Silence is Gold?: A study
on students’ silence in EFL classrooms.
International Journal of Higher Education,
9(4), 153-160. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.
v9n4p153
Harumi, S. (2011). Classroom silence: Voices fromJapanese learners. ELT Journal, 63(3), 260269. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq046

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

15Haugh, M., & Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2010).
Face in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics,
42, 2073-2077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
pragma.2009.12.013
Huang, Q. (2014). Facework strategies in EFL
classroom. Journal of Language Teaching
and Research, 5(1), 175-182. https://doi.
org/10.4304/jltr.5.1.175-182
Iasevoli, B. (2018). Teaching introverted students:
How a ‘quiet revolution’ is changing
classroom practice. The Education Digest,
83(8), 4-8.
Ingram, J., & Elliot, V. (2014). Turn taking and ‘wait
time’ in classroom interactions. Journal of
Pragmatics, 62, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
pragma.2013.12.002
Jahdhami, S. (2018). Revisiting the perception ofsilence in linguistics. Journal of Advancesin Linguistics, 9, 1471-1477. https://doi.
org/10.24297/jal.v9i0.7899
Kim, S., Ates, B., Grigsby, Y., Kraker, S., & Micek,
T. (2016). Ways to promote the classroom
participation of international students byunderstanding the silence of Japanese
university students. Journal of International
Students, 6(2), 431-450. https://doi.
org/10.32674/jis.v6i2.365
King, J. (2013a). Silence in the second language
classroom (1st ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137301482
King, J. (2013b). Silence in the second language
classrooms of Japanese universities. Applied
Linguistics, 34(3), 325-343. https://doi.
org/10.1093/applin/ams043

King, J., & Aono, A. (2017). Talk, silence andanxiety during one-to-one tutorials: A crosscultural comparative study of Japan and UK
undergraduates’ tolerance of silence. Asia
Pacific Education Review, 18(4), 489-499.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-017-953-8
Nakane, I. (2006). Silence and politeness inintercultural communication in university
seminars. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(11),1811-1835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
pragma.2006.01.005
Nakane, I. (2007). Silence in interculturalcommunication: Perceptions andperformance. John Benjamins Publishing
Company. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Obenland, C., Munson, A., & Hutchinson, J.
(2012). Silent students’ participation in a large
active learning science classroom. Journalof College Science Teaching, 42(2), 90-98.
https://doi.org/10.2505/3/jcst12_042_02
Ollin, R. (2008). Silent pedagogy and rethinking
classroom practice: Structuring teaching
through silence rather than talk. Cambridge
Journal of Education, 38(2), 265-280. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640802063528
Schultz, K. (2012). The fullness of silence in theclassroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 94(2), 80.
https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171209400223
Shani, G. (2019). Consuming the nihonjinron.
Nations and Nationalism, 25(4), 1119-1121.
https://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12550
Shao, Q., & Gao, X. (2016). Reticence andwillingness to communication (WTC) of East
Asian language learners. System, 63,115-120.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.10.001

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l16Takahashi, J. (2019). East Asian and nativeEnglish speaking students’ participation in
the graduate-level American classroom.
Communication Education, 68(2), 215-234.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2019.1566
963

Zhou, Y., Knoke, D., Sakamoto, I. (2005).
Rethinking silence in the classroom: Chinese
students’ experiences of sharing indigenous
knowledge. International Journal of Inclusive
Education, 9(3), 287-311. https://doi.
org/10.1080/13603110500075180

Tatar, S. (2005). Why Keep Silent? The classroom
participation experiences of non-nativeEnglish-speaking students. Language andIntercultural Communication, 5(3-4), 284-293.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14708470508668902
Tsou, W. (2005). Improving speaking skills throughinstruction in oral classroom participation.
Foreign Language Annals, 38(1), 46-55.
https://doi.org/10,1111/j.1944-9720.2005.
tb02452.x
Wajnryb, R. & Crichton, J. (1997). To ask or not
to ask: Questions of face in the language
learning classroom. EA Journal, 15(1), 7-27.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9322-6
Zhao, W. (2010). An investigation of students’ facewants in Chinese English teachers’ classroom
feedback. Journal of Language Teaching andResearch, 1(1), 29-24. https://doi.org/10.4304/
jltr.1.1.29-34
Zhong, Q. (2013). Understanding Chinese
learners’ willingness to communicate in a
New Zealand ESL classroom: A multiple
case study drawing on the theory of planned
behaviour. System, 41, 740-751. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.system.2013.08.001
Zhou, N. (2015). Oral participation in EFL
classroom: Perspectives from theadministrator, teachers, and learners at a
Chinese university. System, 53, 35-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.06.007

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

A Laughter Mindfulness Intervention (LMI) in the Language Classroom

Merissa Braza Ocampo

Fukushima Gakuin College

Abstract
The ongoing anxiety and stress caused by the COVID-19 pandemic continue to impact everyone, especially college freshmen
students who are beginning a new phase in their lives. In Japan, such students have had to continuously adapt to uncertainty and risk-prevention measures, which negatively affects their motivation to learn (Tan, 2020). To address this, a Laughter
Mindfulness Intervention (LMI) was administered to 75 first-year English students in Tohoku in 2021. The study assessed theeffectiveness of LMI in reducing students’ stress and anxiety, increasing motivation to learn, and overall well-being. Four corecomponents of Laughter Yoga (LY) were employed: warm-up exercises, laughter exercises, breathing exercises, and an attitudeof playfulness. After two LMI sessions, students’ participation was generally positive, with 80% reporting that they enjoyed LMI
activities. Moreover, students’ perceived stress scale (PSS) slightly lessened after LMI. This suggests that LMI can contribute
positively to students’ learning, motivation, and well-being.

日本語概要
COVID-19によって引き起こされる継続的な不安とストレスは、すべての人、特に人生の新しい段階を迎えようとしている大学 1 年生に影響を与え続けている。日本では、そのような学生は、不確実性とリスク防止策に継続的に適応する必要があり、学習意欲に悪影
響を及ぼしている (Tan, 2020)。これに対処するため、2021 年に東北の 1 年生の英語の生徒 75 人に笑いマインドフルネス介入(LMI) が実施された。この研究では、LMI が生徒のストレスと不安を軽減し、学習意欲を高め、全体的な健康状態を改善する効果を評価した。笑いヨガ(LY) の 4 つのコア コンポーネントが採用された: 準備運動、笑いの練習、呼吸の練習、遊び心のある態度。 2 回のLMI セッションの後、学生の参加は概して肯定的であり、80% が LMI 活動を楽しんだと報告している。さらに、学生の知覚ストレス尺
度 (PSS) は、LMI 後にわずかに減少した。これは、LMI が生徒の学習、モチベーション、幸福に積極的に貢献できることを示唆している。

Laughter is a social signal and form of communicationthat has been integral to human life and culture sinceancient times. It was used by our cave-dwelling ancestors to relieve tension and fear, and to demonstrate toother groups that they were friendly (Hayworth, 1928;
Polimeni & Reiss, 2006). With the “liberation of thevoice” (Provine, 2001 p. 2) it evolved into what we now
think of as human language. Because since laughter isunplanned and uncensored, it is a powerful probe intosocial relationships.
In a pre-scientific age, where many relied on the moral
authority of the Christian church (Hein, 1977), theessential benefits of humor and laughter were citedin the Bible, Book of Proverbs 17:22 (New International
Version), where it states: “A cheerful heart is a good
medicine, but a broken spirit dries up the bones.” Andwell into the 10th century, people understood that a

joyful spirit was therapeutic and that the absence of joy
could make one ill (Savage et al., 2017). Other historicalexamples relating to laughter therapy include ancient
Greek physicians prescribing a visit to the hall of comedians as part of the patient’s healing process, and earlynative American clowns working in cooperation with
their own tribal healers (Savage et al.,2017). In the 14th
century, surgeon Henri de Mondeville reportedly jokedwith his patients in his recovery room (Barrett & Mingo,
2002). In the 17th century, humor was used generally torelease excess tension (Bardon, 2005), and in the 18th
century, English physician William Beattie also usedhumor in treating the sick (Dickie, 2003).
In the 20th century, there was renewed interest inlaughter therapy following the release of the movie‘Patch Adams’ (Kalpakli, 2021). And in 1995, Mumbai-born M. Kataria founded Laughter Yoga (LY). He

18

modernized and simplified the work of earlier laughter
pioneers, emphasizing that laughter is indeed the best
medicine and emphasized that “the more you laughfor no reason, the more life will give reasons to laugh”(Kataria, 1995).

emotions more broadly defined, laughter does not
involve the motivation to do anything (Stanford, 2020).
Thus, the movements of laughter, “have no object”(Spencer, 1911 p. 303): they are merely a release of nervous energy.

In a similar vein, laughter therapy has been discovered
to be an avenue to reduce Anxiety, Burnout, Stress(ABS) by releasing neurotransmitters (Farifteh et al.,2014), which facilitate instantaneous changes in moodstate. Related benefits include a reduction in heart disease, rejuvenated appearance, improved breathing,
and acting as a natural painkiller (Dunbar et al., 2012;
Lapierre et al., 2019). An increase in sleep quality has
also been noted (Zhao et al., 2019; Ghodsbin et al.,2015). Laughter therapy encourages a greater flow ofoxygen to the brain, improves feelings of connectedness, lowers blood pressure, boosts the immune system, and increases concentration and self-confidence(Subramoney, 2020).

A Laughter-based Mindfulness Classroom
Intervention

From a biological perspective, laughter has beenshown to exert stress-reducing effects by suppressing
the bioactivities of epinephrine, cortisol, and 3,4-dihydro-phenylacetic acid (a major dopamine catabolite)(Berk et al., 1989; Yim, 2016). Reduced neurotransmitter activities, including norepinephrine, serotonin, anddopamine are linked to depression, and laughter isshown to enhance dopamine and serotonin activities(Yim, 2016). Additionally, the laughter-induced releaseof endorphins can help to reduce a depressed mood
(Lebowitz et al., 2011). According to Yim (2016), laughter is the natural expression of positive emotion, and it
can be broadly grouped into five different categories:
spontaneous laughter (triggered by positive emotion;
unrelated to free will), simulated laughter (triggered byoneself at will; self-induced), stimulated laughter (triggered by physical contact: ticklish), induced laughter(triggered by the drug: nitrous oxide, and pathologicallaughter (triggered by neuronal damage: pseudobulbar affect). Clearly, laughter has a wide range ofbenefits, including an increase in cognitive function,
improved respiration, enhanced tolerance of pain, anda reduction of stress hormones. The cumulative effectsof these are improved psychological well-being, an
improvement in the overall quality of life (Yim, 2016),
and happiness (Lyle, 2014). At the same time, unlike

Laughter and humor in general have provided a multitude of educational benefits (Lei, et al., 2010). Thesemainly impact the affective dimension of learning,
including improvement of classroom atmosphereand a reduction of anxiety (Neff & Dewaele, 2022).
While these aspects can be thought of as relevant toany educational domain, the current paper provides
an example of an intervention applied specifically to
English language learners in Japan. It focuses moreon how these techniques can be used with language
learners than on particular language learning activities themselves. Nevertheless, the integration of theseapproaches into language lessons has been strongly
endorsed, particularly for students who are worried
about making mistakes, or nervous about their speaking abilities (Azizinezhad & Hashemi, 2011). Beyond
this, the current study also provides an example of LMI
in a language classroom, that can potentially be drawn
upon by language instructors when applying various
language learning techniques.
During COVID-19, the ongoing pandemic-related ABS,and fear affected the quality of life of many people
globally. At the same time, the number of individuals
affected by depression has also risen (Bueno, 2021).
Observing this situation, I became concerned that therise of pandemic-related ABS and fear of the unknown
might even progress into mental problems related-illnesses if no interventions were carried out. This was
the motivation behind the introduction of the current
study, a Laughter-based Mindfulness Intervention(LMI), in my classroom.
More generally, the positive effects of non-pharmacologic interventions are recognized to help reduce
pain, stress, and anxiety. Such interventions can takethe form of superficial massage, breathing exercises,music therapy, yoga, and others (Lewis et al., 2018) (Figure 1). Unlike physical yoga, laughter exercises do not

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l19require special yoga mats or exercise clothes, and eventhose without previous experience can join the exercises. These advantages make LMI possible anywhere
and anytime, and readily implementable, not being
dependent on the availability of classroom resources.
All that is required to boost students’ enjoyment, flushout their boredom, and control their anxiety are theuse of the teacher’s tongue and heart (Li, et al., 2022).
These are also all that is needed for the creation of afamily-like classroom environment where mistakes are
accepted (Ocampo, 2015), which is similarly resource
independent. Teachers know intuitively that the classroom environment affects students’ emotions andwillingness to communicate (WTC). Thus, one of theteacher’s responsibilities is to make the learning process easier and more enjoyable, and motivate students’attention with the judicious use of heart and tongue.

Figure 1.
Major types of non-pharmacologic interventions

MethodIn this study, LMI, a technique that involves mimicking
the act of laughing, was trialed to explore its potential
to improve positive psychological states. As pointed
out earlier, the use of LMI in a language classroom
focuses mainly on the affective dimension of education generally. But it is hoped that it can also be drawn
upon by language instructors when applying various
language learning techniques.

and Kataria (2018) were employed. The LMI was administered to 75 freshmen English students at a university
in Tohoku in 2021. These 75 participants included 23
males and 52 females, whose ages ranged from 19-20
years old. All were enrolled in a first-year English conversation class and had regular, direct contact withthe researcher. The LMI was in the context of the aims
stated in the researcher’s university syllabus in FY
2021-2022, namely improving students’ happiness andwell-being through positive psychology and mindfulness.
During the first semester of spring 2021, three main
research sessions were held. The pre-PSS took place
during the tenth class of the semester, the laughter
activities that comprise LMI took place during thetwelfth class of the semester and the post-PPS wasgiven the following week in the thirteenth class of the
fifteen-class semester.
In the first research session (tenth class), participants
answered a pre-Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) questionnaire (Cohen et al.,1983). The PPS consists of ten questions about perceptions of stress in everyday life. Also,at this session, the researcher discussed its objective toassess the impact of LMI on their learning motivation,
well-being, and laughter benefits. During the lecture,
the researcher gave several short demonstrations ofsimulated laughter and encouraged participants to try
them out. Participants’ confidentiality, the opportunity to ask questions, and emphasis of their autonomy
regarding participation in the LMI were ensured.
Next, during the twelfth class of the spring semesterof FY 2021, students participated in an LMI session,
throughout which the researcher frequently repeated“The more you laugh for no reason, the more life will
give reasons to laugh” and “the body makes no distinction regardless of whether the laughter is real or
simulated” (Kataria, 2018). The LMI included the following four core components of Laughter Yoga (LY):(1) warm-up exercises, (2) laughter exercises, (3) deep
breathing exercises, and (4) an attitude of childlike
playfulness were implemented, described below inmore detail.

Laughter activities patterned on those of De Leo (2021)

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

20(1) The warm-up exercises used were characteristic ofmost laughter yoga sessions, beginning with clappingand synchronizing movements. Warm-up exercises
involved clapping with hands in parallel positions
in order to stimulate the points on the palms andincrease participants’ energy levels. Participants tried
their first chant, in rhythm with their hands, chanting“ho ho, ha-ha-ha”, and breathing from the belly withdeep inhalations and exhalations. Hand clapping wasthen combined with a vocal “ho ho ha ha ha” sequence,and participants continued to clap with a 1-2-3 rhythm,
moving their hands up and down and swinging themfrom side to side as they clapped. Participants continued clapping, breathing, and chanting as they moved
around the room in a circle or from side to side.
(2) Laughter exercises included ‘gradient laughter’, a‘brainwashing and flossing’ exercise, and a ‘COVID-19
crush’ laugh. In ‘gradient laughter’, participants beganwith low vocal intensity and then raised it higher andhigher, opening their mouths slowly as they inhaled.
The researcher gave the following instructions to participants: “We are increasing the blood flow because
our heart rhythm increases. And more blood is circulat-

ing in our bodies to oxygenate our bodies. How to do
it? Smile! Gradually begin to laugh with a calm chuckle.
Increase the intensity of the laugh until you’ve reacheda hearty laugh. Gradually dial back the laugh.”(3) For deep breathing exercises, the researcher introduced an easy and short 3-4-5 breathing exercise(Chatterjee, 2021).
(4) An attitude of childlike playfulness was encouraged
by asking students to think about their own stresses inlife and to laugh at them after they had finished exercises 1-3.
In addition, during this LMI, for their personal guidance
and reference at home, students were encouraged towatch video clips of De Leo (2021) and Kataria (2018),
available on YouTube. After completing the LMI exercises in the second research session (twelfth class of thesemester), in the last research session (thirteenth classof the semester), participants were asked to answer the
post-PSS to help understand the impact of this intervention on participants’ English learning, motivation,
and wellbeing.

Table 1
Perceived stress scale

Perceived Stress Scale Items (1-10)

N

1. How often have been upset because of something that happened 75
unexpectedly?
2. How often have you felt that you were unable to control the im75
portant things in your life?
3. How often have you felt nervous and stressed?
75
4. How often have you felt confident about your ability to handle
75
your personal problems?
5. How often have you felt that things were going your way?
75
6. How often have you found that you could not cope with all the75
things that you had to do?
7. How often have you been able to control irritations in your life?
75
8. How often have you felt that you were on top of things?
75
9. How often have you been angered because of things that hap75
pened that were outside of your control?
10. How often have you felt difficulties when piling up so high that75
you could not overcome them?

SD
PrePostPSS PSS
2.0
1.7
1.8

1.7

2.5
2.0

2.4
1.9

1.6
2.2

1.6
1.8

1.6
1.9
1.8

1.6
2.5
1.4

2.0

1.3

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

21Results and Discussion
As shown in Table 1, in the pre-PSS, the Perceived
Stress Scale Items participants reported experiencing
the most were Item 3 (being nervous and stressed), followed closely by Item 6 (inability to cope with all thethings one has to do). In third place, Items 1, 4, and 10
were given equal weight by participants during the
pre-PSS.
In contrast, in the post-PSS, Item 8 (feeling on top ofthings) was the most strongly reported Item, followed
by Item 3 (nervous and stressed) and Item 4 (confident
about handling personal problems). While the appearance of Item 8 (feeling of being on top of things) in firstplace in the post-PSS is positive, there was a slight dropin Item 4 (confidence in the ability to handle personal
problems). At the beginning of the intervention, participants perceived that they felt that they were on top ofthings. Afterward, however, they felt that they were nolonger in control of the things they wanted to do, influenced by feelings of being upset, nervous, stressed,

and unable to cope with the things they had to do. The
resultant anger and perceived difficulty in overcoming
piled-up school-related responsibilities are shown in
Table 1. Despite participants appearing to engage positively in LMI activities during the intervention from theperspective of the researcher, the PSS results revealed
that they felt out of control of the things they wanted todo. Probing this result further, the researcher spoke toparticipants one-on-one, several of whom responded
that the presentation was difficult for them because
they felt ashamed to laugh in front of other students.

Specific Stress Symptoms
Specific stress symptoms reported by participants preand post-LMI are shown in Figure 2. Interestingly, themost frequently reported symptom was tense muscles, experienced by 13% of participants. The next
most prominent were headaches and eating too muchor too little. Following these, boredom and depression
were the next most prominent symptoms of participants.

Figure 2
Participant’s stress symptoms before LMI

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

22During the initial guidance, participants were hesitant to try simulated laughter, but during the second
and third research sessions, especially when childlike
playfulness was emphasized, they began to laughmore freely. In the case of female participants particularly, this laughter was simulated, but male participants’ laughter also appeared to include spontaneous,
non-simulated laughter (Figure 3 & Figure 4).

Figure 3.

aware of the importance of LMI. However, despite theawareness gained, they were still hesitant to take partin simulated laughter by themselves. In the Japanesecontext, this might be related to cultural values that
tend to suppress individual emotions to improve relationships with others (Bhana, 2001). It can be suggested
that Japanese people tend to focus attention on theeyes rather than the mouth when expressing emotions
or reading them to others. If laughter and smiling arepartially related to shyness, then Japanese shyness israther the result of contingent cultural factors, namely,that it is shameful to make mistakes or stand apart,and with a constant feeling of being monitored andwatched by other people (Haffner, et al, 2009). Interestingly, when somebody laughs in front of another person, be it real or simulated, that person naturally laughs
too in reaction. This was borne out in the current study
where laughter released students’ nervous energy
prior to the activities which involved muscular movements during the early stage of laughing exercises,
such as clapping hands, pointing at group members,
and covering one’s mouth.

Participant’s simulated laughter

Conclusion and Recommendation

To help overcome these limitations and help to spreadand deepen LMI in Japan, this invaluable tool shouldbe implemented with an open mind and heart inschools and the broader community. While the current
study provided participants with non-time-dependent questions, which could be perceived by participants as being life-long questions, in future work, amore time-dependent research tool that focuses theinquiry on a particular period will be employed. Also,
future studies will aim to present even more insights
gained from one-to-one talks with participants, seeking a more nuanced understanding of these processes.
Language teachers and researchers are also strongly
encouraged to explore the approaches introduced inthis paper for themselves, linking them to specific language learning outcomes.

Laughter, with its deep historical roots and therapeutic
application throughout the centuries, is clearly still relevant today and has an important role to play in helping
to address Japanese students’ psychological concerns
in the classroom. During this study, particular laughter-based techniques were carried out in a specificcontext in Japan. In this process, participants became

For the sake of the health and happiness of all, it ishighly recommended to share the idea widely thatlaughter for no reason at all can be beneficial for themind, body, and soul. These exercises helped the participants in this study reap physiological, psychological, and emotional benefits. Perhaps they could for you
too.

Figure 4.
Participant’s childlike playfulness

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

23References
Azizinezhad, M., & Hashemi, M. (2011). Humor:
A pedagogical tool for language learners.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30,
2093-2098.
Bardon, A. (2005). The philosophy of humor.
Comedy: A geographic and historical guide,2, Greenwood Press. 462-476.
Barrett, E., & Mingo, J. (2002). Doctors Killed
George Washington: Hundreds of Fascinating
Facts from the World of Medicine. MangoMedia.
Berk, L.S., Tan, S.A., Fry, W.F., Napier, B.J., Lee,
J.W., Hubbard, R.W., Lewis, J.E. & Eby, W.C.
(1989). Neuroendocrine and stress hormone
changes during mirthful laughter. Am. J. Med.
Sci. 298, 390-396.
Bhana, Y. (2001). The Meaning of a Smile inDifferent Cultures. Retrieved from https://
toppandigital.com/translation-blog/themeaning-of-a-smile-in-different-cultures/
Bueno-Notivol, J., Gracia-García, P., Olaya,
B., Lasheras, I., López-Antón, R., &Santabarbara, J. (2021). Prevalence ofdepression during the COVID-19 outbreak: A
meta-analysis of community-based studies.
International journal of clinical and healthpsychology: IJCHP, 21(1), 100196. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2020.07.007
Chatterjee, R. (2021). Happy Mind, Happy Life.
Control your Mind. Retrieved from: https://drchatterjee.com/the-3-4-5-breath/
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., and Mermelstein, R.
(1983). A Global Measure of Perceived
Stress. J. Health Soc. Behav. 24, 385–396.
Doi: 10.2307/2136404

De Leo, L. (2021). Laughter Yoga with Liliana.
Episode 7. Retrieved from: https://www.
youtube.com/watch?v=E551VUpEj3c
Dickie, S. (2003). Hilarity and pitilessness in the
mid-eighteenth century: English jestbook
humor. Eighteenth-Century Studies, 1-22.
Dunbar, R.I., Baron, R., Frangou, A., Pearce,
F., Van Leeuwen, F. J., Stow, J., Partridge,G., Macdonald, I., Barra, V. & Van Vugt, M.
(2012). Social laughter is correlated with anelevated pain threshold. Proc. Biol. Sci. 279,
1161-1167.
Farifteh, S., Mohammadi-Aria, A., Kiamanesh, A.
& Mofid, B. (2014). The Impact of laughter
yoga on the stress of cancer patients before
chemotherapy. Iran. J. Cancer Prev. 7, 179183.
Ghodsbin, F., Sharif Ahmadi, Z., Jahanbin, I.
& Sharif, F. (2015). The effect of laughter
therapy on the general health of elderly
people referring to Jahandidegan community
center in Shiraz, Iran, 2014: a randomized
controlled trial. Int. J. Commun. Based Nurs.
Midwifery 3, 31-38.
Haffner, J., Casas, K. & Lehmann, J.P. (2009).
Japan’s Open Future: An Agenda for Global
Citizenship. Anthem Press, London SE1
8HA, UK, p 79
Hayworth, D. (1928). The social origin and functionof laughter. Psychological Review, 35(5), 367.
Hein, S. (1977). The Crisis in Biblical Authority: A
Historical Analysis. Concordia Theological
Quarterly, 41, 61-77.
Kalpakli, F. (2021). Health and Healing in Patch
Adams: Patch Adams, the Wounded Healer.
Kesit Akademi Dergisi, 7(27), 52-71.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

24

Kataria, M. (2018). My laughter story (Blog).
Retrieved from https://laughteryoga.org/
prozone-blog/my- laughter-story/
Lapierre, S. S., Baker, B. D., & Tanaka, H. (2019).
Effects of mirthful laughter on pain tolerance:
A randomized controlled investigation.
Journal of bodywork and movement
therapies, 23(4), 733–738. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2019.04.005
Lei, S. A., Cohen, J. L., & Russler, K. M. (2010).
Humor on learning in the college classroom:
Evaluating benefits and drawbacks from
instructors’ perspectives. Journal of
Instructional Psychology, 37(4), 326-332.
Lewis, M.J.M., Kohtz, C., Emmerling, S., Fisher,
M. & Mcgarvey, J. (2018). Pain control andnonpharmacologic intervention. Nursing 48,
65-68.
Li, C., Dewaele, J.-M., Pawlak, M., & Kruk,
M. (2022). Classroom environment andwillingness to communicate in English: The
mediating role of emotions experienced
by university students in China.
Language Teaching Research. https://doi.
org/10.1177/13621688221111623

Polimeni, J., & Reiss, J. P. (2006). The firstjoke: Exploring the evolutionary origins
of humor. Evolutionary psychology, 4(1),147470490600400129.
Provine, R. (2001). Laughter: A Scientific
Investigation. Published by the Penguin
Group, NY, 10014, U.S.A.
Savage, B. M., Lujan, H. L., Thipparthi, R. R.,& DiCarlo, S. E. (2017). Humor, laughter,learning, and health! A brief review. Advancesin physiology education, 41(3), 341–347
https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00030.2017
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, (2020).
Philosophy of Humor. Retrieved from: https://
plato.stanford.edu/entries/humor/#toc. Aug
2022.
Yim, J. (2016). Therapeutic benefits oflaughter in mental health: a theoretical review.
Tohoku J. Exp. Med. 239, 243-249.

Lyle, L. (2014). Laugh your way to happiness: Use
the science of laughter for total well-being.
Watkins Publishing Limited.
Neff, P., & Dewaele, J. M. (2022). Humor strategies
in the foreign language class. Innovation in
Language Learning and Teaching, 1-13.
Ocampo, M. (2019). Family Environment Mode
Approach (FEMA): An “Anxiety Buster” toMotivate EFL Learners. Third 21st CAF
Conference at Harvard, in Boston, USA.
September 2015, Vol. 6, Nr. 1 ISSN: 23301236

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

25

A Method for Evaluating EFL Textbook Units for
Supplemental Printout/Activity Creation
James D. Dunn
Meiji University

Abstract
English education teachers are most likely going to be using a textbook for our classrooms that may, or may not, address ourneeds and wants for our classes. This situation can lead to instances where a textbook may not cover a topic in enough detail,may be of too short a length for a class time, or may lack higher-order thinking skills development that you would like to include
into your classroom. Educators need a reliable and repeatable way to gauge what a textbook asks the students to know and what
it asks them to do during a unit. By using a lens that takes into consideration the knowledge dimension the textbook asks students to employ and the thinking skills it asks students to utilize, we can find where the textbook is lacking in skills development.
The method discussed in this paper allows us to create supplemental activities and printouts that best include multiple facetsof knowledge and thinking skills in the classroom. Ways to implement this method, as well as example printouts, are discussed.

日本語概要
英語教師は、ほとんどの場合、授業で教科書を使用することになるが、その教科書は、私たちの授業に対するニーズに応えてくれるかもしれないし、応えてくれないかもしれない。こういった状況は、教科書がトピックを十分にカバーしていなかったり、一つのユニットが授業時間に対して短すぎたり、授業に取り入れたい高次の思考スキルの育成が欠けていたりすることによって起こりえる。教師には、一つのユニットの中で、教科書が生徒に何を知らせようとし、何をするよう求めているかを判断する、信頼性があり、繰り返しが可能な方法を求めている。教科書が生徒に求める知識の次元と生徒に活用させる思考スキルを考慮した視点を取り入れることで、私たちはその教科
書のスキルアップに欠けている部分を見つけることができる。本稿で取り上げた方法を用いると、知識・思考スキルの多面性を授業に取り入れるのに最適な補助活動やプリントを作成することができる。この方法を実施する方法とプリントの例について説明する。

Introduction
Teachers of English as a foreign language (EFL) areoften familiar with the situation where they are not
one hundred percent in control of your textbook
choice. Even if the situation arises where we are free
to choose our own textbook, there remains the factthat many textbooks lack higher-order thinking andcritical thinking skills development (Susanti & Lailiya,
2021). This absence of higher-order thinking skills cancost students opportunities to develop problem-solving, critical thinking, and logical thinking skills. To solve
this, many educators turn to creating supplemental
activities and printouts to better serve their students’abilities, interests, and needs. But the question must
be asked, how do we identify what the textbook is asking of the students in order to best supplement for ourclasses?

Why are higher-order thinking and criticalthinking skills beneficial
Currently, according to the revised guidelines of theJapanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), EFL students are asked
to accrue logical thinking and critical thinking skills
during their English language education (MEXT,
2011). Towards this end, students are required to gainskills that lie firmly in the higher-order thinking skills
area of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy (Nodirovna &Temirovna, 2022), as well as be exposed to the conceptsof critical thinking and have opportunities to engage inthem. Higher-order thinking skills, either practiced inisolation or in combination, have been shown to positively impact learning outcomes (Pikhart & Klímová,2019). Thus, if a textbook has a dearth of higher-order thinking skills or relies too heavily on one type ofhigher-order thinking skill in its productive activities,

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

26

we should give students the opportunity to utilize andbe exposed to other thinking skills that the textbooks
does not show them.
In addition to higher-order thinking skills, critical thinking skills are an important tool for students to gain, notonly to improve their ability to learn and use English
but, to develop problem-solving skills, ask good questions about information and opinions they encounter,and generate opinions that can withstand criticism.
Critical thinking skills can influence many aspects of a
student’s life, from developing intercultural awareness,
to fostering global viewpoints to help be a valuable
human resource no matter where they are in the world(Tsuda, Kinshi, & Valvona, 2021).

A case for Identifying knowledge and higherorder thinking skills when supplementing
When supplementing higher-order thinking skills(HOTS), it might be best to first identify what HOTS arepresent in a particular unit. This, however, might not be
the whole picture of a unit. We must also look toward
the types of knowledge a unit is asking a student toknow and use in conjunction with the HOTS being
asked of the student to perform. Rex Heer of Iowa

State University’s Center for Excellence in Learning andTeaching has created a useful graphic (Fig. 1) that helps
us to visualize the types of activities students can doat the junctions of knowledge and thinking skills (Heer,2015).
While this graphic seems to have been made withlearners of science or engineering in mind, it is easily
adapted to the EFL context. The overall structure, however, is useful in that educators can easily identify thetypes of knowledge a unit is asking the student to use/know and the thinking skills, as in the verbs associatedwith individual HOTS, students are asked to perform
and use this knowledge to map out the unit.
The graphic created by Heer is useful as it separates out
the types of knowledge a textbook asks the student
to understand and know, The Knowledge Dimension,and gives us Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy (Krathwohl &Bloom, 2001), The Cognitive Process Dimension, as axis
that has points where they meet on the graph. These
areas of intersection allow us to map out different
activities that would activate both the correspondingknowledge dimension and cognitive dimension at thesame time. While this graph currently lists activities,
they are easily removed to either fill in with new activities that are more focused on language learning or use,

Figure 1
Original Graphic from Iowa State University

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

27

as in the case of this paper, as a mapping tool for textbook units (See Appendix Figure 1)
When we know what is in a unit, using a mapping
process that shows most aspects of what could be ina unit, we can see what is missing from a standpointof the knowledge dimension and cognitive process
dimension. This leads us to direct our attention to themissing dimensions and create a supplemental printthat can introduce new aspects of knowledge andthinking skills that the students were not exposed toduring the completion of the textbook unit. These supplemental prints can then expand on these areas while
going deeper into a subject and expanding vocabulary
items students are exposed to.

Creating an Original Supplemental
Printout
A walk-through of evaluating a textbook unit
for knowledge and cognitive skills
To best evaluate a unit, we should look at it from astandpoint of higher-order thinking skills, knowledge
utilized, and the actions performed during the unit.
Using Figure 1 from the appendix, we can mark off
where we see different knowledge and actions utilized

throughout the text. For the sake of clarity, the textbook Unlock: Reading, Writing, and Critical Thinking
1, from Cambridge University Press will be used as an
example. While this paper will focus on this textbook,this method could be applied to any textbook on themarket. From the start of a textbook, there is usuallya section that introduces the topic, either through anaudio/visual activity or through a reading/readings. In
the case of the textbook in question, it gives a photoof a crowd of people with a section entitled Learning
Objectives and an overview of what will be covered
through the unit. This section gives us the impressionthat the unit will be talking about “people”. While wecannot be certain yet, what the unit asks of the student
will become clearer as we continue through the unit.

Unit Introduction and Video Activity
The first section of the unit we can look at in this sample textbook is the unit’s introductory video section.
We are looking for keywords, grammar, and ideas fromthe activities as well as listening and watching thevideo for examples from the knowledge dimension
and cognitive dimension. After watching and looking
through the unit we can fill in where the dimensions
meet as in the example in Figure 2.

Figure 2
Unit Introduction and Video Knowledge and Skills Mapped out

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

28

From this example, we can see that the knowledge
dimensions introduced are factual, from introducing
concepts about people, their jobs, and describing
them. We also see the conceptual aspect of knowledge
in that the jobs are explained briefly which allows thestudents to understand what the people are doing.
Since the textbook introduces vocabulary, asks thestudents to answer questions, match information to
pictures, and recognize the information they hear,
we can include the cognitive dimensions in the Factual dimension of; remember, understand, apply, andevaluate. The lower-order thinking skills are always
involved in the learning of new information as we must
remember it and understand it before we can use it
to answer questions or manipulate it in various ways
in the higher-order thinking skills areas. In the conceptual knowledge dimension, we can include remember,
understand, apply, and add determine. Determine wasadded in that the students must use their understandof the information to match it to photos. This requires ahigher-order thinking skill which requires the lower-order thinking skills below it.

Reading Sections for Knowledge Expected
and Vocabulary
The next sections of the unit we can look at in thissample textbook are the unit’s reading sections. We
are looking for keywords, grammar, and what kind ofknowledge is being asked of the student. This unit has
two readings that are describing people which leads us
to believe that the unit will mostly be about describing
other people (as there was no reading that involved
the concept of “self”) and using nouns and adjectives
to complete the tasks of describing others. From thiswe can start to fill in blanks of our knowledge and cognitive dimensions on the blank graph (see appendix
Figure 1). An example of this can be seen below in Figure 3.

Figure 3
Unit Reading Section Knowledge and Skills Mapped out

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

29

The reading sections have added new areas cognitive
processes as it involves new higher-order thinking skills
from the reading sections and the questions it asks thestudents to answer. It starts to move more into moreopinion giving in the final section of the second reading
which asks students to express if they feel someone’s
life is difficult or interesting. As we continue throughthe unit, we can start to see exactly what the textbook
is asking of the students. Since the textbook has introduced new actions for the student to complete (fromHOTS verbs) we can reflect this as we map-out the unit.
At this point in the textbook, we have the knowledgeof describing people, using adjectives, talking about
jobs, and talking about family members.

Grammar Sections for Writing and Academic
Writing Skills
After finishing the Reading sections, we can look at the
Grammar for Writing and Academic Writing Skills sections to see if they are introducing new knowledge or
cognitive dimension to the textbook. From these sections we find that the textbook introduces the idea ofhome life and using adjectives for describing people’sinterests and jobs, as well as the interests and jobs of
their family members. While this is useful in the sensethat it adds to the ability of the student to complete thewriting task at the end of the unit, it does not add muchto the types of knowledge the students are asked toutilize and gain. For an example of this, you can refer toFigure 4, which integrates the Grammar for Writing andAcademic Writing Skills section’s, as well as the Writing
Task section’s, dimensions into the graph.

Figure 4
Unit Grammar Section Knowledge and Skills Mapped out

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

30

Critical Thinking Activities Help Complete thePicture of the Unit
Finally, we can look at the Critical Thinking section of
the textbook to determine if; one, it does include critical thinking skills, and two, if it adds new knowledge
or cognitive process dimensions to the textbook activities. The Critical Thinking section only asks students torecall previous information from earlier in the textbook,collect information from another person, and applythat person’s answers to the questions in the textbook.
You can see a representation of this in Figure 5.

This Critical Thinking section doesn’t include any higher-order thinking skills, much less critical thinking skills.
Thus underscores the importance of being able tolook at a textbook in a way that can determine if what
is said is being practiced, is being practiced. Since weknow that the critical thinking section, and the unit asa whole, is missing half of the knowledge dimensions,
we can now start to plan on a supplemental activity or
printout that addresses the lack of diversity in knowledge present.

Figure 5
Unit Critical Thinking Section Knowledge and Skills Mapped out

Choosing areas for creating a supplemental
activity or printout
Now that what the textbook asks the students to know
and what it expects them to do, we can start to focus
on what is not present in the unit. From the above figure, we can see that there is no procedural or metacognitive knowledge dimensions present in the unit. While
there are instances of higher-order thinking skills, there
are still many HOTS verbs left to choose from that candeepen a student’s understanding and usage skill of

the topic and vocabulary present in the unit. We now
must determine what would best allow students toboth deepen their understanding of the topic, while
giving them the opportunity to expand on the topic
as well.
For this unit, with a focus on describing others suchas family members and talking about their interestsand jobs, we can switch the focus of the subject from“others” to “self”, something that was very much lacking in the unit. To do this we could create a printout

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l31that focuses on personality types to give the student
new information that is both connected to the topic in
the unit, as well as expands the topic with information
about personalities that deepens their ability to evaluate themselves and others. A representation of this on
our evaluation graph can be seen in Figure 6.

This adds a sense of critical thinking skills to the printout, which was absent in the unit, so students can thenapply the information in the textbook in a new way. For
an example of a printout created to supplement theunit evaluated in this paper, please refer to Appendix
Figure 2.

Figure 6
Supplemental Knowledge and Skills Chosen

The example printout was created for a private university’s unified English language curriculum where all
first-year basic level students used the textbook evaluated in this paper. As one goes through the printout
you can see how it changes the focus of the textbook
from the very beginning by asking about their (the student’s) likes and dislikes (Figure 7). This is to put the student in the mode of using metacognitive knowledge,
again something that was not present in the textbook
proper. As this is a printout that hopes to encourage
critical thinking as well as higher-order thinking skills,
all questions about the student are expected to be
expounded upon with a rationale so the students get
into the habit of justifying their opinions in the class.
The next section of the unit starts to introduce a newarea of information with a move toward personality
classifications. This was chosen to expand upon the
textbook while giving the students a higher-order

thinking skill to further apply to the topic of “people”
in the unit. Starting with them evaluating themselves
and explaining what type of person they think they arewhile, of course, justifying their answer with an example. We then have them move into categories of personalities for them to learn about and apply to themselves. Since this was for a basic level class, a simplified
version of personality types was used. This section
introduces new vocabulary and ideas for the student
to gain as well as, towards the end of the printout, gives
them the opportunity to categorize themselves into apersonality type and then justify their answer with areason they think they fit into that personality category(Figure 8).

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

32

Figure 7
Printout Skills Warm-up Section

Figure 8
Printout Main Practice Section

Finally, as one part of thinking critically is being able tolook at a problem from multiple sides, we encouraged
students to think about the topic from another angle(Figure 9) by explaining what type of personality theywould not like to be and why they felt this way aboutthat personality type.

Interestingly, in using this printout, some students had
the same answer for their personality type and the personality type they did not want to be. Many explanations from the students exhibited a desire to change
themselves in some way or to better give themselvesopportunities to do different things in the future. It was

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

33

the hope of the author that this print would allow students to deepen their understanding of the topic while
expanding both the Knowledge Dimension and Cogni-

tive Processes Dimension to expose students to further
higher-order thinking skills, types of knowledge, andcritical thinking skills.

Figure 9
Printout Final Practice Section

Conclusion
It is important for an educator to be aware just whata textbook is asking of their students. By adopting a“lens” of evaluation and the deconstruction of knowledge and skills utilized in a textbook, we are better able
to design supplemental prints or activities that expand
the topic and thinking skills of students. By breaking
down a unit’s sections and identifying the knowledge
dimensions and cognitive dimensions used, we canthen see what is missing and design a supplement thatbest exposes students to deeper thinking and more
knowledge types. It is the hope of the author that thisway of approaching a unit will help educators better
serve their students as well as serve as a foundation for
creativeness in educational activities that give students
the most exposure to the myriad of knowledge andskills in the world. No textbook can be perfect, but we
can help to expand our students’ horizons in tandemwith the textbooks we are required to use.

Krathwohl, and Benjamin Samuel Bloom. A
Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, andAssessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomyof Educational Objectives. Complete ed. New
York: Longman, 2001.
MEXT. (2011, February 24). English Translation of
the MEXT Guidelines. AJET. http://ajet.net/
announcement/english-translation-of-themext-guidelines/
Nodirovna, N. N., Temirovna, T. M., Principles
of designing lesson plans for teaching
ESL or EFL. Eurasian Journal of Learning
and Academic Teaching, (5), pp.10-12.
Retrieved on August 20, 2022 from https://
geniusjournals.org/

References

Pikhart, M., & Klímová, B. (2019). Utilization of
linguistic aspects of Bloom’s taxonomy inblended learning. Education Sciences, 9(3),235-243. doi:10.3390/educsci9030235

Heer, R. (2015). A Model of Learning Objectives.
Center for Excellence in Learning andTeaching, Iowa State University. from https://www.celt.iastate.edu/

Susanti, A. & Lailiyah, S. (2022). Improving EFL
Students’ Higher Order Thinking Skills
Using Reading Strategies. doi:10.2991/
assehr.k.211223.168.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

34

Tsuda, A., Kinshi K., & Valvona, C., (2021).
Collaborative Learning in Higher Educationin Japan: Toward an Intercollegiate Program.
PanSIG 2021 Journal, From: https://pansig.
org/

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

35

A Tale of Two Syllabi: Towards Theory Driven CLIL Courses

Stephen McNamara

Konan University

Michael Joshua Griffiths
Konan University

Abstract
The importance of content and language integrated learning (CLIL) theories is increasing in the Japanese tertiary sector as
CLIL courses proliferate, often driven by teacher interest. Additionally, in undergraduate English language programmes, teachers may be tasked with developing content-focused courses that are not explicitly described as CLIL, but nonetheless requirecontent to drive language learning. These courses often do not always express designs that are both theoretically driven andcontext-responsive. This article will focus on two syllabi taught in the same context and explain how their design has been
guided by theories on three levels: educational and linguistic philosophies that underpin CLIL; the conditions of CLIL seen to beadvantageous to language improvement explained via second language acquisition theory; and numerous CLIL-relevant conceptual frameworks. The authors examine theoretical similarities and differences between the two syllabi as a way of illustrating
the diversity of CLIL implementation in the Japanese tertiary sector.

日本語概要
教師のCLILコースへの関心の高まりにより、日本の大学では、内容言語統合型学習（CLIL）理論の重要性が増してきています。また、大学レベルの英語プログラムでは、多くの教師がCLILではないカリキュラムでコースを教えています。しかし、これらのコースにおいても、コンテンツ学習と言語学習が同時に行われる必要があります。これらのコースでは、時に理論を用いてデザインされておらず、状況に応じて必要とされるものに対処するためのシステムを備えていないことがあります。本稿では、同じ大学で同じ要件で教えられている
2つのシラバスを題材にし、2つのシラバスが3つのレベルの理論をどのように用いているかを説明します。3つのレベルとは、教育理論と言語理論、言語学習に焦点を当てたCLIL理論、そして様々なCLIL理論です。ここでは、この2つのコースの類似点と相違点を検証します。類似点と相違点から、日本の大学におけるCLILのあり方が多様であることがわかります。

Rising interest in and implementation of Content andLanguage Integrated Learning (CLIL) has been a noteworthy trend over recent decades. Described as significant and growing exponentially, this trend belies thecomplexity of CLIL and its various learning contexts.
Inception and spread of CLIL began in Europe in the
1990s whereas experimentation in Japan likely occurredfrom the late 2000s onwards (Tsuchiya & Pérez Murillo,2019). Thus, several differences are seemingly present in
how CLIL has manifested in these two regions. Europe
has mostly followed a top-down development tract,
often government-led, although bottom-up development instances also occurred. In contrast, Japan has
followed a distinctly bottom-up developmental tract(Ikeda, 2019); with tertiary-level implementation proliferated by institutions (Hashimoto & Glasgow, 2019;

Hemmi & Banegas, 2021) and individual practitioners(Griffiths, 2021). Hence, from the authors’ perspective,
tertiary-level CLIL implementation in Japan shows considerable variety.
The prevalent definition of CLIL is from Coyle et al.
(2010) who describe it as: “a dual-focused educational
approach in which an additional language is used forthe learning and teaching of both [emphasis added]
content and language” (p. 1). This oft cited definition
details the conceptual level but not syllabus level. The
authors’ believe Brown and Bradford (2017) provide
useful details by stating CLIL is: “an approach to education that integrates language and content learning;planning for, fostering, and assessing both [emphasis
added], though the focus may shift from one to the

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l36other” (p. 331). Moreover, it notes the content and language focus of CLIL can vary dependent on contextual
or learning needs. Thus, variant forms of learning andteaching within this approach are possible. These variants are often locatable on a continuum ranging from
Hard CLIL, which is more content focused, to Soft CLIL,
which is more language focused (Ball, 2015). The syllabi
described in this paper are two such examples of thevariation within CLIL yet are in the same context. Bothsyllabi are single-semester content-focused courses,
and have been taught at a medium-sized, private university in western Japan within a language faculty. Students in these courses have completed a year of compulsory academic English and sit within a CEFR A2-B2
range. The intent of this article is to provide examples
of how these courses have been conceptualized andimplemented, related to the relevant theoretical andphilosophical underpinnings.

Philosophical and Theoretical Underpinnings in CLIL
Despite implementation variation, consideration to
the philosophical and theoretical features of CLIL
is required. Unfortunately, explicit statements onthese connections are often absent from practitioner
accounts of syllabus design. Gabillon (2020) says: “…
[CLIL] literature has rarely reported a direct link to thetheory and conceptualization of CLIL as an approach”(p. 100). What follows is a summary of considerationsin this space when designing and implementing a CLIL
syllabus.

Educational Philosophy and CLIL
CLIL is linked to the influential works of Dewey, Piaget,
and Vygotsky. These teaching and learning approaches
are generally referred to as constructivism and sociocultural theory (Coyle et al., 2010; Gabillon, 2020). The
constructivist notions view that active construction ofknowledge with peers is central to learning. The sociocultural notions view that social interaction between
a novice learner and someone or something moreexpert is required. This is reflected in the interactive,
mediated, and student-led activities seen essential to
CLIL. The expert sources may be peers, teachers, ormaterials. Sociocultural theory also provides the con-

cept of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) which
is an optimal learning space spanning between wherea learner is cognitively capable on their own and where
cognitively capable with added support by others(Vygotsky, 1978). Operationalizing these underpinnings in CLIL implementation and practice is crucial.
As Ioannou Georgiou (2012) states: CLIL has “a focus on
the learners’ development and construction of knowledge by means of a dialogic relationship with theirpeers, their teacher, and the materials” (p. 496).

Language Theory and CLIL: Functionalism
The basis of this theory is the understanding that themain purpose of language is to communicate meaning,
and therefore the form of language can be understoodby analyzing what necessitates its use (Butler, 2003
Thompson, 2013). Further, Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), a functional methodology, views language as
the main semiotic medium of humans to address social
needs, to transmit, receive, and construct meaning
through interaction (Coffin, 2017). From a functional
perspective, society and culture ultimately decides thenecessities of language use, and this goes on to control
how and what is said (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004).
Context is ultimately a product of society, and passed
to teachers through ministries and institutions. Tertiary
teachers in Japan share these contextual influences,
but they control the educational contexts in the classroom. In this way, educators shape immediate contexts to create the linguistic needs that students satisfy through language use, the form of their language
allows meaning to be communicated. In this way inthe functional model of language, meaning, form, andcontext intersect. This makes functionalism an essential understanding for CLIL syllabus development,
where content meanings and language acquisition
are interdependent. In CLIL, this manifests as teachersrequiring content, often disciplinary specific content,
to be learnt, which therefore requires authenticallyfunctional language use. Teachers can determine language needed to be literate in content domains, andtherefore in syllabus design are able to predict which
activities will allow these functions.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

37Conditions Advantageous to Language Improvement in CLIL
In line with Second Language Acquisition views on language improvement, CLIL can be described as meaning-focused, where learners make meaning (constructknowledge) from cognitively challenging input andinteraction with other learners thus ouput reflects their
meaning-making attempts. Aside from this meaning-focus, CLIL allows the possibility for a concurrent
focus on form. Long (2015) described this as a possible
third way when discussing how task-based learning
provides the same conditions, in that a singular focus
on either meaning or form is eschewed, thus moving
beyond the shortcomings of each. Furthermore, negotiation of meaning amongst learners provides opportunities for repeating, restructuring, and rephrasing of
language enabling improvement via learner-learnercommunication.

Course 1

Specific Frameworks
The 4Cs framework from Coyle et al. (2010) is an
acknowledged conceptualization designed for wholistic understanding of CLIL (Gabillon, 2020; Meyer, 2010;
Pinner, 2013). The framework describes the interconnection and integration of four main elements of CLIL:
content (the subject for learning), communication (language in the learning process), cognition (thinking andlearning processes), and culture (intercultural understanding). Within CLIL contexts these components areintegrated to promote the teaching and learning ofcontent and language (Coyle et al., 2010). For Course
One, overall design was guided by this framework butothers were also incorporated for further integrationand depth of planning.
Language in CLIL is often understood by viewing development as moving towards more academic forms andconceptualized via the notions of Basic InterpersonalCommunication Skills (BICS) and Cognitive Academic
Language Proficiency (CALP) (Cummins, 1979). The
former describes conversational fluency whereas thelatter describes language required to understand andexpress, in spoken or written form, concepts and ideas
in educational settings. Cognitive development in CLIL
is understood by a movement from lower- to higher-or-

der thinking. This movement is reflected through content complexity and task difficulty. Understanding culture by experiencing CLIL is both an approach benefit
and a Course One goal. Improvement and interaction
amongst other Cs (content, communication, cognition)
facilitates intercultural understanding (culture). That is,the construction of content knowledge and language,
and associated communication around both lead todeeper thinking and learning thus enabling the possibility of better intercultural understanding. Reflection
on learners’ selves and own culture further enhance
this understanding.
The language triptych is a way of understanding the linguistic demands in CLIL and combines three essential
interrelated aspects (Coyle et al., 2010). Cataloguing thelanguage demands of each unit via these three aspects
allows for systematic expression in course design. The
three aspects are as follows. Language of learning centers on language used for accessing a field, subject,
theme or topic, and is generally considered to be content-related terminology and longer lexical units. Once
identified decisions are made whether to pre-teach,teach in context, gloss or overlook each item. Language
for learning focuses on language needed to operate ina learning environment where a range of speech acts
are necessary. Planned, transparent support and scaffolding for this language allows a degree of guidancein terms of what language learners are encouraged touse and a degree of control over removing scaffolding. Language through learning highlights language
needed when learners articulate understanding andthinking, especially at deeper levels. This aspect needs
to be observed in classroom discourse then captured
and recycled to facilitate learning.
Cummins’ matrix (1984) is a cognitive framework often
adapted for CLIL contexts (Coyle et al., 2010). The vertical axis focuses on the cognitive demands while thehorizontal axis of the matrix focuses on the linguistic
demands of CLIL. A lesson or unit will move from quadrant 1 to 3 thus encapsulating linguistic and cognitive
development. However, Coyle et al. (2010) note thisis not an immediately attained outcome as extended
learning in quadrant 2 will “move the learner systematically over a period of time to quadrant 3” (p.44).
Instead, quadrant 3 can be viewed as an idealized goal.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

38Progress across the quadrants can be described acrosslessons, units and entire courses.

Each unit follows a three-lesson cycle modelled on the
aforementioned Cummins’ matrix. Units begin withvocabulary and lexis learning as homework. The first
lesson of each unit includes simpler, shorter texts andtasks. The second lesson builds upon the language andconcepts learnt in the first lesson and include longer
more complex texts and tasks. The more challenging
third lesson includes an analysis task where learners
apply unit concepts to authentic texts and videos or
corpus data and concludes with a series of expository
writing tasks. This unit cycle is followed twice before
any major assessment. Unit progression across Course
One moves from more concrete or observable themes
and content to more abstract or hidden ones. Thus,
later course stages require more complex languageand deeper thinking. The careful and considered staging and sequencing of CLIL course elements allows
for progression through Cummins’ matrix quadrants(Banegas, 2010). The matrix and sequencing wasapplied to all lessons, units, and Course One as a whole,and is also prominent in Course Two.

The nature of AusE content and unavailability of learnerappropriate material meant a bottom-up approach tocourse development was required, but a strong linkto the field was maintained by utilizing research andcorpus data. Texts were written following Moore andLorenzo’s (2007) discursification approach so they
matched the linguistic and cognitive abilities of thelearners at particular points in the unit or course cycle.
Support for language learning in Course One was provided in several ways: essential vocabulary and lexis
was identified and incorporated into the unit preparation homework or taught within texts or tasks, non-essential vocabulary that impedes comprehension was
glossed, language frames were provided alongsidetasks allowing learner deployment as needed. Support for content learning was provided in two modes:
planned (visual prompts and organizers to aid understanding, or additional texts or videos) and unplanned(teacher explanations and additional questions toguide content understanding via classroom discourse).
In Course One, four assessment methods were utilized spanning all 4Cs (Coyle et al., 2010) assessing
content and language in some manner: unit quizzes,
research analysis reports, learner participation, Self-Access Learning Centre tasks. The quizzes assessed unit
vocabulary and lexis, and recall of facts and concepts(content, communication). The reports required thelearners to undertake analysis of authentic materials
based on two prior unit themes and were graded on
depth of analysis, understanding and use of unit content and language, and appropriateness and accuracyof writing (content, communication, cognition, culture)
and were preceded by preparatory guided homeworktasks on analysis and report writing. Learner participation was based on homework and classroom taskcompletion, and contribution to meaning-making andnegotiation during said tasks (content, communication, culture). The self-access tasks were designed tofoster autonomous learning outside the classroom andprovide broader cultural understanding of Australia via
additional topic areas not in the course materials (cognition, culture).

Manifestation of Course and Materials

Course 2

Scope and Sequence
Course One is a 15-week course with institutional aims
of improving language proficiency and intercultural
understanding via study on Australia. Thus, the course
focuses on understanding Australian culture throughAustralian English (AusE) and sits within the intercultural studies discipline. Published studies and a selection of reference books were consulted in order todetermine what themes and content focus areas would
suitable. Four themes, each with two content foci, werechosen based upon their frequency in literature andtheir perceived markedness in AusE, and thus cultural
importance (Appendix A). Extracts from six corpora
and three dictionaries were also utilized in the content
selection process with extracts included in the scoping and sequencing stages, and subsequent materials
design stages.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l39Specific Frameworks
Course 2’s content is modern Western art history, it is in
its seventh iteration, and is taught at the same institution as Course 1. The design of Course 2 has three controlling influences: the institution’s curriculum objectives; media-arts curriculum objectives provided by theAustralian government; and Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain (ACARA, 2020; Anderson
et al., 2001). The main theoretical premise of Course 2 isthat cognition is central to the integration of language
and content. Therefore, this course begins with cognition as the ordinate aspect in the syllabus design andallows the 4Cs (content, communication, culture) to beillustrated. Thought is how students process content,these thoughts are constructed through language
within the mind, and then transmitted through meaningful language (Dalton-Puffer, 2016; Thompson, 2013).
To illustrate: a course on visual history would require
students develop their abilities to describe works ofart, and this is a learning that necessitates both thought
and speech competencies in order to communicate
meanings. Further, the dialogic expression of these
meanings allows for co-construction of knowledge
between learners. This mirrors the language triptych:functional language is needed to interact (language
for learning); language in the mind is used to processcontent (language of learning); and, less represented
in Course 2’s design, the language learned throughlearner needs (Coyle et al., 2010).
The functional model of language indicates that certain subject disciplines will produce certain patternedways of speaking, and by extension, patterned manners of thought (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004; Morton,2020). In CLIL literature, scholars such as Morton (2020)
define disciplinary literacy as specific ways of thinking
contained by an academic field. While an SFL perspective may view these staged interactions of speech as
genres, Coffin (2017) sees them as micro-genres, as
they apply to the smaller speech-act level of language,
rather than the entire interactive repertoire of a subject. Dalton-Puffer (2013, 2016) sees these speech acts
as simple or episodic combinations of communicative
intent, and offers a construct for categorising them andtheir cognitive analogues, allowing domain-specificpatterns of cognition to be identified. This has been

helpful in framing the theory for designing Course 2,
but making epistemological claims on what should
constitute the ideal literacy of any particular discipline
is outside the bounds of her construct.
Therefore, it was necessary to identify the thought competencies specific to the discipline while concurrently
satisfying the institution’s linguistic and content-based
objectives for the course. The subject-specific competencies were taken from the publicly available Australian secondary media-arts curriculum (ACARA, 2020),
the institutional objectives came directly from the university. The Australian curricular objectives are written
as competencies rather than items mirroring the cognitive theories above, but they do not designate linguistic outcomes, allowing a practitioner the flexibility
to decide. These competencies can be understood as
speech acts with inherent communicative intents.
There are multiple media-arts curricular objectives
offered by the Australian government, and they become
more sophisticated as they spiral up through student
grades, implying a cognitive hierarchy. The university
objectives are general, allowing the flexibility that promotes the ground-up approaches to CLIL mentioned
previously in this paper. First, the course must containan emphasis on micro-skills associated with EAP. This
was taken to be a linguistic objective, and the items
themselves were recycled from pre-requisite courses
in the programme. Further, this was taken to imply
CALP as an objective, as it frequently is in EAP courses,
and this implies progressively more difficult cognitive
operations for academic language. The second institutional objective is to examine issues related to globalism from various perspectives. This echoes the general
MEXT intercultural goals for the language curriculum(MEXT, 2020), although unlike MEXT, it does not conflate language and intercultural content, it states acontent focus, which in this model of syllabus design
implies cognition is required to process ideas. The subject choice of Western art history influenced decisions
on which Australian media-arts competencies would
be most beneficial in promoting the institution’s goals.
These were then filtered through Bloom’s Taxonomy of
the Cognitive Domain (Bloom’s). The exact objectives
designated to be used were selected intuitively anditeratively due to the necessity of balancing them with

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l40institution’s objectives as well as attempting to locate
them within Bloom’s Taxonomy. Figure 1 gives an overview of this process.

Figure 1
Objectives and Bloom’s Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain

Scope and Sequence
Course 2 progresses for 14 weeks, following a fourweek activity cycle, with the remaining lesson reserved
for administration and contingencies. The content
moves chronologically through Western art periods ofthe modern era. Refer to Appendix B for the scope andsequence document. Bloom’s Taxonomy was used as
the controlling framework for sequencing cognition.
Bloom’s Taxonomy is a ubiquitous, 6-strata hierarchical thinking skills scheme, which well reflects boththe basal and meso-theoretical underpinnings of thecurriculum and syllabus. A premise of Bloom’s Taxonomy is that learners require competency in lower-order thinking skills in order to use the higher-orders,
and, the language is controlled by the cognitive progression: it takes more complex thought to produce
more complex speech (Anderson et al., 2001). Course
2 has a new Bloom’s foci roughly every two weeks,

ensuring that students have progressively more challenging cognitive and linguistic requirements. Bloom’s
also allows cognitive demands to be closer to students’
ZPD. This is done both reactively within lessons, andin reflective phases of the design process. A further
advantage of applying Bloom’s is that in combination with content choices, it allows for controlling therecommended progression within Cummins’ matrix(Coyle et. al., 2010). This is well matched with the cognitive progression seen in the Australian Media-arts
curriculum. There is some debate over whether educational cognition actually functions in this hierarchicalmanner, and for this reason the scheme was applied
as a heuristic (Dalton-Puffer, 2013). A deliberately fuzzy
application of Bloom’s means that as an organising
construct it can be more flexible, allowing attention to
be paid to other objectives. The content itself, modern
art, arguably moves from the representational towards
abstract as it progresses chronologically, and this is fortunate coincidence in how it can be seen as mimicking

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

41

the increasing abstraction of the Bloom’s taxonomical
descriptors.
The actual items of art history content come frommajor art institutions’ websites and major publisher’s
art history textbooks. This language is processed ina similar manner to Course One before it is put intomaterials, and it is subordinate to the other objectives
and Bloom’s. Students are assessed in presentations
in weeks four, eight and 14. Although weekly student
homework does contain some recall of subject-specific lexical items, the course leans towards assessing
function over form. In presentations and most othersubmissions, answers are judged correct if they show
evidence of applying the cognitive skill to content, andsurface-level linguistic errors are often disregarded.
See Appendix C for a demonstration of how objectives
are operationalised into activities.

Discussion
In this paper, theoretical underpinnings of two syllabi
have been examined in detail. The specific differencesin theoretical orientation are that Course 1 begins withthe 4Cs framework and adds further refinements, while
Course 2’s primary theoretical focus is discipline-specific cognition. In terms of the Hard-Soft CLIL continuity (Ball, 2015), Course 1 is softer. This can be seen
with its clearer focus on language form, its utilizationof Long’s (2015) third way, and evidenced in its assessments. This may also be a product of its content choice
being a highly linguistic theme. Course 2 operates on
the harder side of the continuum, with content andcognition ordering language, and with linguistic form
subordinate to function. However, this is tempered bybeing a course within a language curriculum. Although
there are identifiable differences in the courses, they
are both able to be located relative to each other, as
well as to fundamental CLIL frameworks. Both courses
occur in the same national and institutional situation,
and with cohorts of very similar consistency, they exist
in almost identical contexts. The main contextuallydifferentiating feature of the courses is that they weredeveloped by different teachers, therefore, the choicesof teachers regarding CLIL can be divergent evenwhen operating in very similar contextual bounds. The
authors suggest that implementations of CLIL are not

only highly variable dependent on context but also
dependent on practitioners, and the content choices
they have made. The differences between how teachers develop a course seem likely to be related to theirbeliefs and attitudes, and these related to the previous
educational and professional experiences. However,this discrepancy could also be accounted for by moremundane differences, such as time available to dedicate to course development.
Despite their differences, both courses have legitimate
claims to being CLIL. Both have theoretically informed
stances, and this allows coherence in curriculum, as
well as more likelihood of integration. We refer you tofurther reading that could be influential in framing yourapproach to CLIL syllabus design (Coyle et al., 2010;
Hemmi & Banegas, 2021; Ikeda et al., 2022; Llinares &Morton, 2017; Tsuchiya & Pérez Murillo, 2019).

References
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting
Authority (ACARA). The Australian Curriculum. Retrieved September 01, 2020: https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S.
(2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching,
and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, New
York: Longman.
Ball, P. (2015). CLIL, English teachers and thethree dimensions of content. Modern English
Teacher, 24(2), 15–20.
Banegas, D. L. (2010). Three frameworks for developing CLIL materials. Folio, 14(2), 28–30.
Brown, H., & Bradford, A. (2017). EMI, CLIL, &CBI: Differing approaches and goals. Transformation in Language Education. Tokyo,
Japan: JALT, August, 328–334.
Butler, C. S. (2003). Structure and function. A
guide to three major structural-functional
theories. Part 1: The simplex clause. John
Benjamins Publishing Company

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l42Coffin, C. (2017). Introduction to part ii: systemic
functional linguistics: a theory for integrating
content-language learning (CLL). In Llinares,
A. & Morton (Eds.), Applied Linguistics Perspectives on CLIL (pp. 91–103). Amsterdam,
Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL:
Content and language integrated learning.
Cambridge, United Kingdom. Cambridge
University Press.
Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence,
the optimum age question and some othermatters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19,
121–129.
Cummins, J. (1984). Wanted: A theoretical framework for relating language proficiency to academic achievement among bilingual students.
In C. Rivera (Ed.), Language proficiency andacademic achievement (pp. 2–19). Clevedon,
England: Multilingual Matters.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2013). A construct of cognitive
discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied
Linguistics, 1(2), 216-253.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2016). Cognitive discourse functions: Specifying an integrative interdisciplinary construct. In T. Nikula, E. Dafouz-Milne,
P.Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising
Integration in CLIL and Multilingual Education (pp. 29–54). Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit:
Multilingual Matters.
Gabillon, Z. (2020). Revisiting CLIL: Background,pedagogy, and theoretical underpinnings.
Contextes et Didactiques, 15, 88-116.
Griffiths, M. (2021). Mapping the terrain of content
and language integrated learning in Japanese
universities. The Journal of the Japan CLIL
Pedagogy Association, 3, 110-133.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.
(2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional
grammar (Fourth Ed.). London, United Kingdom. Routledge.

Hashimoto, K., & Glasgow, G. P. (2019). CLIL for
who? Commodification of english-medium
courses in Japan’s higher education. In I.
Liyanage & T. Walker (Eds.), Multilingual Education Yearbook 2019: Media of Instruction& Multilingual Settings (pp. 103–119). Cham,
Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
Hemmi, C., & Banegas, D. L. (2021). International
Perspectives on CLIL. Cham, Switzerland.
Palgrave Macmillan.
Ikeda, M. (2019). CLIL in comparison with PPP: A
revolution in ELT by competency-based language education. In H. Reinders, S. Ryan, &S. Nakamura (Eds.), Innovation in Language
Teaching and Learning: The Case of Japan(pp. 23–45). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Ioannou Georgiou, S. (2012). Reviewing the puzzleof CLIL. ELT Journal, 66(4), 495–504.
Llinares, A. & Morton, T. (2017). Applied Linguistics
Perspectives on CLIL. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Long, M. (2015). SLA and the fundamental LT
divide. In Second Language Acquisition andTask-based Language Teaching (pp. 16–29).
Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.
McNamara, S. (2016) A CLIL approach to syllabus
development utilizing taxonomies from thecognitive domain. Kwansei Gakuin University
Journal of Policy Studies, 52, 25-30.
Meyer, O. (2010). Towards quality-CLIL: Successful planning and teaching strategies. Pulso:
Revista de Educación, 33, 11–29.
Moore, P., & Lorenzo, F. (2007). Adapting authentic
materials for CLIL classrooms: An empirical
study. Vienna English Working Papers, 16(3),28–35.
Morton, T. (2020). A bridge between content,
literacy and language for teaching and assessment in CLIL. CLIL Journal of Innovation
and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural
Education, 3(1), 7–17.
Pinner, R. (2013). Authenticity of purpose: CLIL
as a way to bring meaning and motivation
into EFL contexts. Asian EFL Journal, 15(4),138–159.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

43Thompson, G. (2013). Introducing Functional
Grammar (3rd ed.). London, United Kingdom:
Routledge.
Tsuchiya, K. & Pérez Murillo, M.D. (2019). Content
and Language Integrated Learning in Spanish and Japanese Contexts: Policy, Practiceand Pedagogy. Cham, Switzerland: Springer
International Publishing.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. In M. Cole,V. John-Steiner, S. Scribener, & E. Souberman (Eds.). Cambridge, England: Harvard
University Press

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l44Appendices
Appendix A.
Scope and Sequence of Course One
Lesson
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Unit
Introduction

Content
The Story of Australian English - Geography, history,
language, culture

1 Phonology

Characteristics of AusE vowels
AusE Accents - Broad, general, cultivated
AusE Accent Analysis
Words connected to Australian culture - Mate, bloody,larrikin, bogan
Hypocoristics - Mozzies, prezzie, veggies, Maccas
Transcript analysis
Narrative Tenses - Historical present

2 Lexicon

3 Grammar

4 Discourse

Final Lesson

Differences to other English varieties - Quasi modals
Transcript analysis
Similarities to American English - ‘Like’ as a discourse
markerUniqueness of AusE - Final particle ‘but’
Transcript analysis
Future Directions of Australian English

Assessment

Unit 1 Quiz

Unit 2 Quiz
Accent/Lexicon Analysis
Unit 3 Quiz

Unit 4 Quiz
Grammar/
Discourse
Analysis

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l45Appendix B.
Scope and Sequence of Course Two, Adapted from McNamara (2016)

1

Bloom’s Descriptor
Evaluation

Art Period/
Content
All

Lesson Objectives

Language Objective.

Intros; diagnostics

Conversation; visualvocabulary
Adjs., nouns of shapeand size
Adj. lists; prepositions oflocation
Sequencing language;
prepositions of time2

Knowledge

Realism3Knowledge

4Comprehension

5

Comprehension

6

Application

7

Application

8

All Prior

9

Analysis10

Analysis

11

Synthesis

12Synthesis

13

Evaluation

Pop

Assessing success of
works

14

Evaluation

All

Assessment; reflection All

Describing colour andline
Impressionism Describing colour andline
Post-impresSummarizing andsionism
rephrasing historicalcontent
Fauvism
Biography genre; sum- Sequencing language;
marising biography
biography specific language
Futurism
Discussing principles
Imperativesof political history(Fascism)
CubismInstructing on princiImperatives
ples of differing visualperspective
Presentation/ Assess- All
ment
Expressionism Comparing political
Comparatives: adjs.
perspectives
Dada
Comparing Social per- Comparatives: adjs.,
spectivesand sentences.
Surrealism
Predicting impact;
Conditionals; modals
speculating on mean- (future)
ing
Abstract ExSpeculating on mean- Hedging language;
pressionism
ing
modals (might)

Hedging; declaratives

Cycle
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3

None

None

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l46Appendix C.
Course Two: Content, Cognition, Objectives, and Activity Planner

Content

Realism (late 19c)

FauvismMedia-Arts Descriptor“Make observations
on visual aspects ofmedia”
Knowledge: reportwhat you havelearnedDescribing colour
and line: colour
adjs.; prepositions oflocations; adj. lists
Describe the palette.
Where is his left
hand?

“build on understandings on therole of artists..”
Comprehension:summarise andrephrase content
Sequencing language; biography
specific language

Bloom’s descriptor
Language Objs.

Prompt example

What happened in
Matisse’ life before
and after this waspainted

Italo-futurism, Fascism (1909-1944)“consider context
that creates process
in art production”
Application: discussrules and principles
Procedural language; giving instructions; imperatives
What are the principles of how this work
was constructed?
Tell me how to makethis art.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

47Adapting a Model UN for High School EFL Students of Various Levels

Edward Escobar

Kyoto Gaidai Nishi High School
Abstract

Model United Nations has been growing in popularity within the last 32 years as an active-learning educational conference forhigh school students in Japan for the purpose of raising awareness in global issues as well as allowing participants to convey
creative, logical, and critical output to formulate solutions to world problems in a L2 environment. Many schools are taking interest in either participating in or hosting a Model UN for their students; however, as a Model UN is mostly conducted in English,
teachers may question whether their students can successfully participate due to either low EFL levels or a lack of understanding in global issues. This paper utilizes ongoing action research to answer questions pertaining to how a Model UN can beadapted for high school students of various EFL levels to participate, especially regarding what topics to choose for debate anddiscussion, as well as how to prepare students for successfully participating in a Model UN through simple scaffolding techniques and idea formation, despite their EFL levels.

日本語概要
模擬国連は、グローバルな問題に対する意識を高め、L2環境で世界の問題を解決するために創造的、論理的、批判的にアウトプットすることを目的とした、日本の高校生のためのアクティブラーニング型教育会議として、この32年間で成長を続けています。しかし、模擬国
連はほとんど英語で行われるため、教師は生徒のEFLレベルが低い、あるいはグローバルな問題に対する理解が不足しているために、生徒がうまく参加できるかどうか疑問に思うかもしれない。この論文では、現在進行中のアクションリサーチを利用して、様々なEFLレ
ベルの高校生が参加できるように模擬国連をどのように適応させることができるか、特にディベートやディスカッションのためにどんなトピックを選択するか、また、EFLレベルにもかかわらず、簡単な足場技術とアイデア形成を通して模擬国連にうまく参加できるように生徒をどう準備するか、に関する疑問に答えている。

Model United Nations, also referred to as Model UN or
MUN, “…is an extracurricular activity in which students
role play delegates to the United Nations (UN), simulate UN committees, and learn about diplomacy, international relations, current world issues, and the UN
itself” (United Nations, 2020, p. 8). It is also described
as an active, project-based learning experience that
integrates both content and language to introduce realworld scenarios for students to discuss while implementing creative, logical, and critical thinking skills tocome up with solutions to problems (Adamson, 2013;
Escobar & McGregor, 2021; Fast, 2012; Zenuk-Nishide,2014). To ask secondary EFL learners to participate in an
MUN conference can seem like a monumental task; forthe students who may or may not have the proficiency
level to engage meaningfully, for the teacher who may
or may not have the experience in preparing students,
or for the conference host who may or may not under-

stand how to make sure every participant has a meaningful experience despite the various English levels
represented.
This paper outlines several strategies that may be used
to address the three concerns mentioned from two
perspectives: 1) that of an MUN conference host and2) that of a teacher preparing students to participate.
The strategies are empirical and are being presented
without test controls. Though subjective, this methodof research, described as ongoing empirical action
research, is argued to “…lead to the gradual development of generally valid principles…” (Marrow, 1969, as
cited in Adleman, 1993). As such, these strategies have
gradually developed (and continue to be developed)
using 32 years of first-hand conference and classroom
observations, discussions with both student participants and teachers, and feedback by the Kansai HighP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

48

School Model United Nations Organizing Committee,
whose task is to both organize the annual Kansai HighSchool Model United Nations (KHSMUN) conference
and prepare students to participate in the conference.

to decide an agenda for the conference, and 2) how tobalance the means of student participation.

