Journal

ISSN 2189-0463

THE
CENTERFOR
ELF

Volume 1, Issue 1. April 2015

玉川大学

玉川大学THE
CENTERFOR
ELF

JournalIssue Editors: Travis Cote, Brett Milliner, and Glenn Toh
Translation: Mitsuko Imai

Reviewers:
Jo-Ann Netto-ShekCharlie Robertson
James Essex
Ayako Suzuki
Ethel Ogane
Paul McBride
Andrew Leichsenring
Tricia Okada
Mitsuko Imai
Steve Lia

I

Foreword

n 2013, Tamagawa University launched a new, campus-wide English as a Lingua
Franca (ELF) Program, the first of its kind in Japan. The ELF program is designed toenable students to effectively communicate with people all over the world using
English as a lingua franca. Beginning in 2014, the Center for English as a Lingua Franca(CELF) was established to accommodate the English program and a tutor service. The Center
currently serves approximately 2,500 students, all of whom will be taught by approximately
40 instructors from around the globe. Aware of the deep-rooted, native English speakerbias and norms common not only in Japan, a conscious decision was made by Tamagawa
University to seek qualified, professional English language teachers from outside the inner
circle (Kachru, 1985) countries. The collection of articles in this journal represents theresearch and work from a handful of those ELF teachers.
It is the teachers, their personal beliefs and principles, who determine the successof any language program. If teachers are going to hone their teaching skills, deepen theirknowledge and develop professionally, they must receive proper support. To that end, theeditors of this current issue were involved in creating the Center for English as a Lingua
Franca Journal. All teachers in the ELF Program were invited to submit an academic article
or research paper for consideration of publication in this landmark periodical. Publication inthis inaugural issue of the Center for ELF Journal represents a chance for teachers to add totheir professional resume, but more importantly, this journal issue is an opportunity for ELF
teachers to share ideas and add value to our new Center for English as a Lingua Franca.
In this first issue, the CELF working group committee introduce the ELF Programand share details of its success along with various performance results. Simeon Flowers
discusses how to develop intercultural sensitivity through digital pen pal exchanges. Andrew
Leichsenring explores language learner perceptions and language awareness. Daniel
Worden proposes guidelines as to how teachers can set appropriate reading targets forExtensive Reading (ER). Kensaku Ishimaki and Thomas C. Saunders discuss the benefitsof Extensive Watching (EW) on learner motivation and autonomy. Blagoja Dimoski sharesa practical classroom management tool. And finally, Jonah Glick offers advice on using
dictation in the classroom to support cooperative learning.
This inaugural issue of the journal would not have been possible without financial
support from Tamagawa University, contributions of the authors, and the reviewers who
dedicated their time and professionalism. My special thanks go to Travis Cote and BrettMilliner who dedicated their time to the editorial work and Glenn Toh who contributed tothe inception of the journal from its planning stage, and all CELF faculty and staff members.
I would also like to dedicate this issue to Prof. Sado Takahashi who has devoted more than
three decades of service to English language education at Tamagawa University.

March 2015
Masaki Oda, Ph.D.
Director, CELF

The Center for ELF Journal, The Center for English as a Lingua Franca, Tamagawa University
No. 1

Contents

A Report of the Center for English as a Lingua Franca (CELF) for
Academic Year 2014-2015.................................................................9-Tricia Okada, Brett Milliner, Ethel Ogane, Andrew Leichsenring, Mitsuko
Imai, Travis Cote & Paul McBride

Developing Intercultural Communication in an ELF Program
through Digital Pen Pal Exchange...................................................25-Simeon Flowers

A Teacher’s Exploratory Inquiry of Language Awareness:
Language Learner Perceptions from Oral Presentations.............41-Andrew Leichsenring

A Guide to Setting Appropriate Reading Targets for Extensive
Reading..............................................................................................55-Daniel Worden

Devising an Effective Methodology for Measuring the Benefitof L2 Subtitled Extensive Watching on Learner Motivation,
Autonomy and Skill Development.................................................61-Kensaku Ishimaki & Thomas Saunders

Student Nameplates for Classroom Management and
Beyond...............................................................................................83-Blagoja Dimoski

Effective Teaching with Dictation....................................................97-Jonah GlickAppendix A: CELF Research Achievements - Presentations....100-103
Appendix B: CELF Research Achievements - Publications......104-107
7

8

A Report of the Center for English as a Lingua Franca (CELF)
for Academic Year 2014-2015
ELFセンター2014-2015レポート
Tricia Okada, 岡田トリシャ

Brett Milliner, ミリナー・ブレット
Ethel Ogane, 大金エセル

Andrew Leichsenring, レイクセンリング・アンドリュー
Mitsuko Imai, 今井光子

Travis Cote, コーテ・トラヴィス& Paul McBride, マクブライド・ポール
Tamagawa University, Center for English as a Lingua Franca, Japan

1. INTRODUCTION
English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) refers to the use of English as a contact language between
people who have different first languages, including native English speakers (Jenkins, 2014).
“ELF is simultaneously the consequence and the principal language medium of globalizing
processes” (Jenkins, Cogo, & Dewey, 2011, p. 303). In connection with Tamagawa University’s
goals to enhance education from global perspectives, the Center for English as a Lingua
Franca (CELF) at Tamagawa University piloted in 2012 and officially commenced in 2014.
The CELF has continually promoted initiatives in raising ELF awareness, improving teachingpractices, and researching language education. The objectives of this article are to (1) share
CELF’s understanding of ELF; (2) report on student classroom-related activities and teacher
professional development initiatives; (3) analyze student and teacher survey results; (4)present TOEIC results; and, (5) discuss future developments in the program.
1. INTRODUCTION
リンガフランカとしての英語とは、第一言語が異なる人（一方が英語話者の場合も含む）との間の接触言語である(Jenkins, 2014)。ELFとは、グローバル化過程における結果と原則的言語手段である(Jenkins, Cogo, & Dewey, 2011, p. 303)。玉川大学のグローバル化教育促進という目標に伴い、玉川大学ELFプログラムは2012年に試験的に開始され、2014年に正式にセンターが設立された。ELFセンターでは、ELFに対する認知度を上げることに力を入れると共に、
実践的教育を改善し、言語教育に対する研究も行っている。本稿では、（１）ELFセンターの考えるELF、（２）学生の教室内活動と教員のプロフェッショナル開発に関するレポート、(３)
学生と教員のアンケート結果分析、（４）TOEICの結果、（５）今後のプログラムの発展について述べる。

9

2. TAMAGAWA UNIVERSITY’S RESPONSE TO GLOBALIZATION
Zenjin education is Tamagawa University’s philosophy that aims to integrate the valuesof society and culture harmoniously into individual propensities. Tamagawa students areencouraged to learn not only through instruction but also autonomously, allowing them toacquire the skills and tools necessary in developing a broad awareness of the globalization
process. Globalization involves increasing opportunities for contact in global markets
and services and participation in international events and activities where English plays acentral role as the common language linking people with different first languages. It is, thus,
essential for people in the 21st century to acquire communication abilities in English in its
use as a common international language (Seargeant, 2009). In response to global trends
and in conjunction with preparations for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) has been incrementally promoting
educational reform with full-scale development of new English language education curriculain Japan (MEXT, 2014). The globalization of English has become a key aspect in the strategic
response to globalization of many universities (Jenkins, 2014). The establishment of the CELF
is a significant part of Tamagawa University’s response to the demands placed on institutionsof higher learning by globalization processes.
3. CENTER FOR ENGLISH AS A LINGUA FRANCA, FROM 2012 TO PRESENTIn 2012, the English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) program offered classes to 436 students in
the College of Business Administration and College of Humanities. In the following year,
students from the College of Tourism & Hospitality Management, the College of Liberal Arts,
and the High School Bridging Program joined, and the number of students increased to
1,117. With the establishment of the CELF in 2014, enrollment rose to 1,795 with students
from the College of Arts enrolling in the program. At the time of writing, students in theColleges of Education, Engineering and Agriculture are expected to enroll in 2015 bringing
student numbers to 2,472 (See Table 1).
Table 1
Cumulative enrollment of the CELF each year
College

Department

2012

2013

2014

2015

Business
Admin.

-International Mngmt.
-Tourism &Hospitality Management

171

321

375

347

108

100

97

-

-Comparative
Cultures-Human Science
Tourism & Hospitality
Management

157

320

408

295

-

-

87

104

-

108

197

225

-

180

338

208

Humanities
Tourism &Hospitality
Arts &
Sciences

10

Liberal Arts

Arts

Engineering

Education

Agriculture
High School-Performing Arts
-Media Design

-

-

139
96

159
118

-Intelligent Mechanical
Systems-Software Science-14(elective)
-

78

-

40
(elective)-- Management Science- Engineering Design

-

-

-

78
78

-Education

-

-

-

326

-Early Childhood Care &Development(2016 entry)

-

-

-

-

-Bioenvironmental
Systems-Biosource Engineering-Life Science
Bridging Program

-

-

-

111

-

-

-

111
111

-

48

44

45

TOTALS

436

1,117

1,795

2,472

78

The hiring practices of teachers for the ELF program are based on two criteria:teaching experience and academic achievements. There is no requirement for CELF teachers
to be native speakers of English. All faculty members speak English as their first or second
language and have a master or doctoral degree in TESOL, Applied Linguistics, Education,
or a related field in the Social Sciences, with the majority of teachers having teachingexperience at the tertiary level in Japan. The program’s teachers are of diverse backgrounds
and nationalities. The seven full-time faculty members and 19 part-time teachers in 2013
grew to nine full-time faculty and 25 part-time instructors in 2014, including teachers from
Australia, Canada, England, India, Japan, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, South Korea, The
Philippines, The United States and Ukraine. The CELF’s multi-lingual teachers are encouraged
to integrate language awareness in their lessons and expose their students to different kinds
of Englishes.
The CELF offers classes in four levels from elementary to intermediate each semester.
The TOEIC Bridge is used to assess the proficiency of all incoming first-year students at the
beginning of the semester in order to place them in the appropriate ELF level. CELF students
meet 200 minutes every week for 15 weeks for 50 hours of study in class each semester, andare required to study eight hours outside the classroom each week. There are also intensive
sessions during the summer and winter breaks for students who have matriculated since2013 who want to meet their graduation requirements or improve their Grade Point Average(GPA). Students take the TOEIC IP test at the end of each semester and session. The students
are evaluated based on the following five components: Reading Comprehension 20%,
Listening and Speaking Assessment 20%, Process Writing Assessment 20%, TOEIC IP Scores
20%, Class Work, Participation and Homework 20%. English is used as the main medium of11

communication in all classes, and the use of any other linguistic resource, such as Japanese,is compatible with ELF-aware teaching.
4. CELF’s UNDERSTANDING OF ENGLISH AS A LINGUA FRANCA
4.1 Understanding English as a Lingua Franca
English is now the most widely used means of international and intercultural communication.
Although most uses of English occur away from L1 settings (Cogo & Dewey, 2006), it isL1 versions of English which are regarded as prestigious (Seidlhofer, 2011). Such native
varieties, however, developed to meet the communicative needs of particular societies, have“restricted relevance” for the majority of English users, whose needs and reasons for using
English are different from those of native speakers (Seidlhofer, 2011, p. 148). Native speakers
are likely to be in the minority in “de-territorialised speech events” across the world and theirEnglish “will therefore be less and less likely to constitute the only linguistic reference norm”(Seidlhofer, 2014).
Despite significant changes in the use and users of the language, there is an “uncriticaltendency … to persist in traditional ways of thinking about English” (Jenkins 2014, p. 18). It
is thought that the only ‘acceptable’ English communication is linguistically ‘correct’ English(Seidlhofer, 2011). The assumption that non-native varieties are deficient is challenged
by Widdowson (2012b), who argues that the competence of non-native ELF users cannot
correspond with the competence of native speakers. Native speakers, he points out,
experience English through primary socialization, “whereby language, culture and social
identity are naturally and inseparably connected” (2012b, p. 18). Non-native speakers,
he goes on to say, experience English through secondary socialization, separated fromthese inherent connections. He elsewhere notes that most learners of English will “nevereven approximate” native norms (Widdowson, 2014). Although native English models
are valuable, particularly for learners who will communicate with native speakers, native
proficiency is neither a realistic goal nor an achievable one for millions of learners (Björkman,
2013).
English which does not conform to native norms is used for effective communicationin lingua franca situations across the world. English need not necessarily be connected toparticular countries or ethnicities (Vikor, 2004, p. 329 as cited in Seidlhofer, 2011). It canbe used for functionally appropriate, strategic and effective communication in any local
community (Seidlhofer, 2011). English can be thought of as belonging to everyone who uses
it. Language ownership is equated by Brumﬁt (2001, p. 116) with “the power to adapt andchange” a language.
Rather than being defined according to its form as compared with native norms, ELF isdefined by its function in intercultural communication (Hülmbauer, Böhringer, & Seidlhofer,2008). ELF communication has been characterized as diverse, flexible and creative by Kaur(2014), who notes the supportive and cooperative nature of ELF interactions, as well as theuse of strategies for effective communication, such as paraphrasing, checking or requesting
clarification, confirming, signaling (non-) understanding, and repetition.
In 2011, Jenkins et al. observed that, with the exception of Walker’s (2010) ELForiented pronunciation handbook for teachers, and the final chapter of Understanding

12English as a Lingua Franca (Seidlhofer, 2011), there had been little discussion of thepossibilities of ELF-informed pedagogy, and little consideration of measures for teachers toconsider. Investigations into pedagogical implications were encouraged through the special
focus on pedagogical perspectives at the Seventh International Conference of English as a
Lingua Franca in September 2014.
4.2 Classroom Application of ELF Principles
Rather than prescribing teaching practices, ELF researchers are responsible for making
research findings accessible to teachers who are then enabled to “reconsider their beliefs
and practices and make informed decisions about the significance of ELF for their own
individual teaching contexts” (Jenkins et al., 2011, p. 306). Bjorkman (2013) recognizes
the significance of accuracy in language, but emphasizes that communication is more
important. She suggests that teachers raise awareness of English usage in the world as wellas providing pertinent models and attainable goals. Bjorkman suggests a range of measures
for teachers to consider. She firstly advises prioritizing comprehensibility in language
teaching by exposing learners to a wide range of English, by reducing the ‘nativespeakerist’element in some teaching materials, and by having models which can be applied to avariety of communicative goals. Bjorkman next suggests modifying course materials, by
including listening comprehension materials with a variety of accents, by including cases ofdisturbance which provide examples of negotiation of meaning and use of communicative
strategies, and by including authentic recordings from which students can test listening
comprehension. She also advocates including pragmatic strategies in listening and speaking
materials. Bjorkman’s final recommendation is to change speaking testing so it is clear that
non-native accents are not a barrier to achievement of the highest grades. She suggests that
not only monologic speech should be tested but also dialogic speech, so that a learner’sability to negotiate meaning and to communicate are effectively evaluated.
If being proficient in English means being able to communicate effectively withpeople from various speech communities throughout the world, there is a sense in which“the argument becomes irrelevant whether local standards or inner-circle standards matter”(Canagarajah, 2006, p. 233). Canagarajah believes we need the ability to negotiate English
varieties in outer and expanding communities as well as varieties in inner circle countries.
Jenkins agrees, noting that Inner Circle speakers do not set the linguistic agenda in ELF
communication, and arguing that “no matter which circle of use we come from…we all needto make adjustments to our local English variety for the benefit of our interlocutors when we
take part in lingua franca English communication” (2009, p. 201).
5. CELF STUDENTS’ CLASSROOM-RELATED ACTIVITIES
Beyond the learning engagement found in regular classroom activities, CELF students may
encounter various cultural and language oriented learning experiences. The CELF Tutor
Service provides students with frequently available on-campus contact with tutors who areof various language and cultural backgrounds. During each week of the semester students
may sign up to meet with a tutor, or a teacher can refer a student to visit a tutor for learning
support. In 2014, there were 75 tutor sessions in spring semester and 114 tutor sessions

13

in autumn semester offered weekly, four days a week. Tutor sessions are fifteen minutes induration, and students may attend up to four sessions per week. Online attendance logs
kept by each tutor indicate that a total of 700 tutor consultations took place during the fallsemester of 2014. Attendance log data revealed that students most frequently requested
tutor assistance for Writing (214 sessions), Listening and Speaking (180 sessions), Other (149sessions), and TOEIC related (49 sessions). Trends in student selections for tutor assistanceare being closely followed in order to better serve the needs of the users of this service.
Additionally, throughout the academic year students in some classes enjoy classroom visitsfrom groups of international university students visiting Japan on study tours. In the past year
students from Evergreen College (USA) and Guam University visited CELF classes. It is an
important objective of the CELF to provide quality learning engagement opportunities both
inside and outside of the ELF classroom.
6. CELF TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Previous CELF research has shown that it is the teachers, their personal beliefs and principles,
who largely determine the success of a language program (Cote, Milliner, McBride, Imai, &Ogane, 2014). Consequently, the CELF endeavors to ensure that its teachers have a rangeof avenues for professional development and teaching support open to them throughout
the academic year. Professional development is offered to the CELF teaching staff in theform of opportunities to participate in teacher orientations and ELF related workshops. The
university’s BlackBoard Course Management System is an online learning environment thatprovides an important avenue for teachers to develop professionally. Using the BlackBoard
system, the CELF has created a space for ELF and Extensive Reading guidelines, a teacher’s
blog for discussions about teaching and learning, as well as a “drop box” for the sharing ofteaching ideas which all contribute to a platform for the support of teacher development andpractices (see Figure 1 below).
Figure 1
Language awareness page inside the CELF teacher resources page14

Additional access to professional development is provided in the form of a teacher’s researchforum, where teachers are invited to share their research and teaching ideas, and all teachers
are invited to contribute articles for publication in The Center for English as a Lingua Franca
Journal and collaborative journal issues with The Journal of Saitama City Educators. An
important goal of our ongoing professional discourse and support through these various
professional development initiatives is to achieve a greater awareness among CELF
teachers of ELF-related teaching concepts and their application in ELF-oriented classroom
environments.
7. STUDENT SURVEY RESULTS
At the end of both spring and fall semesters the CELF conducts an online student
questionnaire via SurveyMonkey < www.surverymonkey.com>. The questionnaire is bilingual,that is English and Japanese, and it is expected to gauge student perceptions of the ELF
curriculum and their learning experiences. This year’s set of questions compared to lastyear’s, focused more on ELF awareness and perceptions. Students are able to respond to the
open-ended questionnaire items in English or Japanese and the Japanese responses weretranslated into English for this report. The response rates for spring and fall semesters were
76% and 86% respectively.
7.1 Student Perceptions of the ELF Program
As summarised in Table 2, students appear to have a positive perception of the ELF program.
A total of 88% in the spring and 84% of students in the fall either strongly agreed or agreed
that what they learned in the class was worthwhile, and 76% and 72% respectively either
agreed or strongly agreed that they were satisfied with the ELF program. Students’ responses
to items relating to their experiences inside the ELF classroom were also positive. Close to80% of students in both semesters either strongly agreed or agreed that the classes wereinteresting and that they enjoyed the atmosphere of their ELF classes.
These positive student perceptions were also reinforced when students commented
on the ELF program. A student noted, “The practical focus on English was very helpful for me.
I didn’t like studying English before, but now I do. As a result, I hope that this ELF program
isn’t changed.” Another student stated, “The program helped me develop my knowledge
about the practical application of English.”
Table 2Student perceptions of the ELF classes and curriculum
Question

Strongly
Agree

Agree

NeutralDisagreeStrongly
Disagree

What I learned in the ELF program
was worthwhile. (spring)

539
42%

591
46%

112
9%

27
2%

10
1%

What I learned in the ELF program
was worthwhile. (fall)

457
38%

551
46%

123
10%

46
4%

11
1%

15

I am satisfied with the ELF
program. (spring)

385
30%

588
46%

219
17%

73
6%

14
1%

I am satisfied with the ELF
program. (fall)

341
29%

507
43%

228
19%

85
7%

27
2%

The ELF class was interesting.
(spring)

530
41%

514
40%

164
13%

49
4%

22
2%

The ELF class was interesting. (fall)

457
39%

450
38%

182
15%

71
6%

28
2%

570
44%

455
36%

195
15%

47
4%

12
1%

497
42%

441
37%

183
16%

51
4%

16
1%

I enjoyed the atmosphere of thisclass. (spring)
I enjoyed the atmosphere of thisclass. (fall)

7.2 Student Responses to ELF Related Questionnaire Items
To continue previous research on student perceptions of ELF, and in an effort to informteachers about how students respond to ELF-related information, six Likert items were added
to the surveys. The results are summarized in Table 3. Student responses to these items did
not appear to have changed between spring and fall semesters. A large majority (88% in
spring and 85% in fall) either agreed or strongly agreed with the practical focus of the classes
and 84% of students in both semesters were in agreement that English does not belong
only to native speakers and that it can be their language too. The ELF-related question that
attracted the lowest level of student agreement was, “The ELF classes helped me to initiate
conversations and continue them in English.” About half (42% in the spring and 58% in thefall) agreed with this statement. This feedback suggests that teachers may need to invest
more time in speaking and/or fluency activities and consider promoting use of the tutor
service as a chance for students to practice their conversation skills outside of class.
Table 3
Summary of student responses to the ELF-specific questionnaire items
Statement

NeutralDisagreeStrongly
DisagreeI agree with the practical focus on
English in ELF classes. (spring)

506
40%

619
48%

135
11%

15
1%

4
<1%

I agree with the practical focus on
English in ELF classes. (fall)

447
38%

565
47%

141
12%

34
3%

4
<1%

-

535
42%

522
41%

177
14%

5
3%

191
16%

496
42%

339
28%

126
11%

39
3%

The ELF classes helped me
to initiate conversations andcontinue them in English. (spring)
The ELF classes helped me
to initiate conversations andcontinue them in English. (fall)

16

Strongly
Agree
Agree

I don’t think English belongs tonative speakers. It can be mylanguage too. (spring)

459
36%

615
48%

178
14%

22
2%

5
<1%

I don’t think English belongs tonative speakers. It can be mylanguage too. (fall)

422
36%

581
49%

154
13%

26
2%

8
<1%

I think I will use English with
non-native speakers in the future.
(spring)

476
37%

553
43%

204
16%

35
3%

11
1%

I think I will use English with
non-native speakers in the future.
(fall)

469
39%

484
41%

185
16%

44
4%

9
<1%

English is not only a language
which native speakers use, but alanguage that I may construct/modify for my communicative
purposes. (spring)

351
27%

668
52%

225
18%

32
2%

3
<1%

English is not only a language
which native speakers use, but alanguage that I may construct/modify for my communicative
purposes. (fall)

328
28%

631
53%

195
16%

32
3%

5
<1%

When learning English, I wantto aim towards a native speakermodel of English. (spring)

483
38%

510
40%

228
18%

44
3%

14
1%

When using English, as longas my English is internationallyintelligible, I don’t have to be likea native speaker. (fall)

191
16%

496
42%

339
28%

126
11%

39
3%

Note: *Due to a formatting error in the electronic survey, students were unable to choose the strongly agree option when responding to the statement, “The ELF classes helped me to initiate conversations and continue themin English” in the spring semester survey.
** Percentages have been rounded to remove decimal places.

