2019 April

Volume 5

ISSN 2189-0463

ELF

The Center for English
as a Lingua Franca
JournalWhat is ELF? Introductory Questions and Answers for
ELT Professionals
Reconceptualizing 'Global Jinzai' from a (B)ELF Perspective
How 'Leader-Led Discussion' Task can be Effectively Used in a Japanese
University Setting and Provide a Productive Method of Assessment
Three Bottom-up Listening Training Ideas for the
English as a Lingua Franca Classroom
CELF FD & Research Report

CONTENTS

玉 川大学

The Center for ELF Journal
Issue Editors: Brett Milliner and Travis Cote
Reviewers:
Paul McBride
Mitsuko Imai
Tricia Okada
Blagoja Dimoski
Satomi Kuroshima
Andrew Leichsenring
Simeon Flowers
Angelo Magasic

The Center for ELF Journal: Call for Articles
The Center for ELF Journal is a refereed journal that seeks to promote criticalreflection among English language teaching professionals from a wide range ofprofessional contexts. Manuscripts are subject to blind reviews by two or morereviewers after initial screening by the editorial committee.
Aims of Journal:▪ To encourage critical awareness among language teaching professionals▪ To encourage reflexive thinking among language teaching professionals▪ To encourage a praxis of action and reflection among language teachingprofessionals▪ To encourage language teaching professionals to empower themselves and in
so doing empower their students▪ To encourage sharing of teaching techniques among the CELF teachers▪ To serve and support the professional development needs of the CELF teachers
Types of Articles:
Research article (1000 ~ 3000 words)
Teaching article (1000 ~ 3000 words)
Forum article (1000 words)
Center for English as a lingua franca reports (1000 words)
Book reviews (1000 words)
ELF classroom practices (1000 words)
Guidelines for Contributors:
Article contributions may include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following
areas:English as a lingua franca
Curriculum design and development
Teaching methods, materials and techniques
Classroom centered research
Testing and evaluation
Teacher training and professional development
Language learning and acquisition
Culture, identity and power in language education
Application of technology in the language classroom
Research articles: Research articles should come with a description of the researchcontext and research questions, issues pertaining to the research context, relevant
theories, qualitative or quantitative research data, detaileddescriptions of research method including clear demonstration of attention to research
ethics and commentary.
Teaching articles: Teaching articles should provide a description of the teachingcontext, relevant issues related to the teaching context, teaching theories and approaches
appropriate to the context as well as comments reflecting pedagogical praxis.
Forum articles: From time to time, the editor may call for forum articles focusing on
a particular theme or issue. Readers are also welcome to propose themes or issues forthe forum in consultation with the editor. Contributors will be given the opportunity
to engage with current issues from a given standpoint as well as with each other’s
opinions on the issue.
Center for English as a lingua franca reports: From time to time, the Center for
English as a lingua franca will request a report from full-time faculty. The reports canfocus on a variety of features or services within the ELF program. For example, student
use of the tutor service, research projects, and faculty development.
Book reviews: Writers of book (textbook or other) reviews should first contact theeditors with suggested titles before proceeding with the book review.
ELF classroom practices: Articles should be brief “take-away” descriptions of any
activity, project, strategy or useful tool employed with varying degrees of success inthe ELF classroom (i.e.,“teacher’s toolbox”).
How to submit your manuscript:
Please email your submissions to the editors with the title, “The Center for ELF Journal
Submission”.
email: celfjournal@tamagawa.ac.jp

Issue 5.0 Foreword:
CELF is completing its fifth year. During the 2018-2019 academic year, our faculty
members have successfully accumulated their research records through publications,conference presentations, invited talks as well as JSPS Kakenhi grants, in addition totheir day-to-day teaching activities.
This volume features an article by Dr. Tomokazu Ishikawa co-authored with Professor
Jennifer Jenkins (University of Southampton). Professor Jenkins is one of the key
figures of ELF research and her ideas have significantly influenced the foundation of
CELF. Therefore, it is a great honor to have her article in this volume.
The remaining three articles (Jody Yujobo, Richard Marsh, Blagoja Dimoski & BrettMilliner) are based on classroom experience in our program. I am sure that classroom
teachers will benefit from them.
Our annual FD & Research Report compiled by Rasami Chaikul and Brett Milliner
is growing this year. I am particularly pleased that a number of our full-time faculty
members have received the JSPS Kakenhi grant, and some of them have been invited togive a talk at other institutions. In addition, we had an excellent lineup of FD seminars.
I would like to thank CELF faculty members and administrative staff for their productive
academic year.
Masaki Oda, Ph.D.
Director
CELF