The MUN conference hostAn agenda is a theme that is assigned to an MUN, allowing students to participate with similar knowledge
gained from prior studies leading up to the conference.
Most MUNs hosted around the world may simulate avariety of committees within the United Nations, witheach committee focusing on specific topics related toan agenda that is adopted by the General Assembly atthe opening of the meeting. The KHSMUN announces
the agenda and its committee topics about 6 months
prior to the conference to assure student participants,
especially participants with lower proficiency levels,
arrive with the knowledge and resources to participate
meaningfully.

English is the Lingua Franca of most MUNs hosted
around the world (Tatsuki & Zenuk-Nishide, 2018),
meaning that regardless of the participants’ L1, English
is the dominant language for communication. As
such, when hosting an MUN for secondary EFL learners, understanding the proficiency level of the participants can lead to a meaningful experience. In research
regarding the implementation of the United Nations’Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) content into
EFL education, Jodoin & Singer (2019, p. 56) note thatengagement in such content “...work[s] best with students at an intermediate, or at least B1 level on the[CEFR].” However, based on a survey conducted in 2017by the Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports,
Science and Technology (MEXT), results revealed thatan overwhelming majority of year 3 high school students carried a proficiency level under A2 (文部科学,2018). Understanding the students’ proficiency levels
is crucial because when analyzing the CEFR rubric, A2
definitions include phrases such as “slow and clear”,“simple English”, and “basic everyday vocabulary andexpressions” (CEFR-J). An MUN conference is noneof these. All student participants will be engaging in
discussions within various committees, some will beassigned leadership roles, and most of what takes place
will include unscripted or impromptu dialog in English.
Such an environment may seem overwhelming andcomplicated for EFL learners, but as Corpuz (2021, p.
12) argues, “[the] absence of an environment where
L2 is required to be spoken is a significant concern…
because, without its presence, the students fail to distinguish the importance of learning the language.”
From this analysis of student proficiency levels, what
decisions or strategies can institutions looking to hostan MUN conference, whether as an in-house projector as a multi-school event, do that allows secondary
EFL learners of various proficiency levels to participate
meaningfully? This section will explore two aspects tobe considered in hosting an MUN conference: 1) how

Deciding an agenda

Regarding choosing an agenda, it is important to
explore and choose an agenda that is not only relatable or has a meaningful connection to the conference
participants (Hyland, 2002) but can also be researchedin both the target language L2 and in their L1.
The first question to consider is whether an agenda
is relatable to the conference participants. There area large amount of world affairs and issues the UN
discusses, including sustainable development. Highschool students, however, circulate their lives aroundtheir own personal interests, and many of these interests usually do not focus on these world affairs or sustainable development. So, what would be consideredan agenda to which high school students can relate?
One example is the KHSMUN’s 2021 agenda, The Social
Impact of COVID-19 on Children. This agenda can beconsidered relatable because every participant at thattime was exposed to a disruption in learning (Iwabuchi
et al., 2022), resulting in school shutdowns or transitions to remote learning. Including the phrase on children to an agenda title can increase the relatability of
the chosen agenda (e.g., The Impact of Climate Change
on Children) as it focuses student participants to discuss issues related to their age group.
The next question to consider is whether an agenda
is researchable. According to version 1 of the CEFR-J

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

49

CAN-DO rubric, the ability to “...search the internet orreference book and obtain school-related information”
represents CEFR-J level B1.2, which if we consider the
MEXT survey results mentioned above, greatly underrepresents most high school students in Japan. With
that perspective in mind, it is important to choose anagenda that can also be self-researched in the participants’ L1. Returning to the agenda The Social Impact
of COVID-19 on Children, with the situation beinga world pandemic, KHSMUN Organizing Committee
members responsible for student preparation wereable to assign the task of locating and reflecting on
news articles regularly to students, with students able
to locate news articles both in their English L2 and intheir Japanese L1¹.
Aside from whether an agenda is both relatable to
the MUN participants and researchable, the KHSMUN
Organizing Committee surfs through various media
outlets to identify probable agenda items. Firstly, theUN publishes plenty of reports through its agencies
and committees that both identify current issues andworld trends, as well as break down these issues into
agenda topics. Secondly, paying attention to local L1
media will also give an idea as to what participants aretuning into at home. A final reference point would be
the SDGs as published goals each can contribute to an
agenda item.

Balancing the means of student participation
In the UN General Assembly (GA), resolutions are
passed through consensus, meaning a resolution isagreed upon by the members of the GA before it isintroduced to the floor, either through backdoor meetings or other means of communication. It is a processthat is highly encouraged by the UN when hosting an
MUN (United Nations, 2020). However, such a process
would discourage a majority of secondary EFL learners
from participating actively as the CEFR-J rubric does
not mention the skill of discussing until B2.1. For thisreason, the KHSMUN Organizing Committee has constructed a GA that promotes and balances both verbal
participation and non-verbal or low-verbal participation.

Verbal participation is participation that requires anextended use of verbal output. Examples of such participation includes a 90-second speech all delegations
give to support a position or idea in relation to theconference agenda, and the engagement of debate
through moderation in which participants are encouraged to ask and answer questions pertaining to otherdelegations’ speeches and solution ideas. Both opportunities can be prepared in advance, well before thestart of the GA (KHSMUN participants receive a copy ofa draft resolution at least 12 hours prior to the start ofa GA) which can benefit lower-level EFL learners² who
would struggle at impromptu opportunities.
Non-verbal or low-verbal participation allows participants to take part in the GA using minimal or no verbal cues. One example of such participation includes
opportunities to call a motion, which are prewritten
and are regularly invited to be called upon by the GA
president (see Kyoto Gaidai Nishi High School, 2022,
p. 79). Motions can give a lower-level EFL learner theopportunity to take control of the proceedings of the
GA such as motioning for a suspension of the meeting or motioning to move into moderated caucusing.
There are also opportunities to vote throughout the
GA. These non-verbal or low-verbal means of participating still incorporates the use of the L2 to trigger
cognitive responses, and even though data was notavailable for inclusion into this paper, informal feedback from participants have indicated that meaningful
participation has been achieved through low-verbal or
non-verbal participation.

The MUN participant preparerPreparing secondary EFL learners to participate in an
MUN conference takes time and requires a content andlanguage integrated approach that both introduces
students to topics and world affairs associated with theconference’s agenda as well as allow them to provide
solutions to problems associated with the provided
content. This can be achieved with EFL learners at various levels using 1) identifiable patterns and 2) scaffolding techniques.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

50

Identifiable patterns
Over the course of 32 years, teachers preparing students who also partake in organizing the KHSMUN
conference have relied on the following pattern forthe purpose of simplifying and categorizing content: 1)
what is the problem, 2) what is the cause of the problem, 3) what is the solution to this problem, and 4)
what is the effect of the solution to this problem. These
categories provide a foundation for comprehending
and producing meaningful output that showcases thecomprehension of the provided content. It is also utilized as a framework for writing essays and speeches(e.g., the 90-second position speech mentioned in theprevious section). If students are tasked with readinga case study, report, or article, they are assigned tolocate and record information pertaining to the categories mentioned, or locate information for 1 and 2
before engaging in critical or logical thinking activities
to come up with content for 3 and 4. A final realizationis that this pattern also represents how a UN resolution
is drafted, and so practicing the use of these attributes
leads to tasking students with drafting their own resolution for an MUN conference. These categories do notcover all the information that pertains to a conference
agenda, but they are not supposed to do so. It insteadlays a foundation for students to communicate on topics related to the agenda through cause and effect.
Higher level EFL learners will go beyond the foundation of these four categories, but it is the lower level EFL
learners that will survive on them.

solution(s), and effects of the solution(s) of the paraphrased version through discussion or other activities.
4.
Introduce the original article with the goal ofidentifying additional information.
The information gathered from the reading is used tobridge content within the four attributes mentioned
above into a flowchart that will be discussed below.

Scaffolding techniques
Scaffolding is “...the support provided to learners toenable them to perform tasks which are beyond theircapacity” (Richards & Schmidt, 2010, p. 507). It represents a series of building blocks used to assist students to reach goals set by the teacher. There can bea lot of material, case studies and other articles that
relate to the MUN conference agenda, but without
scaffolding the content into material and activities thatallow lower-level EFL learners to intake the content,
most students will find the material meaningless, orworse yet, become amotivational. The list and explanations below demonstrate a framework for scaffolding a
topic related to an MUN agenda as part of a 12-15 classhour³ curriculum.
Prerequisites

Prior to introducing MUN agenda-related content, students should have experience in utilizing the patterns
mentioned above, have some experience in persuasive
communication (e.g., debate), and a basic understanding of the SDGs.
Vocabulary

A second pattern is how to engage in case studies,
reports, and articles. Teachers preparing students who
also partake in organizing the KHSMUN conference
have used the following pattern:
1.
Have students read a paraphrased version of
the article first. This version is written by the teacher
within the parameters of the weakest student’s i + 1(Krashen, 1985, as cited in Gass & Selinker, p. 200), andshould include the four attributes, or attributes 1 and 2
as mentioned above.
2.
Verify or review unknown or low-frequency
vocabulary that was both in the paraphrased versionof the article and the original.
3.
Identify the problem(s), cause of problem(s),Prior to introducing MUN agenda-related content,
poaching possibly unknown or low-frequency vocabulary words and phrases from content to support
pre-reading activities can provide some support tolower-level EFL learners whose knowledge of the
vocabulary in reading materials provided is less than
95% (Grabe & Stoller, 2002, p. 186). This vocabulary is
expected to be reviewed frequently⁴, especially while
engaging in case studies, reports, and articles as mentioned above.
Develop a relation between the topic and the students

As was discussed earlier, it is important that an MUN
agenda be relatable to the students participating,and activities should be used to demonstrate andP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l51strengthen that relation. One example of activities
used for the 2021 KHSMUN conference, The Social
Impact of COVID-19 on Children, incorporated theConvention on the Rights of the Child, asking students
to analyze their own rights as a child before comparing
their relation to the information of the content material(see Appendix A).
Develop a review flowchart

Once students are introduced to content material, visualizing the information into a flowchart that demonstrates their knowledge and understanding of cause
and effect (i.e., this problem is happening because…)
gives them the opportunity to begin developing ideasof solutions to problems discussed. This flowchart isalso used to make sure every student in the class has
the same information through class collaboration,
which is beneficial for lower-level EFL learners who
may otherwise struggle with the content on their own(see Appendix B).
Case studies, reports, and articles

Case studies are used to solidify and expand the information students wrote in their flowcharts, following
the pattern introduced above. As students gather
more information from these readings, they should
be encouraged to return to the flowchart and add any
new information, sharing their new findings with theclass.

a monumental task to put together. Feedback fromPanSIG 2022 supports this notion, with one participant
stating, “I understand it’s rather complicated to explain
everything a model UN entails but as someone withzero experience on the subject, I felt like I still don’t
grasp how to run one” (Escobar, 2022). Even though
this paper is not a MUN how-to explanation, there area few strategies the KHSMUN Organizing Committee
implements every year based on 32 years of ongoing
empirical action research to ensure the KHSMUN conference is meaningful for its participants representing
various L2 proficiency levels. The strategies should beviewed as subjective, but should not be overlooked(Shumsky, 1969) as they represent a gradual development and improvement of practice (Hammersley,1993). And even if you decide that participating in or
hosting an MUN is not the direction you would like totake, the strategies discussed can still be utilized forcontent and language integrated classes, or projects
that engage in current issues or world affairs, despite
the proficiency level of students being taught.

Notes¹ Over the course of 15 weeks from January to June
2021, students were assigned 7 tasks of locating news
articles related to the agenda’s topic at the time and/or their assigned country and recording a video review
that demonstrates their understanding of the article.

At this point, students should have a treasure trove of
information in their flowcharts that can be used to writeclauses for a draft resolution, as well as write a speechthat outlines their position on the topic being studied
within the MUN conference agenda. These written outputs can then be used to practice MUN procedures.
Each procedure above works off the previously listed
procedure, allowing students, especially lower-level
EFL learners the tools to feed off previously learned
material and patterns.

² EFL learners with a proficiency level of CEFR-J A2.1
and below would find it challenging to give a position speech based on the CEFR-J A2.2: Speaking: Spoken production description: “I can give an opinion or
explain a plan of action concisely giving some reasons, using a series of simple words and phrases andsentences.” Engaging in debate about a participant’s
speech content, EFL learners with a proficiency levelof CEFR-J B1.1 and below would find it challenging
based on the CEFR-J B1.2: Speaking: Spoken production description: “...I can take a series of questions fromthe audience, responding in a way that they can understand.”Conclusion³ One class hour in this explanation is 45-50 minutes.

A Model United Nations, whether from the perspectiveof a host or a teacher preparing students, can seem like

⁴ As an example, the author conducts vocabulary quizzes every class as a warmup.

Construct operative clauses and speeches for MUN
procedural practiceP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

52References
Adelman, C. (1993). Kurt Lewin and theorigins of action research. Educational
Action Research, 1(1), 7-24. DOI:
10.1080/0965079930010102
Adamson, C. (2013). Learning to make a differenceat the Model United Nations. JALT2012
Conference Proceedings, 558-568.
CEFR-J本体: 英語版 (Version 1.0) [CEFR-J Body:
English Version] [PDF document]. http://www.
cefr-j.org/download.html
Corpuz, A.D. (2021). Struggles and Successesof High School Students Studying Second
language. Osaka JALT Journal, 8, 10-26.
Escobar, E. & McGregor, A. (2021, February 13) A
Model UN in A New Age of Social Distancing[Video]. Kyoto JALT Community Spotlight.
https://kyotojalt.org/?p=947
Escobar, E. (2022). [Post-Presentation Survey][Unpublished raw data], PanSIG 2022: (Re)Imagining Language Education.
Fast, T. (2012) Model United Nations in the ESOLClassroom. The 2012 Pan-SIG Proceedings:
Literacy: SIGnals of Emergence, 79-85.
Gass, S.M. & Selinker, L. (2001). Second
Language Acquisition: An Introductory
Course (2nd Ed.). Pearson Education.
Grabe, W. & Stroller, F.L. (2002). Teaching andResearching Reading (C.N. Candlin & D.R.
Hall Ed.). Pearson Education.
Hammersley, M. (1993). On the Teacher
as Researcher. Educational Action
Research. 1(3), 425-445. DOI:
10.1080/0965079930010308

Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and Researching
Writing (C.N. Candlin & D.R. Hall Ed.).
Pearson Education.
Iwabuchi, K., Hodama, K., Onishi, Y., Miyazaki, S.,
Nakae, S., Suzuki, K.H. (2022). Covid-19 and
Education on the Front Lines in Japan: What
Caused Learning Disparities and How Did theGovernment and Schools Take Initiative?. In:
Reimers, F.M. (eds) Primary and Secondary
Education During Covid-19. Springer, Cham.
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-81500-4_5
Jodin, J.J. & Singer, J. (2019). A Framework
for Integrating Education for Sustainable
Development. Osaka JALT Journal, 6, 51-66.
Kyoto Gaidai Nishi High School (2022). The KansaiHigh School Model United Nations (7thEd.) [PDF document]. https://www.khsmun.
com/2016/resources/KHSMUN_MANUAL_
v7.02.pdf
Richards, J.C. & Schmidt, R. (2010). Longman
Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied
Linguistics (4th Ed.). Pearson Education.
Shumsky, A. (1962). The Subjective Experienceof the Researcher. The Journal of
Educational Sociology, 36(3), 134–138. DOI:
10.2307/2264191
Tatsuki, D.H. & Zenuk-Nishide, L. (2018). MUN
Perspectives on Teaching and Learning:
A Focus on Negotiation. Journal of
Research Institute, 58, 1-5. http://id.nii.
ac.jp/1085/00002255/
Theberge, C.L. (1994). Small-Group vs. WholeClass Discussion: Gaining the Floor in
Science Lessons [Paper presentation].
Annual Meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, New Orleans, LA,
United States. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/
ED373983.pdf

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

53

United Nations (2020). United Nations Guide toModel UN. United Nations Publications.
Zenuk-Nishide, L. (2014). Rationale andTheoretical Foundation for a Model
United Nations Class. Journal of Foreign
Studies, 64(2), 33-52. http://id.nii.
ac.jp/1085/00001642/
文部科学省 (2018). 平成29年度 英語力調査結果（中学３年生・高校３年生）の概要 [Summaryof 2017 English Proficiency Survey Results(third-year junior and senior high school
students)] [PDF document]. https://www.mext.
go.jp/a_menu/kokusai/gaikokugo/__icsFiles/
afieldfile/2018/04/06/1403470_01_1.pdf

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l54Appendix A

Activity worksheets to assist in fostering a relation between the agenda topic and the students

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l55

Appendix B

Photo shows students sharing information recorded from a flowchart (figure below)

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

56

Ainu Language Learning Through Synchronous and Asynchronous Online
Methods
Matthew James Cotter

Hokusei Gakuen University Junior College

Takayuki Okazaki
Kindai University

Jennifer Louise Teeter

Kyoto Seika University

Adam Jenkins

Shizuoka Institute of Science and Technology
Abstract
While UNESCO classified the Ainu language as critically endangered in 2009, stakeholders continue to engage in preservation
and revival efforts in a variety of capacities. An Ainu language class developed in March 2021, amidst the COVID-19 pandemic,
adopted a new hybrid style of language learning. An adapted form of Te Ataarangi, a community-based Māori language learning
method originating in Aotearoa (New Zealand), is utilized for the 90-minute weekly sessions held live on Zoom and further supplemented with self-access Moodle activities. Class participants (n=30) include both Ainu and non-Ainu of varying nationalities,
ages, vocations and levels of Ainu language ability. However, all participants are dedicated to Ainu language revitalization. The
mixed hybrid delivery had unique sets of challenges for both the synchronous and asynchronous components.

日本語概要
UNESCOは2009年にアイヌ語を極めて深刻な消滅の危機にある言語と分類したが、アイヌ語関係者は様々な立場で保存や継承、復興の努力を続けている。本稿では、COVID-19が流行した2021年3月に開発された、新しいハイブリッド型の言語習得スタイルを採用したアイヌ語の授業に焦点を当てる。アオテアロア（ニュージーランド）のコミュニティ中心のマオリ語習得法であるテ・アタアランギを応用したこの授業では、毎週90分のセッションがZoomで開催され、さらに自身でアクセスするMoodleのアクティビティで補足される。アイヌと非アイヌの参加者は30人に及び、国籍、年齢、職業、アイヌ語能力レベルなど様々であるが、アイヌ語復興に尽力する人たちである。このハイブリッド型授業が、同期型・非同期型それぞれにおいて抱える課題について考察する。

“Kanto or wa yaku sak no a=ranke p sinep ka isam
カント オㇿワ ヤク サㇰ ノ アランケㇷ゚ シネㇷ゚ カ イサㇺ
天から役目なしに降ろされたものはひとつもない
Every single thing that comes from heaven, has arole on this earth.”– Ainu proverb
Any visitor to Nibutani will encounter this proverb on
the window of the restaurant owned by the Sekinefamily in Nibutani, a town in Hokkaido with a disproportionately high population of Ainu people. Despite
the 2009 UNESCO classification of the Ainu language as

critically endangered, people like Sekine Kenji, an Ainu
language teacher and his daughter Sekine Maya who
has her own YouTube channel to spread knowledge of
the Ainu language, have not given up hope in revitalizing their heritage tongue. Other stakeholders, thosewith an invested interest in the survival of the Ainu language, are also engaged in revitalization efforts ranging from government-funded and private Ainu lessons
in person and classes in elementary schools in areas
where the known Ainu population is proportionallyhigh.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

57This paper describes an Ainu language class developed in March 2021, amidst the COVID-19 pandemic,
that adopted a new hybrid style of language learning.
In response to the need to adapt to the pandemic, thehybrid style made use of synchronous lessons using
Zoom, as well as asynchronous learning activities on
Moodle. These classes draw upon the Te Ataarangi
language learning method founded in Aotearoa New
Zealand in 1979, which is grounded in Māori culturalelements, and based on the understanding that languages are a “social resource of a secure personal identity” (Hond, 2013). Outlined first will be the backgroundbehind the development of the Te Ataarangi method
in Aotearoa New Zealand, then a summary of how the
Ainu language has reached its current situation.

Language Loss and Revival
FIGURE 1

Aotearoa New Zealand – Māori

Loss of

Māori land in the North Island of New Zealand(McAloon, 2008)

When former New Zealand associate Minister of Health
Tariana Turia (2011), who is Māori, the tangata whenua(indigenous people) of Aotearoa, expressed in her
speech that it only took only one generation to lose alanguage, and at least three generations to restore it,
she was speaking from experience. British colonization of New Zealand starting from the 1870s wrought
immense harm on the indigenous Māori and continues to affect generation after generation (Pool, 2011).
The survival of Māori language and culture were particularly impacted by the confiscation of Māori-owned
land and government policies of assimilation and integration.
Seizure of land, largely for engaging in open rebellion
against the crown, saw the majority of Māori land transfer to government or private settler ownership (Figure1) over a mere 80 years (McAloon, 2008). Coupled withthe loss of resources from the land, Māori faced a lossof income and way of life. Subsequent urbanization of
Māori communities led to disconnection from tribalroots, language, customs and knowledge.

As urbanization progressed, the colonial governmentchanged its assimilation policies to integration, due toincreased blending of Māori and settler populations,largely through the imposition of European educationon Māori children. Early anthropologists regarded the
Māori language as ‘a stone-age tongue’ (Best, 1992) andfrom 1814, missionaries established “Native Schools”
to ’save the Māori barbarians’. By enforcing an entirely
English-language curriculum, heavy on European pedagogies that Māori children were unaccustomed to,
the government and missionaries alike intended toeradicate the Māori language and culture. Māori children faced physical punishment for speaking Māori inschool; this continued for decades contributing to massive declines in Māori language use (Al-Mahrooqui etal, 2012). Missionaries aimed to turn Māori into ‘brown
Europeans’ so that Christian ideals could be upheld
and a complete transfer of power would shift to thesettler government.
From the mid 1800s and under these circumstances,
Māori suffered a cataclysmic loss of land, power, political influence, economic stability, and cultural and spiritual strength. Self and group pride and identity were
further damaged by the discrimination Māori faced

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

58

for looking physically different from European settlers. Being cut off from Māori knowledge, language
and community, many Māori sat in a confusing limbo
between two cultures, shying away from ‘things’ Māori.
Hume (1993) refers to this phenomenon as the “Cultural Cringe” where Māori internalize oppression anddismiss their own culture as inferior to the dominantculture, accepting the colonizers view of the status quo.
Consequently, Māori fared statistically worse in areasof higher education, employment, poverty, crime,and physical and mental health in comparison to nonMāori. This steadily worsened over the next 100 years(Marriott & Sim, 2014). With the government providing
little to no support, Māori self-determination groups
took matters into their own hands and embarked ona journey to reclaim their language, culture and pride.
At the start of the 1970s, Māori elders petitioned thegovernment to start Kōhanga Reo, early child careimmersed in the Māori language, to engender a fluent
generation of Māori children. After countless organizedprotests, permission was finally granted, minus funding, and the first Māori Kōhanga Reo was initialized in
1982. By 1991, there were 630 Kōhanga Reo across thecountry (Rei & Hamon, 1993). With the risk of the students defaulting to mainstream English-medium education after completing Kōhanga Reo, and losing theirMāori fluency, the Kura Kaupapa Māori (Māori Schoolof Philosophy) were started in 1987 when Māori wasrecognized as an official language.
While these initiatives saw success in Māori language
fluency at the grassroots level and children were gaining exposure to Māori language, education pedagogies and culture daily, language use at home by parents was key to gaining native fluency. At this stage the
Te Ataarangi method made its appearance.
Originally coined by Caleb Gattegno (1963) as the‘Silent Way,’ Te Ataarangi was developed by Māoriteachers Katerina Te Heikōkō Mataira and Ngoingo
Pewharirangi in the 1970s as a technique to get learners speaking. The method utilizes Cuisenaire rods anda strict set of rules based around silence and gestures
to elicit attention and active participation from the language learners. For decades, practitioners have been
actively training people working in endangered language revitalization in this highly successful technique(Okazaki, 2015). In Aotearoa it has supported more than
50,000 people to speak Māori and it has been adopted
in Hawaii since 2004.

Japan – Ainu
Ainu are an indigenous people of Yaunmosir (Hokkaido), southern Sakhalin, the Kuril Islands, and thenorthern Tohoku region of Honshu. The Ainu language,
descended from the Jomon language (Segawa, 2016),
has been spoken for thousands of years. However, with
oppression by Japanese encouraged to migrate from
Honshu to the southwestern Yaunmosir region fromthe 15th century and Meiji period (1868-1912) seizureof land, Ainu witnessed a significant language decline.
The government justified unilaterally annexation“Hokkaido ‘’ into Japan by regarding the island as terra
nullius or not legally occupied. Subsequently, Japanese-imposed land allocation systems and the prohibited Ainu cultural practices, including earrings, tattoos,
salmon fishing and deer hunting, the latter two being
Ainu diet staples. The government also promoted colonization from Samor mosir (Honshu) and other islands
and attempted to assimilate Ainu.
Assimilatory education entirely in Japanese was formally institutionalized in 1899 under the former
Aboriginie Protection Act and in 1901 under the Regulations for the Education of former Aboriginie Children (Ogawa, 1991).” Japanese language” continued
for half of the classes in a week. Like Māori, Ainu faceda breakdown in intergenerational language transmission while being despised by the majority (Okazaki,2018). Deprived of land and staple foods, and excluded
from their own culture and native language in school,
Ainu also suffered a “Cultural Cringe” leading them tospeak Japanese rather than Ainu to their children andsee their own practices and worldviews as inferior.
The decline of the Ainu language is particularly evident among those born in the 1900s as Kaizawa (1931)
reported in his book “The Cries of the Ainu”:
When speaking in Ainu to young Ainu in their thirties or
younger, few understand the language. Today, the only
people who use the Ainu language are the elderly, andeven they do not use the Ainu language when speak-P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

59

ing to the younger generation (Kaizawa, 1998:382).
Ainu language education began to be actively implemented in the 1980s. Shigeru Kayano of Nibutani beganteaching the Ainu language to children at his own
expense. Initially, Kayano attempted to establish a “language nest” nursery school, similar to Te Kōhanga Reo.
However, the Ministry of Health and Welfare refused toapprove such a nursery school for language education(Kayano, 2010). Nevertheless, Kayano’s Ainu language
classes for children expanded to include adults, andthe Hokkaido Utari Association (present-day Hokkaido
Ainu Association) modelled classes after those in Nibutani, and expanded to include up to 14 classes throughout Hokkaido (Teeter and Okazaki, 2011).
A variety of meaningful projects and classes have beenoffered by the Foundation for Research and Promotionof Ainu Culture (Okazaki, 2018). However, many are notdirectly contributing to Ainu language revitalization on
their own, from a language acquisition point of view, as
learners are not brought together in high enough frequency to ensure a significant level of language acquisition. One exception is the Ainu apprentice program,currently based in Nibutani, where apprentices learn
Ainu language for more than 10 hours a week. So muchis on the shoulders of each Ainu language learner tospend their own spare time to learn and improve their
Ainu language proficiency as it is nearly impossible tofind a space where Ainu language is predominantly
used. Therefore, it is of particular importance to create
an Ainu-only language space where even novice learners can participate.

Te Ataarangi and Ainu
With the opportunity to learn the Te Ataarangi method
directly from Māori leaders through Aotearoa Ainumosir Exchange Program in 2013, practitioners began
to adapt it to teach Ainu language to learners with
no Ainu language knowledge. After experiencing an
intensive week-long workshop in Parihaka, Te Ataarangi experts were invited to provide workshops to
Ainu language educators to create a common understanding of the approach and developed lesson plans
in 2013, 2014 and 2018. Ainu educators also visited Te
Ataarangi classes in Aotearoa in 2015, and 2016. While

Ainu language educators have taken on some aspectsof Te Ataarangi into their teaching pedagogies, classes
based entirely on the method were only offered in Nibutani by Kenji Sekine, a leading Ainu language educatorand the main teacher of the online class detailed in thispaper. However, many learners, workshop participants,
and those wanting to study Ainu live far from Nibutani,and are remote from each other. The need and desire
expressed by those learners coupled with advances inonline technology since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 provided the right circumstances for theadvent of online Te Ataarangi Ainu Language classes.

Project Outline
Launched in March 2021, the online Te Ataarangi Ainu
Language class involves one 90-minute class per week
via the online video conferencing tool, Zoom. Liveclasses led by Sekine Kenji are broadcast from Nibutani, and self-access revision and materials provided
through Moodle, an online open-access Learning Management System (LMS).

ParticipantsParticipants in the class include Ainu and non-Ainu ofvarious nationalities and mixed gender ranging from
Ainu enrolled in a three-year apprentice program in
Nibutani, where grassroot Ainu language revitalization efforts are made, shopkeepers, elementary school
teachers, university professors, university students,
museum staff at Upopoy: The Symbolic Space for Ethnic Harmony (Shiraoi, Hokkaido) and others dedicatedto Ainu language revitalization. Participants join theclass of their own volition and are free to be present
or absent for any given class. In addition to the mainteacher, who first teaches the class content in the main
Zoom room, up to five more co-teachers guide thepractice and revision of the same content in breakout rooms. The main tools used in the online classes
are Cuisenaire rods and various props necessary in theZoom context to signify who is talking to who during
the scripted conversations.
Originating from the Māori Te Ataarangi example, six
rules for participants are followed in class.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

60

1. You can only speak Ainu.
2. Respect the customs and beliefs of others.
3. Don’t rush people to speak.
4. Speak only when it’s your turn.
5. Be humble with each other and sympathize with thevarious emotions each person experiences.
6. Make many mistakes and do not fear them.

Instruments
Zoom

Due to social distancing requirements of the COVID-19
pandemic and the inability to travel for face-to-faceclasses, Zoom was used as a platform to connect participants. The central teacher uses Cuisenaire rods andprops to first teach main room class content on Zoom
(Figure 2).

Co-teachers practice the main room content prior to
the session and guide practice and revision of thiscontent in Zoom breakout rooms. The class timetablefollows a standardized format each week (Table 1).
MoodleAs needs for an asynchronous learning environment
went beyond simply being able to display content on
a website, a more complete LMS needed to be set up
to allow learners to participate in a greater variety oflearning activities. In the end Moodle was chosen as
its vast array of functions and plugins, together with
it being open-source and thus, fully customizable,
provided the flexibility to adapt to the class needs. To
get the students started, Moodle courses were created(Figure 3) and after registering both teachers and students, an explanation on how to access the content
was provided during one of the Zoom sessions.

Figure 2
Central teacher uses Cuisenaire rods and props to teach class content via Zoom

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

61Table 1
Format of a Standard Zoom ClassTime

Language

Content

09:00

Central teacher sends ZOOM link via private LINE group

90:00 - 21:00

Absent or late participants notify the LINE groupJapanese

21:00 - 21:05

Participants log into ZOOM - free discussion

21:05 - 21:10

Students join assigned breakout rooms and converse freely to know eachother better.

21:10 - 21:15

An Ainu prayer is recited and repeated by all participants; a pledge is made in
Ainu to only speak in Ainu for the remainder of the class

21:15 - 21:30

First main content taught by central teacher in main Zoom room

21:30 - 21:40

First main content taught again by co-teachers in breakout rooms

21:40 - 21:50

Ainu

Second main content taught by central teacher in main Zoom room.

21:50 - 22:00

Second main content taught again by co-teachers in breakout rooms.

22:00 - 22:05

First and second main content revised by central teacher in the main room.

22:05 - 22:10

Ainu prayer is recited in the main room and repeated by all participants; apledge to continue speaking Ainu whenever possible is also made22:10 - 22:20

Summary, questions and discussion about content

22:20 - 22:25

Students join breakout rooms again to discuss content with co-teachers.

22:25 - 22:30

Japanese

Notifications and information about Ainu-related initiatives shared by participants.

22:30

Class ends

22:30 ~

Informal interview of a participant or viewing of previous participant interview(voluntary)

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

62Moodle was used to save videos from Zoom, thereby
enabling students to access and review the online
classes. These videos are set into the course for eachweek (Figure 4). Downloadable pdfs of class content,
including new words and phrases learned during theclasses were also added as supplementary learningmaterials. Online quizzes were used to test and assesslearned content as well as provide a means of practice.
Finally, to a lesser extent, the forum and video assessment modules were used for students to submit theirlearning product such as self-introductions in text orvideo form.

Figure 3
Moodle LMS utilised for self-access revision and video storage

Figure 4
Videos uploaded into the Moodle course.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

63Discussion
Research ethics is important as historically indigenous
peoples, including Ainu, have been mistreated, misrepresented and abused under the name of “research”.
According to Māori researcher Linda Tuhiwai Smith “‘research’ is probably one of the dirtiest words in theindigenous world’s vocabulary. It stirs up silence, it conjures up bad memories, it raises a smile that is knowing
and distrustful “ (1999, p.1). As a result, we were cautious to avoid having participants feel like subjects ofa clinical research study, and instead, prioritized maintaining the class atmosphere and sense of community.
There were several advantages, disadvantages andlimitations observed during the 70 weeks of active
participation in the classes and discovered via informal
communication with participants.

Advantages
One advantage of holding classes online is that many
people living in and outside of Yaunmosir have difficulties finding Ainu language classes. Many learners’ resort
to studying by themselves with limited resources. This
opportunity was made possible by regularly meeting
online with like-minded learners wanting to revitalize
Ainu across the country and world was greatly appreciated by participants.
As many participants had little Ainu language knowledge, the immersion environment was particularly
daunting at the beginning. Nevertheless, most participants continue to support each other as the Te
Ataarangi philosophy is to be humble, respectful andwait for the slowest person to learn and utter the target expressions during each session. This supportive
aspect of Te Ataarangi also helps create a ‘learning
community’ which is completely different from traditional, more individual efforts of Ainu language learning, where distance alone has often limited learners to
self-study involving grammar books, dictionaries andlistening to 15-minute radio sessions. The strong senseof ‘togetherness’ and ‘shared learning’ has grownwithin the Zoom platform. Participants can receive
social and psychological support in the main sessions
and also in the breakout rooms when conversing inJapanese before and after class. When travel became
possible, some participants had the opportunity tomeet in person, often for the first time, and already had
a shared connection via the zoom lessons.

Disadvantages and Limitations
Obvious disadvantages to the completely online setting are ultimately connected to the benefits of faceto-face classes. In-person classes may arguably help
build better connections between teachers and students, and between students. Body language andfacial expressions are easier to read and communication is not inhibited by the need to toggle the ‘mute’function while using Zoom.
Furthermore, using rods is challenging as participantscannot physically pass them online. Kinesthetic learning and a sense of presence through receiving, speaking, and passing is an important part of Te Ataarangi.
This shortcoming has been slightly mitigated by theuse of illustrations via the ‘share screen’ function, props,
dolls and toys. While participants pretend that they are
giving and receiving, the experience is not the same.
Additionally, some participants were not familiar or
comfortable with the technology. While a minor hindrance, participants have forgotten to mute themselves
on Zoom to prevent individual utterances from being
heard. Accidental log outs have occurred, and participants did not know how to use functions including
screenshare and record. Use of the Moodle course forself-access learning varied considerably. Weekly vocabulary quiz completion varied from 12 - 24 users completing the quizzes in March 2022, to only 1 - 3 users
completing the weekly quizzes in July 2022. It is possible that participants were too busy or disinterested
in committing to more self-study. Another possibility
is that learners had a poor understanding of the role ofthe Moodle in this novel mix of educational tools.
Finally, some participants have only now reported
frustration with playback of the videos on Moodle, inparticular being heavy on smartphones, thus discouraging them from accessing them again. The authors
and Moodle administrators, now aware of this aredevising ways to lighten the data load such as using
YouTube to house the videos, with links put on Moodle
to the videos. Difficulty hearing pronunciation such as‘ko,’ sounding like ‘ho’ and ‘fu’ sounding like ‘hu’ werereported due to individual devices of either the speaker

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

64or the listener.

who have made this class a reality and a success.

Conclusion and Implications

References

The continuance of the class over a year and a half, witha low dropout rate, illustrates its value and importance.
However, data from Moodle and informal conversations with participants suggests that greater support isrequired to enable participants engage in the self-access learning environment and its various activities.
The onus is on the educators to make it appealing touse, easy to navigate, and more importantly convey
the value of using it to participants. Proposed methods could be improved interface usability, gamification through the attainment of Moodle ‘badges’ ontask completion, a digital dictionary of vocabulary andgame-like activities for the participant and their family
and friends.

Al-Mahrooqi, R., & Asante, C. (2012). Revitalizing
the Māori language: A focus on educational
reform. Social Sciences & Humanities. 20,
1035–1048.

Online education limitations can be combated with
supplementary in-person classes. Hybrid adaptations
post pandemic may allow for periodic face-to-faceclasses or learning camps to foster further language
learning and motivation.
Finally, future participants of this class may become
confident enough in the Ainu language content toteach classes of their own. Some participants haverisen to the challenge by taking on co-teacher roles
within the class itself, contributing to intergenerationaltransmission of the Ainu language and culture. In thisway, the potential for the number of Ainu language
learners to increase is evident. Overall, the online Ainu
Te Ataarangi class has demonstrated potential as anintervention for revitalizing the Ainu language andculture by providing a space for stakeholders to meetand learn effectively while supporting a safer space forexpression of identity.

Acknowledgements
This project is part of the Grants-in-Aid for Scientific
Research (KAKENHI) project ‘Improving Awareness
Understanding of Ainu via Online Resources’ number
20K01208.
Iyayraykere to Kenji Sekine and the other educators

Best, E. (1922). The Astronomical Knowledge ofthe Māori. Retrieved from https://ui.adsabs.
harvard.edu/abs/1922akmg.book.....B
Gattegno, C. (1963). Teaching Foreign Languages
in Schools: The Silent Way. (1st ed.).
Educational Explorers.
Hond, R. (2013). Matua te reo, matua te tangata:
Speaker community: visions, approaches,outcomes: a thesis presented in fulfilmentof the requirements for the degree of Doctorof Philosophy in Public Health at Massey
University, Palmerston North, New Zealand[PhD Thesis]. Massey University.
Hume, L. J. (1993). Another look at the culturalcringe. Centre for Independent Studies.
Ishihara, M. (2004). Ainu jishin niyoru chosaku
nitsuite [On Publications by Ainu people
themselves]. Heisei 16nen Ainu Bunka Fukyu
Keihatsu Semina Hokokushu. Reports ofthe 2004 Ainu Culture Awareness Raising
Seminar. 2004 Ainu Culture AwarenessRaising Seminar.
Kaizawa, T. (1998). Ainu no sakebi [A Call by theAinu]. In M. Ogawa & S. Yamada (Eds.), Ainu
minzoku no kindai no kiroku (pp. 373–389).
Sofukan. Retrieved from https://books.google.
co.jp/books?id=cjIyAQAAIAAJ
McAloon, J. (2008). Land ownership - Māori andland ownership. Te Ara - the Encyclopediaof New Zealand. Retrieved from http://www.
TeAra.govt.nz/en/map/17888/Māori-land-inthe-north-island-1860-1939

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

65Marriott, L., & Sim, D. (2015). Indicators ofInequality for Māori and Pacific People. The
Journal of New Zealand Studies, 20. doi.
org/10.26686/jnzs.v0i20.3876
Ogawa M. (1991). A historical study on “Ainu
School”(an elementary school in Ainu
Community) in Hokkaido(1):The Forming
process of the educational system for Ainu
children in the 1870’s～1900 Japan. The
Annual Reports on Educational Science, 55,
257–325.
Okazaki, T. (2015). Te Ataarangi to Māorigofukko.
Te Ataarangi and Māori language
Revitalization. Konton 12, 48-65
Okazaki, T. (2018). Ainu language shift.
In Routledge Handbook of JapaneseSociolinguistics (pp. 354–369). Routledge.
Rei, T., & Hammon, C. (1933). Te Kōhanga
Reo 1982. Women Together: A History of
Women’s Organizations in New Zealand.
Retrieved from https://nzhistory.govt.nz/
women-together/te-kohanga-reo
Segawa, T. (2016). Ainu to Jomon: Mou hitotsu no
nihon no rekishii. Chikumashobō. Retrieved
from https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=_zu5jwEACAAJ
Teeter, J., & Okazaki, T. (2011). Ainu as a Heritage
Language of Japan: History, Current Stateand Future of Ainu Language Policy and
Education. Heritage Language Journal, 8(2),251–269. doi.org/10.46538/hlj.8.2.5
Tuhiwai, S. L. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies:
Research and indigenous peoples. Zed
Books Limited.
UNESCO - Intangible Heritage Home. (n.d.).
Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/
ark:/48223/pf0000192416

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

66Applying the UDL Design Cycle to Online English Medium Instruction: A Case
Study
Davey Young

Sophia University
Abstract
Compared to their peers without disabilities, students with disabilities can experience unique, additional barriers to learning in

online learning environments, and so the shift to online and distance learning as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic has presented novel barriers to such students (Rao et al., 2021; UNESCO, 2021). Students with specific learning difficulties (SLDs) suchas dyslexia or ADHD are especially at risk of encountering barriers to their learning. Additionally, language learning presents
unique barriers to students with SLDs compared to other areas of study (Kormos, 2017; Smith 2018). This article describes thepractical application of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) using the UDL Design Cycle (Rao & Meo, 2016) to an online English
Medium Instruction course at a private university in Tokyo in the 2020 academic year. The case study concludes with a discussion of potential shortcomings of this application, as well as additional considerations for future applications.
日本語概要
オンラインの学習環境において、障害のある学生は、そうでない同級生と比較して、さらなる独特の障壁を経験する可能性がある。そのため、COVID-19の流行によるオンライン学習や遠隔学習への移行は、そのような学生に新たな障害をもたらしている（Rao et al,2021; UNESCO, 2021）。ディスレクシアやADHDのような特定の学習困難（SLD）を持つ学生は、特に学習に対する障壁に遭遇するリスクがある。さらに、言語学習は、他の学習分野と比較して、SLDを持つ学生に独特の障壁をもたらすことがある（Kormos, 2017;
Smith2018）。そこで本稿は、2020年度の東京の私立大学におけるオンライン上の英語による科目学修に、UDLデザインサイクル（Rao & Meo, 2016）を用いた学びのユニバーサルデザイン（Universal Design for Learning, 以下UDL）の実践について説明する。最後に、この実践における潜在的な欠点と、将来の実践のための追加的な留意点について触れたい。

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately
affected students with disabilities (UNESCO, 2020;2021). Compared to their peers without disabilities,
students with disabilities can experience unique, additional barriers to learning in online learning environments (Rao et al., 2021; UNESCO, 2021). Students withspecific learning difficulties (SLDs) such as dyslexia or
ADHD are especially at risk of encountering such barriers, as these difficulties are not immediately apparent
to others and may even go unnoticed into adulthood(Smith, 2018). In addition, language learning presents
unique barriers to students with SLDs compared toother areas of study (Kormos, 2017; Smith 2018). Suchbarriers may exist in both the cognitive and affective domains and reinforce each other to the point oflowering students’ motivation to learn a foreign language and even threatening their sense of self-worth(Kormos, 2017). Importantly, external influences suchas the instructional environment, including teachers’
and peers’ attitudes and behavior surrounding SLDs
and relevant accommodations, can have a noticeable

impact on motivation to learn a language for students
with SLDs (Csizér et al., 2010).
Japanese policy regarding disability in higher education affords selective inclusion, meaning that students
who do have an identified disability, including less visible ones like SLDs, may remain unidentified and anonymous, only receiving support from their institution if
they choose to report their status and request accommodations, and an unknown number of students withdisabilities opt out of receiving official support (Kondo
et al., 2015; Young, 2021). The number of self-identified
students with disabilities enrolled in Japanese higher
education rose every year since the Japan Student Support Organization began tracking such data in 2006
through 2019. In 2020, however, the number fell for the
first time, suggesting that fewer students with disabilities decided to enter higher education that year, or thatfewer such students felt the need to report their status
and request accommodations in the online learning
environment, or some combination thereof (Young,P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

672021). Without knowing the barriers that students
may face in online learning, teachers have an ethicalresponsibility to design and deliver inclusive online
lessons, especially considering the likelihood thatonline instruction will become more commonplace ina post-pandemic world. Fortunately, the COVID era’sheightened support needs for students with disabilities has also presented “an opportunity to create a flexible, equitable and inclusive system of learning” (UNESCO, 2021, p. 8).
Inclusive education as a human right was first enshrinedat the international policy level by the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
in 2008, and further clarified in that Convention’s General Comment No. 4 (GC4) in 2016 (Davis et al., 2020;
Hunt, 2019). Since then, GC4 has become the “de facto
global development policy on inclusive education
because it outlines the critical policy considerations
and implementation guidelines for Inclusive Education in all UNCRPD signatory and ratifying countries,”of which Japan is one (Hunt, 2019, p. 116). With regard

for implementation guidelines, GC4 explicitly calls for
the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) approach as ameans of realizing inclusive education (Committee on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2016).
UDL is “a framework to improve and optimize teaching
and learning for all people based on scientific insights
into how humans learn” by providing multiple meansof engagement, representation, and action and expression to access, build, and internalize information andskills (CAST, 2018). This three-by-three organization of
the framework creates a matrix of nine UDL Guidelines,
which are further subdivided into 31 Checkpoints that
scaffold an approach to inclusive instructional designand delivery, and each Checkpoint includes recommendations for how to achieve it. “Using a proactive
design process that explicitly integrates UDL, teachers
can be better prepared to support all learners online,
including students with disabilities and English language learners, and other students who experiencechallenges while learning” (Rao, 2021, p. 3). See Figure
1 for a graphic depiction of the framework.

Figure 1
The Universal Design for Learning Guidelines (CAST, 2018)

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

68

The UDL Design Cycle was first proposed by Rao andMeo (2016) and further clarified for applications in language learning by Torres & Rao (2019). This cycle consists of six steps: 1) the identification of barriers, 2) the
development of goals, 3) the development of assessments, 4) the development of flexible teaching methods and materials, 5) instructional implementation,and finally 6) reflection and revision (Rao & Meo, 2016;
Torres & Rao, 2019). The final step is intended to informa new iteration of step 1, and may also inform changes
to goals, assessments, and methods and materials
through the consideration of additional, previously
unidentified barriers to student success. In this way, theUDL Design Cycle is both iterative and reflective, allowing teachers to refine lesson and course delivery to be
more inclusive as time goes on (Torres & Rao, 2019).
While the UDL Design Cycle was originally created toreflect on lesson rather than course delivery, the basic
steps can be conceptually extended to help develop
more inclusive courses. Finally, UDL can be integrated
into any instructional format, including online anddistance learning (Smith & Basham, 2014) and English
Medium Instruction (EMI).

Teaching Context
The teaching context in the present paper is an English
studies department at a private university in Tokyo,
Japan. The course described here is an elective EMI
course available to second year students and above
with priority given to students from the English studies
department. The number of enrolled students was 22
and 25 students for each respective semester captured
in the current review of practice. Due to the generallyhigh proficiency of students in the department, theform of EMI in this course heavily favored content overlanguage in its instructional focus and assessment.
In fact, there were no linguistics goals in this course,
though some language support to ensure comprehension and demonstration of content mastery was still
deemed necessary for student success.

April 7, and three days later the university in question
decided to move all instruction online for the springterm and postponed the start of the semester from
April 12 to May 25 so that faculty and staff would havetime to prepare for this transition. Initial attempts tomake the course more inclusive for the spring semesterof 2020 were therefore made rather hastily, but with aneye to apply the UDL Design Cycle to optimize lesson
content and delivery.

Application of the UDL Design Cycle
Following step 1 of the UDL Design Cycle, identifying barriers, it was anticipated that students may feel
unprepared to learn in an online-only environment,
or isolated and lacking structure and support in an
entirely asynchronous course. However, it was also
anticipated that an entirely synchronous course could
pose barriers to students who experienced problems
with internet connectivity or distractions in theirhome learning environment. Following step 2, theonly explicit goal of the course was for students to beable to demonstrate an understanding of the course
content. Acknowledging the UDL Design Cycle’s stipulation that this goal be both specific and flexible, thiswording allowed a spectrum from basic understanding
to mastery. For step 3, the course trialed a combinationof three assessments: a weekly learning journal for formative assessment, a written midterm for summativeand formative assessment, and a final project for summative and formative assessment. For step 4, developing flexible methods and materials, a number of initial
inclusive design choices were made by consulting different sets of inclusive practices, namely those outlined by Grace and Gravestock (2009) and Evans et al.
(2017), all of which also aligned with at least one UDL
Checkpoint. These design choices, as well as some of
the assessments listed above, are summarized in Table
1.

The beginning of the COVID-19 global pandemic coincided with the start of a new Japanese school year in
April, 2020. The Japanese government declared a stateof emergency for Tokyo and the surrounding area on

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

69Table 1
Inclusive design choices for spring 2020 and the UDL Checkpoints they satisfy

Inclusive Design Choice (UDL Checkpoint)- Communicated clear expectations to students (8.3)-  Created PowerPoint presentations that were friendly to dyslexia and colorblindness (2.3)-  Showed students how to use text-to-speech for pdfs and Word (2.3)-  Showed students how to use voice-to-text for Word (5.2)-  Recorded lesson videos with closed captioning for students to review lecture material or take a lesson on-demand in theevent of an absence from the Zoom lesson (1.1, 1.2, 7.1, 7.3)
-  Posted pdf versions of the PowerPoint deck to Moodle after class (1.1)-  Organized resources and set flexible, suggested deadlines for all assignments with reversible controls on the course’s Moodle
page (6.1)-  Used a spiral curriculum design to revisit concepts with added complexity (3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4)
-  Used a standard, five-stage lesson plan to chunk and progressively introduce and scaffold information and concepts in an
accepting and supportive learning environment that relied heavily on small group discussions in breakout rooms (3.3, 3.4, 7.2, 7.3,
8.3)

- Included a weekly learning journal in which students wrote 300-500 words using a scaffolded prompt to connect their own experiences to the lesson content and demonstrate understanding of that content (3.4, 7.2, 8.4, 9.3)

-  Provided individuated feedback on weekly learning journals (5.3, 6.4, 8.4)
-  Included a final, self-directed research assignment with a clearly articulated rubric and discussions of individual progress
throughout the semester (6.4, 7.1)

-  Provided individual support for students who had difficulty managing the workload and meeting expectations (6.2, 8.1, 8.2, 9.2)

UDL’s 31 Checkpoints are categorized under the nineguidelines and numbered accordingly. For example,
Guideline 1 is “provide options for perception,” andCheckpoint 1.3 is “offer alternatives for visual information.” Inventorying inclusive design choices with the
UDL Checkpoints made it possible to identify which
guidelines were not yet being met in the course designand lesson delivery, which in turn helped inform further
modifications. Table 1 reveals, for example, that there
was a strong focus on Guideline 3, provide options forcomprehension, but no attention paid to Guideline 2,

provide options for language and symbols, in the initialcourse design. Some UDL Checkpoints, while includedin the original design, were also difficult to fully implement largely owing to time constraints related to theincreased workload created by the rapid shift to online
teaching caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, it was very difficult to provide the desired degreeof mastery-oriented feedback for the weekly learningjournal entries because so much time was needed forother aspects of lesson planning, chief among themcreating lesson videos for all classes.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

70

In partial service of step 6, reflection and revision,
specific areas for improvement were identified by collecting feedback from students about several aspectsof the course between the spring and fall semesters.
Twelve students took the survey, which was administered as a Google Form, and all respondents consented
to their responses being used for research purposes.
The first survey item asked students about their intentions to take the fall semester of the course. Half ofthe respondents indicated their intention to continue,
while one said no and five reported that they were
undecided. The next three items used a five-point
Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree) to ask
students about different ways of engaging with thecourse. Ten of the 12 respondents strongly agreed thatthey felt comfortable contacting me with questions orconcerns about the course while one agreed and oneneither agreed nor disagreed; six respondents strongly
agreed that the synchronous Zoom lessons were agood way to engage with course content, five agreed,
and one neither agreed nor disagreed. These responses
suggest that the spring semester’s course design was
successful in fostering collaboration and community(Checkpoint 8.3), and that the standard lesson plan on
Zoom was likely effective at meeting at least some ofthe other Checkpoints considered in its design. Thisconclusion is further supported by the responses to an
open-ended item at the end of the survey, discussed in
more detail below.
Another survey item asked students about the potential usefulness of having asynchronous discussion
forums on Moodle as a way to engage with course
content, though there was no clear consensus regarding this prospect. Students were also asked whether
or not the pre-recorded lesson videos were helpful
and allowed respondents to select multiple answers.
These videos were created using the video-editing
software Camtasia and subsequently posted to anunlisted YouTube channel so that closed captioning
could be generated automatically and the links could
be shared on the course’s Moodle page. Three of 12
respondents reported never watching a lesson video,
while the remaining nine who did watch a video foundit to be helpful, and watching a video to review a lesson
that the student had already attended on Zoom wasselected more than four times as often as watchinga video because a lesson had been missed. Anotherkey inclusive feature of the lesson videos was that itallowed students who missed class to participate in thelesson in an “on demand” format by viewing the lesson video and then writing me an email with answers
to group discussion questions and completed in-classtasks. This flexibility satisfied Checkpoints 7.1 (optimize
individual choice and autonomy) and 7.3 (minimize
threats and distractions).
Next, a short response item invited respondents to write
freely about what aspects of the course were effective
or not effective for helping them learn online. Ten students responded to this open-ended item, and their
responses were descriptively coded (Saldaña, 2021)
using TAMS Analyzer. Subsequent analysis revealed
that students only commented on three aspects ofthe class (interacting with other students in breakout
rooms, the weekly learning journal, and the video
lesson), and there was just one request for additional
support. The most common type of comment (n=5)
was a positive response to interacting with other students in breakout rooms. One representative commentwas “Talking in random breakout groups was effective
to have a chance to talk to a variety of people.” There
were two mixed reactions to interactions with otherstudents in breakout rooms: one respondent enjoyedthese interactions but expressed disappointment thatclassmates often kept their cameras turned off, and theother noted that more often than not, “some students
were not really participative” in group discussions in
breakout rooms. Following the comments on interactions in breakout rooms, there were three positive
comments about the weekly learning journal. One representative comment was “The reading journal helped
me a lot, because I was able to reflect on my thoughts
towards the readings.” There was one also positive
comment about the video lessons: “I had both of zoom
sessions and lessons videos, so, I could understand thecontent by watching the videos. I thought it would be
helpful even in face to face lectures.” Finally, there was
one request for multimodal support: “I think if there’s
short animation movie, it will help me understand theconcepts what we learned easily.”P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

71

The results of the survey supported a number of theinitial inclusive design choices listed above, namely
using a standard lesson plan that prioritized collabora-

tive learning through small group discussions, pre-recording video lessons, and assigning a weekly learningjournal. As such, these features were continued in the

Table 2
Inclusive design choices for fall 2020 and the UDL Checkpoints they satisfy

Inclusive Design Choice (UDL Checkpoint)-          Standardized warm-up discussion at the beginning of class (2.1, 3.2)-          Included a midterm quiz that could be retaken multiple times using Google Forms (3.4, 6.4, 8.4)-          Added an option for students to give a presentation rather than submit a written version of the final assignment (5.1, 7.1, 8.2)-          Offered an optional weekly discussion forum on Moodle for students to discuss course content (5.1, 7.1, 8.3, 8.4)-          Added more visual components to PowerPoint slides and handouts (2.5)-          Posted lesson slides and handouts on Moodle before each lesson (1.1, 7.1, 8.2)

fall semester. Additional inclusive design choices basedon the survey responses were to offer an optional
weekly discussion forum on Moodle for students todiscuss course content, as well as add more visual components to PowerPoint slides and handouts to support
multimodal learning.
My own reflection during step 6 also led to some significant revisions, mostly related to assessment, before
starting the fall semester. First of all, I changed the format of the written midterm from a document-based
assignment submitted on Moodle to a quiz using
Google Forms. This allowed me to provide immediate
formative feedback for certain incorrect responses.
Several questions were also rewritten to make more
explicit links to previous course content and readings,
and students were encouraged to access this content
when completing the quiz. I also allowed students totake this quiz as many times as they liked in order toreduce anxiety and better meet my goal of having students demonstrate understanding of the course content. I also added an option for students to fulfill their

final assignment by giving a presentation rather thancompleting a written version of the task. These andother additional inclusive design choices made for thefall semester, as well as the UDL Checkpoints they satisfy, are summarized in Table 2.

Discussion
Despite its many benefits, UDL does not require feedback from students and presupposes that teachers
know how to implement it successfully (Evans et al.,2017). There is also not a consensus on how UDL principles can be applied across instructional environments(Smith et al., 2019), though the UDL Design Cycle is inpart intended to account for this counterintuitive lackof universality (Rao & Meo, 2016). To help address someof these potential shortcomings in the present case, I
was careful to keep a flexible mindset during course
delivery, gather feedback from students on the efficacyof the inclusive design choices, and reflect on my own
choices and lesson delivery on an ongoing basis.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

72

It is worth noting that some of the UDL Checkpoints
were never captured in this case, for example 6.3 (facilitate managing information and resources), and so there
is still room for improvement with regard to removing
potential barriers to online learning in this course. Still,some Checkpoints are particularly difficult to satisfy
in online learning. Ensuring Checkpoint 7.3 (minimize
threats and distractions), for instance, is largely out ofteachers’ hands in virtual learning spaces. We may beable to minimize threats and distractions in our own
surroundings, but we cannot control the physical environs from which students access the class virtually, nor
can we monitor what peripheral distractions the device
used to access the class present to the student. On thisfront, we can only try to create maximally engaging
lessons and raise students’ awareness of the threats
to their learning that are posed by both physical andvirtual distractions during the learning process. Other
Checkpoints for Guidelines 7-9 (providing options forrecruiting interest, sustaining effort and persistence,and self-regulation respectively) can help offset theseconcerns, as can creating a class routine in a supportive
learning environment. Ultimately, however, teachers
have far less control over how students engage with avirtual environment compared with a material one, andthis may indicate a broader shortcoming of applying
UDL to online learning exposed by the COVID-19 era.
Practitioners and researchers alike may have to grapple with this unpleasant reality in the years ahead, as
undoubtedly there will be a greater reliance on online
learning and subsequent need to provide maximally
inclusive online learning environments.
Additionally, some of the inclusive design choices madeto this course would have been difficult or impossible
in more proficiency-based English language courses.
For instance, the choice between submitting a written assignment or giving a presentation for the final
assignment was offered to accord with Checkpoints
5.1 (use multiple media for communication) and 7.1(optimize individual choice and autonomy). However,in many proficiency-based classes, course aims are
not for students to master a specific knowledge base,but rather master a specific skill base. Giving students
the choice to present their work in an English composition course, for instance, would undercut the central
aim of teaching students how to write in English. Thishints at a central tension that is unique to implementing inclusive practices in foreign language instruction:
instructional aims themselves have a risk of excluding
students who experience barriers to receiving input
or generating output in a given modality. Pedagogicalapproaches like EMI and hard CLIL, in which content
knowledge is emphasized and assessed more so thanskill proficiency (Brinton & Snow, 2017) can circumvent this tension, but these approaches are not always
appropriate, especially for learners in lower proficiency
bands. In such cases, instructors have little recourse
aside from emphasizing coping strategies or workarounds via assistive technologies to help minimize
rather than remove barriers to learning. To again evoke
the example of an English composition course, theinstructor might provide more differentiated instruction and show students how to use voice-to-text features, apps, or software, among other strategies.
Finally, there was a conscious decision to limit the number of online learning platforms used in the course,
largely due to concerns that students would be overwhelmed with learning how to navigate various systems required in their other coursework. All students
were already required by the university to use both
Zoom and Moodle. Nevertheless, other online learning
platforms and tools can provide various other avenues
to inclusion (Rao et al., 2021). There are clearly two sides
to the coin of choosing a smaller or larger number oflearning management systems in any given course, apredicament which calls to mind the paradox of inclusion: efforts to include a certain group or groups ofstudents risks excluding others (Grace & Gravestock,2009). In other words, while some students might benefit from reduced complexity in technology required
for an online course, others might benefit from theadditional features when complexity is increased.

Conclusion
Because of COVID-19, the need to secure safe and inclusive online learning has never been so pronounced.
Fortunately, this increased need has also produced
a number of opportunities. In accordance with GC4,
the best and most current policy guidance on inclusive education available worldwide, all educators
should provide quality inclusive education as a human

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l73right. GC4 explicitly calls for the application of Universal Design for Learning, an inclusive instructional
approach that can be applied to any learning context,
including online learning, to create more inclusive
environments and experiences for all students. Inclusive design choices that accord with UDL guidelines
are especially important for students with invisible orunidentified specific learning difficulties, particularly
in learning environments with a policy of selective
inclusion. As the application of the UDL guidelines will
necessarily vary depending on a variety of context-dependent factors, teachers are advised to closely examine these guidelines, which are freely available online(CAST, 2018), to help them consider new instructional
choices, as well modifications to existing lesson plans
and learning materials, that best suit their individual
teaching contexts and aims. Furthermore, it is important to remember that the UDL Design Cycle is both
iterative and reflective, and that inclusive practices
can further be fine-tuned with the benefit of feedback
from students and/or collaboration with colleagues.
Inclusive teaching is a conscious choice. This choice isachieved not without effort, but it is a choice that best
honors the human rights of all students.

Csizér, K., Kormos, J., & Sarkadi, Á. (2010). The
dynamics of language learning attitudes andmotivation: Lessons from an interview study
with dyslexic language learners. Modern
Language Journal, 97, 470-487. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01054.x
Davis, J., Gillett-Swan, J., Graham, L. J., &Malaquias, C. (2020). Inclusive education asa human right. In L. J. Graham (Ed.), Inclusive
education for the 21st century: Theory, policy
and practice (pp. 79-99). Routledge.
Evans, N., Broido, E. M., Brown, K. R., & Wilke,
A. K. (2017). Disability in higher education: A
social justice approach. Jossey-Bass.
Grace, S., & Gravestock, P. (2009). Inclusion &diversity: Meeting the needs of all students.
Routledge.

References

Hunt, P. F. (2019). Inclusive education as global
development policy. In M. J. Schuelka, C.
J. Johnstone, G. Thomas, & A. J. Artiles(Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Inclusion andDiversity in Education. (pp. 116-129). SAGE.

Brinton, D. M., & Snow, A. M. (2017). The evolving
architecture of content-based instruction.
In A. M. Snow & D. M. Brinton (Eds.), The
Content-based Classroom: New Perspectives
on Integrating Language and Content (2ndEd., pp. 2-20). Michigan Teacher Training.

Kondo, T., Takahashi, T., & Shirasawa, M. (2015).
Recent progress and future challenges
in disability student services in Japan.
Journal of Postsecondary Education andDisability, 28(4), 421–431. https://eric.
ed.gov/?id=EJ1093579

CAST (2018). The UDL Guidelines. https://
udlguidelines.cast.org/

Kormos, J. (2017). The second language learning
processes of students with specific learning
difficulties. Routledge.

Committee on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities. (2016). General comment No.
4. https://www.ohchr.org/en/hrbodies/crpd/
pages/gc.aspx

Rao, K. (2021). Inclusive instructional design:
Applying UDL to online learning. The Journalof Applied Instructional Design, 10(1), 1-10.
DOI: 10.51869/jaid2021101
Rao, K., & Meo, G. J. (2016). Using universal
design for learning to design standards-based
lessons. Sage Open, 6(4), 1-12. https://doi.
org/10.1177/2158244016680688

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l74Rao, K., Torres, C., & Smith, S. J. (2021).
Digital tools and UDL-based instructional
strategies to support students withdisabilities online. Journal of Special
Education Technology, 36(2), 105-112. DOI:
10.1177/0162643421998327

Young, D. (2021). Special education policy and
EFL in Japan. In P. Clements, R. Derrah, &R. Gentry (Eds.), Communities of teachers& learners. JALT. https://doi.org/10.37546/
JALTPCP2020-05

Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for
qualitative researchers (4th ed.). SAGE.
Smith, A. M. (2018). Inclusive practices. Oxford
University Press.
Smith, S. J., & Basham, J. D. (2014). Designingonline learning opportunities for students
with disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional
Children, 46(5), 127-137. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0040059914530102
Smith, S. J., Rao, K., Lowrey, K. A., Garder J.,
Moore, E., Coy, K. Marino, M. T. & Wojcik,
B. (2019). Recommendations for a national
research agenda in Universal Design for
Learning (UDL): Outcomes from the UDLIRN preconference on research. Journal of
Disability Policy Studies, 30(3), 174-185. doi:
10.1177/1044207319826219
Torres, C., & Rao, K. (2019). UDL for language
learners. CAST Professional Publishing.
UNESCO. (2020). Global education monitoring
report 2020: Inclusion and education: Allmeans all. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/
ark:/48223/pf0000373718
UNESCO. (2021). Understanding the impact of
COVID-19 on the education of persons withdisabilities: Challenges and opportunities of
distance education. https://iite.unesco.org/
publications/the-impact-of-covid-19-on-theeducation-of-persons-with-disabilities/

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

75Considering Some of the Practical Issues of Materials Development

Brian Cullen

Nagoya Institute of Technology
Niall Walsh
Aichi Prefectural University

Abstract
Creating language learning materials for English as Second Language (ESL) students is always a balance between theory andpractice. This article will draw on our experience in a combined 30 years of materials development to consider some of the practical issues involved in the process. Questions are included throughout the paper to help the reader consider these points within
their teaching context. Topics covered include appropriate use of both new and tested methodology and language acquisition
theory, utilizing skills and knowledge that you already have, creating materials in teams, understanding the perspective of thelearner, creating materials from the perspective of both the big picture and the smaller details, the importance of piloting andevaluating materials, changing models of publishing, and recognition of changes in technology and student needs.

日本語概要
第二言語としての英語 (ESL) の学生向けの語学学習教材の作成は、常に理論と実践のバランスをとって行われます。 この記事では、合わせて 30 年にわたる材料開発における私たちの経験を基に、材料開発に伴う実際的な問題のいくつかを考察します。 読者が教育の文脈の中でこれらの問題を検討するのを助けるために、論文全体に質問が含まれています。 取り上げるトピックには、新しい方法論とテスト済みの方法論と言語習得理論の両方の適切な使用、すでに持っているスキルと知識の活用、チームでの教材の作成、学習者の視点の理解、両方の大きな視点からの教材の作成が含まれます。 絵と細部、資料の実験と評価の重要性、出版モデルの変化、テクノロ
ジーと学生のニーズの変化の認識。

Developing materials to support language learning
is always a balance between theoretical and practical issues. However, McGrath (2013) notes that many
classroom teachers have not read or demonstrated anawareness of much of the literature on materials development and use (p. 202). This is despite many experts
outlining processes for teachers to follow for materials
development. These theoretical frameworks, some ofwhich are briefly discussed later in this paper, attempt
to scaffold materials design while recognizing thatcreating materials is a practical process. Notwithstanding these theoretical insights, the nature of materials
development is significantly embedded in and influenced by the effectiveness of these materials in theclassroom. Consequently, this paper focuses heavily on
the practical rather than the theoretical approach tomaterials development and draws upon our own experiences as well as referring to the supporting research.

Nine short sections highlight an issue that has arisen
in our engagement with materials development, which
is useful to consider during the process of developing
materials. In addition, questions are provided after
each section to allow teachers to reflect on their teaching context.

Some Older Methodologies are Still
Relevant
The usefulness of learning new approaches mightseem obvious to most teachers. In recent years, communicative language teaching (CLT), task-based learning (TBL) and autonomous learning have dominatedlanguage teaching pedagogies and steered a moveaway from traditional methodologies such as grammar translation or the audiolingual method. However, much like updating and refining materials, manyP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

76teachers should also consider updating or adapting
methodologies that have featured in the past. Take,for example, the behaviorist theory that maintains thatcertain traits of living things, including humans, can betrained through a system of reinforcement and adequate feedback (Ellis, 2012). Behaviorism can manifest
in the language classroom as pattern practice. A typicalapplication of a simple pattern practice activity in second-language pedagogy might look like this:
A: Where is Ms Costello?
B: She is in the bathroom.
A. What is she doing?
B: She is washing her hair.
In the above situation, students are usually provided
with a series of visuals and tasked with changing theunderlined sections. Of course, there is little element of
surprise and nothing authentic about the activity, andthere is no genuine exchange of information. Hence,
today, many teachers may consider this activity ineffective in developing authentic communication skills
due to its mechanical and passive nature. However,there is always the possibility of creating an opportunity for cognitive engagement with even a simple task
like this. Like many cases in materials development, theissue resides in how the materials are presented andtaught and is only limited by the creator’s or teacher’s
imagination. Pattern practice works effectively at one
level by putting words in the learner’s mouths and giving them accurate construction. Although, according
to Lightbown (1985), ‘practice does not make perfect’(p. 177), as he found that mechanical practice did notlead to long-term memory retention among his students. Therefore, repetition is not sufficient in achieving language success. Ellis (2012) endorses this view by
positing that it is important for learners to produce thelanguage in a communicative capacity. This recognition of the usefulness yet insufficiency of pattern practice is not new, and to reinforce language acquisition
from pattern practice activities, Palmer (1971) recommended communication-practice drills that attempt
to extend this kind of simple practice into a more natural, communicative and relevant exchange with thelearner (p. 25). Here is an example;

A:
B:
A.
B:

Where is Ms. Costello?
She is in the bathroom.
What is she doing?
She is washing her hair.

Ask the same questions about other people. Hereare some ideas:
1. your mother 2. your sister
3. your father
A:
B:
A.
B:
A:
B:
A:
B:

Where is your mother?
She is 			What is she doing?
She is 			
Where is your sister?
She is 			What is she doing?
She is 			

Naturally, overuse of one particular methodology like
this, while leading to a controlled classroom, can create
passive and unmotivated students. Therefore, teachers
or material designer must innovate to strengthen andmodernize older methodologies that offer fresh perspectives. Subsequently, teachers can explore specificolder methodologies and techniques and consider if,
through careful pedagogical manipulation, they can
exhibit effectiveness.
Question: What older methodologies could still be
useful for your teaching or materials development?

Theory Can Be Useful for Materials
Development
Many ESL teachers in Japan, especially those working in universities, have completed a TESOL or language teaching Masters program, typically including courses such as Methodology, Research Design,
Testing and Assessment, and Materials Development.
These courses are designed to provide educators witha solid foundation in language learning theory thatapplies to the classroom. For example, methodology
teaches about different approaches to teaching listening, speaking, reading and writing, while testing outlines the processes that create a valid language assessment—all practical for a language teacher and often

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

77

immediately applicable in the classroom.
Materials development is one area of a Masters programthat is of practical value to most teachers. Highlighting
its benefits, McGrath (2013) advocates that materials
development and evaluation should be core components of undergraduate and postgraduate courses. So
while it is useful to review any area of a Masters program after a few years of teaching experience, below
is theory specifically related to materials development.
The research literature in this area covers several overlapping areas including accounts of materials development, needs analysis and syllabus design, and models
of materials development.

Accounts of Materials Development
There are several effective books and collected papers
on materials development (see McDonough & Shaw,
2012; McGrath 2013; Mishan & Timmis, 2015; Tomlinson, 2003). These resources bring in some theory andalso offer insight and personal anecdotes showing
how materials developers worldwide have tried to satisfy the learning needs of their learners in areas suchas general English, English for science and technology, English for medical professionals, and academic
English.

Needs Analysis and Syllabus Design
Needs analysis and syllabus design is the study of what
our learners need to know or to be able to do and how
to fulfill those needs through a syllabus (e.g. Munby,1981). The Can-Do movement (e.g. Dunlea, 2008) thathas emerged in more recent years is similar to needs
analysis in some ways. There are very useful aspectsof having a list of things that we want our learners to
be able to do. However, the materials developer also
needs to take account of local contexts and current
abilities and not just set idealized endpoints for learning.

Models of Materials Development
Some researchers in materials development have also
tried to describe or create a model of the materials
development process. For example, a diagram by Jolly& Bolitho (2011) is shown below.