Students generally appear to have embraced ELF, yet most students still appear towant to target native models. Respondents either strongly agreed (38%) or agreed (40%)
with the statement “When learning English, I want to aim towards a native speaker model ofEnglish.” This statement was rephrased for the fall questionnaire, as “When using English, aslong as my English is internationally intelligible, I don’t have to be like a native speaker.” Thistime, a total of 58% students were in agreement. This result may suggest a change in values
for some students after they experienced ELF classes, however, the 164 (14%) respondents
in disagreement and a further 339 (28%) choosing neutral illustrates that some students

17may still hold native speaker benchmarks. It has been observed by Suzuki (2011) that theseperceptions may have been influenced by previous educational experiences, or popular
ideologies in Japan (Harris, 2012). There is a long-held assumption that native speakercompetence should be a primary teaching and learning objective in English language
education (McKay, 2002; Seidlhofer, 2011; Tanaka & Ogane, 2011; Widdowson, 2012a).
Consequently, ELF users are characterized as incompetent when their performance does
not conform to standard native speaker norms (Widdowson, 2012b). The CELF is planningto consider this issue more deeply as it reviews learning support materials and considers areconfiguration of speaking assessments used in the ELF program.
One aspect of a program such as ours is that students do not often have contact
with speakers of other first languages. There were a total of 52 student comments relating
to this theme in the spring survey and 26 in the fall. Some examples of student comments
included: (1) “I would like more opportunities to speak in English”; and (2) “I would likemore opportunities to study abroad and to interact with native speakers.” During springsemester some classes were visited by students from the University of Guam. One Japanese
student noted, “When the Guam students came to class, it was the best learning experience
for me. I would like to have experiences like this at least once a week.” Unfortunately, there
are no exchange students studying at Tamagawa University, and as a result, there are few
opportunities on campus for students to communicate with other English speakers outsideclass time. A student noted, “There are many teachers from other country in Tamagawa
University, so I want to talk with many teachers from many countries.” This comment suggeststhat the CELF needs to consider how it can leverage its most valuable ELF asset, its teachers,
to increase student engagement using ELF. The ELF tutor service represents one constructwhere students can engage using ELF. As stated earlier more students are using the service
and some students recognized the benefits of this service when they made comments about
the ELF program. For example, (1) “It was great being able to listen to a variety of teachers.”;
and, (2) “It’s nice how we can talk with a variety of teachers in the tutor service. I also learned
that it was easier to communicate with some teachers compared to others.” The CELF willcontinue to compare these results with results from future student questionnaires to achievea deeper understanding about student perceptions of the ELF program and ELF-related
issues, and to make decisions on how the program can be refined.
8. CELF TEACHER SURVEY RESULTS
Results from the teacher questionnaire conducted in the spring and fall semesters of 2014
were collated via SurveyMonkey < www.surverymonkey.com> and analyzed in order tounderstand teacher perceptions of the ELF program and ELF usage. The response rate was
53% (19 out of a total of 34 teachers) in the spring and 88 % (30 out of 34) in the fall. The
results are presented in Table 4.

18

Table 4
Teacher perceptions of the ELF classes and curriculum
Question

Strongly
Agree

Agree

NeutralDisagreeStrongly
Disagree

It is all right if my students don’t
become like native English speakers
as long as they can communicate
effectively. (spring)

16
85%

3
15%

-

-

-

I think my students should have thefreedom not to follow native speakermodels. (spring)

10
53%

4
22%

3
15%

2
10%

-

Students’ effective communication ismore important than strict conformity
to native speaker norms. (fall)

18
86%

2
9%

1
5%

-

-

I would like to spend less time inclass on the finer points of normativemodels of English and more on
attainable forms of English. (spring)

8
43%

7
37%

3
15%

1
5%

-

I would like to spend less time inclass on the finer points of normativemodels of English and more on
attainable forms of English. (fall)

7
33%

8
38%

6
29%

-

-

I believe the use of the students’native language in the classroom canbe a pragmatic resource. (spring)

7
37%

9
48%

2
10%

1
5%

-

I believe the use of the students’native language in the classroom canbe a pragmatic resource. (fall)

7
33%

10
47%

2
10%

2
10%

-

I think ELF is suitable in a Japanesecontext. (spring)

11
58%

5
27%

2
10%

1
5%

-

I think ELF is suitable in a Japanesecontext. (fall)

9
42%

7
33%

5
24%

-

-

The ELF classes have helped mystudents initiate conversations andcontinue them in English. (spring)

7
37%

8
43%

3
15%

1
5%

-

The ELF classes have helped mystudents initiate conversations andcontinue them in English. (fall)

4
19%

14
67%

2
9%

-

1
5%

Note: *Percentages have been rounded to remove decimal places.

19This questionnaire explored teacher perceptions of the ELF classes and curriculum,
providing evidence of a strong degree of teacher support for the curriculum and for theapplication of ELF principles in classroom learning. In relation to the belief that it is alrightif their students do not become like native speakers as long as they can communicate
effectively, there was agreement or strong agreement from 100% of the teachers. In thespring questionnaire, a majority, 75% of the teachers, were in agreement that their students
should have the freedom not to follow native speaker models. In the fall questionnaire thisitem was modified to, “Students’ effective communication is more important than strict
conformity to native speaker norms.” Teacher responses to this item attracted the highest
rate of agreement (85%). These results might suggest that teachers are considering someof the information relating to ELF principles that is being shared between CELF faculty.
Some teachers, however, may not be entirely convinced that ELF is suitable for the tertiary
Japanese context. A total of 85% of the CELF teachers agreed or strongly agreed that “ELF
is suitable in the Japanese context” in spring, and 75% agreed or strongly agreed in thefall. The fact that a quarter of respondents in the fall chose neither to agree nor disagreewith the suitability of ELF may suggest that some teachers are actively considering theappropriateness of ELF principles.
Teacher responses to the statement, “The ELF classes have helped my students initiate
conversations and continue them in English” somewhat contradicted student perceptions.
A total of 85% of teachers in the fall agreed or strongly agreed with this statement. Whereas
339 students (28%) were neutral and 165 (14%) disagreed with the statement “The ELF
classes helped me to initiate conversations and continue them in English.” This misalignment
suggests that more work needs to be done to investigate student and teacher benchmarks
for a successful conversation and whether one is able to continue conversations over aduration of time.
Evidence of teacher awareness concerning ELF-related teaching practices can befound in comments offered by the spring questionnaire respondents. In regard to the issueof learner errors one teacher commented, “Japanese students are very conscious of mistakes,
particularly in grammar.” Another teacher commented on learner ‘errors’ in connection withclass time, stating, “I realize I have used class time unproductively in the past by correcting
writing errors which students would not be expected to remember or to master in the time
available.” Additionally, in relation to the evaluation of listening and speaking assessment,
the following perspective was offered by a teacher: “I reflected from an ELF perspective on
the way I scored the listening and speaking test, and I realized how insignificant it was tofocus too much on grammatical errors.” This teacher’s perception of classroom teaching andlearning practices highlights the importance of facilitating alignment of ELF principles withcomponents of the curriculum. Results from this questionnaire indicate that the majority ofthe program’s teachers are in agreement with practicing ELF-informed teaching and that theteachers from various backgrounds find the ELF program satisfactory and meaningful.
9. OVERVIEW OF TOEIC RESULTS
The Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC) is the most widely accepted
English test in Japan and in a majority of cases, a TOEIC score is required on job applications

20

(Chujo & Oghigian, 2009) and for giving promotions (Tsuji & Tsuji, 2006). The TOEIC
Listening and Reading Test is administered twice a year during the ELF Program; once in thespring term and once in the fall term, and these results make up one component of the final
ELF course assessment. For the first time this year, the TOEIC Speaking and Writing Test wasoffered to those students interested in determining their English skills as measured by thisspeaking and writing proficiency test. The table below shows the average 2014 spring andfall listening and reading test results for all participating colleges and departments.
Table 5
Average 2014 Listening & Reading TOEIC IP test scores for each of the participating collegesand departmentsCollege
Humanities
Arts & Sciences
Business
Administration

Arts
Tourism & Hospitality
Management

Department

Spring TOEIC IP

Fall TOEIC IP

Comparative Cultures

391.4

407.9

Human Sciences

300

375

Liberal Arts

346.6

344.1

International
Management

342.6

345.8

Tourism & Hospitality
Management

387.7

403.3

Performing Arts

315.5

327.5

Media Design

312.3

321

Tourism & Hospitality
Management

439.7

456.8

10. CONCLUSION & CELF MOVING FORWARD
The globally widespread use of English for communication involving non-native English
speakers has provoked a questioning of traditional approaches to the teaching and learningof the language. ELF suggests a reorganizing of pedagogical priorities, and a focus on howlearners can most effectively use the language they already know as well as practicing thecommunication processes that are most useful for them. The CELF is Tamagawa University’s
response to such globalization processes as the ELF phenomenon. Our research anddiscussions on ELF will continue as we endeavor to develop teaching and learning practices
in which are most beneficial for our students, bearing in mind the importance of Tamagawa
University’s Zenjin educational philosophy.
Teacher knowledge is crucial to effective classroom practice. Professional
development activities at CELF not only encourage our teachers to exchange ideas on
research and teaching practices, but also provide opportunities to help raise ELF awarenessand understanding among the faculty. Professional development opportunities include
presenting at the CELF Forum and contributing to the CELF Journal. Teachers may also

21

participate in CELF workshops and use the BlackBoard for sharing teaching resources. CELF
initiatives in professional development will continue and be strengthened.
Our survey results show that many CELF students appear to be targeting native
speaker proficiency. The majority of CELF teachers, on the other hand, appear to believethat the students need not become like native speakers as long as they can communicate
effectively. A majority of teachers also appear to believe that students should have thefreedom not to follow native speaker models. Survey feedback also indicates that whilesome CELF students want more listening and speaking opportunities, most teachers believe
they are helping them in initiating and continuing conversations. It is hoped that the diverse
linguistic and cultural backgrounds of our teachers may help students become more awareof the different usages of English as they learn together not only in class but also during tutor
sessions. We hope to help prepare them to become adept speakers in ELF contexts which
are manifestations of the globalization process.
As the CELF moves to become a campus-wide enterprise in 2015, we continue ourwork to develop guidelines for an ELF-oriented pedagogy. Immediate plans are to evaluate
the teaching materials and speaking assessments used in our program. Our goal for CELF is
to raise an awareness of language in our students, an awareness of language in use which
involves the negotiation and accommodation of linguistic form and meaning.
REFERENCES
Björkman, B. (2013). English as an academic lingua franca: An investigation of form andcommunicative effectiveness. Walter de Gruyter.
Brumﬁt, C. (2001). Individual freedom in language teaching: Helping learners to develop a
dialect of their own. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Canagarajah, S. (2006). Changing communicative needs, revised assessment objectives:
Testing English as an international language. Language Assessment Quarterly: An
International Journal, 3(3), 229-242.
Cogo, A., & Dewey, M. (2006). Efficiency in ELF communication: From pragmatic motives tolexico-grammatical innovation. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 5(2), 59-93.
Chujo, K., & Oghigian, K. (2009). How many words do you need to know to understand
TOEIC, TOEFL & EIKEN? An examination of text coverage and high frequency
vocabulary. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 6(2), 121-148.
Cote, T., Milliner, B., McBride, P., Imai, M., & Ogane, E. (2014). Orientation for ELF teachers:
Lessons learned. In N. Sonda & A. Krause (Eds.), JALT 2013 Conference Proceedings.
Tokyo: JALT.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language (2nd Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Harris, J. (2012). World Englishes and English as a lingua franca: Application in the English
classroom in Japan. Kyoto Sangyo University Higher Education Forum, 2(1), 25-34.
Hülmbauer, C., Böhringer, H., & Seidlhofer, B. (2008). Introducing English as a lingua franca

22

(ELF): Precursor and partner in intercultural communication. Synergies Europe, 3, 2536.
Jenkins, J. (2009). English as a lingua franca: Interpretations and attitudes. World Englishes,
28(2), 200-207.
Jenkins, J. (2014). English as a lingua franca in the international university: The politics ofacademic English language policy. Oxford: Routledge.
Jenkins, J., Cogo, A., & Dewey, M. (2011). Review of developments in research into English asa lingua franca. Language Teaching, 44(03), 281-315.
Kachru, B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English languagein the outer circle. In R. Quirk and H.G. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the World:
Teaching and learning the language and literatures (pp.11-30).
Kaur, J. (2014). Teaching the effective use of ELF: Insights from research into ELF pragmatics,
in K. Murata (Ed.), WASEDA Working Papers in ELF (Vol. 3, pp. 58-68). Tokyo: Waseda
University.
McKay, S. L. (2002). Teaching English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
MEXT (2014). English education reform plan corresponding to globalization. Retrieved fromhttp://www.mext.go.jp/english/topics/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2014/01/23/1343591_1.
pdf
Seargeant, P. (2009). The Idea of English in Japan: Ideology and the evolution of a global
language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Seidlhofer, B. (2014). English used as a lingua franca in the world. [Lecture]. Shaping Learning
Together: A Day with Oxford 2014. Aoyama Gakuin University, November 16.
Suzuki, A. (2011). Introducing diversity into ELT: Student teachers’ responses. ELT Journal,
65(2), 145-153.
Tanaka, H., & Ogane, E. (2011). Promoting Translocal and Transnational Agency: A
Multifaceted Learning Community in Japan. In K. A. Davis (Ed.), Critical Qualitative
Research in Second Language Studies: Agency and Advocacy (pp. 367-396). Charlotte,
NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Tsuji, K., & Tsuji, S. (2006). ESP in business contexts. Annual Report of JACET SIG on ESP, 8,
3-11.
Widdowson, H.G., (2012a). Creative capability: Rethinking the subject English. In K. Murata(Ed.), Waseda Working Papers in ELF (Vol. 1, pp.18-23). Tokyo: Waseda University.
Widdowson, H. (2012b). ELF and the inconvenience of established concepts. Journal of
English as a Lingua Franca, 1(1), 5-26.
Widdowson, H. (2014). English learned as a subject in the classroom [Lecture]. Shaping

23

Learning Together: A Day with Oxford 2014. Aoyama Gakuin University, November 16.

24

Developing Intercultural Communication in an ELF Program
through Digital Pen Pal Exchange
ELFプログラムにおけるデジタルペンパル交流による異文化コミュニケーシ
ョンの発達
S.D. Flowers, シメオン・デイビッド・フラワーズ
Tamagawa University, Center for English as a Lingua Franca, Japan
simeon.d.flowers@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
Development of English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) is parallel to development of interculturalcommunicative competence. However, ethnocentrism is seen as a major obstacle indeveloping intercultural communication. Increasing intercultural experience is prescribed asa method for overcoming ethnocentrism. This paper reports on a study involving 49 Japanese
ELF students who were enlisted to participate in a six-week digital pen pal exchange. Using apretest-posttest experimental design, the effects of the exchange were quantified. Results ofthis study revealed both decreases in ethnocentricity and increases in intercultural confidence
as a result of this six-week exchange. This study contributes to research into effective ELF
practices and the use of technology to support intercultural development.
KEYWORDS: intercultural communication, intercultural sensitivity, ELF, CALL

要旨
リンガフランカとしての英語(ELF)の発達は、異文化間コミュニケーション能力の発達と平行している。しかし、単一文化の国では異文化コミュニケーション力を発達させることは容易ではない。異文化経験を増やすことがその問題を解決する一つの方法として挙げられている。本稿
では、 ELFプログラムを受講している日本人学生のうち、6週間のデジタルペンフレンド交流に参加した49人のコミュニケーション力の研究について報告する。事前事後テストを使用して、交流の効果を観察した。この研究の結果としては、学生の単一文化的な考えが薄れ、異文化間
コミュニケーションに対する自信が増加した。本研究は、異文化間コミュニケーション力の発達を促すことができるテクノロジーの利用を提唱することで、ELFの今後の実践研究に貢献するものである。
1. INTRODUCTION
Development of English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) is seen by many as the next stage ofinternationalization for Japan. Tamagawa University is at the forefront of this movement,
recently opening the Center for English as a Lingua Franca (CELF) in 2014. Along with the25

fundamental change in the way we see the world through the ELF lens, comes the need fora fundamental change to the teaching practices used in support of ELF. Yet, there is still very
little literature in regards to what actually constitutes effective ELF teaching practices. This
study seeks to contribute to an understanding of ELF by investigating the effect of a digitalpen pal exchange and its potential benefit in supporting the ELF paradigm.
2. LITERATURE REVIEWELF deals with the concept of global Englishes which distinguishes between “inner circle,”“outer circle,” and “expanding circle” English users (Kachru, 1992); however, ELF attempts tolevel the playing field in sociolinguistic terms. One of the challenges of any new movement
within language learning pedagogy is in centralizing terms. The definition of ELF is nodifferent. Rather than attempting my own definition, I will use that of one of its seminal
proponents, Jennifer Jenkins (2009):
The vast majority of ELF researchers take a broad rather than narrow view, and include
all English users within their definition of ELF. The crucial point, however, is that when
Inner Circle speakers participate in ELF communication, they do not set the linguistic
agenda. Instead, no matter which circle of use we come from, from an ELF perspective
we all need to make adjustments to our local English variety for the benefit of ourinterlocutors when we take part in lingua franca English communication. ELF is thus aquestion, not of orientation to the norms of a particular group of English speakers, but
of mutual negotiation involving efforts and adjustments from all parties. (p. 201)
So, in ELF all agents must cooperate in order to communicate. It is not surprising,then, that ELF is seen as “precursor and partner” to intercultural communication (Hülmbauer,
Böhringer, & Seidlhofer, 2008), though this in some ways still leaves the notion that ELF
could somehow precede intercultural communication. I might reverse this and argue thatintercultural communication is precursor and partner to ELF. Michael Byram highlights thiswhen he says “lingua franca use requires engagement with both familiar and unfamiliar
experience through the medium of another language” (1997, p. 3). Therefore, use of aforeign language presupposes a desire to communicate interculturally. Therefore, at least
affectively speaking, the seed of intercultural communication begins before the language forcommunication is even considered.
In studies of intercultural communication we find ethnocentrism to be a major
and recurring theme. Indeed, ethnocentrism is seen as a major obstacle in developing
intercultural communicative competence (Bennett, 1998). In a study conducted among
university students in the United States it was concluded that ethnocentrism had a negative
effect on intercultural willingness-to-communicate (Lin & Rancer, 2003). Within ethnicallymore homogeneous environments, ethnocentrism may be an even greater obstacle. For
instance, in a study comparing Japanese university students with American university

26

students it was discovered that Japanese students had significantly higher levels of
ethnocentrism (Neuliep, Chaudoir & McCroskey, 2001).
If ELF as a practice is affected by ethnocentrism, then we might expect to find theliterature of ELF to reflect this connection. In fact, ELF literature is filled with language
which highlights the ethnocentric or ethnorelativistic nature of the ELF discussion. Claims
such as ELF helps students to “take control over” the development of English (Houghton,
2009, p. 78) suggests a war is taking place over the future of the English language. Others
seem to react to these notions by reminding us that native speakers are still relevant to
the ELF discussion (Carey, 2010). More recently the term “native speaker” itself has been
rebuked for its unspoken prejudicial deference (Houghton & Rivers, 2013). What seems
clear from this ongoing debate is that issues of ethnocentrism and discussion of ELF are
intimately intertwined; and since ethnocentrism is a hindrance to developing interculturalcommunication, then overcoming ethnocentrism should be of pinnacle importance in an ELF
program - perhaps even more so than language proficiency itself.
Dong, Day, and Collaço (2008) conducted a study among 419 university students
in the United States on the issue of ethnocentrism and discovered a converse relationshipbetween low levels of ethnocentrism and high levels of intercultural sensitivity. The authors
concluded that teachers should focus on increasing intercultural sensitivity in order toovercome ethnocentrism. A connection between intercultural sensitivity and ethnocentrism
was also identified in a separate study by Chen (2010).
Hammer, Bennett and Wiseman (2003) state that “as one’s experience of culturaldifference becomes more complex and sophisticated, one’s potential competence inintercultural relations increases” (p. 423). This suggests that authentic encounters withdifferent cultures can contribute to an increase in intercultural sensitivity. Pen pal programs
provide one such avenue for authentic intercultural contact. In addition, pen pal programs
promote learning and literacy. Studies have shown that exchanges between children
and adults, for instance, allowed the children to develop their own letter writing throughmodeling (Yellin, 1987). Studies of intercultural pen pal exchanges from members of
inner circle and outer circle groups have shown that participants can model each otherand develop a shared library of vocabulary for the purpose of communication (Barksdale,
Watson, & Park, 2007). Pen pal exchanges have also been used successfully between
inner circle and expanding circle groups to develop both intercultural understanding andlanguage development (Xing, 2014; Yang & Chen, 2014).
3. PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY
It was the purpose of this study to test the effectiveness of a digital pen pal program indeveloping intercultural communication. In doing so this study seeks to answer the following
questions:
1. Can a digital pen pal exchange be an effective way of decreasing ethnocentrism?
2. In what ways will development of intercultural sensitivity affect potential
competencies with ELF usage?

27

4. METHOD
4.1 Subjects
The subjects of this study were 49 Japanese university students at Tamagawa University’s
Center for English as a Lingua Franca (CELF). The students ranged from 19-20 years of age.
The CELF currently uses TOEIC IP scores as part of student assessment. The students in thisstudy had an average TOEIC IP reading score of 111. This is comparable with CEFR level
A2 which identifies them as basic users (ETS, 2013, p. 22). The total average TOEIC IP testscores for this group of students was 314. Educational Testing Services (ETS, 2013) describes
subjects with this score as follows:[Between 220-470] Can understand simple conversations when the other party speaks
slowly and repeats or paraphrases what is said. Is capable of reporting on familiar
topics. Knowledge of vocabulary, grammar, and structure is generally inadequate.
However, if the other party is used to dealing with non-native speakers, the individual
can manage to get the point across. (p. 23)
4.2 Instrument
Intercultural sensitivity in this study is measured using the Intercultural Sensitivity Scale(ISS) developed by Chen and Starosta (2000). The ISS is a 24-item questionnaire whichmeasures the following affective concerns: (1) Interaction Engagement; (2) Respect for
Cultural Differences; (3) Interaction Confidence; (4) Interaction Enjoyment; and (5) Interaction
Attentiveness (See Appendix A). The ISS was shown to be “highly internally consistent” withan 86% reliability coefficient within its context of U.S. college students (Chen & Starosta,
2000, p. 11) and relatively consistent with similar and more widely used instruments (p.
12). The ISS has been used in other studies as well in the United States (Dong et al., 2008),
Germany (Fritz, Mollenberg & Chen, 2001), and China (Peng, 2006). In preparing the ISS for
this study, the questionnaire items were translated into Japanese by the author and a native
Japanese speaker with extensive English experience (See Appendix B). The Japanese items
were then put into digital questionnaire form for distribution. The questionnaire was given a
5-point Likert scale measurement for each item with Japanese responses equivalent to: (1)Strongly Disagree; (2) Disagree; (3) Neutral; (4) Agree, and (5) Strongly Agree.
4.3 Procedure
In order to test the effectiveness of the pen pal exchange on intercultural development,
students were given the ISS both before and after the six-week exchange. Of the 49 students
who participated in the exchange, 46 students completed the pretest, and 42 completed
the posttest. The online version of the questionnaire was administered during class andstudents answered the questionnaire using their smartphones. Student identification was notcollected with their responses.