Contents
What is ELF? Introductory Questions and Answers for
ELT Professionals

1

Tomokazu Ishikawa & Jennifer Jenkins
Reconceptualizing 'Global Jinzai' from a (B)ELF
Perspective

11

Yuri Jody Yujobo
How 'Leader-Led Discussion' Task can be Effectively
Used in a Japanese University Setting and Provide a
Productive Method of Assessment

23

Richard MarshThree Bottom-up Listening Training Ideas for the
English as a Lingua Franca Classroom

36

Blagoja Dimoski & Brett Milliner

CELF FD & Research Report
Rasami Chaikul & Brett Milliner

54

What is ELF? Introductory Questions and Answers
for ELT Professionals
ELFとは何か?
英語教員のための入門的問答
Tomokazu Ishikawa, 石川 友和

Center for English as a Lingua Franca, Tamagawa University, Japant.ishikawa@lab.tamagawa.ac.jp
Jennifer Jenkins, ジェニファー・ジェンキンズ

Centre for Global Englishes, University of Southampton, UK
J.Jenkins@soton.ac.uk
ABSTRACTELF has become a popular research field in Applied Linguistics. But what is ELF in
the first place? As the field continues growing and attracting an increasing amount ofresearch, it is a good time to review where we are now with a focus on English Language
Teaching.
KEYWORDS: ELF, English as a Multilingua Franca, English Language Teaching
1. INTRODUCTION
This volume is published in spring, and we aim to do, as it were, a little ‘spring cleaning’
for ELF and its pedagogy. After all, ELF is often subject to uninformed criticism (seee.g., various references in Ishikawa, 2015), sometimes regarded as promoting a newinternational variety, and other times as allowing anything to go (e.g., Jenkins, 2018).
Neither is, of course, far from the truth. At the same time, it may be hard to say that
ELF researchers are free of all responsibility for unjustified criticism. We admit that ELF
enquiry has been exploratory in nature, developing rather fast, and never intended toconstitute a monolithic, rigid paradigm. Unfortunately (or fortunately from our point ofview!), it is highly likely that our field continues to grow further, seeing that any attempt
to understand communication in this complex, globalised world would always be partial
and incomplete.
In order to carry out the proposed ‘spring cleaning’, the present paper answers
fourteen questions which we come across recurrently. Certainly, this short piece of1

writing can never be a comprehensive review. ELF is a major, transdisciplinary field in
the first place, and our foregrounding of pedagogy towards the end of this paper inevitably
backgrounds discussion of other domains. Even so, it is our hope that the answers below
somehow help English Language Teaching (ELT) professionals, especially those who are
new to ELF, when they reflect on the subject they teach.
2. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Q1. How did ELF research start?
During the 1980s, a British teacher of English (called Jennifer Jenkins) noticed that
her students tended not to use the rules they learnt in her English as a Foreign Language(EFL) classrooms for the purpose of communicating effectively among themselves (seeJenkins, 2012). It seemed to her that when misunderstanding did occur, the cause often
derived from pronunciation. This observation led her to produce the first-ever empirical
publication on ELF (Jenkins, 1996a), which was swiftly followed by another publicationin which the phenomenon was named ‘ELF’ for the first time (Jenkins, 1996b). Prior tothis, she had conducted a five-year project which was then turned into Jenkins (2000),
the first monograph on ELF.
Q2. What was the embryo stage of ELF enquiry like?
Thanks to the related field called world Englishes, 1 which is concerned with nationalvarieties of English along with their dialects and sociolects, people have come to recognise,for instance, Singaporean, Indian, Kenyan, and Nigerian Englishes as established varietiesin addition to traditional ‘vernaculars’ like British English (Ishikawa, 2016; Jenkins,2017). At the earliest stage, ELF researchers wondered whether Japanese people’sEnglish, for example, might also be conceptualised to be an international variety without
official or second language status. In addition, it was hypostatised that there might beshared features across diverse English use in the world which would facilitate meaning
making in a full range of domains (e.g., zero marking of 3rd person present singular–s, and countable use of nouns that are uncountable in ‘native’ Englishes), and thus of
pedagogic importance (e.g., Seidlhofer, 2001). In fact, Jenkins (2000) provides suchfeatures in phonology, termed phonological Lingua Franca Core (LFC). At the sametime, she detects the use of this LFC highly depending on interlocutors. More precisely,
her empirical evidence demonstrates that what is crucial for mutual understanding is thepragmatic strategy of accommodation, i.e., adapting and adjusting language to specificinteractants in a given situation.2