Figure 1
Materials development Ppocess

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

78This six-step description of the materials development
process attempts to scaffold content creation for educators. While this description is informative and beneficial to language teachers, creating materials does notalways conform to a structured process, and this is indicated by the many arrows between different parts ofthe process. Other factors, such as making the content
relevant to a specific learner and time to produce thematerial, force the developer to deviate from or omit
some steps. Therefore, Tomlinson (2003) prefers thatany kind of framework factors in flexibility.
Many other subjects in TESOL Masters programs areless obviously related to materials development, even
if they are interesting. For example, Lexical Studies andGenre Studies help build an understanding of word
patterns and how texts hold together. Even these more
complex areas of theory can raise awareness and open
doors of possibility for materials development.
Question: What theory or subjects did you learn at
graduate school (or from another source) that is
helpful for you in developing materials?

Teachers Already have Skills andKnowledge that Can be Useful
ESL teachers and materials developers have various
skills whose relevance is not always apparent in a language-teaching context. For example, a talented musician can engage learners through music. People skilledin writing can develop students’ creative side throughactivities that target their written production. Similarly,
teachers may have academic knowledge that can form
the basis of learning materials. For example, a teacher
interested in psychology could transfer this interest to
the classroom and find that it brings much into education and people’s lives. So, when a teacher is developing or adapting materials, it is worthwhile considering what he or she can already do. These activities canpersonalize students’ learning and help them connect
with language learning more deeply. It can also introduce emotion and engagement into the classes, which
can enhance learning (Frankel & Mountford, 2021).
However, teachers should proceed cautiously if introducing a talent. While complementing learning with aparticular skill a teacher has can be engaging, it is also
crucial not to be self-indulgent. At all times the teacher
should have a clear focus on developing students’ language abilities. In other words, even if an educator ispassionate about something, it is misguided to assume
their students would share their interest. Bringing
readings into the classroom on favorite novels may
appear motivating to the teacher but offer, in practice,no learning experience to the student. Therefore, it isvital that an analysis of the learner’s needs, capabilities
and desired outcomes is undertaken before introducing something new to the class.
Question: What is a skill that you have and how canit help in some way to developing language learningmaterials?

Creating Materials Alone or in a Team
When developing materials, educators may find that
there are times when they are the sole creator or thatthey are part of a team. There are implications thatmust be considered in both scenarios. Creating materials individually allows the creator autonomy over theprocess. Additionally, the developer is not inhibited bya lack of consensus among other team members. However, a lone developer may lack any meaningful input
from other sources and hence struggle to overcome
creativity difficulties and ensure materials are relevant
for the learners. In many situations, a group of two or
three people may be ideal for a project. In this situation, it is possible to exchange ideas with each otherand offer support. The intimacy also allows members
to remain engaged in the creation process and be committed to its end goals. Unfortunately, group dynamics
may interfere with materials development. There may
be occasions when group members disagree on specific topics and activities to be included. Other members may feel aggrieved that not all contribute equallyto the project. Therefore, people need to consider theirown working style and preferences and assess whichkind of materials development environment is suitable
for their needs.
Question: What is your best working style?

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

79

The Elephant in the Room

Understand the Learner

The old Jain story about the six blind men and the elephant has often been referred to in ESL articles (e.g.
Celce-Murcia, 1985), and it is a valuable perspective
to keep in mind in materials development. Just likethe elephant, learning materials or textbooks can beviewed from many different angles, and reconcilingthem all can be complex. There are the strands of grammar, vocabulary, texts, topics, functions, strategies, andso much more, and educators try to combine them tomake a coherent final product. Many textbooks explicitly show these strands in the “Scope and Sequence”
pages at the beginning of the book, but weaving them
together is complex.

Time-constrained language teachers may occasionally choose to teach the same book or materials withdifferent cohorts of students. For example, a language
practitioner using the same textbook with students ina liberal arts school and an engineering school. Whileon the surface, the students’ levels may appear similar, and it seems appropriate to use the same textbook,
it is important to consider the different worlds people inhabit and the completely different perspectives
people have towards language learning. As a result,the contents of materials or textbooks do not always
translate to a productive or educational classroom. An
additional concern is that time-restricted teachers andcommercially motivated materials designers view all
students as homogenous. In reality, what works wellin one class may fail to inspire the next. Their successdepends on many factors that may interfere with pedagogical goals. Dörnyei (2005) lists key variables such as:

In the commonly used Myers-Briggs personality test
(Bayne, 1997), there is a distinction made between
Intuitors (people who like to see the whole picture, thewhole elephant), and Sensors (people who more naturally focus on the details, the parts of the elephant).
Both of these are necessary when designing materials
for a textbook or for a whole course. A materials developer can also think of this in terms of Top-Down (getting the big picture and filling in the details) and Bottom-Up (building up the details so that they create a
picture). Another elephant metaphor that is sometimes
cited in ESL (e.g. Brookhart, 2017) in order to demonstrate the importance of building up learning throughsmall parts is: “How do you eat an elephant? One bite
at a time!” In the terms of the elephant metaphors, tocreate effective materials, it is necessary to both see
the whole elephant and eat the elephant.
Imagine that you are developing a textbook or materials for a whole course.
Question 1: What are the different strands/parts(grammar, vocab, functions, strategies, topics etc.)that you will combine to create the elephant that isyour materials/textbook?
Question 2: Can you describe the table of contents?
Question 3: How will the parts be woven together
into the whole?

•
•
•
•
•
•

The learner’s personality
The learner’s motivation
The learner’s attitude
The learner’s aptitude
The learner’s preferred learning style
The learner’s intelligence

These considerations have implications for the materials developer. Content must be varied and adjusted totarget the individuals in the classroom. However, even
if the teacher has meticulously planned the materials, there are occasions when they fail to produce thedesired outcome.
Consider the example of two groups of students, liberal arts students and engineering students. Clearly,
they will show some differences (Felder & Brent, 2005).
One cohort may enjoy group work, discussion andsharing activities. However, the other may prefer working alone, and completing closed-answer activities.
The language teacher must factor in these variables
and recognize that students are likely different kinds ofpeople living in different worlds and have a myriad oflearning and cognitive styles.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

80

To that end, both materials developers and teachers
must keep in mind that a textbook or materials are justlaunching points into the learning process. Different
students will respond to different activity types, andmaterials designers need to be flexible and familiar
with a mix of learners to ensure that the materials canbe effective for all. Where possible, differences should
be factored into the learning process and reflected
through choices of activities, optional activities, andflexibility in completing an activity.
Think of two groups of students you have taught (ortwo students within the same class).
Question 1: What were the differences between
them?
Question 2: What kind of activities would havesuited each student?

Evaluate the Materials
Whether creating their materials or choosing an existing textbook, an integral part of materials developmentthat many educators fail to invest sufficient time into isevaluation. Mishan and Timmis (2015) worry that, in themain, teachers are guided primarily by intuition when
examining and evaluating third-party content. Theynote that many teachers informally select a textbook
based on the ‘flick test’, which involves them quickly
scanning a textbook (p. 56). Tomlinson (2013) reportsthat publishers are aware of this and intentionally create attractive materials to induce teachers. In reality, atextbook can look great and be free of errors but still
not achieve its purpose, which is to support learning.
As a materials developer creates materials, it is essentialthat they get feedback and evaluate them carefully. In asense, textbooks are like airplanes – they need a pilot.
Trying out activities with students before using themas the basis for large-scale materials is beneficial. Whenfeasible, having other teachers use your materials
before you publish is also informative. Feedback fromboth students and teachers is vital in creating quality
materials because what makes sense in the materials
designer’s head or looks good on paper does not necessarily translate into valuable and enjoyable learning

experiences.
To carry the metaphor further, like planes, textbooks
also need maintenance. Materials often fail when
first trialed. Even when the pilot is done, and there isa “finished product,” there is almost always a need to
improve, edit and revise. Step 6 of the Jolly and Bolitho
model is to “Evaluate materials.” Too often, teachers only evaluate the students performance and not
the materials. Therefore, the teacher must observe
whether the materials are achieving the course’s goals
and fulfilling the students’ learning needs.
Think about some materials/textbooks that you areusing (either your own or a commercial textbook).
Question: Are they fulfilling the learning needs ofthe learners?

Publishing Materials
There are many small publishing companies now,which only became possible over the last 30 years or
so when high-quality layout software became widely
accessible (Carney, 1990). The big ESL textbook companies like Oxford, Cengage, Pearson, and Longman
are quite different from smaller niche ESL companies
in that they have entire editorial teams, designers, marketing departments and sales teams with a large budget that allows them to travel globally showcasing theirproducts.
However, small publishers and individual teachers canplay a pivotal role in filling a smaller niche – satisfying
local needs for materials development rather than trying to reach students in every country worldwide (e.g.
Hawke & Davis, 1990). Moreover, they have low overheads to create a textbook suitable for a few hundred
students or even a class with particular needs. Small
publishers can also better account for local culturalneeds and avoid the common issue of global publishers whose need to reach a wider audience can resultin banal material (e.g. Nelson, 2019), or textbooks withstrong ideological perspectives (Zhang et al., 2022).
Question: If you were to create materials or a textbook for a particular niche, what would it be? Con-P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l81sider content, linguistic focus, the target language
level and age, geographical market, etc.

Future Considerations
Given the investment of time and resources into quality materials development, many teachers might feela degree of accomplishment once complete. Whilesome materials can be recycled in different teachingcontexts, for most, it is wrong to assume that they haveextended longevity. Once complete, materials are notstagnant artifacts, but must evolve with new methodologies and approaches to teaching courses, suchas content and language integrated learning (CLIL)
and autonomous learning. In that sense, materials arenever complete and are in constant need of revisionand updating.
In the main, new language teaching developments
evolve over time, allowing materials developers timeto predict the need and adapt to them. However, othervariables external to the educational industry are moreunpredictable and can profoundly impact the approachto materials development. This was evidenced recently
as the COVID-19 pandemic had educators scrambling
to tailor materials with online and hybrid components
in response to the effect on education. Many teachers
were forced online for extended periods using technology unfamiliar to them before the pandemic. The
advent of this move towards technology altered lesson
delivery, and as a result, even technophiles had to comply with and quickly adapt to the use of conferencing
software like Zoom or Microsoft Teams and the use ofContent Management Systems like Moodle or Google
Classroom.
Subsequently, materials developers had to accommodate this paradigm shift by producing materials that
supplemented face-to-face practices with online student offerings. Similarly, most school administrations,especially in the university setting, embraced different
aspects of online learning and continue to offer an
online component, and some university courses are
now being delivered completely online (The Universityof Tokyo, 2023).

In addition, education is moving into a time in whichhybrid learning is much more acceptable and, in someinstances, expected from the learners. In response tothis evolving nature of education, materials writers
need to be versatile and innovative in their approachto materials creation in a way that targets both the conventional classroom learner and the online members.
Question: How can materials be best created,shared, and used in a hybrid system (face-to-faceand online)?

Conclusion
The above sections have drawn on background literature and the authors’ combined experiences to present
considerations for both novice and experienced materials developers. Developing materials to support language learning is always a balance between theoretical and practical issues. It is also a balance between somany other things including: new versus older methodology; the skill-set of the teacher versus the learningneeds of the learners; the dynamics of creating alone
versus creating in a team; the big picture versus thelittle details; and the reconciliation of changing technologies with the traditional classroom. The questions
after each section have been an attempt to invite thematerials developer to consider these balances andhopefully to better understand their own materials,
teaching contexts, competencies, and approaches.

References
Bayne, R. (1997). The Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator: A Critical Review and Practical
Guide. Nelson Thornes.
Brookhart, S. M. (2017). How to Give Effective
Feedback to Your Students. ASCD.
Carney, T. F. (1990). Desktop Publishing:
The Downside. Canadian Journal ofCommunication, 15(3–4), 87–104. https://doi.
org/10.22230/cjc.1990v15n3a562

This marks a significant shift in lesson delivery, especially in Japan, which was absent before the pandemic.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

82

Celce-Murcia, M. (1985). Making Informed
Decisions About the Role of Grammar in
Language Teaching. Foreign Language
Annals, 18(4), 297–301. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1985.tb01807.x
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The Psychology of theLanguage Learner: Individual Differences inSecond Language Acquisition. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410613349
Dunlea, J. (2008). The EIKEN Can-do List:
Improving feedback for an English
proficiency test in Japan. Language Testing
Matters: Investigating the Wider Socialand Educational Impact of Assessment–
Proceedings of the ALTE Cambridge
Conference, 245–262.
Ellis, R. (2012). The Study of Second Language
Acquisition. 2nd Edition-Oxford applied
linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2005). Understanding
Student Differences. Journal of Engineering
Education, 94(1), 57–72. https://doi.
org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00829.x
Frankel, S., & Mountford, M. (2021). In search of
meaningful participation: Making connections
between emotions and learning. Emotion,
Space and Society, 39, 100787. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.emospa.2021.100787

Lightbown, P. (1985). Great Expectations:
Second-Language Acquisition Research andClassroom Teaching. Applied Linguistics, 6.
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/6.2.173
McDonough, J., & Shaw, C. (2012). Materials andMethods in ELT. John Wiley & Sons.
McGrath, I. (2013). Teaching Materials and theRoles of EFL/ESL Teachers: Practice andTheory. Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.
org/10.5040/9781472542076
Mishan, F., & Timmis, I. (2015). Materials
development for TESOL. Edinburgh
University Press.
Munby, J. (1981). Communicative Syllabus Design:
A Sociolinguistic Model for Designing theContent of Purpose-Specific Language
Programmes (Revised ed. edition).
Cambridge University Press.
Nelson, J. (2019). ‘I thought Canadians werewhite!’: An intersectional gendered visual
analysis of race, nation, gender, and LGBT+
representation in ESL/ELL textbooks[University of British Columbia]. https://doi.
org/10.14288/1.0378577
Palmer, A. (1971). Communication Practicevs. Pattern Practice or A Live Teacher Is
Absolutely Necessary. Reflections, 9(4).

Hawke, S. D., & Davis, J. E. (1990). Small
Publishers: Filling Market Niches. Teachers
College Record, 91(5), 97–106. https://doi.
org/10.1177/016146819009100509

The University of Tokyo. (2023). The Universityof Tokyo to provide online courses throughCoursera. https://www.u-tokyo.ac.jp/
content/400036465.pdf

Jolly, D., & Bolitho, R. (2011). A framework formaterials writing. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.),
Materials Development in Language Teaching(pp. 107–134).

Tomlinson, B. (2003). Developing Materials for
Language Teaching. A&C Black.
Tomlinson, B. (2013). Applied Linguistics andMaterials Development. A&C Black.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

83Zhang, Y., Ni, Z., Dong, J., & Li, J. (2022).
Constructing the Global Diversity or
Reproducing the Orientalist Gaze: Evaluating
Identity Options and Cultural Elements in
an English Intercultural Communication
Textbook. English Language Teaching, 15(1),130–143.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

84

Corpus Linguistics: What is it and what can it do for you?

Richard Sparrow

Kyoto Sangyo University
Abstract
Corpus Linguistics (CL) is something that most language teachers have heard something about. It is a required subject in manymaster’s degree curricula. The only problem is that many teachers still do not quite have a full grasp of what it is or what they
can do with it. The reason is that CL is mainly used at the level by institutions, publishers, editors, materials writers, researchers,
and other specialists. (Bolton, 2009). This leaves those who wish to learn more about it with a process and language that is very
specialized and dense and has very little room for the language learner / average teacher. It takes a lot of investment to come tounderstand CL like any technical subject. This paper hopes to provide a streamlined version of CL and provide some practicalexamples of what can be done in terms of pedagogical application such as activities done with students or simply ways to maketeaching better. In its current state, CL is still limited in these contexts and these limitations will be examined.
日本語概要
コーパス言語学(CL)は、ほとんどの語学教師が何かについて聞いたことがあるものです。多くの修士課程のカリキュラムで必須の科目です。唯一の問題は、多くの教師がまだそれが何であるか、またはそれで何ができるかを完全に把握していないことです.その理由は、CLが主に機関、出版社、編集者、資料ライター、研究者、およびその他の専門家のレベルで使用されているためです。

（Bolton、2009）。これにより、言語学習者/平均的な教師のための余地がほとんどなく、非常に専門的で密度の高いプロセスと言語
でそれについてさらに学びたい人が残されます. CL を理解するには、他の技術的な科目と同じように多くの投資が必要です。このホワイ
ト ペーパーでは、CL の合理化されたバージョンを提供し、生徒と一緒に行うアクティビティや単に授業を改善する方法など、教育的応用に関して何ができるかのいくつかの実用的な例を提供したいと考えています。現在の状態では、CL はこれらのコンテキストでまだ制

CL is a subject that has been written about extensively
and there have also been a couple of0 books that specifically entreat how to use it in the classroom (Boulton,
2009; Friginal, 2018; O’Keeffe & Mcarthy, 2022, Reppen,
2010) It is a subject of study and practice that goes backhundreds of years. We owe the beginning of corpus linguistics to the 13th century when studies of the Bible bymonks and other experts manually indexed its words
little by little and over time these techniques evolved
to create dictionaries, library databases, and computer
databases (O’Keeffe & Mcarthy, 2022). All this was donewith one goal in mind to investigate phenomena inlanguage and to order it in a way that makes it moreavailable and more easily analyzable. The word corpus
itself means very simply a collection of texts but in themodern sense, it means a collection of texts stored on
a computer (Friginal, 2018). Friginal (2018) also gives us
a more comprehensive definition:“A systematic compiling of naturally occurring
language―serves as a primary dataset for linguists/

researchers interested in analyzing language forms,
functions, and variation.”
It is important to understand that CL is a field withgreat width and depth that can be as simple as searching for how often students use a language form correctly or incorrectly in a collection of texts like a homework assignment or students searching for patterns incorrect idiom usage to researchers putting together
massive amounts of texts and data to look for trends
in speech and opinions surrounding the 2016 referendum in the UK that saw that country leave the European Union leading to the creation of the Brexit Corpus. Friginal (2018) defines CL as:“CL is a data-driven approach or methodology
and various frequency-based results are important,critical sources of information for language teaching
and learning.”
This paper will try and be as straightforward as possible

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

85

in its explanation and will specifically look at how CL
is useful for everyday teacher, CL tools and their uses,
sample exercises, and why teaching students how to
use a corpus is beneficial.

How is CL Useful for Teachers
Languages are complex living things that form dynamic
structures. Often textbooks and lessons portray themin a simplistic, flat, two-dimensional fashion, and thisis not always a bad thing because explanations andinformation must build upon themselves for students
to absorb the material, understand it, and then learn
to use it. There are a few aspects of language learningthat using corpora and CL tools can help add depth forlearners and teachers: Polysemy, Practicality and Patterns, and Authenticity

Polysemy
According to Bloom’s Taxonomy (Armstrong, 2010), oneof the basic things to consider when trying to engage
your students is whether can they remember andunderstand what they are learning. Assigning articles
and vocabulary can only provide surface-level understanding because words often have multiple meanings(Polysemy) depending on the context in which they areused. Teaching students how to use a corpus to find thecorrect meaning for the context it is found in can solve
a lot of confusion when they run into a word they havelearned before but because it is in a different context,
or it is being used idiomatically the meaning is different. Most corpora have different functions and containdifferent texts (Please see the CL Tools section) which
may function differently so please choose the tools to
use in your classroom based on your students’ needs.
Most corpora have a LIST function which allows you tosearch for all forms of a word, word-matching patterns,
and synonyms and create customized word lists.

Practicality and Patterns
Using the LIST function you can search through morethan 1 billion words in 485,202 texts in various genres(TV/Movie, Spoken, Academic, etc) using the Corpus ofContemporary American English (COCA) which can befound free online (https://www.english-corpora.org/)along with other corpora of various sizes and genres.
Students can do mini reports to practice using the corpus for example what are the 12 most used verbs in
American English (excluding be, do, have, and modal
verbs) (see Figure 1) and some examples of each. Students can actively and independently examine andnotice naturally occurring language, and their linguis-

Figure 1
12 most commonly used verbs in American English excluding be, do, have, and modal verbs

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

86

tic patterns and rules. (Boulton, 2009)

Authenticity
Materials used in classrooms should be authentic
and impactful, but how can teachers be sure that thematerials they are creating are authentic or instead theimage of English that we have created based on ourown experiences. The variation in patterns used in alanguage is different from place to place and can becalled World Englishes. Corpora were created to collecttexts created by people and are curated for different
purposes. For example, COCA was created to be a balanced corpus (having an equal amount of texts froma wide variety of genres) that is an effective sample ofwhat is called American English. The British National
Corpus (BNC) is an older balanced corpus that contains
100 million words in texts collected in the 1980s and90s. The Global Web-based English (GloWbE) corpus
which is comprised of 1.9 million words from 1.8 million web pages spanning 20 different English-speaking
countries provides unparalleled insight into the variation in English that can be found in the world. Some corpora look at variation between dialects and some lookat variation over time. The Corpus of Historical American English (COHA) is a collection of texts of American
English from the years 1820-2019. An interesting little
project would be to look at which is more commonly
used, “Going to…” or “Will…” in modern versus older
forms of English (see Figures 2 & 3) (english-corpora.

Figure 2
The frequency of the usage of the phrase “going to…” from the years 1820-2010

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

87Figure 3
The frequency of the usage of the word “Will” from the years 1820-2010org)

CL Tools and Their Uses
There are a wide variety of corpora and tools that areused for CL and Data-Driven Learning (DDL). This section will provide information on how to access themand what practical uses they might have for teachersand students. This section is broken up into two sections: Corpora and Multipurpose Tools.

CorporaMost corpora you find on the internet all have theirconcordancer (search engine) built into the website
which is useful, but they all have different functions
with some more than others. In CL we use the term
concordancer to refer to the program which searches,organizes, and retrieves results from a corpus. Google

is a concordancer that people use every day. Many of
the free online corpora give free access to download
the text files to use in a different concordance program.
www.english-corpora.org was originally a project thatwas started at Birmingham Young University in the
United States by Mark Davies. It has grown exponentially in size and is available for free (with some small
limitations). This website gives access to 19 different
corpora spanning different dialects, genres, and time
periods. The concordancer for each corpus is different
depending on its purpose but the general user interface is the same. COCA in particular has a lot of usefulfunctions, especially for beginners of CL other than the
LIST function including an Academic Word List (AWL)(Gardner and Davies, 2013) search function built in, a
WORD function that assembles a lot of corpus information on one page that is easy to read and analyze
including, definitions, synonyms, collocations (words

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

88that are found frequently together with the searchitem), clusters (words or groups of words that are often
found together with the search item), and Key Words In
Context (KWIC) which generates a list of examples ofthe search item in context with Parts Of Speech (POS)
highlighted in different colors. This corpus will also analyze text for word frequency based on the AWL which isuseful for students trying to improve their writing.
Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English & Michigan Corpus of Upper-Level Student Papers (MICASE& MICUSP) (https://lsa.umich.edu/eli/language-resources/micase-micusp.html) is a collection of written
and spoken language collected at the University ofMichigan in Ann Arbor Michigan. This corpus is relevant to teachers whose goal is to improve their students’ academic writing and speech. This is a collectionof transcripts and writing spanning multiple academic
genres that can be used as a reference from which tocompare the frequency of academic word use andother parts of speech. Teachers of English for Academic
Purposes (EAP) will find it particularly useful.
VOICE (Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English)(https://voice.acdh.oeaw.ac.at/) is a corpus of spoken
English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) and includes transcripts of people who use English as their second language instead of English from countries that include
English as one of their national languages. This corpus
specifically comprises transcripts of natural language
interactions that are divided into speech event types
such as conversations, meetings, and interviews. This
corpus should be useful for students who want to learn
business English, are job hunting, or generally want toimprove their conversational pragmatics in an authentic setting.

cated texts lies in the advanced grammar structuresand unfamiliar language patterns.

Multipurpose Tools
A variety of tools has been created for beginners andadvanced users of CL tools by Tom Cobb (https://www.
lextutor.ca/) (the University of Quebec in Montreal) and
Laurence Anthony (http://www.laurenceanthony.net/
software.html) (Waseda University). Both have tools forcomparing texts, creating corpora, and tools for making materials for the classroom or use in the classroom.
The Lextutor website has a variety of vocabulary size
tests that could be useful for new students to figureout their level or for teachers trying to chart students’progress over time. Laurence Anthony has created a
set of quick tools (AWL word family generator and AWL
text profiler). Both websites have tools for advanced CL
research as well as creating your own corpora.

Sample Exercises
These are exercises that have been found to be practical for use in the classroom. As with most CL exercises
they require some introduction to the tools in general
before the actual exercise, but both are relatively simple in their focus which is good because otherwise students get overwhelmed by unfamiliar terminology andtechnology. If you are going to use www.english-corpora.org you need to guide students through making
an account. It is free and it does not require a lot of time
to do.

Using a Concordancer for Vocabulary
Learning
Created by Jonathan McNair (Friginal, 2018)

WebParaNews (WPN) (http://www.antlabsolutions.
com/webparanews/) is a parallel corpus meaning it is acollection of texts from two different languages. WPN
is a corpus based on the National Institute of Information and Communications Technology’s (NICT) Japanese-English news articles database. The concordancer
is relatively simple to use for beginners and highlights
the searched term in both languages. This might beeasier to facilitate comprehension in pre-intermediate
Japanese EFL learners whose barrier to more compli-This exercise is broken down into a pre-task, task,
and post-task and can be done over several classes.
This allows students to get used to using the corpus
in class and eventually at home by themselves whichhelps build student autonomy. Learning goals include
word choice, recognizing idiomatic language, and peer
review. When beginning the pre-task students shouldhave at least one computer though if they do not thewebsite is accessible by mobile devices.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

89Figure 4
COCA List Function search: START

FigureCOCA List Function search: BEGIN

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

90•First, students should log in and go to the
COCA search page.
•
Using the LIST function, they will search for theLemma form of START by entering it in all caps inthe search bar. Next, they should open another tab
and repeat step one but instead search for BEGIN(see Figure 4-5 above).
•
As pair work let students examine the results
and encourage them to write down some noteson the patterns they notice, what words are often
found before and after the searched items, what
common phrases they find, and any irregularities.
•
Finally, give a handout to each student to fillout by themselves using forms of the word begin or
start.
See Appendix A for an example, but please take notethat what we want students to notice here is which
words are used in which context and when is it considered idiomatic. After they are done filling it out havethe students compare their answers.
•
For the task part you can repeat all the steps inthe pre-task but instead, search for WARM and HOT.
For this handout you want to make sure that you use a
lot more idiomatic language (Appendix A) since for themost part, begin and start can be used interchangeably except for a few instances.
The post-task employs a writing prompt to create
meaning-focused output. As feedback, the teacher canhighlight the misused words (I recommend using a tool
for looking at common multiword clusters which canbe found for free in Laurence Anthony’s AntConc program or Tom Cobb’s Lextutor website). Students will
use the WPN corpus and www.Thesaurus.com to findwords that are more suitable and rewrite the sentences.
This exercise was developed for use by pre-intermediate learners and could be done by high school as wellas college students. DDL and particularly this exercise
focus on exposing the students to large amounts of
input (see figures 4-5). From this input, students will beable to notice important features of vocabulary suchas polysemy, affective meanings, associations, and collocations (Richards, 2008). Being exposed to so much
input in context will allow students to absorb a word’s
meaning quicker than if they were to just naturally
notice it while reading (Friginal, 2018).

Quantifiers in Spoken and Academic Registers
Created by Marsha Walker (Friginal, 2018)
This task is simple as well and has some extensions thatcan be used as a post-task review. The learning goals
are straightforward, word choice (quantifiers), and analyzing register. In this case, register has the same meaning as genre which is situationally defined speech andwriting (Friginal, 2018), and these terms are often usedinterchangeably in CL.
•
First, let students log in to the english-corpora.com website and go to the COCA page. In the
LIST function interface, have them click on the “Sections” icon, in box 1 click on “SPOKEN”, and in box
2 click on “ACADEMIC”. (See Figure 6 below) Next,
have students search for “numerous” and ask them
about the result, “In which genre is numerous used
more?”. Have the students mark down the resulton the handout (Appendix A) and then proceed tofill out the rest by repeating the steps using otherquantifiers.
•
A possible post-task would be to have the students write a short dialogue using quantifiers used
in a spoken context and then share it with the class.
Other possible variations would be to use this forwords of frequency, or other grammar points thatvary between genres.
This lesson is appropriate for a pre-intermediate levelclass though it could be scaled up depending on thelevel of the students. The reason quantifiers were chosen is that using count and non-count nouns is grammatically challenging and also uses situationally appropriate language which is demonstrated well by using
CL (Friginal, 2018).

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

91

Figure 6
COCA List Function search: Refined search criteria for Numerous (comparing use in different registers)

Why CL is Useful for Students
Teaching students how to use a corpus is useful forthem on several levels. The first sample activity introduced in this paper focuses on vocabulary learningin which the responsibility lies often with the student
and teaching them how to use a corpus allows them
to be autonomous in their learning. It teaches themto understand language and its associations, patterns,
and contextual usage. You could say that reading does
the same thing but for a student to learn a particularphrase or vocabulary they might have to read thousands of words and be able to notice every time it
appears. CL provides an immense amount of input thatis focused and if analyzed properly can be extremely
helpful in students’ self-study.

Conclusion

CL from the start has trouble fitting itself into classrooms due to several factors. It is such an expansive
topic, and there are so many tools and terms that are
erudite and strange, that teachers balk at trying to
introduce something that they find hard to understandcompletely. The materials are hard to find, and often
dense (written as research rather than practical articles),and there are no student textbooks that are written forthe conversation classroom that use CL techniques.
Often teachers have a lot of other material they mustcover and simply adding another topic for them tointroduce, feels burdensome and wastes precious classtime. In many contexts, teachers are asked to focus on
letting students have speaking time (or they have beentaught to make that their priority) in class whereas CL
is focused on language learning and meaning-focused
input. Quality input is just as important as output, andas students learn to use CL techniques they can be efficiently implemented in the classroom as well as done
at home if time is lacking. CL is readily implemented in

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

92

writing exercises, but with some creativity can be used
to prepare students for speaking exercises as well bygiving them opportunities to notice patterns in language that are correct and authentic. Many of the corpora and tools that have been mentioned in this paper
provide tutorials and sample tasks that might be usedwith them if the opportunity to explore them is taken.

References
Anthony, L. (n.d.). WebParaNews. Retrieved
August 31, 2022, from http://www.
antlabsolutions.com/webparanews/
Anthony, L. (n.d.). Software. Laurence Anthony’s
Software. Retrieved August 31, 2022, fromhttp://www.laurenceanthony.net/software.html
Armstrong, P. (2010). Bloom’s Taxonomy.
Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching.
Retrieved August 31, 2022, from https://cft.
vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/bloomstaxonomy/.
Boulton, A. (2009). Data-driven learning: on paper,in practice. Corpus Linguistics in Language
Teaching, 17–52. Retrieved August 31, 2022,
from https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal00393809v2.

teachers: Tools, online resources, andclassroom activities. Routledge.
Gardner, D., & Davies, M. (2013). A new academic
vocabulary list. Applied Linguistics, 35(3),305–327. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/
amt015O’Keeffe, A., & McCarthy, M. (2022). In The
Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics(2nd ed., pp. 61–62). essay, Routledge.
Reppen, R. (2010). Using corpora in the language
classroom. Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C. (2008). Moving beyond the Plateau:
From intermediate to advanced levels in
language learning. Cambridge University
Press.
The Michigan Corpora: MICASE + MICUSP: U-M
LSA English language institute. LSA. (n.d.).
Retrieved August 31, 2022, from https://lsa.
umich.edu/eli/language-resources/micasemicusp.html
Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English.
VOICE. (n.d.). Retrieved August 31, 2022,
from https://voice.acdh.oeaw.ac.at/

Boulton, A. (2009). Testing the limits of data-driven
learning: Language proficiency and training.
ReCALL, 21(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1017/
s0958344009000068
Cobb, T. Compleat Lexical Tutor [computer
program]. Accessed September 31, 2022,
from https://www.lextutor.ca/cgi-bin/range/
texts/index.pl.
English-corpora.org. English Corpora: most widelyused online corpora. Billions of words of data:
free online access. (n.d.). Retrieved August
31, 2022, from https://www.english-corpora.
org/
Friginal, E. (2018). Corpus linguistics for English

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l93Appendix A
How often does start or begin occur with “to” and “with? Please look at the first 2 corpus pages andmark the result in the table.

with

to

start
begin
How often is start in front of “to”? How often is it behind?
Is it the same for begin? Please mark the result in the table.
In front

Behindstart
begin
How often is start in front of “with”? How often is it behind?
Is it the same for begin? Please mark the result in the table.
Please fill in the blanks with a form of “begin” or “start”.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

I could not _______ the car.
You ________ tomorrow.
It ________ to rain.
He _________ to sing.
You should ________ off your vacation with a good meal.
When you _________ learning English you should….
To ________ the computer press this button.
Please ___________ as soon as possible.
Hot vs. Warm

1. The emperor thanked them for their ___________ hospitality.
2. Inflation has become a ___________ issue in the presidential election.
3. Everyone thought she looked __________ in her new dress.
4. The situation changed in a ____________ second.
5. When I think about my family I always get ___________ and fuzzy feelings.
6. Thank you so much for the _________ comments.
7. The movie star was __________ off her new movie set when she was mobbed by reporters.
8. Environmental issues such as SDGs have become ________ topics these days.
9. Recently the cold war in Ukraine has become _________.
10. When I met my host family for the first time they greeted me very ____________.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

94

Quantifiers

Quantifiers

Tokens 1 in
SpokenCorpora:Provide 2 exIn which con- amples of the
Tokens 2 in text should we word in context.
Writtenuse this word?
Corpora:(Spoken, Written, or Both)
Underline thenoun the quantifier modifies
He used numerous
sources.

Numerous
Numerous people
applied for the job.

A lot
Lots
Many
Much
Tons ofMultiple
SeveralP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l95Corrective Feedback: Investigating Japanese Learners’ Perceptions
Martyn McGettigan
Hiroshima City University
Abstract
Previous studies looking at student attitudes to corrective feedback (CF) found that students tended to favour comprehensive
and more explicit forms of CF, although there was evidence that Japanese students tended to prefer less comprehensive andmore implicit CF. In this study on oral CF, quantitative data was gathered by means of a survey of Japanese adult learners andqualitative data in interviews with four survey participants. The interview participants took part in a short task and were given
individual CF according to their stated preferences, then asked to reflect on their answers to the survey questions. In contrast
with previous studies, participants in this study were found to exhibit views on CF in line with non-Japanese, adult EFL learners
in previous studies. The method of giving students CF and then asking them to reconsider their preferences was found to be aneffective means of reflection on approaches to CF.
日本語概要
修正フィードバック（CF）に対する学習者の態度に関する先行研究では、学習者は包括的でより明白なCFを好む傾向があることが明らかにされていますが、日本人学習者はより包括的でなくより黙示的なCFを好む傾向があるとの証拠もあります。本研究では、日本人学習者を対象としたアンケートによる量的データと、アンケート参加者4名とのインタビューによる質的データを収集した。インタビュー参
加者は、短い課題に参加し、調査の問いに対して熟考された答えを尋ねられる前に、選考意識による修正フィードバックを与えられた。
先行研究とは対照的に、本研究の参加者は、先行研究における外国人学習者と同じような CF に関する見解を示していることがわかった。学習者にCFを与えた後彼らにどのように修正するが好みか再考するよう尋ねるこのメソッドは、関連する全ての人にとって学習をより良くするために振り返る効果的な手段であることが分かった。

Corrective feedback (CF) has been defined by Ellis andShintani (2014) as “responses to learner utterances that
contain (or are perceived as containing) an error.” (p.
249). These responses can be seen as a form of scaffolding, and may range from the teacher making it
clear there is an error and correction is needed (explicit
correction) to the teacher merely repeating what thelearner said with the correction included (implicit correction). While many studies have looked at what formsof CF are most effective in aiding language acquisition,
far fewer have examined student attitudes towards CF.
This mixed-methods study sought to further explore
the attitudes of Japanese learners towards CF in termsof what the literature has shown to be effective. The
qualitative phase of the study also examined how
actual experience of CF tailored to their expectations
might lead to changes in the learners’ attitudes to CF.
To identify which form of CF the literature has shown
to be most effective, it is necessary first to define thedifferent forms CF can take. Firstly, as stated above, CF
can be more or less explicit. In addition, CF can either
give the correct form as input, or seek to elicit thecorrect form from the student as output. Lyster andRanta (1997) were among the first to try to categorise
these different strategies, and they identified six forms(recasts, repetition, clarification requests, explicit correction, metalinguistic clues, and elicitation). Taking
these six forms of CF, together with the two distinctions
mentioned above, Ellis (2012) proposed a somewhat
simpler, four-way division of CF strategies (see Table 1).
Explicit correction is simply the teacher telling the student they have made a mistake, and giving the correct
form. A metalinguistic clue involves the teacher using
grammatical terminology to prompt the student toself-correct, while elicitation involves the same prompting without the grammatical clue. Recasts involve theteacher repeating the student’s output with the error
corrected, without explicitly indicating that there wasan error. Repetition refers to the teacher repeating thestudent’s output with the error intact, possibly stressing the error and/or employing question intonation.
Finally, a clarification request could be as simple as theteacher saying “Pardon?”.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

96Table 1Strategies for CF

Taxonomy of correction strategies

Two types of correction strategies along two dimensions(Lyster and Ranta, 1997)(Ellis, 2012)

Explicit correction

Explicit/input-providing (EIP)

Metalinguistic clues
Elicitation
Recasts
Repetition
Clarification Requests

A number of studies have sought to compare theeffectiveness of implicit and explicit CF in aiding language acquisition. In his meta-analysis of such studies, Li (2012) found explicit CF to be more effective
than implicit. Ellis et al. (2006) analysed eleven previous studies, most of which compare recasts withsome type of explicit CF, and, in general, reported that
explicit feedback was more effective. However, Ellis etal. also pointed out that all of the studies used formsof testing that would be likely to test explicit morethan implicit knowledge, and might thus be said to bebiased in favour of explicit CF. Addressing this issue,in their own study Ellis et al. (2006) included an oral
imitation test, administered before CF treatment andas both an immediate and delayed post-test, that was
designed to test implicit knowledge. They found thatthe group that had received explicit CF did better thanboth the implicit CF and control groups, although thisdifference only became statistically significant in the
delayed post-tests.
In summary, while the literature clearly does not support one form of CF to the exclusion of all others, there
would seem to be sufficient evidence that explicit CF
is generally more effective in aiding language acquisition.
Some studies have investigated student attitudes
to CF. Cathcart and Olsen (1976), gathered data on
student attitudes to CF by means of a questionnaire
distributed to students from a wide range of backgrounds at a university and two community colleges.

Explicit/output-prompting (EOP)
Implicit/input-providing (IIP)
Implicit/output-prompting (IOP)

The questions focused on how often students wanted
their errors corrected and what types of errors theywanted corrected, as well as asking students to ratevarious correction strategies that included implicit
and explicit, output-prompting, and input-providing
strategies. A majority of students expressed a preference for having all of their errors corrected, with mostof the remaining respondents preferring to have theirerrors corrected most of the time. In terms of whichcorrection strategies students considered most useful,a clear preference was shown for more explicit strategies, with both input-providing and output-prompting
strategies considered useful. Cathcart and Olsen only
found small differences in these preferences between
different nationalities, although they did find some evidence to suggest that Japanese students may be more
averse to “negative-sounding” strategies (p. 47). Morerecent studies have continued to show similar resultsin terms of student attitudes (Roothooft and Breeze,
2016; Sakiroglu, 2020), with a meta-analysis by Li (2017)confirming these results across studies.
In a study focusing specifically on Japanese EFL students at universities, Katayama (2007) found somewhat different results. While still expressing a positive attitude towards CF in general, students were farless clear on whether they preferred all errors to becorrected. On average, they slightly disagreed withthe proposition that teachers should do so. They alsoslightly agreed, on average, that only errors affecting
communication should be corrected. Apart from ignoring the error, or simply repeating the question, which

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

97

were both strongly disliked, Katayama did not find thatstudents had particularly strong preferences for one
CF strategy over another. The CF strategy the students
expressed the greatest preference for was describedas “T gives a hint which might enable S to notice andself-correct.” (p. 294). This is arguably the least explicitof the strategies the students rated. The most obvious
way to account for the differences between this study
and previous studies would be to conclude that they
result from cultural differences between Japaneselearners and those from other cultures. This conclusion
seems to be somewhat supported by the findings of
Cathcart and Olsen (1976) and McCargar (1993), where
Japanese students (university and community college,in the case of Cathcart and Olsen; post-secondary
intensive ESL course attendees, in the case of McGargar) were found to be less positive towards comprehensive correction and particularly direct and explicit
CF strategies. Overall, it seems there is a great deal ofevidence showing students favour error correction,and many want this correction applied to all errors.
They tend to favour explicit correction strategies, both
output-prompting and input-providing. However, evidence also shows that Japanese students may differ,with a greater preference for correction that is lesscomprehensive and more implicit.
Considering the above, this study investigated the following two research questions:
1) To what extent do the oral CF preferences of a sampleof Japanese adults, of differing ages and backgrounds,align with the literature, both in terms of previous studies looking at student preferences, and what has beenshown to be effective?
2) Can experience of individual, oral CF according totheir stated preferences cause students to change
those preferences, and, if so, in what ways?

MethodThe Quantitative Phase: The Online Survey

ent age-groups and contexts, this study aimed to bebroader-ranging, stipulating only that the participants
must have had experience of formal English study. The
quantitative data was collected by means of an online
questionnaire (see Appendix A for the original questionnaire and Appendix B for its Japanese translation).
The questionnaire was divided into two sections. The
first was designed to elicit participants’ preferences interms of oral CF. The participants were asked to indicate their agreement or disagreement, on a five-point
scale, with five statements about oral CF. The second
section asked the participants to rate four types of CF,
covering the four combinations of input-providing/
output-prompting and implicit/explicit, again using afive-point scale from least effective to most effective.

The Qualitative Phase: Interviews and Minilessons
Four interview participants were selected fromamong those that had completed the survey, agreed
to participate in an interview, and were deemed by
the researcher to be of a sufficient proficiency level(roughly CEFR B2 at least) to be able to do so in English.
The interviews were conducted in English in threeparts. In the first part, the participants were asked togive reasons for their responses to the statements
and types of CF in the first and second sections of thequestionnaire. Following this, participants were asked
to take part in a short task (Appendix C). During thistask, the interviewer administered CF in accordancewith the preferences expressed by the interviewee inthe questionnaire and the first part of the interview.
The participants took an average of four minutes and
44 seconds to complete the task. After completing thetask, the participants were asked for their reaction to
the CF they had just received and whether there were
any changes they would make to their initial answers
on the questionnaire. Of the four interviewees, only
two (C and D) were still studying English at the timeof taking part in the study. The entire interview andmini-lesson sessions were recorded and transcribed as
accurately as possible, with all errors included.

The participants were 50 adult native-speakers ofJapanese, found through an open, online survey.
While the previous studies cited each looked at differ-P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

98Results
Quantitative Results
In Table 2, the range, mean, and standard deviation are
given for the participants’ responses to the first part of
the questionnaire.
As can be seen, responses were very mixed, with a fullrange of responses given for each statement. On average, the students felt most strongly about the second
statement which, taking account of the reverse codingof this item, indicates strong support for teachers paying attention to affective factors when administering
CF. This is closely followed by the fifth item, suggesting
students on average thought grammatical explanation
was important and should not be omitted. Students
also favoured correcting all errors, though less strongly

with a mean score of 3.6.
Table 3 shows the range, mean, and standard deviation for responses to the second part of the questionnaire, in which participants were asked to rate
different methods of giving CF from 1-5 (where 5 was
most effective). As can be seen, there was once again awide range of responses, although the standard deviations indicate the majority of responses were clustered around the mean. The most strongly supported
method was explicit and input-providing CF (EIP),
closely followed by explicit and output-prompting CF(EOP). Both were on average rated as effective. Implicit
CF, both output-prompting (IOP) and input-providing(IIP), was on average rated as less effective. Implicit andinput-providing CF was rated as least effective overall,and this was the only method for which no respondent
selected ‘5’.

Table 2
Results of Part 1 of the Online Survey
Statement

Range

Mean

Std. Dev.

A teacher should correct ALL errors students make, rather than ignoring some of
them.

5-Jan

3.6

1.14

A teacher should NOT think about the student’s feelings when correcting errors.

5-Jan

1.92

1.07

Errors should NOT be corrected immediately; they should be corrected at the end of
the activity.

5-Jan

2.88

1.22

A teacher should correct the errors that impede communication, and ignore theothers.

5-Jan

2.52

1.11

The teacher should NOT give a grammatical explanation of an error, only the correct
form.

5-Jan

2.02

0.94

Method of giving CF

Range

Mean

Std. Dev.

The teacher tells me I have made a mistake and then gives the correct form. (EIP)

1--5

3.9

1.05

The teacher tells me I have made a mistake, but waits for me to give the correct form.
(EOP)

1--5

3.52

1.01

The teacher just gives the correct form, without making it clear I have made a mistake.
(IIP)

1--4

1.94

0.93

The teacher asks me to repeat what I said, not making it clear I have made a mistake.
(IOP)

1--5

2.14

0.99

Table 3Results of Part 2 of the Online Survey

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

99

Qualitative Results
Table 4 gives the responses to the survey questions
given by the four interview participants.
As the table shows, the responses were rather varied. There was, however, general agreement on somepoints, such as rejection of the proposition that grammatical explanation should be omitted and agreementthat explicit output-prompting CF is more effective
than implicit CF, and that explicit input-providing CF is
at least as effective as implicit. On the question of correcting all errors, responses ranged from disagreement(2) to strong agreement (5). Interviewee D, who indicated strong agreement, saw correction of all errors
as important for improvement, but also conceded that
this was only her opinion, and this may not be true forall learners. The reason she saw such comprehensive
CF as important for improvement was that it can leadto certain small mistakes never being corrected andpossibly becoming fossilised. As she put it:

When prompted to give her reasons for disagreeing
with comprehensive correction, however, she statedthat she felt this would “discourage” her, and ultimately
concluded that she believed it was important for theteacher to strike the right balance. While the participants who agreed with the statement gave similar reasons, then, those that disagreed seemed to have different concerns, one believing too much correction could
be detrimental to autonomous learning, and the otherhighlighting affective factors.
The interviewees were also each asked to give theirreasons for favouring whichever method of correction
they had given the highest rating. In the case of interviewees A, B, and C, this was explicit, output-prompting CF, which they rated 5, 5, and 4, respectively.
Interviewee D also gave this method a rating of 4, butfavoured explicit, input-providing CF overall, with a rating of 5. Interviewee A explained her choice in termsof students constructing their own corrections being
good practice, stating:...if that is the case [that some errors are not corrected], Japanese learners always use the same
expressions and make the same mistakes. I think it
doesn’t lead to good improvement.

Because making sentence is very good practice. So,teachers don’t need to tell students correct answer
immediately, so that students lose chance to makesentence by themselves.

This response is similar to that given by interviewee
A, who indicated agreement (4) with the statement.
Interviewee B was ambivalent on the question, giving it a rating of 3. She stated that, while the teacher
should certainly correct some errors, it is also important for students to think by themselves and not to have
all their errors corrected. Interviewee C was the only
one to disagree with the statement, giving it a ratingof 2. When asked why she had given this response,
she began by recounting her disappointment whenattending English lessons and not receiving any correction at all:Interviewee B responded very similarly to interviewee
A. Interviewee C also talked about wanting to be given
the chance to self-correct, and also referred to this as“good practice”. Interviewee D focused more on the
explicit nature of her chosen method, seeing CF thatis both explicit and input-providing as necessary forensuring that she can understand the nature of theerror she has made. She said:

Sometimes, when I have attended some English
conversation classes, sometimes I felt a little bit
disappointed because the teacher didn’t correct.
So, I expected him or her to just replace my Japanese English into the better and more appropriate
English. But, yeah, they didn’t, so...

Sometimes, if teachers kind of implies my mistakes,
which... without telling me I have made a mistake...
if just tiny mistakes and easy mistakes... I can probably feel I made a mistake by teacher’s reaction... But,
sometimes, some grammatical mistakes... even justteachers implies something, probably I can’t understand what kind of mistakes I made. So, if teachers...
gives me a clear point where I made a mistake, it’seasier for me to realise.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

100

Table 4
Survey Responses of the Four Interviewees
Survey Question

Interviewee:
A

B

C

D

The teacher should correct all errors

4

3

2

5

The teacher should not think about students’ feelings

4

1

2

1

The teacher should use delayed correction

4

2

2

3

The teacher should only correct errors that could impede communication

2

4

2

1

The teacher should not give grammatical explanation

2

2

2

1

Explicit/Input-providing

4

2

2

5

Explicit/Output-prompting

5

5

4

4

Implicit/Input-providing

4

1

2

3

Implicit/Output-prompting

4

2

2

2

Following this, the interviewees completed a shorttask in which they had to describe three kinds of Japanese food. During and after this task, the researcher
implemented the kind of error correction each interviewee had indicated she favoured to the best of hisability. This included giving either delayed or immediate correction to the interviewee (or, in the case ofinterviewee D, a mixture of the two). Table 5 shows thenumber of errors made by the student (approximate,since deciding what constitutes a discrete error can bedifficult), the number of times the teacher offered CF,
the number of times the student demonstrated uptake(repeating/using the corrected language) of a correction given by the teacher, and the number of times thestudent was able to self-correct without being given
the correct form by the teacher.

Table 5
CF in the Mini-lessons

ErrorsCorrected

Uptake after
teacher correction

Self-repair

Interviewee A

11

9

3

6

Interviewee B

33

7

2

4

Interviewee C

13

7

2

5

Interviewee D

7

4

2

5

After the task and the CF were finished, the interviewees were asked to comment on how they felt about the
CF they had received. All four interviewees expressedsatisfaction. They were then asked if, in light of the CF
they had just been given, they would make any changes
to the answers they gave in the survey. Interviewee A
stated that she would make no changes. Interviewee
C, who received immediate correction, also said shewould not make any changes. Interviewee B, however, found the immediate correction to have madespeaking difficult. Therefore, she opted to change her
response to the third statement to a 4 (mild agreementthat not all errors should be corrected). Interviewee D
received a mixture of delayed and immediate correction, although the speed at which she spoke and thefact that she had indicated only wanting small andsimple errors to be corrected immediately meant thatthe vast majority of the CF she received was delayed.
Also, even though she had opted for input-providing
CF, in almost every case she interrupted the correctionin order to attempt to self-correct, as in the following
example:P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

101Interviewer: Okay, “in a various way”, so, there’s a bitof a problem there because, ‘a various way’ doesn’tquite work...
Interviewee D: In various ways?
Interviewer: Okay, yes. You already got it.
This was pointed out to interviewee D at the end of theinterview, which resulted in her deciding to change heranswer to favour explicit, output-prompting CF over all
the other methods.

Discussion
The results of the survey stage of this study werelargely as reported by previous studies looking at students’ attitudes to CF. As in previous studies, students
taking part in this survey slightly favoured comprehensive correction on average. Furthermore, in line withprevious studies, the respondents favoured explicit CF
over implicit.
Whereas Japanese learners in Katayama’s (2007a)study were found to disagree, on average, with thecorrection of all errors, in this study Japanese learners were found to support it. However, at 3.6 (with 3
being neutral), this was only the third strongest average opinion expressed. It is possible that putting thesame question to non-Japanese learners could perhaps
have produced stronger agreement. This would be inline with the findings of McCargar (1993), who found‘mild agreement’ with comprehensive CF among Japanese learners while most groups expressed muchstronger agreement. Cathcart and Olsen (1976) and
Katayama (2007a, 2007b) also found Japanese students
to regard explicit CF less favourably than learners
from other language backgrounds, particularly when
the CF is delivered in a direct manner which could beconsidered ‘negative-sounding’. In this study, on theother hand, explicit CF was rated much higher than
implicit CF overall. One explanation for this apparent
discrepancy might be that in this study the methodsof delivering CF were simply described without giving
examples (such as ‘don’t say go, say went’). This might
have avoided giving the participants the impressionthat certain methods sounded negative or confrontational. It is important to note that the previous studies mentioned were all based on groups, whereas thisstudy involved administering CF in private lessons. As
such, affective factors related to “saving face” in frontof peers may have had an effect on the previous studies’ results that was absent here.
Overall, in terms of the first research question, apartfrom a slight preference for input-providing over output-prompting CF, the forms of CF preferred on average by participants in this study were shown to be
most effective in previous research. This would seemto be an encouraging outcome that suggests researchbased methodologies can generally be implemented
in a manner that should not come into conflict withstudent expectations. The students views were foundto be slightly more favourable towards correcting all
errors than those of Japanese students in previous
studies, although, as mentioned above, the wording of
the survey and the fact that there were no peers present for the mini-lessons may account for this.
The second research question deals with the extent
to which experience of their stated preferences for CF
can lead students to change their minds about those
preferences. This question deals entirely with dataobtained during the one-to-one interview stage of thestudy. Two of the four interviewees opted to change
their survey answers after receiving CF. This shows thatmeaningful reflection resulting in changes that better
meet student needs can result from this process.
Although small in scope, the results of this study suggest areas for further research. The effect of different
settings (class, group or private) on student views
could be further investigated, as well as the effect of
the wording used to describe the oral CF strategies(descriptions or quoted examples). Finally, the study
has shown that the process of giving CF according tostudents’ preferences, and then asking them for feedback on that CF can add insight on quantitative results,
as well as aiding the teacher’s own reflections and providing a way in which teachers and learners can negotiate an approach to CF that better meets the learners’
needs. In adapting this method to a group or classroom
setting, CF could be administered based on the overall
average preferences of the group or class, and groupor class discussion could take the place of one-to-one
interviews. This would allow for the exploration of

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

102affective factors related to peer judgement, and could
prove a very fruitful way of inviting learners to take adegree of ownership of how CF is applied in their learning context.

References

Cathcart, R. L., & Olsen, J. E. W. B. (1976).
Teachers’ and students’ preferences forcorrection of classroom conversation errors.
In J. F. Fanselow & R. H. Crymes (Eds.). On
TESOL, 76, 41- 53.
Ellis, R. (2012). Language teaching researchand language pedagogy. London: WileyBlackwell.
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit
and explicit corrective feedback and theacquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 28(2), 339-368. doi.
org/10.1017/s0272263106060141

Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback
and learner uptake. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37-66. doi.
org/10.1017/s0272263197001034
McCargar, D. F. (1993). Teacher and studentrole expectations: Cross-culturaldifferences and implications. The Modern
Language Journal, 77(2), 192-207. doi.
org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1993.tb01963.x
Roothooft, H. & Breeze, R. (2016). A comparisonof EFL teachers’ and students’ attitudes
to oral corrective feedback. Language
Awareness, 25(4), 318-335. doi.org/10.1080/0
9658416.2016.1235580
Sakiroglu, H. (2020). Oral corrective feedback
preferences in university students in English
communication classes. International Journalof Research in Education and Science, 6(1),172-178. doi.org/10.46328/ijres.v6i1.806

Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language
pedagogy through second language
acquisition research. Oxford: Routledge.
Katayama, A. (2007). Learners’ perceptions toward
oral error correction. In K. Bradford-Watts(Ed.). JALT 2006 Conference Proceedings.
Tokyo: JALT.
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective
feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language
Learning, 60(2), 309-365. doi.org/10.1111/
j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x
Li, S. (2017). Student and teacher beliefs andattitudes about oral corrective feedback. In
H. Nassaji & E. Cartchava (Eds.). Corrective
Feedback in Second Language Teaching and
Learning. New York: Routledge. 143-157.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l103Appendix A
English Version of Questionnaire
Are you_ malePlease indicate your age_ female?

__ under 18 __ 18-29 __ 30-39 __ 40-49 __ 50-59__ 60-69 __ over 70

How long have you studied English in yourlife?

___ years and ___ months

Businessman/woman _ civil servant _What do you do?
student/researcher _ housewife/husband _ other _How many hours a week do you study En___ hours
glish at the moment - in formal lessons?
- in your free time? ___ hours

What prefecture do you live in?

_________________________________

Please select a number from 1-5, where 1means strongly disagree and 5 means strongly
agree:

A teacher should correct ALL errors students
make, rather than ignoring some of them

A teacher should NOT think about the student’s
feelings when correcting errors
Errors should NOT be corrected immediately; they should be corrected at the end of theactivity.

Strongly

Strongly

disagree

agree

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

4

5

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

104

A teacher should correct the errors that impede
communication, and ignore the others.

1

2

3

4

5

The teacher should NOT give a grammaticalexplanation of an error, only the correct form.

1

2

3

4

5

Please rate the following methods of correction,from 1 (least effective) to 5 (most effective).
Least

Most

effective

effective

The teacher tells me I have made a mistakeand then gives the correct form.

1

2

3

4

5

The teacher tells me I have made a mistake,but waits for me to give the correct form.

1

2

3

4

5

The teacher just gives the correct form, without
making it clear I have made a mistake.

1

2

3

4

5

The teacher asks me to repeat what I said, notmaking it clear I have made a mistake.

1

2

3

4

5

Are you interested in taking part further in thisresearch project?

Yes ___

No ___

If yes, please enter an e-mail address by which_______________________________________
you can be contacted.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l105Appendix B
Japanese Version of Questionnaire
＿

男性

＿

女性

あなたの性別を教えてください。

__ 18才未満 __ 18~29才 __ 30~39才 __40~49才 __ 50~59才 __ 60~69才 __ 70才以上あなたの年齢を教えてください。

あなたはどのくらい英語を勉強していますか（していましたか）？

___ 年 ___ ヶ月＿ ビジネス＿ 公務員 ＿ 学生/研究＿ 主婦/主夫＿ その他

あなたの職業はなんですか？

現在、一週間に何時間英語を勉
強していますか？
－レッスンとして___ 時間－自由時間に___ 時間あなたはどちらにお住まいですか？

県

次の質問に賛成するかを１～５の５段階の中で選び回答ください。最も賛成する
場合は５を，最も強く反対する場合には１を選んでください。
強く反対する
先生は生徒の間違えを，一部でなく全て直すべきである。

1

2

3

強く賛成する4

5

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

106

間違えを直す際に，先生は生徒の感情を考慮すべきではない。

1

2

3

4

5

間違えをその場ですぐ直すべきではな
く，終わりの段階で直すべきである。

1

2

3

4

5

先生はコミュニケーションの障害になる
間違えのみを直すべきであり，他の間違えは無視すべきである。

1

2

3

4

5

先生は，間違えの文法的な説明をしないで，正答を示すすべきである。

1

2

3

4

5

次の質問について１～５の５段階の中で選び回答ください。間違えを直すことについて，最も効果的な手法と思われる場
合には５を，最も効果的でない手法と思われる場合には１を選んでください。
最も効果的でない

最も効果的先生が，私が間違えたことを指摘し，正答を教えてくれる。

1

2

3

4

5

先生が，私が間違えたことを指摘し，その上で，私が正答を述べるまで待つ。

1

2

3

4

5

先生が，私がミスしたことを明確に指摘しない，正答を教えてくれる。

1

2

3

4

5

先生が，私がミスしたことを明確に指摘しないで，私に発言をもう一度繰り返さ
せる。

1

2

3

4

5

この研究プロジェクトへの更なる参加に関心を持っていただけますか。お聞きし Yes ___ています。

No ___

もし関心を持っていただけるのなら，コンタクトさせていただくためのeメールア _______________________________________
ドレスを記入ください。

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l107Appendix C
Mini-lesson Task
Someone is visiting your city in Japan for one day. They want recommendations for food.
They will only have time to try three things.
Make three recommendations. You can recommend general Japanese food, or specialities fromyour home town.
Explain what is in the dishes and how they are made. Answer any questions the person asks.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

108

Effects of Weekly Explicit Grammar Instruction on L2 speaking Development

Shzh-chen Nancy Lee
Osaka University

Abstract
Research in the task-based learning and teaching (TBLT) field has been looking at the effects of form-focused instruction on
speaking development. Past studies have produced significant gains in oral fluency and syntactic complexity yet limited gains
in syntactic accuracy. The present study therefore aimed to examine the effects of explicit form-focused instruction over timeby looking at changes to learners’ speaking output from receiving weekly explicit grammar instruction over seven weeks. Threetarget participants received 10 minutes of grammar instruction from the researcher on three past tense forms for seven weeks.
Pretest and posttest were conducted before and after the intervention period. Changes in the participants speaking output were
quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed. All participants improved in syntactic accuracy in terms of global accuracy and local
accuracy. While the three participants developed differently in their speaking over time, the focused tasks successfully directed
one participant’s attention to the target forms through focus-on-forms and also raised his awareness toward grammatical accuracy.

日本語概要
タスク中心型指導方法 (TBLT) 分野の研究において、フォームがスピーキング力にあたえる影響は広く研究されてきた。しかし、流暢さと複雑さに良い影響をもたらしたが、文法の正確さの向上に対してほぼ影響がなかった。本研究は、明確なフォーム・フォーカスト・イン
ストラクションの効果を縦断的に調べるため、7週間にわたって毎週文法指導を受けた学習者のスピーキング変化を調べた。対象となる
参加者 の3 人は、毎週10 分間の過去形文法指導を受けた。介入期間の7週間の前後にプリテスト及びポストテストを行った。そして、参加者の発話の変化を量的および質的に分析した。その結果、参加者3人とも文法の正確さが向上した。 また、時間の経過とともに3 人の参加者はスピーキングの発達過程に違いがあったが、フォーカス・オン・フォームズのタスクによって1 人の参加者の注意力が過去形文法に向けることに成功し、文法の正確さに対する意識も高めた。

In order to develop learners’ English speaking ability,
many Japanese universities have implemented communication-based classrooms. In these classrooms,
task-based language teaching (TBLT) has become acommon approach where students complete different
tasks in English that resemble real-life situations. While
research found TBLT to be a good approach for developing speaking ability, the integration of form intomeaningful tasks is desirable (Long, 2015). More recent
TBLT research started to recognize the importance ofform-focused instruction (FFI) for developing learners’
speaking ability. A number of studies have shown FFI
leads to significant gains in fluency (e.g., Ahmadian &Tavakoli, 2011) and some gains in syntactic complexity(e.g., Bygate, 2001). However, to date, not many studies have produced significant gains in syntactic accuracy (see Gass et al., 1999; Mochizuki & Ortega, 2008;

Sangarun, 2005 for exceptions). It may be that limited
syntactic accuracy gains have been observed because
previous studies mainly looked at the effects of FFI
by using task repetitions (e.g., Bygate, 2001; Bygate &Samuda, 2005; Lambert et al., 2017). In addition, theFFI intervention was often implemented during one
single session. Therefore, the present study aimed toinvestigate the effects of form-focused instruction on
EFL learners’ speaking ability by looking at the effects
of receiving weekly explicit grammar explanation overtime. Data of this study was a part of the researcher’doctoral dissertation research.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l109Task-based language teaching (TBLT)
Task-based language teaching grew out from thecommunicative language teaching (CLT) paradigm
to become one of the most commonly approaches inEnglish communication classrooms. The original TBLT
principle suggests that learners do not need to learn
consciously but, rather, they can learn incidentally bycompleting tasks designed by teachers which focus
their attention on meaning (Ellis, 2018). Task can be
defined differently by different researchers (Ellis, 2003).
According to Ellis (2003), tasks primarily focus on meaning, use real-world language through skills of listening,reading, speaking and writing, engage cognitive processes such as selecting, classifying, ordering, reasoning, and evaluating information, as well as have clear
communicative outcomes. In addition, tasks can beboth focused, which focus on meaning and nonlinguistic purpose(s) only, and unfocused, which are designed
to provide learners with opportunities to use specificgrammatical features (Lyster, 2007).

Focus on form (FonF) and Focus on forms(FonFs)
Focus on form (FonF) was first introduced as a term todescribe brief instructional focus of linguistic featuresduring meaningful communication (Williams, 2005).
According to its initial interpretation, focus on form isconcerned with the communication of meaning andincidentally occurred linguistic features when they are
triggered by learner-oriented problems during realcommunication. Therefore, teachers would wait reactively for learner problems to occur and only respond to
those problems when needed. Therefore, target forms
would only originate from problems experienced by
the learners, as reactive responses to problems thatemerge during tasks (Ellis et al., 2001). Compared tofocus on form (FonF) which occurs incidentally, focus
on forms (FonFs) was introduced as a term to describe
decontextualized, planned, pre-selected teacher-centered instructions of linguistic features. However, theambiguity and overlap of the distinction between
FonF and FonFs is inevitable. Therefore Ellis (2001) suggested the umbrella term, form-focused instruction(FFI) to refer to all instructions, both incidental andplanned that intend to direct learner attention to lin-

guistic forms of the target language.

Form-focused instruction (FFI)
Form-focused instruction (FFI) can also be both implicit
and explicit, ranging from implicitly structured interventions such as planning and repetition, to more
explicitly teacher directed interventions such as modelling, feedback, and explanations of target linguistic
forms (Norris & Ortega, 2000). Metacognitive process oftarget linguistic forms can be encouraged through FFI
where form can assist learners’ interlanguage development (Ellis et al., 2001). During FFI, learners are encouraged to attend to forms that they have not yet acquired(Williams, 2005) and compare their current interlanguage knowledge with the target language knowledge. Therefore, when given effectively, FFI could lead
learners to compare forms stored in short-term memory in the input given to them, with knowledge stored
in their long-term memory.

Grammar instruction
In the EFL context, form-focused instruction is considered effective because it reduces ambiguity andfacilitates cognitive mapping between form, meaning, and the use of linguistic expressions for learners(DeKeyser, 1998). Through grammar instruction, teachers can guide learners’ attention to specific syntactic
forms, which can then enhance their ability to speak
those forms accurately (Goh & Burns, 2012). This explicitness can encourage learners to notice error forms intheir output. According to Noticing the gap hypothesis(Schmidt & Frota, 1986), learners need to make conscious comparisons between their own output and target language input. By doing so, learners could modify
their spoken language and achieve greater accuracy.
According to Swain (1985), awareness is a mechanismthat triggers the cognitive processes needed so learners need to become aware of what they are producing
in order to make accurate and precise output. Learnerawareness is therefore important because simply
speaking the target language without consciousness isinadequate (Goh & Burns, 2012).
Unlike the more implicit form-focused instructions
such as planning (e.g., Ahmadian & Tavakoli, 2011) andP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

110task repetition (e.g., Bygate, 2001), grammar explanation explicitly focuses on form and could potentiallyassist learners to acquire grammatical features moreaccurately and quickly (Han, 2004). However, theeffects of grammar instruction on speaking development is difficult to measure, as changes in oral output
are more difficult to be captured than changes in written output (Ellis, 2005). Ellis further suggests that it iseffective to combine different grammar instructions
such as explicit explanation, production practice, andnegative feedback together.

Measuring speaking proficiency
From a linguistic perspective, speaking proficiency isoften measured using three constructs: complexity,
accuracy, and fluency (Ellis & Barkhuizen, 2005). Syntactic complexity is often measured by global complexity,
complexity by subordination, and complexity via subclausal or phrasal elaboration (Norris & Ortega, 2009).
Within which, global complexity is often measured bymean length of T-unit. Accuracy is often measured by
identifying deviations from the native-speaker normin terms of errors (Housen & Huiken, 2009). Syntactic
accuracy can be measured by global accuracy in termsof the number and percentage of error-free T-units(Michel, 2017) and local accuracy of specific linguistic
forms (Iwashita et al., 2008). Fluency is often measured
by speed without unneeded pausing or dysfluency
markers, such as hesitations, false-starts, or reformulations (Ellis, 2003).

MethodIn order to examine the effects of receiving grammar
instruction over time on English speaking ability, aclassroom-based study was conducted on 41 firstyear Japanese university students. Participants were
given weekly grammar explanation by the researcher
for seven weeks. Participants’ weekly oral output
immediately after receiving grammar instruction wasrecorded, transcribed, and analysed. The research
period included one pretest week, seven weeks ofinterventions, and one posttest week. Pretest andposttest were used to measure the effects of intervention over time on participants.

Research population
Participants came from one national university inWestern Japan. Students at this university are considered to have high academic ability and above intermediate level English writing and reading proficiency
levels. Participants were non-English majors and had
two 90-minute mandatory English courses per week
for 15 weeks per semester, of which one of the courses
was taught by the researcher. In the communication
focused course taught by the researcher, 41 participants engaged in meaning-based tasks, including conducting pair work and small group discussion of current global news and topics.

Instrumentation
Four-picture cartoon narration (equivalent to Eiken
Pre Level-1) was chosen for the present study because
it could focus on speaking output while standardizing content and task difficulty. A total of eight cartoons were used. The same cartoon (see Appendix A)
was used for pretest and posttest to ensure that any
difference in participants’ performance of the pretestand posttest would be due to the effects of researchintervention and not differences in task difficulty. The
remaining seven cartoons were used one per week
for seven weeks during the intervention period. The
cartoons were adapted from a commercial textbook(Akao, 2011).

Procedures
The research was conducted in a CALL classroomtaught by the researcher. Participants recorded theirnarrations on individual desktop computers. In pretest, all participants narrated one four-picture cartoon
for a maximum of two minutes. During the intervention period, participants received 10 minutes of FonFs(focus on forms) grammar intervention on three pasttense forms: past simple, past continuous, and past
perfect. Past perfect continuous form was excluded
because it is not commonly used in speaking. The
grammar intervention included three focused tasks(Lyster, 2007): receiving explicit blackboard grammar
explanation by the teacher, completing fill-in blankgrammar drills (Murphy, 2012), and oral pair work of

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

111making sentences based on the three past tense forms.
For the explicit blackboard grammar explanation, theteacher chose verbs from the four-picture cartoon eachweek and explained how the verb is changed between
the three past tense forms. For the fill-in blank grammar drills, participants completed activities on three
past tense forms adapted the above textbook. For theoral pair work, participants took term practicing formulating sentences orally to each other by using a listof verbs prepared by the researcher, taken from eachweek’s four-picture cartoon. Each week immediately
after intervention, participants narrated a different cartoon and recorded themselves on the computer. The
weekly cartoons had different content but equivalentdifficulty level. In posttest, all participants narrated thesame cartoon used in the pretest.

Target participants
In order to examine the effects of focused grammar
instruction, three average achieving participants(pseudonyms: Daiki, Daiichi, and Daisuke) were chosenfrom the 41 research participants for week-to-week
analysis. Appointing average achievers as target participants excluded potential outliner issues as high andlow achievers are likely to improve in speaking proficiency differently from average achievers. Daiki was
the strongest speaker and Daiichi was the weakest.

Data analysis
All three participants’ cartoon narrations were transcribed and analyzed. Quantitative analysis predominantly focused on syntactic accuracy. Global accuracy
was measured by determining the total number andaccurate number of T-units. Local accuracy was measured by determining the number of instances of pasttense usage by counting the total number of past simple, past continuous, and past perfect forms and how
many of them were accurately used. However, very
few number of past continuous and past perfect forms
were identified, so they were excluded from further
quantitative analysis. For qualitative analysis, a holistic
approach was used to examine syntactic accuracy elements.

Results
Table 1 indicates the total number and accurate number of T-units produced by three participants over time.
Overall, participants produced more T-units as well as
more accurate T-units towards the end compared tothe beginning of the study. In Week 7, all three participants produced the same number of T-units. Daiichi
and Daisuke almost doubled in the number of accurate
T-units in the last week while Daiki did not change in
the number of accurate T-units produced.
Table 1. N umber of T-units produced over time

Daiki
Week

T

A

Daiichi

Daisuke

T

T

A

A

Pretest

15

10

13

3

9

4

1

10

6

14

5

8

4

2

11

6

15

8

12

9

3

12

9

13

4

8

6

4

13

9

17

7

9

6

5

14

7

12

6

14

13

6

14

10

11

6

10

7

7

14

9

14

6

14

12

Posttest
12
10
18
7
11
Note. T = total number; A = accurate number

7

Table 2 presents the total number and accurate number of past simple tense produced by three participants over time. Overall, participants produced a significantly greater number of accurate past simple tense
constructions at the end of the study compared to thebeginning. Daiichi and Daisuke used more past simple
tense in posttest compared to pretest whereas Daikiscored seven out of seven in his usage of past tenseusage. On the other hand, Daiichi started out to be theweakest speaker, and had only two accurate past tenseusage in Week 7. In the post test, Daiichi had six accurate usages of past tense form.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

112Table 2. Number of simple past tense used over time

Daiki
Week

T

A

Daiichi

Daisuke

T

T

A

A

Pretest

10

7

9

1

6

3

1

6

3

8

0

6

2

2

10

5

5

1

8

6

3

7

5

7

1

7

6

4

12

9

9

1

9

5

5

8

7

5

0

6

5

6

12

9

7

1

5

5

7

8

7

8

2

9

7

7
7
12
6
12
Posttest
Note. T = total number; A = accurate number

10

The section below presents one of Daiki’s narrationtranscripts during the seven weeks (see Appendix
B for more of his transcripts). Due to word limitation,
only Daiki’s transcripts were presented because hebest illustrated the changes over time. Dysfluencies arebolded, dependent clauses placed into brackets (DC),and some self-repairs are coded with (SR).