28

4.4 Materials
For the pen pal exchange, I used an online program called PenPalSchools <https://
penpalschools.com>, an online Learning Management System (LMS) style tool for teachers tomanage pen pal exchanges over the internet. The LMS format allows both instructors of theparticipating groups to monitor the exchanges online through a simple interface.
The exchange was centered on weekly editorial articles which both students were challenged
to read and respond to. The editorials covered different topics each week such as: theenvironment; poverty; technology; war and conflict; government; and, culture. The articles
were associated with question prompts which both exchange partners were encouraged torespond to. The intention was that discussion would be generated between the exchange
partners on each of the weekly topics.
PenPalSchools offers both three-week and six-week exchanges. They also offer
exchanges at the beginner, intermediate, and advanced level. The subjects of this study
were enrolled in the beginner level due to their low reading comprehension level. This isin keeping with the practice of providing reading material which does not overwhelm thereader with new vocabulary in hopes of maintaining focus on the overall meaning of thepassage (Harmer, 2001, p. 213-215). Due to unknown reasons, the students were not placed
into the beginner level program which was initially selected, but instead placed into anadvanced course. Students complained that they could not understand the passages, and so
the key points of each week’s readings were reviewed collectively during class.
The subjects of this study were paired with a group of American high school students.
There were more Japanese university students in this pairing than American high school
students; so some of the exchanges were between three member groups consisting of two
Japanese students and one American student. In many cases the American student wasunresponsive and did not participate in the exchange which may have affected the results ofthe study.
All of the Japanese students in this study were encouraged to continue reading theeditorials and responding to the question prompts until the end of the six-week exchange
despite any cases of unresponsiveness from their American counterparts. In terms ofteacher involvement with the process of student writing, a case-by-case tutor role was taken.
The instructor gave minimal correction, and only where the intended message seemedcompromised. In other words, meaning was emphasised over form. The students were notgraded on their writing, but rather participation in the exchange was rewarded with fullpoints towards the writing component of the course which was 20% of the final grade.
4.5 Data Analysis
Pretest and posttest comparisons of the ISS questionnaire were examined using an unpaired
two-tailed t-test to determine probability (p). Industry standards have long suggested a
p-value below .05 is statistically significant, however opposition to this standard has beensteadily growing (Nuzzo, 2014). Effect size is argued to be an equally important, if not a more
important measurement to consider (Cummings, 2013). Effect size in this study is reported asa measure of Cohen’s d. The formula used to calculate Cohen’s d for this study can be foundin Figure 1.

29

Figure 1
Formula for calculating Cohen’s d as taken from Lakens (2013)

Results in this study report both p-values and effect size. Statistical significance is given
to p-values below .05. Effect size (d) is interpreted where a value of 0.2 is considered a small
effect, a value of 0.5 is considered a medium effect, and a value of 0.8 is considered a large
effect (Cohen, 1988; Cummings, 2014). Results were calculated such that positive d-values
indicated a positive effect while negative d-values indicated a negative effect.
5. RESULTS
Analysis of the pretest-posttest ISS yielded statistically significant results in two areas: amedium positive effect on the Interaction Engagement factor (d = 0.5); and a medium
positive effect on the Interaction Confidence factor (d = 0.5).
Table 1Results of statistical analysis on the pre and post ISS (df = 83)
SubscalesInteraction Engagement
Respect for Cultural Differences
Interaction ConfidenceInteraction Enjoyment
Interaction Attentiveness

Pre/Post

M

SD

Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post
Pre
Post

3.51
3.71
3.65
3.45
2.65
3.02
3.52
3.39
3.48
3.7

0.43
0.43
0.47
0.57
0.8
0.72
0.76
0.91
0.61
0.64

t

p

d

2.17

0.04

0.5

-1.76 0.08

-0.4

0.02

0.5

-0.69 0.33

-0.2

1.59

0.3

2.33

0.12

Note: *Statistical significance present at the p < .05 level. Effect size is measured by Cohen’s d where a value of
0.2 is considered to be a small effect, a value of 0.5 is considered to be a medium effect, and a value of 0.8 isconsidered to be a large effect (Cohen, 1988). Positive d values indicate an increase in the attribute measured,
while negative d values indicate a decrease in the attribute measured at the end of the 6-week exchange.

5.1 Medium Positive Effect on Interaction Engagement (d = 0.5)
Results showed a medium positive effect in the Interaction Engagement factor. Interaction
Engagement was measured by items 1, 11, 13, 21, 22, 23, and 24 of the ISS questionnaire.
Analysis of item 11 and item 24 yielded the most statistically significant results.

30

Table 2
Detailed results of statistically significant changes to the interaction engagement factor
Pre/Post

M

SD

t

p

d

1. I enjoy interacting with people from different
cultures.

Pre
Post

4.00
4.24

0.84
0.91

1.27

.21

0.3

11. I tend to wait before forming an impressionof culturally-distinct counterparts.

Pre
Post

3.13
3.67

0.81
0.69

3.37 .001

0.7

13. I am open-minded to people from different
cultures.

Pre
Post

3.74
4.02

0.95
0.90

1.44

.15

0.3

21. I often give positive responses to myculturally different counterpart during ourinteraction.

Pre

3.39

0.83

Post

3.50

0.89

0.59

.56

0.1

22. I avoid those situations where I will have todeal with culturally-distinct persons.*

Pre
Post

2.65
2.57

0.64
0.70 -0.56

.58

-0.1

23. I often show my culturally-distinct
counterpart my understanding through verbal
or nonverbal cues.

Pre

3.78

0.84

Post

3.64

0.88 -0.76

.45

-0.2

Pre

3.87

1.05

Post

4.31

0.72

.02

0.5

Item

24. I have a feeling of enjoyment towards
differences between my culturally distinct
counterpart and me.

2.32

Note: *Items are reverse coded.

5.2 Medium Positive Effect on Interaction Confidence (d = 0.5)
Results showed a medium positive effect in the Interaction Confidence factor. Interaction
Confidence was measured by items 3, 4, 5, 6, and 10 of the ISS questionnaire. Analysis ofitem 5 and item 6 yielded the most statistically significant results.
Table 3
Detailed results of statistically significant changes to the interaction confidence factor
Pre/Post

M

SD

t

p

d

3. I am pretty sure of myself in interactingwith people from different cultures.

Pre
Post

3.00
3.33

1.03
1.00

1.53

.13

0.3

4. I find it very hard to talk in front of people
from different cultures.*

Pre
Post

2.32
2.36

1.20
0.98

0.17

.86

0.0

5. I always know what to say wheninteracting with people from different
cultures.

Pre

2.26

1.04

Post

3.05

1.10

3.43 .001

0.7

Pre
Post

2.87
3.43

1.05
1.02

2.54

.01

0.5

Pre
Post

2.78
2.95

1.19
1.15

0.68

.50

0.1

Item

6. I can be as sociable as I want to be wheninteracting with people from different
cultures.
10. I feel confident when interacting withpeople from different cultures.
Note: *Items are reverse coded.

31

5.3 Other Notable Results
There were a few other question items which showed statistical significance: item 12 fromthe Interaction Enjoyment subscale; item 18 from the Respect for Cultural Differences subscale; and item 19 from the Interaction Attentiveness subscale.
Table 4
Other notable results from detailed analysis of ISS items
Pre/Post

M

SD

t

p

d

12. I often get discouraged when I am
with people from different cultures.*

Pre
Post

3.87
3.27

1.09
1.14

-2.51

.01

-0.5

18. I would not accept the opinions ofpeople from different cultures.*

Pre
Post

4.30
3.38

0.63
1.34

-4.07

< .001-0.9

19. I am sensitive to my culturally-distinct
counterpart’s subtle meanings during
our interaction.

Pre

2.83

1.06

Post

3.21

0.78

1.97

.05

0.4

Item

Note: *Items are reverse coded.

6. DISCUSSION
6.1 Reduction in Ethnocentrism
Participants experienced a medium positive effect in the Interaction Engagement factorof the ISS (d = 0.5). Item 11, “I tend to wait before forming an impression of culturallydistinct counterparts,” scored a notable increase (d = 0.7), as did item 25, “I have a feelingof enjoyment towards differences between my culturally distinct counterpart and me,” (d =0.5). Both of these would indicate they were able develop a more complex understanding of
cultural differences which gave them both greater wisdom in knowing that first impressions
are not always correct, and that discovering cultural differences can be a source ofenjoyment. This suggests a reduction in ethnocentric tendencies. Indeed, this is confirmed
by Chen’s study identifying intercultural engagement as the best predictor of ethnocentrism(2010, p.5). As overcoming ethnocentrism is of prime importance to developing interculturalcommunication (Bennett, 1998; Lin & Rancer, 2003), and intercultural communicativecompetence is so intimately tied to ELF (Byram, 1997; Hülmbauer, Böhringer, & Seidlhofer,2008), we can say that students moved closer towards more effective ELF communication asa result of this exchange.
6.2 Gains in Confidence
The students also experienced a medium positive effect in the Interaction Confidence
factor of the ISS (d = 0.5). Item 5, “I always know what to say when interacting with people
from different cultures,” scored a significant increase (d = 0.7), as did item 6, “I can be associable as I want to be when interacting with people from different cultures,” (d = 0.5).
This can also be seen as a contributor to intercultural willingness-to-communicate and may
have something to do with a lowering of anxiety in relation to communication in the English
language.

32

One of the more positive things to come out of the era of Krashen was the Affective
Filter hypothesis (Krashen, 1982), or more specifically, the research that it inspired into
studies of learner anxiety (Brown, 1994; E. Horwitz, M. Horwitz, & Cope, 1986; MacIntyre& Gardner,1994; Young, 1991). Anxiety studies have found particular interest among
researchers in Japan (Kitano, 2001; Ohata, 2005; Williams & Andrade, 2008). Williams andAndrade (2008) sought to study the source of the anxiety that Japanese university students
felt with regard to English language learning. They discovered that the fear of making a
bad impression or receiving a negative evaluation from their teacher (associated with theinability to express oneself clearly and correctly) was the largest contributor to anxiety (p.
186). It seems then, that we as teachers can be the greatest hindrance to a student’s sense ofownership of ELF.
In terms of the Japanese subjects of this study, it is possible that using English tocommunicate with someone other than their teacher contributed towards a reduction
in anxiety. Their counterparts were younger, so there was no authority to fear. Theircommunication was not graded beyond simply receiving points for participation, so there
was no need to fear a negative evaluation from their teacher. Their American high school
counterparts made frequent spelling and even occasional grammar mistakes, so there wasno need for perfection unless to outperform inner circle users. One could argue then, that theincrease in intercultural confidence these subjects experienced points to a greater awarenessof their mutual ownership of ELF.
6.3 Negative Results
There were some areas of reduction in intercultural sensitivity. Most notably the near medium
effect on the Respect for Cultural Difference factor (p = .08, d = -0.4). This seems to be mostly
the result of student responses to item 18, “I would not accept the opinions of people fromdifferent cultures,” (p < .001, d = -0.9). Chen (2010) identified respect for cultural differences
as the best predictor of intercultural communication apprehension (p. 5). Lin and Rancer(2003) also linked intercultural communication apprehension to intercultural willingness-tocommunicate, although to a lesser extent than ethnocentrism. Perhaps then it is fair to saythat intercultural willingness-to-communicate was more affected positively by a loweringof ethnocentrism and an increase in confidence than negatively by any apprehension
experienced as a result of the exchange.
6.4 Issues with the Experimental Design of this Study
Due to the exclusion of student identification in soliciting responses to the ISS, pretestand posttest results were unable to be tested for linear correlations. Collecting student
identification information would also allow for both linear correlations and cross-analysis
with student feedback. This could help answer questions such as why the exchange seemed
to affect a small increase in intercultural communication apprehension. In addition, there arealways language translation issues when translating instruments. Analysis of the Japaneseversion of the ISS should be examined for internal consistency.
6.5 The Role of Digital Sojourn in the Future of ELF
Michael Byram, who is famous for both his work in intercultural communication and33

linguistics, acquaints intercultural communicative competence with “sojourners” who are
fundamentally affected by their experiences, affect change in others they meet along theirtravels, and return home with new perspectives to affect upon their native culture (1997, p.
1). We live in a rapidly changing digital landscape which now provides us ELF teachers withnew ways to develop intercultural communicative competence. I see digital sojourn, then, as
the next stage of intercultural development. By digital sojourn I mean the use of technology
to spend extended amounts of time “traveling” among a particular culture and its people.
While it is impractical to expect each ELF user to physically travel around the world in orderto gain the invaluable experience associated with intercultural development, ELF users
can use modern technology to support their efforts toward intercultural communicativecompetence through digital sojourn.
In addition to digital pen pal exchange, there are many other ways we can capitalize
on our current technological landscape in support of digital sojourn. One example would be
to move past the traditional view of pen pal exchange as being between two people. In theage of the Internet, we are no longer limited to one-on-one exchanges as a result of separate,physical mailing addresses. Rather than stick with the notion of pen pal exchanges being
between two people, a kind of collaborative pen pal experience could be had using modernsocial networking tools. There has been some emerging work in this area which has yielded
promising results (Jones, 2008). As previously mentioned, many of the American students did
not participate in the exchange leaving quite a few of the Japanese students alone or with
only another Japanese student to communicate with. A collective exchange would resolve
the need for all members to be equally responsive, and could contribute to collaborativeintercultural development. In addition, social networking tools can support a social learning
atmosphere, an atmosphere which values both emotional and cognitive development
equally (Kreijns, Kirschner, & Jochems, 2003).
Most social networking tools are developed for mobile devices, which provides
some additional benefits. We already have nearly 100% smartphone use among Japanese
university students (Cote, Milliner, Flowers, & Ferreira, 2014), and Japan is not alone inthis trend. Whether this trend is ultimately for better or for worse, the fact remains thatsmartphones are already playing an integral part of this next generation’s social and culturaldevelopment. Rather than letting this fact discourage us, we might find ways to implement
their use in teacher supported intercultural social development. Using mobile devices for theexchange would allow for easy extension beyond the classroom and the seamless inclusionof multimedia content. Two or more classrooms could easily share cultural artifacts from theirindividual geolocations through a combination of photos and text, or even video. Students
could be inspired by their instructors to generate content to share, or they could simply
inspire each other. Here in Japan, students have been observed successfully completing
highly complex, multimedia projects in social learning contexts (Flowers, 2014).
In addition to finding creative ways of using technology to support digital sojourn,educators can supplement online intercultural experiences with traditional classroom based
methods of intercultural development. Multiple perspectives pedagogy and reflection havebeen shown to significantly enhance intercultural development over experience alone inoverseas exchange programs (Pedersen, 2009). Combining classroom based instruction
with student reflection and online intercultural experiences should also effectively bolster

34

intercultural development in teacher orchestrated digital sojourn.
7. CONCLUSION
Helping our students to overcome ethnocentrism is an important part of our duty as
ELF instructors as it supports our student’s transition towards intercultural sojourner andempowers them in their mutual ownership of English as a lingua franca. Through a six-weekdigital pen pal exchange, the students in this study were able to develop their intercultural
sensitivity, most notably through decreases in ethnocentrism and increases in confidencewith regard to intercultural communication. The fact that they were able to do this without
the need for a physical exchange supports the notion that digital sojourn is a viable methodfor developing intercultural communication. It is hoped that this study will inspire others toexperiment with digital pen pal exchange and other such applications of modern technology,
which can be used to unite classrooms around the world in authentic ELF.
REFERENCES
Barksdale, M. A., Watson, C., & Park, E. S. (2007). Pen pal letter exchanges: Taking first steps
toward developing cultural understandings. The Reading Teacher, 61(1), 58-68.
Bennett, M. J. (1998). Intercultural communication: A current perspective. In Milton J. Bennett(Ed.), Basic concepts of intercultural communication: Selected readings. Yarmouth, ME:
Intercultural Press.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (2000). The development and validation of the intercultural
sensitivity scale. Human Communication, (3), 1-15.
Chen, G. M. (2010). The impact of intercultural sensitivity on ethnocentrism and interculturalcommunication apprehension. Intercultural Communication Studies, 19(1), 1-9.
Cumming, G. (2013). The new statistics why and how. Psychological science, 25(1), 7–29.
doi: 0956797613504966.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (second edition).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cote, T., Milliner, B., Flowers, S., Ferreira, D. (2014). What’s going on at the MALL?
PeerSpectives, (12), 34-40.
Dong, Q., Day, K. D., & Collaço, C. M. (2008). Overcoming ethnocentrism throughdeveloping intercultural communication sensitivity and multiculturalism. Human
Communication, 11(1), 27-38.
ETS. (2013). TOEIC program data & analysis 2013. Retrieved from http://www.toeic.or.jp/

35

library/toeic_data/toeic_en/pdf/data/TOEIC_Program_DAA.pdf
Flowers, S. (2014). Documentary project: An experiment in cooperative learning.
PeerSpectives, (12), 32-34. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/6623136
Fritz, W., Mollenberg, A., & Chen, G. M. (2001). Measuring intercultural sensitivity indifferent cultural context. Proceedings from The Biannual Meeting of the International
Association for Intercultural Communication Studies. Retrieved from http://files.eric.
ed.gov/fulltext/ED456491.pdf
Hammer, M. R., Bennett, M. J., & Wiseman, R. (2003). Measuring intercultural sensitivity:
The intercultural development inventory. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 27(4), 421-443. doi:10.1016/S0147-1767(03)00032-4
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching (3rd ed.). Essex: Pearson
Education Limited.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The
Modern language journal, 70(2), 125-132. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1986.tb05256.x
Houghton, S. (2009). The role of intercultural communicative competence in thedevelopment of world Englishes and lingua francas. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of
English Language Studies,15, 70-95.
Houghton, S. A., & Rivers, D. J. (Eds.). (2013). Native-speakerism in Japan: Intergroupdynamics in foreign language education (Vol. 151). Multilingual Matters.
Hülmbauer, C., Böhringer, H., & Seidlhofer, B. (2008). Introducing English as a lingua franca(ELF): Precursor and partner in intercultural communication. Synergies Europe, 3, 2536. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/download/30870560/hulmbauer.pdf
Jenkins, J. (2009). English as a lingua franca: Interpretations and attitudes. World Englishes,
28(2), 200-207.
Jones, H. (2008). Competent communicators: Explaining an international communicationexchange. Enhancing Learning in the Social Sciences, 1(2).
doi: 10.11120/elss.2008.01020004
Kachru, B. (1992). The other tongue: English across cultures. Illinois: University of Illinois
Press.
Kitano, K. (2001). Anxiety in the college Japanese language classroom. The Modern
Language Journal, 85(4), 549-566.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.
Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P., Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction incomputer-supported collaborative learning environments: a review of the research.
Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 335-353.
Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science:
A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front. Psychol, 4: 863. doi: 10.3389/
fpsyg.2013.00863

36

Lin, Y., & Rancer, A. S. (2003). Ethnocentrism, intercultural communication apprehension,intercultural willingness-to-communicate, and intentions to participate in anintercultural dialogue program: Testing a proposed model. Communication Research
Reports, 20(1), 62-72.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1994). The subtle effects of language anxiety on cognitive
processing in the second language. Language Learning, 44(2), 283-305. Retrieved
from http://faculty.capebretonu.ca/pmacintyre/research_pages/journals/subtle_
anxiety1994.pdf
Neuliep, J.W., Chaudoir, M., & McCroskey, J.C. (2001). A cross-culturalcomparison of ethnocentrism among Japanese and United States college
students. Communication Research Reports, 18(2), 137-146.
Nuzzo, R. (2014). Scientific method: Statistical errors. Nature, 506, 150-152.
doi:10.1038/506150a
Pedersen, P. J. (2009). Teaching towards an ethnorelative worldview through psychology
study abroad. Intercultural Education, 20(1), 73-86.
Peng, S. Y. (2006). A comparative perspective of intercultural sensitivity between college
students and multinational employees in China. Multicultural perspectives, 8(3), 38-45.
Williams, K. E., & Andrade, M. R. (2008). Foreign language learning anxiety in Japanese EFL
university classes: Causes, coping, and locus of control. Electronic Journal of Foreign
Language Teaching, 5(2), 181-191. Retrieved from http://e-flt.nus.edu.sg/v5n22008/
williams.pdf
Xing, J. (2014). An Empirical Study of Applying E-mail Exchange to College English Learners’
Writing. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5(4), 856-864.
Yang, S., & Chen, J. (2014). Fostering foreign language learning through technology
enhanced intercultural projects. Language Learning and Technology, 18(1), 57-75.
Yellin, D. (1987). “My pen pal goes to college”: A functional approach to literacy learning.
Proceedings from the Spring Conference of the National Council of Teachers ofEnglish (6th, Louisville, KY, March 26-28, 1987). Abstract retrieved from http://eric.
ed.gov/?id=ED282236
Young, D. J. (1991). Creating a low-anxiety classroom environment: What does language
anxiety research suggest? The Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 426-437.
APPENDIX A
Intercultural Sensitivity Scale questionnaire (Chen & Starosta, 2000, p. 14)
1. I enjoy interacting with people from different cultures.
2. I think people from other cultures are narrow-minded.*
3. I am pretty sure of myself in interacting with people from different cultures.