2

1 As an umbrella term, Global Englishes refers to both research fields of world Englishes and ELF(Jenkins, 2015a).
2 Other and more specific pragmatic strategies identified thus far (e.g. Pietikäinen, 2018) include
clarification questions (e.g. “who?”); incomprehension tokens (e.g. “hmm?”); repeating (e.g. “this is our
second try” – “second try?”) and self-repeating; paraphrasing (e.g. “you mean …?”) and self-paraphrasing; code-switching; discourse organisation (e.g. “what I want to say now is …”); and confirmation checks(e.g. “sure?”).

Q3. Is ELF concerned with international varieties of English?
This proposition is inaccurate. In reference to large-scale corpora, such as VOICE (Seidlhofer,2004) and ELFA (Mauranen, 2003),3 ELF researchers have found ELF communication tobe so dynamic and fluid that the concept of ‘variety’ is not applicable. Meanwhile, despite
misconceptions, the LFC refers exclusively to pronunciation, not to any other linguistic
levels, and in any case, is not a variety. Accordingly, the field of ELF quickly moved fromvariety-oriented enquiry and form-centred studies. Indeed, neither is part of contemporary
ELF discourse (Baker & Jenkins, 2015). This is not to say that ELF is competing with world
Englishes (see Q2 above). While we recognise the importance of regional communicationand thus regard world Englishes as a complementary paradigm, our focus is essentially on
global communication which transcends cartographical boundaries.
Q4. If not ‘variety’, then what?
A useful notion for ELF enquiry is English ‘similect’ (Mauranen, 2012), which refers to
the contact language between an L1 and English as an additional language at the cognitive
level. Unlike any variety, the Japanese English similect (i.e., L1-Japanese people’sEnglish), for example, has no stable, geographically definable speech community since
L1-Japanese people normally communicate in Japanese among each other. Therefore, theirEnglish will not develop into an established variety through interaction over generations.
The same is true for other English similects (e.g., L1-Korean people’s English, L1-Thaipeople’s English, and L1-Hungarian people’s English). For this reason, and althoughsimilar, the same English similect is idiolectally different to a remarkable extent, depending
on individual experience of encountering other English similects. This experience, in turn,is regarded as second-order contact since two or more English similects contact each other,
this time, at the interactional level. From a macro perspective, synchronous interactions
across the globe potentially trigger gradual language change.
Q5. Is ‘similect’ a simplified view?
The notion of ‘similect’ does represent a conceptual simplification (Mauranen, 2018a).
Obviously, the users of L1 English may participate in global encounters, whether it
is ‘native’ Englishes (e.g., British and North American) or ‘nativised’ Englishes (e.g.,
Singaporean, Indian, Kenyan, and Nigerian). While they may be monolingual(ish),especially in the case of the former, the reality is largely multilingual at all three levels(i.e., cognitive, interactional, and macro; see Q4 above). At the same time, individual
repertoires of the same L1s (including English) or L1 varieties can be very different. On
a personal note and due to this age of mobility, a number of the first author’s students
at an English-medium faculty have told him that they are not sure what their L1s are. It
should be added that the aforementioned three levels are intertwined and not clear-cut(Mauranen, 2012). They provide angles with different time and space scales, and need to
be integrated to understand ELF communication.
3 These acronyms respectively stand for the Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English (VOICE)
and the corpus of English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings (ELFA), which now has an additional
written corpus (WrELFA 2015). Another large-scale project is the Asian Corpus of English (ACE), whichemulates VOICE as an Asian counterpart (Kirkpatrick, 2010).