Week 1 transcript:
One day, a mayor was meeting with other city hallofficials. They found that (DC1) eeee they they use
too much electricity] and and mmm they thought the[(DC2) the cost of electricity is too too high]. So so they
decrease decrease expenditure. Yes, maybe maybe insummer they they must use air conditioner so electelectricity expenditure is likely to be high. A few weeks
later a few weeks later, eeeee they they decide that[(DC3) they turn turn off all all lights during lunch hour].
Eeee the next day at lunch time, They said [(DC4) theyturn turn off all lights at city hall]. A month later, eeee
they they succeed to cut cut down electricity consumption by five percent. Maybe eee maybe if they cut
down, no, maybe if they don’t use eee nandaro air conditioner[(DC5) they can eee cut down more consumption].

Discussion
Results indicate that explicit grammar instruction
was effective in the present study at improving EFL
speaking proficiency because all three participants

improved in some elements of speaking after sevenweeks. In particular, they improved in syntactic accuracy in both global accuracy and local accuracy. This
was an encouraging result because while few previous
studies have found gains in syntactic accuracy, they
have examined more specific local accuracy features,for example, Gass et al. (1999) found accuracy gains in
two Spanish copula verbs: ser and estar. The present
study looked at the effects of focus on forms (FonFs) on
participants by using focused tasks, through plannedand decontextualized grammar instruction (Ellis et al.,2001). Three past tense forms were pre-selected andwere focused throughout the seven weeks using blackboard explanation, grammar drills and structured oralpair practice. For global accuracy, participants in thisstudy produced a higher number of accurate T-units
in the posttest compared to pretest. The increase inglobal accuracy was likely due to the explicitness of theteacher-centered instructions used, which emphasizedon the importance of grammatical accuracy and raised
participants’ awareness towards producing moreaccurate forms. For local accuracy, participants useda larger number of accurate past simple tense in the
posttest compared to pretest. Local accuracy possibly
improved more than global accuracy because participants’ attention was led specifically to focus on thetarget past tense forms. This supports Goh and Burns’(2012) argument that explicit form-focused instruction
guides learner attention to specific syntactic forms
which enhances their ability to produce these forms
during speaking output. Another possible reason is
because participants possibly paid more attention toform while had slightly lower awareness toward grammatical accuracy because while attention is necessary
for language acquisition, awareness might not alwaysbe (Williams, 2013).
However, the three participants improved their pasttense usage differently despite receiving the sameamount of grammar instruction intervention for sevenweeks. In the posttest, Daiki achieved 100% accuracy in
his usage of past simple tense forms. It is possibly thatthe consecutive seven weeks of grammar interventions
successfully led his attention to the usage of past tense
forms (Goh & Burns, 2012). On the other hand, Daiichi made 50% errors with his past tense usage in the
posttest. One of the reasons might be that his attention

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

113

has not been completely directed to past tense usage
as he might have placed attention to other elementsof speaking. Nevertheless, Diichi improved from two
accurate usages in Week 7 to six accurate usages ofpast simple tense in the posttest. Therefore, if longer
intervention period was in place, it is possible that Daiichi would continue to improve his local accuracy as hecould continue to improve in the usage of past tense
forms.
Qualitative week-to-week analysis indicates that participants improved in speaking over time from the effects
of receiving explicit grammar instruction. While Daiki
probably started with a better understanding of pasttense usage compared to the other two participants,
he still made many grammatical errors in the earlier
weeks. For example (dysfluency markers omitted in thefollowing), in Week 1, Daiki narrated, “they decrease
expenditure,” “A few weeks later, they decide that theyturn off all lights during lunch hour,” “A month later,
they succeed to cut down electricity consumption by
five percent,” and “they can cut down more consumption.” In Week 3, “he confess his manager that he have
has no time to spend with his family.” He made the largest number of global and past tense errors in Week 1
and 2 but from Week 3 onwards, he made little local
errors and was able to continue without large fluctuations in the remaining weeks. Daiki’s steady accuracy
gains suggests that he was continuously led by the
focused tasks to direct his attention to the target linguistic forms which speedily and successfully developed his interlanguage (Ellis et al., 2001). Daiki might
have improved speedily and steadily in local accuracy
because the combined three grammar interventions in
the present study were explicit and effective enoughfor him to focus on the target past tense forms (Ellis,2005). The explicit grammar explanation also assisted
Daiki to acquire the past tense forms more accurately
and quickly from as early as Week 3 (Han, 2004). While
the focused tasks only targeted past tense forms,
Daiki’s global accuracy also improved because he
improved in the usage of “could.” For example (dysfluency markers omitted in the following), in Week 1,
he narrated, “Maybe if they don’t use air conditioner
they can cut down more consumption.” From Week 3
onwards, he narrated using “could” instead of “can.”This indicates that while the focused tasks directed

his attention to the target forms, they also raised hisawareness toward more accurate grammatical usage.
This increased awareness possibly triggered Daiki’s
cognitive processes so he was able to to make accurate
and precise global grammatical output (Swain, 1985).

Conclusion
The present study looked at the effects of explicit
grammar instruction on L2 speaking developing bygiving participants seven weeks of focus-on-forms
instruction intervention. Overall, all three participantsin the present study improved in English speaking
ability especially syntactic accuracy from the effects
of receiving explicit grammar instruction. While grammar instruction is often considered to be a more traditional method of teaching, it was effective in thepresent study at improving both global accuracy andlocal accuracy especially past tense usage. Participants’attention was directed to focus on the target past tense
forms through focus-on-forms instruction by using
focused tasks, including blackboard grammar explanation, grammar drills and structured pair oral practice.
In addition, participants’ awareness toward grammatical accuracy was likely raised after seven weeks ofinterventions. Nevertheless, while the same amountof form-focused instruction was given in the present
study, learners developed their syntactic accuracy differently over time. While two participants improved insyntactic accuracy with fluctuations, one participant
improved more speedily and steadily without fluctuations. His attention was possibly more effectively
directed to the target linguistic forms which more
speedily and successfully developed his interlanguage
than the other two participants. Not only his attention
was effectively led to the focused target forms, he waspossibly able to produce more accurate grammatical
output because his awareness towards accurate grammatical usage was also more effectively raised.
The present study suggests that form-focused instruction can be integrated into meaningful tasks as task
itself is probably not enough. While this implication
has already been suggested by many other researchers, the present study hope to add some weight to thisposition by looking at its effects over time. Traditional
grammar instruction such as explicit blackboard expla-

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

114

nation and fill-in blank grammar exercises could be
effective pedagogies for task-based classrooms.

References

Ahmadian, M. J., & Tavakoli, M. (2011). The effectsof simultaneous use of careful online planningand task repetition on accuracy, complexity,
and fluency in EFL learners’ oral production.
Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 35-59.
doi:10.1177/1362168810383329
Akao, F. (2011). Eiken junikyu nijishiken mensetsu
kanzen yosou mondai. [The Eiken pre-Level 1
study book for the secondary interview test].
Obunsha.
Bygate, M. (2001). Effects of task repetition on
the structure and control of language. In
M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.),
Researching pedagogic tasks, second
language learning, teaching and testing (pp.
23-48). Routledge.
Bygate, M., & Samuda, V. (2005). Integrativeplanning through the use of task repetition. In
R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performancein a second language (pp. 37-74). Benjamins.
DeKeyser, R. (1998). Beyond focus on form:
Cognitive perspectives on learning andpracticing second language grammar. In C.
Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on formin classroom second language acquisition(pp. 42-63). Cambridge University Press.
Ellis R. (2001). Introduction: Investigating formfocused instruction. Language Learning,
51(s1), 1-46. doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.2001.
tb00013.x
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning andteaching. Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (2005). Instructed language learningand task-based learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.),
Handbook of research in second language
teaching and learning (pp. 713-727).
Routledge.
Ellis, R. (2009). The differential effects of three
types of task planning on the fluency,
complexity, and accuracy in L2 oral
production. Applied Linguistics, 30, 474-509.
doi:10.1093/applin/amp042
Ellis, R. (2018). Reflections on task-based
language teaching. Multilingual Matters.
Ellis, R., & Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analysing
learner language. Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001).
Preemptive focus on form in the ESL
classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 35(3), 407-432.
doi:10.2307/3588029
Gass, S., Mackey, A., Alvarez-Torres, M., &Fernández-García, M. (1999). The effects oftask repetition on linguistic output. Language
Learning, 49(4), 549-580. doi:10.1111/00238333.00102
Goh, C. C. M., & Burns, A. (2012). Teaching
speaking: A holistic approach. Cambridge
University Press.
Han, Z. H. (2004). Fossilization in adult second
language acquisition. Multilingual Matters.
Housen, A., & Kuiken, F. (2009). Complexity,
accuracy, and fluency in second language
acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 461473. doi:10.1093/applin/amp048.
Iwashita, N., Brown, A., McNamara, T., & O’Hagan,
S. (2008). Assessed levels of second
language speaking proficiency: How distinct?
Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 24-49. doi:10.1093/
applin/amm017

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l115

Lambert, C., Kormos, J., & Minn, D. (2017). Task
repetition and second language speechprocessing. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 39(1), 167-196. doi:10.1017/
S0272263116000085
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention
to articulation. MIT Press.
Long, M. H. (2015). Second language acquisition
and task-based language teaching. John
Wiley & Sons.
Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages
through Content: A counterbalanced
approach. John Benjamins.
Michel, M. (2017). Complexity, accuracy, andfluency (CAF). In S. Loewen & M. Sato
(Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructedsecond language acquisition (pp. 66-94).
Routledge.
Mochizuki, N., & Ortega, L. (2008). Balancing
communication and grammar in beginninglevel foreign language classrooms: A
study of guided planning and relativization.
Language Teaching Research, 12(1), 11-37.
doi:10.1177/1362168807084492
Murphy, R. (2012). English grammar in use: A
self-study reference and practice book forintermediate learners of English (4th ed.).
Cambridge University Press.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectivenessof L2 instruction: A research synthesisand quantitative meta-analysis. Language
Learning, 50(3), 417-528. doi:10.1111/00238333.00136

Sangarun, J. (2005). The effects of focusing on
meaning and form in strategic planning. In R.
Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance ina second language (pp. 111-141). Benjamins.
Schmidt, R., & Frota, S. N. (1986). Developing
basic conversational ability in a second
language: A case study of an adult learnerof Portuguese. In R. R. Day (Ed.), Talking
to learn: Conversation in second language
acquisition (pp. 237-326). Newbury House.
Skehan, P. (2009). Modeling second language
performance: Integrating complexity,
accuracy, fluency and lexis. Applied
Linguistics, 30(4), 510-532. doi:10.1093/
applin/amp047
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence:some roles of comprehensible input andcomprehensible output in its development. In
S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input insecond language acquisition (pp. 235-253).
Newbury House.
Williams, J. (2005). Form-focused instruction. In E.
Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second
language teaching and learning (pp. 671-691).
Routledge
Williams, J. N. (2013). Attention, awareness,
and noticing in language processing andlearning. In J. M. Bergsleithner, S. N. Frota& J. K. Yoshioka (Eds.), Noticing and second
language acquisition: Studies in honorof Richard Schmidt (pp. 39-57). National
Foreign Language Resource Centre.

Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2009). Towards anorganic approach to investigating CAF in
instructed SLA: The case of complexity.
Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 555-578. doi.
org/10.1093/applin/amp044

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l116Appendices
Appendix A
Four-picture cartoon for narration
This is a story about a woman who participated in an eco-tour.
Your story should begin with the following sentence:
One day, a woman was watching a TV program.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l117Appendix A
Week 3 transcript:
One day a married couple was in their small old apartment. And the apartment eee was eee was that the
woman was living in there living there. Eee so it was it was too small for for two two people to live in. Eee
the the apartment was very very dirty and and even the roof was broken. So so they eee thought that theyshould move to a large large place. And one year later, eee they move move to a very very great eee very
new building. The room was very new the room was new and beautiful. So they were very satisfied with it.
(SR) So they thought they made the they thought they had made a great choice. But several months later,
eee near their apartment, mmm as many as many three big big buildings was built was being built. So eee
two years later two years later, their sunshine was deprived because because their building was taller thantheir apartment.

Week 5 transcript:
One day a company employee a company employee came home late. Eee the time was almost midnighttwelve o’clock. He had wanted eee he had wanted with his son or and daughter. Eee he was very depressed.
Eee yes his work was very tired. Eee was very busy and and there was a lot there was there were a lot ofthings to do. So he he should have eee over overtime working should have had overtime working. Then a
few days later, he he confess he confess his manager that eee that he have has no time to spend with hisfamily. And asked asked him to eee reduce the working time. A week a week later eee in the company in thecompany meeting, the eee employer decided that eee they they reduce eee overtime working. Eee The aim
was eee improve working efficiency. And everyone was agree mmm agreed with it. So, a month later, he
could he could go home by seven oclock and he could eat diner with his family and talk with with them andit was enjoyable.

Week 7 transcript:
One day a boy was playing video games with friends in this room. And they were very they were very
enjoying. But it it was very sunny. So eee his mother recommended them to eee go out and play and playsoccer or soccer because eeee she thought they should exercise exercise. Half an hour later, eee they went
to a park and near his house but there was a sign. It say it was saying, no ball games. So eee they were notallowed to play soccer. But they started to they started to play soccer. And but a little later, it was eee it wasvery exciting to for them to play soccer. So they were were playing out of park. So so they bothered a driverin in the road kana on the road. So, eee the next day, they they stopped eee playing soccer in a park. Uuuu
they added to play video games eee in the park.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

118Horizontal and Vertical Alignment in Discussion Book Design and Direct
Publication
Anthony Brian Gallagher
Meijo University

Abstract
In an ideal EFL discussion course, students should learn to express the four CORE components of discussion, which are: basic
concepts, opinions, reasons for their opinion, and examples that illustrate those instances. Pedagogically sound and level-appropriate student books should harmonise these core components of what good discussions should resemble with accessible
language, and engaging content. Level-sequential courses benefit from well-designed student books that facilitate competent
progression from lower to higher levels. In the absence of differentiation within courses (i.e. standardised, one-level courses)
students need books that promote open exploration of concepts with questions and content that allow extension, amelioration,and elaboration. Well-articulated course expectations can, with standardisation training, create this environment and align discussion courses both horizontally and vertically..
日本語概要
理想的な EFL のディスカッションコースでは、学生はディスカッションの 4 つの核となる要素、すなわち、基本概念、自分の意見、自分の意見の理由、そしてそれらの例を説明する例を表現することを学ぶ必要があります。教育学的に健全で、レベルに合ったスチューデ
ントブックは、良いディスカッションの核となる要素を、わかりやすい言語、魅力的で興味深い内容で調和させる必要があります。レベル
別のコースでは、低レベルから高レベルへの適切な移行を促進するために、優れたデザインのスチューデントブックが必要です。差別化されたコース（標準的な1レベルのコース）がない場合、生徒は、拡張、改善、推敲を可能にする質問と内容で、概念のオープンな探求を促進する本を必要とします。コースに期待されることが明確にされていれば、標準化のトレーニングによって、このような環境を作り出し、ディスカッションコースを水平方向と垂直方向の両方で調整することができます。

In an ideal EFL discussion course, students should learn
to express four core components of discussion, which
are: basic concepts, opinions, reasons for their opinion,and examples that illustrate (Concepts Opinions Reasons Examples). The preparation for this can be donewith a well designed quality student book that has considered layout and content that both accommodates
the students additions, and includes quality content
and instruction.
Pedagogically sound and level-appropriate student
books should harmonise the core components of what
good discussions should resemble with accessible
language, and engaging and interesting content. Level-sequential courses need to have well-designed student books to facilitate competent progression fromlower to higher levels as students develop and learn.
In the absence of differentiation within courses (standardised, one-level courses), students need books that
promote discovery and open exploration of concepts,
with questions and content that allow extension, amelioration, and elaboration. While this seems a simple

and logical construct, in practice it can often be poorly
executed to the detriment of students’ learning anddevelopment. Well-articulated course expectations
can, with standardisation training, create this environment and align discussion courses both horizontallyand vertically. By providing students with a sensible
rationale as to why this course of study is of value tothem, and allowing them to see the logical progressionof skills and learning laid out in the course materials,
students are more likely to engage with the content
and the discussions. Effectively, quality-assuring course
design and offering a progressively challenging experience. This article proposes that the best solution tothese issues is the development of tailored, course-specific booklets which are vertically aligned and suitable
for a specific and agreed level of student.

Horizontal and Vertical Alignment in
Education
In regular schools all around the world, students begin
at a certain age and progress through their education

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

119

at a standard pace in line with the language and culture of their surroundings. Starting with the fundamentals, students familiarise themselves with basic
information to establish a hopefully solid base from
where they can progress to a medium, then higher
level. This logical advancement is usually dependent
on continued success at each step along the way withoccasional assessment to confirm that the minimum
amount of learning is happening. Understanding that
there is some retention of that provisional knowledge,
it can then be developed and ameliorated to reachthe highest possible standards expected before goingfurther to reach levels that are beyond the highest
expectation for that stage in their learning. It is generally agreed (Polikoff, Zhou and Campbell, 2015),(Machalow, 2020), (Mahroof and Saeed, 2021) (Case andZucker, 2005) (Amiri and Rezvani, 2021) that student
books (textbooks, workbooks, ebooks, booklets, etc.)
should align vertically (basic > low > medium > high)within each course of study as it matures and increases
in complexity. It should also be obvious that across any
curriculum that there is horizontal alignment between
courses that assures learners that they are learning at
the correct level gives confidence that the course is ofgood quality and has been professionally planned. Thisavoids any single course which may be too low or highfor students at whichever corresponding stage of theirlearning. In the world of second language learning, theCommon European Framework for Reference (CEFR)
is accepted as the modern established standard thatmost books conform to (see appendix A). Martineau etal. (2007) considered both horizontal and vertical alignment as integral parts of the development of content
standards, test blueprints, items, item pools, instruments, performance level descriptors, and performance standards. They went on to explain that “comprehensively integrating alignment into development
processes results in procedural efficiencies and gains
in validity evidence for the measurement of student
progress” which is what all good professional educators should aspire to do (Martineau et al., 2007, p28).
Alignment is defined as “the degree to which expectations and assessments are in agreement and servein conjunction with one another to guide an education system toward students learning what they are
expected to know and do. Alignment describes thematch between expectations and assessment that canbe legitimately improved by changing either student
expectations or the assessments” (Wise & Alt, 2005, p
vii).
Institutions are sometimes measured on the quality of
their alumni which Sukandi (2019, p142) describes as“a measure of the quality of a college, but the qualityof the alumni depends on the quality of the college”
which clearly means that the standard expectation of
an institution is based on the quality of the product ofthat institution, i.e. the graduating students (alumni).
The inference here is that the quality of the courses
created should reflect well the quality of the institution
and the educators within it. Of course this is a very reasonable assumption, that is to say the better the vertical alignment of courses offered by the institution,
the better the quality of the final product, the alumni.
It should be obvious that vertical alignment should be
the easier of the two alignments because the courses
would run sequentially, whereas horizontal alignment
requires the collaboration of colleagues running othercourses that are expected to be at the same approximate level.
When attempting to horizontally align expectations
and outcomes of any course shared between a groupof teachers, there is a definite need to use a quality student booklet (Amiri & Rezvani, 2021). For clarification,
the definition proposed here is that a student booklet
should be considered as a combination of textbook
and workbook. It contains everything necessary forthe course to be completed successfully. A booklet
that affords space for the students to add in their own
research, as well as including terminology and othercontent, facilitates suitable understanding of the topics included. This type of instructional material bringsin cognitive psychology and behavioural neuroscience,as students have been shown to learn more when they
write information down which affects their retrieval
processes (Umejima et al., 2021), (Mueller & Oppenheimer, 2014), & (Bohay et al, 2011). This in turn canbe considered progress in learning, and this style ofprinted material affords students a complete booklet
for that specific purpose.
Instructional materials as a basic component of cur-P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

120riculae, and a central constituent of standards-based
programs play a provisional role in both setting theaims and leading the way (Ibid). In general, textbook
series are intended and expected to sustain balanceand priority in content and objectives coverage. For
such series, alignment within and across the textbooks
ought to be examined together with common quality criteria (Cunningsworth, 1995; Nation & Macalister,
2010; Sheldon, 1988; Ur, 1996)
Case & Zucker explain that “horizontal alignment isessentially the side by side agreement of the facetsof education aiming to achieve educational objectives. For example, “it might be the degree to which
an assessment matches the corresponding content
standards for a subject area at a particular grade level”(Case & Zucker, 2005, p. 3).
Within university ESL/EFL courses that are planned tobe coordinated and are not level differentiated acrossthe cohort of students, it is more critical to have a bookthat allows students and teachers to customise thelearning expectations and the extension of activities
beyond the basic expectations. One would expect all
good quality courses to have well-articulated, specificand measurable skills and goals. Learning outcomesshould be clearly explained to students at the beginning of the course and throughout the course. Avoiding extremes of variation in the individual teachingcontext as much as possible can mitigate any discrepancies while ensuring standard agreed outcomes.
In doing so, teachers as well as students can be confident that the quality of the course basics are aligned
at that level. Once this is secured, then coordinatedcourses can move to the vertical alignment of follow-on
levels in a progressive manner that shows growth. Thiscan then be cross-referenced with the outcomes thatare perhaps expected at that level of ability and skill.
Baseline establishment also allows exceptional students to go beyond the highest expected standard
while understanding that they report with confidence
that the goals for the course were met.

institution because of well-articulated standards andbenchmarks at each stage of the learning (Pollock,2007).
These benchmarks are best when they are well articulated and consistent across all cohorts. They canbe described using various strategies including but
not limited to: classifying, categorising, alphabetizing, sequencing, explaining, summarising, describing, determining, predicting, confirming, identifying,inferring, reading, re-reading, differentiating fact fromfiction, understanding, drawing conclusions, visualising, drawing, self-correcting, chunking, blending,reviewing, problem-solving, justifying, estimating, andinterpreting. This was before the No Child Left Behind(NCLB) law which was enacted in 2001, and required
American states to show steady improvement in student performance in reading and mathematics, withthe goal of having all students “proficient” by 2014.
Each state was responsible for setting their standards
to measure and define the term “proficiency.” A lawthat later proved to be controversial and yielded many
unexpected results with the gap between states withthe highest and lowest standards amounting to as
much as three to four grade levels (Tofig, 2014) . While
this specific example pertains to the United States ofAmerica, it does bear relevance to the concept of policy, standards, and benchmarks used in assessment
and seems to promote the idea of vertical alignment.

Exemplar
A problem-solving example of the benchmarks needed
to meet a standard could be as follows:
Students will monitor and reflect on the process ofmathematical problem solving’(1) determine what information is needed to solve theproblem,(2) explain the methods and reasoning behind the
problem-solving strategies used, and(3) verify results of a problem.

In many schools in the United States of America, ofcourse dependent on the state, school boards andteachers are confident in what is being taught in their

From this example we can clearly see that certain
actions -strategy verbs- must be demonstrated by the

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l121

students in order to meet the requirement of the standard. The actions to be taken by students are well articulated and varied. The task that is set for them includes
monitoring, reflecting, determining, solving, explaining, reasoning, employing strategies, and verifying.

Standardised Book Content
As most regular classes in most schools around theworld are differentiated and tasks are completed withdiffering competencies, it is best to create a student
booklet (a combination of textbook and workbook)that accommodates all students. A design that is
flexible enough to cover all the core elements of theintended learning, while still being challenging andworthwhile enough that students will engage with thebooklet. Depending on the level, the students will havedifferent expectations, but the standard should still beapplicable across the course and syllabus. This can be
agreed and standardised in order to authenticate andquality-assure the course (Nation and Macalister, 2010,p149). The common hurdle in some institutions is thatbooks are chosen to match the course goals, but thesegeneric fit books often do not encapsulate the course,
but they can be simply described as a ‘close enough’fit to cover most of what the course is intending to dowith the intention of the teacher supplementing thematerial with additionals.
Generic textbooks with additional tasks (commonlyreferred to by many as ‘four skills’ books) can be considered disruptive to discussions, confusing for students, and one might suggest, be best avoided. Primarily, this is because whatever is articulated in the books
as the outcomes or goals of the learning experience is
not aligned with each individual course. Clearly-articulated goals mean that instruction has all unnecessary
and additional information redacted before the course
and lessons begin. From a pragmatic point of view it isbetter to avoid any confusion or unnecessary languagethat goes beyond the scope of the intended content.
This also reclaims time that can be lost to re-explanation or reclarification caused by excessive, extensive, or
unnecessary lexis both in the text and in the instruction given relating to the assigned task. Although many
institutions in Japan are closely linked with their local
bookstores and publishers, where they facilitate a cor-dial and congenial rapport, they are often thoughtof by educators as being slow to respond to change.
In some cases, causing disruption to timely adjustments to materials, as well as being capable of causing
interruption in the implementation of new materials
because of the inherent nature of the time required
to make changes, and the number of parties involvedin the printing and publication process. It seems mostappropriate then, that teachers, course managers
and designers, should be most closely involved withbooklet creation, because they are directly involved indeveloping the courses and curriculae.
It could be argued that the key players in this fantastic orchestra of pedagogical movement are actually
the teachers and their students who need to reachagreement over how their effort, learning and performance will be assessed and rewarded. Expected
outcomes from each level of study need to be clearly
explained and conveyed in order for both parties to besatisfied that this contract of understanding has takenplace. Teachers need to explain to students how they
will be assessed and the teachers need to implement
the correct methods of assessing in order to reach avalid and accurate grade. Teachers and assessors whoare involved in both formative and summative assessments, need to undergo some training and collaboration with others in order to align with each other andensure that interpretation of descriptors is fully understood. This establishes the essence of the descriptions
and for them to be comfortable enough in their interpretation of them that any differences between assessors is minimal. Therefore, the more clearly articulated
are the learning outcomes and goals for the courses,
the more consistently the scores will be assigned andthe more reliable the quality of the course can beassured.

Pedagogical Concepts in Discussions
Practically any discussion should include at least one
core concept that all participants can contribute to
exploring, and for that concept to be open enoughfor students to divulge their opinion on the matter,and explain their reasoning. One would expect thisexchange to normally include an explanation, reasoning and some example(s) that demonstrate their point

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

122

to varying degrees. The strengths and validity of claims
made would be central to any ensuing discussion anduseful for informatively assessing students’ performance and progression. Consistent use of terminology
and descriptions of tasks leads to mutual understanding of expectations and the standards that should be
attained in order to justify a summative assessment
result in whichever class the student may be enrolled.
Designing curriculae with this consistency in mind
also improves the quality of the teaching because theshared understanding of the goals is well understoodand therefore applicable to the situations that may be
put in place to reach the assessed work. Additionally,by having excellent teaching and understanding of
the assessed work teachers can better articulate boththe formative and summative assessments to students,
which one would expect to transfer over to the students if done in a consistent and effective manner. Thisamelioration of courses can then support teachers intheir own decision-making process for other courses
and lead to improvement in understanding the expectations of assessment and quality assuring each course
to which they are connected. Meliorism is the doctrinethat the world tends to become better or may be madebetter by human effort, and effective design is a sterling example of how this can be done. However, theworld does not so easily fall into place like this, and wemust be wary of the pitfalls that hinder this progress.

Effective Discussion Content
Producing a discussion coursebook (booklet) with
content that will facilitate the goal of developing successful discussion students has already been exploredand can be strengthened by effective unpacking of thecontent used in each book. Combined with well-articulated instructional material as well as accurate output measurement, discussion skills can be assignedthat focus on targeted formative goals at stages of thelearning. These short goals can be combined, extrapolated, compounded and refined as students improveand prepare for the summative tasks which will test
their ability and learning. Returning to the idea of the“CORE” being exploration and explanation of a concept, each concept involved in each course should beaccessible to all learners to some reasonable level. Concepts may be best explored in context and in scenariosthat simulated the intended use of the language skills
and reasoning
Opinionating being a key element to any discussion
should be scaffolded in order to allow students to growfrom the initial statement of initial ideas up to andbeyond rhetoric and idealism. Reasoning should be
explored and reconsidered as students develop theirideas and formulate new versions of original ideas once
they consider the input from others in the discussions
that they have. Examples, in their plural form, are integral to any reasoning process and opinion formulating
because they are the foundational ideas upon which
opinions are generated. A need to grow the numberof examples must be encouraged and explored as students build up their portfolio of evidence to support
ideas. Judging the depth and quality of each example
is also improved over time as we develop our understanding of strong and weak ideas and what is exactly
required or expected by others in a discussion in orderto sway favour with other participants.
A strong knowledge of content must be partneredwith a palatable layout in design that has flow and feature. We all know that students often respond well tothe rhythm and pattern (Givvin et al, 2005) in lessons as
they have some expectation of what is to come ahead,
reducing their anxiety, and allowing them to be confident of the challenges that may lie ahead. Lewis andTsuchida (1999, p15) suggested that each “lesson is likea swiftly flowing river” even going so far as to romanticise that “Like Rings of Water in a Pond: the Impactof Research Lessons Research lessons are centred in
the practice of ordinary teachers in ordinary classrooms. But their impact does not stop there because,at the same time, a mechanism exists that allows theseexamples of good practice to be disseminated all overthe country and thus contribute to the improvementof Japanese education”. Harnessing these two ideasof some information being structured and the otherbeing more free is effective for many people, and isvery well suited to discussion. The concept that students research in order to prepare for the discussions
is also a critical element in improving engagement in
the topics of discussions. It should seem reasonable toanyone following the logic here that we derive a similar
idea of how discussion courses could very effectively

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l123

be designed.

Design and Layout
How can a well-designed standard layout be effective?
Students respond and react best when there is a lesson rhythm that builds, as comfort replaces discomfort
and insecurity, and students appreciate the flow of thelesson style as well as the general expectations placed
upon them. Relying on ourselves and others to gain
insight into ideas and ways of exploring ideas is partof the discussion process. All discussions must reveal
information to participants in order for it to be of value
to those involved and interesting and challenging to
explain. Discovery can be developed in a variety ofmanners including brainstorming, ordering, filteringand removing tidbits of information that only serve torepeat ideas and fail to bring disclosure or exposureof novel thoughts and ideas. Building on academic
vocabulary is a great start to share the new knowledge
and descriptive terminology of any topic and should
always be encouraged by the discussion leaders. Further to this, is the creation of provocative or leading
questions that are open and inviting, with a means toencourage participation in the discovery and exposureof previous knowledge on topics. These questions canbe developed week on week from basic questions thatallow general responses, up to complex and multifaceted questions where parties have the opportunity toconsider and reconsider judgements and biases thatthey may have or come across. Add to this chances todelve deeper into meaning and motivations, in order
to find the truth in each topic, or as close to the truth as
they can manage at this time in their education.
Having a standard formula for the starting of any group
discussion is comfortable and reliable for students furnishing them with the opportunity to look more closelyon the content of the day as opposed to the design of thebook or distracting pretty pictures that may influence
thinking because they are western-centric or biased insome alternative form. One such standard formula in a
discussion setting can be for students to lead a short
discussion by explaining the ‘CORE’ elements and driving the discussion forward with prepared questions
that are both logical and open to participants involved.
By taking notes during the discussion, points that are

discovered can be reported on and not forgotten. In
this way the discovery revealed during the process canbe reviewed and used as evidence as content learned.
This can also be added to a portfolio of work to show
mastery of skills if such a portfolio were to exist acrosscurriculum, which also supports the idea of horizontalalignment and is another form of evidence to educators and administrators that courses do align and learning is specific. Since this mid-discussion element is notplanned but organically elicited, true discovery canthen be claimed, and added to the learning that was
initially planned.
Not necessarily based on evidence, but more basedon practical experience, it can be suggested that short
discussions at the CEFR A1 and A2 levels in groups are
best carried out in groups of no more than four participants, for a period of no more than 10 minutes.
The ideal length of time is perhaps needed to be analyzed in another study, but this pragmatic approachis a comfortable time length that gives each participant an opportunity to get their opinion, reasons andexamples into the discussion. Any discussion that isshorter in length will not accommodate all the speakers to express themselves and get to the elements of
discovery at any quality of depth. As competence andconfidence grows, discussions will become more fruitful and complex, leading to hopefully more discovery
and improved fluency in usage of discussion skills andexperience. As skills expand the discussions may growin length as students ameliorate. So, what are the barriers to change? Evolution of materials and improvement of curriculae means considering new approaches
to creating them. Exploration of the newest publication possibilities should be considered by educators inorder to bring about change and to open doorways to
new opporchancities* .
*https://www.collinsdictionary.com/submission/628/
Opporchancity

Standard Publishing Pitfalls and Direct
Publishing Solutions
Direct publishing is a timely way to get effective and tailored materials into the hands of students without theneed to go through editors and traditional publishingP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l124houses. For a multitude of reasons, this new possibility
cannot be stressed enough. The ability to: customize
to institution and level specific needs; reduce update
times and costs, ease edition edits, and accommodate
personalisations including graphics, logos, tables andfigures, affirm this notion.
Unfortunately, institutional agreements with local bookshops and publishers may interfere with the rollout ofsuch self-publications because of the inability to adjust
at course levels, or even at faculty level. Evidence of thisis difficult to provide because of the sensitive nature of
the relationships but it is basically explained away bymany as common knowledge. It is only fair to note thatsometimes both parties are culpable here, but clearly
we can acknowledge that the more players involved inany scene the longer things take to bear fruit and themore opportunity exists for things to go wrong along
the way. When it comes to purchasing, bookshops andcooperatives often bundle book lists together for students in order to streamline the fulfilment side of any
order, and to maintain a good working relationshipbetween each partner. This is very understandable
but also comes with its own pitfalls and risks including: shortages, delays, new editions, price changes andpayment systems, order errors, and the independent
nature of each individual publishing house. Conversely,
the benefits of direct publishing can negate many ofthese pitfalls in that direct publications can be turned
around and updated in a fraction of the time. Only
three parties are involved in the process which are theauthor(s), direct publisher and the despatch companies
that will do the deliveries.
Using the Kindle Direct Publishing (KDP) route allows
authors to create their own individual materials in a
fraction of the time, to decide costs independently,
to manage edits and additions, and to publish in eachregion worldwide and in each marketplace meaningthat the author can share their with the world beyond
the confines of their own institution. A key benefit tothis route is that anyone who can create content, canaccess this free service and have high quality printed
copies of books in a very short time frame with awell-established delivery network that retracts theneed for storage, distribution and financial investment in expensive print runs. With the print-to-ordermodel upon which they operate, the smallest to thelargest needs can be met, and the barriers to successful fruition are almost negligible. The global impact
on the world of education of this advent of service is aground-breaking step in the possibilities for teaching
and learning, or meliora for which university education
and research is responsible. A seismic transformationin the velocity of positive change and differentiatedtailoring of materials that meet the needs of students
is indeed a contribution to humanity and education asa whole.

The Specific Example of the KDP
Process
The steps taken in order to get the book content, ISBN,and author information into the Kindle Direct Publishing (KDP) system, and available in the Amazon marketplace is available online at Kindle Direct Publishing for
any author wishing to seek information on the process(see Appendix B).
However, direct publishing with any independent
printer could have similar results and a wheen of
results of which the outcomes could be different, but
the main advantage of the aforementioned service
is that they already have a global network set up andconsiderable customer care access points and delivery,
taxation, printing standards, procurement and otherlogistics involved in the process that make the processseamless for the person or persons wishing to explore
these options. With a large number of global consumers already linked with this publisher, the ease of use,
turnaround, customer care, sales, financing, sourcing
and shipping are almost second to none at this point
in time.
Understanding how to prepare the materials for
upload and avoiding the few avoidable pitfalls is a process which becomes more familiar with each successive effort. One should consider (1) why included elements are critical to developing student skills in fruitful
discussions, (2) assessment of students’ performanceand discovery, and (3) reflection and meaningful learning. The style of an excellent discussion booklet is student-centred, and student-led, with guidance from theteacher facilitating increased depth of learning while

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l125building confidence in students’ individual and collective discussion skills.

Summary
In creating a successful EFL discussion course, it isessential to focus on the four core components of discussion: concepts, opinions, reasons, and examples.
Where concepts refer to the fundamental ideas thatstudents need to understand in order to participate ina discussion.
There is a clear need for student booklets to provide
clear explanations of these concepts using accessible
language. These booklets should be designed withstudents input at their core, affording them space todocument their learning as they discover new things
through discussions, and as they develop their discussion skills. These booklets should be level-appropriate
for each course and vertically aligned in increasing
complexity as courses develop in levels of proficiency.
Ensuring that students are able to progress in a logical fashion without feeling disjointed or frustrated is aquality assurance responsibility of each institution, andone which is best and most closely controlled by thecourses’ designers of that institution.
As opinions are an integral part of any discussion,courses should allow students to express theirthoughts and perspectives through these discussions,and their learning. Student booklets should engage
and encourage them to do so through questions andactivities that stimulate critical thinking and discovery
which they can document as they progress.
Well-designed student books can facilitate competent vertical progression from lower to higher levels
because they provide a clear and structured frameworkthat helps students to build on their previous learning,
and to develop the skills they need to participate inmore advanced discussions. It can be suggested thatthe way to bring this about is by course designers creating these booklets and directly publishing them inthis curriculum-tailored manner, and by focusing on
the four core components to develop their discussion
skills.

References
Amiri, A. & Rezvani, R. (2021) A tale of three
official English textbooks: An evaluationof their horizontal and vertical alignments.
Language Related Research 12 (3) :51-79
http://lrr.modares.ac.ir/article-14-46437-fa.
html
Bohay, M>, Blakely, D.P., Tamplin, A.K. &Radvansky, G.A. (2011, Jan 1) Note Taking,Review, Memory, and Comprehension.
The American Journal of Psychology; 124(1): 63–73. doi: https://doi.org/10.5406/
amerjpsyc.124.1.0063
Case, B., & Zucker, S. (2005). Horizontal andvertical alignment. Pearson Education.
Cunningsworth, A. (1995). Choosing yourcoursebook. MacMillan.
Givvin, K.B., Hiebert, J., Jacobs, J.K.,
Hollingsworth, H., & Gallimore, R. (2005 Aug)Are There National Patterns of Teaching?
Evidence from the TIMSS 1999 Video Study.
Comparative Education Review 49(3). https://doi.org/10.1086/430260
Lewis, C. C. & Tsuchida, I. (1999) A lesson
is like a swiftly flowing river: howresearch lessons improve Japanese
education. Improving Schools 2(1):12-56
DOI:10.1177/136548029900200117
Machalow, R. (2020) Rethinking standards textbook alignment: How elementary mathtextbooks are interpreting and enacting thecommon core state standards. Universityof Pennsylvania ProQuest Dissertations
Publishing, 2020. 28031191. https://
repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.
cgi?article=5711&context=edissertations

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l126

Mahroof, A. &Saeed, M. (2021) Alignment
between Curriculum, Textbook and Boardof Intermediate and Secondary Education
Question Papers of English at Secondary
Level. Open Access Library Journal, 8:
e7282. https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1107282
Martineau, J., Paek, P., Keene, J. and Hirsch,T. (2007), Integrated, Comprehensive
Alignment as a Foundation for Measuring
Student Progress. Educational Measurement:
Issues and Practice, 26: pp28-35. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2007.00086.x
Mueller, P. A., & Oppenheimer, D. M.
(2014). The Pen Is Mightier Than the
Keyboard: Advantages of LonghandOver Laptop Note Taking. Psychological
Science, 25(6), 1159–1168. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0956797614524581
Nation, I.S.P., & Macalister, J. (2010). NegotiatedSyllabuses. Language curriculum design,
p149. Routledge.
Pollock, J. E. (2007) Improving student learning
one teacher at a time. The association forsupervision and curriculum development(ASCD), USA.

Tofig, D. (Sep 18, 2014) Education PerformanceStandards Vary Widely Among States, In
Some Cases by Several Grade Levels.
American Institute for Research. https://www.air.org/news/press-release/educationperformance-standards-vary-widely-amongstates-some-cases-several
Umejima, K., Ibaraki, T., Yamazaki, T., & Sakai,
K.L. (2021) Paper Notebooks vs. Mobile
Devices: Brain Activation Differences During
Memory Retrieval. Frontiers in Behavioral
Neuroscience, 15. http:DOI: 10.3389/
fnbeh.2021.634158
Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching:
Practice and theory. Cambridge University
Press.
Wise, L.L. & Alt. M. (2005, Sep) Assessing
Vertical Alignment in Aligning assessment
to guide the learning of all students. State
collaborative on assessment and student
standards, technical issues in large scaleassessment. The council of chief state school
officers. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/

Polikoff, M.S., Zhou, N. and Campbell, S.E.
(2015), Methodological Choices in theContent Analysis of Textbooks for Measuring
Alignment With Standards. Educational
Measurement: Issues and Practice, 34: 10-17.
https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12065
Sheldon, L. E. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks
and materials. ELT Journal, 42(2), 237-246.
Sukandi, P. (2019) Horizontal and Vertical
Alignment Analysis Graduate of Widyatama
University. International Journal of
Innovation, Creativity and Change. 6(7).
https://ijicc.net/images/Vol6Iss7/6712_
Sukandi_2019_E_R.pdf

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l127Appendices
Appendix A
Common European Framework for Reference
The CEFR is a professionally constructed and extensively researched example of vertical alignment that clearly articulates different standards of language and communication ability.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_European_Framework_of_Reference_for_Languages
Common reference levels
The Common European Framework divides learners into three broad divisions that can each befurther divided into two levels; for each level, it describes what a learner is supposed to be able to
do in reading, listening, speaking and writing. The following table indicates these levels.
Level A Basic user A1 Breakthrough + A2 Waystage
Level B Independent user B1 Threshold +B2 Vantage
Level C Proficient user C1 Advanced + C2 Mastery
https://cefrlevels.com/overview/index.html
CEFR stands for Common European Framework of Reference. The CEFR levels provide a way ofdescribing a person’s language proficiency.
There are six levels: A1, A2, B1, B2, C1 and C2. A1 is the lowest level in terms of ability and C2
is the highest. The CEFR levels were developed for European languages (not only English) anddespite the word ‘European’ in the description, they are rapidly gaining popularity around the world.
The general descriptions of each level are as follows:C2
Can understand with ease virtually everything heard or read.
Can summarize information from different spoken and written sources, reconstructing arguments
and accounts in a coherent presentation.
Can express themselves spontaneously, very fluently and precisely, differentiating finer shades ofmeaning even in the most complex situations.
C1
Can understand a wide range of demanding, longer clauses, and recognize implicit meaning.
Can express ideas fluently and spontaneously without much obvious searching for expressions.
Can use language flexibly and effectively for social, academic and professional purposes.
Can produce clear, well-structured, detailed text on complex subjects, showing controlled use oforganizational patterns, connectors and cohesive devices.
B2
Can understand the main ideas of complex text on both concrete and abstract topics, including
technical discussions in their field of specialization.
Can interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity that makes regular interaction with native
speakers quite possible without strain for either party.
Can produce clear, detailed text on a wide range of subjects and explain a viewpoint on a topicalissue giving the advantages and disadvantages of various options.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

128

B1
Can understand the main points of clear standard input on familiar matters regularly encounteredin work, school, leisure, etc.
Can deal with most situations likely to arise while travelling in an area where the language is spoken.
Can produce simple connected text on topics that are familiar or of personal interest.
Can describe experiences and events, dreams, hopes and ambitions and briefly give reasons andexplanations for opinions and plans.
A2
Can understand sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of most immediate
relevance (e.g. very basic personal and family information, shopping, local geography, employment).
Can communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring a simple and direct exchange of information on familiar and routine matters.
Can describe in simple terms aspects of their background, immediate environment and matters inareas of immediate need.
A1
Can understand and use familiar everyday expressions and very basic phrases aimed at the satisfaction of needs of a concrete type.
Can introduce themselves and others and can ask and answer questions about personal details
such as where he/she lives, people they know and things they have.
Can interact in a simple way provided the other person talks slowly and clearly and is prepared tohelp.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l129Appendix B
The Direct Printing Amazon KDP Process in Simple Form
In short form the process involves initial content creation by the writer in a word processed format that is uploaded to the system before a layout is chosen. The size of the book has a range ofchoices including size, paper and cover quality, kindle version, paperback or hardcover, title andeditions, free ISBN option (initial 3 month exclusivity rights with Amazon), authors and contributors, book description, keywords, categories for online listing, marketplace and pricing options,and pre-order ability. The process can be completed in as little as a few hours, and once approvedby Amazon staff (normally within 72 hours) the book will appear in the bookstore, where it is thenavailable to order by the wider online community.
https://kdp.amazon.com/en_US/
Each book will feature a front and back cover page with author details and some design, as well as
the optional ISBN barcode. Templates are freely available to use for the covers and creators canupload other images to replace standard template images.
The progress status of each book created is as follows:
Draft: You’ve started your book, but haven’t submitted it to be published. Draft will appear next toyour title on the Bookshelf.
In Review: During review, Amazon checks the book to make sure it meets their content guidelines.
The review process can’t be expedited or cancelled once it’s started. You also cannot make any
additional edits at this time. It can take up to 72 hours for titles to be reviewed and published, andup to 10 business days for low-content books to be reviewed and published.
Publishing: Your title is being published and will be available on the Amazon store shortly. Your
book is not available for any additional edits until this process is complete.
Live: Your title now available for purchase. You can now search for your book on the Amazon
store. You can also make any changes to your book, if necessary. Only certain attributes can bechanged after a book is published.
Live with unpublished changes: Changes were made to your “Live” book and you haven’t published the updates. You may have also just viewed some details in your title setup. To publish any
changes, you’ll need to submit your title for review again.
Blocked: Your title has been made unavailable for further editing due to your request or due to a
problem related to the book’s content. Blocked titles also can’t be deleted from your Bookshelf. If
you have concerns about your blocked title, please contact us for more information.
Pre-order: See our pre-order status page for a complete list of pre-order statuses.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

130Improving Argumentative Essays with the Toulmin Model and Fallacy Repair

John E. McCarthy

Showa Women’s University
Abstract
The argumentative essay can be a challenging assignment for Japanese university students of English due to both the language

proficiency and the critical thinking skills required. In comparison to native English speakers and non-native speakers of various
other cultural backgrounds, Japanese students are likely to have had less practice with written argumentation and may find it
difficult to choose appropriate support, explain the relevance of that support, and refute counterarguments. This paper discusses
ways in which teachers can address these challenges by incorporating instruction and activities based on the Toulmin Modelof Argument, which research has shown to be useful in improving students’ written argumentation (Qin & Karabacak, 2010;
Simon, 2008; Stapleton & Wu, 2015; Varghese & Abraham, 1998; Yeh, 1998). In addition, the paper provides examples of somecommon logical fallacies that can weaken students’ arguments and introduces activities designed to help students recognize
and repair such fallacies.
日本語概要
論証型論文は、言語能力と批判的思考能力の両方が要求されるため、日本の大学の英語学習者にとって難しい課題である可能性があります。英語を母国語とする学生や他の様々な文化的背景を持つ非母語話者と比較すると、日本の学生は論述に関する練習をあまりしていない可能性が高く、適切なサポートを選択し、そのサポートの妥当性を説明し、反論に反論することが困難であると感じるかもしれません。本論文では、学生の論述力向上に有用であることが研究により示されている「トゥールミン・モデル・オブ・アキュメント」に基づく指導や活動を取り入れることで、教員がこれらの課題に取り組む方法について述べる（Qin & Karabacak, 2010; Simon, 2008;
Stapleton & Wu, 2015; Varghese & Abraham, 1998; Yeh, 1998）。さらに、学生の議論を弱める可能性のある一般的な論理的誤謬の例を示し、学生がそのような誤謬を認識し修復するために設計された活動を紹介する。

The argumentative essay is a staple of university academic writing classes and is covered in widely used
ESL texts, including Great Writing 4 (Folse et al., 2014),
Longman Academic Series 5 (Meyers, 2014), NorthStar:
Reading and Writing 5 (Cohen & Miller, 2015), and Refining Composition Skills (Smalley et al., 2012). However,it poses particular challenges for Japanese students,
who may have limited practice with essay writing (Mulvey, 2016) and critical thinking skills (Okada 2015, 2017;
Tanaka, 2014) that would be useful for argumentative
writing assignments. In addition, due to differencesin cultural traditions, students from East Asian countries, including Japan, may be less used to arguing
opinions and questioning the opinions of others thantheir Western counterparts (Pratt et al., 1999; Tweed &Lehman, 2002; see also McCarthy, 2021). As a result, in
learning to write effective argumentative essays, Japanese students may benefit from instruction focused on
the structure of arguments as well as the type of reasoning that makes arguments persuasive. In this paper,

these issues will be discussed in relation to the Toulmin
Model of Argument and the identification and repairof logical fallacies. First, the paper will describe theelements that comprise an argument according to the
Toulmin Model. Next, the influence of these elementson the effectiveness of writing will be addressed. The
paper will then discuss common logical fallacies thatcan reduce the strength of arguments, even whenthose arguments appear well constructed. Finally, thepaper will offer ideas on the incorporation of the Toulmin Model and the repair of the fallacies into lessons,specifically, in Japanese university English classes.

The Toulmin Model
The Toulmin Model, or Toulmin Argument Pattern(TAP), described by philosopher Stephen Toulmin in
The Uses of Argument (1958/2003), identifies the following components of argumentation: claim, data,
warrant, backing, rebuttal, and qualifier (see Appendix

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

131A). According to Toulmin’s model, a claim is used tomake an assertion, and data provides support for theclaim. A warrant acts as a link between the claim andthe data, and backing adds support for the warrant. A
rebuttal includes both an opposing argument and its
refutation. A qualifier, such as “may” or “in most cases,”
limits the scope of the claim. These elements may notalways be explicitly stated, and warrants and backing
in particular may be implicit.
It should be noted that ESL writing texts typically distinguish between an opposing argument, or counterargument, and the rebuttal, or refutation, of that argument (Cohen & Miller, 2015; Folse et al., 2014; Meyers,
2014; Smalley et al., 2012). Various studies related to the
Toulmin Model (Du, 2017; Nussbaum & Schraw, 2007;
Qin & Karabacak, 2010; Stapleton & Wu, 2015; Zhang,2018) make a similar distinction. Therefore, when discussing those studies, this paper also distinguishes
between “counterargument” and “rebuttal.”
The significance of the Toulmin Model in argumentative writing has been shown in studies involving both
native English speakers and ESL students. Although
the number of studies involving Japanese participants
is limited, findings from research in various settings
may provide useful insight into the potential benefits of integrating the Toulmin Model into classes ofJapanese students. In particular, studies indicate aconnection between the presence of specific Toulmin elements and the overall quality of writing. For
example, in comparing the essays of American sixth-,
eighth-, and tenth-grade students, and professional
writers, Crammond (1998) found that students in thehigher grades used warrants and countered rebuttals
more frequently, with the most frequent use among
the professional writers. The impact of Toulmin elements on the effectiveness of writing was also shownin Connor’s (1990) research examining argumentative
essays written by 16-year-olds from the United States,
England, and New Zealand, which indicated that thepresence and effectiveness of claims, data, and warrants accounted for 48 percent of the variation inholistic scores. Nussbaum and Schraw (2007), in their
examination of American undergraduates’ writing,likewise noted a correlation between greater use ofcertain argumentative elements (counterarguments

and rebuttals) and higher overall scores. Additionally,Du (2017), Qin and Karabacak (2010), and Zhang (2018)
had similar findings regarding counterarguments andrebuttals in the English writing of Chinese university
students.

Applying the Toulmin Model
Given that certain Toulmin elements are associatedwith better argumentative writing, how can teachersdevelop their students’ use of these elements? Following is an explanation of factors that can lead to more
frequent and more effective use of the components ofargumentation.

Familiar Topics
Familiar essay topics have been shown to result in theincreased use of certain elements of argumentation(Stapleton, 2001). In the study, Japanese undergraduates in an English writing class were asked to respondto two readings, each of which took a strong position
on a separate issue. One of the topics (rice importation
to Japan) was presumed to be more familiar to the students, while the other (gun control in the United States)
was presumed to be less familiar. Results indicated thatessays written on the familiar topic included morearguments, more data, and more rebuttals. In addition,
the familiar topic resulted in a greater variety of data
and a deeper level of abstraction. Considering the issue
of familiarity, the author has found the following topics to be successful in writing activities with Japanese
university students: university requirements, Englishonly policies in the workplace, online vs. face-to-faceclasses, and childcare subsidies, among others.

Interactive Argumentation
In an argumentative essay, the writer typically must
supply the argument as well as the counterargument,
which the writer then refutes. In interactive argumentation, however, counterarguments are naturally brought
up by the other side, prompting rebuttals (Ferretti etal., 2000; Macagno, 2016; Nussbaum, 2005; Nussbaum& Kardash, 2005). Applying this concept to academic
writing classes, teachers may use pre-writing activities

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l132such as group discussions, debates, and synchronousand asynchronous online messaging to help students
generate ideas for counterarguments and rebuttals.

Specific Goal Instructions
The goals that students are given in their writing
assignments can also have a significant impact on thecomponents of argumentation included, as shown by
Ferretti et al. (2000) and Nussbaum and Kardash (2005).
In the study by Ferretti et al., fourth- and sixth-gradersin the United States were given writing prompts that
included either a general goal to persuade the reader,or a more specific goal to state an opinion, reasons supporting that opinion, reasons why someone might disagree, and an explanation of why those reasons were
wrong. Results showed that the more specific goal
instruction produced greater use of counterarguments
and rebuttals and greater overall persuasiveness inthe writing of the sixth-graders but not in that of the
fourth-graders, possibly because the younger students
did not fully understand the specific goal instruction.
Nussbaum and Kardash (2005), basing their research on
the work of Ferretti et al. (2000), analyzed the writingof American undergraduates. Participants were given
a writing prompt that included one of two different
goal instructions or no goal instruction. Participants inthe “reason condition” were asked to provide as manyreasons as they could to support their opinion. Thosein the “counterargue/rebut condition” were asked toinclude reasons for their opinion, opposing reasons,and an explanation of why those reasons were wrong.
A control group received the prompt with no goal
instruction. Findings indicated that the more specificgoal resulted in significantly more counterarguments
and rebuttals as well as higher holistic scores.
In a second experiment in the same study, participantsin one group received a prompt with no goal instruction, while those in the other group were instructedthat their goal was to persuade the reader. Consistent
with the findings of Ferretti et al. (2000), Nussbaum andKardash (2005) found that the persuade goal reduced
the use of counterarguments, possibly because participants believed that including counterarguments
would weaken their case.

Considering this point, teachers may find it useful togive goal instructions specifying the elements of argumentation to include, while avoiding persuade goals
that could actually be counterproductive.

Graphic Organizers
Another way to increase students’ use of argumentative elements is by having them plan with graphic organizers based on those elements (Nussbaum & Schraw,
2007; Yeh, 1998). Yeh’s study involving seventh-gradestudents in the United States compared the effectiveness of planning with two different types of graphicorganizers. One group of participants used a concept
map that focused on the writing process and included
spaces for the writer’s opinion, an introduction, threereasons, and a conclusion. The other group used twoorganizers based on elements in the Toulmin Model.
Participants received six weeks of writing instructionthat differed only in the type of planner used. The
participants’ writing was then analyzed for development, including organization, focus, and clarity; voice;and conventions, including grammar, spelling, andpunctuation. The study found that students who used
the Toulmin-based planners had significantly higher
gains in development and voice. In addition, participant interviews at the end of the experiment indicated differences in the participants’ understandingof argumentative writing. For example, when asked
what made written arguments strong, 78% of thestudents who had used the processed-based plannergave answers that focused on writing conventions,gave vague answers, or said they did not know. Only
22% focused on how well claims were supported or
the connection between claims and support. In contrast, when answering the same question, 61% of thestudents who had used the Toulmin-based planners
focused on strength of support or the connection
between claims and support, while 39% focused onconventions, answered vaguely, or said they did notknow (Yeh, 1998, p. 75).
Nussbaum and Schraw’s (2007) study of American
undergraduates also examined the effectiveness ofplanning with a graphic organizer based on argumentative elements, although the organizer, unlike Yeh’s,
did not incorporate secondary Toulmin elements, such

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

133

as warrants. Nussbaum and Schraw found that participants who used the graphic organizer included morecounterclaims and rebuttals and had higher holistic
scores than those in a control group. However, theresearchers surmised that planning with the graphicorganizer may have encouraged my-side bias in someparticipants. With this in mind, when using graphicorganizers, teachers may find it necessary to clarify
the importance of considering multiple viewpoints
in order to form a cohesive argument, as opposed toraising counterarguments merely so that they can bedefeated.

Strengthening Toulmin Elements by
Reducing Fallacies
Although the Toulmin Model can be a valuable tool inteaching students how to best structure an argumentative essay, the model does not provide guidelines on
the content of effective arguments. As a result, essays
which fit the model in terms of their elements may still
employ faulty reasoning. This point is illustrated by
Stapleton and Wu’s (2015) study analyzing both thestructure and quality of reasoning in the English argumentative essays of Hong Kong high school students.
The study found that even essays that seemed wellstructured contained ineffective reasoning, including
inadequate support for claims, unrefuted counterarguments, and counterarguments that were overly weak(straw person fallacy). The study points to the importance of both surface structure and reasoning in theeffectiveness of writing. Consequently, it seems thatstudents would benefit from instruction in the content
as well as the components of effective argumentation.
One way that teachers might address the issue of argument strength is by making students aware of common
logical fallacies and how to avoid them.

Background
Many of the fallacies we know today can be traced
back to Aristotle’s Sophistical Refutations (ca. 350 B. C.
E./1984) and John Locke’s An Essay Concerning Human
Understanding (1690/1993), with more being addedfrom various sources over the years (Athanassopoulos& Voskoglou, 2020; Hahn & Oaksford, 2007; Hansen,

2020; Walton, 1989). Examples of fallacies that may
appear in students’ argumentative essays (e.g., begging the question, straw person, and slippery slope)are listed in Appendix B.

Categorizing Fallacies
Although it can be helpful to know the categories used
to identify fallacies (see Appendix B), it should be notedthat it is not always clear when an argument is fallacious since fallaciousness can depend on context (Corner et al., 2011; Felton, 2005; Hahn & Oaksford, 2007;
Hundleby, 2010; Mercier & Sperber, 2011; Ricco, 2007;
Walton, 1989). Therefore, in teaching students how tomake effective arguments, focusing on the identification and categorization of fallacies can be problematic. A more effective strategy is to focus on helping
students recognize flaws in reasoning and how to
repair those flaws. (Blair, 1995, as cited in Hansen, 2020;
Felton, 2005; Hitchcock, 1995, as cited in Hansen, 2020;
Hundleby, 2010).

Incorporating These Concepts into
Classes
In my own classes for Japanese university students
majoring in English, I have found activities focusedon the Toulmin Argument Pattern and logical fallacies
helpful in improving students’ written argumentation.
In particular, I apply many of the concepts discussed inthis paper to a second-year course emphasizing criticalthinking and academic writing. Following, is an explanation of how and when during the 15-week semester
I cover these concepts.

Introduction of Toulmin Terms(Week 2) From their previous English study, students
will have some familiarity with the format of an argumentative essay. However, they may be unaccustomed
to focusing on the way that individual elements work
together to form persuasive arguments. In addition, inorder to discuss essays in terms of these components,
students will need to grasp the concepts behind them,as well as a vocabulary that describes them. Therefore,
to facilitate students’ understanding, I introduce theToulmin elements in steps, in the context of familiar

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

134

topics (e.g., university requirements, English-only policies, and online vs. face-to-face classes).
I begin by explaining what is meant by “claim,” illustrating with examples (see Appendix A). I then ask students
to work in pairs or small groups to come up with theirown claims related to a familiar topic. As groups reportback, we discuss their claims, and I clarify the meaningof the term if necessary. Following the discussion on
claims, I repeat the activity for “data.” Because students
may have a tendency to focus on finding statistics,
without adequately considering how well those statistics support claims, I ask the students to think of the“type of data” that would strengthen their arguments,
regardless of whether that data is actually accessible.
After students have reported back on their ideas
regarding data, I repeat the activity for the secondary
elements of the Toulmin Model: “warrant,” “backing,”and “qualifier.”

Introduction of Graphic Organizer(Week 3) The class reviews the Toulmin elements covered in the previous week and discusses them in thecontext of a previously assigned reading. I then introduce the terms “counterargument” and “rebuttal,”connecting them with examples from the reading. Following this discussion, I introduce a graphic organizer
based on the Toulmin Model and ask the students towork in pairs or small groups to complete it using information from the assigned reading.
I then have the students work in pairs or small groups
to complete an organizer on a new topic with which
they have personal experience (e.g., online class vs.
face-to-face class). Once again, students report backon their answers, and I provide clarification as needed.

Fallacies(Weeks 4-6) Because students may be unfamiliar withthe concept of fallacies and may have limited practicefocusing on logic in their writing, I spread the introduction of fallacies over multiple classes, covering a few
fallacies each lesson. I introduce the fallacies with an

example of each (see Appendix B). I then give students
a handout with additional examples from assigned
readings or examples that I have created, and ask them
to work in pairs or small groups to identify the fallacies
and make suggestions on how to repair them. Aftercovering the various fallacies, I have students practiceidentifying and repairing them using a more comprehensive handout (see Appendix C).

Debate(Weeks 7-9) By this point in the semester, students
should be used to looking at written arguments interms of their effectiveness. However, they may needadditional practice in developing strong arguments,
which in-class debates can provide. I begin the debate
activity by assigning students to four teams: one pro
and one con team for two different topics. The teams
spend one week planning with a Toulmin-based organizer, and in each of the following two weeks, there isa debate on one of the topics. This activity seems particularly useful in helping students think from different
perspectives, as they must attempt to predict theiropponents’ arguments in order to prepare successful
rebuttals. The debate activity also provides an opportunity for students to assess the arguments of theirclassmates according to the criteria discussed in thecourse. As a follow-up assignment, students report on
the debate they did not participate in, evaluating eachteam’s effectiveness in supporting its claims with data,
refuting opposing arguments, and avoiding fallacies.

Editing Sample Essays(Weeks 10-11) For these lessons, I create essays containing examples of both strong and weak arguments
based on issues I have notice in students’ written work.
I then ask students to work in pairs or small groups tofind the flaws in argumentation and make suggestions
on how to repair those flaws.

Consolidation
In the final weeks of the course, students continue writing and editing their own work, putting into practicethe various concepts studied throughout the semester. Because the students are likely to have had lim-

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l135ited experience with argumentation before taking thecourse, applying the concepts to their writing can bechallenging. A formal data analysis on the development of students’ argumentation has not been conducted. However, it is my impression that by the endof the course, they are generally able to make better
connections between claims and data and are moreaware of the need to address opposing points of view.

Conclusion
As this paper has discussed, convincing argumentative
writing requires both an effective pattern of argumentation and strong reasoning within that pattern. By
incorporating the Toulmin Model and the identification and repair of fallacies into their lessons, teachers
can address both these issues. It is the author’s hopethat the teaching suggestions offered in this paper will
help facilitate that process.

References
Aristotle (1984). Sophistical refutations (W. A.
Pickard-Cambridge, Trans.). In The complete
works of Aristotle, volume 1 (J. Barnes, Ed.),
pp. 278-314. Princeton University Press.
(Original work published ca. 350 B. C. E.)
Athanassopoulos, E., & Voskoglou, M. G. (2020).
Quantifying Aristotle’s fallacies. Mathematics,
8(9), 1399. https://doi.org/10.3390/
math8091399
Carter, M. (2019, December 23). When do boys
stop growing? Parents. Retrieved March 18,
2022, from https://www.parents.com/kids/
development/physical/when-do-boys-stopgrowing/
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (n.d).
Adult obesity facts. Retrieved March 18,
2022, from https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/
adult.html

Connor, U. (1990). Linguistic/rhetorical measures
for international persuasive student writing.
Research in the Teaching of English, 24(1),67-87. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40171446
Corner, A., Hahn, U., & Oaksford, M. (2011). The
psychological mechanism of the slippery
slope argument. Journal of Memory andLanguage, 64(2), 133-152. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jml.2010.10.002
Crammond, J. G. (1998). The uses andcomplexity of argument structures in expert
and student persuasive writing. Written
Communication, 15(2), 230-268. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0741088398015002004
Cutler, D. M., Glaeser, E. L., & Shapiro, J. M.
(2003). Why have Americans become more
obese? Journal of Economic Perspectives,17(3), 93-118. https://www.brown.edu/
Research/Shapiro/pdfs/obesity.pdf
DiFranza, J. R. (1999). Are the federal andstate governments complying with the
Synar Amendment? Archives of Pediatric
Adolescent Medicine, 153(10), 1089-1097.
https://doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.153.10.1089
Du, F. (2017). The analysis of argumentcounterargument structure in Chinese EFL
learners’ argumentative writing. Journal ofStudies in Education, 7(3), 121-129. https://doi.org/10.5296/jse.v7i3.11275
EF. (2021). EF English Proficiency Index: A rankingof 112 countries and regions by English skill.
Retrieved March 24, 2022, from https://www.
ef.com/wwen/epi/
Felton, M. (2005). Approaches to argument
in critical thinking instruction. Thinking
Classroom. 6(4), 6-13.

Cohen, R. F., & Miller, J. L. (2015). NorthStar:
Reading and writing level 5 (4th ed.).
Pearson.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l136Ferretti, R. P., MacArthur, C. A., & Dowdy, N.
S. (2000). The effects of an elaborated
goal on the persuasive writing of students
with learning disabilities and their normal
achieving peers. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 92(4), 694-702. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.4.694
Folse, K. S., Muchmore-Vokoun, A. & Vestri
Solomon, E. (2014). Great writing 4: Greatessays (4th ed.). National Geographic
Learning.
Hahn, U. & Oaksford, M. (2007). The rationality of
informal argumentation: A Bayesian approachto reasoning fallacies. Psychological Review,
114(3), 704-732. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033295X.114.3.704
Hansen, H. (2020). Fallacies. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.),
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,
Summer 2020 Edition. Retrieved September
22, 2021, from https://plato.stanford.edu/
archives/sum2020/entries/fallacies/
Howard, J. (2019, December 27). The US officiallyraises the tobacco buying age to 21. CNN,
retrieved March 18, 2022, from https://edition.
cnn.com/2019/12/27/health/us-tobacco-age21-trnd/index.html
Hundleby, C. E. (2010). The authorities of the
fallacies approach to argument evaluation.
Informal Logic, 30(3), 279-308. https://doi.
org/10.22329/il.v30i3.3035
Locke, J. (1993). An essay concerning humanunderstanding (J. W. Yolton, Ed.). Everyman.
(Original work published 1690.)
Macagno, F. (2016). Argument relevance andstructure. Assessing and developing students’uses of evidence. International Journal of
Educational Research, 79, 180-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.07.002

McCarthy, J. E. (2021). Critical thinking inacademic writing: Challenges for Japanese
students at English-medium universities.
Gakuen, 965, 13-27.
Mercier H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans
reason? Arguments for an argumentative
theory. Behavioral Brain Sciences,34(2), 57-111. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S0140525X10000968
Meyers, A. (2014). Longman academic writing
series 5: Essays to research papers.
Pearson.
Mulvey, B. (2016). Writing instruction: What isbeing taught in Japanese high schools, why,
and why it matters. The Language Teacher,40(3), 3-8.
Nussbaum, E. M. (2005). The effect of goal
instructions and need for cognition oninteractive argumentation. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 30(3), 286-313.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.11.002
Nussbaum, E. M., & Kardash, C. M. (2005).
The effects of goal instructions and text
on the generation of counterarguments
during writing. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 97(2), 157-169. https://doi.apa.org/doiLanding/doi=10.1037%2F0022-0663.97.2.157
Nussbaum, E. M., & Schraw, G. (2007). Promoting
argument-counterargument integration in
students’ writing. The Journal of Experimental
Education, 76(1), 59-92. https://doi.
org/10.3200/JEXE.76.1.59-92
Okada, R. (2015). Thinking in the Japaneseclassroom. Journal of Modern Education
Review, 5(11), 1054-1060. https://doi.
org/10.15341/jmer(2155-7993)/11.05.2015/004

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l137

Okada, R. (2017). Conflict between criticalthinking and cultural values: Difficulty asking
questions and expressing opinions in Japan.
Asian Education Studies, 3(1), 91-98. https://doi.org/10.20849/aes.v2i1.122
Pratt, D. D., Kelly, M., & Wong, W. S. S. (1999).
Chinese concept of “effective teaching” inHong Kong: Towards culturally sensitive
evaluation of teaching. International Journalof Lifelong Education, 18(4), 241-258.
Qin, J., & Karabacak, E. (2010). The analysis
of Toulmin elements in Chinese EFL
university argumentative writing. System,
38(3), 444-456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
system.2010.06.012
Ricco, R. B., (2007). Individual differences in
the analysis of informal reasoning fallacies.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32,
459-484.
Simon, S. (2008). Using Toulmin’s Argument
Pattern in the evaluation of argumentationin school science. International
Journal of Research & Method in
Education, 31(3), 277-289. https://doi.
org/10.1080/17437270802417176
Smalley, R. L., Ruetten, M. K., & Rishel Kozyrev.
(2012). Refining composition skills: Academic
writing and grammar (6th ed.). National
Geographic Learning.
Stapleton, P. (2001). Assessing critical thinking in
the writing of Japanese university students:
Insights about assumptions and content
familiarity. Written Communication, 18(4),506–548.

Stapleton, P., & Wu, Y. A. (2015). Assessing thequality of arguments in students’ persuasive
writing: A case study analyzing therelationship between surface structure andsubstance. Journal of English for Academic
Purposes, 17, 12-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jeap.2014.11.006
Tanaka, J. (2014). A dialectical approach to criticalthinking in EAP writing. Second Language
Studies, 33(1), 53–84.
Toulmin, S. (2003). The uses of argument.
Cambridge University Press. (Original work
published 1958.)
Tweed, R. G., & Lehman, D. R. (2002). Learning
considered within a cultural context:
Confucian and Socratic approaches.
American Psychologist, 57(2), 89-99. https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.57.2.89
Varghese, S. A., & Abraham, S. A. (1998).
Undergraduates arguing a case. Journalof Second Language Writing, 7(3), 287306. https://doi.org/10.1016/S10603743(98)90018-2
Walton, D. N. (1989). Informal logic: A handbook
for critical argumentation. Cambridge
University Press.
Yeh, S. S. (1998). Empowering education:
Teaching argumentative writing to cultural
minority middle-school students. Research in
the Teaching of English, 33(1), 49-83. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40171572
Zhang, Y. (2018). An investigation into thedevelopment of structure and evidence use
in argumentative writing. Theory and Practicein Language Studies, 8(11), 1441-1448. http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0811.08

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l138

Appendix A
Elements in the Toulmin Model
Toulmin Element (aka)

ExampleClaim (argument, opinion, assertion)

TOEIC should not be used as a placement tool in the Academic
English Program.

Data (grounds, support, evidence, reason)

The content of TOEIC does not match the program’s curriculum.

Warrant (link, connection)

Tests that match a program’s content are better placement
tools.

Backing (grounds, support, or evidence for warrant)This has been shown by validity studies.

Rebuttal (counterargument and rebuttal or refutation)

Some say that TOEIC should be used because the university should focus on skills that will help students find jobs.
However, the Academic English Program is not meant to bea career preparation program.

Qualifier (hedge)

Expressions such as in many cases, often, most likely, according to, etc.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l139Appendix B
Common Fallacies
Fallacy

Begging thequestion (petitio
principii)

Description

ExampleAssuming that an open quesAccording to the department’s policy, expulsion is antion has been settled (e.g.,
appropriate punishment for plagiarism. Therefore, it isusing support that is basically aunnecessary to consider making the policy less severe.
restatement of the claim)

The harmful effects of a Western diet on fertility are
False cause (post Attributing causation to correla- obvious in the case of Japan. The country’s birth rate has
hoc ergo propter) tion
dropped dramatically as the Japanese diet has become
increasingly Western.

Plagiarism is wrong for many reasons, which are exIrrelevant conProviding data that supports a plained clearly in the Student Handbook. Every student,
clusion (ignoratio claim different from one being including Amanda, should understand why the university
does not allow plagiarism. Therefore, we conclude that
elenchi)madeAmanda’s paper was plagiarized.

Straw person

Admitting students randomly instead of by academic abilMisrepresenting the opposing
ity would have terrible consequences for the university.
argument in order to weaken it
That is why I oppose making the entrance exam optional.

Composition

A recent survey of potential home buyers indicates that
Implying that if some members
real estate prices in Tokyo have become increasinglyof a group have a characterisunaffordable. Therefore, the government should provide
tic, all members of the groupfinancial help to all Japanese citizens who are planninghave that characteristic
to buy homes.

Division

Implying that if a group hasa certain characteristic, eachmember of the group has thatcharacteristic

Data on English proficiency in Europe shows that English
proficiency is higher in Denmark than it is in Finland.
Consequently, I support hiring the Danish applicant overthe Finnish applicant.

Assuming that an “expert’s”
Appeal to authority
opinion is adequate support,(ad verecundiam)regardless of its actual merit

According to the principal of West Salem High School, if
teachers’ and principals’ salaries were increased by 10%,students’ test scores would rise by the same amount oreven more.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

140

How would you feel if you failed the class? Wouldn’t you
Emotional appeal Appealing to emotions without
be heartbroken? This shows the unfairness of the current(ad misericordiam) adequate support for the claim
grading system.

Ad hominem

Criticizing the person giving the Grant’s dating history shows that he has no skill in mainopposing argument instead of taining relationships. Do you think someone that sociallycriticizing the argument itself inept could run a sales division?