37

4. I find it very hard to talk in front of people from different cultures.*5. I always know what to say when interacting with people from different cultures.
6. I can be as sociable as I want to be when interacting with people from different cultures.
7. I don’t like to be with people from different cultures.*
8. I respect the values of people from different cultures.
9. I get upset easily when interacting with people from different cultures.*l0. I feel confident when interacting with people from different cultures.
11. I tend to wait before forming an impression of culturally-distinct counterparts.
12. I often get discouraged when I am with people from different cultures.*13. I am open-minded to people from different cultures.
14. I am very observant when interacting with people from different cultures.
15. I often feel useless when interacting with people from different cultures.*16. I respect the ways people from different cultures behave.
17. I try to obtain as much information as I can when interacting with people from different
cultures.
18. I would not accept the opinions of people from different cultures.*19. I am sensitive to my culturally-distinct counterpart’s subtle meanings during ourinteraction.
20. I think my culture is better than other Cultures.*
2l. I often give positive responses to my culturally different counterpart during ourinteraction.
22. I avoid those situations where I will have to deal with culturally-distinct persons.*
23. I often show my culturally-distinct counterpart my understanding through verbal or
nonverbal cues.
24. I have a feeling of enjoyment towards differences between my culturally distinct
counterpart and me.
Note: *Items 2, 4, 7, 9, 12, 15, 18, 20, and 22 are reverse-coded.
Interaction Engagement items are 1, 11, 13, 2l, 22, 23, and 24,
Respect for Cultural Differences items are 2, 7, 8, 16, 18, and 20,
Interaction Confidence items are 3, 4, 5, 6, and l0,
Interaction Enjoyment items are 9, 12, and 15,
Interaction Attentiveness are 14, 17, and 19.
APPENDIX B
Intercultural Sensitivity Scale questionnaire (Japanese Translation)
1. 私は異なる文化の人たちとのふれ合いを楽しむ。
2. 私は他の文化の人たちが狭量だと思う。
3. 私は異なる文化の人たちとのふれ合いに少し自信がある。

38

4. 私は異なる文化の人たちがいる空間で話すのがとても難しい。
5. 私は異なる文化の人たちとふれ合う時に何を言えば(話せば)いいかいつも分かってる。
6. 私は異なる文化の人たちとふれ合う時に赴くままに社交的になることができる。
7. 私は異なる文化の人たちと一緒にいるのが好きではない。
8. 私は異なる文化の人たちの価値観を尊重する。
9. 私は異なる文化の人たちとふれ合う時に怒りやすくなる。
10. 私は異なる文化の人たちとふれ合う時に自信がある。
11. 私は文化的に異なる相手に対しての印象を作る前に待つ傾向がある。(すぐに印象を形成しない)
12. 私は異なる文化の人たちと一緒にいる時に落胆する。
13. 私は異なる文化の人たちに対して偏見がない。
14. 私は異なる文化の人たちとふれ合う時によく観察する。
15. 私は異なる文化の人たちとふれ合う時に役に立たないとしばしば感じる。
16. 私は異なる文化の人たちの振る舞いを尊重する。
17. 私は異なる文化の人たちとふれ合う時にできるだけ多くの情報を得るようにする。
18. 私は異なる文化の人たちの意見を受け入れない。
19. 私は文化的に異なる相手とのふれ合いの中で、曖昧な意味(裏の意味など)を理解する。
20. 私は自分の文化が他の文化よりも優れていると思う。
21. 私はしばしば文化的に異なる相手とのふれ合いの中で肯定的な応答をする。
22. 私は文化的に異なる相手に対処しなければならない状況を避ける。
23. 私はしばしば文化的に異なる相手に対して自分の理解を言語もしくは非言語の合図を通し		て示す。
24. 私は文化的に異なる相手と自分との違いを楽しむ気持ちがある。

39

40

A Teacher’s Exploratory Inquiry of Language Awareness:
Language Learner Perceptions from Oral Presentations
言語意識に関する調査：オーラルプレゼンテーションにおける学習者の言語
認識
Andrew Leichsenring, レイクセンリング ・ アンドリュー
Tamagawa University, Center for English as a Lingua Franca, Japan
andrewl@lit.tamagawa.ac.jp

ABSTRACTThis paper presents a teacher-led inquiry into learner language awareness and learnerperceptions of: oral presentations using first language (L1) support when using a second
language (L2); and L2 learner and user identity. The quantitative-based results of thispreliminary inquiry represent a source of understanding for the researcher, who later,
intends to undertake a qualitative-based study of learner oriented language awareness andspeaking assessment. A questionnaire was distributed to 144 Japanese first and second
year tertiary students who completed a semester course in general and academic English.
A cross-sectional analysis was applied to the questionnaire results which aimed to gather
student perceptions of the use of and identity with a L2, that is, English. Key findings from the
exploration of learner perceptions in this research included the acceptance of spoken errors
when giving oral presentations and a sense of ownership of English among the participants.
This research presents learner perceptions that may prompt teachers to consider conducting
language awareness research with their students with the aim of reflecting upon themodification of traditional speaking assessment practices.
KEYWORDS: ELT, language awareness, learner perceptions, oral presentations

要旨
本稿は、第二言語でオーラルプレゼンテーションを行う際に第一言語のサポートを使うことに対する学習者の言語意識と認識、また第二言語使用者のアイデンティティについてのアンケー
ト調査を纏めたものである。この量的調査の結果は、後の学習者の言語意識とスピーキングの評価に関する質的調査の基として使用される。アンケートは一般的なアカデミック英語コースを受講している日本の大学1年生と2年生合計144人を対象に実施された。学生の第二言語である英語の使用とアイデンティティに対する認識に関する情報を集めることを目的にアンケートを行い、断片分析によって考察された。結果として、学生の間で、プレゼンテーション時における言語エラーに対する許容と英語を自らの言葉とする感覚が見られた。この研究結果により、スピーキングの評価を行う際の教員の対応、すなわち学習者の言語をどう修正するかということに影響を与えるであろう学生の言語意識が確認された。

41

1. INTRODUCTION
The researcher explored students’ perceptions about giving oral presentations in class using
their L2 (English) while also having the freedom to use their L1 (Japanese) to support theircommunication. A review of the literature is provided next with a focus on three main areas:
learner perceptions, language awareness (LA), and the development of L2 user identity. Thisis followed by the methodology section which includes the research design, the activity andparticipants, and the research questions asked. Lastly, the findings and a discussion of theresearch conducted is presented. In this current research, the teacher is hereafter referred toas the researcher.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Student Perceptions of their Learning and their Importance to Teachers
It was important for the researcher to understand students’ perceptions of their learning inorder to understand how they viewed themselves as both learners and users of English andto develop better speaking assessment in the future. In the context of the current research,
perceptions of oneself can be defined as how a student understands and makes sense of
himself and his learning (Williams & Burden, 1999). As suggested by Tudor (1993), the mainrole of the teacher in traditional modes of teaching is to supply knowledge. However, thecurrent research valued the knowledge that students had about their learning preferences
and the views that they had of themselves as learners and users of English. The role ofthe teacher is important in the process of facilitating self-reflective practices and in the
promotion of learner autonomy among students. As noted by Barfield, Ashwell, Carroll,
Collins, Cowie, Critchley, Head, Nix, Obermeier, and Robertson (2001, p. 3), “the ability to
behave autonomously for students is dependent upon their teacher creating a classroom
culture where autonomy is accepted.”
In order to better facilitate self-reflective practices among students and encouragethem to think actively and independently, Asmari (2013) recommends that retrospective
tasks, such as interviews, group discussion and structured questionnaires be employed
to encourage learners to reflect upon learning and help learners to take responsibility for
their language learning processes. In the current research, a questionnaire was the selected
instrument for data collection. An important point about observing learner perceptions isthat “particular ways of experiencing a phenomenon are seen to occur because students
attend to different aspects of a phenomenon and experience those aspects in different ways”(Marton & Runesson, 2003, p. 18). Thus, it was important for the researcher to be aware that
his students experience a phenomenon, such as language learning, both as individuals andas members of a learning community.
2.2 Language Awareness (LA)The concept of language awareness (LA) was central to the exploration of learner perceptions as it provided one approach for the researcher to observe student perceptions about
their use of English to communicate while engaged in an oral presentation activity. On its
website, the Association for Language Awareness (ALA, 2015) defines LA as:42

explicit knowledge about language, and conscious perception and sensitivity inlanguage learning, language teaching and language use…(and) covers a wide
spectrum of fields. For example, LA issues include exploring the benefits that canbe derived from developing a good knowledge about language, a conscious
understanding of how languages work, of how people learn them and use them…
According to ALA, LA is relevant for the learner and the teacher. LA was importantin the current research because it provided a platform for understanding the way students
demonstrated their use of language through their oral presentations, and their selfperceptions as English speakers. The researcher was a participant observer in the sensethat he was present in the classroom when students prepared and presented their work andwas present when the students completed the questionnaire. Subsequently, the researcher
gained a partial understanding of students’ language awareness as a classroom observer andgained further understanding from the questionnaire results.
The selection of PowerPoint for the oral presentation activity was an attempt by the
researcher to incorporate technology into coursework oral assessment criteria. The software
was chosen to provide students with opportunities to: do web-based research, work attheir own pace, have the freedom to choose their own materials, and achieve a degree of
autonomy in the way they used language (Pinkman, 2005).
An important reason for a teacher to consider the implementation of a LA approachin teaching and learning is that: “it is a departure from the traditional top-down transmissionof language knowledge that requires least active thinking in learners. Instead, LA can be
developed only by learners themselves through paying deliberate attention to language
usage” (Lin, 2011. p. 125). Lin (2011) also notes that the evaluation format can be effectivein raising LA. In relation to the oral presentation activity utilised in the current study, students
were given the opportunity to focus on the criteria outlined in Table 1 and decide whether
or not to additionally focus on the accuracy of their grammar and pronunciation despite theomission of these items from the evaluation criteria.
Table 1
Oral presentation evaluation criteria
Name:

Topic:

Score:

Comments:

Contents &Timing0 1 2

Posture Visual Aids
0 1 2

0 1 2

Eye Contact

Gestures

Volume &Inflection

Questions &Answers

0 1 2

0 1 2

0 1 2

0 1 2

Note: *Answer key: 0 = poor / 1 = average / 2 = good43

In terms of LA, everyone is a learner, even teachers have to continue to explore
language systems, so it is a lifelong process (Bourke 2008). According to Wright (2002),
a teacher’s language awareness encompasses an awareness of his learner’s developing
interlanguage. Interlanguage (Selinker, 1972) refers to the way a L2 learner approximates theL2 while preserving some features of their L1. Subsequently, the perceptions that students
had about their use of interlanguaging when giving an oral presentation was an area ofinterest for the current researcher to pursue.
2.3 L2 user identity: To be or not to be my language?
The researcher explored his students’ sense of themselves as users of English in relation totheir identity with an L2. The current research viewed an individual’s perception as being
central to identity formation. The definition of identity offered by Burke and Stets (2009),
a set of meanings that define who an individual is when occupying a particular role insociety or as a member of a particular group, was instrumental in framing this research. Thisis because the current research explored the various influencing factors that may shape astudent’s sense of L2 identity, including global and local cultural influences of the languageon the student as both English learner and user.
Kirkpatrick’s (2007) view of native speakers as a diminishing best model of English
informed the researcher’s perspective by providing some initial grounding to approach theissue of L2 identity. Consequently, the researcher sought an understanding from the literature
as to how this stance might position his students in terms of their L2 identities. Canagarajah(2005) suggests that L2 speakers often appropriate English in order to meet their localised
needs and pursue their localised interests. While Jenkins (2003) notes that many L2 speakers
express a desire to preserve something of their L1 accent in order to project their linguacultural identity in English. It is also possible that the development of identity among L2
English speakers may sometimes be related to identifications with both local and global
cultures, resulting in hybrid identities (Pennycook, 2007). With these views in mind, theresearcher explored the possibility that a variety of identity-driven positions existed amongst
his students and hence this phenomenon was of value to explore in the current research.
In order to support L2 learner perceptions and the development of L2 identity among
language learners, Jindapitak (2013, p. 124) suggests that teachers can encourage theirstudents “to feel free to use their localized versions of English, as long as they are intelligible
and comprehensible, without having to worry that these productions will be evaluatedvis-à-vis native-speaker benchmark.” A justification proffered by Matsuda (2003) for why
English as an international language (EIL) learners may benefit from an orientation towards
local English varieties is that linguistic assessment in the EIL paradigm does not focus on
how closely learners approximate the standards of native speakers, but rather, it realisticallyfocuses on the learners’ communicative effectiveness. EIL is defined by Kachru (1992) as
being the present state of English that is used as a global language for wider communication.
The researcher kept in mind the potential significance of communicative effectivenessfor assessment purposes while engaged in the current research. Of particular interest to
the researcher was the orientation that his students chose, that is, to target either a native
speaker model of English or a local variety of English when giving oral presentations.

44

3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 Data Collection and Analysis
A cross-sectional study design was employed to explore the phenomena of language learner
identity and learner perceptions of language learner use of L1 and L2 in an oral presentation
activity. Primary and secondary data were used in the current research. Primary data was
obtained from students who each participated in an oral presentation activity and postactivity questionnaire, see Appendix 1. The questionnaire consisted of closed and open
items. In order to minimise the possibility of acquiescence bias (Schuman & Presser, 1996),
that is, the tendency to agree, regardless of content, to all questions, particularly when in
doubt, the researcher sought a justification for the particular responses made by participantsin the questionnaire. Of the questions asked, four questions related to the presentation andthe fifth question referred to students’ perceptions of language user identity. Participants
were requested to write responses in English and use translation software (e.g., Google
Translate) for language support. Participants answered anonymously and were individuallyunidentifiable. An abridged version of the questions follows, see Appendix 1 for the fullversion:
1. My goal in the presentation was:A - to speak native speaker English.
B - to speak as a Japanese speaker of English.
2. Which was more important when you did the oral presentation:
A - to speak English with no mistakes or almost no mistakes?
B - to speak English with a clear message, but also some mistakes are ok?
3. Do you think it was useful to speak some Japanese when you were presenting?
4. Which Japanese words did you write on your slides or speak during your oralpresentation?
5. Japanese is my language, but also English is my language. Agree or Disagree? Why?
The fifth question was included in the oral presentation post-activity questionnaire
for comparison to a similar item which appears in a program-wide student end-of-semester
questionnaire that all students who study general and academic English are requested tocomplete. The item is: I don’t think that English belongs only to native speakers. It can be
my language too. Students are required to select a response of agreement (strongly agree
or agree), neutrality, or disagreement (disagree or strongly disagree). All 144 participant
responses to the fifth question in the oral presentation post-activity questionnaire werecompared with the responses from the aforementioned end-of-semester questionnaire item.
The program-wide student questionnaire was conducted in the 2014 spring semester (1279
students) and again in the 2014 autumn semester (1191 students), see Tables 6A and 6B for
the results. After tabulating the data, the researcher analysed that data by correlating the
responses from participants and totaling the results in terms of percentages.
3.2 Activity & Participants
A cohort of 144 students participated in the oral presentation post-activity questionnaire.
Participants were enrolled in either 100 level courses (introductory), 200 level courses (lower-

45

intermediate), or 300 level courses (higher-intermediate). The four groups that participatedin this research in 2014 were: Spring 200s; Spring 300s; Autumn 100s; and Autumn 200s. In
the autumn semester, students engaged in a language awareness lecture in their class time.
The researcher did not include a language awareness component in spring semester courses
because the materials had not been prepared at that time. Preceding the oral presentation
activity, three teacher-led workshops during class time were held in order to help students
prepare for their presentations. Each class participant completed a three-minute PowerPoint
monologic oral presentation which included a dialogic question and answer session with awhole class audience. The post-activity questionnaire, see Appendix 1, was written in both
English and Japanese and was completed by each participant at a later date during classtime. Responses were written in English only, with some students using translation software
to support their written responses. In the 2014 spring semester, 61 second-year students
were involved in this study. Among these participants were, 21 (Spring 200 level) students
in the College of Liberal Arts and 40 (Spring 300 level) students from the College of Tourism
and Hospitality Management. In the 2014 autumn semester there were 83 participants,
including 37 first-year (Autumn 100 level) students from the College of Humanities and 46
second-year (Autumn 200 level) students from either the College of Business Administrationor the College of Performing Arts.
4. RESULTS
Findings were collated from the responses of the 144 learners who completed the oralpresentation activity as part of their general and academic English course assessment.
From the oral presentation post-activity questionnaire, responses to the first question
determined the course level and the other five questions explored learner perceptions of
doing the activity and students’ use of various lingua-cultural resources in their presentations.
As mentioned in the previous section (see Methodology), in the 2014 spring semester,a language awareness component was not included in the course syllabus. However, inthe 2014 autumn semester this component was added to the syllabus in time for the oralpresentation activity, and as part of an ongoing developmental initiative in the general andacademic English program.
On the issue of learners aiming to be either a native English speaker or Japanese
speaker of English when giving an oral presentation, the results presented in Table 2 suggestthat a greater number of learners in the autumn semester identified themselves as desiring
to be Japanese speakers of English when compared to the spring semester responses. This
result raises the issue of a possibility that the addition of a language awareness component
in the autumn courses may have influenced a shift in students’ perceptions about aiming
to be a native English speaker or a Japanese speaker of English. Further research would be
required to investigate the validity of this assumption.

46

Table 2
Aim towards a native speaker variety or a local speaker variety of English?

Learners were also asked if they aimed to speak in English either without any mistakes(or perhaps almost no mistakes) or with some mistakes as being acceptable. The results inTable 3 indicate that there was a strong acceptance of some spoken errors with the view topresenting a clear message as being an appropriate goal. Among the possible reasons forthis commonly-held view, as evidenced in Table 1, is that the assessment for this activity did
not include a spoken accuracy component and so participants viewed the acceptance of
spoken errors as appropriate in this communicative context.
Table 3
Acceptance of English speaking mistakes or not?

The belief that speaking some Japanese was a useful resource when presenting wasstrongly affirmed by a majority of participants, see Table 4. The two most commonly selected
reasons for the usefulness of Japanese were: (a) it could assist the speaker to communicate
the meaning of difficult English words or terms; and (b) it was necessary to help the audience
understand presentation-based content. The reason most cited as to why Japanese language47

was not useful when presenting was a perception among some students that the purpose of
the activity was to learn to present in English in class.
Table 4The use of L1 (Japanese) when giving an oral presentation

The actual usage of Japanese, either spoken, written, or both, was significantly higher
in the autumn semester when compared to its usage in the spring semester, see Table 5.
Perhaps in alignment with the results found in Table 2, and the goal of aiming to be a native
speaker of English or a Japanese speaker of English, participant responses exhibited in
the 2014 autumn semester questionnaire may have been influenced by the inclusion of alanguage awareness component in their courses prior to the oral presentation activity.
Table 5The actual forms of L1 when giving an oral presentation

The perception among participants that both Japanese and English belonged tothem was held by a majority of learners in each of the four groups, see Table 6A. The twomost commonly cited reasons written by respondents were: (a) English is a common and48

popular language in the world; and (b) it is important in the future lives of these participants.
However, for those participants who did not perceive English to be their language, the twomost commonly selected reasons were: (a) a lack of ability to understand English well; and(b) a lack English use in their lives. When compared with the program-wide results from the2014 spring and autumn semesters, see Table 6B, all four course level groups, as presented
in Table 6A, contained a lower percentage of students who felt that English was theirlanguage too. That is to say, Spring 200s, Spring 300s, and Autumn 100s.
Table 6A
English is my language too (post-activity questionnaire)

Table 6B
English is my language too (program-wide questionnaire)

5. DISCUSSION
In this section, a discussion is presented on: a) the findings in relation to the literature review,b) limitations and considerations of the current research, and c) the researcher’s intention to
conduct future research on language awareness.

49

5.1 Findings in Relation to the Literature Review
The researcher gained an understanding of his students’ sense of language awareness. In
particular, students demonstrated a non-uniform desire in their determination to aim to beeither a native speaker of English or a local (Japanese) speaker of English. Further, language
awareness among the students was displayed through the overwhelmingly affirmative
perception that speaking with some errors was acceptable when giving an oral presentation.
It must be noted that speaking with some errors was understood by participants in thecontext that when giving an oral presentation they were not evaluated on the accuracy of
their grammar or pronunciation. Satisfactory evidence about the value of using L1 to support
their oral presentations in L2 was indicated by students’ usage of L1, in either written,
spoken, or both forms of communication. In regard to the issue of L2 user identity, a majorityof respondents indicated that they felt a sense of ownership of English which may be notedas their L2. The researcher intends to conduct future research to explore the phenomenon ofmultiple language user-identities as a consequence of these findings.
5.2 Research Limitations & Considerations
The results demonstrate associations among the variously studied variables of: a native
variety versus a local variety speaker goal; the acceptance of spoken errors when presenting;written and spoken forms of L1 language support when giving an oral presentation in an L2;
and a sense of ownership and identity with an L2. However, a cross-sectional research design
cannot reveal causation of the phenomena being studied (Gray, 2014). While a longitudinal
study may have offered revelations of causation, the respondents in this research were only
available to participate during a semester long period. Another disadvantage of the crosssectional study design used in the current research concerns the feasibility of replicating theresults, because again, the participant course groups disbanded at the end of each semester.
Also, the oral assessment activity cannot be viewed as generic in design and cannot easily be
replicated by a different researcher. There would be some expectant differences in approach
between researchers when conducting the oral presentation activity and the post-activity
reflection. Despite some limitations in this research, it is possible for a future study to be
conducted using an oral presentation activity and post-activity reflection to establish primarydata that could be used to compare against secondary data, as was done in the current
research.
5.3 Future Research
Findings from the current research show that for a teacher, there are benefits to be gained
from conducting an exploratory inquiry into the language awareness of one’s students.
The cross-sectional analysis of learner perceptions about their language awarenessand L2 learner and user identity provides grounding for future research in the form of asmall-scale qualitative design (e.g., interviews). It is the researcher’s intention to further
explore learner perceptions on preparing for and giving an oral presentation, primarily inEnglish. An in-depth inquiry can be expected to reveal further understanding of learner
language awareness, which may be of benefit to speaking assessment formulation andimplementation.