3

Q6. How has ELF communication been defined?
Over the last few years, ELF communication, in other words, the target phenomenon of theresearch field of ELF, has most often been defined as ‘any use of English among speakers
of different first languages for whom English is the communicative medium of choice, andoften the only option’ (Seidlhofer, 2011, p. 7). Notably, this definition is confined to theuse of English even though the majority of English users are multilinguals who interact
with each other in a diverse linguistic environment. In addition, the difference in L1s isassumed to be decisive in defining ELF communication. In contrast to this assumption,
however, an instructor and students often share the same mother tongue in numerous ELT
and English-medium classrooms, which demonstrates that Seidlhofer’s (2011) definition
does not go far enough.
Q7. Does ELF focus on English and L1 status?
This proposition is inaccurate. The focus of ELF enquiry has shifted from English and L1
status, albeit that neither would be ignorable in ELF studies. Instead, Jenkins’ (2015b)
notion of English as a Multilingua Franca (EMF) foregrounds multilingualism, or rather
emergent multilingual practice, as the theoretical raison d’être of the target phenomenon.
The working definition of ELF communication as such, or more precisely, an EMF scenario,
is: “Multilingual communication in which English is available as a contact language ofchoice, but is not necessarily chosen” (Jenkins, 2015b, p. 73). An increasing number of
ELF researchers, particularly at the Centre for Global Englishes (e.g., Will Baker, Sonia
Morán Panero, and Ying Wang), are working on fleshing out this updated notion.
Q8. How do we understand EMF?
As the current notion in the field of ELF, EMF (see Q7 above) addresses the empiricalevidence that “the best solutions need not be the most standardised-like or native-like …
[or] even English” (Mauranen, 2018b, p. 114), and that global communication neverfails to bring out multilingualism with varying degrees of overtness (Cogo, 2018; seee.g., Pennycook & Otsuji, 2015, pp. 78-79). In this regard, even when transcribed or
text communication appears to be English on the surface, covert multilingual influence
would be detectable across different linguistic levels (e.g., phonology, lexicogrammar,
pragmatics, and discourse structure; see e.g., Hülmbauer, 2013, p. 64). Accordingly,
multilingualism here should be considered to be far less about either multiple named
languages or individual multilingual repertoires. It is about how malleable and permeable
both languages and repertoires are through interaction across agents, time, and space, withEnglish “always potentially ‘in the mix’” (Jenkins, 2015b, p. 74).
Q9. Does an ‘EMF scenario’ include monolingual and bilingual English users?
In an EMF scenario, individuals may not be multilingual themselves, or bilingual in
the case of L1 English users. Even so, they should be capable of ‘multilanguaging’ i.e.,learning and exploiting previously unfamiliar multilingual resources as communicatively
effective by virtue of their accumulating experience (Ishikawa, 2017a; Jenkins, 2015b).
As a corollary, unlike the most quoted definition by Seidlhofer (2011, p. 7; see Q6 above),the notion of EMF would embrace communication among English-knowing multilingual
4and multilanguaging speakers of the same L1s or L1 varieties (Ishikawa, 2017a).
Q10. How is EMF different from translanguaging?
EMF may be seen as broadly conceptualised translanguaging (e.g., García & Li,
2014; Li & Ho, 2018). Many translanguaging studies have targeted how bilinguals
and multilinguals use multilingual resources strategically. However, an EMF scenario
would never exclude monolingual(ish) L1 English users so long as they are capable ofmultilanguaging (see Q9 above). Also, the potential availability of English is different
from multilingualism and translanguaging, both of which can exist without the English
language. EMF is concerned with English as being the currently most prominent global
lingua franca. Without it, global communication would be more difficult. However, thisEnglish is not equal to monolingual ‘standard’ English in EFL, but rather ‘English’
appropriated by multilinguals in this multilingual world.
Q11. What about culture in ELF communication?
While language has been a central issue of ELF enquiry, the target phenomenon inevitably
takes a form of ‘intercultural’ communication. The current notion of EMF coincides withanother empirically based notion of transculturality, which recognizes how interactants
move through and across, and thereby blur and transcend, the boundaries and scales (i.e.,
local, national, and global) of named cultures whether consciously or subconsciously(Baker, 2015; see e.g., Baker, 2018, the ‘mooncake’ example). In this regard, interactions
serve as the locus of transforming individual cultural understandings and orientations (seee.g., Baker, 2009, pp. 581-582). The possibility is that cultural differences as obstacles
to achieving meaning turn out not to be long-lasting (Ishikawa, 2017a). In short, as ahighly relevant notion for EMF, transculturality highlights the border-transgressing andtransforming nature of culture with cultural ‘barriers’ possibly short-lived.
Q12. How far is ELF communication about language and culture?
How language and culture converge or diverge for meaning making in each instance isan empirical question (e.g., Risager, 2012). This meaning making, in turn, assembles
multiple semiotic modes (e.g., emoticon, gesture and posture, image, music, and speech),especially in technology-mediated communication (see e.g., Sangiamchit, 2018, p. 352).
It amounts to the condition of what is called transmodalities, which index the bricolageof semiotic resources entangled as well as “continuously shifting and re-shaping in theircontexts and mobility” (Hawkins, 2018, p. 64). In other words, linguistic and othermodes are transgressively merged, situationally transforming perceived meaning. Anyinterpretation of meaning can therefore be short-lived as described in Q11.