Slippery slope

Implying that a certain acIf school uniforms were no longer required, students
tion will lead to other actions, would not develop a group identity, which would prevent
eventually resulting in negative them from successfully working in teams once they enter
consequences.
the workforce.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l141Appendix C
Fallacies Exercises
Look at the examples below. What fallacies do they contain, and how could you repair those fallacies? If
different data would be more effective, what kind of data would you use?
English Education Should Be Mandatory
ARGUMENT
If students are free to take only the classes they want to, they may avoid classes that are difficult but areimportant for their future. Such classes, including not only English but also math and science, help students
prepare for university entrance exams. These classes also help students start preparing for their future
careers. Today’s students are tomorrow’s workforce, so it is essential that they develop the knowledge andskills demanded by the Japanese job market, including English proficiency. For this reason, English should
remain a required subject.
English Education Should Be Mandatory
COUNTERARGUMENT
Supporters of the current requirement for English classes claim that English is the most useful foreign
language for Japanese. However, when one examines the employement data for this university, one findsthat the foreign company that hired the highest number of recent graduates is based in Korea. According tothis data, Korean is, in fact, more useful than English for Japanese students.
English Education Should Not Be Mandatory
ARGUMENT
English should not be a required subject because mandatory English classes are not effective in producing
high English proficiency. According to Lincoln Springfield, a successful IT entrepreneur, when language
classes are required, students view them as a duty instead of as a learning opportunity. As a result, theirmotivation as well as the amount they learn is low. Springfield is a leading figure in today’s business world,and his opinion is convincing evidence for making English classes optional.
English Education Should Not Be Mandatory
COUNTERARGUMENT
Those who support Japan’s English education requirement claim that it is necessary in order to keep Japan’s
workforce competitive with Europe’s, for example. Some people who hold this viewpoint say that English
skill in Japan has decreased in recent years.However, according to EF’s English Proficiency Index (2021),
English proficiency in most Asian countries has been increasing for the last decade.
The Smoking Age Should Be Lowered

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

142

ARGUMENT
In many ways, there is no difference between an older teenager and a legal adult. For example, although aperson becomes a legal adult at 20 years of age, one reaches one’s full height years earlier. Typically, girls
reach their full height by 14 or 15, and boys by 18 (Carter, 2019). In this regard, a teenager will not growmore mature between the ages of 18 and 20, or even 18 and 30. Therefore, creating artificial differences
between 18-year-olds and 20-year-olds, such as the current smoking age limit, is meaningless.
The Smoking Age Should Be Lowered
COUNTERARGUMENT
Supporters of a higher legal smoking age claim that it would result in better health among the population.
However, health data shows that raising the smoking age does not improve health nationwide. In the UnitedStates, in 1992, the government established an age limit of 18 for smokers in all states (DiFranza, 1999). The
age limit was raised again, to 21, in 2019 (Howard, 2019). However, during that period, obesity in the UnitedStates actually increased, rising from 30 percent of adults in 1988-1994 (Cutler et al., 2003) to 42.4 percent
in 2017-2018 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, n.d.).
The Smoking Age Should Not Be Lowered
ARGUMENT
Currenlty, Japanese under the age of 20 are not permitted to smoke. Although people under 20 may prefera lower age limit, the limit should not be lowered because it is illegal for those under 20 to smoke. Therefore,
no change should be made to the current law regarding the purchase of tobacco products by teenagers andyoung adults.
The Smoking Age Should Not Be Lowered
COUNTERARGUMENT
Some people who support an age limit of 18 for the purchase of tobacco products claim that it is possible to
make responsible decisions before reaching the age of 20. These people, however, have not considered thedangerous consequences that such a change in the age limit would have. If the age limit were lowered to 18,
some would claim that 16-year-olds were mature enough to smoke. Then, if the age limit were reduced to16, some would propose reducing it to 14. In this way, a change in the current limit of 20 could easily lead toelementary school students smoking legally.
(Fallacies in examples above: 1, straw person; 2, composition; 3, appeal to authority; 4, division; 5, irrelevant
conclusion; 6, false cause; 7, begging the question; 8, slippery slope)P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l143Interdisciplinary Teacher Collaboration for an ESP Course: A Case Study
Kayoko Yamauchi
Toyo Gakuen University

Abstract
In the growing context of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) and English Medium Instruction (EMI) all around the world,Interdisciplinary teacher collaboration (ITC) has been promoted so that students can learn academic disciplines in English whiledeveloping useful English skills (Chaovanapricha & Chaturongakul, 2020; Kampen et al., 2020). Landscape of Practice (LoP)
where teachers learn through boundary crossing and participation in communities of practice (CoPs) has become important insuch collective learning (Wenger-Trayner, et al., 2014). Interdisciplinary teacher collaboration (ITC) where an English teacher
works with a content teacher towards a shared goal is one way to actualize this LoP. Nevertheless, its actual implementation
process is not well documented (Lu, 2020). Therefore, this case study explores ITC’s impact on teachers’ decision making indesigning, implementing, and evaluating an elective business-content ESP course at a private university in Japan. A variety
of data related to ITC has been collected and examined. The findings show how and when ITC influences teacher’s decision
making in designing an ESP course to enhance students’ learning.
日本語概要
世界的に ESP（English for Specific Purposes）や EMI（English Medium Instruction）が盛んになる中、学生が英語で学問を学
びながら、有用な英語力を身につけるために、教師間の連携（Interdisciplinary teacher collaboration：ITC）が推進されている(Chaovanapricha & Chaturongakul, 2020; Kampen et al., 2020)。特に、教師が境界を越えて実践共同体（CoPs）に参加し学ぶという実践の風景（LoP）が、そうした共同体の学びにおいては重要になっている（Wenger-Trayner, et al., 2014）。英語教員
が専門科目の担当教員と、共通の目標に向かって協働する学際的な教員のコラボレーション（ITC）は、この LoP を実現する 1
つの方法である。しかし、その実際の実施プロセスについては十分な報告がなされていない（Lu, 2020）。 そこで、本ケースス
タディでは、日本の私立大学における選択科目「ビジネス・コンテンツ ESP コース」の設計、実施、評価において、ITC が教員の意思決定に与える影響について検討した。ITC に関連する様々なデータを収集、検討した結果、学生の学習効果を高める
ESP コースの設計において、ITC がいつ、どのように教師の意思決定に影響を及ぼすかを明らかにした。

In the growing context of English for Specific Purposes(ESP) and English Medium Instruction (EMI) all aroundthe world, Interdisciplinary teacher collaboration (ITC)
has been promoted so that students can learn academic disciplines in English while developing useful
English skills (Chaovanapricha & Chaturongakul, 2020;
Kampen et al., 2020).
When describing collaboration, communities of practice (CoPs) are often used to describe how a groupof people who share a concern or a passion in suchcollaboration work, learn and innovate in a particular social context (Pyrko et al., 2019). When language
teachers collaborate beyond their field in designing
an ESP course, however, recognizing and working
through broader landscapes of practice (LoP) are crucial (Wenger-Trayner et al., 2014; Yamauchi et al., 2022).

Previous studies indicate the crucial role of ITC for EMI
and ESP faculty in designing an EMI/ESP course (Brown,
2015; Lu, 2020). For instance, in comparing the Content
and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) and the language teachers’ perceptions of ideal CLIL pedagogies
in the Netherlands, Kampen et al. (2020)’s findings
point out that experts tend to manifest idealistic views
about CLIL, while language teachers tend to have morepractical views. This implies the importance of understanding how such views reflect their actual roles in ITC
in the process of curriculum design.
Chaovanapricha and Chaturongakul (2020) investigated the roles of English teachers and subject teachers engaged in the collaborative process of interdisciplinary teaching in ESP subjects at a Thai university andexplored the benefits and drawbacks of implementing
such collaborations. Their findings revealed the exten-

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l144sive roles taken on by both teachers involved in the ITC.
Roles for the English teacher involved being a lesson
planner, teacher, learning organizer, and class activities designer. The subject teacher’s role was identified
as a consultant or informant, supporter, monitor, andfacilitator. The benefits were that an English teacher
gained confidence, reduced worry in teaching ESP subjects, and received instant feedback from the subject
teacher. The drawbacks were that it was challenging tobalance the different schedules of both teachers andthat lesson planning was time consuming.
Similarly, in a study of finding trends in EMI, Wilkinson(2018) mentioned that ITC between subject experts
and language specialists can be seen challenging, asteacher identity is linked to one’s disciplinary principles. However, facilitating their commitment to “thecollaborative venture” for innovative teaching beyond
one’s disciplines could lead to success of EMI programs(Wilkinson, 2018, p.610). Considering the challenges in
ITC, Miyama (2009) proposed an interdisciplinary andcomplementary approach for such communication
where both language teachers and content teachers
have mutual understanding of respecting areas of theirexpertise.
Although ITC related studies on language teaching
above show the importance of clarifying the roles
among teachers and the pros and cons of its implications both in Japan and abroad (Chaovanapricha& Chaturongakul, 2020; Coyle, Hood, & Marsh, 2010;
Kampen et al., 2020; Miyama, 2009), few studies havedocumented such collaboration systematically interms of the course design (Brown, 2015; Lu, 2020;
Miyama, 2009).
Therefore, this case study attempts to capture ateacher’s decision-making process in ITC between an
English teacher and a content teacher from a perspective of LoP. Specifically, it aims to explore ITC’s impact
on teachers’ decision making in designing, implementing, and evaluating an elective business-content ESP
course for the spring 2022 semester at a private university in Japan.
In an attempt to systematically document ITC for
language teachers and researchers, this case study
adapted Nation and Macalister’s (2010) language curriculum design model. It consists of three outside circles and a subdivided inner circle (Figure 1 replicatedby the author). It is said that “the outer circles (principles, environment, needs) involve practical theoreticalconsiderations that will have a major effect in guiding
the actual process of course production” (Nation &Macalister, 2010, pp.1-3). The following two researchquestions were created to systematically document
ITC in designing an EMI/ESP course while exploring theimpact of ITC in its process for the present case study:
1.
When and why do teachers tend to cross interdisciplinary boundaries in reference to LoP?
2.
How does the impact of ITC affect teachers’
decision making in designing, implementing, and evaluating an ESP course?

Figure 1
Nation and Macalister’s (2010) language curriculum design model (p. 3)

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

145

Methods
In order to see the impact of ITC, this study has combined self- or auto-ethnography approach and Nationand Macalister’s (2010) Language Curriculum Design
Model in analyzing the data mentioned above. Ethnography usually studies social interactions, practices,and events, but self- or auto-ethnography involves “thestudy of the researcher’s own group; a group in which
the researcher is an established participant” (Eriksson,
2010, p.91). To complement the radical subjectivityof self-ethnography between a content teacher andthe researcher, a curriculum design model createdby Nation and Macalister (2010) has been combined
for more objective data analysis. After the labelingthe recurring themes and categorizing them into themodel, the data has been analyzed to determine its relevance to ITC and the curriculum design model.

Setting
This case study is of designing and implementing anelective business-content ESP course for the third- andfourth-year students during the spring 2022 semester at a private university in Japan with the assistanceof a content teacher specializing in entrepreneurshipeducation and venture business. The business content teacher agreed to repurpose her Venture Business
Management course in an ESP context.

Data
The data used in this study is of two participants: acontent teacher and this researcher, who is also thelanguage teacher. Different forms of the data (email,chats on Microsoft Teams, casual oral chats, and an
end-of-semester survey) collected or transcribed
during December 2021 to July 2022 are used for the
analysis. The end-of-semester survey about ITC was
created by this researcher to get more specific insightsfrom the content teacher. It was given to both participants in Japanese as an opportunity for reflection.
It includes the following seven points in a form of
open-ended questions: how the curriculum syllabus/
course design was re-examined for this collaboration,
the impact of ITC on the class, opinions about sharing
materials and information, something that you noticed

through collaboration, what should be done together
for better ITC, opinions about EMI and CLIL, and othercomments (see Appendix for the questions). In total,
there are 185 entries from the language teacher and 37
from the content teacher. Although the number of theentries has been counted to depict a general pictureof this study, the content quality of the entries, not thequantity, has been analyzed extensively. As this casestudy focuses on the systematic documentation of thecollaboration process, the data has been grouped into
five phases in a semester shown below:
1. Pre-semester (during the syllabus writing andcourse designing phase)
2. Early-semester (during Week 1-3, as the orderof courses between the content teacher and theresearcher reversed after lesson 3)
3. Mid-semester (during Week 4-7)
4. Late-semester (during Week 8-12, this study could
not cover the whole 15 weeks due to the participants’schedules)
5. Survey at the end of the semester (Week 12)
Afterwards, each entry was translated and categorized into the Nation and Macalister’s (2010) curriculum
design model by the researcher who is a non-native
English speaker. Two examples (by the content teacher,CT, and by the language teacher, LT, respectively,
except for “Goals”) are shown below:•

Environment analysis (Outer Circle): CT, “As aco-teacher on LMS, can you see the materials that I
uploaded before the scheduled time?”; LT, “I could
not find much information about case study video
competition.”•

Needs analysis (Outer Circle): CT, “When I
use Mandal-Art, our students tend to run out ofideas and get tired of the repetition. So, it is almost
impossible to fill every cell.”; LT, “Our students
seemed to be interested in comparison between
Japanese and foreign companies in the previous
survey.”•Application of principles (Outer Circle): CT, “I
would like our students to keep their eyes open.”;LT, “I would like to revisit case studies as it is the

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l146main approach that our faculty put an emphasis
on.”Comparison of ITC between a Language
Teacher and a Content Teacher•

Goals (Inner Circle): LT, “By the end of thesemester, I would like the students to be able todescribe their final proposal using the technicalterms for their favorite thinking method.”•Content and sequencing (Inner Circle):CT, “Thank you for nicely adapting my materials.
Even English-Shiritori Game (A Japanese wordchain game)”; LT, “After comparing our materials, I
decided to recycle the materials more closely andfocus on application of your contents.”

In order to see when and why teachers from different
disciplines tend to cross interdisciplinary boundaries
in the collaborative curriculum design process, Table
1 was created. The left column shows types of entries
in terms of the Nation and Macalister’s (2010) curriculum design model. This shows what types of ITC tend
to take place between teachers. The top row showsa type of teacher followed by a designated phase inparenthesis. This helps us show when and what typesof ITC tends to occur in a process of curriculum designby whom.

•

Format and presentation (Inner Circle): CT,“When the 2020 pandemic forced us to shift online,
I modified the course design. I decided to start withindividual tasks and end with group tasks, insteadof making it all interactive. … So, I would like tocontinue this format.”; LT, “My class won’t need atextbook. I will center my course around the casestudy video.”•

Monitoring and assessment (Inner Circle): CT, “I used to manage assignments throughC-learning, but I plan to use LMS this semester.”; LT,“All students finished giving presentations within
a lesson.”•

Evaluation: CT, “I gained a new perspective
through seeing you nicely adapt my materials.”; LT,“I was able to verbalize what we want through thisITC.”

Results
In order to see the results systematically from a macro
to a micro perspective for this exploratory case study,
the results are organized into three types by thisresearcher: 1) Comparison of ITC between a Language
Teacher and a Content Teacher, 2) ITC’s impact on andpossible roles of a content teacher, and 3) ITC’s impact
on and possible roles of a language teacher.

Regarding the timing indicated in the top row, bothteachers (32% by LT, 59% by CT) communicated actively
in the pre-semester when writing the syllabus anddesigning the course. Towards the end of the semester,
the ITC slightly increased (28% by LT, 5% by CT). However, the two-way collaboration’s pause was observedin the middle of the semester (15% by LT, 0% by CT).
In terms of types of ITC, there are three obvious trends.
First, both the content and the language teacher
tended to share ideas about the outer circles in the
curriculum designing process (Environment such asscheduling and resources and Content and Sequencing such as institutional requirement and advice basedon students’ reactions) during the syllabus writing andcourse designing phase. And once the semester starts,
it was mostly the language teacher communicating
mainly about the outer circles (Environment Analysis such as materials and lesson plans, Needs analysis
such as students’ reactions and confirmation of thecontent teacher’s advice, and Application of Principles
such as benefit of ITC) in addition to some inner circles(Content and Sequencing such as how contents wereadapted or added and Format and Presentation suchas effective approaches and activities). Interestingly,
once the semester started until the end-of-semester
survey, neither participant mentioned Goals and Evaluation compared to other types.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

147

Table 1Comparison of entries per teacher

ITC’s Impact on and Possible Roles of aContent Teacher
After examining the general trends in ITC, Table 2 wascreated to see more detail regarding ITC’s impact on
and possible roles of the content teacher in this curriculum design process. The first column shows types ofentries in terms of the Nation and Macalister’s (2010)
curriculum design model, indicating types of ITC
communicated by a content teacher. The second column shows a summary of types of ITC related themes
regarding the model. The rest of the columns are organized in order of the five phases to show when andwhat ITC related themes occurred.
The findings indicate the content teacher’s both frequent and infrequent ITC related themes at different
phases. For instance, at the pre- and an early- semester
stages, the content teacher tends to share practical andtheoretical aspects of the course design through scheduling, planning, materials, needs, concerns, and ideals
regarding Nation and Macalister’s (2010) outer circles.
In addition, the content teacher shared expertise in thecourse design through advice, input, and assessment
tools in inner circles, key factors in writing the syllabus.

Throughout the whole process, confirmation throughthe teacher’s expertise on “Content and Sequencing”
was observed. In contrast, “Principles”, “Goals”, and“Format” were not as frequently mentioned as others.
It is also interesting to note that in the survey, the ITC’s
potential impact on the content teacher’s future course
development or professional development was noted,
such as “gaining a new perspective” and “looking forward to creating something new” through ITC.

ITC’s Impact on and Possible Roles of aLanguage Teacher.
Table 3 was created to better detail ITC’s impact on andpossible roles of the language teacher in this curriculum design process.
The findings show that aside from the obvious difference in the volume of contents, both similar and different trends compared to the content teacher wereobserved. Like the content teacher, the language
teacher tended to collaborate beyond one’s CoP interms of both practical and theoretical aspects of thecourse design. This includes sharing scheduling, plan-

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l148ning, materials, needs, and concerns regarding Nationand Macalister’s (2010) outer circles which involve practical theoretical considerations. In contrast, “Goals”
were not frequently mentioned by the language
teacher as much as others compared to the content
teacher. This might have been stemmed from thenature of ESP/EMI course design. As the goals are at thecore of the course design (Nation & Macalister, 2010),
the language teachers need to develop a learning
objective of the course along with the content teacher’s expertise as Miyama pointed out (2009). Also, this
implies sharing information about “how to” executethe course within the outer circles rather than the inner
circles’ “what to” was fundamental in the early stage of
ITC for the language teacher.
When focusing on the differences between the content and the language teacher, however, interesting
trends emerge. The first difference was when ITC wasdeployed. While the content teacher tended to collaborate in a decrescendo mode (active at an earlystage of curriculum design and passive as the semester
unfolded), the language teacher tends to collaborate
steadily throughout the whole process.
Frequent ITC related themes that were not observed in
the content teacher’s communications illustrate changing roles of the language teacher. For instance, at an
early stage, themes from an apprentice’s perspective
are often mentioned. These include tools, asking foradvice, feelings, purposes, goal setting process, syllabus design process, and reframing the understanding
through ITC. This implies the important open-mindedrole of the language teacher towards new content/
knowledge. Gradually, however, based on observations from the lesson, more ITC-related themes about
appropriate contents and approaches for the students
tended to be generated by the language teacher. Thisimplies language teachers’ strengths in the processof course design and what language teachers could
elaborate their expertise on when designing a ESP/EMI
course.

Table 2A content teacher’s ITC related themes per phaseP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l149Table 3A language teacher’s ITC related themes per phase

Discussion
Three types of the data (comparative data between
two teachers, data from the content teacher, and datafrom the language teacher respectively) above imply
ITC’s potential impact on teachers’ decision making in asystematic manner. This study’s first research question
was to explore when and why teachers tend to crossinterdisciplinary boundaries in reference to LoP.
The first overall findings hint at how and to what
extent teachers’ valuable time should be spent on ITC
in selective phases of the curriculum design process.
Considering the content teacher’s concentrated ITC at
the pre- and the final- semester, ITC should be encouraged at a pre- and post-semester, focusing on clarifying outer circles in the curriculum design process. For
example, identifying what is possible in one’s teachingenvironment such as how to make use of LMS or online
platforms for collaboration. Also, as in Miyama’s (2009)previous study, the overlapping recurring themes
between the participants imply that developing
mutual understanding of boundaries of LoP regard-

ing teaching environment (e.g. shared understandingof institutional requirement), teaching capability (e.g.
having flexibility in dealing with new contents andapproaches), time constraint (e.g. scheduling), course
planning (e.g. sharing course/lesson design process),and expertise in the contents from one’s CoP is key toefficient ITC.
The second findings from analyzing the content teacher’s communications demonstrate how ITC is powerful in gaining help from a content teacher’s expertisein the outer circles, especially at a preparation stageof the curriculum design, which is the main theme inthe second research question. Once a course is set,
during the semester it is recommended to shift the
ITC’s focus on gaining the content teacher’s confirmation on a language teacher’s decision making with
reports from a course. As the increased time constraint
and never-ending commitment on ITC being often thecommon obstacle, this kind of shift in attention could
help us facilitate a sustainable ITC (Chaovanapricha &Chaturongakul, 2020; Lu, 2020).

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

150

Similarly, the final findings from examining the language teacher’s communications illustrate how teachers’ roles in ITC could shift throughout the process ofcourse design and delivery. In terms of the language
teachers’ extensive roles in ITC, the finding is similar
to the Chaovanapricha and Chaturongakul’s study(2020). However, the roles were more expansive as
the language teacher in this study actually taught theclass, unlike their study. While the content teacher inthis case tended to exhibit expertise throughout andshifted their role from an information giver to a mentor(shown in an active ITC in the pre-semester) , the language teacher tended to exhibit her expertise gradually as she increased the understanding of the contents(shown in an increased ITC in the inner circle towards
the end of semester). In other words, throughout the
curriculum design process, the language teacher’srole tended to shift from a learner, implementer, andobserver to an evaluator. Thus, understanding suchroles as well as possible trends in role shifts in ITC could
benefit in future collaborative curriculum development(Chaovanapricha & Chaturongakul, 2020; Kampen et al.,2020). In addition, such a complementary and inclusive
relationship where each teacher’s strength is utilized
efficiently should be explained up front when implementing ITC in designing an ESP curriculum (Gearait etal., 2021).
Furthermore, considering the fact that most of thedata used in this study is obtained from online communication tools such as Microsoft Teams and email,finding ways to make technology or digitalization ourally could also help us facilitate ITC in the post-pandemic world. For example, teachers seem to exchange
expertise at their convenience through institutional
digital platforms, which allows them to collaborate efficiently without much time and labor constrains often
mentioned in previous studies (Cammarata & Tedick,2012, as cited in Gearait, et al., 2021). In other words,
in post-pandemic ITC, ensuring teacher’s autonomy inmaking decisions on when, where, how to collaborate
is key to creating an ESP course through ITC.

in designing, implementing, and evaluating an ESP
course at a university in Japan. The findings are examined in order for a practice-oriented researcher to document the impact of ITC systematically in the hope that
this will help others contemplate when and why teachers tend to cross interdisciplinary boundaries in LoP for
future ITC.
Based on the findings, for efficient ITC, developing
mutual understanding and expectation of one’s CoP
and focusing on the outer circles early in the curriculum design process are recommended. In addition,
throughout the curriculum design process, expecting
developmental shifts in target and teacher roles will
help us facilitate sustainable ITC in designing an ESP
curriculum. As ITC becomes more and more importantin enhancing education in this unpredictable world,
this small-size case study has attempted to illustratepotentially effective patterns and trends in ITC. It is
hoped that further research with a larger sample setof data or reversed study for content teachers getting
more inputs from language teachers will provide moreinsightful evidence and results.

References
Brown, H. (2015). English-medium instruction in
Japan: Discussing implications for language
teaching. In P. Clements, A. Krause, & H.
Brown (Eds.), Focus on the learner, (pp. 419425). Tokyo: JALT.
Chaovanapricha, K., & Chaturongakul, P. (2020).
Interdisciplinary teacher collaboration in
English for specific purpose subjects in a Thai
university. English Language Teaching, 13(5),139-148.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL:
Content and Language Integrated Learning.
Cambridge University Press. http://oxico.sk/
lg/aj/assets/ukazky/clil.pdf

Conclusion
This small-scale case study has attempted to explore
ITC’s potential impact on teachers’ decision making

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l151

Eriksson, T. (2010). Being native – distance,
closeness, and doing auto/self-ethnography.
[Gothenburg University Publications
Electronic Archive (pp. 91-100)] https://core.
ac.uk/download/pdf/16329047.pdf
Gearait, B. M, Ruairc, G. M., & Murray, C. (2021).
Actualising Content and Language Integrated
Learning (CLIL) in Irish-medium education;
Why, how and why now? Irish Educational
Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.20
21.1910971

Nation, I.S.P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language
Curriculum Design. New York, NY: Routledge.
Pyrko, I., Dörfler, V., & Eden, C. (2019).
Communities of practice in landscapes ofpractice. Management Learning, 50(4), 482299.

International Commission on the Futures of
Education (2020). Education in a postCOVID world: Nine ideas for public action.
Paris, UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/
ark:/48223/pf0000373717/PDF/373717eng.
pdf.multi
Kampen, E.V., Meirink, J., Admiraal, W., &Berry, A. (2020). Do we all share the same
goals for content and language integrated
learning (CLIL)? Specialist and practitioner
perceptions of ‘ideal` CLIL pedagogies in the
Netherlands, International Journal of Bilingual
Education and Bilingualism, 23(8), 855-871.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.14113
32
Lu, Y. (2020). A case study of EMI teachers’
professional development: The impact ofinterdisciplinary teacher collaboration. RELC
Journal, 1-15.
Miyama, A. (2009). Senmonkyouin tono renkei
process no nouhau [Know-how in theprocess of working with specialized faculty].
In K. Fukui, J. Noguchi, & K. Watanabe(Eds.), ESP-teki bilingual wo mezashite:
Daigakueigokyouiku no saiteigi [Towards ESP
Bilingualism: Redefining university English
education in Japan] (pp. 60-73), Osaka
University Press.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l152Appendix
The End-of-semester Survey Questions Followed by the Researcher’s Translation
1.

この度、コラボの話があってから、ご自身のカリキュラムのシラバス・コースデザインについてどのように再検討されましたか。（専門分野外の教員にその内容や意図等を伝えるべく、考慮された
点 は あ り ま す か？）How have you reconsidered the syllabus/course design of your own curriculum
since the collaboration started? (Are there any considerations you have taken into account in order tocommunicate its content, intent, etc. to faculty outside of your area of expertise?)2.

コラボをしていく中で、授業自体に何か影響はありましたか。その理由をお聞かせください。(In thecourse of this collaboration, did it have any impact on the class itself? Please explain why.)3.

コラボをしていく中で、教材やクラスの共有方法やその状況についてどのようにお考えですか。(As you
collaborate, what are your thoughts on how to share teaching materials and classes and the status ofsuch sharing?)

4.

コラボをしていく中で、授業に関するコミュニケーションを通して気づいた点などはありますか。(Asyou collaborate, what are some of the things you have noticed through communication regarding theclasses?)

5.

言語教育の教員と専門の教員のコラボにおいて、（今回できたこと・できなかったことを含め）、どんなことを一緒にすべきとお考えですか。
（例：シラバスや授業案の作成、授業案の作成、授業参観、等）(What do you think should be done together (including what was/was not done this time) in thecollaboration between language education teachers and specialized teachers? (e.g., preparing syllabi
and lesson plans, lesson plans, class observations, etc.))

6.

EMI (English-Medium Instruction) や CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) に 対 し、 ど のような印象を持たれていますか。今回のコラボを踏まえ、今後他の言語教育の教員と専門の教員がコラボする際に、考慮すべきことはどのようなことだとお考えですか。(What are your thoughts on
EMI (English-Medium Instruction) and CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning)? Based on
this collaboration, what do you think should be taken into consideration when collaborating with otherlanguage education teachers and specialists in the future?)7.

他に共有したいことがあればご自由にお書きください。(If you have anything else you would like toshare, please feel free to do so.)P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

153Japanese Students’ Views of Self-regulated EFL Learning: An Interview
Study
Szabina Ádámku
Meisei University
Abstract
Outside-class learning and self-regulation have gained ever-increasing attention, especially due to recent technological innovations and the emergency remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic. Through qualitative semi-structured interviews
with relatively proficient Japanese university students of EFL (N = 17), this study aimed to gain insights into the learners’ perspectives, experiences and approaches regarding their self-regulated learning (SRL). Inquiries focused on the participants’ (1)views on the pedagogical facilitation of their SRL, (2) means and approaches in their outside-class SRL processes, and (3)their commitment, metacognitive, satiation, emotion and environment controls (Tseng et al., 2006). This research asked a small
sample of high achievers; however, it uncovers their recalls of little pedagogical facilitation in their SRL, desires and initiations
for contextual and communicative practices, limited preference of digital means, and applicable solutions to learning barriers
across the five controls. Although non-representative, this study is hoped to initiate further research discussions and inquiries.

日本語概要
本稿は、自己調整学習 (self-regulated learning) に関する学習者の視点、経験、およびアプローチへの洞察を提供するもので、特に近年のコロナ禍における授業外での言語学習に焦点を当てた研究である。質的研究技法を用いて17名の日本人大学生に半構造化イ
ンタービューを行い、大学生の自己調整学習を分析した。本研究は以下に焦点を当てて分析を行った。(1)

教育的な自己調整学習の促

進、(2) 授業外での学習に対するアプローチと意義、(３) 自己調整学習への関わり、メタ認知、満足度、感情や環境の調整、の3つである。本研究の参加者は、高い学習成果を収めた大学生を中心に行ったが、本研究の分析として、大学生の実践的なコミュニケーションに対する欲求や積極性とICTツールを使いこなす技術との関連性が観察され、5つの因子における学習障壁への適用可能な解決策を提示する。

In recent years, the demands and challenges of English
as a Foreign Language (EFL) learning have increased
not only within classroom settings but also on outside-class learning platforms such as learners’ selfformed practice groups or the rapidly proliferating
digital and online realm of EFL development. As an
economically, technologically or culturally influential entity on the global scene, Japan has not been
exempted from such challenges; whilst combating
the shift from grammar-translation to communicative
language teaching (CLT) approaches (Mitchell, 2017),
all stakeholders have been opening to novel means of
EFL acquisition. Focusing on an increasingly important
aspect of learning, this paper reveals the outcomes ofan interview study conducted among Japanese university students about their views, means and practices
they applied in their outside-class, self-regulated EFL
learning.

Sharing numerous characteristics, self-regulated learning (SRL) is commonly associated with learner autonomy (Dörnyei, 1998) as both notions are driven by thelearner’s agency; that is, learners act as agents of theirlearning processes with capacity and will (Oxford, 2017).
However, the two concepts differ from crucial aspects.
On the one hand, an autonomous learner is able to“take charge of [their] own learning” (Holec, 1981, p. 4)
with a “capacity for thinking and acting independently”(Littlewood, 1996, p. 428); while on the other hand,
SRL entails “proactive processes that students use toacquire academic skill such as setting goals, selecting
and deploying strategies, and self-monitoring one’s
effectiveness, rather than a reactive event that happens due to impersonal forces” (Zimmerman, 2008,
pp. 166-167) with cognitive and affective control overeach learning process (Lewis & Vialleton, 2011; Murray,
2014; Zimmerman, 2005). These processes are cyclical,
consisting of three phases: in the forethought phaseP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l154learners form their strategies, which is followed by aperformance phase of active learning and continuous
self-monitoring, completed by a self-reflection phasewith a retrospective look at the learning outcomes that
affects future learning processes (Zimmerman, 2005).
Beyond goal-setting and planning in the first phase,“learning strategies fall under the umbrella of self-regulated learning” (Mizumoto, 2013, p. 255); therefore,
SRL performance activities require effective strategy
use (Oxford, 2017).
As a learner-directed activity, SRL requires certain
levels of motivation and self-efficacy. Beyond the evidently important initial motivation in or before the firstphase of SRL (Tseng & Schmitt, 2008), Dörnyei’s (1998,
p. 118) view of motivation as a process, whereby “a certain amount of instigation force arises, initiates action,and persists as long as no other force comes into play
to weaken it and thereby terminate action, or until theplanned outcome has been reached”, can be seen on
a par with and, therefore, crucial in SRL activities. Furthermore, Bandura (1982) emphasized that one of thebasic features of human motivation is our perceptionof our self-efficacy; in other words, one’s evaluation of
their own abilities in managing activities they aim toaccomplish. This is in alignment with Zimmerman’s(2008) mention of self-beliefs as additional criteria
for successful SRL, and Mizumoto’s (2013) findings ina questionnaire study on self-regulated vocabulary
learning, in which self-efficacy showed correlation withall other scrutinized variables, namely goal-setting,volitional control, strategy use, satisfaction with strategy use and vocabulary knowledge.
Yabukoshi and Takeuchi’s (2006) conducted qualitative
research among Japanese junior high school students
and teachers of EFL. Beyond finding that learners preferred so-called “simple” strategies in their SRL, suchas repetitive writing and reading out loud or creating
vocabulary lists, as opposed to “demanding” strategies
which would involve keywords, associations or analyzing, the responding learners’ (N = 347) most preferredstrategies were those of vocabulary learning, which
resonates with the importance of vocabulary expansion in language learning (Folse, 2011; Ghazal, 2007;
Webb & Nation, 2017) and strategy use in vocabulary
learning (Nation, 2008).

In the quantitative paradigm, Tseng and colleagues’(2006) study aimed to validate their ‘Self-Regulating
Capacity in Vocabulary Learning’ (SRCvoc) questionnaire introducing five scales on self-regulatory vocabulary learning processes: commitment control relating
to the learners’ willpower to continue learning until
the desirable goal is reached, metacognitive control,
whereby they manage their concentration and procrastination, satiation control in which they overcome
boredom, emotion control that tackles unwanted
or discouraging emotions, and environment control
setting their surroundings as beneficial to their study
session. Besides successful validation of the researchtool, the outcomes indicated that learning strategies
are more dependent on learners’ “creative effort on
trying to improve their own learning” than actual use
of certain methods (p. 95). The authors emphasizedthat instruction plays an undoubtedly decisive role inlearning processes while highlighting the importanceof sufficient capacity for self-regulation.
The SRCvoc has received further research interest;
however, it has not been investigated to a great extent.
In a critical literature review, Rose (2012) highlighted
its efficiency in providing insights into “the underlying
self-regulatory capacity of a learner, rather than strategy
use itself” (p. 95); in other words, claiming that self-regulation is related to “initial driving forces”, whereas
strategies are about “the outcome of these forces”.
Furthermore, he emphasized the rather complex connections between the scales; in his doctoral study, hefound instances of environment control affecting boredom control, stress, or procrastination. In the Japanesecontext, Mizumoto and Takeuchi (2012) embarked
on a large-scale investigation replicating Tseng andcolleagues’ (2006) SRCvoc-scale study, encountering
similar results to those of Rose’s (2012) regarding interconnections between some of the scales, in this caseemotion, environment and metacognitive controls
having direct effects on procrastination. Moreover, forfurther research they suggest the addition of volitional
control as another construct, which refers to the “teachability of self-regulation” (p. 90). Another SRCvoc study(Bilican & Yesilbursa, 2015) of experimental nature, conducted in Turkey, further questions the workability ofthe survey. Applying training sessions on the control
scales, the researchers found no significant change in

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

155

SRCvoc between pre- and post-questionnaire results;
nevertheless, they found improvement in scores withpre-test and post-test measures. They admit, however,that such changes also occurred in the control group,leaving doubts about the benefits of the training.
Outside-class learning has attracted academic andpedagogical attention for decades and the emergency
remote teaching (ERT) during the COVID-19 pandemicput SRL in the spotlight (Carter et al., 2020). In its
essence, ERT differs from pre-planned and specificallyorganized online courses (Hodges et al., 2020) and thesudden change of educational platforms challenged
institutions, instructors and learners alike. Learners
experienced increased workload, changes in theireveryday habits, social, emotional and personal conditions, roles and conducts of institutions and the needfor a higher level of ICT skills (Aristovnik et al., 2020).
The switch to ERT was also demanding for teachers as
their diverse ICT skills determined the success of theiradjustment to the new learning environment (Fekete,2022). However, the fundamental role of educators in
SRL (Cotterall, 2000; Lewis & Vialleton, 2011; Murray,
2014; Tseng et al., 2006) gained ever more recognition (Carter et al., 2020). In another part of the hereby
described interview study (Adamku, 2022), most students admitted their disfavor towards ERT and wererelieved about their EFL practice opportunities whenface-to-face learning resumed. However, experiences
and positive aspects of ERT are likely to be carried on
and blended into future pedagogical approaches withpossibilities to facilitate and develop outside-class SRL.
In view of the above and with a note of calls for qualitative inquiries into SRL and the SRCvoc scale (Rose,2012; Tseng et al., 2006), this interview study aimed
to investigate into Japanese university students’ outside-class, self-regulated vocabulary-learning processes. While parts of the findings on the participants’previous learning experiences, self-regulated vocabulary-learning strategy use, and perceived importanceof SRL, have been discussed in a previous publication(Adamku, 2022), this paper focuses on (1) how Japanese university students viewed the facilitation of theirself-regulated EFL learning practices in organized educational settings, (2) how Japanese university students
conducted outside-class self-regulated EFL learning

practices, and (3) how Japanese university students
controlled their outside-class self-regulated learning
processes. The last-mentioned research interest was
inspired by Tseng and colleagues’ (2006) control constructs validated in the quantitative paradigm; therefore, this qualitative inquiry was an attempt to find out
about how learners perceive their abilities to control
their self-regulated vocabulary learning. However, inthe semi-structured interviews, the participants often
diverted from vocabulary-learning SRL practices andshared their experiences in a general EFL learning
sense; therefore, this paper reports broader on SRL
with references to vocabulary learning.

Methods
Context and Participants
The research was carried out among 17 participants(Table 1) from a private university in Tokyo. Their EFL
proficiency level can be described as relatively proficient, as the interviews were conducted in English by
the researcher herself, a foreign guest lecturer at the
Department of International Studies. Although their
exact levels were not scrutinized in this study, mostof them ranged between intermediate upper-intermediate level, with the exception of Masayoshi, Ken,
Kaito, Kou, Shin and Wai, who gained advanced-levelproficiency in their study-abroad experiences. Due toconvenience sampling from the researcher’s teachingpractice and colleagues’ recommendations, most of
the participants (n = 14) were students of the aforementioned department and three additional respondents belonged to the departments of Education (two)and Business (one). The sample consisted of 12 maleand five female participants with one first-year, eight
second-year, three third-year and five fourth-year students. Although the sample is non-representative, thecollected data can provide useful insights into the proposed research problem area.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

156

Table 1The Sample

Participant (pseudonym)

Gender

Year

Major

Makkeimale

1stInt. comm.

Suama

female2nd

Int. comm.

Yuki

male

2nd

Int. comm.

Shinzomale

2ndInt. comm.

Natchanfemale2nd

Int. comm.

Sarianafemale2nd

Int. comm.

Umi

female2nd

Int. comm.

Nachanmale

2ndInt. comm.

Masayoshi

male

3rd

Int. comm.

Takashimale

3rdInt. comm.

Wai

male

4th

Int. comm.

Kaito

male

4th

Int. comm.

Esu

male

4th

Int. comm.

Kou

male

4th

Int. comm.

Shiba

female

2nd

Education

Ken

male

3rd

Education

Shin

male

4th

Business

Total:

12 x male1 x 1st14 x Int. comm.

N = 175 x female

8 x 2nd2 x Education

3 x 3rd1 x Business5 x 4thData Collection and Procedures
Data collection took place in the second half of July,
2021, through 17 one-to-one semi-structured interviews. An initial pilot interview was carried out with afourth-year student and it proved all aspects such as
the schedule, tools, venue, or timing workable; therefore, the results of this interview were included in thedata. The students were first approached via email
which described the research aims and ethical considerations such as confidentiality, anonymity, voluntary
participation, and the option to withdraw at any time
during the research. Before the interviews started, theparticipants also signed an informed consent form.
The average 42-minute interviews were recorded, latertranscribed and underwent thematic content analy-

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

157sis (Creswell, 2009). The part of the data presented inthis paper was collected through 14 main interview
questions (Appendix A) and formed into 8 themes and
38 codes (Appendix B). Intra-coder consistency was
ensured by re-coding performed by the researcher
herself, while inter-coder consistency was checked bydebriefing (Davis, 1995), involving a researcher outside
the research context but informed about the context
and pre-coding scheme and provided with parts of thetranscript with added themes and codes. The debriefing resulted in the confirmation of the coding method
and, regarding the codes processed for this paper, nomain alteration was necessary.

Findings
Pedagogical Facilitation of SRL
The first research question inquired about how Japanese university students viewed the facilitation of
their self-regulated EFL learning experiences in organized educational settings. The data provided insights
not only into their current university studies but the
respondents often shared previous experiences fromtheir K-12 educational periods. Six of them specificallystated that they had received no particular guidancefrom their teachers regarding their outside-class SRL,
while altogether seven responses referred to some
sort of facilitation. Two of them related to translation
practices, two emphasized learning from textbooks
or workbooks, two suggested reading, and in one
instance the teacher recommended practice throughconversation. “Actually, I learnt some strategy fromteachers, mainly to take notes or do textbooks, these[…] are still strategy, I think. But for conversation […], we
didn’t learn any strategy from teachers” recalled Kou, afourth-year student. Another fourth-year student, Esu,
simply described facilitation as “my teacher said ‘justremember’”, which may be interpreted as rote-learning
vocabulary or even grammar structures. In general, theresponses do not indicate high-level pedagogical facilitation. Kaito, for instance, measured his own efforts incomparison to the teachers’ by saying
I just made up the method myself. What they suggested made me bored. English is fun, like talking[…], listening […], writing […], but just studying

made me bored […] so I just wanted to find out
more fun stuff [like] watching a movie and write it
down and I just say it, like pretending [I’m] the actor.
Unfortunately, university teachers’ SRL-facilitation
efforts were mentioned in even fewer responses,
only one in each category of conversational practice,attending the university’s Language Lounge free-practice sessions, the vocabulary-learning application Quizlet, and generally expanding vocabulary knowledge.

Students’ SRL Practices
The second research question was directed to what
students actually do in their SRL; that is, how Japanese
university students conduct outside-class self-regulated EFL learning practices. It can be generally concluded that many participants of this research werecommitted to finding means of SRL in order to reach
their EFL learning goals. “Studying alone is a nice way
for me but in class, just sitting and just writing and juststudying some grammar and words is not interesting”,
said Shinzo. The numerous responses arranged into
the themes of receptive (reading and listening) andproductive (speaking and writing) skills. Three students (Natchan, Wai and Esu) mentioned reading articles for their research projects and one (Sariana) set her
smartphone in English. Not surprisingly, self-regulated
listening comprehension practice mainly manifested
in listening to music (five responses) and watching videos and movies (six responses). Writing was found in
two categories: three learners regularly wrote diaries
and four responses revealed having regular correspondence with foreign penfriends. Speaking was generally
the most preferred way of EFL practice; in most cases
the students sought conversational opportunities
for their skills development and they attributed theirdislikes towards ERT mainly to the lack or shortage of
speaking practice. As Shiba stated, “I’m good at memorizing so it was the best way for me but I can’t use […]the words when I speak in English”. The learners’ resolutions to finding speaking options were manifold: nine
responses affirmed efforts to speak with English teachers as much as possible; seven students were active
participants of Language Lounge, a free-conversational practice opportunity provided at the university;
seven responses related to self-created student groups

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l158organizing English speaking sessions face to face or on
online video platforms; and three students admitted totalking alone, out of which one added singing English
songs and another, Shiba, spoke to her dog.

sessions with friends to motivate herself and, therefore,
continue progressing in her studies and Esu spends
most of his time on campus where he finds the atmosphere contributory to his determination.

Being conducted after the ERT applied in the COVID-19
restrictions of personal contacts, the research interest
extended to uses of digital options in SRL practices,
especially because of the vast availability of devices athand that can be used for more than basic communicational functions, for instance problem-solving or learning (Fekete, 2020). Although some participants mentioned a few EFL practice applications or websites suchas Quizlet (two), Duolingo (two), vocabulary.com (one),
Hamaru (one), Listening Trainer (one), Taboo (one), or
conversational apps (two) and online video teachers(one), the use of digital or online dictionaries was yet
the most widely used option with six occurrences.
These findings further strengthen the overall assumption weaving through this research that learners preferface-to-face speaking opportunities to learning alone
and, however fun and SRL-supportive some digital
approaches may be, the participating students did notprove to be well-acquainted with a wide range of digital means that could assist their language practice.

Metacognitive control concerns the maintenance ofconcentration and restraint over procrastination. This
theme arranged into three categories: no problem
in controlling procrastination (five respondents), no
metacognitive control (three respondents), and procrastination-control strategies, the latter dividing into
the three codes of physical aids, taking a break or (re)scheduling. Suama, for instance, used physical aids
such as a comfortable pencil, fragrance, lemon waterand sweets; and Shin took a walk while reading his
textbook. Scheduling techniques also proved to bebeneficial to some respondents; while some rescheduled their goals or tasks, Masayoshi reported deliberate procrastination by planning the task shortly before
the deadline reasoning it with being more productive
and Shin maintained his concentration by switchingstrands of learning, for example, from grammar practice to vocabulary learning. Yuki pointed out his specific viewpoint about procrastination saying that

SRL Controls
The third research question related to Tseng and colleagues’ (2006) five self-regulatory controls: those ofcommitment, metacognitive, satiation, emotion andenvironment. Commitment control relates to the learner’s willpower to reach their set goals. While two students specifically stated their lack of success, severalof them could relate to some successful commitment
control. Some (Shinzo, Wai) simply found it easy tokeep to their goals, some could control their commitment by a positive mindset (Shiba) or out of habit as,
for instance, Kaito and Makkei explained: “because I’m
a student, I have to do this. Okay, I finish, and the next
day I have to do this, okay, I finish. Like it’s a habit, so
I don’t think, I just keep going” (Kaito), “I don’t know
because I’m used to it, [it’s] just a habit” (Makkei). Some
apply certain strategies; for instance, feeling their willpower weakening, Suama and Umi break down theirgoals and create smaller, easily achievable ones. Sariana listens to motivational songs or sets up videocall

yes, I sometimes do [procrastinate], but it doesn’tmean I’m lazily procrastinating it. My concentration
span really dictates what I can do at a particulartime, so ‘procrastinating’ is, I think, not the right
word […], but I just put them aside for a while until I
recover from tiredness.
Eight responses referred to successful satiation control,that is, control over boredom. Masayoshi said “I overcome [boredom] because after starting to study, I will
try to find something interesting in that”. Other participants declared exercising, walking, drinking something, changing the place or their mental state and listening to motivational music as means of overcomingboredom. Surprisingly, three students stated that they
merely continue to study even when they were bored,
denoting it as a successful solution for achieving theirgoals set for that study session.
The greatest challenge of the interviews was inquiring
about the learners’ emotion control; learners mostly
indicated boredom as an emerging emotion in theirP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l159

outside-class learning; therefore, excluding boredom,
this theme received the fewest relevant responses.
Three students, however, revealed no emotion during
studying, while three admitted their resentment of
the learning material and solving it by resetting theirlearning goals or changing their mindset to stay positive. Shin confessed to getting irritated at times but hefound practicing concentration skills a successful wayof handling the situation. Kou also mentioned resentment along with exhaustion and laziness; nevertheless,he confessed his incompetence in overcoming these
emotions.
Although two respondents attributed no importanceto controlling their environment, this theme produced
the most diverse and largest number of responses in
two categories: in the learners’ own rooms and public
places. Regarding their rooms, several codes emerged;
they enlisted numerous different solutions related to
comfort, silence or undisturbed atmosphere, readily available equipment or even ‘English atmosphere’
whereby they are surrounded by English posters, printouts, textbooks, post-its and the like. Per contra, somelearners preferred studying in public places that were
either noisy or silent, both types viewed as motivating in learning. Sariana described her experience as “I
get motivation from the people who study hard at thelibrary […], a lot of students concentrate on their work,
then ‘oh […], I have to do it like them’”.

Discussions and Conclusion
This interview study aimed to investigate three aspectsof Japanese university students’ outside-class self-regulated learning (SRL) processes in their EFL development, focusing on (1) their views about the pedagogical facilitation of their SRL, (2) how they conduct SRL,
and (3) how they control their SRL learning processes.
They reported little pedagogical help, advice or development of their outside-class SRL and were often dissatisfied with their teachers’ facilitation, which would
be essential to the support of SRL development (Cotterall, 2000; Lewis & Vialleton, 2011; Murray, 2014; Tsenget al., 2006). Nonetheless, responses to the second
research question revealed several SRL approaches
they used in order to improve their EFL skills outsideorganized classroom settings, often with gratifying

results. An interesting finding is the learners’ intentions to find conversational opportunities in theiroutside-class practices with teachers, fellow students,
penfriends and, if they lack such options, alone or with
their dog. All of these initiatives indicate certain levels of SRL motivation in both the initial stage (Tseng& Schmitt, 2008) and throughout the SRL cycle (Zimmerman, 2005; Dörnyei, 1998); as well as self-beliefs(Zimmerman, 2008) or self-efficacy (Bandura, 1982;
Mizumoto, 2013) which, however, may also be justified
by the homogeneity of the sample; that is, the participants’ relatively fluent levels of EFL that the interviews
required, being conducted in English.
The respondents’ SRL control across Tseng and colleagues’ (2006) five control scales, namely commitment, metacognitive, satiation, emotion, and environment controls, was diverse. While some responses
revealed no control over some of the factors, other
responses provided meaningful insights into what
learners find important and how they tackle difficulties
in their outside-class practices along the three cycles of
SRL (Zimmerman, 2005). In the forethought phase, they
set their learning goals and suitable environment thatbest fit their learning process; while some respondents
reported silent, well-equipped settings, others prefermore stimulating or often noisy places that stimulate
their concentration. Most controls scrutinized in thisstudy, however, manifest in the performance phase, inwhich learners attempt to control their concentrationor emerging procrastination, boredom and emotions.
In cases when learners recalled difficulties in their SRL,
their solutions were manifold; from physical aids suchas suitable tools, drinks or snacks, through exercise orwalk, to psychological approaches such as changing
their mindset or resetting their original goals, they
disclosed multiple useful remedies. Finally, the respondents proved conscious about their controls to thedegree that they regularly apply useful techniques,indicating efficacious reflection phases, the results ofwhich affect their consequent SRL processes (Zimmerman, 2005).
The results of this research reflect previous findings in
SRCvoc studies, especially regarding the interconnecting nature of the controls. For instance, satiation control often overlapped with emotion control and envi-

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l160ronment control cannot be clearly distinguished fromsatiation, commitment or metacognitive controls; thatis, it is unsure whether learners set their environment
merely for a most beneficial learning arrangement or
to overcome other barriers which may be categorized
and coded in other themes.

Limitations and Further Research
Directions
Although this qualitative interview study reached anadequate number of respondents, its greatest limitation lies within the sample. Firstly, the fact that theinterviews were carried out by the researcher herself
through convenience sampling in English required
relatively proficient English learners of a private university, resulting in findings describing only a small
segment of Japanese EFL learners. Secondly, as mostof the sample (n = 14) belonged to the department ofInternational Studies which provides more-than-average opportunities for English language practice, theirneeds for SRL may differ greatly from those learners ofEnglish at institutions or departments where EFL practices are less highlighted. Noting that more diversity
would provide greater insights in both limitations of
the above, the current sample’s SRL learning conducts
can be directive to less successful learners or acrosslower levels and applicable among different educational, social or socio-economic settings. Thirdly, theconveniently selected sample lacks heterogeneity inage and gender with only one first-year student andfive female participants but these two factors were notscrutinized in the study. Nevertheless, investigations
into such differences would be worth approaching in
future research inquiries. Finally, as mentioned before,
the SRL controls may have an intertwining nature; consequently, the interview protocol must be designedwith a great flexibility in order to gain a clearer pictureof the underlying reasons behind SRL controls.

References
Adamku, S. (2022). Proficient JapaneseInternational Communications majors’
perceptions of successful EFL learning
strategies: Self-reported comparisons oflearning experiences in K-12 educationand Meisei University’s International
Communications program. MeiseiInternational Communication Studies, 14,
19-37. Retrieved 31 August 2022, fromhttps://meisei.repo.nii.ac.jp/?action=pages_
view_main&active_action=repository_view_
main_item_detail&item_id=2845&item_
no=1&page_id=13&block_id=114
Aristovnik, A., Keržič, D., Ravšelj, D., Tomaževič,
N., & Umek, L. (2020). Impacts of the COVID19 pandemic on life of higher education
students: A global perspective. Sustainability,
12(20), 8438. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su12208438
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism
in human agency. American Psychologist,
37(2), 122-147. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003066X.37.2.122
Bilican, R., & Yesilbursa, A. A. (2015). Selfregulated capacity for vocabulary learningin Turkish high school students: An
experimental study. Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 197, 83-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
sbspro.2015.07.393
Carter, R. A., Rice, M., Yang, S. Y., & Jackson,
A. (2020). Self-regulated learning in online
learning environments: Strategies for remotelearning. Information and Learning Sciences,121(5/6), 321-329. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS04-2020-0114
Cotterall, S. (2000). Promoting learner autonomy
through the curriculum: Principles fordesigning language courses. ELT Journal, 54,
109-117. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/54.2.109

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l161

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design:
Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Davis, K. A. (1995). Qualitative theory andmethods in applied linguistics research.
TESOL Quarterly, 29(3), 427-453. https://doi.
org/10.2307/3588070
Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second andforeign language learning. Language
Teaching, 31(3), 117-135. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1017/S026144480001315X
Fekete, I. (2020). Information and Communications
Technology (ICT) literacy of HungarianEnglish majors: A validation study.
Journal of Adult Learning, Knowledge
and Innovation, 4(1), 31-39. https://doi.
org/10.1556/2059.2020.00002
Fekete, I. (2022). Profiling Hungarian K-12
teachers based on their technopedagogical skills: State of affairs anddevelopmental possibilities amid COVID19. Journal of Adult Learning, Knowledge
and Innovation, 5(2), 111-124. https://doi.
org/10.1556/2059.2022.00056
Fekete, T., & Porkoláb, Á. (2020).
Karanténpedagógia a magyar közoktatásban:
A digitális oktatásra történő átállás eddigi
tapasztalatairól. [Quarantine pedagogy inthe Hungarian public education: About theexperiences of switching to digital education.]
Iskolakultúra, 30(9), 96-112. https://doi.
org/10.14232/ISKKULT.2020.9.96
Folse, K. (2011). Applying L2 lexical researchfindings in ESL teaching. TESOL Quarterly,
45(2), 362-369. https://doi.org/10.5054/
tq.2010.254529
Ghazal, L. (2007). Learning vocabulary in EFL
contexts through vocabulary learning
strategies. Novitas-ROYAL, 1(2), 84-91.

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T.,
Bond, A. (2020). The difference between
emergency remote teaching and online
learning. EDUCAUSE Review, 3. Retrieved
29 August 2022, from https://er.educause.
edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-betweenemergency-remote-teaching-and-onlinelearning
Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language
learning. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.
Lewis, T., & Vialleton, E. (2011). The notionsof control and consciousness in learnerautonomy and self-regulated learning: A
comparison and critique. Innovation in
Language Learning and Teaching, 5(2), 205219. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2011.5
77535
Littlewood, W. (1996). “Autonomy”: An anatomy
and a framework. System, 24(4), 427435. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346251X(96)00039-5
Mitchell, C. (2017). Language education pressures
in Japanese high schools. JALT Shiken, 21(1),1-11. Retrieved 31 August 2022, from https://
hosted.jalt.org/teval/node/70
Mizumoto, A. (2013). Effects of self-regulated
vocabulary learning process on self-efficacyInnovation in Language Learning andTeaching, 7(3), 253-265. https://doi.org/10.108
0/17501229.2013.836206
Mizumoto, A., & Takeuchi, O. (2012). Adaptationand validation of self-regulating capacity
in vocabulary learning scale. Applied
Linguistics, 33(1), 83-91. https://doi.
org/10.1093/applin/amr044
Murray, G. (2014). The social dimensions oflearner autonomy and self-regulated learning.
Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 5(4),320-341. https://doi.org/10.37237/050402

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l162

Nation, I. S. P. (2008). Teaching vocabulary:
Strategies and techniques. Heinle, Cengage
Learning.
Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching
language learning strategies: Self-regulationin context. New York, NY: Routledge.
Rose, H. (2012). Reconceptualizing Strategic
Learning in the Face of Self-Regulation:
Throwing Language Learning Strategies out
with the Bathwater. Applied Linguistics, 33(1),92–98. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amr045
Tseng, W-T., Dörnyei, Z., & Schmitt, N. (2006). A
new approach to assessing strategic learning:
The case of self-regulation in vocabularyacquisition. Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 78-102.
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami046
Tseng, W-T., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Toward a modelof motivated vocabulary learning: A structural
equation modelling approach. Language
Learning, 58(2), 357-400. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00444.x
Yabukoshi. T., & Takeuchi, O. (2006). Exploring
language learning strategies used by
Japanese junior high school students of EFL:A qualitative approach. 外国語教育メディア学
会機関誌, 43, 39-56. 10.24539/let.43.0_39
Zimmerman, B. J. (2005). Attaining self-regulation:
A social cognitive perspective. In M.
Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & Moshe Zeidner(Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (2ndEd.), (pp. 13-41). San Diego, CA: Elsevier
Academic Press.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating selfregulation and motivation: Historicalbackground, methodological developments,and future prospects. American Educational
Research Journal, 45(1), 166-183. https://doi.
org/10.3102/0002831207312909

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l163

Appendices
Appendix A
The interview questions relating to the hereby scrutinized research questions
GENERAL SRL
1.

Do you learn English outside your English classes?
a.

If yes, is it for your classes or for other purposes?

b.

Can you tell me more about that?

2.

How often do you learn English outside your classes?

3.

Do you have a schedule for learning English outside your classes?

4.

What learning practices do you use in your outside-class English learning?

5.

How important is it for you to learn English outside classes?
a.

6.

How important is it for you to build strategies for outside-class English learning?
a.

7.

(Why?)(Why?)How efficient do you find your outside-class learning?

SRVL and its facilitation
8.

Have any of your teachers taught you strategies for learning new words outside the classroom?
a.

9.

If yes, what were they?

How do you feel about choosing appropriate vocabulary-learning strategies for your targeted words?

CONTROLS
1.

2.

How do you feel about your willpower to achieve your vocabulary learning goals?
a.

How you are able to control it?

b.

Do you have any methods to control it?

Do you feel any certain emotions when you learn words? (e.g.: nervous/impatient/afraid/bored)a.

Do you feel you can overcome them?
i. If yes, how?

3.

Do you sometimes procrastinate vocabulary learning?
a.

Do you get distracted easily during vocabulary learning?
i. How do you overcome this?

4.

Do you easily get bored during vocabulary learning?
a.

5.

Can you overcome it? (How?)

Do you choose specific settings for your vocabulary learning?
a.

(If yes, how? - context, place…)

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l164Appendix B
The related codes and themes
Themes
SRL

Codes
SRL: Homework, LMS tasks
Conversation with teachers
Self- initiated conversation with JP friends
Penfriend/online foreign friend
Speaking alone
Listening to music
Singing songs
Preparation for test
Revising previous textbook
Self-selected textbook
Research articles
Language Lounge
Setting smartphone in English

Teacher’s advice (K-12)

No facilitation
EN-JP dictionaries
Good explanations
Note-taking: words and translations
Workbook, textbook
Conversation
Reading
Reading aloud

Teachers’ advice (university)

Speaking
Language Lounge
Lifelike content (movies)
Smartphone application
Learning vocabulary

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l165Commitment control

Successful
Unsuccessful

Metacognitive control

Physical aids
Break
Rescheduling

Satiation control

Successfully overcoming boredom

Emotion control

No emotion
Resentment
Irritated
Mentally exhausted

Environment control

Room
Public place

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l166Phonological Clustering: A different approach to L2 vocabulary instruction

Anthony M. Diaz

Miyazaki International College
Abstract

L2 vocabulary has traditionally been presented to learners in thematically or semantically based approachs. While this is likely
the most practical way of teaching new words to L2 learners, several studies have found that semantically grouped words
had the lowest impact on word retention when compared with other methods of vocabulary presentation (Tinkham, 1993;
1997, Waring, 1997, Wilcox & Medina 2013). In contrast with these traditional approaches, phonological clustering presents
phonologically similar words to learners with the aim of raising learners’ awareness of the shared phonological patterns between
words and replicating the conditions in which the mental lexicon integrates new words into existing phonological schema. To
build a case for phonological clustering as a valid approach to vocabulary instruction, recent developments in phonologicaltheory and their implications for the Japanese EFL context are cited and an explanation of how this approach could be applied
to vocabulary instruction is given.
日本語概要
L2 語彙は従来、テーマ別または意味別に学習者に提示されてきました。これは L2 学習者に新しい単語を教える最も実用的な方法だと思われますが、いくつかの研究では、他の単語提示方法と比較して、意味的にグループ化された単語は単語の定着に最も影響が少ないことが分かっています（Tinkham, 1993; 1997, Waring, 1997, Wilcox & Medina 2013）。これらの従来のアプローチとは対照的に、音韻クラスタリングは、学習者に音韻的に類似した単語を提示し、単語間で共有される音韻パターンに対する学習者の意識を高め、メンタルレキシコンが既存の音韻スキーマに新しい単語を統合する条件を再現することを目的としています。音韻論的クラスタリングが語彙指導の有効なアプローチであることを立証するために、音韻論の最近の発展と日本の EFL 文脈への示唆を引用し、このアプローチが語彙指導にどのように適用できるかを説明する。

Semantic Clustering
The traditional organizational approach to the presentation of L2 vocabulary has been what the L2
vocabulary literature refers to as semantic clustering (Tinkham 1993; 1997, Waring, 1997). This methodof structuring vocabulary content presents students
with words selected from a single word class that sharean individual semantic field, such as family words like
“mother”, “father”, “brother”, and “sister.” This way ofpresenting vocabulary seems to be the most common
way textbooks organize their vocabulary content andis likely the approach instructors are most familiar with.
Figure 1 shows an example of semantic clustering forwords used to describe food sourced from an English
listening and speaking textbook.

Thematic Clustering
A second common method of presenting vocabulary

is referred to by the literature as thematic clustering.
Thematic clustering refers to the presentation of
vocabulary according to shared psychological associations among words and a shared thematic concept(Tinkham, 1997, pp. 141-142). Unlike semantic clustering, this approach to presenting vocabulary is cognitively based rather than lexically based and often consists of vocabulary selected from different word classes.
To illustrate this kind of clustering, Tinkham gives theexample of words thematically associated with theword “frog” such as, “pond”, “swim”, “hop”, “green”, and“slippery”. Figure 2 shows an example of the thematicclustering of words related to the unit theme of “taking
risks” from an Academic English textbook.

Phonological Clustering
In contrast with these traditional approaches to presenting L2 vocabulary, phonological clustering is anapproach in which groups of words that contain the

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l167same phonological patterns are presented to L2 learners, such as the set of words “fringe”, “hinge”, “cringe”,“binge”, “singe”, and “tinge”. The underlying motivation for presenting L2 vocabulary in this way is thebelief that lexical entries in the L1 and L2 are mostly
phonological in nature rather than semantic (Wilcox &Medina, 2013). Support for this approach is the aim topresent L2 vocabulary in a way that mimics the conditions that underlie the natural process of pattern recognition and phonological schema construction thatare believed to occur in a speaker’s L1.

Figure 1
An example of semantic clustering from the textbook “Real Listening and Speaking 3” (Craven, 2008, p. 15)

Figure 2
An example of thematic clustering from the textbook "Pathways Foundations: Listening, speaking, and critical thinking" (Fettig & Najafi,
2014, p, 24)

Figure 3syllable structure of the single-syllable English word ‘strengths’

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

168

Phonological Clustering Methods
Regarding phonological clustering, there are a number of ways that words can be grouped according totheir shared phonological patterns. Words could begrouped according to their shared onsets, nuclei,
codas, rhymes (nucleus and coda) or a combinationof features. See figure 3 for a syllable structure diagram
for the word “strengths”, which is a word that exemplifies the most complex possible syllable structure in
the English language. This approach is based on theidea that the more words are phonologically similar,
the more they will reenforce shared phonological patterns and facilitate storage due to their proximity in themental lexicon. The most salient method of phonologically grouping words would likely be words grouped
according to the same first three phonemes. This isbecause the first three phonemes have been found tohave a strong effect on word perception (Pisoni et al.,1985). This effect is due to the concept of phonologicalpriming, whereby there is a coactivation of phonologically similar words in the mental lexicon that facilitates
the perception of words. Depending on their length,
this type of grouping might consist of the onset andnucleus. One such example of this type of grouping iswords like “cream”, “creed”, “creep”, and “creek”, whichshare the same onset [kɹ] and nucleus [i] .

Empirical Support for Phonological Clustering
In their experiment to investigate the effect on word
retention that different approaches of vocabulary presentation elicited, Wilcox and Medina (2013) presented
participants with four different groupings of words:
words that shared phonological and semantic features,words semantically grouped, words phonologicallygrouped, and words that were neither semantically nor
phonologically related to each other. The presentation of these words was combined with an immediate
and delayed post-test. Interestingly, what the authors
found was that out of all of the groupings, participants
had the worst performance recalling the semanticallygrouped words. These results agree with previous
findings by Tinkham (1993; 1997) and Waring (1997)
regarding the negative effect that the presentation ofsemantically similar words has on word retention for L2
learners. Furthermore, Wilcox and Medina (2013) foundthat the words with the highest effect on word retention were those that were neither phonologically nor
semantically related, and words that were semanticallyand phonologically related had the second greatest
effect on word retention, and words that were only
phonologically related had the third most positiveeffect on word retention. While these findings might
contradict the belief that phonological clustering is avalid approach to vocabulary instruction, Wilcox andMedina’s findings still indicate that phonologically clustered words have a stronger effect on word retention
than the traditional approach of semantic clustering.
As part of their experiment, Wilcox and Medina
reviewed 10 elementary Spanish textbooks from a variety of publishers and found that all of the textbooks
presented vocabulary in semantic clusters rather thanphonological clusters (p. 1067). As Wilcox and Medina
point out, a major issue related to grouping words
based on their shared semantic fields is that instructors
and curriculum designers often assume that semantically related words consist of the same sets of words
cross-linguistically, but this is sometimes not the case,due to cultural differences. They offer the exampleof how the semantic field “locally available fruits” isdependent on one’s environment (Wilcox & Medina,
2013, p. 1067). For example, a person living in the Midwestern United States would likely be unable to buy
an exotic fruit like guanábana (soursop) at their local
fruit vendor, and vice versa, a shopper in rural Mexico
is unlikely to think of cranberries when asked about
locally available fruit. Tinkham (1993) identifies thatrather than theoretical concerns, the main reason forpresenting vocabulary in a semantically clustered way
is related to teachers’ perceptions of the communicative needs of students (p. 371). Wilcox & Medina (2013)
note that while previous studies have shown that
there is evidence that phonological repetition aids inthe retention of non-words, research that explores thepotential efficacy that phonologically clustered words
may have on learning is lacking, and currently, theirstudy represents the only investigation of this topic
at the intersection of L2 phonology and vocabularyacquisition.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l169

Literature Review
Considering developments in phonological theory andspeech perception (Bybee, 2003; Goldstein & Vitevitch,
2014; Port, 2007; Pisoni et al., 1985), the following sections will briefly discuss recent theoretical developments regarding how phonological representations
are organized and stored in the mental lexicon in orderto support a phonologically clustered approach to
vocabulary instruction.

Developments in Phonological Theory:
Exemplar-based models of phonologicalrepresentation
Within the last few decades, the field of phonology has
been moving away from the earlier generative framework as popularized by Chomsky and Halle in their work
“The Sound Pattern of English” (1968) to a frameworkthat incorporates concepts from the broader field ofcognitive psychology. In the generative framework ofphonology, phonological representations are conceptualized as abstract, with words being stored in the lexicon as serially ordered discrete phonemes (Port, 2007).
Critics of this framework point out that extra linguistic information, such as the voice quality of speakers,
sociolinguistic variation, and diachronic languagechange are largely ignored in favor of the idealized
form (Port, 2007). In contrast, exemplar-based models of phonological representation conceptualize
phonological representations more like a collectionof aural templates called exemplars that consists of
all instances of a word and its variant pronunciations
that a listener experiences over their lifetime. Since
recent work in phonology has approached the topic ofphonological representation from an exemplar-based
framework, it is only natural to ask what implications
these theoretical models could hold for the fields ofSecond Language Acquisition (SLA) and Foreign
Language Acquisition (FLA) respectively.

Use-based model of phonologicalrepresentation
In her book “Phonology and Language Use” (2003),
Joan Bybee discusses several exemplar-based theories

that attempt to explain how phonological representations are organized in the mental lexicons of speakers.
According to her use-based model, phonological representations are stored in highly organized schemata
with lexically similar words being stored in proximity
to each other within the minds of speakers. In chapter
2, Bybee uses the term lexical connections to refer tothis phenomenon (p. 22). She also proposes that theseconnections can be either phonological or semantic.
Bybee views the construction of these schemata as
use-based in nature, that is, phonological schema
emerges from use. Therefore, it would make sense tohypothesize that L2 vocabulary learning might occur
according to a similar process, i.e., that learners construct phonological schemata in their mental lexicons
resulting from their individual use of the target language. However, the question remains that if learners
are not adequately exposed to the phonological patterns of the target language, will their phonologicalrepresentations be organized according to the phonological systems of their L1? Considering these theoretical developments and their relation to L2 vocabularyacquisition, there may be motivation for the teachingof phonologically similar patterns in order to elicit theconditions that facilitate the construction of L2 phonological schemata and word acquisition. In particular,
this approach seems to offer the most benefit to EFL
learners whose L1 phonology is very different from theL2, because they may be insufficiently exposed to thephonological patterns of the target language and as aresult may struggle to incorporate unknown phonological patterns into existing phonological schemata.

L2 Phonology
L2 research has found that adult learners’ L1 and L2
phonological systems are not completely separate(Best & Tyler, 2007, p. 18). In their Phonological Assimilation Model (PAM), Best and Tyler (2007) draw a distinction between SLA and FLA and point out that FLA
is an “impoverished context” for language acquisition
due to a variety of factors which include: instruction
taking place in an L1 environment, relying on formal
and grammatical instruction rather than communicative contexts, and featuring instruction that is oftendelivered by L1 accented teachers (p. 19). These are all
major issues regarding the EFL context of English edu-

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l170cation in Japan, since it is likely that Best and Tyler’s
definition of the “impoverished context” of FLA would
apply to most Japanese English learners.
Another popular model of L2 phonology is Flege’s
speech learning model (SLM). According to thismodel, language-specific aspects of speech are transferred to long-term representations called “phonetic
categories” (Flege, 1995, p. 293). The model also postulates that the processes learners use to acquire thephonology of their L1 can be applied to L2 learning andthe resulting “phonetic categories” evolve throughout
the learners’ lifespans as a result of increased experience and exposure to the phonology of the L2 (Flege,
1995, p. 293).
Other studies indicate that a learner’s L1 exhibits influence on how they perceive sounds in an L2. For example, Flege (1995) cites two instances where speakers
from different language backgrounds will substitutedifferent sounds when pronouncing segments that are
not part of their native phonological systems (p. 237).
This mismatch indicates that a learner’s L1 influences

the way that they perceive sounds, because if it did not,all learners would be expected to use the same approximations for non-native phonemes regardless of their
L1 backgrounds.

Japanese Phonology
The implications of the PAM and SLM models of L2
phonology are especially relevant when consideringteaching students from language backgrounds thathave markedly different phonemic inventories, i.e. Japanese students of English. Furthermore, If the theoryof phonological schema creation posited by Bybee(2003) is valid, then it may imply that a student learning a language with a different phonemic inventory
will construct phonological schemata predicated on
their native phonological system. Table 1 expands on
Bybee’s model for lexical connections and illustrates
how a Japanese English learner might construct phonological schema in their mental lexicon from theEnglish word “bus”.

Table 1
Expanding Bybee’s lexical connection model to L2 phonology

Because Japanese utilizes a cross-linguistically common five-vowel inventory, Flege’s SLM theory would
postulate that the English vowel phonemes that are
not part of Japanese phonology would be perceived
as whatever their closest value in Japanese would be(Flege, 1995, p. 239). As Table 1 indicates, the English
vowel /ʌ/ would become /a/ or /aː/ in the Japanese phonological schema. It is also important to notethat while the vowels in these English words in most
North American accents are /ʌ/ in “bus”, /æ/ in “bath”
and “math”, and /ɜ/ in “earth”, in Japanese they are allrendered as /a/ or /aː/. This is related to Japanesedistinguishing vowel quantity rather than quality withcertain English vowels being perceived as being longer than others. We can verify this by observing how
English words are transcribed in the katakana syllabary.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l171

In this way, it is possible to theorize how a native Japanese speaker might perceive vowels that are not partof their native language. It is also worth noting that
where the English phonological schema has two phonological connections, the Japanese has three due tothe necessary empenthetic (added) unrounded vowel/ɯ/ that results when these words are transcribed into
the Japanese syllabary.
In addition to having fewer vowels, Japanese has fewer
consonants than English, and as we can see in Table 1,
its phonological system is unable to contrast between
commonly contrasted English phonemes such as /s/and /θ/. As a result, words like “sick” and “thick”, which
utilize /s/ and /θ/ as contrastive features, are both transcribed the same way in the Japanese syllabary シック[ʃiʔku] and are are likely to be perceived as thesame word.