50

6. CONCLUSION
It can be understood from the current research and literature review that language learnerperceptions are important to both a teacher and a student. A teacher can be influential in
the development of how students view their learning and usage of, and identity with, an
L2 by encouraging them to be self-reflective, active, and to think independently. Language
awareness serves a purpose as a strategy that can aid students to be responsible for
their language learning process and can help teachers to develop and improve speaking
assessment.
REFERENCES
Asmari, A. A. (2013). Practices and prospects of learner autonomy: Teachers’ perceptions.
English Language Teaching, 6(3), 1-10.
Association for language awareness. (2015). Retrieved fromhttp://www.languageawareness.org
Barfield, A., Ashwell, T., Carroll, M., Collins, K., Cowie, N., Critchley, M., Head, E., Nix, M.,
Obermeier, A., & Robertson, M. C. (2001). Exploring and defining teacher autonomy:
A collaborative discussion. In A. S. Mackenzie, & E. McCafferty (Eds.), Developing
autonomy, proceedings of the college and university educators’ 2001 conference,
Shizuoka, Japan (pp. 217-22). Tokyo: JALT.
Bourke, J. M. (2008). A rough guide to language awareness. English Teaching Forum 46(1),12-21.
Burke, P. J., & Stets, J. E. (2009). Identity theory. Oxford University Press: USA. Canagarajah,
S. (2005). Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Gray, D. E. (2014). Doing research in the real world. London: SAGE.
Jenkins, J. (2003). World Englishes: A resource book for students. London: Routledge.
Jindapitak, N. (2013). The politics of standard English: An exploration of Thai tertiary
English learners’ perceptions of the notion of standard English. Asian Social Science,
9(5), 118-127.
Kachru, B. B. (1992). The other tongue: English across cultures. Urbana: University of Illinois
Press.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2007). World Englishes: Implication for international communication andEnglish language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lin, Y. (2011). A language awareness approach to English language teaching in joint
programs in China. Proceedings of the 16th Conference of Pan-Pacific Association ofApplied Linguistics (pp.123-128). Hong Kong: PAAL.
Marton, F. & Runesson, U. (2003, August). The space of learning. Paper presented at The
Symposium Improving Learning, Fostering the Will to Learn, European Association for51

Research on Learning and Instruction, Padova, Italy.
Matsuda, A. (2003). Incorporating world Englishes in teaching English as an international
language. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 719-729.
Pennycook, A. (2007). Global Englishes and transcultural flows. London: Routledge.
Pinkman, K. (2005). Using blogs in the foreign language classroom: Encouraging learner
independence. The JALT CALL Journal, 1(1), 2-24.
Schuman, H., & Presser, S. (1996). Questions and answers in attitude surveys. London: Sage.
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL, 10, 209-231.
Tudor, I. (1993). Teacher roles in the learner-centered classroom. ELT Journal, 47(1), 23-24.
Williams, M., & Burden, R. L. (1999). Students developing conceptions of themselves as
language learners. Modern Language Journal, 83, 193–201.
Wright, T. (2002). Doing language awareness: Issues for language study in language teacher
education. In H. Trappes-Lomax, & G. Ferguson (Eds.), Language in Language Teacher
Education (pp.113-130). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

APPENDIX 1
Oral Presentation Activity Questionnaire
Please circle: ELF 101/102 or ELF201/202 or ELF301/302
1. Please circle (A or B) AかBのいずれかに○をしてください:A - My goal in the presentation was to speak native speaker English.
プレゼンテーションの目標はネイティブスピーカーのように話すことである。
B - My goal in the presentation was to speak as a Japanese speaker of English.
プレゼンテーションの目標は日本人の英語使用者として話すことである。
2. Which was more important when you did the oral presentation: (circle A or B)
プレゼンテーションを行う際、どちらがより重要でしたか。
A - to speak English with no mistakes or almost no mistakes?
ミスをせずに、または少しのミスだけで話す。
B - to speak English with a clear message, but also some mistakes are ok?
伝えたいことが明確に伝われば、ミスをしても良い。
3. Do you think it was useful to speak some Japanese when you were presenting?
(circle please) 発表の際、少し日本語を使うことは有益であると思いますか。
Yes or No.
Why? ________________________________________________________________
4. Which Japanese words did you write on your slides or speak during your oralpresentation? (Please give two or three examples and circle spoken or written)

52発表の際に使用した日本語の単語は何ですか。下線部にその単語を日本語と英語で書いてください。また、スライドに書き込んだ日本語は、平仮名、カタカナ、漢字のどちらで書いたかを選んでください。
i.
spoken/written romaji/hiragana/katakana/kanji _____ English _____
ii.
spoken/written romaji/hiragana/katakana/kanji _____ English _____
iii.
spoken/written romaji/hiragana/katakana/kanji _____ English _____
5. Japanese is my language but also English is my language. (circle one answer)
日本語は私の言語であるが、英語もまた私の言語である。（どちらかに○をし、理由を説明してください。）
Agree or Disagree.
Why? ________________________________________________________________

53

54

A Guide to Setting Appropriate Reading Targets for Extensive
Reading
多読における適切な読書目標を設定するための指標
Daniel Worden, ダニエル ・ ウォーデン
Tamagawa University, The Center for English as a Lingua Franca, Japandaniel.worden@lab.tamagawa.ac.jp

ABSTRACTTo enable teachers to set measurable and fair reading targets for graded reading, the author
used average word counts from major publishers to develop a simple rule of thumb. As
many have found, setting an appropriate reading target for an extensive reading programme
is not as straightforward as it might seem. A number of complex issues, such as how muchreading learners need, and at which levels, makes target setting difficult. In order to justify the
proposed rule of thumb, this paper explores how much reading is necessary for learners to be
successful. The focus is on suitable reading volume and reading level.
KEYWORDS: extensive reading, reading, fluency, vocabulary development

要旨
教員がグレイディッドリーディングに対して測定可能で公平な読書目標を設定するために、著者は大手出版社の平均単語数を使用することで、分かりやすい指標を生み出した。多くの教員が直面しているように、多読において適切な読書目標を設定するのは容易なことではない。学
習者がどのくらい読む必要があるのか、どのレベルかといった様々な問題が目標設定を困難にしている。本稿では、成功した学習者になるためにどのくらい読む必要があるのかということを考察し、提示している読書目標の適切さについて、主に、読書量とレベルに着目して議論する。

1. INTRODUCTION
This paper will discuss the setting of appropriate word targets for extensive reading (ER)programmes. It is the aim of this paper to advise teachers on suitable reading targets. It issometimes the case that reading targets are set either too low or too high, or students readbooks that are not at a suitable level. Inappropriate targets and levels can have various
negative effects such as minimal gains in reading proficiency and may be counterproductive
to the goals of ER. It is hoped that this paper will go some way towards helping teachers
select optimal reading goals. To do this, first the main goals of ER will be laid out. Then, thereliability of commonly suggested reading targets will be examined. Next, the amount ofreading needed to reach the aforementioned goals of ER will be discussed. Finally, a method55

for calculating reading targets will be presented.
2. WHAT ARE THE GOALS OF EXTENSIVE READING?
In order to know what constitutes an appropriate and worthwhile reading target for an
ER programme we must first understand the goals of ER as a methodology. Nation andWang (1999) state that ER goals “include gaining skill and fluency in reading, establishingpreviously learnt vocabulary, learning new vocabulary and grammar, and gaining pleasurefrom reading” (p. 356). Similarly, the Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied
Linguistics defines ER as an approach which is “intended to develop good reading habits,
to build up knowledge of vocabulary and structure, and to encourage a liking for reading”(Richards, Platt, and Platt, 1992, p. 132 in Bamford & Day, 1998). Day and Bamford (1998)
suggest as goals that students will “have increased word recognition ability… [and] read at
an appropriate rate” (p. 45-46). From these examples, we can see that fluency, reinforcementof previously learnt vocabulary and grammar, and fostering a positive attitude towardreading in a second language are at the forefront of ER’s goals.
3. WHAT IS THE MOST COMMON READING TARGET RECOMMENDATION?
As many may guess, as with any skill, “Reading must be developed, and can only be
developed, by means of extensive and continual practice. People learn to read, and toread better, by reading” (Eskey, 1986, p. 21 in Day & Bamford, 1998, p. 4). “The more time
allotted to a program, the more the students read, the greater the likelihood that they will
become effective and efficient readers” (Day & Bamford, 1998, p. 46). Many studies havebeen conducted that back up these statements (see Day & Bamford, 1998, for an in-depth
discussion of these studies), but what is the minimum amount of reading a learner should do
if they want to make significant gains? The most common guideline given by ER advocates(Day & Bamford, 1998; Nation, 2009; www.erfoundation.org; www.robwaring.org) is one
book a week at the learner’s level. This simple piece of advice becomes difficult to follow
however, when one discovers that different publishers, and even graded readers series fromthe same publisher, use different grading schemes. For example, a Penguin Readers leveltwo book is not at the same level as an Oxford Bookworms level two book, and an Oxford
Bookworms level two book is not even at the same level as an Oxford Dominoes level two
book. Fortunately, standardising scales such as the Kyoto Scale and the Extensive Reading
Foundation (ERF) Graded Reader Scale (<www.erfoundation.org>) can solve this problem.
Another complicating issue is the fact that books lengths can vary greatly. Thisis common, even among books from the same level, series, or publisher. For instance,
Detective Work (Penguin Readers, level 4) is 10,933 words long while On the Beach (alsoPenguin Readers, level 4) is 32,655 words long. This kind of discrepancy means that even
if students do read one book a week, the actual amount that each learner reads is likely tovary considerably, and some less motivated students may seek to lighten their workload byseeking out and reading short books. This of course means they will benefit less from the ER
programme and, if students are being evaluated, will unfairly receive equal reward for lesseffort. A solution to this problem will be presented in the conclusion of this paper.

56

Obviously, the oversimplification present in the “one book per week” guideline, while
having some merit in that it is likely to encourage a significant amount of reading, has thepotential to have negative influences on an ER programme due to the discrepancies in booklevels and lengths mentioned earlier in this section.
4. HOW MUCH READING IS NEEDED TO DEVELOP VOCABULARY?
Nation (2009) states that “one way an extensive reading programme can contribute toproficiency development is through vocabulary growth” (p. 54). Day and Bamford (1998)
elaborate, claiming that “An extensive reading approach… ensures that students havethe best possible chance to… learn words from context through multiple encounters
and to become better readers so that incidental vocabulary learning becomes easier” (p.
18). Furthermore, Coady (1993, p. 18 in Day & Bamford, 1998) claims that “the incidental
acquisition hypothesis suggests that there is gradual but steady incremental growth ofvocabulary knowledge through meaningful interaction with text” (p. 17). Nation (2009)
adds, however, that despite this optimism, incidental learning is fragile, and therefore, “it isimportant to have a quantity of input with substantial opportunities for vocabulary repetition”(p. 50) to reinforce learning. Nation (2009) also states that “it is important to make surethat there are repeated opportunities to meet the same vocabulary in reading, and these
repeated opportunities should not be delayed too long” (p. 51). As Waring and Takaki (2003)
found, over time, learnt vocabulary is forgotten when such opportunities no longer existed.
In a study which utilised the Oxford Bookworms series, Nation and Wang (1999)
examined vocabulary learning possibilities using graded readers and found that in orderto achieve sufficient repetition of the words at each level, learners need to read one book aweek at levels 2 and 3 respectively, one and a half books at level 4, and two books at level 5
and 6 respectively per week. For reference, these levels correspond to Kyoto Scale levels 5,
6, 7, 8, and 9, and have average words counts of 5,973, 9,853, 15,881, 23,953, and 29,411
words respectively. Reading at this volume and pace ensures that the new words introduced
at each level are met repeatedly and often enough that they can be learnt incidentally.
However, reading two level 6 books per week, as Nation and Wang (1999) suggest isnecessary for the acquisition of new words at that level, would amount to 58,822 words per
week. It should be noted, that this suggestion is made with the caveat that, at higher levels,
because the headwords occur with low frequency, a significantly larger amount of readingneeds to be done to repeatedly encounter the headwords of that level. Nevertheless, if we
imagine a fifteen week course, the projected reading target while reading at this rate would
be 882,330 words; an unrealistic figure for most L2 learners. Using data from their study,
Nation and Wang (1999) also concluded that in order to learn words through incidental
acquisition it was necessary to read more books at higher levels than lower levels, and toproceed through the levels relatively quickly. They conceded, though, that this approach
would be counterproductive to the goal of fluency development, as fluency development
relies on reading easy books to build automaticity of previously learnt words. The notion thatthe goals of incidental vocabulary acquisition and fluency development are at odds to somedegree will be dealt with in the conclusion of this paper.

57

5. HOW MUCH READING IS NEEDED TO DEVELOP FLUENCY?
Fluency development, one of the main goals of ER, involves large amounts of reading which
can be of great benefit to learners. Beglar and Hunt’s (2014) assertion that “reading fluency
development is built on a foundation of large amounts of reading” (p. 32), has been echoed
repeatedly by second language reading experts (Beglar & Hunt, 2014; Day & Bamford, 1998;
Nation, 2009; Waring, 2009).
While it is true that a larger amount of reading will lead to more significant gains
in fluency, it should be noted that even a limited amount of ER has been shown to have apositive impact on fluency. A compilation of studies by Beglar and Hunt (2014) demonstrated
that both low intensity and relatively short ER programmes resulted in reading speed gains.
For example, Sheu’s (2003) investigation reported an average increase of 36.1 words per
minute (wpm) during a low intensity programme, while Iwahori (2008), found an averageincrease of 28.64 wpm in a short programme. Sheu’s (2003) study dealt with a low-intensity
ER programme in which learners read only nine graded readers over the course of twosemesters, while Iwahori’s (2008) study examined an intensive reading programme thatlasted just seven weeks. These results can be taken into account when considering a readingtarget for an ER programme.
To achieve significant gains in fluency, Beglar and Hunt (2014) found in their study
that 200,000 words annually is the minimum amount that should be read at the beginnerand intermediate levels. This goal seems to be backed by the results of the study which showthat “the top quintile, who gained an average of 32.99 wpm, read an average of 208,607
standard words over the academic year” as well as Beglar and Hunt’s impression that “a goalof reading 200,000 standard words in one year has been shown to be feasible in a variety ofeducational contexts” (p. 42). In this study, which focused solely on reading rate gains, it wasalso found that “lower-level simplified texts were more effective than higher-level simplified
texts” in promoting fluency (Beglar & Hunt, 2014, p. 44).
The contrast between this finding, suggesting the efficacy of lower-level reading
for fluency, and Nation and Wang’s (1999) finding, suggesting the efficacy of higherlevel reading for incidental vocabulary acquisition, adds further support to the notion thatrecommended reading levels differ depending on whether the goal of reading is fluency
development or vocabulary acquisition. Again, this will be taken into consideration in the
conclusion of this paper.
6. A METHOD FOR CALCULATING READING TARGETS
Minimum weekly reading targets using words read, and not books read, will be presented
here. (For information on book word counts see the ERF Graded Reader List (<erfoundation.
org>). The targets (see Table 1) are based on the average length of books from major
publishers at each level (based on the Kyoto Scale). The rule of thumb I am suggesting is to
use the average word count, at the appropriate level for each student, as a weekly readingtarget. As these are minimum targets, students should be encouraged to read more if
possible by whatever means of motivation the instructor prefers. Of course, for significant
reading gains, it is recommended that extensive reading be continued for several years.

58

Table 1
Average word counts of graded readers at different reading levels
Kyoto
Scale
Level

Starter

1

2

3

4

5

6

Average
word
count

545

1015

3459

3747

5163

8569

9890

7

8

9

13821 20153 22824

Note: *Recommended reading targets for each level (based on the Kyoto Scale), which have been calculated bysimply finding the average word count of books from major publishers at each level.

As can be seen in Table 1, the length of books does not increase in equal increments throughthe levels. This is probably due to the variation of word counts between publishers combinedwith the fact that not all publishers have books available at each level. Despite word countvariation and differences between publishers, however, if one does wish to designate
measurable and fair reading targets for learners, then this table may be useful as a guide toenable them to do so.
7. CONCLUSION
The complicating factors of setting appropriate reading targets for an ER programme include
the use of different grading schemes by publishers, as well as variations in the amount of ER
and the way that ER should be done to achieve different goals (i.e., vocabulary development
or fluency development). It has been demonstrated that the common recommendationof reading one book a week at the appropriate level works well as general advice, butneeds qualification because there is significant variation in the length of books at eachlevel depending on publisher and series. Other studies in ER have also identified that gains
in fluency and overall reading proficiency are more achievable than gains in incidental
vocabulary acquisition. And therefore, these goals should be prioritised in the language
classroom. If reading large amounts is one of the best ways to become a good reader, andif vocabulary can be learnt in other ways such as with flash cards, it makes sense to set aminimum reading target that is more conducive to fluency development than to vocabularyacquisition. This seems prudent since, at advanced levels, intensive study that pays direct
attention to low-frequency vocabulary appears to be more efficient and practical than relying
on incidental acquisition by way of extensive reading. This view is supported by Brown(2008) who says that “There is no doubt that for simply learning the meaning of words, direct
intensive methods are far more efficient than extensive reading” (p. 239), and Paribakht
and Wesche (1997, in Huckin & Coady, 1999) whose study showed that reading coupledwith vocabulary instruction leads to quantitatively and qualitatively superior gains whencompared to reading alone.

59

REFERENCES
Beglar, D., & Hunt, A. (2014). Pleasure reading and reading rate gains. Reading in a Foreign
Language, 26(1), 29-48.
Brown, D. (2008). Why and how textbooks should encourage extensive reading. ELT Journal,
63(3), 238-245.
Day, R. R., & Bamford, J. (1998). Extensive reading in the second language classroom.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Huckin, T., & Coady, J. (1999). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Studies
in second language acquisition, 21(2), 181-193.
Nation, I. S. P., & Wang, K. (1999). Graded readers and vocabulary. Reading in a Foreign Language, 12, 355–380.
Nation, I. S. P. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL reading and writing. New York, NY: Routledge.
The Extensive Reading Foundation. (2013, October 13). Retrieved from http://erfoundation.
org/wordpress/
Waring, R., & Takaki, M. (2003). At what rate do learners learn and retain new vocabulary fromreading a graded reader. Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(2), 130-163.
Waring, R. (2009). The inescapable case for extensive reading. In A. Cirocki (Ed.), Extensive
Reading in English Language Leaching (pp.93-111). Munich, Germany: LINCOM
Europa. Retrieved from http://www.robwaring.org/er/what_and_why/er_is_vital.htm

60Devising an Effective Methodology for Measuring the Benefitof L2 Subtitled Extensive Watching on Learner Motivation,
Autonomy and Skill Development
L２字幕付き多試聴 (Extensive Watching) によるモチベーション、
自律学習、スキル発達に与える効果に対する測定方法の考察
Kensaku Ishimaki, 石巻 賢作
Tamagawa University, Centre for English as Lingua Franca, Japank-ishimaki@lab.tamagawa.ac.jp
Thomas C. Saunders, サンダース・トーマス（宮松 知雄）
Tamagawa University, Centre for English as Lingua Franca, Japantcsaunders@lab.tamagawa.ac.jp

ABSTRACTAs the digital revolution continues apace, those involved in education are presented with anincreasing number of choices for improving second language (L2) skills and abilities. Someof these technological advancements represent a relatively novel way to incorporate modern
media into educational approaches. This paper maintains that watching videos in particular,
lends itself to heightened student engagement. As Uematsu (2004) has demonstrated,students who engage in film watching, with L2 captions enabled, showed a distinct
improvement over subjects who watched the same material with using L1 captions. The
authors hope to take these findings a step further and distinguish a quantified comparativeadvantage in the efficiency of this practice, when combined with Extensive Watching (EW)
activities that maximise exposure to authentic, natural and contextualized language. The
contention is that, by engaging in EW activities with English Captions (EC) enabled, students
can simultaneously exercise both their listening and reading faculty. Although this paper
does not attempt to gauge tangible skill-improvements at this time, it will act as a precursor
to a forthcoming and deeper study that will attempt to do so. For now, we will investigate theeffects of an EW pilot project on learner motivation and autonomy.

KEYWORDS: extensive watching, closed captioning, learner motivation, learner autonomy,
extensive reading principles

61

要旨
デジタル革命の急速な進行に伴い、教育関係者にとっては第２言語の技能向上をはかる上でより多様な学習方法が選択できるようになりつつある。こうしたテクノロジーの進歩により、現代のメディアを教育手法に取り入れた比較的新しい学習方法も提起されている。本稿ではその中で特に映画鑑賞が学習行動を促す効果に着目する。植松(2004)は英語(L2)字幕を利用した映画を使用し、同じ映画を日本語(L1)字幕で鑑賞したグループよりも高い学習効果が得られたことを示している。本稿ではこの知見をさらに深め、上記の活動と、Extensive Watching(EW)
ー学習者がより現実に近い自然でかつ状況を伴った言語使用に可能な限り多くふれることを意図した活動ーとを組み合わせ、その活動の優位性について量的な分析を行うことを想定している。この研究の目的は、英語字幕を使用した多試聴（EW)という学習活動を採用することにより学習者がリスニングとリーディングの両方の技能を並行して学習することができるかを検証することである。なお、本稿は学習者の技能の向上について量的に測定を行うことを意図するものではなく、これを行うためのより詳細な研究に向けての先行研究として位置付けられるものである。今回の研究は、後に予定されているより包括的な研究の計画に向け、まずはEWの試験運用による学習者の動機づけや自律学習への効果を検証する。
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Brief Background
Technological advancements in the last 20~30 years have led to an immense increase in theavailability of digital media and Information Technology (IT) resources for a growing numberof people. The increasing ubiquity of these developments has led to great changes in theways people approach all manner of activities and daily pursuits – educational practices
and ways of learning have by no means been immune to these vicissitudes. It is impossible
to investigate all these manifestations and their effects on teaching practices in one essay.
However, the authors would like to focus on a particular advancement and how it might bebeneficially applied in the realm of foreign language study: digitised video material with
controllable subtitling capabilities. It is the authors’ belief that the digitisation of videos,such as DVDs and web streaming, represent a modern media advancement that can provide
learners with several education-specific advantages while also providing students with
innovative and engaging materials that increases motivation. Used strategically, the authors
postulate that these can be immensely valuable tools in these changing times.
1.2 Aims of This Paper
More specifically, this paper will focus on a teaching practice termed Extensive Watching(EW), and look to investigate learners’ attitudes toward it. In this instance, the implementationof this EW methodology was aimed at improving the listening and reading skills of several
university-level English as Lingua Franca (ELF) students in Japan. It’s hard to pin down
exactly when EW activities began, but it is safe to say that it is a relatively new concept in
ELT -especially when one considers the novelty of controllable subtitling capabilities, thathave only come about in the Digital Age. That said, EW derives many of its tenets from thewell-established practices of Extensive Reading (ER) and places a specific focus on exposing
students to large volumes of language use as its greatest benefit. Stalwarts of both theEW and ER philosophy, contend that activities of this nature can foster and improve higher
levels of motivation and learner-autonomy in ELF study, while simultaneously improving

62ability in the target language (Bell, 2001; Day & Bamford, 1998; King, 2002; Lin, 2002;
Uematsu, 2004). One of the key concepts behind the advantages of EW implications is adirect derivative of Extensive Reading (ER), as adapted to film and video viewing. There isalready considerable research to support the utility of the ER methodology and its practicaleffectiveness (Bell, 2001; Day & Bamford, 1998). This paper aims to distinguish a competentand practical means of implementing EW techniques in the realm of ELF education, as wellas make initial explorations into its effects on user motivation and learner autonomy. The
authors believe that the digitisation of visual media (and its expressed relation to DVDs andtheir language options), adds a tremendously valuable functionality, when applied to EW
exercises and activities.
The basis of this claim is heavily founded on studies and papers that have been
published and presented elsewhere, which make assertions to the advantage of watching
English language films with the English Captions (EC) engaged (King, 2002; Uematsu, 2004).
It has been argued that by doing so, students not only improve their listening abilities, butalso improve their reading capacity as well (King, 2002; Uematsu, 2004). The primary goalsof this project are twofold: first, to shed further light on the advantages of using digital video
media with English captions, as an interesting means for students to work on improving theirlistening and reading capacities; and second, doing so while also being exposed to highvolumes of vocabulary and language-in-context, in the same spirit of ER enterprise.
1.3 A Small Caveat
Finally, it is important to note that this project is very much a “work-in-progress” and is aprecursor to a longer forthcoming paper that aims to investigate the comparative advantageof this method over more traditional means of study. However, at the time of publication,
the project lacks the empirical data and primary sources to distinguish these claims with any
definitive proclamation. Without deliberately attempting to answer any specific researchquestion(s), the aim of this paper is to discern and delineate the theories and practices
behind this project; the overall architecture of its methodology; analyse implications oflearner autonomy and motivation; and address any considerations and adaptations that the
researchers may need to undertake in the longer-term.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Video and DVD use in ELTThere have been a great many studies conducted on the efficacy of using films, TV shows,and other video technology resources (VTR) material as tools in English Language Study(Hirano & Matsumoto, 2011; Ismaili, 2013; King, 2002; Lin, 2002; Nakamura, 2007). Although
there is great variance in approaches and techniques, the general consensus is that these areuseful study mechanisms, with somewhat nuanced differences in findings and conclusions.
Where there is contention, it is largely in the arenas of comparative effectiveness of one
method over another, or the depth of their efficacy and utility. Without contesting a singularprocedural superiority, a brief review of these findings is useful here.
There are countless arguments that have shown that video use enhances several
areas of language capacity and Nakamura (2007; p.126) has conveniently listed these63advantages as providing: (a) exposure to genuine and realistic language (demonstrating
natural speed and pronunciation); (b) understandings of different cultural features orpractices; (c) clear contexts for students and learners to understand situation-specific English
usage; (d) enjoyable settings to lower students’ affective filters; (e) identification of common
spoken language through subtitles and/or scripts; (f) encouragement of independent andautonomous study outside the classroom; and (g) longer concentration periods with lower
levels of study fatigue. There is little research to contest these assertions, yet the potencyof corollary outcomes in actual language ability and improvement is debatable. Yet, almost
all scholars agree on the positive effects and affirmations above, when taken in relation to
the advantages of student motivation and engagement, as they relate to video watchingactivities.
The use of subtitles and their effectiveness on the other hand, is an area of scholastic
review that has generated a fair degree of dispute. There is a relatively large body of inquiry
in this sphere and one can find any number of reports and papers to make assertions (with ahigh level of certainty) about the positive and/or negative outcomes of watching video with(or without) captions engaged. That said, the vast majority of these analyses have been too
myopic in their scope. Most reports tend to focus on the utility function or marginal benefit
as it applies to one specific area of language improvement (most often listening ability)(Hirano & Matsumoto, 2011). Where studies have not focused on individual language skills,
there is limited literature that investigates the direct benefit of watching videos with L2 audio
and L2 captions simultaneously engaged. For example, some reports look at using video
as supplemental to scripts, captions and other reading material or vice versa (Ismaili, 2013;
Iwasaki, 2011); or the comparison of focusing on one video extensively, over many shortclips from several sources (Osuka, 2007). Although the findings are interesting, most studiesof this sort do not look at the marginal benefit of watching English language videos with theECs engaged -especially not in the spirit of an extensive exercise, where high volumes ofconsumption are specifically encouraged.
On the other hand, Uematsu (2004) has cogently demonstrated that when students
watched video content with ECs engaged they were able to improve in multiple skill
areas (both listening and reading) and demonstrated the advantages of this practice. His
study separated students into two groups and had them watch the same material. One
group watched the films with L2 audio and L1 subtitles, the other with both L2 audio andcaptions. Upon completion of the project, it was discovered that while both groups saw
some improvement in listening abilities, as measured by the TOEIC Test, the second group(with L2 audio and L2 captions), also enjoyed a measurable enhancement in the reading
section of the test -presumably, other areas of language proficiency would have seen somecomparative improvement in the second group as well, but these were not quantified.
Additionally, Ryu (2011) and Lin (2002) have argued that closed caption use (either L1
or L2) lowers the difficulty level of the authentic material movies, and makes input morecomprehensible. Also, Garza (1991) explained that watching captions-engaged video gives
students a familiar graphic representation of spoken language. Students are therefore more
empowered to begin assigning meaning to previously difficult aural utterances and cangradually build up their listening comprehension, in tandem with their reading fluency.
Keeping these advantages in mind, the digitalisation of video and the widespread64