Q13. Is EFL, as it were, an enemy of EMF?
Arguably, the premise behind this question is inaccurate. EFL may be a ‘frenemy’ of
EMF, even if not a friend (Ishikawa, 2018). Of course, there are many ‘native’ Englishes,
given that dozens of countries and regions use English as a de jure or de facto official
language. It may therefore be odd for EFL to feature a particular ‘standard’ variety in acouple of nations where a large population speaks only English. After all, such ‘standard’5English for monolinguals is, in a way, simplistic and linguistically marked against today’s
prevalent social contacts beyond geographical boundaries, for which language tends tobe enacted amorphously. At the same time, however, it is this idealised, provincial, andmonolingual approach to English that affords practicality in a classroom. For this reason,
what we really problematise is not the EFL approach per se, but the danger of conflating theconvenient fiction of ‘standard’ English with English in its entirety and thereby ignoring
multilingual reality in ELT settings.
Q14. How can ELT bridge the gap between EFL and multilingual reality?
EFL is likely to have a scaffolding effect on becoming a capable English user in global
communication so long as the convenient fiction as described in Q13 is not confused withEnglish in its entirety (e.g., Sifakis & Tsantila, 2019). To this effect, it is known that theunderstanding of global diversity in English through classroom instruction and activities
will influence students’ language attitudes positively (e.g., Galloway and Rose, 2017). In
addition, the most recent empirical data demonstrates that students’ first-hand experiencein an EMF scenario (see Q7 above) in tandem with such a classroom is likely to promote
more active English use both inside and outside the classroom (Ishikawa forthcoming). In
other words, their EMF experience, if together with linguistic and cultural awareness inthe classroom, may well serve as a powerful pedagogic mediation to nurture interactional
ability. Accordingly, what we would like to suggest is EMF awareness (cf. Sifakis,2017), which embraces conceptual understanding, attitudes, and practical ability to be
integrated for effective global communication. For this purpose, EMF-aware courses
may be designed according to two principles: (1) facilitating students’ experience in an
EMF scenario whether online or in person, and (2) encouraging their critical thinking on‘English’ and culture in reference to the notion of EMF coupled with that of transculturality(see Q8 & Q11 above). Students will formulate their own attitudes towards this updated
representation of ‘English’ even if ideological monolingualism is still circulated in a social
sphere. The same empirical data illustrates that more active language use undergirded bypositively developing attitudes further deepens conceptual understanding, and that sucha virtuous circle has the power to allow a classroom to embrace increasingly diverse
aggregate resources in language and culture (Ishikawa forthcoming).
3. CONCLUSION
The research field of ELF continues presenting an intellectual challenge to ELT
professionals, or more broadly, all concerned with language and communication in thisage of globalisation. The current notion of EMF invites us to “disinvent” English (Makoni& Pennycook, 2007) from monolingual provincialism and see it within prevalentmultilingualism. Incorporating EMF awareness into the classroom has the potential forstudents to open up a new space of using English in their own right as being multilingualand multilanguaging English users. After all, it may be ‘native’ English speakers who are‘abnormal’ or highly unusual in today’s complex world if they choose to stay monolingualand relatively monocultural. On the other hand, it is multilingual and multilanguaging
English users capable of seeing culture as “emerging in situ” (Baker, 2015, p. 99) who
6are “‘unmarked’ … to be able to participate fully in ELF [communication]” (Jenkins,
2015b, p. 78).
Among several foreseeable issues for ELF researchers to tackle (see Jenkins, Baker& Dewey, 2018, Section 7), a primary one in ELT is language assessment, especiallyvis-à-vis the current fit-for-all model of internationally commercialised English tests for
additional language users. Many of us are working on this issue (e.g., Jenkins & Leung,
2019; Leung, Lewkowicz & Jenkins, 2016; Murata, Ishikawa & Konakahara, 2018),
and will possibly see you again to discuss it in our next attempt for ‘spring cleaning’.
REFERENCES
Baker, W. (2009). The cultures of English as a lingua franca. TESOL Quarterly, 43(4),567–592. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00187.x
Baker, W. (2015). Culture and identity through English as a lingua franca: Rethinking
concepts and goals in intercultural communication. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Baker, W. (2018). Transcultural communication and English as a lingua franca:
New perspectives on language, culture and intercultural communication.
Plenary paper at the Eleventh International Conference of English as a Lingua
Franca (ELF11), London, July. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/326399714
Baker, W., & Jenkins, J. (2015). Criticising ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua
Franca, 4(1), 191–198. doi: 10.1515/jelf-2015-0013
Cogo, A. (2018). ELF and multilingualism. In J. Jenkins, W. Baker & M. Dewey(Eds.), The Routledge handbook of English as a Lingua Franca (pp. 357–368).
London: Routledge.
Galloway, N., & Rose, H. (2017). Incorporating Global Englishes into the ELTclassroom. ELT Journal, 72(1), 3–14. doi: 10.1093/elt/ccx010
García, O., & Li, W. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hawkins, M. R. (2018). Transmodalities and transnational encounters: Fostering
critical cosmopolitan relations. Applied Linguistics, 39(1), 55–77. doi:
10.1093/applin/amx048
Hülmbauer, C. (2013). From within and without: The virtual and the plurilingual in
ELF. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 2(1), 47–73. doi: 10.1515/jelf2013-0003
7