Empirical Support for a Phonologically
Organized Lexicon
Now that the theoretical concepts underlying a phonologically clustered approach to vocabulary teaching
have been explained, several experiments that support
the idea that entries in the mental lexicon are organized according to shared phonological patterns will
be outlined.
Pisoni, Nusbaum, Luce, and Slowiaczek (1985)
In perception experiments conducted by Pisoni et al.
(1985), subjects were presented with a prime word
followed by a test word. Some trials included words
that were unrelated or the same, and some trials presented words that had the same: initial phoneme, firsttwo phonemes, or first three phonemes (p. 6). Theirfindings indicated that listeners were able to perceive
words presented in noise after hearing a prime wordthat had the same initial phoneme, the first two phonemes, or the first three phonemes. The prime words
appeared to have the strongest effect when the first
three phonemes were the same indicating:perception, which suggests a perceptual proximityof phonological representations.
Goldstein and Vitevitch (2014)
Building on Chan and Vitevitch’s (2009) previous work
regarding the effect of the clustering coefficient (C) on
word perception, Goldstein and Vitevitch (2014) discovered that groups of similar sounding words whenpresented together could facilitate word acquisition.
The concept of C, which is a theoretical developmentfrom the field of network science, relates to the theorized structure of phonological schemata in the mental
lexicon. In this structure, a word and its phonologicallysimilar neighbors are all nodes in a network of phonological representations. A word with a high C value has
many neighbors that are also neighbors of each other,and a word with a low C value has neighbors that areless likely to be neighbors of each other. A low C value
minimizes the number of connections between nodes
in the phonological network, thereby decreasing the
spread of activation through the network. See figure 4
for a visual representation of these concepts. The effectof a low C value on perception is that when words havefewer connections between nodes in their phonological networks, they are recognized more quickly thanwords that have a high C (Chan & Vitevitch, 2009).
Applying this concept to word learning Goldstein andVitevitch experimented with teaching groups of nonwords that had a high and low C and found that thewords with a high C were retained by participants better, thus suggesting that words with similar phonological patterns are more easily retained by learners when
they are presented together.

1.
The first part of a word plays an important rolein the phonological processing of words.
2. The priming words affected participants’ word

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l172

Figure 4
An example of words with high (badge) and low (log) clustering coefficients from Goldstein and Vitevitch (2014)

Development of an Application to
Automatically Group Vocabulary
Yet, the question remains; how does one practically
apply the concept of phonologically clustered vocabulary to an orthographically opaque language such as
English? Due to English’s lack of sound to symbol correspondence, at first glance, it is not always clear evento native speakers which words have the same phonological patterns, and it often requires some training in
the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) for learners
and instructors alike to recognize the shared patterns.
The representation of vowels in English is also an oftencited example of the difficulty associated with pronunciation teaching, since English has a larger number ofvowels than graphemes (letters) that are used to represent them, sorting words from a text according to theirshared vowel sounds can be a very impractical task.
These issues are especially relevant for Non-native
English-Speaking Teachers (NNESTs), since they maylack the phonological awareness to effectively perform
this task. In consideration of these issues, a simple program might serve useful to convert English words totheir equivalent phonetic transcriptions in order tomore easily sort them according to their shared phonological patterns. Regarding this task, there is a python
script called English to IPA that can convert English
words into IPA transcriptions (Mphilli, 2020). This script

uses the Carnegie-Mellon University Pronouncing
Dictionary (The CMU Pronouncing Dictionary, n.d.), a
pronunciation resource based on the North American
pronunciation of words, to convert any text that a user
inputs into IPA. Once words are converted to IPA by the
Python script, a simple alphabetizing program can beused in order to sort the words and in this way, words
that share the same onsets or onsets and nuclei canbe identified from any text. Using a similar method, it isalso possible to arrange words in alphabetic order fromright to left (backwards). In this way, words that sharethe same codas or rhymes (nucleus and coda) canbe grouped together from any text. At the time of the
publishing of this paper, the author is currently working
on adding a number of features to an application forphonologically grouping words. When the application
is finished it will be a tool that teachers and learners
can use in order to raise their awareness of the sharedphonological patterns that exist between words.
Table 2 demonstrates how the program could beapplied to a word list such as the “The New General
Service List “(NGSL) (Browne, Culligan, & Phillips, 2013).
The words in Table 2 were selected from the 2nd mostfrequent 1000 words in the NGSL and are based on thefirst two phonemes of each word that emerged frompatterns in the data. The first two phonemes were chosen based on ease of selection and in consideration of
Pisoni et al.’s (1985) findings regarding the initial pho-P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

173Table 2A selection of phonologically clustered words from the 2nd 1000 words of the NGSL

/fl/

/kr/

/kə/

/sp/

/st/

[flaɪt] (flight)[kraɪ][kəˈlɛkt][spid] (speed)[streɪt] (straight)[floʊ] (flow)(cry)(collect)[sprɛd] (spread)[strɛs] (stress)[flæt][kraɪm] (crime)[kəˈlɛkʃən][spɑt] (spot)[strɛŋθ] (strength)(flat)[kraʊd] (crowd)(collection)[stɪk] (stick)[kəˈmərʃəl](commercial)[kəˈmɪti](committee)

nological sequences of words.

Limitations
Since there is little research related to this topic, theclaims made in this paper are likely to be disproven.
Furthermore, since a phonologically based organization of the mental lexicon is a theoretical concept, it
will likely be difficult to discover solid empirical evidence that supports how L2 learners construct theseL2 phonological schemata. Nevertheless, replicating
Pisoni et al.’s (1985) perceptual experiments or Wilcox
and Medina’s (2013) vocabulary learning experiments
to confirm if they produce similar results with different
populations of students and languages may yield interesting findings. Even with the development of an application that automatically groups words according totheir shared phonological patterns, work still remains
to be done regarding how to implement this kind of
approach practically in a language course. At the very
least, the application might serve as a tool to raise thephonological awareness of teachers and students andto aid in pattern recognition. Despite these limitations,this is an under-researched area which could contribute to the understanding of how the L2 mental lexicon
is organized.

Conclusion
By presenting vocabulary with a pronunciation focus ina phonologically clustered approach, it might be possible to not only raise learners’ awareness of the phonological patterns of the target language but also tofacilitate the construction of phonological schemata,which may lead to better word retention due to thewords sharing similar phonological patterns (Goldstein& Vitevitch, 2014). Exemplar and use-based modelsof phonology hold some compelling implications forL2 vocabulary acquisition; if these theoretical claims
prove to be true, phonological representations emerge
from a speaker’s experience and use of language,
therefore, unless learners are adequately exposed tothe phonological patterns and phonetic qualities of atarget language, they may have trouble constructing
phonological schemata and integrating new words
into existing schemata in the mental lexicon. Since
the number of studies that investigate the efficacy ofa phonologically clustered approach to L2 vocabulary
instruction are very limited, it might be worthwhile toexplore this avenue of research to investigate if Wilcox
and Medina’s (2013) findings could be replicated with

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l174Japanese learners of English to further strengthen thepedagogical motivation for this approach to the presentation of vocabulary.

References
Best, C. T., & Tyler, M. D. (2007). Nonnativeand second-language speech perception.
Language Experience in Second Language
Speech Learning, 13-34. doi:10.1075/
lllt.17.07bes
Browne, C., Culligan, B. & Phillips, J. (2013). The
New General Service List. Retrieved fromhttp://www.newgeneralservicelist.org
Chan, K. Y., & Vitevitch, M. S. (2009). The
influence of the phonological neighborhoodclustering coefficient on spoken word
recognition. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance, 35(6), 1934–1949. https://doi.
org/10.1037/a0016902
The CMU pronouncing dictionary. (n.d.). Retrieved
August 25, 2022, from http://www.speech.
cs.cmu.edu/cgi-bin/cmudict
Craven, M. (2008). Real listening and speaking 3:
With answers. Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, J. L. (2003). Phonology and language use.
Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1968). The soundpattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.
Fettig, C., & Najafi, K. (2014). Pathways
foundations: Listening, speaking, and criticalthinking. National Geographic Learning.
Mphilli, (2020). Eng-to-IPA (Version 0.0.2) [Sourcecode] https://github.com/mphilli/English-toIPA

Flege, J. (1995). Second language speechlearning: Theory, findings and problems.
In W. Strange (Ed.), Speech perception
and linguistic experience: Issues in crosslanguage research (pp. 233-277). Baltimore,
MD: York Press.
Goldstein, R., & Vitevitch, M. S. (2014). The
influence of clustering coefficient on wordlearning: How groups of similar soundingwords facilitate acquisition. Frontiers in
Psychology, 5. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01307
Pisoni, D. B., Nusbaum, H. C., Luce, P. A., &Slowiaczek, L. M. (1985). Speech perception,
word recognition and the structure of thelexicon. Speech Communication, 4(1-3),
75-95. doi:10.1016/0167-6393(85)90037-8
Port, R. (2007). How are words stored in memory?
Beyond phones and phonemes. New Ideas
in Psychology, 25(2), 143-170. doi:10.1016/j.
newideapsych.2007.02.001
Tinkham, T. (1993). The effect of semantic
clustering on the learning of second language
vocabulary. System, 21(3), 371-380.
doi:10.1016/0346-251x(93)90027-e
Tinkham, T. (1997). The effects of semantic
and thematic clustering on the learningof second language vocabulary. Second
Language Research, 13(2), 138-163.
doi:10.1191/026765897672376469
Waring, R. (1997). The negative effects of learningwords in semantic sets: A replication.
System, 25(2), 261-274. doi:10.1016/s0346251x(97)00013-4
Wilcox, A., & Medina, A. (2013). Effects ofsemantic and phonological clusteringon L2 vocabulary acquisition amongnovice learners. System, 41(4), 10561069. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
system.2013.10.012

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

175

Pragmatic Markers Used in Textbook Dialogues

Chie Kawashima
Tochigi Technical High School
Abstract
This study investigates the representativeness of pragmatic markers used in textbook dialogues. The textbooks selected forthe study were five beginner-level international ELT textbooks and six Japanese high school EFL textbooks. The pragmatic
marker types identified in these textbooks were classified into interpersonal function and textual function with subdivision into
more discrete functions based on Brinton’s (1996) classification system. The study revealed uneven appearance of pragmatic
marker types in relation to their frequency and functions across the textbooks. Lack of pedagogical attention was also pointed
out alongside the absence of tasks to practise the use of pragmatic markers. The findings of the study suggest the necessity tosupplement the dearth of pedagogical treatment of pragmatic markers used in textbook dialogues with teachers’ efforts using
a variety of techniques.

日本語概要
本研究は、語学教材の対話文における語用標識の扱いについての調査を行ったものである。本研究で使用した教材は、初級レベルの洋書教材5種類、ならびに日本国内の高等学校で使用されている英語教科書6種類である。それぞれの教材の中の対話文で使用されている語用標識をBrinton(1996)による語用標識分類体系を基に、全体的に対人関係的機能およびテキスト機能の２つに分け、それぞれの機能の中で更に詳細化された機能へと分類を進めた。本研究で明らかになった点は、語用標識の種類や機能の分布が教材間で均等ではないことである。同様に語用標識の使用が練習できるタスクの欠如など学習配慮がなされていないことも判明した。本研究の結果から、語学教材における語用標識に関する学習配慮については、語学教師の多様な工夫により補足される必要性が示唆される。

Pragmatic markers frequently appear in language
textbooks in dialogue. Although they play an important role in terms of speech coherence and maintaining interlocutor relationships in conversation (Archer
et al., 2012), they have not received much pedagogical attention in EFL contexts. Therefore, learners may
have limited opportunities to learn how to use themin authentic interactions in their target language. In
order to address the representativeness of pragmatic
markers used in textbook dialogues, this study investigates their types and functions along with instruction
presented in the beginner level pedagogical materials. Pragmatic markers are words and phrases such aswell and you know which serve as pragmatic functions
within the linguistic system. Although arbitrary use of
these semantically empty markers can be grammatically acceptable, they are pragmatically essential andfunction as an important pragmatic element in a discourse (Brinton, 1996).

According to Carter and McCarthy (2006), the mostcommon pragmatic markers in informal conversation
are single words such as anyway, cos, fine, good,
great, like, now, oh, okay, right, so, well, and phrasal/
clausal elements such as you know, I mean, as I say,for a start and mind you indicating the speaker’s
intentions and interpersonal meanings (p. 208). In addition, markers such as actually, really, indeed, etc. serve
as a sign of the speaker’s attitude; hedges like kind of,like, just, etc. allow the speaker to sound less assertive;
and interjections such as wow, gosh, ouch, etc. display
the speaker’s exclamative utterances (Carter & McCarthy, 2006). Therefore, pragmatic markers serve a variety of functions and may be indispensable in everyday
authentic spoken discourse.
Pragmatic markers have been classified differently by anumber of scholars. For example, Brinton (1996) classified pragmatic markers into two macro functions: interpersonal functions and textual functions. Interpersonal

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l176functions are associated with speakers’ voice to be
involved with the interlocutor and express their emotions, reactions, attitudes, evaluations, judgements,
expectations, and demands, as well as shared knowledge or solidarity, and hedge the utterances to display tentativeness or politeness (O’Keeffe et al., 2020;
Tajeddin & Alemi, 2021). Textual functions, on the other
hand, indicate a structural boundary in the discourse,
and cohesive passages of discourse such as opening,
guiding, and closing a presentation are created by
the speaker with the use of textual markers (Tajeddin& Alemi, 2021). Furthermore, they divided each macrofunction into more discrete micro functions as shownin Table 1. Later, this inventory was applied by Chapeton Castro (2009) to examine the impact of pragmatic
markers used in the classroom discourse.

markers. Vickov and Jakapcevic (2017) noticed teachers’ appropriate use of pragmatic markers in the classroom instruction had a positive impact on students’listening comprehension. Erten (2016) observed theeffect of instruction on the elementary-level Turkish L1
learners’ awareness-raising of using fillers, which theyfound attractive or useful.

As several researchers have shown, the use of pragmatic
markers is not taught in language classes and inappropriate use of them is often not corrected (Hellermann &Vergun 2007; Thonus, 2007). Alcon and Tricker’s (2000)
study pointed out that the frequently used marker ofwell was not practiced in communicative activities in
EFL materials. Hellermann and Vegun (2007) statedthat textbooks put an emphasis on formulaic phrases
rather than pragmatic markers, which were not treatedas the objects for instruction. Likewise, Buysse (2017)
found much less frequent use of you know by non-native speakers of English due to neglected instruction ofthem in textbooks. Furko and Mono (2013) noted that
only a limited number of textbooks provided learners
with the opportunities to practise the use of well suggesting the necessity of teachers’ supplement of theincidental learning with explicit instructions. In addition, Murahata (2018) pointed out that the use of theadversative interjection oh was often overgeneralisedin the EFL textbooks. They noticed oh was often used
in a resultative situation inappropriately.

RQ1. How many types of pragmatic markers of eachmacro function are used in textbook dialogues?

Textbooks play an important role in a foreign language
education. In EFL contexts, textbooks are not only thesources of input for learners providing opportunities
to practice the target language but also function as aframework and de facto syllabus to regulate the classroom instruction (Nguyen, 2011; Soleimani & Dabbghi,2012). Additionally, classroom instruction is also vitalfor learners in terms of appropriate use of pragmaticThis study explores two types of beginner-level pedagogical materials of international ELT textbooks andJapanese high school EFL textbooks as to the use ofpragmatic markers. In order to investigate the treatment of pragmatic markers used in dialogues comparing the difference between these two types oftextbooks in treatment of pragmatic markers, the following research questions were established:

RQ2. What types of pragmatic markers are present in
textbook dialogues? How frequently does each type ofmarker occur?
RQ3. What are the micro functions of identified pragmatic markers? How frequently does each micro function of pragmatic marker type occur?
RQ4. Are these identified pragmatic markers adequately instructed?

Methods
Textbook Selection
The data analysed in this study were collected from thewritten transcription of oral dialogues introduced in
textbooks. The selection of textbooks was made basedon the results of an informal survey of major publishers as conducted in Kawashima’s (2021) study of pragmatic roles of visuals in ELT textbooks. I selected their
top-selling language textbooks which focus on the 4
skills: five beginner-level international ELT textbooks
and six EFL textbooks used in Japanese high schools as
displayed in Appendix A.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l177

Data Analysis
First of all, I identified types of pragmatic markers suchas oh, okay, well, etc. in the dialogues in each of theselected textbooks eliminating those with non-pragmatic use. Second, the identified pragmatic markers
were classified into two macro functions: a) interpersonal functions and b) textual functions, according to
Brinton’s (1996) classification system (Table 1). Then thenumber of pragmatic marker types in each macro function was counted textbook by textbook.
Next, each pragmatic marker type was counted in eachtextbook. This was performed to determine whichmarkers were frequently used and which markers were
underused/absent in the materials. Further classification was then performed whereby the individual markers were subdivided into each micro function based on
the inventory of Brinton’s (1996) classification system inTable 1. The aim of this classification was to compare
the frequency of each type of markers in relation totheir functions across the textbooks. Finally, in order todetermine how pedagogical attention was paid to theuse of pragmatic markers, additional investigation wasmade as to whether or not explicit treatment of pragmatic markers regarding macro and micro functions
and practice tasks were provided.

Table 1
Brinton’s (1996, pp. 37-38) classification system for pragmatic markers
Macro Functions

Micro Functions

Examples of Pragmatic Marker
Types

Interpersonal

Response/Reaction markers-to express a response/a reaction

yeah, oh, but, oh yeah, well,functions(Rea)

to the preceding discourse

eh, oh really?

-to signal understanding andcontinued attention
Backchannels (B/C)
Cooperation, Agreement
markers (Coo)mhm, uh huh, yeah-to express cooperation or intimacy

okay, yes, yeah, mhm-to express deference-to save face (politeness)-to express disagreement

but, no-to check/express/confirm

right?, okay?

understandingyeah, mhm, yes

Disagreement markers (Dis)Checking Understanding(Ch)
Confirmation markers(Con)-to request confirmationah, I know,
yeah, mhm, yes

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l178

Table 1 (Continued)
Textual functions

Opening/Closing Frame markers-to initiate discourse, (e.g., claiming(Op/Cl)hearers’ attention)

So, okay, now, right, well

-to close discourse
Turn Takers/Givers (T/T)-to acquire the floor

okay, yeah, and, e, well

Fillers / Turn Keepers (F)-to relinquish the floor-to sustain discourse

um, e, and then, because

Topic Switchers (T/S)-to hold the floor-to indicate a new topic

okay, well, now

New/Old information indicators-to denote new information

and, because, so

Sequence/Relevance markers-to denote old information-to constrain the relevance of one

so, and, and then, because(S/R)

clause to the preceding clause

Repair markers (Rep)-to repair one’s or other’s discourse(In)

Results
Range of Pragmatic Marker Types
As Table 2 displays, a wider range of pragmatic marker
types were identified across the international ELT textbooks compared to the Japanese high school EFL text-

well, I mean, you know, likebooks. A wider range of interpersonal marker types
were present in both types of textbooks compared tothat of textual markers except for Cutting. The rangeof textual marker types used in Vivid and Select was
especially narrow and only three different types wereidentified.

Table 2Range of Pragmatic Marker Types(International ELT Textbooks)
Interpersonal(Japanese H.S. EFL Textbooks)

TextualInterpersonal

Textual(Textbooks)

Function

Function

Total

Total

(Textbooks)

Function

FunctionInterchange

23

13

36

Progress

18

8

26

Headway

27

13

40

Crown

9

7

16

Cutting

15

20

35

Vista

11

4

15

Global

15

12

27

Vivid

12

3

15

Time

13

6

19

Select

7

3

10

Quest

14

5

19

Average

10.1

4.3

14.4

Average

18.6

12.8

31.4

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l179Types of Pragmatic Markers and Frequency

total number of pragmatic marker types used in the
dialogues was far smaller than that of the international
ELT textbooks. Most of the pragmatic marker types
were not evenly represented across the textbooks.
Although the interpersonal marker of oh predominantly appeared across these textbooks along withokay, these two markers were not present in Crown.
Really, which occurred predominantly in Vista andQuest, was absent in Progress.

Table 4 and Table 3 show pragmatic marker types
and the number of occurrences. Across the international ELT textbooks, the interpersonal markers of oh
and okay were predominantly used. Yeah and really,
which did not evenly appeared across these textbooks,
were also on the list of frequently recurring interpersonal markers.
As for textual markers, and occurred 79 times acrossthe international ELT textbooks. On the whole, the textual use of well was more common compared to interpersonal use. Er and mmm predominantly occurred in
Cutting, where far more textual markers were identified.

The frequency of textual markers in the Japanese highschool EFL textbooks was even lower. Nevertheless,well and and as a textual marker occurred more thanten times respectively in Progress, and textual markers were more frequently used than interpersonalmarkers in Crown. In addition, by the way, which wasabsent in the international ELT textbooks, was used anumber of times across these textbooks.

Across the Japanese high school EFL textbooks, theTable 3
Types of Pragmatic Markers and Frequency in International ELT Textbooks

Interchange

Headway

CuttingGlobal

Time

Total

oh

41

35

14

16

1

107

okay

15

18

26

17

4

80

yeah

2

19

8

4

2

35

Interpersonal

really

14

6

0

6

4

30

well

11

9

4

10

2

36

wow

5

6

1

6

7

25

but

3

10

0

4

0

17

others

32

48

15

18

10

124

(Total)

123

151

68

81

30

454

and

13

21

33

11

1

79

well

19

16

8

3

3

49

Textual

so

12

5

16

16

1

50

er

0

0

17

3

0

20

mmm

0

5

9

2

0

16

now

2

10

1

1

0

14

uh

4

4

0

0

5

13

okay

1

1

4

7

0

13

um

0

7

1

3

0

11

hmm

3

1

1

0

2

7

others

6

4

19

6

1

36

(Total)

60

74

109

52

13

308

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l180Table 4
Types of Pragmatic Markers and Frequency in Japanese EFL Textbooks
Progress

Crown

Vista

Vivid

Select

Quest

Total

oh

18

0

2

4

2

3

27

really

0

1

8

2

0

6

17

okay

4

0

3

4

1

3

15

sure

1

2

3

4

1

3

14

well

1

0

2

0

1

1

5

wow

5

0

1

0

0

3

9

yeah

6

0

0

0

0

3

9

others

17

8

5

13

3

10

56

(Total)

52

11

24

25

8

32

152

well

17

1

1

0

2

3

24

and

12

5

1

1

1

1

21

so

3

3

0

2

0

0

8

by the way

3

0

0

1

0

1

5

others

5

5

2

0

1

3

16

(Total)

40

14

4

4

4

8

74

Interpersonal

TextualMicro Functions of Pragmatic Markers
The micro functions of the identified pragmatic markers are summarised in Table 5 and 6. The function of
Response/Reaction (Rea.) was predominantly present
in the international ELT textbooks, and the interpersonal markers of oh was typically used for this function.
In Interchange, Global, and Time, really also functioned as Rea. a number of times. Cooperation, Agreement function (Coo.) markers as okay and yeah alsofrequently appeared across the textbooks. In Headway and Cutting, the use of yeah as Coo. was more
frequent than okay. Well functioned as Disagreement(Dis.) several times in addition to but.

As for the textual functions, the function of Filler (F.)
was most dominantly present across these textbooks.
Cutting stood out for the frequency of F. with the useof a number of different pragmatic marker types as
er, mmm, hmmm, etc. Well also functioned as a F. anumber of times in this textbook. And and so as a New/
Old Information Indicator (In.) or a Sequence/Relevance (S/R.) marker commonly appeared across the

textbooks. The functions of Topic Switching (T/S.) andRepairing (Rep.) identified in these textbooks mainly
used well. The markers with the remaining functions
were underused or absent.
Across the Japanese high school EFL textbooks, themarker with Rea. occurred in higher frequency. Oh andreally were preferably used for this function. However,Crown stood out for underuse of this function. The
markers with remaining functions occurred far lessfrequently. Con. was present across these textbooks,
and okay was mainly used for this function. Unlike theinternational ELT textbooks, the function of Con. wasmore commonly used than Coo. Sure was outstandingly used as Coo. alongside okay and yeah.
The majority of identified textual markers functioned
as S/R. or Rep. and were clustered in Progress or
Crown. And and so were mainly used as S/R., and Rep.
used mostly well. By the way as T/S occurred several
times exclusively in Progress. Fs., which occurred frequently across the international ELT textbooks, were
underused across these textbooks.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

181

Table 5Micro Functions of Pragmatic Markers in International ELT Textbooks(Interpersonal Functions)(Textual Functions)

Rea

B/C

Coo

Dis

Ch

Con

Op

Cl

T/T

F

T/S

In

S/R

Rep

Interchange

78

1

16

13

2

13

7

3

0

9

7

2

20

12

Headway

91

0

27

18

1

14

3

0

0

21

14

16

10

10

Cutting

25

2

31

2

3

5

4

0

0

50

10

27

14

4

Global

50

2

10

5

1

13

6

3

0

13

3

9

14

4

Time

18

2

8

1

0

1

0

0

0

8

0

1

1

3

(Total)

259

7

92

39

7

46

20

6

0

101

34

55

59

33

Table 6Micro Functions of Pragmatic Markers in Japanese EFL Textbooks
Rea

B/C

Coo

Dis

Ch

Con

Op

Cl

T/T

F

T/S

In

S/R

Rep

Progress

31

0

5

5

1

10

6

0

0

0

6

0

13

15

Crown

2

0

2

3

0

4

0

0

1

1

1

1

7

3

Vista

16

0

2

1

0

5

0

0

0

1

0

1

0

2

Vivid

16

0

2

0

0

9

0

0

1

0

0

3

0

0

Select

6

0

1

0

0

1

1

0

0

0

1

0

1

1

Quest

16

0

12

1

0

3

0

0

0

3

2

0

2

1

(Total)

87

0

24

10

1

32

7

0

2

5

10

5

23

22

Note: Each micro function is displayed with a shortened form or an abbreviation in the parentheses as in Table 1.

Instruction of Pragmatic Markers
Not a single explicit mention of the pragmatic markers
in the textbooks investigated in this study was identified. At the same time, output practice tasks wereabsent all across these textbooks. However, the directions of reading aloud or listening carefully were provided in some of the dialogues with pragmatic markers in the international ELT textbooks. Even though anumber of pragmatic markers were used in textbook
dialogues, they were neither explicitly introduced norpractised. Learners were solely able to be exposed tothe pragmatic markers used in the dialogues.

Discussion
Overall, this study identified the range of pragmatic
marker types and their frequency in each textbook
and the function of each identified marker. Then, pedagogical treatment of these markers was also examined. These findings of the study imply particularityof beginner level textbooks and pedagogical issues inpresenting pragmatic markers.

First of all, a wider range of interpersonal marker types
were identified across the textbooks. Interpersonalmarkers involve response forms to questions (yes, no,and yeah), to directives (okay), and assertions (backchannels) as well as interjection (oh, ah, and well)(Biber et al., 1999). Therefore, the textbooks examined in this study were all beginner-level where informal everyday conversations were presented, and lesstextual markers might be used to make the discourse
structures simple. Additionally, the substantial difference between these two types of textbooks was therange of pragmatic marker types used in the dialogues.
Although both types of textbooks focus across 4 skills,
Japanese high school EFL textbooks might place moreemphasis on linguistic information rather than everyday language use.
Second, the identified recurring pragmatic markers
as oh, okay, well, so, and yeah were almost identicalwith those commonly used in everyday authentic interaction as listed on the inventory of Biber et al. (1999)

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

182

and Carter and McCarthy (2006). However, some of
the commonly used markers as anyway, now, right,
you know, like, etc. were underrepresented or absent
across the textbooks. They were among the most commonly used pragmatic markers in the data set of spoken text of beginning ESL learners in the United States(Hellermann and Vegun, 2007). The acquisition of thesemarkers can be made in real life in the early stage ofL2 acquisition. Moreover, uneven representation ofthese commonly used markers across the textbooks
was noted. Oh and okay were completely absent inCrown while by the way, which was absent in theinternational ELT textbooks, was among the frequently
used textual markers in the Japanese high school ELT
textbooks. The forms of pragmatic markers tend to be
more explicit using the words with propositional meaning in EFL materials whereas lexically empty markers
as oh, okay, and well, etc. with versatile functions are
predominantly used in authentic interactions (Cheng &Warren, 2007). The pragmatic marker types learners are
exposed to may be limited if they rely solely on a single
textbook.

response against the speaker’s anticipation (Carter &McCarthy, 2006). Buysse (2015) observed EFL learners’
overuse of well in the speech management due to theirlack of confidence rather than as an attitudinal function
like disagreement. They stated that well as a speech
management function was commonly present in pedagogical materials and included in learners’ restricted
inventory of pragmatic devices. This unbalanced representation of pragmatic marker types in relation to theirfunctions across the textbooks may be a cause of learners’ inappropriate use of them in authentic interaction.

Third, a large number of identified markers functioned
as Rea., where oh was predominantly used. The use of
the remaining marker types for this function was very
limited. As in Murahata’s (2018) findings, oh as Rea. may
be overgeneralised in both types of textbooks. A frequent use of okay alongside yeah as a Coo. was foundin the international ELT textbooks while sure was morecommonly used in the Japanese high school ELT textbooks. According to Biber et al. (1999), yeah functions
as a response to directives similar to okay, but it istreated as a weakened or indirect negative response incontrast to stronger responses of sure and certainly.
The preference of the Japanese EFL textbooks in presenting markers with propositional meaning may havean impact on learners’ language use in authentic situations. Additionally, less frequent appearance of Coo.
markers than Con. in Japanese high school EFL textbooks might be attributed to lack of directive speechacts presented in the dialogues.

Pragmatic markers may be grammatically optional
but they are essential for appropriate language use ineveryday communication This study identified a wide
range of pragmatic markers with different functions in
textbook dialogues. Some of them occurred in higher
frequency. Although many of those identified in thisstudy are commonly used in everyday interaction, theuse of them was not adequately represented to learners in textbooks, and enough pedagogical attention
was not paid in EFL contexts. Perhaps, language teachers could use a variety of techniques such as incidental
learning, explicit instruction, etc. to supplement where
textbooks are lacking.

Furthermore, several different micro functions wereinvolved in the versatile marker of well, which functioned predominantly as a filler in the international ELT
textbooks. However, this marker typically functions as

Finally, although this study identified a number ofpragmatic marker types and functions, not a singleof them was highlighted or explicitly practised in the
textbooks. Learners are unlikely to learn the macro andmicro functions of pragmatic markers through simple
exposure (Alcon & Tricker, 2000). The lack of explicit
instruction found by this study suggests that this is thecase for learners.

Conclusion

References
Alcon, E., & Tricker, D. (2000). Teaching discourse
competence in the classroom: An example
based on the discourse marker well in EFL
materials. Paper presented at the The 22ndInternational Conference of Aedean, Lleida.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l183

Archer, D., Aijmer, K., & Wichmann, A. (2012).
Pragmatics: An advanced resource book forstudents. New York: Routledge. https://doi.
org/10.1558/eap.27075
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S.,& Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of
spoken English. London: Longman. https://doi.org/10.1017/s136067430221028x
Brinton, L. (1996). Pragmatic markers in English.
Grammaticalization and discourse functions.
Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110907582
Buysse, L. (2015). ‘Well it’s not very ideal...’ The
pragmatic marker well in learner English.
Intercultural Pragmatics, 12(1), 59-89. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2015-0003
Buysse, L. (2017). The pragmatic marker you knowin learner Englishes. Journal of Pragmatics,
121, 40-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
pragma.2017.09.010
Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge
grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. https://doi.org/10.4312/
vestnik.1.207-211
Chapeton Castro, C. M. (2009). The use andfunctions of discourse markers in EFL
classroom interaction. Profile, 11, 57-77.
Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (2007). Checking
understanding: Comparing textboooks anda corpus of spoken English in Hong Kong.
Language Awareness, 16(3), 190-207. https://doi.org/10.2167/la455.0
Furko, B. P., & Monos, K. (2013). The teachabilityof communicative competence and theacquisition of pragmatic markers: A casestudy of some widely-used business English
coursebooks. Argumentum, 9, 132-148.

Hellermann, J., & Vergun, A. (2007). Language
which is not taught: The discourse marker
use of beginning adult learners of English.
Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 157-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.04.008
Kawashima, C. (2021). Pragmatic roles of visuals
in ELT textbooks. In P. Clements, R. Derrah &P. Ferguson (Eds.), Communities of teachers& learners (pp. 290-299). Tokyo: JALT. https://doi.org/10.37546/jaltpcp2020-36
Murahata, G. (2018). A critical analysis of theinterjections ‘oh’ and ‘ah’ as pragmatic
markers in MEXT authorized English
textbooks. ARELE: Annual Review of English
Language Education in Japan, 29, 49-64.
Nguyen, M. T. T. (2011). Learning to communicate
in a globalized world: To what extent do
school textbooks facilitate the developmentof intercultural pragmatic competence?
RELC Journal, 42(1), 17-30. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0033688210390265
O’Keeffe, A., Clancy, B., & Adolphs, S. (2020).
Introducing pragmatics in use. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429342950-3
Soleimani, H., & Dabbaghi, A. (2012). Textbook
evaluation: A reflection on the New
Interchange series. International Journal of
Research Studies in Language Teaching
1(2), 23-46. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2012.
v1i2.70
Tajeddin, Z., & Alemi, M. (2021). Pragmatics
pedagogy in English as an international
language. Routledge. https://doi.
org/10.4324/9781003097303-1
Thonus, T. (2007). Listener responses as apragmatic resource for learners of English.
The Catesol Journal, 19(1), 132-144.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

184

Vickov, G., & Jakupcevic, E. (2017). Discourse
markers in non-native EFL teacher talk.
Studies in Second Language Learning
and Teaching, 7(4), 649-671. https://doi.
org/10.17234/diss.2021.7779

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l185Appendices
Appendix A
Textbooks Investigated in this Study
International ELT Textbooks
Interchange Intro (Cambridge University Press 2013)
American Headway Starter (Oxford University Press 2010)
Cutting Edge Starter (Pearson Education 2012)
Global Beginner Course Book (MacMillan 2010)
Time Zones 1 (Cengage Learning 2010)

Japanese High School EFL Textbooks
Progress in English 21 Book 3 (Edec 2012)
Crown: English Communication I (Sanseido 2013)Vista: English Communication I (Sanseido 2013)
Vivid: English Communication I (Daiichi Gakushusha 2013)
Select: English Expression I (Sanseido 2013)
Vision Quest: English Expression I (Keirinkan 2013)

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

186Preparing Students for Academic Writing: A First-Year University Writing
Class
David James Townsend
Shujitsu University
Abstract
How quickly a university writing program can get students up to speed is a vital measure of success. This paper will describe
the first year of a successful writing program implemented in the English Department of a Japanese private university. All
students must complete an 8,000-word graduation dissertation. Unfortunately, many students have had very little experience
with English writing beyond sentence-level translations or journal entries before entering university. While academic writing isformally introduced in the second year, this paper will detail how the steps taken in the first year prepare the students by getting
them up to speed as quickly as possible for the increasingly demanding requirements they will encounter in the years that follow.
Initially, some information will be given about the current state of writing education in Japanese high schools, before explaining
the theory and practical applications of this successful program.
日本語概要
大学の英作文プログラムを学生がいかに速く習得できるかは、成功の重要な尺度だ。この論文では、日本の私立大学の英語学科で実施した最初の一年間の英作文プログラムの成功例について説明する。すべての学生は８０００語程度の卒業論文を書く必要がある。しかし残念ながら多くの学生は大学入学前に高いレベルの英作文の経験がほとんどない。アカデミックライティングは大学二年目に正式に導入されるが、この論文では一年目のこのプログラムで、学生たちが、厳しくなる要件に迅速に対応する準備の方法について詳しく説明している。まず日本の高校における英作文の授業について説明し、この英作文プログラムの理論、実践的な応用法を説明する。

This paper will describe in detail the first year of afour-year writing program developed in the English
department of a private Japanese university. All
students in this department must complete the firstand second year of the writing program conducted
in English. In the third year, students choose oneof three areas of specialization: English and American Culture, Translation / Interpretation, or English
Communication. They will then join a seminar classtaught by a faculty advisor from their preferred areaof specialization.
As part of the graduation requirements of thedepartment, all students must write a dissertation.
Their seminar advisor guides them through thisprocess in the third and fourth years. Students whochoose the English and American Culture stream
write their dissertations in Japanese, students specializing in English Communication are required
to write their dissertations in English, while thosestudents choosing Translation / Interpretation canelect to write their dissertations in either English or

Japanese. All dissertations written in English must
be approximately 8,000 words in length. As mentioned earlier, however, the first and second year of
the English writing program is conducted in English
regardless of what area of specialization the students choose. While the number of students choosing the English Communication course varies fromyear to year, it usually accounts for about half of thestudents in the department.
Unfortunately, as will be explained in more detailbelow, many of the students entering this program
have had very little previous experience writing in
English. As a result, the writing program must prepare these novice writers in four short years to beable to research and write numerous academic
papers culminating in their graduation dissertation.
The writing program has been carefully designed
and continuously tweaked over the years to help
our students develop the skills necessary to successfully complete their graduation dissertations.
While academic writing is not formally introduced

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

187

until the second year, the goal of the first year of
the writing program is to lay the foundation needed
for students to be able to handle academic writing
when it is introduced. Such a foundation includes
improving the students’ writing fluency, introducing
them to the basic mechanics of writing (formatting,punctuation, topic sentences, et cetera.) as well as
providing some practice with the most common rhetorical patterns.
Initially, this paper will explain how the current situation in the Japanese education system does not doenough to promote writing in high school. It will thenexplain the first year of the writing program which is
divided into three important components: structured
extensive writing, classroom instruction, and peer
editing / teacher check. Furthermore, specific information and examples will be provided that flesh out
what the goals and objectives of each component
are and how they all fit together.

The Current State of Japanese HighSchool Writing
Writing can be a very difficult skill to master. Even being
a proficient speaker of a language does not guarantee
the ability to write effectively. There are many examples of students in English-speaking countries thathave problems with writing despite their proficiency
in the language they grew up with. The most recent
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)
report measuring the proficiency of U.S. students inwriting found that 73% of students in grade 12 lack
proficiency (The Nations, 2011).
It is easy to point the finger at the widespread use ofsmartphones and computers in modern society asa significant reason for this sad state of affairs. However, this problem has predated such technologicaladvancements. For example, Dana Golstein (2017)
states in a New York Times article ominously titled Why
Kids Can’t Write, that in 1874 more than half of firstyear students at Harvard University failed an entrance
exam in writing.

As difficult as writing is in one’s first language (L1),this is compounded exponentially when writing in asecond or foreign language (L2). In fact, Richards andRenandya (2002) suggest that writing is often considered to be the most difficult language skill for learnersof English. While most aspects of learning an L2 canbe challenging, writing possesses a number of uniquecharacteristics that make it especially difficult.
Errors with spelling, grammar, punctuation, capitalization and formatting are laid bare on the page for all
to see. As a result, "...writing requires greater precisionand care than speech as it is a more formal act of producing a permanent record. When we speak, we gauge
our listeners' response and instantly clarify if any points
which have not been comprehended. As no such interactions take place in a piece of writing, our communication skills have to be unambiguous" (Hilton andHyder, 1992: p. 7). Finally, there are rhetorical patterns
and conventions that are unique to different types ofwriting genres.
As was touched upon earlier, despite the tremendousemphasis being put on English language education in
Japan, many Japanese students enter university withvery underdeveloped writing skills. The reason for this,according to Mulvey (2016), is that students in Japan
simply have very little to no experience with L2 writingin high school.
Furthermore, what little practice Japanese highschools do have with English writing is often limited
to sentence-level translation and vocabulary training(Nakanishi 2006). In fact, Mulvey (2016) cites researchthat indicates almost 60% of textbooks that are usedin high school writing classes continue to favor teacher-centered instruction solely focused on particular
grammar items at the sentence level rather than on
how to construct short texts.
While the average Japanese high school student has
limited experience with English writing, that might notnecessarily be the case for students choosing to enter
an English department. There is a possibility that thesestudents might have had more exposure to English thatprecipitated their desire to specialize in English at University. In order to acquire a better understanding of

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

188

the English-writing experience of the students entering the English department, an in-house questionnaire
was administered on the first day of the writing class(Townsend, 2022).
As a result, 68.2% of the students in the first-year writing class (n=88) reported writing no more than halfa page per week in their high school English classes.
42.1% reported writing 2 or 3 lines per week. Sadly,
11.4% of respondents reported having no experienceof any kind writing English in high school. Additionally,
when asked to define the types of writing they completed in their high school English class, 74% of the
respondents answered that their writing assignments
were primarily English to Japanese or Japanese to
English translation.
Such as the case with most students finishing highschool in Japan, the students entering the writing program being examined here do so with underdeveloped
writing skills. As a result, the first year of the English
writing program must take novice writers, and preparethem in one short year to be able to begin learning academic writing in the second year. Over time, the writing
program that has been developed is highly effective indoing just that. The three components of the first-year
writing program will now be examined.

Structured Extensive Writing
According to Paul Nation (2013), one of the leading
experts on language acquisition, the time-on-task principle applies as much to writing as it does to the otherskills. As such, every successful writing course for novices should include a lot of writing for fluency. In thefirst year of the writing program, the students will be
expected to write a total of eight papers between 400
and 800 words. While having no maximum wordcountcap would allow for more writing practice, the 800word limit provides the students with sufficient writing
practice while at the same time encouraging them tobe mindful of what information is most essential.
Another thing to consider when designing a writing
program is the content of the writing. One option
would be to allow the students to engage in extensive

free-writing activities where the students write about
anything they like. While this has its benefits, there
are other factors to take into consideration that makea more structured approach advisable. Research on
language acquisition has shown that different typesof texts make frequent use of different language features (Nation, 2013). As a result, if the language learners engage in a variety of writing activities that cover awide range of language types, the students will more
likely be exposed to a wider range of grammaticalforms and vocabulary than if they engaged solely infree-form writing.
The following topics have been carefully chosen toprovide the students in the first year of the writing program exposure to different grammatical structures aswell as a wide variety of vocabulary:First Semester
Project 1: University Plans
Project 2: My High School
Project 3: Favorite Person
Project 4: Original Short Story
Second Semester
Project 5: My Future Dreams
Project 6: Favorite Singer / Group
Project 7: Movie Review
Project 8: Important Things Learned This School Year
When describing their high school, the students use
the past tense. When writing their movie review, they
are required to write a synopsis of the movie’s plot in
the present tense. When detailing their dreams for the
future, they use the future tense as well as phrases forexpressing probability. Finally, in the project wherestudents explain the important things they learnedin their first year of university, they use a mixture ofverb tenses. For example, they first explain what their
expectations were entering university, and then contrast this with the reality of their school life. As well,they are encouraged to explain how these experiences
will influence them as they move forward in their university career.
Additionally, these topics give the students the chance
to experience a variety of writing conventions. For

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

189

example, when writing their short story, they are
expected to follow the established conventions of atypical short story arc (opening, conflict, climax, resolution, and conclusion). While a detailed description of
all the projects is outside the scope of this paper, it isbelieved that the breadth of language items, conventions and grammatical structures that the students are
exposed to through these carefully curated topics ismore beneficial than free-form writing alone.
Finally, when planning a writing program that focuses
on developing fluency, it is important to make sure thewriting tasks are not too difficult. Nation (2009) refers
to this as meaning-focused output, and is accomplished here by providing writing activities that thestudents already possess experiential knowledge of.
Six of the eight first-year writing projects are ones thatthe students can immediately begin writing without
any research needed.
The remaining two projects have been integrated witha first-year class that teaches students how to conduct research (Townsend, 2018). In that class, students
gather information on both a non-Japanese singer orgroup as well as a movie that they are somewhat familiar with, but are interested in learning more about. A
worksheet is used as a guide, directing them on whatkinds of information they should be researching. Once
this worksheet has been completed, it is passed on to
the writing teacher. The writing teacher then returns
the worksheets to the students in the writing class who
use the information as the basis for their writing project. The focus in the writing class is developing writing
fluency though structured extensive writing on manageable, but varied topics.

Classroom Instruction
Initially, students are provided instruction on how the
writing projects should be properly formatted. All projects must have five paragraphs: an introduction, threebody paragraphs as well as a conclusion. Samples are
given to the students which provide an easy-to-understand model detailing such important things as margin
specifications, font type and font size, spacing requirements, et cetera. Students are also provided instruc-tion and practice with the proper use of capitalization,indenting paragraphs, and punctuation. While much ofthis is a simple review for many students, for those students who have had little experience writing in English
before university, this is very much needed.
As well, when a particular grammatical structure or
writing convention is necessary for successful completion of one of the projects, instruction is provided
in class to prepare the students. Again, useful models
are provided, and the students engage in instructional
activities conducted in pairs or small groups that help
reinforce the instruction.
Finally, in each class a commonly-occurring problem
is addressed. Some of these include instruction andpractice with article and preposition usage, sequencing information, singular / plural, linking information
as well as creating topic sentences. While these issues
are common to all projects, whenever possible they
are introduced when they have some direct relevanceto the current project. For example, sequencing information is reviewed and practiced in preparation of thestudents writing their short stories when time-orderwords and phrases are essential.
For many students entering the department, proper
formatting of English texts is something they havenever had experience with. While the formatting specifications might change slightly in future classes, thefirst-year writing class provides a foundation that will
be useful for future writing up to and including graduation dissertations. As well, the focus on commonly-occurring problems begins to address serious issues students have that can severely affect the quality of theirwriting. Addressing these problems in the first-year
limits the amount of time that must be spent on themin the second year, when more important things canthen be focused on.

Peer Editing and Teacher Check
The final component of the first-year writing class is the
feedback students are provided to assist them in revising and improving future drafts. The first type of feedback is offered by the teacher after the completion of

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

190

the first draft. This teacher check serves two purposes.
First, it allows for timely interventions if problems are
identified. These problems could be with formatting,misunderstanding the theme, or problems understanding the conventions necessary for the topic.
Secondly, the teacher provides the students with follow-up questions that they can use to improve theirpaper. For each successive draft, the students must add
approximately 200 words. Often, students are not sure
where they should add additional information. The follow-up questions indicate to the student where they
could expand their story. As well, they make the writeraware when parts of their paper are confusing, whichallows them to revise these areas to make their paper
more understandable. This early intervention by theteacher has proven useful in catching potential serious
problems while they can still be easily addressed.
As well as the teacher check, each draft is checked by
two classmates. In many respects this accomplishes thesame thing as the teacher check, but allows for a wider
spectrum of feedback. It is also very valuable for the
students to gain perspectives and insights from theirpeers.
The peer editing is broken into two rounds, each witha distinct objective. In the first round, students are randomly assigned a partner and they exchange drafts.
They read their partner’s draft carefully and check it
for mechanical problems. They should check for issues
with formatting, punctuation, grammar, spelling or
convention usage.
If they find an error, they should fix it. If something ispotentially problematic, but the student does not feel
confident how to proceed, they mark it for further consultation. After the students have had enough time tocheck their partner’s draft, they engage in a counseling session where they take turns explaining the problems they found and how they can be fixed. As well,for those areas marked for further consultation, theyshould work together with their partner to resolve theissue. If the two of them cannot fix the problem, they
are encouraged to ask the teacher for assistance. This
first round of peer editing focuses the students on the
explicit mechanical aspects of writing, and allows themto learn from each other.
In the second round, the students are randomly
assigned a new partner. This time, the focus changes tocontent. Of course, if any previously undetected errors
are found, they should be addressed. However, themain goal of the second round is to look for areas where
the draft they are examining could be expanded. Whenreading their partner’s draft, students are asked to look
for areas that they would like to learn more about, or
areas they find incomplete or confusing. Then, they
are requested to write simple follow-up questions thatallow the students to write additional information to
make their paper more interesting, or clarify an areathat is hard to understand.
This peer editing could be done as homework, butallowing the students time to negotiate with eachother when considering how to resolve a problem
makes it a worthwhile classroom activity. There aremany benefits that peer editing such at this provides
students in developing their L2 writing. As Rieber(2006) notes, “The very act of critically assessing someone else’s assignment can cause students to assess
their own assignments more critically. In other words,
students can learn more from their review of anotherstudent’s paper than they learn from a peer’s review of
theirs” (p. 325).

Conclusion
Over many years of trial and error, the first year of
the writing program described above has developed
into a very important introduction to English writing
for students with underdeveloped English writing
skills. It has proven effective in providing first-year
students with the necessary foundation that allows
them to more confidently handle the introduction ofacademic writing in the second year.
Each class is divided roughly equally between thethree components introduced above. Classes generally begin with the classroom instruction component. Following this, peer editing is conducted on thedrafts that were completed as homework. Finally,
the students use this feedback to begin working on

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l191their next drafts. They must finish the next draft for
homework and have it ready to be checked by twoclassmates in the following class (or hand it in forgrading if it is the final draft).

Mulvey, B. (2016). Writing Instruction: What Is
Being Taught in Japanese High Schools,
Why, and Why It Matters. The Language
Teacher, 40(3), 3-8.

Writing an 8,000-word graduation dissertation
would an extremely challenging task for any student. When those students are writing in their L2,
and they are starting the process off as virtual
beginners... it is a monumental task that needs tobe handled carefully. The first-year writing classhas proven very successful in providing students
with the skills necessary to prepare for academic
writing in the second year, and eventually complete
their dissertation in their fourth and final year. It isa challenge, but the mix of these three components
help the students develop the skills necessary tomeet this challenge.

Nakanishi, C. (2006). A Teaching Approach toJapanese College Students’ EFL Writing.
Tokyo: Keio University Press.

Students are introduced to a wide-variety of genres,
given explicit instruction in various rhetorical patterns and conventions of English writing, as well as
provided practice with many commonly-occurring
errors. Furthermore, students are provided sufficient writing practice to improve their overall writing fluency. This provides a basis for the students
entering their second year when academic writingis introduced, and they will be expected to synthesize material, quote sources, provide in-text references, and compile a Works Cited list. While this is
still challenging, the foundation that was provided
in the first-year of the writing program makes thistransition less onerous.

Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (Eds.). (2002).
Methodology in language teaching: An
anthology of current practice. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.

References
Goldstein, D. (2017, August 2). Why Kids Can’t
Write. The New York Times. Retrieved
from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/
education/edlife/writing-education-grammarstudents-children.html

Nation, I. S. P. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL Reading
and Writing. New York: Routledge.
Nation, I. S. P. (2013). What Should Every EFL
Teacher Know? Compass Publishing.
Reiber, L. J. (2006). Using Peer Review to Improve
Student Writing in Business Courses. Journalof Education for Business. 322-326.

The Nations Report Card - 2011 Writing
Assessment. (2011). U.S. Department of
Education, Institute of Education Sciences,
National Center for Education Statistics,
National Assessment of Educational Progress(NAEP). Retrieved from https://www.
nationsreportcard.gov/writing_2011/
Townsend, D. J. (2018). An integrated university
language curriculum In P. Clements, A.
Krause, & P. Bennett (Eds.), Language
teaching in a global age: Shaping theclassroom, shaping the world. Tokyo: JALT.
170-176.
Townsend, D. J. (2022). Reassessing the Level ofFirst-Year Writing Students. Shujitsu English
Studies, 39, 55-67.

Hilton, C., & M. Hyder (1992). Getting to Grips with
Writing. London: Letts Educational.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

192

Proposal of a Difficulty Estimation Method for Extensive Reading of General
Books in English
Riho Sakaguchi
Masaaki NiimuraMark Brierley

Shinshu University

Abstract
The purpose of this study is to validate a tool which will automatically predict the yomiyasusa level (YL) of texts in order to makeit possible to practice extensive reading using books of unknown or uncertain difficulty. The study used web-based Coh-metrix
software to analyse text, then Lasso linear regression and grid search cross validation to develop a model. The model predicted
YL with a strong correlation of .91, which is better than the Flesch Reading index.
日本語概要
本研究では，YL の設定されていない一般図書を用いた多読学習を可能にするため，一般図書の YL を予測することを目的とした .YL に寄与するパラメータを調査し，そのパラメータを用いて線形回帰を行った結果，既存の難易度手法である FRE よりも
YL の予測に適した手法になったが，高い予測精度であるとはいえない結果となった . その原因として，YL の予測に適したパラメータの選定ができていなかったことがあげられる . そこで，今後は YL の予測精度を高めるために，パラメータ選定方法の改善や Coh-Metrix で 算出されるパラメータ以外の検討を行う .

Extensive reading is a method for acquiring a foreign
language by reading a large number of books in a relatively fluent manner. The aim is for readers to simply
become engrossed in the text, which they read once
only rather than repeatedly. Readers should enjoy
rather than analyze the text. Sakai (2002) proposed
three principles of extensive reading to help learners tocontinue reading a lot without falling behind: 1) Don'tlook words up in the dictionary; 2) Skip the parts you
don't understand and move on: 3) Stop reading if it’sboring. Therefore, in order to increase the effectivenessof learning through extensive reading, it is importantfor students to select books that are appropriate for
their level and for an extensive reading program tobe successful it is important to have a large number ofbooks catalogued into a range of different levels.

Graded readers
Extensive reading libraries usually begin with theacquisition of graded readers that have been speciallywritten or adapted for learners by limiting the vocab-

ulary, or number of headwords, and often also by limiting the total number of words in the book. Publishers of graded readers assign levels or stages to theirbooks, which will help learners to choose books thatare appropriate for their level of reading proficiency.
However, the standards used to determine the level ofdifficulty of a book differ from publisher to publisher.
For example a stage 1 title from Oxford Bookworms
may be as difficult as a level 2 Macmillan graded reader
or a level 3 Pageturner.

Currently used methods for estimating
readability
In order to unify the various standards used to assignlevels, various researchers, reading support groups
and companies have developed difficulty level estimation methods. The Flesch Reading Ease (FRE)index is a well-known example that is available as atool in Microsoft Word and is expressed as a number between 0 and 100 (see Fujiwara, 2016). The
higher the number, the more readable the text, andP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

193the lower the number, the more difficult it is to read.
The index is calculated on the basis of the numberof words and syllables. The formula is shown below.
FRE = 206.835 - 1.015 ⨉ ave. words per sentence- 84.6 ⨉ ave. syllables per word

YL (yomiyasusa level) is a measure of readability
for Japanese learners of English, defined by the
SSS English Multilingual Reading Study Group, andis expressed as a numerical value from YL0.0 to
YL10.0 (see Sakai & Kanda, 2005). The lower thenumber, the easier the text is to read; the higher
the number, the more difficult the text is. This is anindex based on the subjective opinions of a variety of Japanese learners who have read multiple
books. Many learners in Japan use YL as a guideline for selecting books for extensive reading.
Several other scales of reading difficulty exist
including the EPER levels, ERF levels and Kyoto
levels but in this study we will have considered the
YL and will compare our assessment of difficultywith the FRE.

Problems in learning to read a lot of books
using extensive reading materials
One of the problems when practising extensive reading is that the number of graded readers is limited.
Since the purpose of graded readers is to support
beginners to read widely, there are many books withlow YL levels, but at higher YL levels, the variety ofgraded readers decreases, and there is a gap between
the most difficult graded readers, which are based on
a vocabulary of around 3,000 words, and texts aimed
at first-language adults which need a vocabulary ofat least 6,000 words (Nation & Anthony, 2013). Even
where graded readers are available, learners may want
to read books that have not been specially written forthem. In addition, publishers are steadily producing
new graded readers that may need to be objectively
assessed for their level.

Previous studies
In a study by Hara (2020), a machine-learning-based
difficulty estimation method is proposed to enable
extensive reading with books that have not been
assigned a YL. Hara’s study focused on syntax and verified whether the ordering of parts of speech could be
used as a new feature for estimating the degree of difficulty. The study suggested that syntax is insufficient as
a parameter for estimating difficulty since the difficultyof a text appears to be related to various factors suchas word difficulty and the length of the text as well as
syntax.

Objective of the study
The purpose of our research is to estimate the difficultylevel of general books by considering new parametersthat contribute to the level of difficulty.

MethodThus far, the YL of a book has always been determinedsubjectively. Our method sought to estimate the difficulty of general books by using objective criteria that
could be expressed numerically. First we establishedparameters, then used these parameters to estimate
difficulty by performing linear regression analysis.
Examination of parameters contributing to YL
To examine the parameters that contribute to
YL, we used the Coh-Metrix site (see Graesser,
McNamara, Louwerse, & Cai, 2004). Coh-Metrix isa web-based software that quantitatively evaluates
the linguistic features of texts. When Coh-Metrix
analyzes a text, it calculates the scores for a totalof 106 parameters in 11 categories. The categories
used by Coh-Metrix and the parameters are shownin Table 1.

For this purpose, it is necessary to set YL levels for general books that have not been divided into levels.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l194Table 1
Coh-metrix categories and corresponding parameters

Category

Parameters

Descriptive

Number of paragraphs, sentences, words, average length of paragraphs and sentences, average
number of syllables per word, etc.

Text easability

Narrativity, syntactic simplicity, cohesion, z-scores for specific word types, z-scores for paradoxes,
additions, comparative conjunctions, etc.

Referential cohesion

percentage of overlapping nouns, percentage of overlapping arguments, percentage of overlapping
content words, etc.

Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA)

Mean of Cosine Similarity, Standard Deviation of Cosine Similarity, etc.

Lexical diversity

content word type token ratio, measure of textual lexical diversity (MTLD) of all words, etc.

Connectives

incidence of all conjunctions, incidence of causal conjunctions, etc.

Situation Models

Occurrences of causative verbs, occurrences of causative verbs and particles, etc.

Syntactic complexity

average of modifiers per noun, minimum edit distance of headwords, syntactic similarity, etc.

Density of syntactic patterns

incidence of noun phrases, verb phrases, adverb phrases, etc.

Word information

average age of acquisition of content words, average of familiar content words, etc.

Readability index

FRE, FKG, etc.

As can be seen from the table, the readability index
categories are calculated from existing difficulty
estimation methods. Therefore, we consideredthem inappropriate for our analysis and excluded
the parameters in this readability index category.
In this study, we input the first five hundred or sowords from both graded readers and general books
into Coh-Metrix, and calculated the score for eachparameter. Since the number of words in graded
readers is limited and may have different characteristics from those in general books, a test of the difference of the population correlation coefficients was
performed. This is a method for verifying whether
the two populations are different based on two sam-ple correlation coefficients. The null hypothesis isthat the correlation coefficients between the YL anda given parameter will be the same whether we arelooking at graded readers or general books. A twotailed test was conducted, as shown in the formula
below.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

195

rt: Correlation coefficient for a graded reader
between YL and the score for a given parameterri: Correlation coefficient for a general book between
YL and the score for a given parameter
nt: Sample size of graded readersni: Sample size of general books
The p-value was obtained from the test statistic. If
the significance level is set at 5 percent, the null
hypothesis cannot be rejected for parameters withp-values less than 0.05. Therefore, we cannot saythat there is a difference in the correlation coefficients between the graded readers and the generalbooks. The fact that there is no difference meansthat the parameters can be treated in the same way
for both types of books. Therefore, only the parameters for which there is no difference were obtained.
Next, the acquired parameters and YL were evaluated. The parameter that has the strongest correlation with YL in each category was obtained, and linear regression was performed using this parameter.

Linear regression
Linear regression is the process of finding a formulathat can describe the trends in a given data set. Whenan appropriate linear regression model is found, it ispossible to predict the desired value from unknown
data. There are several types of regression analysis,
but some, such as multiple regression analysis, must
be avoided because of the risk of over-learning, orover-adaptation to the data used to train the model.
Lasso regression analysis is a means of suppressing thisoverlearning.
Lasso regression analysis suppresses overlearning by
normalizing data using the sum of the magnitudes of
the coefficients for each variable in the model. Therefore, the coefficients of explanatory variables that do
not affect the objective variable have the property of
being as close to zero as possible and can be used to
select explanatory variables that affect the objective
variable. Therefore, in this study, Lasso regression analysis is used to predict YL with the acquired parameters
as explanatory variables and YL as the objective vari-able.

Examination of the parameters contributing to
YL
Coh-Metrix was used to analyze both general books
and graded readers and compare data with the YLs.
The correlation coefficients between the scores and YL
calculated from the analysis were tested for differencesin the population correlation coefficients between thegraded readers and general reading books. From the
beginning, the lexical diversity category was excluded
because there were no corresponding parameter inthis category.
Among the categories of parameters for which no difference was found, the parameter with the strongest
correlation with YL was obtained for each category.
The obtained parameters are shown in Table 2 and thescatter plots of YL and each parameter are shown in
Figures 1 to 9 where the horizontal axes are YL and thevertical axes are the values of each parameter.

Total number of words
The parameter that correlated most strongly with YL
in the descriptive category was the total number ofwords. This correlation is very strong, and the higher
the YL, the higher the total number of words (See Figure 1). This corresponds to the findings of Holster, Lakeand Pellowe (2017).

Figure 1
Word countP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l196Z-scores for paradoxical, appositional, andcomparative conjunctions
The parameter that correlated most strongly with YL
in the text usability category was the z-score of paradoxes, additions, and comparative conjunctions. This
indicates the extent to which paradoxical (but, however, etc.), additional (and, moreover, etc.), and comparative (although, whereas, etc.) conjunctions are used ina text compared to the mean for other parts of speech.
The z-scores of these three types of conjunctions correlate with YL, and the z-scores of paradoxical, additive,
and comparative conjunctions are found to increase as
YL increases (Figure 2).

Figure 3
Content words

Cosine similarity in adjacent sentences
The parameter that correlates most strongly with YL
in the LSA category is the cosine similarity in adjacentsentences. This measures how conceptually similar
each sentence is to the next sentence. The correlation
with YL is very weak (Figure 4).

Figure 2
Z-scoreContent word overlap
The parameter that correlates most strongly with YL in
the referential cohesion category is the mean of overlapping content words in adjacent sentences. This indicates the extent to which the same content words areused in adjacent sentences. It is found to be correlatedwith YL, and the percentage of overlapping content
words decreases as YL increases (Figure 3).

Figure 4
CosineOccurrence of causal connectives
The parameter that correlates most strongly with YL in
the connectives category is the incidence of causative
connectives. This indicates the percentage of causal
connectives (e.g., because, since) among all parts ofspeech. It was found to be correlated with YL, withthe percentage of causal connectives increasing as YL
increases (Figure 5).

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l197calculated by the number of edits that must be madeto convert one string into another. A lemma is a dictionary form of a word. It was found to be correlated with
YL, and the higher the YL, the larger the minimum edit
distance of the lemmas (Figure 7).

Figure 5
Causal connective

Percentage of causative verbs
The parameter that correlated most strongly with YL
in the situation model category was the incidence of
causative verbs. This indicates the percentage of causative verbs (result, lead, etc.) among all parts of speech.
It was found to be correlated with YL, with the percentage of causative verbs increasing as YL increases (Figure 6).

Figure 7
Edit distance

Verb phrase occurrence rate
The parameter that correlated most strongly with YL in
the syntactic pattern density category was the occurrence rate of verb phrases. It was found to be strongly
correlated with YL, with fewer verb phrases decreasing
as YL increases (Figure 8).

Figure 6
Causal verbs

Minimum edit distance of adjacent sentencesby Lemma
Figure 8

The parameter that correlates most strongly with YL in
the syntactic complexity category is the minimum edit
distance of adjacent sentences by the lemma. The edit
distance tells us how different two strings of words are,Verb phrase density

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

198

Average number of familiar content words.
The parameter that correlated most strongly with YL in
the word information category was the mean of familiar content words. It is based on the MRC Psycholinguistic Database (n.d.), with lower values for unfamiliar
words and higher values for frequently seen words.
The correlation with YL was found to be very strong,with unfamiliar words becoming more common as YL
increased (Figure 9).

a method to find ways to improve the generalization
performance of a model. The hyperparameters andother parameters with the highest accuracy are set bygrid search, and the accuracy is evaluated by cross-validation. In this way, an optimal model for predicting YL
was created.
Table 3
Order and coefficient of determination of the discriminant thatpredicts YL

Order

Coefficient of Determination

1

0.787

2

0.84

3

0.8

4

0.13

5

0.177

Results and discussion

Figure 9
Word familiarity

A model to predict YL was obtained using Lasso regression analysis on the test data. The results are shown in
Figure 10 where the horizontal axis is the actual YL andthe vertical axis is the predicted YL.

Linear regression with parameters
Linear regression was performed with the obtained
parameters as explanatory variables and YL as theobjective variable. First, the data used for analysis was
divided 4:1 into training and test data. Then, the training data was used for the analysis.
First, in order to determine the order of the model
to predict YL, Lasso regression was performed withorders from 1 to 5, and the coefficient of determination for each order was calculated. The obtained coefficients of determination are shown in Table 3, whichshows that the highest coefficient of determination is
obtained when the order is 2, so the order of the model
to predict YL is 2.
Next, we performed a grid search using cross-validation. Cross-validation is a statistical method to evaluate generalization performance, and grid search is

Figure 10
Actual YL and Predicted YL

Comparison with an existing difficulty
estimation method
A comparison was also made between our method andFRE. We obtained the FRE of the test data and investi-

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

199

gated the relationship with YL. Figure 11 shows a scatter plot of YL and FRE. The horizontal axis in Figure 11
shows the actual YL and the vertical axis shows the FRE.
The correlation coefficient between the actual YL andour predicted YL was .917, while the correlation coefficient between the actual YL and the FRE was -.650. A
correlation of 1 or -1 would indicate a perfect match.
From this, it can be said that our method is more suitable for predicting YL than FRE.

making it difficult to increase the accuracy of YL prediction. In order to improve the accuracy of YL prediction,
we will improve the parameter selection method andconsider parameters other than those calculated by
Coh-Metrix in the future.

Acknowledgements
This research is supported by JSPS Kakenhi grant
20K00800.
The authors would like to thank our co-researcher
David Ruzicka for extensive editing of this paper.

References
Fujiwara, I. (2016). レクサイル指標の位置づけと計測方法 [Methodology of Lexile Index and
Its Foundation]. Kansai University Foreign
Language Education Forum, 15, 41-55, 2016.

Figure 11
Actual YL and FRE

Prediction accuracy
In order to determine the degree of accuracy withwhich YL could be predicted, MAE (mean absolute
error) and RMSE (mean squared deviation) were calculated. The MAE was 0.728 and the RMSE was 0.966
making RMSE/MAE 1.326. RMSE/MAE is an indicator ofwhether the forecasting model is able to represent thegeneral characteristics of the data used in the training, and the closer it is to 1.253, the more accurately
it predicts. In this study, RMSE/MAE was greater than
1.253, showing that a large number of data significantly
missed the prediction, indicating that the prediction
accuracy of YL was not high.

Conclusion
The method used in this study is more suitable for predicting YL than FRE. However, it was not able to predict
YL more accurately than RMSE/MAE values. We believe
this is due to the parameters used in the linear regression. As can be seen in Figures 1-9, there were few
parameters that had a very strong correlation with YL,

Hara, Y. (2020). 機械学習による一般図書の多読向け難易度推定手法の提案 [A proposal of difficulty
estimation method for extensive readingof general books by machine learning].
Graduation thesis.
Holster, T. A., Lake, J, and Pellowe, W. R. (2017).
Measuring and predicting graded reader
difficulty. Reading in a Foreign Language,29(2), 218–244. http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl/
October2017/articles/holster.pdf
Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M.
M., & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-metrix: Analysisof text on cohesion and language. Behavior
Research Methods, Instruments, andComputers, 36, 193-202.
MRC database. (n.d.) MRC psycholinguistic
database. The University of Western
Australia. https://websites.psychology.uwa.
edu.au/school/mrcdatabase/uwa_mrc.htm
Nation, P. & Anthony, L. (2013). Mid-frequency
readers. Journal of Extensive Reading, 1,
5-16.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

200

Sakai, K. (2002). 快読100万語! [The way to 1 million
words]. Tokyo: Chikuma Shobo.
Sakai, K. & Kanda, M. (2005). 1,000,000
English words read in the classroom:
Recommendations for extensive readingclasses. Tokyo: Taishukan Shoten.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

201

Reflections on the Effects of Free Writing in an EFL Writing Class

Edo Forsythe
Hirosaki Gakuin University

Steven G. B. MacWhinnie
Hirosaki Gakuin University
Abstract
Japanese university students are often required to perform free writing activities in their EFL classes to encourage and build
confidence in writing in English. Free writing activities in this research are writing freely about a given topic for a set time. The
authors have had their students do free writing activities throughout the course of 2 years of English composition courses andanalyzed the quantitative effects of such activities. This paper explains the free writing activity tasks used, then provides quantitative data to show the participants’ progress in EFL writing in terms of the number of words written per minute. Despite thecommonly accepted notion that free writing improves language learners’ writing abilities, the data did not demonstrate increased
writing fluency in terms of being able to write more in a given timeframe.

日本語概要
日本人の大学生は、英語で書くことの自信をつけさせるため、EFLの授業でフリーライティングを行うよう求められることがよくあります。 本研究のフリーライティングは、与えられたトピックについて、一定時間、自由に書くことです。 著者らは、2 年間の英作文授業の過程で大学生にフリーライティングを行わせ、定量的効果を分析しました。 この論文では、使用されるフリーライティングのタスクについて説明し、次に、参加者の 英作文の進捗状況を 1 分あたりの単語数で示す定量的データを提供します。 自由な作文は語学学習者の作文能力を向上させるという一般的に受け入れられている概念にもかかわらず、データは、特定の時間枠でより多くの文を書くことができるという点で、作文の流暢さの向上を示していません。

In many cultures, the idea that practice makes perfectis a given truism. Language teachers have long applied
this idea to the practice of foreign language writing,and in the 1980s Jacobs’ (1986) concept of quickwriting
and Fox and Suhor’s (1986) free writing formalized that
idea. That concept developed into the current practiceof free writing that Li (2007) defined as, “writing quickly
for a set time from ten to fifteen minutes, just putting
down whatever is in the mind, without pausing andworrying about what words to use, and without goingback to modify what has been written” (p. 42). Rivers(2007) further clarified free writing as writing continuously for a set time without pausing, thinking, or correcting. Darling (2018) explained that free writing could
be either guided—with a teacher-defined topic—or
unguided—with a student-chosen topic. Recently, language teachers in Japan have used free writing activities to encourage learners’ confidence and fluency

in foreign language writing (Azizi, 2015; Baba & Nitta,
2014; Darling, 2018; Muller, 2014a, b; Rivers, 2007).
Even though free writing is a long-standing practice inforeign language education, its efficacy has not beenthoroughly researched in the Japanese university
English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learning context(Ferreira, 2013). This study aims to address that gap
in research by exploring whether Japanese university students’ EFL writing abilities improve over timethrough the regular practice of free writing in theirlanguage classes. Basing its methods on that of Azizi(2015), Baba and Nitta (2014), and Muller (2014a, b), thisstudy assessed the participants’ writing fluency basedon the number of words per minute (WPM) that theywrote in numerous iterations over the research period.
The research question that guided this study was, whatis the effect of incorporating free writing activities in

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l202Japanese university EFL classes on students’ writing
fluency as measured by their words-per-minute produced?