development and distribution of DVDs means that students have increasing access tocontrollable media, where language and caption choice can be decided by the user. Further,because DVDs allow viewers to stop, pause, rewind and review scenes or whole films andprograms, there is an undisputed gain in learner-autonomy for the development of effective
study practices. This is of course not limited to the DVD format (some video-streaming
websites such as www.TED.com have toggles for multi-lingual closed captioning capabilities).
However, since almost all films are now released or available on DVD, there is an immense
amount of choice for pupils to select from and they can elect to watch films or other media
that suits their individual preference. This element of choice and learner-agency is an
important factor when considering extensive study exercises and their merits for student
incentive and action. This consideration was a key motivating factor when devising this study
and the authors aimed at creating a high level of choice for the students to decide from.
2.2 Principles of Extensive Reading and Applications for Extensive Watching
Although its educational merit is somewhat less contested in terms of measured advantages
for language learners’ skill development, the field of study surrounding ER practices is quite
profound. Yet, for the purposes of this project, the authors will focus on the key advantagesof the ER approach and its theoretical understandings; especially as they relate to theiradaptation for EW activities and methods.
Extensive Watching is not an entirely novel concept and its development orconception is heavily couched in the literature, philosophy, and practice of the Extensive
Reading approaches (Holden, 2000; Lin, 2002). A key theoretical principle of ER is the
Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), which generally states that learners are
intrinsically motivated when they have more control of their learning and the materials used.
In their Top Ten-Principles of Teaching Extensive Reading, Day and Bamford (2002) include
the following tenets (among others) as being central to the effectiveness of ER activities:(a) students and learners should choose what they want to read; and (b) the purpose ofreading is usually related to pleasure, information acquisition and general understanding.
Both of these claims are consistent with the theory of self-determination and, when applied
to a medium such as films or TV shows (which already lend themselves to higher degrees
of learner motivation and engagement), should (as this paper contends) provide a virtuous
cycle of reinforcement in regards to learner-autonomy and motivation.
Yet, before addressing elements of engagement and motivation, it is important tonote that Day and Bamford also distinguish two other aspects of effective ER activity thathave some bearing on this study: (a) the material should be easy; and (b) a focus is placedon students reading as much as possible. With regard to the former, deciding levels ofwritten texts is somewhat easier than choosing levels of films and videos. There is a litanyof resources, such as Graded Readers and thorough investigation in the ways and meansof grading written material. However, this is not the case for films, and cataloguing video
according to English difficulty or content is an underdeveloped area of study - somethingthat proved to be a minor stumbling block when designing this survey.
In terms of the volume of consumption, it is the position of these researchers that
exposure to English (in any form) is tantamount to any effective learning in L2 study. With
that sentiment, EW activities adapted from ER principles (particularly with ECs engaged),65

espouse an unprecedented level of consumption of the target language in all its forms. In ahighly homogeneous and relatively insular society such as Japan (where access to natural,authentic, and contextualised English is at a premium), the value of this exposure to aural
varieties of the studied language cannot be understated.
2.3 Enhanced Learner Autonomy and Motivation
Furthering the above arguments, Yoshino (2008) has shown that using Graded Readers
through ER activities in her course promoted learner autonomy and reported a positive
attitude toward English study among learners. Her conclusions implied that students weremore intrinsically motivated to study on their own time and their own terms, when given ahigh level of choice regarding the materials employed to improve their foreign language
fluency.
As evidenced above, other scholars have argued that video use also increases learnerengagement and motivation (Hirano & Matsumoto, 2011; Ismaili, 2013; Lin, 2002; Nakamura,2007). Therefore, it stands to reason that if these two practices are combined in EW-inspired
education, students should demonstrate a high level of commitment and autonomous
educational industry. As such, the first stage of this project, and the primary purpose ofthis paper, is to establish a strong correlation between EW-oriented enterprise and useror student motivation -learner autonomy. With that in mind, the authors devised a scheme
to grade and quantify student responses to EW-directed study in order to measure theeffectiveness of the longer-term study centered on the efficiency of EW-based curricula.
3. METHODOLOGY
Before discussing the finer details of the methodology it will be useful to restate that thiswas a pilot project and its main goals were to: (a) to examine learners’ attitude toward theactivity; and (b) to flesh out any administrative problems or drawbacks that the researchers
could face when implementing the more robust investigation of EW benefit in an educational
context. Since these purposes were rather limited in scope, it was deemed sufficient to only
allot a short period of time for its completion.
More specifically, this activity was assigned as homework in four separate ELF classes
during the 2014/15 Fall-Winter Semester (assigned over the year-end winter break from
December 20, 2014 ~ January 8, 2015), at a private Japanese university. The classes ranged
in size from 15-20 students (69 participants total) and all subjects were Japanese nationals(save one, who was from China), in 1st and 2nd year university (usually aged 18-20),
majoring in either the Liberal Arts or Comparative Culture faculties. Subjects were explicitly
instructed to watch the various titles with ECs engaged and asked to watch as many films as
possible. The completion of this project was mandatory and students were told that it would
factor into their final grades, yet in order to maintain an element of the voluntary spirit ofExtensive Watching, subjects were given a large list of films and TV shows to choose from,which included 100 titles, and set a minimum watching requirement. Anything beyond thatminimum was done on their own accord, however, a grading incentive was attached to theextra films they watched.
In order to devise the list, the researchers brainstormed several titles that were thought66

to be interesting or relevant to the students. During this process, considerations were madeto include a wide variety of titles and genres that would give the subjects as much choice
as possible. However, since the researchers are also the teachers of these classes and havewell-founded relationships with the learners, the list was devised with the students’ levels in
mind. An in-depth review of the films will reveal that there is a slight bias toward films andtitles that are marketed to more juvenile audiences or subjects. This is a direct reflection ofgenerally selecting level- and subject-appropriate movies or shows.
It must also be mentioned that there was no way to assign levels to the films and TV
shows, as there is a considerable dearth of research and study in this area. There are a few
web resources and studies, which aimed to create a quasi-leveling system for films, howeverthese were based on scripts found on the Internet Movie Script Database <www.imsdb.
com>, which is a crowd-based site and materials are all user-generated. Scripts on IMSDB
are written or submitted by anyone who choses to do so, therefore there is a considerable
degree of variance in standards and styles. As such, the accuracy of word counts and levels
is very unreliable. For example, some scripts were very heavy on scene descriptions or
character actions, while others were explicitly dialogue based.
Since accurate word counts of the various scripts were unavailable among theaccessible resources, the authors decided to use runtimes as the congruent variable by whichto assign points for the films. The purpose of this points system was twofold: first, to ensurethat students watched the films and participated in the activity; and second, to establish abaseline of viewing time to meet minimal requirements of sufficient quantifiability. The titles
were awarded one point for every thirty-minute block of runtime. For example, a 102 minutefilm would receive 3 points as it is in the 3 block range, whereas a 22 minute TV show would
be awarded 1 point as it did not surpass the first 30 minute block. Regretfully, this led tosome discrepancy and potential selection bias among the titles since a video that was, forexample, 94 minutes long would receive the same point value as a film that was 119 minutesin length (both fall in the 30 minute block of 91~120 minutes, meaning they both get 3
points). A further shortfall of this method was that it did not account for films that might beseen to utilise difficult language or subject matter, however, as mentioned above, the overall
importance of the project was to expose students to as much English as possible, and theauthors felt this was the simplest way to achieve this end.
Once the list was compiled and distributed to the classes, the researchers asked
that students complete two online surveys, which were facilitated by the survey anddata-generating website, SurveyMonkey <www.surveymonkey.com>. The two surveys
differed in the fact that one was to be filled-out on multiple occasions, after watching eachselection (the Extensive Watching Film/Video Report –see Appendix B); and the second
was to be completed at the end of the whole activity, to provide overall feedback about
the assignment. The purpose of these questionnaires was threefold: (a) to demonstrateevidence of task completion and film viewing; (b) to provide an element of interactivity
and help students to digest the films they were watching by delivering task-based activities
and questions pertaining to each title watched; and (c) to generate data for analysis of the
project’s efficacy and development of autonomous study practices.
Upon completion of the assignment, the researchers were able to draw certain
conclusions from the data and generate several suggested changes and amendments for67their proposed forthcoming research project, as well as considerations for further analysis.
These findings and any limitations that were encountered are discussed below.
4. FINDINGS AND RESULTS
Relying more heavily on the second survey (a post-activity questionnaire), the authors
proceeded to clean the data and found that 49 of 66 responses were suitable for analysis.
The pertinent data to gauge motivation and effectiveness of the project are delineated here.
4.1 Volume of EW Completion and Student Activity
In the final survey, Q1 and Q15 (Tables 1 & 2) demonstrate the overall amount of films
watched and approximate time spent for the EW activity. Except for two subjects thatwatched 12 movies, the majority of students watched between 2 to 6 films, or between 4 to
16 hours.
Table 1Q1. How many movies did
you watch?

68

Number ofmoviesNumber of
respondents

12

2

11

0

10

0

9

0

8

1

7

1

6

6

5

5

4

5

3

19

2

8

1

2

Table 2
Q15. About how many hours did you
spend on this activity in total?
Hours

Number of
respondents

24-26

2

22-24

0

20-22

1

18-20

0

16-18

0

14-16

5

12-14

2

10-12

2

8-10

7

6-8

17

4-6

10

2-4

2

0-2

0

Unfortunately, these figures do not demonstrate a high level of EW activity on the partof the students by their own agency, and when one cross-checks these results with answers
provided in the Extensive Watching Film/Video Reports, or the points allotment in the video
list, it is plain to see that many of the students chose to do the minimum required viewing.
Unless a subject chooses two extremely long films worth 6 points each, they must watch
between 3 and 4 films. This majority likely reflects students choosing to view the minimum
runtime (or slightly above it) to ensure completion of the assignment and receive a passing
grade.
However, the structural time limitation of the exercise may account for part of thereasoning behind this. Since this project was assigned over the winter holidays students may
not have had enough time to view much more than the base requirement. Given more time
to watch these films or had the project been implemented earlier in the term these numbers
may have reflected a higher level of interest and participation. That said, the subjects within
the majority that demonstrated slightly higher viewing rates than the mean average (5 to
8 films in Q1, or 10 to 16 hours in Q15), did show some level of engagement beyond theminimum requirement.
A final note regarding the two subjects who claimed to have watched 12 films eachmust be made here. Upon further inspection, there were some discrepancies between
the data provided by these two students and their responses compiled in the Extensive
Watching Film/Video Reports. Discrepancies of this sort represent a form of administrative
constraint, which will be discussed in greater detail under the Limitations and Constraints
section below. Since the assignment had a direct link to the students’ grades there was aninherent incentive for the subjects to exaggerate the number of films they watched. Although
the answers provided by these two subjects were found to contain potential deviations of
this sort, it is impossible to ascertain whether or not this reflects the structural bias intrinsic in
the assignment’s grade component. There is a possibility that the two students in question
misunderstood the task or were confused about the method of filling out the two different
surveys. Despite this variance, the subjects’ responses were included even after the data
cleaning stage, as the authors deemed that their feedback in the rest of the survey would still
be useful.
4.2 Levels of Learning and Perceived Skill Improvement
Q2 to Q4 (see Table 3), probe the perceived levels of skill improvement for each of the major
areas in language study. However, since time constraints did not allow for empirical testing
via a standardised proficiency test such as the TOEIC®, these results cannot be verified
with quantifiable data. Yet, it is still useful to note that the majority of students felt they had
improved their overall abilities and this could have a positive influence on confidence andlearner engagement in the future. With a particular focus on listening and reading capacities,
the subjects demonstrated a very high level of accordance with the statements affirming thepositive effects of this activity.

69

Table 3
Summary of student perceptions about the language learning benefits of EW
Statement
Q2. Watching videos
for this activity helped
you improve yourlistening skills.
Q3. Watching videos
for this activity helped
you improve yourreading skills.

Strongly
Agree
agree

Neither agree ordisagreeDisagreeStrongly
disagree

41%

49%

10%

-

-

22%

47%

24%

6%

-

Q4. Watching videos
for this activity helped
you improve yourwriting skills.

2%

31%

33%

31%

4%

Q5. Watching videos
for this activity helped
you improve yourspeaking skills.

8%

29%

49%

10%

4%

4.3 Learner Attitudes and Motivation
Overall, the results of the final survey showed a generally positive attitude toward theactivity. Table 4 shows responses to Q6, Q7 and Q8, which address participant opinions
about the project. Generally, students claimed that they enjoyed this method of study andmany of them showed a markedly positive attitude toward the endeavor as a means to keep
motivated in their continued pursuit of English improvement. The responses to Q7 and Q8
in particular, demonstrate a very positive sentiment toward the EW experiment and thisreassures one of the central assumptions of this paper, regarding student motivation andlearner autonomy.
Table 4
Numerical representations of learner attitudes and opinions
Statement

70

Strongly
Agree
agree

Neither agree ordisagreeDisagreeStrongly
disagreeQ6. Watching videos
for this activity
motivated you to learn
English more.

49%

39%

8%

4%

-

Q7. This is a good way
to study English.

65%

27%

8%

-

-

Q8. I would
recommend thismethod of study to afriend.

57%

37%

4%

2%

-

4.4 Negative Questions
Negative questions were also employed in the survey to act as a secondary check for the
purposes of cross-referencing answers and distinguishing any deviations that may arise
from students failing to understand the questions. Table 5 speaks to these questions andthe data suggests that these effectively served their purpose of reinforcement. In both topic
areas (Preference and Attitude for Q9; and Perception of Learning in Q10), subjects showed
positive attitudes and opinions toward the activity.
Table 5Student responses to the negative statements
Statement

Strongly
Agree
agree

Neither agree ordisagreeDisagreeStrongly
disagreeQ9. I did not like thisactivity.

-

8%

6%

43%

43%

Q10. I did not learnmuch from this activity.

-

-

10%

49%

41%

4.5 Continued EW Study
At first glance, the following preferences illustrated in Table 6 shows somewhat contradictory
information, but upon consideration, there is a logical explanation for the minor discrepancy.
The responses to Q11 seem to suggest that the subjects were interested in viewing films
with ECs engaged. In fact, upon completion of the method after the term of the project, 86%of respondents affirmed their intention to continue utilising this method. Yet the student
responses to Q12 suggest that many students (who had an opinion on the matter) felt that
this may not be the best method for improving their English. The authors feel that although
the information in these two figures might be at odds with one another, one explanation
for this could be that many students choose to utilise a wide variety of techniques whenstudying English. Although a lot of the respondents may not have felt that this method was
the optimum practice available to them, they may elect to include it among their repertoireof study approaches and continue to occasionally watch films with ECs engaged.

71

Table 6
Student responses to items relating to the future implementation of EW
Statement

Strongly
Agree
agree

Neither agree ordisagreeDisagreeStrongly
disagreeQ11. I will continue
to use this method ofstudy to improve myEnglish.

37%

49%

12%

2%

-

Q12. I feel that othermethods of study are
better for improving
my English.

4%

29%

63%

4%

-

4.6 Language Preference Before and After
Although the respondents were not explicitly queried on their language preference for films
before the assignment, Q13 asked what their predilection is in their free time (see Table 7).
Since this was asked at the termination of the exercise, it’s likely safe to assume that evenafter the EW activity, the majority of subjects still preferred Japanese subtitles when watchingfilms for leisure. Conversely, Q14 (Table 7) suggests that the EW activity had an impact on
their preference of language. However, from this survey, we cannot tell how this inclination
has changed and to what degree. To investigate this further, the researchers may want toadminister a pre-activity questionnaire and a post-hoc survey to quantify and determine thedepth of its effect on language preference when watching L2 films. In the future, it will be
useful for researchers to conduct a focus-group discussion to elicit immediate responses.
It will also be good to include open-ended questions to learn more about the extant
preferences and how they might change over time. Lastly, it will be interesting to see howmuch students will engage in viewing films with L2 audio and L2 captions when watching
media without the explicit goal of language study in mind.
Table 7
Students’ language preference of film viewing for leisureQ13. When I watch
English language
films in my free time I
prefer...

Q14. The activity
changed my preference
for language films.

72Japanese Japanese
dubbing subtitles

Englishsubtitles

Neither
dubbing
norsubtitles

-

8%

55%

35%

2%

Strongly
agree

Agree

NeutralDisagreeStrongly
Disagree

20%

53%

24%

2%

-

5. LIMITATIONS AND CONSTRAINTS
The authors encountered several limitations to this study and these will need to beaddressed going forward with this research. The limitations can be broken down into the four
sub-headings of: Administrative Issues; Structural Biases and Shortcomings; Survey- or DataSpecific Problems; and, User Engagement Issues.
5.1 Administrative Constraints
As analysis of the data took place it became apparent that some students may not have been
entirely honest in their answers or about how thoroughly they completed the assignment.
Overall, there was no mechanism to ensure the candor of the students when performing
the tasks demanded of them. Participants could cut corners at any number of areas in theassignment (e.g. actually watching the films with ECs engaged; actually watching the videos
at all; copying each other’s work; etc.) and responses had to be taken at face value.
As mentioned above, there were some debatable answers to some of the questions(more so in the Extensive Watching Film/Video Reports than elsewhere) and the only
recourse was to clean the data as thoroughly as possible to ensure the legitimacy of theresearch. Of course, these constraints exist in other areas of study as well, and one must
understand that there will always be some incentive to cheat or not be entirely honest whencompleting the tasked homework.
Ideally, as the longer-term project is rolled out over entire semesters and restructured
to not have as much of a time constraint factor, there could be a change in the way subjects
approach the activity. Furthermore, as discussed below, making EW a weekly exercise, wherestudents are asked to fill out a form each week, might help to mitigate the urge to cheat. Thatsaid, there is currently no means by which to totally ensure user honesty and the researchers
must have faith that the incentive to cheat does not outweigh the desire to maintainacademic integrity.
5.2 Structural Biases and Shortcomings
As with all research, there were some structural biases and issues that affected the research.
Chief among these was time constraints, as this was carried out over a very short periodof time. Students did not have enough time to develop a habit of EW practice and were
only allotted a few weeks to complete the assignment. If this were made into a weekly
exercise, where learners were asked to view and report on one film per week, perhaps theywould have watched more videos and benefited from a habit-forming routine that ensured
greater amounts of films were watched and thus larger data generated. Although the shortterm goals were seen to be reached for this stage of the project, the authors are currently
entertaining ideas that could mitigate this minor drawback and ideally demonstrate aquantifiable and tangible improvement in skills and abilities.
Additionally, although the list of film and show titles was quite vast, it was limited
to approximately 100 titles. This is partly due to the fact that the researchers did not haveenough time to compile a more comprehensive list and will surely be addressed by the nextstage of the study.
Finally, since the authors were unable to discover truly useful grading or leveling73

quotients for the films and TV shows, there was no means to assist students in selecting levelappropriate films to ensure the maximum benefit of an extensive reading style programme.
5.3 Survey or Data-Specific Problems
There were also some areas related to the data collection that could be improved upon. The
biggest of these is certainly with regard to the verification of improved skills and abilities.
Since there was no empirically measurable testing done (such as a standardised proficiency
test) at the beginning and end of the project, any perceptions of language improvement on
the part of the subjects had to be taken at face value and could not be objectively quantified.
In relation to this, the study lacked a control group against which to measure the marginalutility value of this method. That said, it was never the purview of this study (at this stage,
anyway) to attempt to investigate this comparative advantage.
Furthermore, it became apparent that several of the questions were perhaps poorly
formulated. In hindsight, it will be useful to restructure several of the questions to improveon response options and data accuracy. For instance, many questions included a middle
option such as “3 -Neither Agree Nor Disagree”. Although the availability of this option isappropriate in certain questions, there were quite a few (particularly in the post hoc survey)
that may have conditioned the respondents’ answers.
Finally, and somewhat in relation to the above, the authors encountered somequestions where students were given too much leeway in response types. For example,
there were some questions that should have been limited to selecting a numerical value,
but during the survey creation stage, “text input” options were used on SurveyMonkey andtherefore respondents could give ambiguous or inaccurate answers. This meant that in thedata cleaning and analysing stage, researchers had to use rounding and approximations todiscern the optimum quantitative data. More care will be necessary in future.
5.4 User Engagement Issues
Although closely linked with the Structural Biases and Shortcomings above, a few user- or
subject-centered problems were encountered as well.
First, as we saw in the data analysis section, many of the students chose to only do theminimum-viewing requirement. Again, had the subjects been given more time, then perhaps
this problem would not have been so acute. However, it must be noted that the true strategy
behind Extensive Watching was not entirely realised. Although the majority of the learners
completed the assignment, there were only a few who elected to watch a greater number of
titles and videos.
Also, there may have been some confusion regarding the English used in the survey
questions. This was addressed in the preceding section, but must also be understood as ashortcoming of the study subjects as well. As mentioned above, it will probably be useful tohave bilingual questions that ensure the subjects fully comprehend each question, allowing
for responses to be as accurate as possible.
6. FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS
Beyond what has already been discussed above, the authors feel that in order to create74

more effective and directed study, there are several areas that will benefit from someattention. First, giving more time to conduct the exercise will certainly alleviate some of theconcerns and difficulties in implementation. As alluded to above, the project should prosper
if the subjects are asked to watch one film per week and keep a film viewing log or report.
Second, having a direct correlation between grades and a minimum viewing requirement
over a limited time will tempt students to cheat or be disingenuous about their answers.
Minimum thresholds are certainly useful, but if the participants are given a more leisurely
viewing schedule, then perhaps the outcomes would be different. As for quantifying the
progress and effectiveness of this exercise in regard to skills-assessments, the authors will be
continuing the project in the coming terms and using TOEIC IP results to discern if there are
any tangible benefits, as Uematsu (2004) has already suggested.
In a slightly different vein, since the students involved are all enrolled in a university
ELF program, more ELF-specific principles and considerations could be taken into account.
There was some effort made to include a selection of films that were demonstrative ofdifferent English varieties, however these titles were quite limited and the list could certainly
include a few more. Interestingly, the most popular titles were from the Harry Potter series
and/or Disney selections, so the subjects may not actually be interested in viewing a large
selection of films that demonstrate the worldwide variances of English. Again, this couldchange if the term of the assignment is altered and/or if the instructors made more of aneffort to emphasise the importance of ELF philosophy in the regular classes. If a priority on
ELF tutelage were made more apparent, then perhaps the surveys should include questions
that deliberately force students to think about and consider ELF, while watching the films.
Finally, with consideration to the list itself, more titles in general will provide more choice
and the authors should attempt to devise a means by which to have accurate leveling andgrading for the video options.
However, overall the researchers found that the data - albeit limited in scopeand depth - was sufficiently reassuring to continue with the project and devise a morecomprehensive study to engage in for the future. At the time of writing, the authors are
already working to adjust the parameters of the inquiry to accommodate the above
considerations, as well as delineate a truly effective means of implementing this digitised
medium and approach in their ELT methodologies.
REFERENCES
Bell, T. (2001). Extensive reading: Speed and comprehension. The Reading Matrix, 1(1).
Retrieved from http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/bell/article.pdf
Day, R., & Bamford, J. (1998). Extensive reading in the second language classroom.
Cambridge University Press.
Day, R., & Bamford, J. (2002). Top ten principles for teaching extensive reading. Reading in a
Foreign Language, 14(2), 136-141.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self−determination in humanbehavior. New York: Plenum
Garza, T. J. (1991). Evaluating the use of captioned video materials in advanced foreign
language learning. Foreign Language Annals, 24(3), 239-258.