Ishikawa, T. (2015). Academic rigour in criticising English as a Lingua Franca.
Englishes in Practice, 2(2), 39–48. doi: 10.1515/eip-2015-0002
Ishikawa, T. (2016). World Englishes and English as a Lingua Franca: Conceptualising
the legitimacy of Asian people’s English. Asian Englishes, 18(2), 129–140. doi:
10.1080/13488678.2016.1171672
Ishikawa, T. (2017a). Conceptualising English as a global contact language. Englishes
in Practice, 4(2), 31–49. doi: 10.1515/eip-2017-0002
Ishikawa, T. (2017b). Japanese university students’ attitudes towards their English andthe possibility of ELF awareness. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 6(2),237–263. doi: 10.1515/jelf-2017-0012
Ishikawa, T. (2018). EFL and ELFing: Friends, foes, or ‘frenemies’? Invited paper at
the First Forum of Aichi University’s Institute for Research in Humanities andSocial Sciences, Toyohashi, October.
Ishikawa, T. (Forthcoming). Awareness of English-within-multilingualism in L1-sharedclassrooms.
Jenkins, J. (1996a). Changing pronunciation priorities for successful communication ininternational contexts. Speak Out!, 17, 15–22.
Jenkins, J. (1996b). Native speaker, non-native speaker and English as a Foreign
Language: Time for a change. IATEFL Newsletter, 131, 10–11.
Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an International Language. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Jenkins, J. (2012). English as a Lingua Franca from the classroom to the classroom.
ELT Journal, 66(4), 486–494.
Jenkins, J. (2015a). Global Englishes: A resource book for students (3rd ed.). London:
Routledge.
Jenkins, J. (2015b). Repositioning English and multilingualism in English as a Lingua
Franca. Englishes in Practice, 2(3), 49–85. doi: 10.1515/eip-2015-0003
Jenkins, J. (2017). ELF and WE: Competing or complementing paradigms? In E. L.
Low & A. Pakir (Eds.), World Englishes: Rethinking paradigms (pp. 12–28).
London: Routledge.