Literature Review
Jacobs (1986) recommended using quickwriting asa means to help students develop ideas and practice
expressing ideas without the students worrying about
content or form, or about overthinking the topic (p.
282). However, a closer reading of Jacobs’ researchshows that there were mixed results to this practice(p. 284). Fox and Suhor (1986) found that free writing
encouraged the learners to write in less formal language, but that the practice did not “automatically
produce better writers” (p. 35). Later, Elbow (1998) recommended free writing because it improved a writer’sability to write more fluently due to them not having toworry about being judged for making mistakes.
Bello (1997) recommended free writing as one of two
approaches to improving EFL writing skills, the otherapproach being process writing, and used free writing
as a springboard to more extensive process writing (p.
2). Jacobs (1986), Fox and Suhor (1986), and Bello (1997)
seemed to view free writing as an activity to warm
up the learner’s creativity and writing abilities before
engaging in more focused writing development activities. Li (2007) provided a strong rationale for the useof free writing to promote students’ general academic
skills (p. 51), but did not focus on using free writing to
improve writing fluency. These are only a few examplesof the existing research into free writing in language
learning, but the authors feel that they are representative of the conflicting views about its efficacy in the
EFL classroom.
In a Japanese university EFL context, free writing has
certainly been recommended for teaching EFL writing(Ohno, 2002), even in the face of strong reluctance due
to lack of teacher confidence (Iseno, 1991) and someskepticism in the process (Rivers, 2007). One reason
for this skepticism might be that Japanese high school
textbooks were not using free writing to improve students’ English writing abilities as the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT)
recommended (Kobayakawa, 2011). Also, few Japanesehigh school students are given experience with freewriting (Darling, 2018). This lack of familiarity with freewriting carried over into university EFL classes, therefore, Bradley (2013) stated that the lack of free writing experience of Japanese university students in EFL
also extended to Japanese-language writing, so there
would be little expectation of L1 to L2 carry over tosupport the efficacy of free writing in EFL (p. 9). Bradley recommended a mixed approach to EFL writing
instruction that included simple and well-explained
free writing activities, and Rivers (2007) recommended
free writing as a tool to improve Japanese university
students’ creativity in writing as well as in oral communication with little demands on the teacher for preparation or feedback.
Following these recommendations, several instructors have used free writing in Japanese EFL writingclasses—including the authors of this study. Muller(2014a, 2014b) evaluated the use of free writing in Japanese EFL classrooms in both high school (2014a) anduniversity settings (2014b). In the high school-based
study, Muller analyzed the number of words produced
as a measure of fluency and found that the students
did not increase in the number of words produced
over the course of the semester. However, Muller’s(2014a) students responded positively to the free writing activities and stated that they felt that their writing
had improved. Muller (2014a) provided several recommendations for making free writing more effective,
such as providing topics that students are interested
in and making the process communicative by having students share their writing with partners (p. 25).
These recommendations align with those profferedby Herder and King (2012) for applying free writing ina high school extensive writing program as a means
to improve learner confidence in their writing. Herderand King used words per minute (WPM) as a measureof student writing fluency and saw modest improvement in their study results in an 11-week study (p. 129).
Herder and King also found that students reported afeeling of positive improvement from the free writing
activities (p. 130).
Muller (2014b) continued to explore free writing at theuniversity level and found that the participants had an“overall positive evaluation of free writing…in relation

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

203to the results obtained” (p. 29). Muller’s (2014b) study
found that through a year of weekly free writing activities, there was no significant difference in the number
of WPM produced (p. 33). Considering the time limits
for the free writing activities, Muller (2014a, 2014b)
used both 5-minute and 10-minute writing periods andfound no evidence that more writing time equated tomore WPM (p. 34); so longer periods of writing do notnecessarily equate to greater productivity in this sense.
Baba and Nitta (2014) also explored the effects of regular, 10-minute free writing on a given topic with two
Japanese university students over a 30-week longitudinal study. As with Herder and King’s (2012) study,
Baba and Nitta (2014) found that the average WPM ofthe participants fluctuated weekly, but the data indicated an overall upward trend in the number of WPM(pp. 15-23), contradicting Muller’s (2014b) findings butwith a vast difference in the number of research participants. Baba and Nitta (2014) did recommend repetitive free writing practice as a way to improve writing
fluency over the course of a semester or even longer if
possible (p. 30).

more beneficial for students to use self-selected topics
in free writing with Japanese university students. Ferreira compared the participants’ free writing samples interms of Bonzo’s (2008) General Fluency Index insteadof the WPM comparison, so it is difficult to compare theresults with existing research discussed above. However, Ferreira (2013) found that participants seemed “toexpress themselves with a larger variety of words when
asked to write about topics of their own choosing. Thatis, they appear to be more fluent according to the fluency index used…for this research” (p. 304).
Free writing as a language improvement activity has
been used for decades to varying degrees of success,but one theme that seems to be constant across thecurrent research among Japanese university students:
they feel that free writing helps improve their writing
fluency even if the quantitative data does not always
bear that out.

Methods
ParticipantsAzizi (2015) continued the exploration of free writing inJapanese EFL settings with research similar to Muller’s(2014b) in an attempt to encourage the students’ tolerance for ambiguity in language learning and to build
the learners’ confidence (p. 84). Azizi (2015) analyzed
the WPM of the participants’ computer-based free writing activities over a 9-week class term and unlike previous similar research, found an average improvement of
43 WPM among 36 Japanese university student participants (p. 86). When considering student perceptions offree writing, as with Muller’s (2014b) study, the participants in Azizi’s (2015) study expressed positive feelings
toward the efficacy of free writing activities in their EFL
classroom. Relatedly, in Darling’s (2018) study of using
free writing journals in Japanese university EFL classes,
the students had only positive comments and felt thatthe activities helped them improve their writing fluency (p. 22).
Regarding the topics used in free writing, Muller (2014a)
found that students prefer to be given a topic to write
about and Darling (2018) reported that participants
were okay with either teacher-provided or self-selected
topics (p. 22). Ferreira (2013) explored whether it was

The participants of this study were 73 first- and second-year students at a private university in northern
Japan. As the data was collected over the course of two
years, one cohort of private university students participated in the project for two consecutive years. Also,
68 first-year students at a public, national university innorthern Japan participated in the study. The private
university students were English-language majors andthe public university students were majoring in a wide
variety of subjects. Informed consent was obtained
from all of the participants at the beginning of thestudy period and students were given the option to
opt out of the study at any time.
The private university students were enrolled in arequired English writing class in which the timed writing was a required part of their course work. The public
university students were enrolled in a required English
Writing (Intermediate) class that focused on improving
EFL writing ability and used free writing as a way topractice different writing styles.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

204Data collection
All of the free writing done in this study was done in
the classroom by hand. In the private university setting, students were given a worksheet with three different topics for that week’s free writing assignment(see the Appendix for full list of topics). Topics in thewriting assignments were based on topics that werecovered in the course textbook, American Headway(Soars & Soars, 2016), or on slightly more difficult topics related to content the students were expected tohave encountered throughout the year at university or
recent news headlines. A variety of topics was provided
with the intention of accounting for both student ability and students’ interests as recommended by Baba
and Nitta (2014).
Students were instructed to choose a topic and thento write about the same topic for two weeks’ worth offree writing activities. Students were given 10 minutes
for the free writing exercise. Students were allowed touse dictionaries for the free writing, but they were told
not to use machine translation. At the end of 10 minutes, students were instructed to count the number ofwords they had written and write that number at thebottom of the worksheet before submitting it to theresearcher. Private university participants completed a
total of 17-20 free writing activities in this study.
In the public university setting, the researchers used
the textbook Writing for Fluency and Accuracy(Boon, 2017) and within that textbook are free writing
exercises on given topics (see Appendix). The participants wrote on those topics for 5 minutes at first, thenreviewed their writing with a partner and discussed
it. The instructor then provided some explanation
about the genre being practiced before the participants wrote again on the same topic for 10 minutes
from scratch. When a third free writing was done in thelesson, the participants were given 5 minutes to write
about their partner’s opinion and comments about thelesson topic. After each free writing activity, the students counted their words and noted the total word
count and calculated the WPM in a chart provided in
the back of the textbook. At the end of the semester,
the students who agreed to participate in the study
were asked to submit a photo of their free writing chartfor quantitative analysis. Public university participants
completed a total of 15-16 free writing activities in thisstudy.

Data analysis
The data for all of the participants was compiled intoa spreadsheet to calculate average WPM for the twocohorts and to create the graphs provided below tochart the participants’ progress individually and collectively across the term of the study. Based on previous
research practices in investigating free writing efficacy (Azizi, 2015; Baba & Nitta, 2014; Muller, 2014b), theauthors focused on analyzing the participants’ WPM
data to assess whether the free writing activities were
having a positive effect on their writing fluency. Whenlittle observable improvement was noted, the private
university students’ data was analyzed using paired
t-tests to determine whether a statistically significant
improvement could be found.

Results
Private university participant results
For the cohort that completed two years of free writing
activities, their WPM increased from 6.36 to 7.78 (n=35)(Figure 1) over the first year. In the second year their
WPM began at 7.34 and decreased to 7.30 (Figure 2).
While the first year generally showed a small increase(about 14 words for each assignment), this increase was
not maintained in the second year, with students’ WPM
remaining fairly stable throughout the second year of
the study.

Figure 1
Chart of 2018 private univ. Freshmen average WPM across 20
free-writing activities

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

205Figure 2
Chart of 2019 private univ. Sophomores average WPM across
17 free-writing activities

For the 2018 sophomore cohort, there was a small
increase in WPM of 5.49 to 7.04 (n=25) (Figure 3). This
indicates an increase of about 15 words per free writing
over the course of the year. As stated above, this was
not found to be statistically significant. The 2019 freshman had similar results with a starting WPM of 4.64 anda final WPM of 8.64 (Figure 4). This accounted for an
increase of 40 words per assignment over the course of
the year. This also was not statistically significant.

were found. Next, further t-tests were done to assess
students WPM at the start of the term, and at the endof the term (week 1 and week 10), again, no statistically significant results were found. This analysis was
repeated for week 1 and week 20, and then week 1 andweek 37 for the cohort who completed two years of
the project. No statically significant results were found.
Further, the data was edited to include only those students who had completed all free writing in the firstyear, and then those students who had completed allfree writing in the second year, and then all students
who had completed the free writing activities entirely
for both years in an attempt to try to find some statistically significant increases in WPM in free writing. In allcases, no statistically significant results were found.

Public university participant results
The public university participant cohort data was collected over two years in a total of three classes. The
2020 freshman cohort’s (n=9) WPM decreased slightly
from 11.7 to 9.24 (Figure 5) over the semester. The 2021year cohort was split across two classes. In freshmanclass 1 (n=29), their WPM began at 8.14 and increased
to 10.12 (Figure 6). Public freshman class 2 (n=30) had
an even slighter increase in their WPM averages from
7.14 to 7.29 across 15 weeks of research (Figure 7).

Figure 3
Chart of 2018 private univ. Sophomores average WPM across
20 free-writing activities

Figure 5Chart of 2020 public univ. Freshmen average WPM across 16
free-writing activities
Figure 4
Chart of 2019 private univ. Freshmen average WPM across 20
free-writing activities

Statistical analysis was performed in an attempt toidentify significant changes over the course of thestudy. First, paired t-tests were applied to evaluate thechanges in students WPM from each set of same topic
free writing activities. No statistically significant results

Figure 6
Chart of 2021 public univ. Freshmen class 1 average WPM
across 15 free-writing activities

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l206

Figure 7
Chart of 2021 public univ. Freshmen class 2 average WPM
across 15 free-writing activities

In none of the public university cohorts did the overall
average WPM increase significantly through a semesterof regular free writing activities. Paired t-tests were notdone on the public university participants’ data dueto the fact that observable WPM data suggested thata paired t-test would provide no additional valuable
results.

Discussion
As seen in Azizi’s (2015) and Baba and Nitta’s (2014)
research, this study found small increases in WPM after
a semester or more of free writing activities for manyof the participants. However, these increases were
not statistically significant nor consistent across all ormost participants as some of the average WPM totals
decreased after a semester of practice, as was also seenin Muller (2014b). Looking at individual participant data
in an attempt to find some positive results to report, theresearchers noted that while some students were able
to increase their WPM consistently over time, others
did not; in some cases, the free writing WPM decreased
over time. The reasons for this cannot be determinedfrom the numeric data. The research question guiding
this study was, What is the effect of incorporating freewriting activities in Japanese university EFL classes on
students’ writing fluency as measured by their wordsper-minute produced? The data showed that there isno significant benefit to including free writing activities in EFL classes in terms of increases in students’
WPM produced.

Limitations
In using WPM as a measure of the participants’ writing
proficiency, the researchers did not address the factthat there are varying ideas of what constitutes a word.
It is possible that as students wrote more often, theyused longer, more difficult words but that would nothave been apparent in their counting of words. Future
research could address this by training participants tofollow Carver’s (1976) recommendation that a word beconsidered 6 characters at the university level (p. 197).
Additionally, the researchers realize that topic selection
might have added a confounding variable to this study,in that students may not have had a topic of interest
to choose from, thereby causing them to have less towrite about, or conversely familiar topics might haveallowed participants to write more quickly because
they did not have to think too deeply about what towrite. Future studies into free writing should consider
what effects that the topic might have on the participants’ text production.
This study did not analyze comments from the participants about their feelings about the efficacy of freewriting activities as Azizi (2015), Darling (2018), andMuller (2014b) did. Given the evidence from existing
literature about student perceptions of the benefits offree writing, future research into student perceptionsof free writing would help to clarify the efficacy of suchactivities in EFL contexts. Also, none of the research
discussed herein except for Ferriera (2013) analyzed thetext of the participants to determine whether improvements in textual cohesion, grammatical accuracy, or
vocabulary employment were observed after longterm free writing practice. Such research would certainly provide valuable insights into the benefits of freewriting in EFL classrooms, so the authors encourageother researchers to continue to pursue those avenues.

Conclusion
Free writing is a commonly used activity in language
classes (Bello, 1997; Elbow, 1996; Muller, 2014a, b; Rivers, 2007). Existing literature (Azizi, 2015; Herder & King,
2012; Muller, 2014b) used words-per-minute (WPM) asa measure of writing fluency in assessing the benefitsof free writing, and this study attempted to duplicate
their research. This study of the efficacy of free writing
activities in a Japanese university context investigatedwhether participants’ average WPM increased over alongitudinal study of regular free writing tasks in EFL
classes. The participants of this study were 73 private
university English majors and 68 public university stu-P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

207dents from a variety of majors, all participating in theirfirst or second year of university. The data collected
was the word counts of free writing activities conducted in classes and the data was analyzed longitudinally to explore whether increases could be seen overtime. Similar to Muller’s (2014b) research, no significant
increases in WPM were seen in any of this study’s participant cohorts over a long period of free writing practice. Even though Azizi (2015) and Baba and Nitta (2014)
found slight increase in WPM and positive student
impressions of free writing, the efficacy of free writingin Japanese EFL classes has not yet been firmly established by this or other studies and additional researchis necessary and encouraged.

References
Azizi, E. (2015). Word count matters: Increasing
EFL learner’s writing fluency throughfreewriting. Kokusaigaku Kenkyu, 4(1),83-89. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.
net/10236/13145
Baba, K. & Nitta, R. (2014). Phase transitions
in development of writing fluency from acomplex dynamic systems perspective.
Language Learning, 64(1), 1–35. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12033
Bello, T. (1997). Improving ESL learners’ writing
skills (ED409746). ERIC. Retrieved fromhttps://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED409746.pdf
Bonzo, J. D. (2008). To assign a topic or not:Observing fluency and complexity inintermediate foreign language writing. Foreign
Language Annals, 41(4), 722-735.
Boon, A. (2017). Writing for fluency and accuracy.
Tokyo, Japan: Cengage Learning.

Bradley, N. (2013). Approaches to writing and theJapanese university context. Language andCulture: Bulletin for the Institute for Language
Education, 26, 1-15. Retrieved from https://taweb.aichi-u.ac.jp/tgoken/bulletin/pdfs/
NO26/01p1-15Bradley.pdf
Carver, R. P. (1976). Word length, prose difficulty,
and reading rate. Journal of Reading
Behavior, VIII(2), 193-203. Retrieved
from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/
pdf/10.1080/10862967609547176
Darling, M. (2018). Using freewriting in journals
to improve written fluency. Encounters, 6,
19-27. Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/
display/233128817
Elbow, P. (1998). Writing without teachers. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Ferreira, D. (2013). Researching the effects ofstudents’ self-selected topics on writing
fluency. Ferris Letters, 48, 297-306. Retrieved
from https://www.academia.edu/6241332/
Researching_the_Effect_of_Students_Self_
selected_Topics_on_Writing_Fluency
Fox, D., & Suhor, C. (1986). Limitations of freewriting. The English Journal, 75(8), 34-36.
Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/
stable/819077
Herder S., & King, R. (2012). Extensive Writing:
Another fluency approach for EFL learners.
Extensive Reading World Congress
Proceedings, 1, 128-130. Retrieved fromhttps://erfoundation.org/proceedings/erwc1Herder-King.pdf
Iseno, K. (1991). Free writing instruction. Annual
Review of English Language Education in
Japan, 2, 73-82.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

208Jacobs, G. (1986). Quickwriting: A techniquefor invention in writing. ELT Journal, 40(4),282-290. Retrieved from https://www.
researchgate.net/publication/249252394
Kobayakawa, M. (2011). Analyzing tasks inJapanese high school writing textbooks:
English I, II, and writing. JALT Journal, 33(1),27-48. Retrieved from https://jalt-publications.
org/files/pdf-article/art2_14.pdf
Li, L. Y. (2007). Exploring the use of focused
freewriting in developing academic writing,
Journal of University Teaching & Learning
Practice, 4(1), 40-53. Retrieved from http://
ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol4/iss1/5
Muller, T. (2014a). Implementing and evaluating
free writing in a Japanese EFL classroom.
In T. Muller, J. Adamson, P.S. Brown & S.
Herder (Eds.), Exploring EFL Fluency in Asia
(pp.163-177), London, England: Palgrave
Macmillan. Retrieved from https://www.
researchgate.net/publication/304987593_
Implementing_and_Evaluating_Free_
Writing_in_a_Japanese_EFL_Classroom/
Muller, T. (2014b). Free writing in medical ESP:
Exploring issues of research methods for
intact classroom research. Journal of Liberal
Arts and Science University of Toyama, 42,
29-37. Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/
reader/84136915
Ohno, A. (2002). Considering strategies forteaching English writing. Sōgō Seisaku
Ronshū [Comprehensive Policy Collection],2(1), 113-118.
Rivers, D. (2007). Free-writing as an expressive
communication tool for Japanese English
Learners. The Language Teacher, 31(11),9-12.
Soars, L., & Soars, J. (2016). American headway
series. New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l209Appendix
Private University Class Free Writing Topics
There are ten sets of question topics. Each set was used twice (once per week for two consecutive weeks)
for a total of 20 free writing sessions. The same topics were used in the first and second year of the project.
Set 1: Hobbies, favorite game / sport, favorite movie
Set 2: School days, clubs, part-time jobs, favorite holiday
Set 3: Foreign country to visit, studying at university, favorite foodSet 4: Where you want to live, favorite book, school trips
Set 5: Weekend activities, favorite TV show, pets, animals
Set 6: Summer vacation, North Korea problem, celebrities
Set 7: Birthdays, aging society, concerts
Set 8: Halloween, global warming, Japanese comedians
Set 9: New Year, declining birthrate, musician ‘idols’
Set 10: Spring break, age of adulthood, internet of things (IoT)

Public University Class Free Writing Genres and Topics
Unit 1: Narrative Paragraphs: Interesting things about me; About their partner
Unit 3: Descriptive Paragraphs: My friend; About their partner’s friend
Unit 5: Compare and Contrast Paragraphs: Two popular pets; Comparing self and partner
Unit 7: Cause and Effect Paragraphs: My study habits; Classmate’s study habits
Unit 9: Summary Paragraphs: A typical day summary
Unit 11: Opinion Paragraphs: Working in a group; Classmate’s opinions

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

210

Effect of Illustrations on Engagement & Phrase Retention

Craig Armstrong
Kumamoto Health Science University
Abstract
Quickly-rendered blackboard illustrations are part of a teacher’s toolkit. They simplify and amplify the message being communicated and kindle interest among students in the subject matter. During segments of transmissive teaching, these sketches areused in order to elevate the students above being mere passive observers and lure them into longer intervals of contemplation
regarding a word’s meaning and its potential forms and uses. While this widely-used and time-honoured technique has long
seemed successful, an attempt at quantifying its merits is made in this study. Students attending similar lessons, with the maindifference being the use or non-use of such illustrations, were surveyed to gauge the method’s effectiveness. The data gatheredsuggests that these illustrations enhance student engagement and retention of targeted language.

日本語概要
黒板にイラストを素早く描くことは、教師にとって重要なツールのひとつです。生徒の興味を引き、伝えたいことをシンプルに教えることができます。伝達型授業では、生徒を単なる受動的な観察者から解放し、言葉の意味や潜在的な形、使い方についてじっくり考えさせるために、これらのスケッチが使用されます。このような手法は古くから広く使われているが、本研究ではその効果を定量的に検証することを試みた。本研究では、イラストを使用するかしないかの違いだけで、同じような授業を受けている生徒を対象に、この手法の有効性を調査した。その結果、イラストを使用することで、生徒の学習意欲を高め、学習した言葉を定着させることができることが分かりました。

I often use quick blackboard illustrations – many ofwhich are humorous in intent - to clarify the meaning ofa word or to increase student engagement in the classroom. Young learners tend to brighten when I draw,
and adult students tell me that they find enjoyment
not only in the completed drawings but also in observing the act of drawing itself. These positive reactions
and comments led me to wonder whether these drawings had any measurable effect on students’ retentionof targeted language. Why do amateurish sketches
attract their attention, apparently making them more
receptive to the message?
Chandler (1994) writes that “information and meaning
arises only in the process of listeners, readers, or viewers actively making sense of what they hear or see.
Meaning is not ‘extracted’, but constructed.” For meaning construction to happen, attentiveness is needed,
and anecdotal evidence suggests that humorous drawings may be effective in boosting mental participationby learners. Mirror neurons, stimulated by witnessing

what is done by others, are motor neurons, and that“the motor system is involved in understanding theactions and intentions of others.” (Ferrari & Rizzolatti,2014) Many of us watching Bob Ross in The Joy of
Painting have mentally held a brush and constructed
an image in our minds even before his landscape wascomplete. However, Chandler continues, as no message contains a single, fixed meaning, inconsistencies
between the sender’s intention and the meaning constructed by the receiver come about due to varying
individual perspectives and expectations. What exactlyis done by the receiver cannot be predicted. How cana teacher a) engage the students so that they become
willing participants in the act of constructing, and b)
guide them to construct the intended meaning?

On Engagement
Chandler’s observation rests upon the assumptionthat the receivers are indeed active. Wolf worries thatthe modern reliance on quick results and immediate

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

211gratification inhibits the precision and independentinterpretant-building required in language learning,
characterising the ‘busy mind’ of the 21st-century consumer as one whose attention is constantly divided
between multiple screens and tasks.
We’re left with a more short-circuited brain…
skimming is the new normal, and we’re becomingbrowsers and word spotters… [The young] are nolonger wanting to try, push risks and to put pen topaper as much. They’re always passive, expecting
the answer.” (Wolf, M. in Milligan & Robinson, 2019).
Where Chandler expresses concern about what meaning is constructed, Wolf wonders whether any meaning
is constructed at all.
Do low-tech blackboard sketches help to overcome thisby calming and focusing minds? Further, can humorous
drawings improve affective responses among learners?
Balogh (2015) states that “it is now commonly believedthat foreign languages can be acquired faster andmore effectively when the learning experience is an
enjoyable one”. Certainly, humour is a powerful tool in
the hands of a competent and prudent teacher. Freudsaid that humour can be used to reduce psychologicaltension caused by stress (Hadiati, 2018).
The argument for the use of simple, quickly drawn
images is supported by the four maxims of Grice’s
Cooperative Principle, summarised by Raskin for the
purposes of humour:
Maxim of Quantity: give exactly as much information
as is necessary for the joke.
Maxim of Quality: say only what is compatible with thewords of the joke.
Maxim of Relation: say only what is relevant to the joke.
Maxim of Manner: tell the joke efficiently (Raskin, 1985)

On Construction
Chandler (1994) explains that the subject, or the participants’ view of it, can shape received meaning. In otherwords, how the message is transmitted is also a factor
in determining the width of divergence between theintended meaning and the meanings generated byinterpreters.
Modern media is replete with images and videos ofprofessional polish which, even decades ago, would
have been nearly inconceivable. These works, while
completely valid in their own right, in general bear
scant resemblance to the simpler art and effects which
made up the pop culture imagery of past generations.
Present-day works are criticised as flawless, one-dimensional and untouchable, with a tendency to leave
the viewer “far too aware of the messenger to fullyreceive the message” (McCloud, 1993, p.37), requiringno additional effort to construct and comprehend. In
contrast, McCloud says that, as details are eliminated,focus is brought upon specific details and, “by stripping down an image to its essential ‘meaning’, an artist can amplify that meaning in a way that realistic art
can’t” (McCloud, 1993, p.30). Horsburgh (1967) requires
the following from drawings if they are to be considered a successful aid to language learning: they must
be drawn boldly, they must be drawn with speed, andthat symbolism and simplicity be favoured over realism and detail. While contemporary, lifelike art tends
to engage the eye, uncluttered doodles engage themind. Can simple drawings narrow this gap between
message and meaning? Can “amplification throughsimplification” (McCloud, 1993, p.30) reduce the number of possible interpretations which are drawn from agiven message?
This paper asserts that boldly rendered line drawings combined with tactful humour contribute to theagreeable epistemic environment valued by Balogh(2015) and by Li and Jia (2006), overcome the mentalpassivity of the students, and help to maintain theirfocus on the desired subject matter by removing theextraneous, off-topic stimuli contained in photography
and overly detailed illustrations which often appear in
textbooks and other teaching materials.
The following research question is addressed: Do simple, humorous illustrations improve students’ engagement and retention of targeted phrases?

MethodIn 2020, as part of the medical English language study
curriculum at a Japanese nursing university, fourP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l212classes of second-year undergraduate students were
taught how to ask a patient about their health-related complaints. Two classes were held in the springsemester, and the other two in the autumn. In bothsemesters, there was one class of nursing students andone of medical technology students. The two springclasses had 42 participants in total while there were
116 between the two autumn groups. The unusuallylarge autumn class of 85 participants consisted of twoclasses of medical technology students which the university combined under its new Covid-19 prevention
regime. Study area (nursing or medical technology) –not English level – determined which class the students
were in.

What seems to be the problem?
What seems to be the trouble?
What happened?
All of these sentences may be roughly translated into
Japanese as どうされましたか？
The above questions were separated into two groups:
one to be used when a patient presents no glaring outward symptoms (e.g., a sore throat, a headache), andthe other for times when the problem is evident, suchas a conspicuously broken limb or a bleeding gash. The
information was presented on the blackboard in thefollowing manner:

The Non-Graphic Board
For this particular lesson, the length of instruction (10minutes) and time given for pair work practice (5 minutes) were the same for each of the four groups. The
verbal and written instructions given to two of thefour groups were supplemented with simple, humorous blackboard sketches, while the other two groups
were presented with a blander presentation which wassolely verbal and written (i.e., did not introduce any
graphics). In both semesters, only one group received
the humorous version with graphics.
According to the lesson, the correct interrogatives
were:What is the matter?
What is the problem?
What is the trouble?
What seems to be the matter?

Correct pronunciation, focus word stress, and interrogative sentence intonation were explained, as was theinterchangeability of the words matter, problem, andtrouble. Students were asked to repeat each question
two to three times. The four lessons to this stage wereconducted similarly, with the one deliberate change
being in the visual and oral presentation of the set ofquestions. Student attention, engagement, and affective responses in all four classes were, to all appearances, high. See Figure 1 for a depiction of the Nongraphic board.

The Graphic Board
For the ‘non-obvious problem’, the patient seeking
treatment appears as a man of indeterminate age. No

Figure 1
Non-graphical Board

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l213

outward signs explicitly announce his complaint or reason for visiting the hospital. It is therefore incumbent
on the hospital worker to elicit some explanation fromthe patient regarding his affliction or injury. As with
the non-graphic group, the above six possible interrogative sentences were presented as appropriate forachieving that end. In the second panel, however, thevictim is wounded in a most overt, grievous, and ridiculous fashion. Two details were considered vital in the
humorous portrayal of this unfortunate person: that
his injury be bloodless, and that his countenance becompletely unaffected by the awfulness of his reality.
The lack of blood and emotion each served a specificpurpose. A display of blood would detract from the lesson in two potential ways: it would be superfluous tothe joke, and it may distress sensitive viewers. Indeed,

Grice warned that any flouting of his maxims be donewith care and in good taste (Grice, 1967). Further, hisblank-faced composure, incongruously maintained in
the second panel, exists to normalise absurdity – anindispensable ingredient in traditional comedy. Thiscalm demeanour implies that he believes that presenting oneself at a medical facility in such a plainly farcical condition is in no way out of the ordinary. By thesemeans, it is hoped that any shock or upset induced by
the image be eliminated entirely, and that amusement
be the sole reaction among students.
Seven days following the presentation, the students
were given a slip of paper in class on which was a single
question:

Figure 2
Graphical Board

What is どうされました in English?
Approximately 2 minutes were given for answers tobe written. Participants were instructed not to consult their notes, textbooks, or each other during thisshort period. To remove extrinsic motivation (Ryan &Deci, 2000), it was made clear that their participation
was voluntary and that their questionnaires would beanonymous. The slips were subsequently collected forevaluation, and after class they were sorted into two
categories: correct and incorrect. Only answers whichfaithfully reproduced one or more of the seven interrogatives presented during the lesson were consideredcorrect. All others were categorised as incorrect.

Results
The Spring Groups
The results of this binary appraisal regime were thatthe two virtually identical data sets produced a p valueof 0.41 in a one-sided t-test. There seemed to be noappreciable improvement in the performance of thegraphic group (See Figure 3). However, while rigidlyclassifying the responses as either correct or incorrect,
two marked differences in the responses of the groups
became apparent: their relative quality and the number of blanks. To quantify this, a second, more itemised
look at the data was undertaken (See Figure 4).

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l214

Since acquisition of vocabulary precedes communicative competence, viewing answers as a simple correct

or incorrect dichotomy was unhelpful, for it relegatedrespectable near misses to the same bin as nonsensicalFigure 3
First semester (Spring) questionnaire binary results

Figure 4First semester (Spring) questionnaire subjective results

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

215

answers or blanks. There was in fact a noticeably larger
number of incorrect yet coherent responses in thegraphic groups which deserved some consideration. A
means by which the comparative quality of the incorrect ones could be weighed was merited given the factthat they were not uniformly bad or incomprehensible.
To that end, a reassessment of the data was carried out,
one which would remove from the incorrect bracket
submissions which contained enough correct vocabulary and grammatical structure to be understood bymost any listener. This would thereby give a clearer
picture of the overall relative correctness and understandability of the responses and what, if any, effectthe inclusion of graphical element scaffolding in thelesson may have had on target language acquisition by
the pupils.
Broadly speaking, imperfect yet comprehensible
responses fell into two sub-categories: 1) nearly grammatically correct and 2) grammatically correct but
inappropriate. Although flawed, these contained Chandler’s building blocks from which the desired meaning
may be reliably constructed by the listener/ reader. All
answers which could be described in one of these two
ways were given the classification semi-correct. Examples of these were:
1) nearly grammatically correct:
What’s happen?
What the matter?
2) grammatically correct but inappropriate:
What is your problem?
What is the matter with you?
Answers which defied understanding were left categorised as incorrect.
What are you?
Do you find?
Finally, the number of uncompleted questionnaires
was large, warranting them a classification of theirown. Thus, in this second round of data analysis, blanknon-responses, which had been counted as simply
incorrect in the first accounting, were tallied independently and called blanks. These included pristine
blank papers and those which had been written on, but

the response had either been erased or crossed out.
By recording these non-responses independently as afourth category, a clearer picture of the relative qualityof responses between the two data sets became manifest.
This was an important development, for under thisrevamped categorisation structure, it became apparent that answers which were incorrect yet would likely
be intelligible to an English-speaking patient weremuch more common in the graphic group. Conversely,
the non-graphic group had more blanks.
Even in this four-category system, between the two
spring groups the percentages of purely correct (20%and 23%) and incorrect (25% and 23%) responses
were nearly the same. However, this is where thesimilarity ended. It was in the percentage difference
between the two groups’ semi-correct answers thatthe improvement was apparent, with fully half of thegraphic group’s responses being semi-correct while
only a quarter of those of the non-graphic group qualifying as such. In short, the ratio was two to one.
In the non-graphic group, 45% of the responses were
either correct or semi-correct, suggesting that meaningful communication would presumably be established between these students and an English-speaking patient on a first attempt less than half of thetime. However, the graphic group achieved a muchhigher degree of success, producing questions which
would theoretically elicit a desired response in nearly
three-quarters (73%) of cases. Moreover, the graphic
group submitted far fewer blanks, demonstrating thata greater proportion of these students possessed theconfidence or at least a heightened inclination to put
pen to paper.
It can be said, therefore, that while the overall number of binary correct - incorrect responses was nearly
the same in the spring groups, the relative quality of
the answers was superior in the graphic group, andthe participants were more willing to engage with thequestionnaire.

The Autumn Groups

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

216

Would the same lesson and questionnaire in theautumn produce a similar result? For the non-graphic
group, the results of the binary correct – incorrect classification system in the autumn were nigh identical to
the spring. While 19% of the spring group’s responses
were correct, the autumn group answered correctly on
20% of their questionnaires (See Figure 5).
The autumn graphic group did show a stronger correct result than the spring graphic group (29% vs. 23%).
Although it is impossible to say with confidence what
would account for the improvement, it may have been
that, by the second semester of 2020, the students
had become accustomed to wearing masks and beingtaught by a mask-wearing person (See Figure 6).

In the four-category subjective analysis, the results
between the spring and autumn groups, both nongraphic and graphic, were comparable. The ratio of thesums of the correct and semi-correct groups acrossboth semesters held firm. The spring non-graphic
group’s total of 45% was consistent with the autumn
non-graphic group’s 42%. Similarly, both the graphic
groups’ spring and autumn totals were in the mid-70
range (73% and 77%, respectively).
There was a noticeable change in the blank response
category. Despite the fact that the proportion of blank
responses had nearly been halved in the non-graphic
autumn group (18%) from its spring counterpart (30%),

Figure 5
Second semester (Autumn) questionnaire binary results

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

217

Figure 6
Second semester (Autumn) questionnaire subjective resultsthese percentages remained much higher than in thegraphic groups (Spring: 4%, Autumn: 7%). Even in theautumn, when the gap between the non-graphic andgraphic groups had substantially closed, the nongraphic group still had more than double the percentage of blank responses. The relative absence of blank
responses in the spring and autumn graphic groups
suggest that the humorous illustrations had made:a) the subject matter and subsequent questionnaire
less daunting, and b) the participants more inclined toattempt a reply.
To answer the question “Did the graphic groups perform significantly better on the questionnaire?”, a onesided t-test was performed on the spring and autumn
result totals. For the binary results, correct answers
scored as 1, and incorrect answers were 0. The test gavea p value of 0.189, showing no significant difference.
For the spring and autumn subjective result totals, twoseparate t-tests were done: one weighted for student
questionnaire engagement, and one which was not.
For the former, the following scores were assigned: cor-

rect = 3, semi-correct = 2, incorrect = 1, blank = 0. Incorrect scores were given a value of 1 to account for thefact that the participant attempted an answer. The pvalue of a one-sided t-test here was 0.006. For the lattert-test, scores were as follows: correct =2, semi-correct =1, and both incorrect answers and blank questionnaires
were scored as 0. The resulting p value was 0.024.

Discussion & Conclusion
Media-savvy youngsters recognise and disdain fakery
in images in textbooks and in stock photos. The simplicity of line drawings allows the viewer to focus on
the message being conveyed by the instructor rather
than peripheral messages they may perceive in moredata-laden imagery. A briskly-rendered illustration
focuses the attention of the learner and, althoughproviding ample space for viewer interpretation andconstruction, act as simplified and amplified guardrails to direct them toward the intended message andknowledge. “By de-emphasizing the appearance of thephysical world in favour of the idea of form, the cartoon

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

218

itself places itself in the world of concepts” (McCloud,
1993, p.39), where learners’ intrinsic motivation (Ryan &Deci, 2000), stimulated by the pleasurable challenge of
meaning construction through thoughtful observationof the instructor’s act of drawing, can begin to grow.
Intrinsic motivation has been associated with greater
retention of key information (Guthrie et al., 1998),
greater persistence in overcoming frustration (Deci &Ryan, 1982), and enhanced enjoyment (Cox & Guthrie, 2001). The latter two factors may help explain theincreased engagement with the questionnaire among
the graphic groups.
In contrast, fully realised artwork or photography neither forces students to fill in any blanks nor requires
them to act rather than observe. The reduction ofengagement caused by automation or by media imagery that is visually rather than mentally stimulating
comes at a cost as we circumvent deep cognitive processing.
The tenets of Grice’s first two maxims are satisfied byline drawings which are no more and no less informative than the explanation demands, and are economical and conducive to making the desired point clear.
The third demands that they are relevant to the transitory conversational interests – the education andlearning – of the participants. Extra information, whichcontains more steps of accomplishment between the
maker and viewer, threatens to confuse the students
by making them believe there was some point to thenonessential data. The fourth – the maxim of Manner- demands that obscurity of expression be avoided,
brevity be sought, and the information be presented
in an orderly fashion (Grice, 1967). The drawings’ simplicity allows the viewer to skip the first cognitive step– that is, understanding the situation which the text
describes - because one does not need to be educatedto ‘get’ what an uncomplicated illustration is trying toconvey (McCloud, 1993). Assisted by the frameworkprovided by the illustration(s), observers are forced tofill in the blanks for themselves, and are able to move
more rapidly through the steps of observing, perception, and interpreting and into meaning construction.
Humour falls within Grice’s ‘conversational implicatures’. It moves the conversation in a mutually acceptedand fixed direction – teaching by the instructor andlearning by the student. Yet it challenges and explores
the boundaries of the cooperative principle which
Grice states participants agree to observe, and thereinlies the stimulus.
The most obvious function of humor is to create
solidarity among the participants. Davies (1984)
showed humorous exchanges are co-constructed,
with participants taking up the humor produced
by another speaker, elaborating on it, repeating it,
commenting on it, or merely signaling their appreciation, thereby reinforcing it. (Attardo, 2017)
For viewers used to having media presented to themas a fait accompli, simple illustrations which change
a relationship between the sign and its referent fromnatural to paradoxical or negative (Hadiati, 2018) – i.e.,
which are humorous – create signs which birth uniqueinterpretants in the minds of their audience, enticing
them into active attempts at construction of meaning.
Cognitive psychology’s generation effect – the act ofcalling something to mind, whether a word, sound, or
picture – leads to better retention of information (Rosner et al, 2013).
Learners’ responses in the graphic groups did improve.
In the spring semester, the non-graphic group’s
responses were correct or semi-correct 45% of thetime, while the graphic group’s number was 73%. The
autumn non-graphic and graphic groups were, respectively, 42% and 77%. Likewise, the learners’ ability - orat least willingness - to engage with the questionnaire
was higher. In both semesters, blank responses weremuch less frequent among the graphic group. Theirability to generate intelligible situational interrogatives, however imperfect, suggests they were inside
Vygotsky’s Proximal Zone of Development.
The subjective classification system aside, the datashows that a consequential difference between the
non-graphic and graphic groups was the greaternumber of blanks among the former, and therefore
the higher rate of questionnaire participation among
the latter. This supports the proposition that simple,
humorous illustrations engage the viewer, obviate
the need for excessive explanation, alleviate class-P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l219

room tedium, and elevate the viewers into active andvolitional participants who construct meaning evenduring periods of transmissive teaching.
It follows that a classroom language teacher ought tohave or seek to gain some competency in drawing.
Simplicity is key, so with practice, anyone can produce
engaging illustrations which reduce the number ofunintended interpretations made by learners.

References
Attardo, S. (2017, March 29). Humor in Language.
Oxford Research Encyclopedias. https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/view/10.1093/
acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore9780199384655-e-342
Balogh, Susanne (2015). An Extensive Readingand Extensive Listening Program in a
Japanese Elementary School, The 2015
PanSIG Journal, 2. https://pansig.org/
publications/2015/2015pansigjournal.pdf
Chandler, D. (1994). The Transmission Model ofCommunication http://visual-memory.co.uk/
daniel/Documents/short/trans.html
Cox, K.E. & Guthrie, J.T. (2001). Motivational andcognitive contributions to students’ amountof reading. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 26, 116- 131.
Davies, C. E. (1984). Joint joking: Improvisational
humorous episodes in conversation. In C.
Brugman, M.Macaulay, A. Dahlstrom, M.
Emanatian, B. Moonwomon, O’Connor (Eds.),
Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Meeting of
the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 360-371.
Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (1982). Intrinsic
motivation to teach: Possibilities andobstacles in our colleges and universities
New Directions for Teaching and Learning.
27-35.

Ferrari P.F., & Rizzolatti G. (2014) Mirror
neuron research: the past and the future.
Philosophical Transactions, 369. https://www.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4006175/
Grice, H.P. (1967). Logic and Conversation. In
Cole et al (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3:
Speech Arts, 41-58. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/
studypacks/Grice-Logic.pdf
Guthrie, J.T., van Meter, P.V., Hancock, G.R., Alao,
S., Anderson, E. & McCann, A. (1998). Does
concept-oriented reading instruction increasestrategy use and conceptual learning fromtext? Journal of Educational Psychology, 90,
261-278.
Hadiati, Chusni (2018). Humor in Some Linguistic
Perspectives, 1. https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/324795696_Humor_is_
Some_Linguistic_Perspectives
Horsburgh, David (1967). How to Use theBlackboard in Teaching English. Orient
Longman, 4.
Li, X., & Jia, X. (2006). Why don’t you speak up?:
East Asian students’ participation patternsin American and Chinese ESL classrooms.
Intercultural Communication Studies,
15(1),192-206. http://web.uri.edu/ iaics/2006vol-15-no-1/
McCloud, Scott (1993). Understanding Comics:
The Invisible Art. Harper Perennial
Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic Mechanisms of
Humor. Dordrecht: Reidel, 103.
Rosner, Z.A., Elman, J.A., & Shimamura, A.P(2013). The generation effect: activating broadneural circuits during memory encoding.
Cortex. 49(7):1901-9.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

220Ryan, R.M. & Deci, E.L. (2000) Intrinsic andExtrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions andNew Directions. Contemporary Educational
Psychology. 25: 54-67.
Wolf, M. in Milligan, L. & Robinson, L. (2019). The
first generations of ‘digi kids’ are struggling
with literacy as experts warn against screen
time. ABC News. https://www.abc.net.au/
news/2019-11-11/screen-time-and-impact-onliteracy/11681026
Wolf, M. (2019). The Reading Brain: We
Were Never Meant to Read [Conference
Presentation]. Ministry of Education, Science,and Culture Reykjavik, Iceland, https://www.
stjornarradid.is/media/menntamalaraduneytimedia/media/maryanne-wolf/icelandlecture827final.pdf

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l221Teacher Trainees’ Opinions of the Viability of TBLT in Japanese HighSchools
Joshua Brook Antle
Tsuda University
Abstract
For this study, teacher trainees spent nine weeks discussing and analyzing the merits of task-based language teaching (TBLT).
They also experienced a TBLT lesson from the students’ perspective. Qualitative data were collected which indicated the student’s positive impressions of TBLT. They believed TBLT would lead to communicative English classes which would be motivating and enjoyable for the students. They also felt that the current entrance exam system is the main obstacle to using TBLT
classes in Japanese schools.
日本語概要
この研究では、教員研修生が 9 週間かけ、TBLT のメリットについて話し合い分析した。 また、学生の視点から TBLT の授業も体験した。 TBLT に対する学生の肯定的な印象を示す質的データが収集された。 彼らは、TBLT が学生の意欲を高め、楽しいコミュニケーション英語クラスにつながると信じている。 また、現在の入試制度が日本の学校で TBLT クラスを使用する上での主な障害であると感じている。

Keywords: communicative; entrance exams; teacher
trainees
The potential benefits of task-based language teaching(TBLT) include more communicative English classes, ahigher level of student engagement and a more enjoyable experience for the students. In this study, teacher
trainees discussed these merits and debated the viability of incorporating TBLT into Japanese schools.

Background
For this study, Willis’ (1996) definition that “tasks
are always where the target language is used by thelearner for a communicative purpose (goal) in orderto achieve an outcome” (p. 23) is used. The appeal of
TBLT is its focus on communicating meaning throughoral interactions. Zieglar (2016) explains “TBLT, then,offers an ideal environment for negotiation, feedback,and output, thereby providing opportunities for L2
development to occur” (p. 139). In comparing TBLT and
PPP (present/practice/produce), two forms of communicative language, Harris and Leeming (2022) foundthat TBLT produced more immediate increases in proficiency. However, both approaches resulted in improvement over a short period, and could prove equallyeffective over the long term.
While other communicative language teachingapproaches are also effective for improving communicative competence in our students, TBLT offers otheradvantages. Holland et al. (2017) found that a task centered around student-created podcasts created a senseof autonomy and accountability in the students. Similarly, Kato (2019) found that students responded well toa TBLT methodology during tasks involving iPads.
The proficiency level of the students is a prime concern when choosing tasks. While certain tasks are best
suited for higher proficiency levels, TBLT is quite flexible and can be successfully used for all levels. Rasuki(2016) states “task-based teaching allows teachers
to design and implement instruction that best suits
learners’ needs and proficiency levels” (p. 7). Harrisand Leeming (2022) similarly state “TBLT is argued tofacilitate acquisition by allowing students to focus on
language that they are ready to acquire, and also to
consider multiple structures at a given time” (p. 3). As
long as the given task is doable, TBLT allows students
to use language at their current level while also testingout language at a slightly higher level. When working
with lower levels, however, teachers must be aware of

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

222

the need for adequate scaffolding (Jackson & Ward,
2016; Harris, 2018). Harris also mentioned that teachers
can use a weaker form of TBLT which is more similar
to the typical Japanese teaching approaches. Brooks(2019) states “this weaker form of TBLT allows for much
more flexibility and it is easier for Japanese teachers tointegrate this type of TBLT into their existing classes”(p. 48). Numadate (2019) conducted a TBLT study usinga job fair task, and she describes how TBLT offers great
flexibility while also giving the students the freedom
to use language of their choice. With suitable tasks andsupport, TBLT is appropriate for low-level students andcan help them develop self-efficacy as they can use
their language resources to successfully complete thetask through communicating meaning (Willis, 1996).
In addition to oral communication, TBLT can also be
used to teach grammatical structures. In Willis’ framework (the pre-task, the task, the post-task), the final
stage is an opportune time to practice grammar.
The post-task is a suitable time for students to lookat errors they made during the task or unknown language which might have been helpful during the task.
The language the students study in the post-task will
be beneficial if the task is repeated (Harris & Leeming,2022). Zieglar (2016) also notes TBLT provides “opportunities for learners to be active participants in the task:
to notice their errors, modify their output” (p. 137). The
belief is that students will be more receptive to grammatical instruction after having gone through the task
and noticing gaps in their knowledge.
The main obstacle for implementing TBLT on a larger
scale in Japan is the importance of entrance exams.
Researchers (Butler & Iino, 2005; Littlewood, 2007; Sato,2009) have claimed that TBLT is not suitable for test
preparation. Harris (2018) states “it is argued, TBLT does
not allow focus on discrete test items” (p. 141). Harrisand Leeming (2022) describe the current environmentfor English education by stating “the focus on testingthat is a feature of secondary school education in Japan
creates an environment where students often strive for
accuracy at the expense of fluency or the simple enjoyment of using language” (p.6). However, Brooks (2019)believes
The solution to many of these problems is not toavoid using TBLT in the Japanese English language
classroom, but to rather scaffold it in a way thatmeets the needs of our students. Teachers need to
be aware of their students’ expectations and thepotential problems Japanese students may experience when doing tasks in the classroom. (p.49)
Another important consideration for implementing
TBLT in Japan is the teaching material needed. In manycases, teachers spend considerable time creating or
adapting material for TBLT lessons (Harris, 2018). It isparticularly challenging for teachers to create materials
which are suitable for lower-level students which also
follow the framework outlined by Willis (1996).
If TBLT is to be more widely used in Japan, it will benecessary to convince both in-service teachers andteacher trainees that TBLT is an effective methodologythat they can realistically use in their classrooms. Harris(2018) notes “there has been very little work done on
the beliefs of teachers who are actually carrying out
TBLT in foreign language classrooms in Japan” (p. 142).
While this study will focus on teacher trainees, hopefully it will provide insight into the concerns of futureteachers regarding TBLT.

Procedure
Qualitative research with thematic analysis was used
for this study. The participants were 35 fourth-year
seminar students who will mostly be future English
teachers at junior high schools and senior high schools
in Japan. These students have a relatively high level ofEnglish proficiency. Several had study abroad experience, and they were able to understand the majority of
the course material. The data were collected over three
years from three separate seminar groups (approximately 12 participants each year). This seminar met
once a week for a 90-minute lesson. For this study, only
the first term (the first nine weeks) was used for datacollection. The nine classes were organized as follows:
Class 1 – introduction and one chapter from a pedagogical TBLT text
Classes 2 and 3 – one chapter each week from the ped-

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l223agogical TBLT text
Classes 4 to 8 – one academic article about TBLT eachweekClass 9 – example TBLT lesson
During the first three weeks, the seminar teacher/researcher for this study led the class in a pedagogical discussion of TBLT using Willis’ (1996) textbook ‘A
Framework for Task-Based Learning’. In each of the following five classes, an academic article was assigned
as homework; the students were required to read thearticle for the following class. Additionally, two or three
students were assigned the role of class leaders. They
wrote a summary of the article, created discussion
questions based upon the article and led class discussions. The final class was an example TBLT lesson conducted by the seminar teacher; this lesson’s purpose
was to give the seminar students the experience ofa TBLT lesson from the perspective of students. Afterthe nine classes, the students completed a structured
reflective paper containing six open-ended items
which are also the research questions for this study.
The items are as follows:
RQ 1. Do you think Task-based Language Teaching(TBLT) is a viable approach for English education in
Japan?
RQ 2. Do you think TBLT is a suitable approach for lowlevel learners?

had to support their points and explain their opinions.
They were also told to imagine themselves as English
teachers. The researcher felt that the students’ English
proficiency level was at a high enough level to bothunderstand the articles and respond to the items on
the structured reflective paper.

Findings
Each of the research questions will be addressed individually. For each question, I will indicate how many
participants responded in the affirmative wheneverpossible. This will be followed by the themes whichwere identified and quotations from participants corresponding to those themes. An analysis of the findings
will be presented in the Discussion and Conclusion
section of this paper. The numbers in parentheses following the student comment refer to the year and theparticipant number.

1. Do you think Task-based Language
Teaching (TBLT) is a viable approach forEnglish education in Japan?
From the responses collected, 27 of the participants
answered in the affirmative while eight students
answered in the negative.

Justification - Affirmative
TBLT can stimulate communication.

RQ 3. What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of TBLT?
RQ 4. How could you incorporate TBLT into English
classes in Japan?
RQ 5. Do you think TBLT would affect student motivation?
RQ 6. Do you plan on using TBLT in the future?
The students were instructed that they could reference articles, class discussions and personal experience when answering the questions. They were free
to respond in any way they felt appropriate, but they

“I believe that by working together with several students on a task, they can strengthen their communication skills”. (22-08)“TBLT seems difficult to introduce, but it is not.
All it takes is for the teacher to take the stance of
supporting the students from input to output ofEnglish with various activities, rather than teachinggrammar and vocabulary in a one-sided manner”.
(21-01)
Meaning over form is a good approach for Japanese
students.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

224“If TBLT is introduced in elementary school, children
can learn English through ‘thinking’, ‘listening’, and‘speaking’. (21-10)“In TBLT, the goal is to complete a task and theemphasis is on the meaning rather than the accuracy. This approach can give students an experience that is similar to actual communication anddevelop their English skills”. (21-07)
TBLT is more enjoyable for students.
“Japanese schools, especially in public schools,
have to change the teaching method, in which students can join the class more actively, and have funstudying English”. (20-16)

Justification – Negative

2. Do you think TBLT is a suitable approach
for low-level learners?
From the responses collected, 24 of the participants
answered in the affirmative while 11 students answeredin the negative.

Justification - Affirmative
TBLT will be motivating for the students.
“I also think that TBLT gives learners the confidence
and motivation to accomplish tasks and get results
at a level that is appropriate for them, because they
will see a clear outcome”. (22-02)“When learners feel they can communicate inEnglish, it would motivate them to learn English
more”. (21-05)

Teachers have difficulty in using TBLT.
TBLT is a good approach for multilevel classes.
“English education in Japan is basically based onteaching with textbooks and has been taught byteachers who mainly learned grammar-translation
method in their school including universities”. (2008)
The importance of entrance exams makes TBLT problematic.
“It may be difficult for students to be aware of themerits of TBLT”. (21-08)“In my opinion, students are studying it in order toget scores on the exams”. (20-15)
The burden on teachers to create materials is a concern.
“Teachers have to prepare materials and tasks to
use in a class of task-based learning. It takes evenmore time and effort if the teacher prepares tasks
that suit each level of student. Thus, it can be hardfor teachers”. (21-03)“Low-level learners can benefit by hearing what
better students say. They can learn a lot from better students. Furthermore, better students canimprove their language skills by explaining andparaphrasing for weaker students”. (21-02)“If we have a class with students of different language levels, pairing people with higher levels withthose with lower levels may help the students tolearn more effectively I think”. (20-10)
TBLT is appropriate for low-level students.
“TBLT can be used as a good ‘introduction to English
learning’, especially for ‘low-level’ learners, as it canbe done to a certain extent without technical terms
or knowledge, and can hone children’s thinking
and output skills”. (21-10)“TBLT helps them to rapidly acquire a basic stock ofwords and phrases and give them the opportunities and the confidence to use them”. (20-16)

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

225Students will feel it is okay to make mistakes.
“A class with tasks and activities is more likely to beremembered than a one-sided classroom lecture,and students are less likely to feel hesitant using theassigned language when it is needed”. (21-01)

Justification - Negative“By not involving the teacher in the task more thannecessary, learners acquire the ability to communicate and convey meaning rather than grammar”.
(22-02)“Since grammar instruction is not given before theactivity, learners are free to use whatever vocabulary and grammar they know to complete the task”.
(21-07)

TBLT will lead to the L1 being used.
Mistakes are okay.
“When the tasks become more complex, students
who do not have the confidence to speak English
use Japanese more often during pair or groupwork”. (21-07)
TBLT requires a certain level of English to work
properly.
“The reason is that TBLT is an educational methodthat assumes that English can be spoken to someextent”. (20-13)

3. What do you think are the strengths andweaknesses of TBLT?
Strengths
TBLT allows students to learn other skills.
“TBLT allows students to acquire skills that are useful in various aspects of life, such as communication, problem solving, and cooperation”. (22-08)
Students learn English which is useful for real-life communication.
“Students get opportunities to use the target language naturally to complete the required task. They
can interact with the language while they enjoy
completing the tasks”. (21-02)“The strengths of TBLT is that it connects what happens in the classroom to real-world interactions”.
(20-16)“It allows learners to experiment and make errors”.
(21-08)“The ability to practice mistakes once they haveactually occurred is a strength in that it leads togreater improvements in accuracy”. (22-02)
The structure of a TBLT lesson will help the students.
“The strengths are that TBLT has clear 3 stages:
pre-task, task cycle, and language focus, so bothstudents and teachers are able to understand how
they should act in each stage easily, and it is an efficient way to learn”. (21-05)

Weaknesses
There is a large burden placed on the teacher.
“The disadvantages were that it places a heavy burden on teachers, such as task management”. (22-03)“If they teach English using TBLT, they must spend a
lot of time preparing materials”. (21-03)
TBLT does not teach enough grammar.
“For better or worse, there is very little focus on‘grammar’. Grammar is an important element that
forms the foundation of all skills, including speaking, writing, and listening”. (21-10)
Assessment is difficult.

Meaning over form is emphasized.
“In order to evaluate learners, teachers have to

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

226watch each learner carefully, how much they try to
use English, how much they improve their English
and so on”. (21-05)“It is difficult for teachers to know who did and did
not do an assigned task within the group”. (20-15)

4. How could you incorporate TBLT into
English classes in Japan?
For this item, many students responded with specificideas for lesson plans. However, several students alsomentioned government issued textbooks in theiranswers. In general, the students felt that because of
the textbooks, TBLT could not be used in every class,but it could be used as a supplement to the textbook
content.
“Since teachers have to follow the textbook that
schools or the government assigned, teachers
cannot do TBLT all the time. So I think a good way
to do task-based activities is after teachers finish
teaching a whole section and have extra time to
do it. Another way of incorporating TBLT is doingtask-based activities which have a topic relevant to
textbook contents”. (20-14)

5. Do you think TBLT would affect student
motivation?
From the responses collected, 32 of the participants
answered that TBLT would positively affect student
motivation while the other three students answeredthat it would negatively affect motivation because thetasks would likely be too difficult for the learners.
Achievable goals would positively affect motivation.
“Task-based activities have a clear aim or goal whichis easy to understand”. (20-14)“Teachers should make them set achievable goals
and to highlight student’s success”. (20-16)“TBLT gives students chances to have a sense ofachievement”. (21-05)

6. Do you plan on using TBLT in the future?
All but three of the students answered that they areplanning on using TBLT in the future. The reasons fortheir answers are similar to the positive responses
given for the previous research questions. The only
caveat commonly mentioned was their ability to use
TBLT while also spending enough time on the assigned
textbook.

Discussion and Conclusion
The overall response to TBLT was largely positive.
The participants agreed with the literature about thepotential benefits of TBLT for Japanese students bycommonly mentioning how it would stimulate conversations, allow students to communicate meaning inauthentic situations and be both enjoyable and motivating for students. They also believed TBLT would besuitable for lower-proficiency students if the tasks wereat a suitable level.
Their main concern was preparing their future students
for entrance exams. While grammar instruction in the
post-task stage is a part of Willis’ framework (the TBLT
lesson structure the participants were shown), they still
felt that the focus on entrance exam preparation would
be a major impediment to using TBLT in most classes.
It should also be noted that in the example TBLT lesson conducted in the ninth class, the students were
exposed to several grammatical exercises within the
post-task stage. However, this stage accounted for only
25% of the total class time spent on this TBLT lesson.
Other concerns about using TBLT included L1 use anda lack of materials.
If the current entrance exam system remains in place,it seems unlikely that TBLT would be used as the mainteaching approach in Japanese classes. The participants in this study feel that TBLT would be effective in
helping Japanese students become competent English
speakers, yet they do not think it is possible to use
this approach on a full-time basis due to the pressureof preparing students for entrance exams. A realistic
compromise might be to include TBLT units withingovernment-endorsed English textbooks. If the benefits of TBLT can be shown in various Japanese contexts,

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

227

the government might be more willing to make thischange to the textbooks. By having every fourth lesson or so be a TBLT lesson, the students would be able
to experience the benefits of TBLT and the teachers
would not have to prepare materials. Moreover, thesetextbook units would require little preparation on theteacher’s part, and they would, hopefully, be level-appropriate. While this compromise might be disheartening, it would represent a foothold for TBLT. In the
future, with more influence, these teacher trainees may
be able to use TBLT to create classes which are morecommunicative and enjoyable for the students.
Joshua Antle is an Assistant Professor in the English
department at Tsuda University. His research interests
include collocations and spoken fluency.

References
Brooks, S. (2019). Bridging the Gap Between
Teacher and Student Perspectives of TBLT
in the Japanese EFL Classroom. In S.
Sasayama (Ed.), Proceedings of the TBLT
in Asia 2018 Conference, (pp. 47-58). JALT
Task-Based Language Teaching SIG.
Butler, Y. G., & Iino, M. (2005). Current Japanesereforms in English language education: The
2003 action plan. Language Policy, 4, 25–45.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-004-6563-5
Harris, J. (2018). Responding to the critics:
Implementation of TBLT in Japan. Indonesian
Journal of Applied Linguistics. 8(1), 139-148.
https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v8i1.11473
Harris, J. & Leeming, P. (2022). The impact
of teaching approach on growth in L2
proficiency and self-efficacy: A longitudinalclassroom-based study of TBLT and PPP.
Journal of Second Language Studies, 5(1),114-143. https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.20014.harHolland, S., Hayashi, P. & Rode, T. (2017).
Student-produced podcasts: TBLT in action.
In S. Sasayama and J. Harris (Eds.) Taking It
To Task, 2(1), (pp. 11-24). JALT Task-Based
Language Teaching SIG.
Jackson, L. & Ward, D. (2016). Rethinking student
presentations: A task-based language
teaching approach to making short groupsmartphone documentaries. In S. Sasayama
and J. Harris (Eds.) Taking It To Task, 1(2),(pp. 9-19). JALT Task-Based Language
Teaching SIG.
Kato, K. (2019). Task-based methods and iPadmaterials for active learning. In P. Clements,
A. Krause, & P. Bennett (Eds.), Diversity andInclusion, (pp. 369-377) Tokyo: JALT. https://doi.org/10.37546/JALTPCP2018-49
Littlewood, W. (2007). Communicative andtask-based language teaching in East
Asian classrooms. Language Teaching,40, 243–249. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S0261444807004363
Numadate, J. (2019). Authentic application of TBLT
in Japan. In S. Sasayama (Ed.), Proceedingsof the TBLT in Asia 2018 Conference, (pp.
38-46). JALT Task-Based Language Teaching
SIG.
Rasuki, M. (2016). Integrating a genre-based
approach and task-based instruction inteaching writing skills. In S. Sasayama and
J. Harris (Eds.), Taking It To Task, 1(2), (pp.
3-8). JALT Task-Based Language Teaching
SIG.
Sato, R. (2009). Suggestions for creating
approaches suitable to the Japanese EFL
environment. The Language Teacher, 33(9),11–14. https://jalt-publications.org/files/pdfarticle/33.09-art2.pdf

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

228

Willis, J. (1996). A Framework for Task-Based
Learning. Longman.
Ziegler, N. (2016). Taking technology to task:
Technology-mediated TBLT, performance,and production. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 36, 136-163. https://doi.
org/10.1017/S0267190516000039

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

229

The Genre and Discovery Learning Approach to Teaching andAssessing Writing
Louisa POON Yin Ting
Mita International School/ British Council
Abstract
The process approach (Taylor, 1981; Zamel, 1982; Raimes, 1983) is the most commonly used approach to teaching writing.
Since the approach covers from brainstorming to composing, it allows teachers to participate and give feedback in the writing
process as a reader, before switching back to their role as a grader. However, it is debatable how much it benefits students, as
it lacks focus on a particular skill (content, organisation and coherence, language, or writing style). This is notably valid withupper-intermediate or higher proficiency English learners, who tend to be weaker in just one or two aspects, but not all. This
workshop will focus on applying the genre approach (Hyland, 2002) with application of the discovery learning method andcollaborative writing, to the existing process approach. By minimising lecturing (where students discover the conventions andlinguistic features with the teacher’s guidance) and maximising peer learning (with more scaffolding than the process approach),students write as a group, receive instant feedback in a class, and eventually work individually. It is an approach addressing all
skills step-by-step when teaching half/ one term with flipped learning.
日本語概要
プロセスアプローチ（タイラー1981年、ザメル1982年、ライムズ1983年）とは、ライティングを教えるにあたり最もよく使われる手法である。その手法はブレインストーミングから文章作成まで網羅するので、教師たちが採点者であるまえに読者として、ライティング作業の途中でフィードバックを与えることを可能にする。しかし、その手法は、特有の技能（内容、組み立て、統一性、言語やライティングスタイ
ル）に焦点をあてないため、どれだけ生徒にとって有益かは疑わしいところもある。この問題点は、全ての分野でなく一つや二つの分野だけが劣っている中上級者や高い能力を持つ英語学習者にとっては顕著である。このワークショップでは、現存する手法にディスカバリ
ーラーニング手法とコラボレイティブライティング（共同執筆）を応用し、ジャンルアプローチ（ハイランド2002年）に焦点をあてる。講義（生徒が教師の指導のもと、従来の慣習と言語学的要素に気づく）を減らし、ピアラーニング（プロセスアプローチよりも足場掛けに重点を置く）を最大限にし、生徒にグループで書かせ、クラス内で即座にフィードバックを受け、最終的には各自が各々作業をする。これは学期の半分、または学期の全てを反転授業にして、全ての技能に一つずつ取り組む手法である。

Teaching Writing and the Process Approach
In recent decades, the most dominant approach toteaching writing is arguably the process approach, as
it is widely adopted in popular textbooks by a numberof world-renowned publishers. The process approach(Taylor, 1981; Zamel, 1982; Raimes, 1983) recognizes
writing as a cognitive process, instead of a mere act toproduce a text as a product.
With a focus of emphasising that writing is a ‘non-linear, exploratory and generative process whereby
writers discover and reformulate their ideas as theyattempt to approximate meaning’ (Zamel, 1983, p.165),
a typical writing textbook would have one of the earlier
chapters describing the benefits hence the importanceof following the procedure of ‘pre-writing, writing,post-writing’, instead of a one-off 30-minute activity
to students. Students are then supposed to brainstorm
and/ or research for ideas, organise their ideas, thenwrite their first draft. Self-editing and peer reviewing
are common tasks which follow, and students would
submit the second draft to their teacher, receiving
feedback before writing their final draft.
One of the key concepts of this approach is the feedback between drafts being helpful in facilitating recursive planning, drafting, revising and editing (Flower &Hayes, 1981), with teachers’ role shifting from a marker
to a reader, meaning that they participate in the writing process. In addition, with the chance of having theirearlier drafts read by more people, such as their peers,

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l230

students can reduce or hopefully even avoid blind
spots with their writing.

Potential Weaknesses of the Process
Approach
Regardless of the wide recognition the process
approach has gained and the enormous research on
it as an effective writing teaching method, it seems towork less effectively among L2 writers (Hyland, 2002).
As Hyland argues, ‘[The fact that little hard evidence
suggests that process-writing techniques lead to significantly better writing] is not really surprising, as“the approach” is actually many different approaches
applied unevenly and in different ways’ (2002, p.25).
As mentioned above, writing textbooks typically takea descriptive approach to the steps of process writing,but little information concerning the role of the teacher
as a facilitator is provided. With the added challenge ofmanaging a class of students in a writing lesson, it is
not uncommon that teachers end up focusing only on
covering the basic structure of an essay, then setting
time to ensure pre-writing, writing and post-writing
take place, which makes the process contestably more
linear than unguided writing, despite the fact that theprocess approach is theorised to encourage creative
thinking while not downplaying the awareness of purpose of writing, its audience and context.
The feedback system also tends not to be ideal. In
terms of students’ attitude towards the feedback theyreceive, there is a tendency to disregard peer feedback, as many may doubt that their classmates are“proficient” enough to “correct” their writing, although
the intention of peer reviewing is usually not about
getting their work evaluated, but to receive opinionsfrom readers on how communicative the text is (Chenget al., 2015). Even feedback from the teacher may notpromote recursiveness of the writing process. As feedback is often just one-way communication (teacher
providing feedback to student), or at best back-andforth communication between the teacher and thestudent, mostly asking for clarification of commentsor rechecking of the corrections made, in many cases
the final draft ends up being a copying task requiring
students to rewrite or retype all the corrections theirteacher has already made for them, when it is on the

final stage of giving feedback, after students failing toself correct with reference to the teacher’s colour code/
correction code.
In some optimistic cases, however rare they are, when
the class size is more manageable, time is ample, andthe teacher is more experienced in teaching writing,the teacher may attempt offering feedback which
encourages critical thinking, which means not providing direct corrections. Still, providing feedback in sucha situation can still be too complex, or even impossible,
to deal with. For L2 writers, challenges of writing canbe multifold, as a text can be problematic on different
levels, ranging from failing to address the purpose/ fulfil the task to lacking linguistic clarity (see next section
for more information). Studies have shown that evenprofessional gatekeepers such as journal reviewers
can be at a loss as to what to comment on (Shashok,2008), as language teachers probably have developed
a tendency to overcorrect a certain element while
under-correcting the others, when being shown a text
which is problematic at different levels.

What Constitutes “Good Writing”
Given the complexity of both leading a writing classand commenting on students’ papers (and helping students gain the most from peer reviewing), it is important to take a step back and look at what makes ‘good
writing’. The following list shows my analysis of someholistic criteria of an effective academic essay:
writing style
critical and creative thinking
logical thinking (e.g. the flow of ideas, theeffectiveness of evidence provided)
language accuracy (e.g. grammaticality,
mechanics)
appropriateness (e.g. what content to include,
academic conventions)the form/ structure (e.g. paragraphing, thesis
statement, topic sentences, conclusion/ summary)The criteria are sequenced such that the more essential are at the bottom and the less essential, yet what
distinguishes an excellent work from a fair work, areP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l231placed at the top on the list, with a view to see a text as
a communicative device. In other words, it is a must for
students to master the lower-order criteria to be seen
as a successful writer of the text type, but if their aim is
to be an advanced writer, they would have to demonstrate criteria higher up on the list.

L1 Writers vs L2 Writers
Taking what good writing means into account, the factthat process writing is a method mainly designed forteaching writing is probably why it does not work to its
best in an ESL/ EFL setting.
To illustrate, with reference to the above list, while
native speakers tend to need less help on language
accuracy and probably logical/ critical/ creative thinking as well, such criteria may be what L2 writers, especially those from collectivist cultures would struggle
with (Ramanathan & Atkinson, as cited in Hyland,2002). For L2 writers, learning writing is not just about
learning to express themselves in the written form, butalso showcasing their understanding of the grammatical rules of the target language, in this case, English,
and complying to the cultural norms of the target language, with the essay pattern of writing a thesis statement and topic sentences being an example, as sucha logical flow is distinctively different from oriental
logical thinking, for instance (e.g. ‘patterns of written
discourse in different languages’, Kaplan, 1966). Therefore, there are many more challenges for L2 students tomeet than just learning ‘writing’.

Literature Review

The Genre Approach (Swales, 1990; Hyland,
2002)
According to Swales, genre approach is an approachcommonly used in teaching English for Specific Purposes (ESP), Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), andthe New Rhetoric School. As discourse communities
evolve their own conventions and traditions, specificgenres are formed in texts serving particular communicative plans and purposes (Swales, 1998, as cited in
Hyland, 2002).
Therefore, to achieve such communicative goals, it is
helpful to study sample texts to understand ‘the ways
they are structured and the choices of content andstyle they make available’ (Hyland, 2002, p.66).
Figure 1 is a suggested lesson design which illustrates
a model of genre analysis (Bhatia, 1993, as cited in
Hyland, 2002) as a reference.

Figure 1(Bhatia, 1993, as cited in Hyland, 2002)

A Proposed Approach to Teaching Writing:
Process Approach + Genre Approach +Discovery Learning
The proposed approach in this paper is not about
denying the idea of the process approach, but rather,addressing the weaknesses of the approach when carried out in an L2 classroom setting, to better achieve
the intended outcomes. Before explaining the proposed approach, some brief information of the genre
approach and discovery learning is as follows:

Discovery Learning (Bruner, 1961; BicknellHolmes & Hoffman, 2000)
The learning theory, as its name suggests, ‘permits
the student to put things together for himself, to be
his own discoverer’ (Bruner, 1961, p.21). Bruner (1961)
described the role as a teacher being someone who
provides students with a firm grasp of subject knowledge, then allows autonomy as far as possible. By discovering regularities and linking the task with what has
been taught, students would be able to devise ways

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

232

to solve similar problems and hence have such knowledge better retained in their mind –– which Bruner
referred to as ‘cumulative constructionism’(1961, p.23).

teacher/ language learner. This lays the framework of
how teaching writing can be scaffolded, especially inan L2 classroom setting.

Bicknell-Holmes and Hoffman suggest three important attributes of discovery learning: ‘1. The creation,
integration and generalisation of knowledge throughexploration and problem solving; 2. A process of learning driven by interest-based activities in which thelearner exercises some control over the sequence andfrequency with which they occur; 3. Activities which
strive to integrate new knowledge with the learner’s
existing knowledge base’ (2000, p.314).

The Proposed Approach Explained
Figure 2 shows my proposed lesson design (for five
45-minute lessons), based on the previously mentioned concerns, applying flipped learning:

Therefore, by applying discovery learning to a writingclass, an additional benefit is that it helps students getused to the mindset of providing and receiving feedback, which improves the quality of giving peer review
in the later lessons (see ‘Third lesson: Instant feedback
and discovery learning’).

Putting the Approaches Together
The list showing my analysis of some holistic criteria ofan effective academic essay is revisited (see ‘What Constitutes “Good Writing”’):(The higher the criterium: Less likely to be solved by
self-proofreading and reading reference materials)
writing style
critical and creative thinking
logical thinking (e.g. the flow of ideas, theeffectiveness of evidence provided)
language accuracy (e.g. grammaticality,
mechanics)
appropriateness (e.g. what content to include,
academic conventions)the form/ structure (e.g. paragraphing, thesis
statement, topic sentences, conclusion/ summary)(The lower the criterium: more likely to be solved by
self-proofreading and reading reference materials)
Generally speaking, the lower the criterium, the easier it is to be taught in a larger class/ to be achievedby self-learning, while the higher the criterium, themore feedback is needed from a professional language

Figure 2
My proposed writing lesson design (for five 45-minute lessons)in this paper

Input Lessons: Schema Building
First Lesson: Genre Analysis

Genre analysis (see figure 1) is the first task to take placein the approach. In groups of 3-4, students are shownat least one sample text. (The number of sample texts
provided depends on how familiar or experienced students are with the genre; for students who are entirely
new to the genre, it is less confusing to just show them
one good example, while for those who have alreadyhad exposure to the genre before, it is more beneficial to show them 2-4 texts with minor mistakes ofdifferent kinds (content, organisation and coherence,
language, or writing style), facilitating analytical discussions. Then, students compare their analysis of the

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

233text, focusing on the purpose, audience, the form andstructure with other groups in a student-led in-classdiscussion, while the teacher provides feedback whenneeded. Students can be given a topic to research forthe next lesson.
Second Lesson: Collaborative Writing

In the same group, students work on composing a text
relevant to the topic they have been given in the previous lesson. After being given the prompt, students
are given 10 minutes to share what they have brainstormed as homework, with the purpose of composing
a brief outline as a group.
Moving on to the writing stage, students are asked towrite on the same Google doc (reason to be explainedin the next part). In fact, for all collaborative writing
tasks in this approach, Google docs is used, as it allows
text co-construction, which means students can be
writers but editors of their group mates’ work at thesame time, which helps ensure coherence of the text.
Also, functions such as ‘edit’ and ‘comment’ allow
group mates to leave traces of their contribution as aco-writer. Note that in this approach, the writing, editing and proofreading are less staged, but more fluid
and spontaneous. As Storch suggests, collaborative
writing “provides a natural environment for peer feedback” (2013, p.23). In the case of students being new
to the text type, typical interactions usually involvereconfirming the text’s structural and lexical conventions, and students should be referring to the sample
text(s) from the previous lesson. Providing a handoutof the summary of the text type would also be helpful(see Appendix 1 for my sample handout for short essay
writing).
Students can continue working on their writing as
homework if they need more time.
Third Lesson: Instant Feedback and Discovery Learning

Students should have all finished the collaborative
writing, and be able to see work from other groups, as
all works are on the same Google doc. Using students’work as a source of discussion, the teacher highlights
typical problems/ errors from their writing, scaffolding from the lower criteria to the higher ones. As discussed earlier, since students should be more capableof noticing issues related to the form/ structure andlanguage appropriateness, the teacher should prompt
those issues as something to discuss in groups, eliciting
corrections from students. For critical thinking or writing style-related issues, for instance, the teacher can
ask guiding questions, or provide language upgrades,
explaining the flaws of the original writing. By theteacher providing instant feedback to everyone’s writing, students have the chance to learn from the feedback from their peers and to solve common problems
together as a group. Such an activity also offer professional examples and training on how to give reviews,
which improve the revision types and quality of feedback students can do in the output lessons (Min, 2006).