75

Holden, W. R. (2000). Making the most of movies: Keeping film response journals.
Modern English Teacher, 9(2), 40-45.
Ismaili, M. (2013). The effectiveness of using movies in the EFL classroom– a study
conducted at south east European university. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary
Studies, 2(4), 121-132.
Iwasaki, H. (2011). Lexical Inference With Movies and Their Scripts. 映画英語教育研究: 紀要,(16), 79-90.
King, J. (2002). Using DVD feature films in the EFL classroom. Computer Assisted Language
Learning, 15(5), 509-523.
Lin, L. Y. (2002). The effects of feature films upon learners’ motivation, listening
comprehension performance and speaking skills: The learner-centered approach.
Taipei: Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Nakamura, K. (2007). Teaching learning strategies to EFL college students through DVD
movies. 北海道工業大学研究紀要, 35, 125-132.
Osuka, N. (2007). The Comparison of a Class Using One Movie and a Class Using Several
Movies. 映画英語教育研究: 紀要, (12), 3-12.
Ryu, D. H. (2011). The Effects of Film Subtitles on Students’ Language Awareness. 映画英語教
育研究:紀要, (16), 17-31.
Xhemaili, M. (2013). The advantages of using films to enhance student’s reading
skills in the EFL classroom. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(13), 62-66.
植松茂男. (2004). DVD映画教材利用時の英語字幕が英語学習に与える影響について. メディア
教育研究, 1(1), 107-114.
平野順也, & 松本知子. (2011). 映画を利用したリスニング指導: 総合的な英語力を目指して. 映
画英語教育研究: 紀要, (16), 91-103.
吉野康子. (2008). 外国語としての英語学習の動機づけ: 自己決定理論の視点から. 実践女子大学
FLCジャーナル, 3, 63-81.

APPENDIX A
CELF 202/302 Extensive Watching Assignment
INSTRUCTOR: Thomas (Tommy) Chikao Saunders/Kensaku Ishimaki
SEMESTER: F/W 2014
COURSE CODES & SECTIONS:
2014F-ELF 302 (E9)(Tues. 1/2 & Fri. 3/4) Rm. 348
2014F-ELF 302 (F9)(Tues. 3/4 & Fri. 1/2) Rm. 348
2014F-ELF 202 (E4)
(Tues. 1/2 & Fri. 3/4) Rm. 434
2014F-ELF 202 (F4)
(Tues. 3/4 & Fri. 1/2) Rm. 434
OVERVIEW/BACKGROUND:
There are many ways to improve your English comprehension techniques and abilities.
One of these methods, that might be more enjoyable, is to watch English films and/or TV
shows. However, sometimes this can be a bit difficult, as the dialogue can be very fast or a
bit advanced. There is significant evidence to suggest that the best way to maximise yourEnglish learning experience in while watching videos, is to watch them with the English

76

subtitles/captions enabled. In this way, you can work on your listening ability, at the sametime as improving your reading speed and proficiency.
With that in mind, the following assignment (which will count toward the “Homework
and Participation” portion of your grade) is aimed at helping you improve your English skills
in a fun and interesting manner. The main purpose of this assignment is to have students
expose themselves to as much naturally spoken English as possible, while reading in English(at the same time) to follow the story. In this way, we hope that the students will be able tostrengthen their listening and reading skills, while experiencing a variety of vocabulary incontextual settings.
Finally, the students who participate in this activity will be given an opportunity tocommunicate their opinions and feelings about the project, and their responses will assist
researchers find the best way to incorporate videos, films and other audio-visual material in
the ELF/EFL classroom.
**Note: The information gathered in this exercise will be used for a teaching practices article
that Mr. Saunders and Mr. Ishimaki are co-authoring for the forthcoming CELF Journal,
published by Tamagawa University. That said, in accordance with Japanese Personal
Information Protection Laws, none of your personal information will be published or madepublic to the readers of the journal. The authors appreciate your assistance and cooperationin this matter and thank you in advance for your honest and clear answers in completing theaccompanying surveys and documents.
INSTRUCTIONS:Each of the films in the list below has been given a point value between 1~6, basedon its length (measured in minutes per video). Students will be asked to watch a minimumof 12-points worth of videos, with the English captions engaged (and English audio on).
Students can choose any combination of films and TV shows, so long as they meet theminimum requirement of 12-points for the entire assignment.
As an added bonus, if students watch more than the minimum 12-points of video
they can earn extra points toward their final grade. For every 3 points above the minimum
12-points, students will earn an additional 1% toward their final grade in their ELF class (upto a maximum of 5%).
In addition, students will have to complete a short Movie/TV Show Report at the end ofeach video they watch. This report can be found at this address https://www.surveymonkey.
com/s/-video-report.
Also, upon completion of the entire assignment student will be asked to fill out a shortsurvey about their feelings toward the “Extensive Watching” exercise. The final survey can befound here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/EWFinalSurvey. If either of these reports or
surveys are not completed, the instructors will not be able to verify (check) the completion of
the assignment and this may result in a student not being awarded the correct grade for thework they have done.
• To be clear, students must watch the various media WITH ENGLISH AUDIO ANDCAPTIONS ENGAGED.
• Also, the Extensive Watching Film Report(s) are to be completed after watching each TV

77

show or film.
• Lastly, the Extensive Watching Assignment Final Survey is to be done after the student as
finished watching videos and will only be available to complete from.
APPENDIX B
Extensive Watching Film/Video Report
Extensive Watching Video Report - Basic Info
Please answer each question on this page and include as much information as necessary.
1. What was the title of the movie or TV show you watched (if it was a TV show, please indicate the episodetitle, the season number and the episode number - Example: (Friends; Season 1, Episode 1)?

2. Who is the director of the film?

3. What was the genre of the film?

4. When was the film or TV show originally released (what year was it made)?

5. What was the film's runtime (how long was the video in minutes -- Example: "112 min")?

Next

Extensive Watching Film/Video Report
Extensive Watching Video Report - Comprehension
Please answer all of the questions with as much information as necessary
6. What was the setting of the film (where did it take place)?

1

78

APPENDIX B continued
7. Who was in the film (names of the main actors) and what were their character's names?

8. Please give a brief plot summary of the film (explain what happens in the story).

9. Was there anything about the film that surprised you?
Yes
No

10. If you answered, "Yes" to question #9, please explain more.

11. Overall, how much of the movie do you think you understood (with English audio and English Subtitles
engaged)?
0% ~ 20%
21% ~ 40%
41% ~ 60%
61% ~ 80%
81% ~ 100%

Prev

Next

Extensive Watching Film/Video Report
Extensive Watching Video Report - Personal Response
Please answer all of the questions with as much information as necessary
12. Why did you choose this film?

2

79

APPENDIX B continued
13. On a scale of 1 -5 (1 = worst; 5 = best), how much did you enjoy the film?
1 " I did not enjoy the film at all"2 "I only enjoyed the film a little"
3 "I enjoyed the film"
4 "I really enjoyed the film"
5 "I really enjoyed the film a lot!"

14. What was your favourite part of the film? Please describe it in detail.

15. How would you rate the difficulty of the ENGLISH in this film/TV show (1 = very easy; 5 = very difficult)?
1 "Very Easy"
2 "Easy"
3 "Moderate"
4 "Difficult"
5 "Very Difficult"

16. How would you rate the difficulty of the STORY of this film/TV show (1 = very easy; 5 = very difficult)?
1 "Very Easy"
2 "Easy"
3 "Moderate"
4 "Difficult"
5 "Very Difficult"

17. Would you reccommend this film/TV show to a friend?
YesNo* 18. Have you seen this film/TV show before in Japanese?
No
Yes, with English audio and Japanese captions/subtitles engaged
Yes, with Japanese audio/dubbing

Prev

Next

3

80

Extensive Watching Film/Video Report
Extensive Watching Video Report - Student Information
Please answer the following questions to ensure that you will recieve grades for this assignment* 19. What is your name?

* 20. What is your student ID?

21. Which class are you in?
CELF 302
CELF 202

Prev

Done

4

81

82

Student Nameplates for Classroom Management and Beyond
学級経営及び様々な用途に有益な学生ネームプレートの活用法
Blagoja Dimoski, ブラゴヤ・ディモスキ
Tamagawa University, Center for English as a Lingua Franca (CELF), Japanbdimoski@lit.tamagawa.ac.jp

ABSTRACTAs educators, our common aim is to develop and refine our classroom practices for the
betterment of the learners to whom we have been entrusted. The realization of this goal
is dependent, in large part, on how effectively we can implement a combination of bothclassroom teaching practices and management techniques. While the significance of theformer seems self-evident, the latter, and how the use (or lack) of such techniques canaffect outcomes, may be less obvious. As such, educators who are unfamiliar with, or simply
unaware of, the variety of classroom management options that are available may be missing
a valuable opportunity to further develop their own teaching skills as well as to enhance theirstudents’ overall learning experience. To this end, this paper describes how, by implementing
a single, yet versatile, classroom management tool, namely a student nameplate, teachers
can acquire vital and ongoing information about their learners to help make more informed
choices, organize groups effectively, and enhance teacher-student rapport. At the same time,
the system provides a means for students to express their individuality, develop a personal
study plan, reflect on their progress, and take on greater accountability in their own learning.
KEYWORDS: accountability, affective, self-expression, self-reflection, trust

要旨
教育者としての共通の目標は、我々に託された学習者の能力向上のために、ティーチング技法をより発展させ、より洗練させることである。この目標を達成するには、いかに効果的にティーチング技法とマネジメント技法をうまく併用して実施していくかが重要である。前者のティーチング技法の重要性は明白である一方で、後者のマネジメント技法についてはあまり着目されていない。様々な授業のマネジメント方法に精通していない教育者や単にそれらになじみのない教育者は、教育手法を開発することや学生が学習経験を積む貴重な機会を見逃してしまっている可能性もある。本稿では、教育者がどのようにして、マネジメント技法のツールでもある“ネームプレート”を活用しているのかを説明する。これは単純なツールではあるが、用途が広く、教育者は学習者の現況を知ることにより、指導におけるより良い選択ができ、グループ活動を効果的に纏められ、さらに教員との信頼関係を築くことができる。また、学生は個性を表現し、学習計画を立て、自分の進歩を振り返り、自らのライティングに責任を持つというスキルを発達させることにも役立つ。

83

1. INTRODUCTION
Success in the language classroom is dependent on a host of factors, not least of which is ateacher’s ability to manage the class and the learner’s ability to manage their own learning.
A classroom management system which utilizes student nameplates can help teachers andstudents better cope with their individual management needs simultaneously with a single
tool. In doing so, it places them on parallel paths toward achieving both their common andindividual goals in the language classroom.
Even in their most basic form, nameplates help teachers identify students and learn
their names (Abell, 2003; AlAamri, 2013; Heil, 1995). Beyond this basic function, however,when we consider how much of the hidden space (e.g., of an A4 sheet of paper) of such a
nameplate is unused, the design reflects an inefficient use of resources, and its functions arelimited. It follows then that, the more functional the design, the greater its potential. Clearly,
this was realized by Kamibeppu, Kelly, and Fryckman (2003, p. 2), whose multi-purposeclassroom management nameplate design incorporates innovations which, in addition to
fulfilling the (above) basic requirement of any nameplate, enables students to keep trackof their attendance and homework assignments, and provides space for them to enter the“course name, class day/time, name in kanji and romaji, address, e-mail, ID number, etc.”
This paper discusses an alternative nameplate design that builds on the features
proposed by Kamibeppu et al. (2003) by offering modifications to the ‘Name & Photo’,‘Attendance’, ‘Homework’, and ‘Student Information’ sections of their nameplate. The author
also goes beyond their design by incorporating three additional components, namely, ‘About
You’, ‘Assessment’, and ‘My Study Plan’, thereby taking advantage of all the available space
on both sides of the A-4 sheet of paper (see Appendices 1 and 2).
2. THE SEVEN COMPONENTS OF THE NAMEPLATE
2.1 Name & PhotoAccording to Savignon (1997), providing opportunities in which language learners arefree to make personal choices, and which give them freedom to express their individuality
is essential to building a successful language learning environment. It is a vital aspect ofgood language teaching practices that Savignon has termed ‘My Language is Me’. Thissection of the nameplate (see Figure 1) presents learners with such opportunities. Students
should, therefore, be given the freedom to choose the name they wish to use in class–be it
their actual first name, nickname, or even an imaginary (English) name. This same level ofautonomy should be extended to students regarding the photo they attach and how (or if)they wish to design this section.
The author concurs with Kamibeppu et al. (2003), that the end result of this processof free expression is not merely a collection of individuals’ names, but more importantly,
windows which reveal insights into the personalities behind the names. Moreover, thiscomponent enables teachers to refer to students by their individual names from the outset,
even in large classes. From a classroom management perspective, this is significant as“referring to students by their name…builds rapport and stops discipline problems before
they occur” (Mclean, 2012, p. 310).

84

Figure 1
The ‘Name & Photo’ component of the student nameplate

Note: *Students write their (in-class) name and attach their photo in the space provided.

2.2 Attendance
The method by which the author uses the nameplates to take class attendance is similar tothe one described by Kamibeppu et al., (2003). First, students receive their nameplates oneby-one from the teacher at the beginning of each lesson. Students then enter the class datein the grey cell (see Figure 2) along with the symbol ‘O’ below it to record their attendance.
If a student enters late, they must approach the teacher to obtain their nameplate. Before
handing the nameplate to the student, the teacher (not the student) enters the date and thesymbol ‘L’ (Late), and if the teacher so chooses, how many minutes the students was late. This
places the onus on the student to inform the teacher of their tardiness, thereby eliminating
the possibility of students challenging the teacher about the time they entered. For students
who are absent, the teacher enters the date and the symbol ‘A’ (Absent) on their nameplates
during the lesson. Perhaps most notably, this section eliminates the need for students to ask
the teacher about the number of lates or absences they have accumulated during the course– placing greater accountability and responsibility on the student (Kamibeppu et al., 2003).
In the empty box below their attendance, students have space to write brief comments
to the teacher at the end of each lesson. To date, the range of comments received by theauthor has been extensive. Some of the more typical comments include: “Today’s nice lesson
and useful” (feedback about lesson); “Difficult todays test.” (feedback about assessment);“This unit looks a little difficult and interesting.” (feedback about materials); “I’m sic(k)”(feedback about physical well-being); “I think you shouldn’t smoke.” (advice); “I’m happy.”(affective feedback); “What’s something you need to do this year?” (recycling key language
structures covered in class); “I love soccer. My position is defense.” (sharing information);“Did you watched soccer game yesterday?” (initiating small-talk). Visual learners, on the other
hand, often prefer to express their thoughts and emotions with pictures or diagrams.
Teachers have options when it comes to responding to students’ comments, that is,either verbally, for example face-to-face, as they are handing out nameplates or with written
responses (on the nameplates), which they do outside of class. In a way, it is almost likehaving a class Twitter® account, albeit a paper version, which enables brief, yet meaningful,exchanges between the teacher and individual students on an ongoing basis.
As a side note, teachers may wish to consider whether to make the writing of dailycomments a course requirement or something that students can engage in voluntarily.
Additionally, because one of the aims of this section is to promote greater learner selfexpression based on the tenets of ‘My Language is Me’ (Savignon, 1997), grammar

85correction should be avoided unless it is requested by the student.
Figure 2
The ‘Attendance’ component of the student nameplate

Note: *Students use this to record their attendance and to exchange comments with the teacher.
**The above student sample also contains comments by the author.

2.3 Homework
The homework section in the nameplate presented by Kamibeppu et al., (2003) is useful inthat students “are constantly reminded by the blank spots next to homework assignments
about what has not been done, and what needs to be done” (p. 3). Building on this novel
concept, the author has incorporated a feature, namely, a grading scale as seen in Figure
3, which provides greater functionality and added benefits. Thus, in addition to having acomplete record of homework that either has or has not been completed, the teacher canalso keep track of how well it was completed by entering one of the symbols ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’, or‘X’ in the students’ nameplates. This serves as a helpful reminder to students that the teacher
is monitoring, not only whether or not they have completed their homework, but also thequality of their work.
Providing students with a detailed record of their homework enables them to monitor
their progress and manage their learning more effectively. Needless to say, for teachers, thevery same data serves as a valuable resource when calculating students’ final grades.
Figure 3
The ‘Homework’ component of the student nameplate

Note: *Completed homework is signed and graded by the teacher.

86

2.4 Student Information
In this section (see ‘Student Information’ in Appendix 1), students provide their full name(in English and in Japanese) and student number to assist the teacher with administrative
duties. Students also write the name of their supervisor (or their homeroom teacher, seminarteacher, advisor, etc.) to give the teacher greater options if or when issues arise. For example,
a teacher can choose whether to address a problem with a student directly or take a lessintrusive approach by contacting the student’s supervisor in private to gain new perspectives
on the relevant issues before proceeding further.
In addition to the above information, teachers may also wish to include space forstudents to provide their (university) e-mail address or (mobile) phone number. Although
this can give teachers added flexibility when dealing with (certain) classroom management
problems, it is important for them to first consider the privacy policies of the individual
institutions to which the belong in order to determine the appropriateness of requestingsuch additional information.
2.5 About You
According to Savignon (1997), learner attitude has, perhaps, the single biggest impact on
language learning outcomes. Thus, she strongly advocates for teachers to involve learners
in the “affective as well as the cognitive aspects of language learning” (p. 181). Therefore,‘About You’ (see Figure 4) is a needs analysis tool designed to involve students in both theaffective and cognitive aspects of their own learning.
From a learner’s perspective, the tool presents an opportunity to express theirindividuality in greater depth. It also makes explicit to students that their personal
background, interests, feelings, opinions, and needs are pertinent to and valued by theirteacher. Moreover, because evidence suggests that “high anxiety can inhibit motivation”(Agawa & Ueda, 2013, p. 11) in learners, and that, for some learners, the source of theiranxiety arises from the actions of the teacher (Andrade & Williams, 2008), ‘About You’
provides a (confidential) means for students to share their private concerns or individual
requests with the teacher. Having such information helps teachers address the needs of theclass on a more personal level and reduces the risk of conflicts arising down the track.
From a pedagogical perspective, this section promotes a goal-setting mindset andplaces greater accountability on students from the outset. Moreover, it serves to remind
students, albeit indirectly, that affective factors and their ability to identify and deal withthem effectively, can influence learning outcomes. In turn, the information teachers acquirefrom students in this section can be summarized and shared (without referring to individualnames) with the whole class during subsequent class meetings. Thus, by raising students’awareness of the class dynamics, they can gain a better sense of how their own personality,
language skills, and specific needs fit in with the rest of the class and how, based on theinformation, the teacher plans to proceed.
Equally, teachers can use ‘About You’ to raise the level of transparency in the classby sharing their own personal background, interests, (course) goals, teacher concerns, andrequests to students with the whole class. Ultimately, this mutual exchange of personal
information and greater transparency helps to create a more social environment in whichpeople are the primary focus, rather than the titles (or roles) attached to them. This,87

particularly in a new class, can be reassuring for students.
Figure 4
The ‘About You’ component of the student nameplate

2.6 Assessment
Typically, course syllabi contain a vast amount of information which students are expected
to process and, it is hoped, retain. However, when students stop bringing their syllabus toclass, they may easily lose sight of one of the key elements of the syllabus, namely, course
assessment. To address this issue, the author has incorporated a section (see Figure 5)
for recording key assessments in the nameplate. This provides students with a graphicalrepresentation that is succinct and easy to grasp at a glance. Moreover, the students haveeasy access to their results throughout the course. With this incoming supply of information
at their fingertips, students are better able to assess their progress and, through selfreflection, take appropriate measures to ensure success. Ultimately, students can use thedata, along with their homework and attendance information, to estimate their final gradewith greater confidence.
Similar benefits apply to teachers as well. With just a glance, teachers can easily
identify which of their students are excelling and which ones are struggling. Also, teachers
who make their own nameplate can use this section to jot down key assessment dates andother relevant notes/reminders during the course. Finally, having all the assessment resultsof each student presented in this way makes the process of calculating students’ final grades
more straightforward and, ultimately, faster for teachers.
Figure 5
The ‘Assessment’ component of the student nameplate882.7 My Study Plan
According to Richards (1997), a defining feature of good language learners (as opposed
to less successful ones) is an awareness of and ownership over their own learning. Indeed,this notion is supported by Nunan’s (2000) action research study which demonstrated thatproviding “opportunities for learners to reflect on the learning process, did lead to greater
sensitivity to the learning process over time” (p. 143), and thus, he concludes that “language
classrooms should have a dual focus, not only teaching language content but also on
developing learning processes as well” (p.143). Naturally, we cannot simply assume that ourstudents come to our classes with effective learning strategies already in place, or that theyeven recognize their significance.
To this end, the ‘My Study Plan’ component is designed to raise students’ awarenessof various affective and behavioral learning strategies. It also helps students to formulate astudy plan that is conducive to their own specific needs, and then to implement, monitor, andevaluate their plan through a process of repeated self-reflection and self-reporting.
Specifically, ‘My Study Plan’ consists of three sections: A) My Feelings, B) My In-Class
Actions, and C) My Out-of-Class Actions. First, students (regardless of their level) respond toeach of the items in sections A, B, and C with one of the following symbols: O (I will…), (Iwill try to…), or X (I don’t think I can/need to…). They can also add their own items in each of
the sections (see Figure 6).
Figure 6
The ‘My Study Plan’ component of the student nameplate

Note: *The above responses were made by a student in an intermediate level reading and writing class at thestart of the course.