8

Jenkins, J. (2018). Introduction. In J. Jenkins, W. Baker & M. Dewey (Eds.), The
Routledge handbook of English as a Lingua Franca (pp. 1–4). London:
Routledge.
Jenkins, J., & Leung, C. (2019). From mythical ‘standard’ to standard reality: The
need for alternatives to standardized English language tests. Language Teaching,52(1), 86-110. doi: 10.1017/S0261444818000307
Kirkpatrick, A. (2010). Researching English as a lingua franca in Asia: The
Asian Corpus of English (ACE) project. Asian Englishes, 13(1), 4–18. doi:
10.1080/13488678.2010.10801269
Leung, C., Lewkowicz, J, & Jenkins, J. (2016). English for Academic Purposes: A needfor remodelling. Englishes in Practice, 3(3), 55–73. doi: 101515/eip-20160003
Li W., & Ho, W. Y. (J.). (2018). Language learning sans frontiers: A translanguaging
view. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 38, 33–59. doi: 10.1017/
S0267190518000053
Makoni, S., & Pennycook, A. (Eds.). (2007). Disinventing and reconstituting
languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Mauranen, A. (2003). The corpus of English as lingua franca in academic settings.
TESOL Quarterly, 37(3), 513–527. doi: 10.2307/3588402
Mauranen, A. (2012). Exploring ELF: Academic English shaped by non-native
speakers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mauranen, A. (2018a). Conceptualising ELF. In J. Jenkins, W. Baker & M. Dewey(Eds.), The Routledge handbook of English as a Lingua Franca (pp. 7–24).
London: Routledge.
Mauranen, A. (2018b). Second Language Acquisition, world Englishes, and English
as a Lingua Franca (ELF). World Englishes, 37(1), 106–119. doi: 10.1111/
weng.12306
Murata, K., Ishikawa, T., & Konakahara, M. (2018). WASEDA Working Papers in ELF(Vol. 7), 1-12. Tokyo: ELF Research Group Waseda.
Pennycook, A., & Otsuji, E. (2015). Metrolingualism: Language in the city. London:
Routledge.
Pietikäinen, K. S. (2018). Misunderstandings and ensuring understanding in private
9

ELF talk. Applied Linguistics, 39(2), 188–212. doi: 10.1093/applin/amw005
Risager, K. (2012). Linguaculture and transnationality: The cultural dimensionsof language. In J. Jackson (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language andintercultural communication (pp. 101–115). London: Routledge.
Sangiamchit, C. (2018). ELF in electronically mediated intercultural communication.
In J. Jenkins, W. Baker & M. Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of English
as a Lingua Franca (pp. 345–356). London: Routledge.
Seidlhofer, B. (2001). Closing a conceptual gap: The case for a description of English
as a lingua franca. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 133–158.
doi: 10.1111/1473-4192.00011
Seidlhofer, B. (2004). Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua
franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 209–239. doi: 10.1017/
S0267190504000145
Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Sifakis, N. C. (2017). ELF awareness in English language teaching: Principles andprocesses. Applied Linguistics, Advance articles. doi: 10.1093/applin/amx034
Sifakis, N. C., & Tsantila, N. (Eds.). (2019). English as a Lingua Franca for EFL
contexts. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
WrELFA (The Corpus of Written English as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings).
(2015). Written academic ELF (WrELFA). Retrieved from http://www.helsinki.fi/
englanti/elfa/wrelfa.html