Output Lessons: Application
Flipped Classroom: Individual Writing as
Homework
A topic of the same genre is set as writing homework,with the whole class typing on the same Google doc.
Students can then, although writing individually, havea chance to view peers’ writing, since active reading oftexts of the same genre, whether well-written or not,is believed to be arguably more advantageous thanhaving their essays commented upon (Lundstrom &Baker, 2009; see ‘Potential weaknesses of the process
approach’), as they can learn what to write and not towrite in the role as a reader.
Fourth Lesson: Peer Review in the Manner of Teamwork

In different groups of 3-4, students use the ‘comment’
function to spot any problems on peers’ papers, focusing on the lower-order criteria (see ‘what constitutes“good writing”’). Then, the best writing in the groupis picked, and the group works on this paper to makeit better (group editing and proofreading), using the‘edit’ function. In the last 10 minutes of the lesson, eachgroup has to explain: (i) why this writing is the best in
the group; (ii) what has been changed and why. This
is to foster higher-order thinking skills, nurturing conscious intellectual moves in editing and proofreading.
Students should read all the other chosen writing fromother groups in preparation of the next lesson.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l234Fifth Lesson: Task Repetition of the Third Lesson:
Instant Feedback and Discovery Learning

The same lesson flow as the third lesson is to berepeated, but if possible, the teacher should give students more autonomy in discovery learning this time,
as students are already accustomed to such a lesson
flow. It is recommended that the teacher can simply
just highlight some expressions and sentences, andask the groups to contemplate why such lines are highlighted.
Consolidation

To complete this approach, an individual writing task
can be set (if a strong class), or students can be asked toedit on their draft written for the fourth lesson, not thegroup one, but the individual one. Students can thensubmit their writing and get assessed, by either a moregeneric rubric, i.e. content/ organisation/ language
accuracy/ language variety, or the framework shownin the previous sections (see ‘what constitutes “goodwriting”’/ ‘Putting the approaches together’).

Summarising the Proposed Approach and its
Rationale
The following are the intended goals of this hybrid
approach:1.
Input lessons made more interactive:
By doing lessons in the form of text analysis, collaborative writing, discovery learning and group
reviewing, students are constantly thinking aloudwith their peers and negotiating understanding
through interactions. It is easier to retain what has
been learnt when students are actively engaging.
2. Non-time-staged: The nature of recursiveness of writing is addressed, as students are situated such that they are being a writer, an editor anda reviewer at the same time (see ‘Second lesson:
Collaborative writing’). Likewise, the teacher is nolonger just a timekeeper of pre-writing, writing andpost-writing stages, but a more efficient facilitator:
while listening to discussions and tracking changes
on Google docs, they can note down common misconceptions and errors to address at the end ofeach lesson.

3. Whole-class instant feedback being
more effective: When receiving feedback fromteachers, most students, unfortunately, focus moreon ‘how can I make it mistake-free’ instead of ‘why
did I get this wrong’. Doing whole-class instantfeedback enables students to focus on the ‘why’,
which is believed to help prevent them from making the same error in the future as they know thecause of it. Another benefit is that they can learn
from each other’s mistakes, which is a good chancefor the teacher to convince students that such problems are typical, which should work better than justhaving a slide of ‘common errors in writing’ to lecture on. In addition, it is also a good chance to foster
critical thinking, as students are having a long discussion class on how to fix those writing problems
themselves.
4. Peer review made more purposeful: It is
hard to deny that the traditional way of doing peer
review does not provide students with much incentive. While it would be very helpful for writers themselves to receive peer feedback, if done thoughtfully, it is human nature to get less motivated to
do something not directly beneficial to ourselves,
which is why many students, as reviewers, lack theeffort when giving peer reviews. Hence, it is likely
to be more productive to do group peer review, as
students have a mutual goal to work on (In lesson
2, they are co-writers, and in lesson 4, they have tochoose a winner).
5. Providing better reasoning as a habit:
Although not the intended goal of this approach,while students share their idea in the beginning oflesson 2, they get into the habit of giving evidence,examples, or elaborations to clarify themselves totheir group mates, before deciding which point tofocus on, which is an excellent pre-task warming up
for academic essay writing.

Constraints and Limitations
The following are the intended goals of this hybrid
approach:1.
Since the key to this framework is to allow time
for text analysis, group writing, and ample peer dis-P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l235cussions to take place under a teacher’s observation and facilitation, at least 3 lessons (but ideally
5 lessons) of a minimum of 45-minute classes are
required to make this approach effective.
2. The intended age would be 12+, and theintended level of students would be CEFR levelB1 - lower C1, as students at this age and level arecommunicative enough to have discussion, but stillneed guidance.
3. The recommended class size would be 6-20:
for problem solving tasks, groups of 3-4 people
work best for initiating intellectual discussions (cf.
Laughlin et al, 2006), and having no more than 5groups in a class would allow the teacher to pay
better attention per group.

Conclusion and Remarks:
Teaching Writing in Japan
As mentioned briefly in ‘L1 writers vs L2 writers’, teachers should make cultural adjustments while using any
teaching approaches. Being in a collectivistic culture,
many Japanese students may feel uneasy being asked
to share their opinions, as this is perceived as aggressive in their culture. However, Japanese students seemto be more comfortable having discussions and participating in group activities; in fact this should be what
they are used to doing. To put their minds at ease insharing their opinion and analysis is hence the first
step.
In the case of this proposed approach in this paper,
the starting point of the discussion (in the second lesson) is discussing the forms and structure of the genre.
Since this has been something covered in the previous
lesson, the availability of notes and handouts fosters
a comfortable environment for students to be more
open to share opinions. On a related note, it is also
useful that the teacher can introduce the importanceof bringing in evidence to support their claim at thispoint, which leads to the idea of doing research andcitations, and making them feel less threatened, once
they are convinced that it is contributing to, but notdominating, the discussion.

Another consideration would be building students’
confidence. In an ESL/ EFL setting, students can beeasily discouraged when receiving too much ‘constructive’ feedback. Therefore, when providing instant feedback, the teacher should make a distinction between
error-correction and picking resources for teaching
purposes. The teacher should take care not to highlight all mistakes on a paper in front of the whole class,but rather, choose around 3-5 typical/ more significant
problems per paper, ideally on different aspects, forclass discussion. In this sense, no one would feel inferior. One other method for building a lower-achievingclass’s confidence would be setting the last task also as
a group writing task, as there is a higher chance for a
successful writing with collective wisdom.
It should be borne in mind that the lessons/ courseshould be an effective yet pleasant learning experience. The proposed writing lesson design in this paper
intends to scaffold the traditional process writing
approach further, so as to minimise stale lecturing, andhelp students gain confidence by having more learnerautonomy via plentiful in-class discussions and peer
reviewing. Students having a sense of accomplishment
is a vital drive for them to continue striving to be a successful writer.

References
Anastasiadou, A. (2014). The Impact of the
Application of a Process Writing Component
on the Students’ Writing Output in English
as a Foreign Language, in N. Lavidas, T.
Alexiou, A. M. Sougari, Major Trends in
Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, De
Gruyter, England, 3: 11-32.
Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard
Educational Review, 31: 21-32.
Bicknell-Holmes, T. & Hoffman, P. S. (2000). Elicit,
engage, experience, explore: Discovery
learning in library instruction. Reference
Services Review. 28(4), 313-322.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l236Cheng, K. H., Liang, J. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2015).
Examining the role of feedback messages inundergraduate students’ writing performance
during an online peer assessment activity.
The internet and higher education, 25, 78-84.

Zamel, V. (1982). Writing: the Process of
Discovering Meaning. TESOL Quarterly, 16:
195-209.

Flower, L. & Hayes, J. (1981). A cognitive process
theory of writing. College Composition andCommunication, 32: 365–87.
Min, H. T. (2006). The effects of trained peer
review on EFL students’ revision types andwriting quality. Journal of Second Language
Writing, 15(2), 118-141.
Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and Researching
Writing. Harlow: Longman.
Laughlin, P. R., Hatch, E. C., Silver, J. S., & Boh, L.
(2006). Groups perform better than the bestindividuals on letters-to-numbers problems:
effects of group size. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 90(4), 644–651.
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, S. W. (2009). To give isbetter than to receive: The benefits of peer
review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journalof Second Language Writing, 18:30-43.
Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in Teaching
Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shashok, K. (2008). Content and communication:
How can peer review provide helpful
feedback about the writing?. BMC Med Res
Methodol, 8: 3.
Storch, N. (2013). Collaborative writing in L2
classrooms. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English inacademic and research settings. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, B. (1981). Teaching Composition to Low
Level ESL Students. TESOL Quarterly, 10:309-313.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l237

Appendices
Appendix 1
A sample handout for short essay writing

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l238

University Students’ Impressions about the Use of Jokes in the EFLClassroom
Kevin Crowley
Ritsumeikan Asian Pacific University

Kent Jones
Ritsumeikan Asian Pacific University
Abstract“Why shouldn’t you write with a broken pencil? Because it is pointless.” Jokes like this fall into the category of dad jokes. The
usage of humor in the EFL classroom has been known to increase motivation, increase confidence, keep student attention,and create a positive classroom atmosphere. Furthermore, Japanese university students seem to favor the inclusion of jokes
in English courses (Neff & Rucynski 2017). To verify such claims, through a daily warm-up icebreaker of dad jokes and a follow-up questionnaire, this study aimed to gather data about Japanese university students’ impressions of such jokes in the
English classroom. This questionnaire surveyed 124 Japanese university students after eight weeks of introducing a joke atthe beginning of each class. The students were surveyed about their impressions of jokes in six areas: enjoyment, practicalusage of assisting in the comprehension of the meaning of words, motivation, shareability, classroom atmosphere, and general
education. The results of the survey were overwhelmingly positive in all categories except for the shareability category. The
possible implications of these results are also discussed, such as the recommendation that jokes be used as an icebreaker andthe possibility of extended lessons that examine jokes.
日本語概要
なぜ折れた鉛筆で書いてはいけないのか？それはポイントレスだからだ。」（Pointlessは無意味と尖った部分がないという意味）。このようなジョークは、オヤジギャグの種類に属する。英語教育（EFL）の授業でユーモアを使用することは、モチベーションを上げ、自信をつけ、生徒の注意力を持続させ、教室を明るい雰囲気にすることが知られている。さらに、日本の大学生は、英語コースにジョークを取り入れることが好きなようだ（Neff & Rucynski 2017）。このような主張を検証するために、毎日のウォームアップのアイスブレーカー
である、オヤジギャグとフォローアップのアンケートを通じて、本研究は英語教室におけるそのようなジョークに対する日本の大学生の印象に関するデータを収集することを目的とした。このアンケートは、毎回授業の最初にジョークを導入して8週間経過した後、124名の日本人大学生を対象に調査したものである。調査項目は、「楽しさ」「言葉の意味の理解を助ける実用性」「モチベーション」「共有性」「教室の雰囲気」「一般教養」の6項目で、ジョークの印象について調査した。その結果、「共有性」を除くすべての項目で、圧倒的に肯定的な意見が多かった。また、この結果から考えられることとして、ジョークをアイスブレーカーとして使用することの推奨や、ジョークを考察する授業の拡張の可能性などが議論されている。

There is abundant research that has examined theusage of jokes in the ESL/EFL classroom. Concerning
the practical benefits of jokes in EFL and addressing
why they would be included in the first place, there
are numerous known advantages. Namely, humor
has been shown to improve student motivation, confidence, attention, and overall classroom atmosphere(Neff & Rucynski, 2017). Considering how prone L2
learners are to struggle with the aforementioned
points, humor is arguably more important in L2 classrooms than in their L1 classrooms. The inclusion ofhumor as a teaching tool also has the potential to aid

learners’ vocabulary knowledge. For example, Blythand Ohyama (2011) included 10-minute humorous riddle segments in their lessons for a semester and foundthat vocabulary acquisition and language awarenessincreased when comparing pre and post-tests. Moreover, on the issue of classroom atmosphere, West (2016)noted that the use of playful language in the Japanese
EFL classroom lowered anxiety in the classroom. Dealing with anxiety when speaking a foreign language is
an issue that is notoriously more prevalent for Japaneselearners of English compared to other international
students learning English (Kitano, 2002). Furthermore,

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l239

humor training can also help better equip students tonavigate and understand comedic content that they
may find in English media, which contains a considerable amount of puns, satire, and editorial cartoons.
Understanding such humor is a skill that is overlooked
yet essential in the 21st century when trying to readand understand current events in English since many
news media outlets rely on humor to convey a message (Hodson, 2008b). Furthermore, since Japaneselearners of English have little opportunity to interact inEnglish in Japan, many will seek online formats and arevery likely to run into internet meme culture, in which
understanding the humor is crucial to understanding
the meme. Lastly, there has also been shown to be astrong correlation between teachers who use humor in
the classroom and a positive evaluation from students
regarding those teachers (Bryant et al., 1980), suggesting that teachers who are ‘humorous’ may form better
rapport with their students.
Regarding past research of Japanese EFL students’impressions of jokes in the classroom, Neff & Rucynski(2017) asked 918 university students across Japan
about their views on humor in the classroom andfound strong support for its inclusion. This study,
however, did not include any sort of exposure phaseto jokes in the class’s lesson as part of the research.
Instead, the study only inquired into students’ views
on humor in the classroom and its relationship to cultural understanding. The authors of this study believedthat exposing students to English jokes regularly in theclassroom is important to minimize the effects of memory decay and changes in attitudes or behaviors overtime. The goal was to ensure that students’ impressions of the jokes were based on recent memory, rather
than outdated recollections. By regularly familiarizing
students with English jokes of various difficulties, theauthors aimed to preserve the accuracy and relevanceof their impressions. Although this approach could beviewed as priming students to enjoy the jokes to get a
positive response in the survey, the authors chose various difficulties of jokes to potentially leave students
feeling bewildered, which they believed was more realistic when dealing with humor in a foreign language.
Choosing only easy jokes that they were confident
students could understand would increase the chanceof enjoyment, but it is unlikely that such jokes would

be encountered when surfing the internet. Moreover,since the university where the study was conducted
had a large percentage of international students, Japanese students who were taught the jokes would have ahigher chance of hearing them in real life.
In another study, Stroud (2013) surveyed 104 Japanesehigh school students that addressed student-perceived
benefits of humor for learning and included a jokephase (teacher-created jokes), and even included jokesthat students were instructed to produce (student-created). In this study, they looked at five effects of humor
on the classroom: relaxation, retention, participation,
enjoyment, and atmosphere. While student-createdhumor had a large degree of uncertainty due likely to
students not being confident about making their own
jokes, teacher-created humor had overwhelmingly
positive effects in all five areas. English instructors inJapan have also been surveyed on their views of theuse of humor in the classroom and strongly agreed it isa powerful tool for the EFL classroom, but few teachers
viewed it as essential in EFL (Neff & Rucynski, 2021).
Despite the wide variety of research that has alreadybeen conducted in this field, little research has asked
EFL university students about their impressions regarding the inclusion of jokes in their classes as a warm-up
activity. In particular, the novelty of this research wasto discover whether Japanese university students
find jokes favorable after telling students a joke andexplaining its meaning at the beginning of class overthe course of a semester.
The Research Question (RQ) can be distilled to the following: What are Japanese university students’ impressions of jokes as a warm-up activity in an EFL college
class?

Methodology
From the aforementioned RQ, this study further elaborates on the idea of “student impressions of jokes” into
the following questions: (1) How much did students
enjoy jokes told at the beginning of their classes? (2)Do students believe jokes can assist them in the comprehension of English words? (3) Do students feel thatjokes can motivate them to study more? (4) Does the

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l240

inclusion of jokes help create a positive atmosphere?
(5) Are students likely to tell the jokes to others, and (6)Do students believe that jokes are useful to education?
There was a total of seven questions given in English,
including a Japanese translation of the questions toensure that participants understood them clearly
that inquired about the student’s impressions of thejokes they were exposed to in the classes. Six of theseven questions correspond with the research questions above, and the seventh asked if they had othercomments or opinions regarding jokes. The data that
we received from the questionnaire responses wereintended to answer the above research questions, distilled to the following domains: enjoyment, facilitationof vocabulary acquisition, motivation, shareability,classroom atmosphere, and general education.

English often could understand the punchline immediately. Nonetheless, the aim of this research was not toassess whether or not the students could ‘get’ the joke,
but rather to determine whether they had a favorable
impression of jokes as a warm-up in English classes,
regardless of their level of English proficiency or theircomprehension of the joke. The students’ impressionof the jokes and whether they perceived any benefit intheir language learning was more important to assess
as such factors could have significance towards lesson
design for EFL.

Description of Teaching Methods andMaterials

The survey was administered to students of intermediate, upper-intermediate, and advanced levels of aninternational university in Kyushu, Japan, who agreed
to participate. In total, there were 124 respondents: 76(61%) female and 48 (31%) male. Student names andstudent ID were not requested as the questionnaire
was intended to be taken anonymously in order toencourage honest impressions about the inclusion ofjokes in the lessons.

Jokes were used as a warm-up at the beginning of eachclass as an icebreaker. We chose to present them in thisformat for two reasons: 1) to provide activation of background schema, which has been shown to be an effective pre-reading strategy in the EFL classroom, as it canhelp learners to better understand and remember new
information by building on their prior knowledge andmaking meaningful connections to a particular topic(Hattie, Biggs, & Purdie, 1996; Williams & Burden, 1997;
Carrell & Eisterhold, 1983), and 2) to start the class witha light-hearted atmosphere in order to hopefully set
the tone of the class as not being overly serious.

Jokes were mostly of the ‘dad joke’ category, which
typically includes a relatively simple pun as the punchline. To understand the humor in such jokes, students
often needed to know the polysemous meaning ofwords or how words combined together can sound likeother words or phrases. All of the jokes were selected
and curated by the teachers ranging from question-answer types to short-story types and ranged from what
we determined as easy to difficult (see Appendix for
examples of the types of jokes used). Students’ reactions indicated that we successfully selected jokes thatwere of a variety of levels, as some jokes elicited smiles
or laughs, while other reactions such as blank stares or
expressions of confusion indicated a lack of comprehension of the joke’s punchline. Of course, a student’s
own proficiency in English was also likely a determinant of whether they understood the humor in thejoke or not, as it was noticed by both administrators of
the research that students who could easily converse in

On the first day, the educational value of jokes was
explained—Jokes were explained to the class to bepotentially enjoyable and could teach multiple meanings of words, and could possibly be a memorable way
to study vocabulary. This was to reassure the students
that there was some purpose to the jokes. Students
were given a question, told it was a joke, and one totwo minutes to think about the joke. During this thinking time, the teacher took attendance. If no one could
correctly guess the answer after the time had passed,
they were then told the punchline. Some students
guessed the answer to the joke with varying degrees ofsuccess. If a student got the answer correct, the teacher
applauded the student and either allowed that student
to explain it in Japanese to the class for students who
were still confused (which was often the majority of theclass) or included Japanese explanations built into theslides. After the punchline was given by either the student or teacher, relevant language points related to the

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l241joke were briefly taught, such as pronunciation, polysemy, or grammatical insights. For example in the joke,“What kind of cheese isn’t yours?” “—Nacho cheese!”,the blending of the words “not” and “your” which combine to sound like “nacho” was brought to attention
to show how the pronunciation of contracted words
changes. An example of polysemy was explained in thefollowing joke: “Why was the artist afraid he might go
to jail?” “—Because he’d been framed!”. Many students
knew “frame” as in a “picture frame” but did not know
the verb used in crime situations, thus proving to bea learning experience for most students. Any example
of a grammar joke would be the necessary usage of acomma in the sentence “Let’s eat, Grandma!” versus“Let’s eat Grandma!” (See more examples of jokes in
the Appendix). When the teacher ended up explaining the meaning of the joke, the ways in which it was
explained differed –sometimes in English, sometimes
in Japanese, or sometimes the PowerPoint included
one additional slide that had the translation of the jokeor punchline included near the English words.

Student Survey Design
Google Forms was chosen as the survey engine due
to its simplicity and easy-to-use format, as well as
students’ familiarity with it. Names, emails, and classcodes were not requested, making the survey completely anonymous.
The survey was administered on two separate occasions: 1) 60 students were given the survey two anda half months after they finished the Spring semesterof 2021. 2) Another 64 students were given the survey
mid-semester at the end of the first quarter of the Fallsemester of 2021, for a total of 124 participants. The
survey was held both on-campus in class and offsite as
some students were taking online classes due to COVID
restrictions or other personal reasons.

Figure 1
Enjoyment of the Jokes

Question 1: What do you think about the jokes thatwere introduced at the beginning of each class? 全てのクラスの冒頭で紹介されたジョークについてどう思いますか？
Answer choices and results: I really liked the jokes(blue, 59.7%), I liked the jokes (green,29.8%), I have nostrong opinion about the jokes (yellow, 8.9%), I disliked
the jokes (red, 0.8%), I really disliked the jokes (purple,
0.8%).
We hypothesize that there would be a strong favorable impression of the jokes in the Enjoyment category
due to the mostly warm reaction by the students, andas expected there was an overwhelmingly positive
impression at nearly 90% (by combining the top two
answer choices: “I really liked the jokes” and “I liked thejokes”).
The other categories that we researched were Word
Analysis (Figure 2), Motivation (Figure 3), Atmosphere(Figure 4), Shareability (Figure 5), and Value in EFL Education (Figure 6).
Question 2: Did you feel that the jokes helped you think
more about the meaning of words? ジョークが言葉の意味についてもっと考えるために役立ったと思いましたか？

Results
In Question 1, students were asked about how muchthey liked the jokes that were introduced at the beginning of each class (See Figure 1 below).

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l242Figure 2.

Figure 4

Word Analysis

Atmosphere

Answer choices and results: Very much so (blue, 34.7%),
Yes, it did (green, 37.1%), A little (yellow, 21%), Not really(red, 6.5%), Not at all (purple, 0.8%).

Answer choices and results: Very much so (blue, 58.9%),
Yes, it did (green, 30.6%), A little (yellow, 8.1%), Not
really (red, 1.6%), Not at all (purple, 0.8%).

Question 3: Did the jokes motivate you to study more?
ジョークはあなたにもっと勉強するモチベーションを与えましたか？

Question 5: Did you ever tell the jokes that you learnedin class to other people? クラスで学んだジョークを他の人に教えたことがありますか

Figure 3

Figure 5

Motivation

Shareability

Answer choices and results: Very much so (blue, 36.3%),
Yes, it did (green, 27.4%), A little (yellow, 21%), Not really(red, 12.9%), Not at all (purple, 2.4%).

Answer choices and results: Yes, a lot (blue, 11.3%), Yes,
often (green, 7.3%), Sometimes I did (yellow, 27.4%),
Occasionally (red, 22.6%), Not at all (purple, 31.5%).

Question 4: Did the jokes make the atmosphere of theclass more fun? 冗談はクラスの雰囲気をもっと楽しくしましたか？

Question 6: Do you think the inclusion of jokes in the
English classroom is useful to your education? 英語の教室にジョークを含めることはあなたの教育に役立つと思いますか？

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

243Answer choices and results: Yes, very much so (blue,
41.1%), Yes, it is (green, 37.9%), A little, perhaps (yellow,
16.1%), Not really (red, 3.2%), Not at all (purple, 1.6%).
The above six categories were compiled into Table 1
below and the evaluation of the students was summarized into a 5-point scale that was labeled as follows:
Very favorable, Favorable, Indifferent, Unfavorable,
and Not favorable at all. An Overall column was added
which averaged the evaluation of the participants ofeach category.

Figure 6
Valuable in EFL

Table 1
Overall Impressions of Jokes in the EFL Classroom Divided into Six Categories (N=124)

Enjoyment

Word
Motivation
analysisAtmosphere

Shareabil- Valuable
ityin EFL

Overall

Very favorable

59.70%

34.70%

36.30%

58.90%

11.30%

41.10%

40.33%

Favorable

29.80%

37.10%

27.40%

30.60%

7.60%

37.90%

28.40%In the Middle

8.90%

21.00%

21.00%

8.10%

27.10%

16.10%

17.03%

Not very favorable

0.80%

6.50%

12.90%

1.60%

22.20%

3.20%

7.93%

Unfavorable

0.80%

0.80%

2.40%

0.80%

31.50%

1.60%

6.32%

The final question, Question 7 was stated as such: “Do
you have any other comments or opinions about theusage of jokes in class? クラスでのジョークの使う事について、他にコメントや意見はありますか？”. There
were many answers to this question that is too copious
to include here. However, here are some examples ofboth positive and negative comments:•
ジョークのレベルが高くて理解できなかったです。もっと簡単な方がウケると思います！
I like your class very much so please keep joking！
•I felt happy when you said a joke and laugh•I like your English jokes! But sometimes they
were too difficult to answer.
I thought everyone in our class was grinning in
beginning class.
•
雰囲気が良くなるのですごくいいと思います！
•
difficult English joke, I can’t understand. However, easy English joke is fun!
•
Most of the words used in the jokes were new

to me, so I learned a lot.
•
I sometimes found the joke was difficult tounderstand, so if they made it a little easier andmore familiar it would be better.

Discussion
The survey data of the 124 students showed a remarkably favorable attitude towards jokes in five out of the
6 categories. For the purposes of filtering out favorability, the top two (out of five) responses, “Very favorable”
and “Favorable”, will be considered as students showing support for a particular category. Whereas “In the
Middle”, “Not very favorable, and “Unfavorable” will beconsidered as showing “little to no support”.
The Enjoyment category scored the highest with 59.7%
and 29.8% as very favorable and favorable, respectively
for a total of 89.5%. Probing whether students thought
deeply about the meaning of words was an interest-

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

244

ing question since it infers an appreciation of the joke
beyond the humor itself and of the meaning (or double
meaning) of words. The Word Analysis category scored34.7% and 37.1% as very favorable and favorable,
respectively for a total of 71.8% support. The questionthat enquired about the jokes increasing their motivation to study English more was an important question for us as motivation is one of the key factors forlearning. In the Motivation category, nearly 64% (36.3%
very favorable and 27.4% favorable) of participants
supported the idea that the jokes motivated them tostudy more. The results were modest here, however, it
indicates that jokes may have an important role in the
motivation to study English outside of the classroom.
Although this question only probes at their feeling of
motivation and we did not ask for further details or
evidence of whether this feeling of motivation actually
led to the students studying more than usual. Question
4 asked about whether jokes improved the classroom
atmosphere (Atmosphere category), and the results
were very similar to that of question 1 (Enjoyment) inthat most students thought that the jokes improved
the classroom atmosphere, with very few disagreeing (58.9% very favorable and 30.6% favorable, 89.5%
in total). In Question 6, students were asked if they
thought that the inclusion of jokes in the English classroom was useful to their EFL education (ie. Value in EFL
category). Although Question 2-Word Analysis also
hints at an educational benefit, we asked this questionin order for students to reflect on potential benefits
separate from analytically thinking about the meaningof words. Despite this, the results of Question 6 weresimilar to that of Question 2, although slightly stronger
in the positive categories with 79% positive impressions (41.1% very favorable and 37.9% favorable) .
The only exception seems to be in the Shareability category which had 11.3% of respondents said that they
told the jokes they learned in class to other people a lot
and 7.6% respondents said they told other people thejokes often. This low level of support (or lack of favorability in this category) is unsurprising as it is difficult
to remember jokes even in one’s own native language,
let alone a foreign language. Furthermore, students
may not have felt they had the confidence to deliver
the joke properly or surmised that their friends or families may not get the joke due to the jokes being in

English. Japan’s ‘joke-telling’ culture also differs fromanglophone countries as there are expected places,
known as ‘warai no ba’, where humor and joke-tellingare welcome (Neff & Rucynski, 2021); and the usage ofpuns are often found in oyaji gyagu, which suggested
by its name, is often perceived as something only
middle-aged or old men tell and something not to be
admired or imitated among youth. That being said, it
is still remarkable that even nearly 19% had shared thejokes to some degree (combining the highest favorability responses, Very favorable and Favorable) andaround 27% were in the middle (worded as “sometimes
shared the jokes with other people”). Thus, while theShareability category scored the lowest, 46% of students sharing jokes that they learned in class is a surprising result given that the jokes were in English, andstudents were able to remember the contents of thejoke well enough to tell them to others. The willingnessof students to share jokes that they have learned froma lesson icebreaker may be due to them using the jokes
as an icebreaker themselves. Although speculation,
it is possible that students may tell English-speaking
foreign friends jokes as a way to initiate conversation
or lighten the atmosphere to avoid nervousness while
speaking English –a sort of social lubricant.
Overall, students exhibited a positive attitude towards
jokes in five out of six categories, with the highest levels of support in the Enjoyment and Atmosphere categories, both at 89.5%. The perceived value of incorporating jokes in EFL was 79%, and the Word Analysis
category also received strong support, with 71.8%. The
Motivation category garnered 64% support, suggesting that jokes could play a crucial role in motivating
students to study English outside of the classroom. The
only exception was the Shareability category, which
had low support at 18.9%, potentially due to culturaldifferences and/or the difficulty of recalling jokes ina foreign language. However, the percentage of students who reported sharing the jokes they learned inclass increased to 46% when accounting for the “sometimes” sharing option, indicating that some students
used them as icebreakers with others or that the enjoyment of some jokes extended beyond the classroom
into social interactions. However, adhering to the predetermined criteria of only considering the responses
categorized as “Very Favorable” and “Favorable” thatP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l245

signify a positive impression, it may be more suitable tomaintain the utilization of the 18.9% figure. In any case,the results of the highest-scoring five out of six categories align with previous studies that demonstratethat jokes can affect enjoyment (Stroud, 2013), learners’ motivation (Neff & Rucynski, 2017), and classroom
atmosphere (Neff & Rucynski, 2017; Blyth & Ohyama,
2011; Stroud, 2013). Additionally, we inquired about theperceived value of jokes in EFL education, which theother studies did not investigate, and discovered thata vast majority of students favored their inclusion. In
conclusion, the study’s results suggest that students
have a positive attitude towards jokes in the EFL classroom, with high levels of support for enjoyment, atmosphere, perceived value, word analysis, and motivation
categories.

Limitations
There are a number of limitations that should be
addressed regarding the survey conducted and its
analysis.
Firstly, explaining to the students the pedagogicalvalue of jokes may have biased participants in favor ofjokes. Both teachers who conducted the research only
mentioned this in brief at the start of the semester toexplain to students why jokes were being told, we donot think it had too much influence over the students’
overall impression of jokes. However, we do admit that
this framing may not be ideal for a blind study, especially in regard to the “valuable in EFL category”.
Secondly, some of the wording of the answers in thesurvey may be problematic. For example, the answers
in Question 3, “Did the jokes motivate you to study
more?”, were “Not at all”, “Not really”, “A little”, “Yes, itdid”, and ”Very Much So” may not correspond appropriately with the answers to other questions such as
Question 5, “Did you ever tell the jokes that you learnedin class to other people?”, which include answers suchas “”Not at all”, “Occasionally”, “Sometimes I did”,“Yes, often”, “Yes, a lot”. Furthermore, the wording ofa question’s particular answer choices itself may havelent itself to some bias, like in Question 5’s answers, inwhich “Sometimes, I did” could be considered more in
the favorability category than a truly “in the middle”

impression.
Thus, although there were five answer types thatgenerally correspond to Very Favorable, Favorable,
In the Middle, Not very favorable, and Unfavorable,
the answers to each question may not fit neatly intoa Likert Scale and may further not correspond witheach other appropriately as the analysis in Table 1 indicates. Therefore, it may have been better to pose thequestions as statements instead and rather than use avariety of answer types, use answers such as Strongly
Agree, Agree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Disagree,
and Strongly Disagree. Although the weakness of thewording of the answer choices is recognized, we still
consider that this study shows a favorable impressionof the various categories as indicated in Table 1. One
indicator of this is that although in some questions,the middle choice answer was usually leaning toward
the Favorability category, only the Favorable and Very
Favorable categories were taken into account as evidence of the percentage of favorability. Consequently,
it is possible that there could be an even higher percentage of Favorability in reality. Nevertheless, futurestudies should be careful to select their answer-choice
wording carefully and it may be better to use a proper
5-point or 6-point scale to ensure the results are robust.

Conclusion and Implications
The data collected indicates high favorability of the
inclusion of jokes as a warmup in a Japanese university English class. However, this data was taken froma university in Japan that is known for having a large
number of international students. Thus, there could
be a bias in favor of foreign cultures that this university’s students possess that other universities may not
to such a degree. Future studies that enquire into Japanese university students’ impressions of the usageof jokes in the English classroom may want to verify
if this is shared with universities where the ability tocommunicate in English is less of an overall focal point.
Nevertheless, the discovered implications are that theinclusion of jokes may not only create an enjoyable
atmosphere and motivate the students to study more
but may also aid students in thinking about English
words more deeply. A possible implication of thesefindings is that students may gain value from the cre-P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

246

ation of longer lesson activities based on jokes, rather
than a short ice-breaker activity. The high rating thatstudents gave to the value of jokes in education provides some support for the notion that they may be
receptive to such lessons. While it is unclear what role
jokes can and should play in an EFL university classroom, it is clear that jokes and humor in general can bea positive tool for teachers and curriculum developers
to employ that most students would welcome.

References
Bryant, J., Comisky, P. W., Crane, J. S., & Zillman,
D. (1980). Relationship between college
teachers’ use of humor in the classroom andstudents’ evaluation of their teachers. Journalof Education Psychology, 72, 511–519.
Blyth, A., & Ohyama, T. (2011). Using humour in
EFL classes. In A. Stewart (Ed.), JALT2010
Conference Proceedings (pp. 735-745).
Tokyo: JALT.
Carrell, P. L., & Eisterhold, J. C. (1983). Schema
theory and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL
Quarterly, 17(4), 553-573. https://doi.
org/10.2307/3586774

Neff, P., & Rucynski, J. (2021). The English
classroom as “warai no ba”: Instructor views
on humor and language learning in Japan.
International Journal of Educational Research
Open, 2, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijedro.2021.100070
Stroud, R. (2013). The Laughing EFL Classroom:
Potential Benefits and Barriers. English
Language Teaching, 6(10), 72-85.
Retrieved from https://www.academia.
edu/4613770/Stroud_R_2013_The_
Laughing_EFL_Classroom_Potential_
Benefits_and_Barriers_English_Language_
Teaching_6_10_72_85
West, T. (2016). Observations on the Effectivenessof Humor and Language Play in the L2
Classroom. New Directions in Teaching and
Learning English Discussion, 4, 25-31.
Williams, E., & Burden, R. L. (1997). Psychology
for language teachers: A social constructivist
approach. Cambridge University Press.

Hattie, J., Biggs, J., & Purdie, N. (1996). Effectsof learning skills interventions on student
learning: A meta-analysis. Review of
Educational Research, 66(2), 99-136. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066002099
Hodson, R. (2008b). Media humour in thelanguage classroom. Proceedings of CLaSIC
2008, 669–679.
Kitano, K. (2001). Anxiety in the College Japanese
Language Classroom. The Modern Language
Journal, 85(4), 549–566. https://doi.
org/10.1111/0026-7902.00125
Neff, P., & Rucynski, J. (2017). Japaneseperceptions of humor in the English language
classroom. HUMOR, 30(3), 279-301. https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2016-0066

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l247Class Democracy:
Allowing Students to Have Input in Class Decisions
James Emmet Owens
Kanda University of International Studies
Abstract
Research suggests allowing individuals agency in decisions encourages greater engagement, responsibility (Birdsell et al.,2009), participation and empowerment (Collins et al., 2019) in addition to communicative competence (Egitim, 2021). Thus,
partly in response to the recent pandemic-associated transition to either wholly or partly online classes, during the 2021-22 academic year the teacher-researcher allowed students a choice in matters such as lesson format and assignment deadlines. Students were then surveyed to establish the extent to which this experiment in class democracy was well-received, and whether
or not it benefitted the learning environment. In this paper, the results will be discussed. The analysis reflects on, for example,
whether too many decisions were allocated to students (or not enough), how to be mindful of minority voices in any ‘voting system’, and whether allowing students a role in decision-making increases their motivation. This paper will provide a summary ofthe decision-making progress, the results from student surveys, and how this will affect future decisions in the classroom.

日本語概要
研究によると、個人に決定権を与えることは、コミュニケーション能力（Egitim, 2021）に加えて、より大きな関与、責任（Birdsell etal, 2009）、参加、エンパワーメント（Collins et al, 2019）を促すとされています。そこで、近年のパンデミックに伴う全面的または部
分的なオンライン授業への移行に対応するため、教師兼研究者である筆者は、2021-22学年度の授業形式や課題の締め切りなどの事項について学生が選択できるようにしました。そして、この授業民主化の試みがどの程度評価され、学習環境にメリットをもたらしたかについて、学生を対象に調査を行いました。この論文では、その結果について説明します。分析では、例えば、学生に割り当てられた決
定事項が多すぎたのか（あるいは少なかったのか）、「投票システム」において少数派の声にどう配慮すべきか、意思決定において学生に役割を与えることが彼らのモチベーションを高めるのか、などについて考察しています。本稿では、意思決定の進捗状況、学生アンケートの結果、今後の教室での意思決定にどのような影響を与えるかについて示します。

During the 2021-22 academic year, the author took
advantage of greater class flexibility offered in
response to the recent pandemic to offer students
some input into classroom decisions. This was inspiredin part by both historical and recent relevant research
advocating that we abandon the convention whereby
the teacher makes most if not all decisions for how thelanguage classroom should be managed. Breen andLittlejohn (2000), for example, claim “there are several
justifications for raising such decisions to the level ofovert negotiation with students” (p. 8). In the following
section, these justifications, and limitations, are examined in greater detail. This is followed by an explanation of how student reactions to providing input were
explored, and the extent to which this experiment inallowing student input can be considered a success.

Literature Review
Benefits to the learner
The main justification for allowing more student input
into classroom decisions centres around the direct
benefits such “overt negotiation” offers to the learners
and the learning process itself. This is not an exclusively
modern phenomenon. Vygotsky (1962) believed thatstudents learn as they engage in social activity, while
Rogers (1969) maintained that it was fundamentally
the teacher’s job to enable learners to assume responsibility for their own learning. More recent research has
demonstrated that allowing individuals agency in decisions encourages greater engagement and responsibility (e.g. Birdsell et al., 2009). In fact, Breen and Littlejohn(2000) propose that the main goal of the classroom is
to develop each “learner as an active agent of his or her

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l248

learning” (p. 19).
Justifying high levels of student agency and the benefits to the learning process, Breen and Littlejohn claimthat it “activates both personal and interactive negotiation while… contributing to their scope and quality
during learning”, and that these are essentially “...mutually supportive processes for developing the capacity
to communicate in a new language.” (p. 10-11). That is,
the act of negotiation itself involves, and demonstrates
proficiency in, the development of communicativecompetence, a finding further echoed by Egitim (2021).

Benefits to society
A democratic classroom, it is argued, also has benefits in terms of its consequences in wider society,the first step in which is to make the school (and theclassroom) a microcosm of democratic civilisation: “If
we ever hope to have schools that are engaging andthat truly embody democracy, then the classes withinthem must provide opportunities for students to experience autonomy, freedom, and choice in what is studied, when, and how” (Morrison, 2008, p. 50). The hopeseems to be here that democracy in wider society canfilter down into the classroom, which can then in turnlead to more effective participation in democratic processes at the level of society. According to Breen andLittlejohn (2000), “student responsibility and co-operation during learning” can both be a functional demonstration of, and help to further enable, “participation
as a citizen in democratic processes” (p. 19). More succinctly, Crookes (2021, p. 251) paraphrases the point
often made that, “if we want democracy in society, it
does not make sense to exclude it from schools”.

Counter-arguments
There are, of course, issues with trying to install democracy in the classroom, no matter how well-intentioned
the motives. Amongst these are the mental strain it canadd, especially if the class contents are already challenging: “...when it comes to democratic education”,
there is “… the challenge of having too much choice
and an increased focus on the self” (Underwood, n.d.,
Challenges Students May Face section, para. 1). Leaving
too many decisions in the hands of students can leadto cognitive overload, and/or a sense of selfishness orentitlement, where they might otherwise be inclined tofollow simple instructions and be more co-operative.
Power dynamics also come into play: “There is also thechallenge of one student, or a group, dominating thespace of a democratic classroom.” (Challenges Students
May Face section, para. 1). If not managed well by theteacher, the more dominant students may effectively
get their way by importuning less dominant personalities, or the ‘tyranny of the majority’ may preponderate
too often. If, for example, the same 60-70% of students
form a bloc who consistently choose later deadlines for
assignments rather than earlier, the remaining 30-40%
of students with alternative preferences could feel permanently disgruntled, resentful and/or disempowered.
There may also be time constraints. How much time
would the negotiation/decision process take, andwould students find this irritating in a course that
already felt demanding? Breen and Littlejohn (2000)
acknowledge that it would be “highly unusual andinefficient… to seek negotiated agreement on all of
the major questions in every lesson, even if this was
feasible” (p 30). Culture and personality are otherconcerns. While many may relish the opportunity for
their voice to be heard, students often have their own
expectations, based on experience or preference, of
how a classroom should function, and if they are notused to being consulted or negotiated with, they may
not necessarily value the experience.
In realistic terms, students may not always make decisions with the interests of others, or even their own
long-term interests, at heart. Being human, they may,for example, always choose the ‘easier’ or ‘lazier’ option;
the extended deadline or the online class because it ismore immediately convenient, rather than what is bestfor their own learning, or the circumstances of theirpeers.
Even advocates of greater democracy in the classroom
are keenly aware of these limitations. Breen and Littlejohn (2000) concede that, while ideally we may want toproduce students who can “take responsibility for theirdecisions” and “be responsible for the impact of suchdecisions on others” (p. 20), it can be difficult given

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l249that, “[c]ollaborative decision-making requires the constant balancing of an individual agenda with everyone
else’s” (p. 22).
The teacher then, aware of “the potential and limitsof negotiation” in both their own classroom and the“wider educational and cultural context in which it
is located” needs to be realistic about what they canachieve in terms of class democracy, and should be“explict” as to “...what seems non-negotiable”, whileat the same time making the best use of any “feasible
opportunities for sharing decisions” (p. 27). This study
wished to exploit one such ‘feasible opportunity’: theflexibility of class format in response to the COVID-19
pandemic.

Background and clarification
At this point, it would seem expedient to clarify what
this brief experiment in limited class democracy is,what it is not, and what it sets out to investigate. Muchof the literature on democracy in the classroom is fairly
radical in its aims, framing it in the wider context of a
critique of ‘oppressive’ traditional teaching practice(Fritzsche, 2022) and/or of ‘neoliberal’ models of education (Fielding & Moss, 2010). Some advocate turning
the classroom into a forum where almost every decision is made by students, including the curriculum andcontent of the course itself (Crawford, 1978, as citedin Crookes, 2021). Operating within a much more constrained context, where detailed curricula are pre-set
by the institution or must be submitted before thecourse begins, the goals of this study are far more modest.
In this study, students were given limited input (butstill more than they were used to) into some classroom
decisions, and then the impact of that input and theirlevel of satisfaction were measured. Most typically, I
allowed students to discuss, vote or help me decide on(where possible) which classroom they prefer (wherea choice was available), deadlines for assignments,
and whether lessons should be (and/or which lessons
should be) face-to-face, online.. etc.
The last option needs greater clarification. In responseto the COVID-19 pandemic, classes at my university inthe academic year 2020-21 were initially all switched toonline classes (available in both Zoom and asynchronous/‘on-demand’ formats). However, the institution
had to achieve a delicate balance in terms of not only
addressing health concerns, but also student and parent satisfaction, and pressures from MEXT to have faceto-face components of lessons. Accordingly, in 202122 the university encouraged a combination of bothface-to-face and online formats for lessons, with some
exceptions and scope for flexibility (e.g. health exemptions). It was basically up to most teachers how they
wished to proceed, with up to 47% of lessons being
made available online per course.
While the decisions were mostly made by the teachers
themselves, it also presented a great opportunity forthe author to involve students in the decision-making
process. As all the author’s courses were taught twice a
week, students could not only help decide the numberof online classes, but also when to have online classes(e.g. Monday face-to-face, Wednesday online; or alternate weeks of face-to-face and online classes).

Methodology and Research Questions
Decisions were largely based on voting systems, butdifferent styles of voting were experimented with,which allowed the author to also explore which forms
of input and democracy students proved most effective. For example, votes were at times based on a showof hands (i.e. no anonymity), anonymous polls onzoom (during online classes), or anonymous polls via
google forms (typically after class). Sometimes thesevotes were preceded by discussions in which students
shared their preferences and opinions; but sometimes
they were not, depending on time constraints. Whilethe usual process was to go with the clear majority
decision, occasionally the teacher had to interveneand make a contrary decision. This would happen
when, for example, the same minority of students
were constantly being side-lined (e.g. a small numberof students who wanted earlier deadlines corresponding to their own scheduled workloads). In the case of
appeasing the minority, one rule of thumb was to let
the minority have their way in every 4th or 5th decision,
where the minority still had significant numbers (e.g.
20-30% of the class).

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

250

I wished to investigate how students really felt about
being allowed some input into classroom decisions.
Specifically, I wanted to know:

combined.

•••

The author taught four classes during the 2021-22 academic year. Three of the four classes featured students
in the English department, while one class was forfirst-year students within the Global Liberal Arts (GLA)
faculty. The English department classes taught wereFoundational Literacies (for first-year students), MediaEnglish (sophomores) and Critical Thinking (mostly
third and fourth-year students). Each class had 20 students. All first and second- year classes were high-tier,whilst the Critical Thinking class has mixed levels. In
total, 44 students responded and consented to theiranswers used, which was slightly more than half of thetotal number of students enrolled (80) in the various
classes. A roughly equal proportion of students fromeach taught course responded (54.5% first years, 22.7%
second years, 15.9% third years, and 6.8% fourth years)
making the pool of responses a fairly representative
sample.

Did students value having input?
Did they want more input? Less?
How effectively were the opinions of theminority also valued?
•
How effective was the way in which ‘democracy’ was practised?
, and any other points of interest or concern that may
have emerged from the experiment.
Accordingly, at the end of the semester, each class wassent a survey (through Google Forms) asking them toprovide feedback. This survey successfully underwent
an ethical review, following standard university practice, and was approved. It was also clearly stated that
all responses would remain confidential. While most of
the answers were multiple-choice, respondents wereallowed to comment if they wished, but were promisedthat their identities would be protected in any publication. The surveys were voluntary, and students wereallowed to deny consent for their data to be used inpublication.
What follows is an explanation of the survey, and ananalysis of the results. For the sake of language efficiency, the Results and Discussion sections have been

Results and Discussion

Amount of input
In the survey, students were asked what types of decisions they were allowed input in, and how often. Table
1 summarises the responses.

Table 1
What decisions were you allowed input into, and how often
The teacher allowed us input into…

Always

Often

Sometimes

RarelyNever

Choice of class format(e.g. Zoom, Face to face)

20

17

7

0

0

Which classroom we used

23

11

3

1

6

Assignment deadlines

26

10

7

1

0

Assignment tasks

24

14

3

2

1

Something else

19

9

4

2

10

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

251

Typical answers for ‘something else’ included choice ofgroup mates for assignments, and whether or not they
preferred to work as individuals, in pairs or in groups
for a given task.
The most predominant answers for each question were
‘Always’, followed by ‘Often’, though it is interesting tonote that, even within the same class and regarding
the same question, some students answered ‘always’
and others ‘never’. This suggests that the same level of
democracy can be perceived in different ways in theminds of each respondent, and there is clearly a large
subjective component to this survey. Nonetheless, it isclear from the results that most students felt they had
regular input in the four main areas, especially class format and assignment deadlines.

Balance of input

being ‘most’, followed by ‘some’.
Students were subsequently asked more specificallywhich decisions they think they should be allowed
input in. The results are summarised in Figure 2, andsupport the findings of the previous question, i.e. thatstudents believe that having at least some input intoclassroom decisions is important for them. The mostcommon answer for each section was ‘agree to someextent’, followed by ‘strongly agree’. This was mostoverwhelmingly the case with regards to assignment
deadlines and class format. The fact that ‘to someextent’ was a more popular answer than ‘strongly
agree’ echoes the ‘most’ and ‘some’ answers shown in
Figure 1. That is, students do not feel they should be
involved in every decision, and seem happy to concede
authority to the teacher to make some decisions forthem, a sentiment well-summarised by the following
student comment:

The next series of questions looked at the level of input
students feel to be appropriate, to what extent this wasachieved, and other issues pertaining to balance, suchas the extent to which the minority should be integrated into decision-making, and the extent to which
this took place.

I think allowing students to make decisions in classcan make a class more active. However, the final
decision should be made by the teacher, taking into
account the opinions of the students, because a
student’s opinion alone is not a good balance.

As can be seen from Figure 1, all respondents indicatedthat they felt students should have input into at least
some class decisions, with the most common response

The only relevant comment listing examples of otherdecisions on which they felt they should be consulted
was how they are divided into groups.

Figure 1
Summary of what students feel to be an appropriate level of general input

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

252

Figure 2
Which decisions students felt they should be allowed input in

Figure 3 looks at the extent to which students feel theteacher got the balance right in terms of allowing too
little or too much student input into decisions. As canbe seen, the vast majority of students (84.1%) felt thebalance to be just right, with smaller numbers believing they should have been allowed more input (11.4%)
or less input (4.5%).

Respondents were also asked to consider the best way
to deal with minorities of voters in classroom democracies. The author wanted to know whether students
felt the teacher was mindful enough, or too mindful,of those who consistently were outvoted, and thus
may have felt marginalised, and also what students
feel about this issue: should a democracy be mindfulor such minorities, or always go with the majority vote?.

Figure 3
Overall balance of input

Figure 4 summarises responses on whether students
do feel always going with majority decisions is unfair
on minority voters, and is perhaps the most polarising question in terms of response, with large numbers
both agreeing and disagreeing with the statement(to some extent). Nonetheless, there are no students
who strongly disagree with the statement, and most

students agree that it is unfair (and by implication that
therefore it is right to concede to the minority sometimes).

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

253

Figure 4Student feelings on consideration of minority opinion

Students were also asked if they thought the teacher
overall struck an appropriate balance when dealing

with this minority. The answers can be seen in Figure 5.

Figure 5Student feelings on Involving the minority of voters

A clear majority of respondents feel the balance was“just right” (and by implication that sometimes it isright to let the minority have their own way). Most of
the relevant comments with regards to this echo thefindings. For example, one comment applauded the“moderate amount of the choices” offered, and also
the fact that the teacher “considered both majority
and minority opinions.” However one student opined

that, “Majority decision may not respect the opinionsof the minority, but that’s the way it is, and I don’t thinkit can be helped.” Similarly, one student thought it “isthe best way to follow the majority opinion when we
decide something”, although they conceded “there aresome bad points”, and other students supported theidea of moderation and compromise when dealing
with minority voters:

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

254…if majority opinions don’t oppress minority
extremely, voting is functional. However, someclass decision may not be tolerable for minority, so
if class can make compromise, they should do. Students should understand that all of our wills neverbe adopted.

deadlines and class format, and that the teacher did
this to an appropriate level. Most also believe that theminority of students should be considered, too, andthat again the teacher got the balance of doing so justright.

How input is collected
Another respondent suggested that it depends on thetype of decision being made: “If it’s not particularly
important, we’ll come to a conclusion soon enough.
However, when it comes to important decisions, I think
it is necessary to listen to minority opinions.”
Overall, then, it seems fair to say that students felt theteacher got the balance of decisions correct. Most students feel that they should be consulted on some but
not all decisions, especially with regard to assignment

As explained earlier, the way students voted andgave their input was varied, with some votes anonymous and others not, and some votes preceded bydiscussions. Sometimes no vote took place at all, withthe teacher ‘feeling the room’ after a discussion took
place. The survey featured a question asking them fortheir preferences in this regard, and their answers aredemonstrated in Figure 6.

Figure 6
Student preference for providing input

As can clearly be seen, the most popular form of input
was an anonymous vote (either a Zoom poll or GoogleForm) following a discussion. The next most prevalentpreference was for an anonymous vote without discussion. Interestingly, a class discussion with no vote wasmore popular than a non-anonymous vote after discussion. The least popular option (4.5%) was a show ofhands without any discussion.
It would seem that what would students care mostabout in terms of providing an input is the ability to do
so with anonymity (when voting). Perhaps this is unsurprising given the context. The majority of students are

Japanese and/or raised in Japan, where the stress andimpact of peer-pressure and fear of peer-judgement
is well-documented. The students also have a generalpreference for discussing their options first with peers
before voting.

Pros and cons of student input
Respondents were asked to what extent they agreed
with a range of other statements regarding what could
be considered the pros and cons of student input, andprovided some interesting answers. Each question anda summary of the answers can be seen in Figures 7-10.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

255

As Figure 7 demonstrates, all students believed having input into classroom decisions motivated student
interest in the class to at least some extent.
Figure 8 suggests that the question of whether students felt it was lazy of the teacher to ‘outsource’
decision-making to students or not to be polarising

to some degree. However, the most popular answers
were ‘Disagree to some extent’ and ‘Strongly disagree’,so it would seem safe to conclude a majority of students did not feel this to be the case.
Opinions regarding whether or not students would
make ‘easier’ but not necessarily ‘better’ decisions

Figure 7
Effect of providing input on motivation

Figure 8
Is it lazy for the teacher to let students decide?

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

256when given the choice (Figure 9), were varied and interesting. While overall most students agree that this is
the case, either strongly or to some extent, over a thirdof respondents (16 in total) disagreed, either strongly

or to some extent. This honest appraisal from studentssuggests that one of the earlier stated potential limitations of class democracy does ring true.

Figure 9
Will students make ‘easy’ choices rather than the ‘best’ choices?

Both the question itself and the results for the nextquestion (Figure 10) were similar to those in Figure 9.
The question again alludes to a limitation of democracy (making decisions that are better for individuals
than the whole class), and while most respondents
agreed with the statement, a not inconsiderable number (nine in total) did not. Once more, the respondents
showed an admirable level of honesty in answering
this question, and it does suggest another limitation of
democracy in the classroom is well-founded.
In summary, then, when it comes to analysing theadvantages and disadvantages of consulting students
on certain decisions in the classroom, all students felt
it had a positive impact on their motivation, and mostdisagreed it was lazy for the teacher to do so. However,most students also conceded that it may lead many tomake ‘easy’ and/or selfish decisions that might not be
the best choice for their own learning or for the classas a whole.

Is democracy good or bad?
The final question was a simple one: generally speaking, did students think the idea of ‘class democracy’ is agood or bad idea? The results, as exhibited in Figure 11,
are clear: 92.3% (41 in total) of respondents felt it wasa ‘good’ thing.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l257

Figure 10
Are decisions made by students selfish?

Figure 11
Is democracy overall good or bad in the classroom?

Limitations
Before summarising the results in the conclusion, it
seems expedient to concede where there are limitations to these findings.
There are issues when the evaluatee is the same person
administering the survey, especially when that person
is in a position of authority. For example. if students liketheir teacher, they may be more likely to offer unrelated
positive appraisals (‘Halo effect’, Thorndike, 1920). This
could be enhanced by the well-documented tendencyof respondents to choose positive answers on any survey (acquiescence bias). Respondents may also fearthat their identities would be known to the teacher andthat providing answers that could be perceived as critical or negative would have a negative impact on, forexample, their grading. However, the wording of thesurvey reassured them both of their confidentiality andthat their answers would not affect their grades, andsome students seem to have given honest, and frankadmissions in certain sections, so this would seem tobe mitigated to some extent.

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l258

In addition, the sample size was small. Furthermore,
any voluntary survey carries the obvious potential forvoluntary response bias (responses may not be representative of all students, as those with stronger opinions are more likely to respond), and nonresponse bias
(those with no interest in, in this case class democracy,
are less likely to respond, which would certainly limit
the findings that all students thought it was good fortheir motivation). However, with over half of all students responding, again that seems less of a concern
here.
The author does not make any claims of statistical significance. However, what the results of this survey dooffer are an indication of the extent to which students
responded well to having input in class decisions, andhelps the author tailor any similar efforts in the future.

Conclusion
Did students value having input?
The responses to the survey would seem to indicate aresounding ‘yes’. 93.2% of students stated they thoughtclass democracy was a ‘good idea’, 100% agreed that it
motivates students to have more interest in the class,100% believed that students should have at least some
input into class decisions (with 43.2% believing thatthey should be involved in most decisions, and 15.9% in
all decisions). The overwhelming majority of students
stated they believed they should be allowed input into
all the examples listed (class format, assignment deadlines, classroom.. etc), and this was most discernibly thecase with assignment deadlines (97.7%) and class format (95.5%).
Students were frank about the fact, as most conceded,
they may make decisions that are ‘lazy’, short-termist
or selfish, all of which can be seen as limitations todemocracy in wider society, too, it could be argued.
However, this is more about the level of input theyshould be allowed (addressed in the next section) thanwhether they should have any input at all, and most
students would likely agree with the previously cited
respondent that, “...the final decision should be madeby the teacher, taking into account the opinions of thestudents, because a student’s opinion alone is not agood balance.”

Did they want more input? Less?
When asked how often students felt they were allowed
input into each of the five types of decisions, the mostpopular answers were ‘always’ followed by ‘often’. In
terms of striking the right balance in terms of too muchor too little, 84.1% felt the teacher got it ‘just right’.
While there were some students who would have preferred more input, there were also those who would
have preferred less, a set of results that suggests thelevel of input they were allowed was well-balanced.
When asked if students felt there was any other area
where they should have been allowed input, the only
suggestion was for how the groups for tasks andassignments are formed, which is something to think
about going forward.

How effectively were the opinions of theminority also valued?
While there was more variation in opinion on thetheme of making concessions to minority voters, most
students agreed that always granting the majority theirwish would be unfair on others, and the vast majority(88.6%) again felt the teacher got the balance ‘justright’ in terms of sometimes making such concessions,while respecting democratic votes.

How effective was the way in which‘democracy’ was practised?
The results above suggest that most students felt theteacher got the balance in general terms ‘just right’.
More specifically, in terms of how democracy waspractised, most students (84.1%) indicated that they
preferred having a vote of some kind, with or without a discussion. Of those, the clear preference (66%of respondents in total, and 78.5% of the aforementioned group that prefer a vote) was for an anonymous
vote rather than a show of hands. In total, 77.2% of
respondents would rather integrate a discussion with
their peers into any decision-making, with or without
a vote. This set of results suggests anonymous votes,
preceded by discussions if time permits, are the mostP a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l259

appreciated and effective form of democracy in theclassroom, going forward.
Limitations notwithstanding, this modest experimentwith class democracy seems to have met with somesuccess, based on the reactions from students. Students overwhelmingly believe they should provide
at least some input and that doing so has a positive
impact on their motivation, valued the input they
were permitted, felt the amount of input they had was
well-balanced, and sensed that an appropriate levelof concessions were made to minority voters. Goingforward, they would like more say in how groups areformed for tasks, and would prefer their input to be in
the form of discussions followed by anonymous votes,
where time permits.
It is hoped this experiment will inspire other teachers
to allow students to have a say in classroom decisions,even if very limited, as it clearly has met with theirapproval in this instance.

References
Birdsell, B., Ream, S., Seyller, A. & Zobott, P.
(2009). Motivating students by increasing
student choice. Masters thesis, Saint Xavier
University. Retrieved from https://www.
researchgate.net/publication/234651137_
Motivating_Students_by_Increasing_
Student_Choice
Breen, M. P. & Littlejohn, A. (2000). Classroom
decision-making: Negotiation and processsyllabuses in practice. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Collins, J., Hess, M. E., & Lowery, C. L. (2019).
Democratic spaces: How teachers establish
and sustain democracy and education in theirclassrooms. Democracy and Education, 27(1),3.

Egitim, S. (2021). Collaborative leadership in
English language classrooms: engaging
learners in leaderful classroom practices andstrategies. International Journal of Leadershipin Education, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/136
03124.2021.1990413
Fielding, M., & Moss, P. (2010). Radical Educationand the Common School: A Democratic
Alternative (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.
org/10.4324/9780203837405
Fritzsche, L. (2022) Integrating contemplative
pedagogy and anti-oppressive pedagogy
in geography higher education classrooms,
Journal of Geography in Higher Education,46(2), 167-184. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098
265.2021.1946766
Morrison, K. A. (2008). Democratic classrooms:
Promises and challenges of student voice
and choice, part one. Educational Horizons,
87(1), 50–60.
Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom to learn: A view ofwhat education might become. Columbus,
Ohio : C.E. Merrill Pub. Co., 1969.
Thorndike, E. (1920) A constant error in
psychological ratings. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 4, 25-29. https://doi.org/10.1037/
h0071663
Underwood, Julia. (n.d.). The Challenges of
Democratic Education. Retrieved from https://juliaunderwoodjau.wixsite.com/msunderwood/
about3-cu6c
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Crookes, G. V. (2021). Critical language pedagogy:
an introduction to principles and values, ELT
Journal, 75(3), July 2021, 247-255. https://doi.
org/10.1093/elt/ccab020

P a n S I G 2 02 2 J o u r n a l

JALT Special Interest Groups and the
PanSIG Conference
Accessibility in Language Learning
The Accessibility in Language Learning SIG became a new forming SIG in February 2021. This SIG aims to create a communityof language teachers to better understand learners with special needs to improve learners’ overall learning experiences withdiverse learning needs.

Bilingualism
Our group provides support to families who are bringing up children in two or more languages in Japanese contexts. Our
newsletter, Bilingual Japan, includes practical information about bilingual parenting, as well as academic and theoretical issues.
The SIG’s annual forum and banquet at the national conference provide an opportunity for members to network with otherbilingual families. Further information can be found at www.bsig.org.

Business Communication
The JALT Business Communication (BizCom or BC) SIG represents a group of like-minded teachers intended to develop thediscipline of teaching English conducive to participation in the world business community in Japan. To facilitate this, we aim toprovide instructors in this field with a means of collaboration and sharing best teaching practices.

CEFR and Language Portfolio
CEFR & LP SIG wants to discuss the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) and European Language Portfolio(ELP), and other similar frameworks andtheir relevance for Japan. There is an emphasis on developing materials to support
educators who would like to use these pedagogic tools; the bilingual Language Portfolio for Japanese University is available on
the SIG website.

College and University Educators
Our goal is to provide a forum for the presentation and discussion of educational activities, ideas and research of broadinterest to college and university educators in Japan. If you are involved in tertiary education and are committed to professional
development, you are CUE too.

Computer Assisted Language Learning
The CALL SIG serves the interests of language teaching professionals who are interested in bringing together knowledge
and skills of technology and language learning. CALL practitioners work in a variety of educational settings: private language
schools, elementary and secondary schools as well as colleges and universities.

Critical Thinking
The Critical Thinking (CT) SIG was established for the purpose of providing a clear but ever-reforming definition of criticalthinking; to provide a forum for the discussion of critical thinking and praxis; to provide research opportunities to language
educators interested in promoting critical thinking; and to provide an area where language teachers can enjoy friendly,
professional and engaging examination of the rationale, validity and, furthermore, the critical importance of its instruction invarious environments.

Extensive Reading
The ER SIG exists to help promote extensive reading (ER) in Japan. Through our website, our newsletter, the ERJ Journal, andpresentations throughout Japan we aim to help teachers set up and make the most of their ER programmes.

Gender Awareness in Language Education
The purpose of the GALE SIG is to research gender and its implications for language learning, teaching, and training. We
welcome submissions for our newsletter (spring, summer, and fall issues) on topics, both theoretical and practical, related to the
SIG's aims. Book reviews, lesson plans, think pieces, poetry -- basically anything related to gender and language teaching iswelcomed. To see our past newsletters, please visit our website at www.gale-sig.org.

Global Issues in Language Education
GILE aims to promote global awareness, international understanding, and action to solve world problems through content-based
language teaching, drawing from fields such as global education, peace education, environmental education, and human rights
education. The SIG produces a quarterly newsletter, organizes presentations for local, national, and international conferences,and maintains contacts with groups ranging from Amnesty International to Educators for Social Responsibility to UNESCO.

Intercultural Communication in Language Education
This SIG aims to explore various ways language teachers could help shape their students’ intercultural minds, raise theirstudents’ cultural self-awareness, and educate for intercultural understanding. It promotes discussion about various approaches
to teaching intercultural communication in a language classroom, allowing educators to become better informed about language
intercultural education theory. We also promote the development of resources appropriate to a foreign language teachingenvironment while considering the practical challenges of taking culture into account in the language classroom.

Japanese as a Second Language
日本語教育研究部会（JSL SIG）の役割は、第二言語としての日本語指導、日本語学習、日本語教育研究の向上を目指し、指導、学習、研究のための資料や情報を与えることです。日本語の指導者、学習者、研究者の皆様加入大歓迎です。発表の援助をし、ニュースレターと論文集を発行するので論文・記事の寄稿を歓迎します。
The mission of the Japanese as a Second Language (JSL) SIG is to serve as a resource for promoting JSL teaching, learningand research. We welcome JSL teachers, learners, and researchers to join and take an active role in our SIG.

Learner Development
The Learner Development SIG is an active and supportive community of individuals with a broad range of personal andprofessional experiences, all sharing an interest in exploring learner (and educator) development. We encourage anyone withsimilar interests to join us. To find out more, please visit our SIG's website, ld-sig.org.

Lifelong Language Learning
We offer a bright future to our aging society. The energy of older learners who wish to lead active lives is flowing all over Japan.
LLL (Life Long Learning) is willing to help these older learners enrich their lives through language learning. LLL also provides
resources and information for teachers who teach English to older learners by holding events and publishing online newsletters.

Listening
The Listening Special Interest Group (Listening SIG) provides a forum for focused listening research and discussion in specificregard to teaching and learning. The group offers both teachers and researchers a place to connect, collaborate and sharepractice and research regarding how teachers teach listening and assess their learners, how learners improve their listening anduse it to improve their knowledge, and finally how theoretical aspects connect to classroom practice.

Literature in Language Teaching
Hi! A hearty welcome to the Literature in Language Teaching SIG. We started up this group to encourage and promote the useof literature in the language classroom. Literature provides real content to engage and to motivate our EFL students.

Materials Writers
The MW SIG was established for the purpose of helping members to turn fresh teaching ideas into useful classroom materials.
We try to be a mutual assistance network, offering information regarding copyright law, sharing practical advice on publishingpractices, including self-publication, and suggesting ways to create better language learning materials for general consumption
or for individual classroom use.
教材開発研究部会 (MW) は、メンバーが日々の教育の場で得た新しいアイディアを教材にしていく助けとなることを目的に設立されました。著作権に関すること、自費出版を含めた出版に関する実践的なアドバイス、広く一般学習者または特定の授業のためにどうしたらより良い語学教材が作れるか、といったことに関するアイディアを共有しお互いを高め合える部会であることが願いです。教材開発についてもっと知りたい、自分のアイディアを形にしたいという方、入会大歓迎です。一緒に活動しませんか。

Mind, Brain, and Education
The Mind, Brain, and Education SIG is a forum for language educators and researchers to share insights in neuroscience. We
hope to be a driving force in bringing relevant new discoveries in psychology, cognitive neuroscience and neurolinguistics into
language teaching in Japan.

Mixed, Augmented, and Virtual Realities
Mixed, Augmented and Virtual Realities (MAVR) is not a new concept or area of study, but it an area that is beginning to be
implemented at a larger scale in many other fields. There are those of us working in this area connected to education here in
Japan and more specifically language education in Japan. Our SIG is not just about the technology, it is also looking into whatthese technologies mean for how we communicate and learn as we create and augment our own reality.

Other Language Educators
Hello; dobr denj; kalimera; ni hao; guten tag; anyong hashimnikka; bonjour, buenos dias; hyvää päivää; bom dia; haisai;konnichiwa!
In a time when we can easily understand where and how other people live, there is still only one surefire way to find out what
they think individually or as a culture: to learn their language. As every culture contains specific patterns of thought and mindsets
which cannot always be put into English or translated easily from one language to another, learning its language opens thedoor to that culture and the countries using it. The purpose of the OLE SIG is to serve the special needs of such learners andteachers.

Performance in Education
The mission of the Performance in Education (PIE) SIG is to provide a forum for teachers and academics to discuss, research,and implement oral interpretation, speech, debate, and drama in language education. The main activities are creation ofa newsletter and sponsoring a National Speech, Drama, and Debate Contest. Future activities may be the sponsoring ofworkshops and conferences, and supporting local and regional speech, drama, and debate contests or festivals.

Pragmatics
The Pragmatics SIG welcomes members who are interested in both research and practical teaching issues related to "howpeople do things with words." The group's newsletter, Pragmatic Matters, is published electronically three times a year. Our
Pragmatics Resources series offers practical and theoretical papers on language in use. If you do anything with language, you
are using pragmatics! So, come join us!

School Owners
Language School owners have always played a significant role in JALT both at national & local levels. The SO SIG is where
owners can share ideas, experiences, and solutions to the academic and commercial challenges they face which cannot be
addressed through other SIGs. If you have questions or would like to learn more about what the SIG provides, please contact us
at so@jalt.org or visit our website at https://jaltsosig.wixsite.com/home.

Study Abroad
The Study Abroad SIG welcomes anyone interested into its wide membership, domestically and overseas. The aim is tofacilitate an active and working network of faculty, staff, and students who can share and exchange experiences, knowledge,
and knowhow on how to plan, prepare, implement, and evaluate different study abroad programs/experiences. Study abroad
includes all categories of inbound and outbound, one-way study abroad, exchange, internships, experience, and cultural
programs. The goal for many SIG members is to network, to collect and share data and information for future collaboration,
research, presentations, and papers in the area of study abroad.

Task-Based Learning
The JALT Task-Based Learning (TBL) SIG is a Special Interest Group aimed at teachers who currently use, or are interested
in using, task-based approaches in the classroom. The SIG focuses in particular on issues related to Task-Based Language
teaching and learning in the Asian EFL context, where TBLT has yet to enter the mainstream of language pedagogy. We hopethat the SIG will serve as a useful forum for the exchange of practical teaching ideas, theoretical discussion, and academic
studies of TBLT issues.

Teacher Development
The Teacher Development SIG is a group committed to helping ourselves and our peers to become more effective language
teachers in order to better serve learners. As such, our varied activities and interests include forums, conferences, and journals
about professional development, practitioner research, and reflective practice. Our SIG offers opportunities for teachers fromdifferent educational settings to come together for careful and critical reflections and explorations of their practice, with a view todeveloping as professionals. The TD SIG is a flexible group, open to new ideas and potential collaborations.

Teachers Helping Teachers
The THT SIG began from the charity work of the late Bill Balsamo and we organize 4 overseas conferences in Laos (Feb/Mar),
Vietnam (Early August), Kyrygystan and Bangladesh (Sept, date depends on Ramadan) as well as work to develop overseas
volunteer opportunities. Participants pay their own way, and are asked to prepare 2-3 presentations (practical presentations
are most welcome) that they may present multiple times to organize and fill out the conference schedule. For more information,please contact thtjalt@gmail.com.

Teaching Younger Learners
The TYL SIG is for teachers of younger learners. This SIG was formed by the merger of the JALT Teaching Children SIG and theJunior Senior High SIG in February 2015. The goal of the TYL SIG is to support those involved with or simply interested in theteaching of languages to learners aged 0-18. We publish a bilingual newsletter with columns by many of the leading teachers in
the field.

Testing and Evaluation
The Testing and Evaluation SIG aims to provide avenues for research, information, and discussion related to foreign language
testing and evaluation both from within JALT membership and with other professional organizations which have common
interests and goals. Please visit our website at www.jalt.org/test.

Vocabulary
The Vocabulary Special Interest Group (Vocab SIG) provides a forum for focused research and discussion in specific regard to
vocabulary acquisition. We offer both teachers and researchers a place to connect regarding how learners improve vocabularyknowledge, how to test their knowledge, and how these theoretical aspects connect to classroom practice. The Vocabulary SIG
aims to be a driving force for both current and future research in the field of how vocabulary can be taught, learned, and tested
in an increasingly global context.

PanSIG Journal 2022
ISBN# 978-4-901352-57-4
Patrick Conaway –Editor-in-Chief
Duncan Iske –Associate Editor
PanSIG Journal

PanSIG Journal 2022

ISBN# 978-4-901352-57-4
Created and edited by Patrick Conaway and Duncan Iske

PanSIG is a yearly conference held by the Special Interest Groups in
the Japan Association of Language Teachers.

The PanSIG 2021 Journal 1