Next, students select items from the checklist of most relevance to them and write ashort paragraph (under 50 words) (see Figure 7 & Appendix 2) in which they elaborate on
and provide justification for the symbols they assigned to the items. After class, the teacher
can read the information and respond with written comments accordingly.

89Figure 7
Space for first paragraph of the ‘My Study Plan’ component

Note: *The student wrote the above paragraph at the start of the course.
**This student sample also contains comments by the author.

Then, midway through the course, students reflect on their (initial) study plan and write
a second paragraph to discuss the effectiveness of their earlier choices and to revise theirplan if necessary (see Figure 8).
Figure 8
Space for second paragraph of the ‘My Study Plan’ component

Note: *The student wrote the above paragraph halfway through the course.
**This student sample also contains comments by the author.

Finally, at the end of the course, students write a third and final paragraph in which
they evaluate and/or comment on the overall effectiveness of the learning choices they madethroughout the course (see Figure 9).
Figure 9
Space for third paragraph of the ‘My Study Plan’ component

Note: *The student wrote the above paragraph at the end of the course.

90

Ultimately, this process of self-direction, self-reflection, and self-evaluation of learning
processes helps students become more effective managers of their own learning and places
a greater sense of responsibility and accountability on them.
3. CHALLENGES
Thus far, the paper has focused primarily on the benefits of the nameplate system. It is
important to remember, however, that a nameplate is merely a tool, and as with any tool, it
is ineffective without appropriate human input. It follows, then, that the overall effectivenessof the nameplate system is dependent largely upon the actions of the user. This means, tomaximize its potential, the system requires time, effort, and an ongoing commitment on thepart of the user.
Even seemingly simple tasks, like handing out nameplates to students, opening
individual nameplates to check and sign homework, and reading and responding tostudents’ daily comments can substantially add to a teacher’s workload. That said, as
teachers’ familiarity with the system grows over time, so too their ability to streamline andintegrate the system into their own unique teaching contexts.
There is, however, one aspect of the system that is an ongoing concern. Regardless of
the users’ familiarity with the system, there is an inherent risk, however slight, of misplaced
nameplates. Thus, without backing up (vital) information contained in the nameplates, alost nameplate can mean the loss of irretrievable student data, perhaps permanently. To
safeguard against this, teachers need to be: (a) vigilant by ensuring that students return
their nameplates at the end of the every lesson; and (b) prudent by storing them in a securecase or container, and by keeping a backup file which contains, at the very least, a record ofstudents’ attendance, homework, and assessment results.
Undoubtedly, the above precautionary measures add further to a teacher’s workload.
Even so, the author does not view such extra demands on the user as a weaknesses of thesystem, but rather, as one of its strengths. To illustrate, in a four-year longitudinal study ofschools in the Chicago area, Bryk and Schneider (2003) found that participants’ willingness“to extend themselves beyond the formal requirements of a job definition” (p. 42), in otherwords, “to go the extra mile for the children” (p. 43), was one of the key elements present
among school communities with high levels of relational trust. In turn, they found strong
evidence that “schools with high relational trust were much more likely to demonstrate
marked improvements in student learning” (p. 43). In this sense, the author regards any
extra effort required to maintain the nameplate system, not as time lost, but rather, as time
invested in the well-being of our students.
Regarding privacy issues, if a student appears reluctant to provide personal
information, such as their contact details, teachers can try to reassure them that the
information is solely for the teacher and will not be shared with other members of theclass. They can also add that, once the double-sided A4 sheet of paper has been folded(twice) to complete the nameplate, the only parts visible to others are the ‘Name & Photo’and ‘Attendance’ components (see Appendix 3). This feature of the design ensures that
information that is meant to be private remains just that, private. If, however, despite theabove reassurances, the student remains unwilling to provide the requested information,

91

then naturally, their position on the matter must be respected.
It is worth noting that the author has been using the nameplate system for more thanten years in a wide variety of English language courses (and levels) in Japanese universities.
Despite some challenges along the way, there have been no instances of nameplates being
misplaced permanently or of students refusing to fill-in all the required information.
4. CONCLUSION
As discussed above, the nameplate system offers a host of useful applications for the
language classroom. It not only helps teachers manage their classes more effectively, but alsoenables students to express their individuality, engages them in the learning process, helps
them better manage their own learning, and promotes greater learner accountability.
Clearly, the benefits are extensive, and yet, the author believes that the nameplatesystem’s most notable quality lies, not within the diverse functionality of its individualcomponents, but rather, in the flexibility of the system as a whole. That is to say, thenameplate design presented in this paper is not set in stone. Instead, teachers are free tomake modifications (minor or major) to the design or create original components and apply
them as their needs dictate. Teachers may even wish to create digital versions of certain
components and apply them to online tools for teaching such as a course management
system. Albert Einstein once said, “Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you
everywhere”. In the end, we are only limited by our imaginations, so the range of possibilities
and applications is essentially endless. Through a process of ongoing experimentation,teachers can create effective nameplates which compliment their individual teaching styleand develop them over time to accommodate the ever changing needs of their students.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author wishes to thank Richard McMahon for his insightful feedback and comments regarding ‘My Study
Plan’ during its initial phase.

REFERENCES
Abell, K. (2003). Tools & techniques: Learning students’ names. Hands-On English,
13(2), 5.
Agawa, T., & Ueda, M. (2013). How Japanese students perceive demotivation toward
English study and overcome such feelings. JACET Journal, 56, 1-18.
AlAamri, K. S. S. (2013). Western teachers’ cultural and linguistic challenges in teaching
English language in the classroom. Literacy Information and Computer Education
Journal (LICEJ), 4(3), 1049-1057.
Andrade, M. R., & Williams, K. E. (2008). Foreign language learning anxiety in Japanese EFL
university classes: Causes, coping, and locus of control. Electronic Journal of Foreign
Language Teaching, 5(2), 181-191.
Bryk, S. A., & Schneider, B. (2003). Trust in schools: A core resource for school reform.
Educational Leadership, 60(6), 40-44.
Heil, D. C. (1995). Insiders and outsiders: Insights into curriculum design and management
techniques for Japanese students. 英米学研究, 30, 43-60.

92

Kamibeppu, M., Kelly, E., & Fryckman, J. (2003). Using nameplates as a multifunctionalclassroom management tool. In M. Swanson & K. Hill (Eds.), JALT2003 Conference
Proceedings (pp. 367-373). Shizuoka: JALT.
McLean, S. (2012). From the TESOL Program to the classroom: Practical tips for new teachers.
In A. Stewart & N. Sonda (Eds.), JALT2011 Conference Proceedings (pp. 305-315).
Tokyo: JALT.
Nunan, D. (2002). Learner strategy training in the classroom: An action research study. In J. C.
Richards & W. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: An Anthology of Current Issues
and Practices (pp. 133-143). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Savignon, S. J. (1997). Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice: Texts andcontexts in second language learning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Richards, J. C. (1997). The language teaching matrix. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
APPENDIX 1
The front side of the (A4 size) sheet of paper containing five components

Note: *After it is folded to make the nameplate, the sections ‘About You’, ‘Student Information’, and ‘Homework’
are hidden from view.

93

APPENDIX 2
The reverse side of the (A4 size) sheet of paper containing two components

Note: *After it is folded to make the nameplate, all of the information on this side is hidden from view.

94

APPENDIX 3
Examples of two (blank) student nameplates after being folded

Note: *While the nameplate is being used in class, only the ‘Name & Photo’ and ‘Attendance’ sections are		visible to observers.
**The nameplate in the foreground shows the side that would face the teacher, while the one in the backgroundshows the student’s eye view.

95

96

Effective Teaching with Dictation
ディクテーションによる効果的な教育法
Jonah Glick, ジョナ ・ グリック
Aoyama Gakuin Women’s Junior College, Japanjonah_glick@hotmail.com

ABSTRACTDictation has an unfairly deserved reputation as a boring, uninspiring activity that is moresuited for the audio-lingual classroom than for communicative classrooms. This article
discusses several ways of using dictation activities in a student-centered and fun way in an
EFL or ELF setting. A step-by-step description of various dictation activities including ‘Rapid
Connected-Speech Dictation,’ ‘Form-Focused Dictation’ and ‘Discussion Question Dictation.’
will be shared in this paper.
Keywords: dictation, cooperative learning

要旨
ディクテーションは退屈でつまらないアクティビティであり、コミュニカティブな指導よりもオーディオリンガル教育に適しているというように見なされ、あまり着目されていない。本稿
では、EFLまたはELFプログラムにおける、ディクテーションを使用した学生中心の楽しいア
クティビティ‐Rapid Connected-Speech Dictation, Form-Focused Dictation, Discussion
Question Dictation - を紹介する。

When many teachers today hear the word, ‘dictation,’ they think of a teacher-centered activity
not suitable for their student-centered interactive classrooms. In the author’s experience,dictation has an unfairly deserved reputation as a boring uninspiring activity that is moresuited for the audio-lingual classroom than for communicative classrooms. Nevertheless,Nation lists ‘dictation’ as one of the twenty most useful teaching techniques for the EFL
classroom (Nation, 2013). I want to describe some ways that my colleagues and I at a private
women’s college in Tokyo employ dictation activities that I believe are language-focused,
student-centered and, most of all, fun. Students in the Introductory College English 1Aclass, which is a speaking and listening class, are required to do homework each week that
includes listening to a conversation about a certain topic, for example, movies. They answer
comprehension questions, study fifteen vocabulary words identified as words that most
students don’t know1, and then finally, they complete two dictations: (1) five sentences that1
Brent Culligan and colleagues at Aoyama Gakuin Women’s Jr. College created this list. First, they compiled a 6000 word list fromfrequency lists including Coxhead’s Academic Word List. Next, they wrote 120 yes/no tests. The students marked ‘Yes’ if they knew theword, or ‘No’ if they didn’t. To control for guessing, non-words were included. Results were analyzed using Item Response Theory. Then, theresearchers determined how difficult each word was, which words the students probably knew, and which words they didn’t. Finally, theycreated a list of the 120 most frequently occurring words based on the probability that the average student would know about half of them.

97we refer to as Rapid Connected-Speech Dictation and, (2) five questions about the week’s
topic.
In class, I repeat the five Rapid Connected-Speech Dictation sentences and ask thestudents to review their answers. Next, I have the students work in groups of three andcompare their answers. If they find any discrepancies, they must talk within their groups andagree on a common transcription of the spoken utterance. If a shared understanding cannot
be reached, they are instructed to note this and ask me at a later time. Then, I assign eachgroup a sentence and ask them to write it on the board. Finally, we look at each sentence
together as a class and if there are any grammar, vocabulary or usage points to consider, we
discuss it as a class.
After I finish this activity, I move on to the activity we call a ‘Form-Focused Dictation.’
This is a dictation activity consisting of five sentences focused on a certain pronunciation
issue, for example the reduction of ‘going to’ to ‘gonna.’ First, I explain what ‘form’ thedictation is focusing on and remind them that they are going to hear many spoken examplesof this form in the five sentences. Thus, this activity functions as a ‘noticing’ activity meaningthat the students are required to pay attention to a form that helps them be able to recognize
it in conversation or in a listening passage and eventually use it in their own speech. Next
I tell the students to write down what they hear as I read each sentence three times. After I
finish reading the sentences, I put the students in groups to compare their answers. Finally,
I ask the students as a class to tell me how to write each sentence on the board. If they havewritten something different from what I said or have forgotten a word, then I give them hints
about the sentence and encourage them to figure out what was originally said. However,from an ELF perspective, the teacher might choose to focus more on the meaning of theindividual sentences and to disregard differences, as long as the meaning of the sentence isthe same.
After the class has finished this, I move on to checking the the five discussion questions
that they wrote for homework by listening to a recording of these questions and writing themdown as a dictation. These questions are the starting point for the students to work in groups
to have a conversation about the topic of that week’s lesson. Since the students have listened
to these sentences at home, I simply read the sentences once and tell the students to review
their answers. I then give them a chance to compare their answers with other students.
Finally, I put the students in groups of three and ask each group to write one question on theboard. We then check each question together to make sure they are all complete. The next
step is for the students to create some more questions on the topic that they want to discuss.
The conclusion to this activity is for the students to work in groups and talk about the topic
using the questions from the dictation and the questions that they generated themselves.
In conclusion, I believe the activities I have described can be used in a student-centered communicative way that is fun. These activities are easy to use in any teaching situation
and are not difficult to create. I encourage you to incorporate dictation activities into yourlessons and to report on their effectiveness.
REFERENCES
Nation, P. (2013). What Should Every EFL Teacher Know? Seoul: Compass Publishing.

98

APPENDIX A: CELF Research Achievements - Presentations..............................................100-103
APPENDIX B: CELF Research Achievements - Publications................................................104-107

99

8/28/2014

8/29/2014

Borneo,Malaysia

Borneo,Malaysia“Politically correct ELT”

“How Did We End Up Here?”
Narratives of Filipino English
teachers in Japan

Masaki Oda

Tricia Okada

9/20/2014

9/20/2014

Extensive Reading on Mobile
Tokyo, Japan Devices: Is it a worthwhile
strategy?

Tokyo, JapanTokyo, JapanTokyo, Japan

Online extensive reading for
ELF students

Introduction to Xreading

Making the most of online forms

Google Forms & SurveyMonkey:

Event Management

Is ELF of Benefit in a
Japanese Educational
Context?

Masaki Oda

Travis Cote & Brett Milliner

Brett Milliner & Travis Cote

Travis Cote & Brett Milliner

Flowers

Brett Milliner & Simeon

Travis Cote & Brett Milliner

Paul McBride& ELF

9/20/2014

ELF:Shifting paradigm of university ELTAsia TEFL Conference
Asia TEFL Conference

Borneo,Malaysia

9/28/2014

Tokyo, Japan

programs in Asia

Masaki Oda

Presentation
Plenary
8/29/2014

9/28/2014

Java,
Indonesia

Globalization or Englishization:
Impacts of English in educational
policies

Masaki Oda

Masaki Oda

Asia TEFL Conference

9/6/2014

Teacher Voices - World Englishes

Panel discussion

7th International Conference of

Seminar10/7/2014

Sumatra,Indonesia

Never ending journey: Beliefs about
language learning & teaching

Presentation
Presentation
Presentation

The

Presentation

Athens,GreecePosterTEFLIN Indonesia

10/10/2014

Sumatra,Indonesia

YOJALT: Technology for English

The 7th Annual Extensive Reading
The 7th Annual Extensive Reading

Seminarteachers

YOJALT: Technology for English

teachers

teachers

YOJALT: Technology for English

English as a Lingua Franca

Presentation

University of Bengkulu in Sumatra

10/11/2014

Event hosting

Invited lecture

University of Bengkulu in Sumatra

From native speaker models to EIL/

Invited lecture100CategoryPresentation

Event Name

3rd LINEE+International Conference
Linguistic and Cultural Diversity inSpace and Time

Invited public lecture on language

Date Location

Title

Debrovnik,
Croatia“How did we end up here?

4/29/2014

Java,
Indonesia

Presenter(s)Tricia Okada

Masaki Oda

Masaki Oda

Travis Cote & Brett Milliner

Masaki Oda

Masaki Oda
Speakers”

Masaki Oda

Seoul, Korea

Ethel Ogane

De-mythicizing “Native

Programs for Japanese Universities?

Politically Correct English Language

Teaching English in Japan

Language Education in Japan: Current

Paperless extensive reading andEnglish as a lingua franca

Learner Beliefs and Learning of

whose agenda?

English, English, everywhere. But

English in Japan”

Narratives of Filipinos teaching

6/2/2014

policySurabaya,Indonesia

Invited public
lecture6/4/2014

LOOW4 Conference

student engagement

Featured talk

Nagoya,Japan

JALT CALL Conference 2014
6/7/0214

Poster

6/13/2014

state, challenges, and future directions:

ISLS 2014 Conference

Akita, Japan

Invited talk &panel discussion

7/5/2014

ELF: Identity andtranslanguaging

From policy to practice in a

English as a Lingua Franca:

Tricia Okada

Cote, Andrew Leichsenring &Brett Milliner, Paul McBride, Travis

Paul McBride & Brett Milliner

Japanese university

extensive reading aid for schools

Introduction to M-Reader: An online

strategy?

Extensive reading on mobile

Brisbane,
Australia

Japan Association on Asian Englishes 6/28/2014 Kyoto, Japan
English (KATE)

8/11/2014

Keynote talkFeatured talk

AILA World Congress 2014

Korean Association of Teachers ofPresentation

Borneo,Malaysia

Brett Milliner & Travis Cote

Borneo,Malaysia

devices: Is it a worthwhile

8/28/2014

8/29/2014

Asia TEFL Conference

8/28/2014

Asia TEFL Conference

Presentation

Asia TEFL Conference

Presentation

Presentation

Borneo,Malaysia

101

Invited lecture

Lecture for MATESOL program at St.
Michael’s College

Conference

8th International Online Language

Presentation
forum: Language teaching in the Asian

Representations and self-representations

context

forum: Language teaching in the Asian

Center for English as a lingua franca

context

forum: Language teaching in the Asian

Center for English as a lingua franca

context

Center for English as a lingua franca

Event hosting

Presentation

Plenary talkPresentationof queer(s) in East Asia

From native speaker models to

Vermont, USA EIL/ELF: Shifting paradigm of ELTClass blogging in the EFL
classroom

CELF WG

Brett Milliner

Masaki Oda

Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia

Event Management

Brett Milliner & Tricia Okada

3/2/2015

3/3/2015

CELF

ELF program introduction

programs in Japanese universities

3/7/2015

CELF

Doing justice to the English asa lingua franca paradigm

Tricia Okada

Glenn Toh

Ethel Ogane, Paul McBride,3/7/2015

CELF

entertainers in Japanjourney of Filipino transgender

Performance from diaspora: The

3/7/2015

3/21/2015

Vienna,Austria102

JACET ESP SIG: English for tourism
10/11/2014 Tokyo, Japan
major students

Event management

Tokyo, Japanpractices

Mitsuko Imai

Leichsenring & Ethel Ogane

Travis Cote & Brett Milliner

10/11/2014

Tsukuba,Japan

Use of online assignments toincrease study hours

Paul McBride

Event hosting

major students
11/24/2014

Tsukuba,Japan

ELF policy and practice inJapanese university contexts

Masaki Oda

English as a lingua franca: Changing

Language awareness and teaching

Yokohama,
Japan

Xreading: A digital approach
to extensive reading

Activities for listening andspeaking in small talkTravis Cote

Ethel Ogane

Paul McBride, Andrew

1/18/2015

Tokyo, Japan

Travis Cote & Brett Milliner

Masaki Oda

2/14/2015

case of a Japanese University

Travis Cote

Presentation
JALT National Conference
11/23/2014

New Delhi,
India

English as an international language: A

ELF and the College of Tourism

Presentation
JALT National Conference
12/18/2014

New Delhi,
India

JACET ESP SIG: English for tourism

Presentation
IAWE Conference

12/19/2014

and Hospitality Management

Presentation
IAWE Conference
YOJALT: Teaching speaking and
The 2nd International Symposiumon

Innovative Teaching and Research in ESP

listening

Presentation
Presentation
Posterグローバル化時代の大学英語教育-EFL環境し

Phnom Penh,
ELF policy & practice inCambodia Japanese University contexts

Brett Milliner & Travis Cote

たでの日本の英語教育は如何にあるべきか

2/28/2015

Phnom Penh, Extensive reading on mobile
Cambodia
devices

Fukuoka,Japan
CAM TESOL 2015

2/28/2015

JACET Kyushu/Okinawa Conference 2/15/2015

Presentation

CAM TESOL 2015

Presentation

Presentation

103

Proceedings of the 12th Asia TEFL and 23rd MELTA
8/31/2014 online extensive reading aid
International Conference 28 – 30 August 2014
for schools

Introduction to M-Reader: An

ArticleThe Journal of Saitama City Educators 4(5)11/1/2014

11/1/2014

Social conditions and learnerfor second language learning:

Reconditioning the conditions

Filipinos teaching English
in the Kanto area

management with Xreading

Effective extensive reading

5 articles from CELF
teachers

context?

Japanese educational

Is ELF of benefit in a

ArticleProceedings of the 7th International Conference of
9/6/2014
English as a Lingua Franca

CELF & JSCE

The Language Teacher 38(6)11/1/2014

Collaborative Journal

ArticleThe Journal of Saitama City Educators 4(5)Issue: JSCE 4(5)Article11/1/2014

Paul McBride & BrettMillinerPaul McBride

Brett Milliner & Travis Cote

Brett Milliner & Travis Cote

Tricia Okada

Masaki Oda

Paul McBride & BrettMillinermotivation

The Journal of Saitama City Educators 4(5)Managing extensive
11/1/2014 reading: Introduction to
M-ReaderBlackboard in the Center for(CELF)

Dialogizing ‘the known’: Experi-ence of English teaching in Japanthrough an essay of derivatives as a

Glenn Toh

Brett Milliner & Travis Cote

12/1/2014

11/7/2014 English as a Lingua Franca

Resistance to the known: Counter-conduct inlanguage educatione-Education Newsletter 2

Conditions for English Language Teaching and
Learning in Asia

Book chapter

ArticleArticleBook chapter

dominant motif

104ArticleType

Peerspectives (12)Peerspectives (12)Publication Name

4/1/2014

4/1/2014

Date

Use a blog to start yourpaperless classroom

What’s going on at the
MALL?

Title

Brett Milliner

Travis Cote, Brett Milliner,
Simeon Flowers & Dan
Ferreira

Author(s)ArticleProceedings of Language in the Online & Offline
World 4: The Latitude

8/1/2014

8/1/2014

Extensive reading on
mobile devices: Is it aworthwhile strategy?

oral presentations

EFL learners doing ICT-based

outcomes for university-level

Maximizing learning

5 Articles from CELF
teachers

The cosmetics of teaching
English as an international
8/1/2014
language in Japan: A
critical reflection

Brett Milliner & Travis Cote

Andrew Leichsenring

Brett Milliner & Travis Cote

Glenn Toh

Travis Cote, Brett Milliner,
Oreintation for ELF
8/1/2014
Paul McBride, Mitsuko Imaiteachers: Lessons learned& Ethel Ogane

Masaki Oda

Article

JALT2013 Conference Proceedings

6/4/2014

ArticleThe pedagogy of English as an international
language: Perspectives from scholars, teachers,
and students

Learner beliefs and thelearning of English as a
lingua franca

Book chapter

The Journal of Saitama City Educators 4(4)The Journal of Saitama City Educators 4(4)CELF & JSCE
Collaborative
Journal Issue: JSCE
4(4)ArticleArticleProceedings of the 12th Asia TEFL and 23rd MELTA
8/31/2014
International Conference 28 – 30 August 2014

105

106

Article

ArticleArticleThe Language Teacher 39(3)観光学部紀要 (2)Form technology for
3/30/2015 language teachers: How
do you like your monkey?

Brett Milliner & Simeon
Flowers

Mitsuko Imai

Report for the MicroConference on Tourism
3/31/2015
English Education
Travis Cote & Brett Milliner
Tamagawa University, 11
October 2014

The relationship between
The Journal of Tokyo University of Pharmacy andonline assignments and3/31/2015
Life Sciences (18)study hours: How can we
increase net study hours?

107