10Reconceptualizing ‘Global Jinzai’ from a (B)ELF
Perspective(B)ELF視点からのグローバル人材養成コンセプトの再考
Yuri Jody Yujobo, 祐乗坊由利ジョディー

Center for English as a Lingua Franca, Tamagawa University, Japanyujobo@lit.tamagawa.ac.jp
ABSTRACTThe cultivation of ‘global jinzai’ has been the main Japanese agenda across multifaceted
disciplines and is a pressing national issue for businesses, government, and global
education policy reforms. The term ‘global jinzai’ equates to global leaders or global
human resources. In a definition by The Global Human Resource Development Committeeof the Industry-Academia (2010), it describes people who possess three elements: (1)active and responsible membership in society; (2) a high proficiency in foreign language(English); and (3) holds a deep appreciation in intercultural understanding. First, thispaper will review the major roadblocks in higher education in the path to develop theseleaders including: low self-esteem, lack of sustainability of inbound and outbound mobility
programs, and the paradox of goal-setting to native English speaker (NES) norms. Second,
this paper will reconceptualize these issues by taking on an English as a lingua franca(ELF) and English as a business lingua franca (BELF) perspective to raise awareness on
the changing use of English in social and business contexts among non-native English
speakers (NNES). Finally, this paper will suggest teaching practices for an ELF and
BELF-informed curriculum to provide students with opportunities to take ownership of
their multilingual strengths for developing their own communicative capabilities.
KEYWORDS: ELF, BELF, Global human resources, Education reforms
1. POLICIES PROBLEMS AND CLOSED MINDSET TOWARD CULTIVATING‘GLOBAL JINZAI’Japan has entered the new era known as Society 5.0 with the sophistication of artificial
intelligence, cyber society, and the Internet generation (Cabinet Office, 2018; MEXT,
2018). The traditional education model was based on a memorized set of knowledge.
This was appropriate for the industrial era, in which industries flourished under Ouchi’s
Theory Z Management Style (1981) of lifetime employment and high employee loyalty.
However, in the new Society 5.0, job security is at risk of computerization and automation.
A 2018 OECD study found 14 percent of all jobs across 32 nations have a high riskof automation with a further 32 percent at risk of significant changes (Nedelkoska &11

Quintini, 2018; OECD, 2018). Students need to acquire new skills for tackling the rapid
technological changes requiring creativity, flexibility, and adaptability. They need to betaught a new set of abilities to apply cognitive and social intelligence, leadership and21st-century skills.
1.1 Issues of low self-esteem and need for university English reforms
Economic organizations, such as Japan Business Federation (Keidanren) and Japan
Association of Corporate Executives (Keizai Doyukai) put pressure on MEXT (Ministryof Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology) to react to the stagnant growthof global human resources and its inability to sustain a pool of confident and globallycompetent university graduates. One problem companies face with their newly hired
employees is the lack of confidence in English communication skills. The Keidanren places
education policies at fault in the deterioration in the quality and inward tendencies ofuniversity students, and the separation between global human resources that the industrial
world demands (Yoshida, 2017, p. 88).
Conversely, Japan has consistently scored in the highest-ranking group in theOECD PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) results taken in 72
countries to half a million fifteen-year-olds on their knowledge in science, mathematics,
reading, collaborative problem solving and financial literacy (OECD, 2012) and oftencauses misconception with the disguised figures of successful results. However, theOECD survey also revealed that Japan lagged far behind countries such as China, US, andthe Republic of Korea in student confidence levels in their capabilities and found lower
motivation to learn. Results showed 72 percent of high school students felt they are “notuseful”, 52 percent are “satisfied with their life”, and 56 percent said they perceive thatthey have “decent abilities” (Kimura & Tatsuno, 2017, p. 13). Low self-esteem was notfound only among students, but also with young employees.
Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI) (2009) found morethan 40 percent of newly hired employees lacked global perspective and exhibited
non-willingness to work abroad citing reasons such as difficulties in English language
communication with non-Japanese workers, lack of confidence in leadership, and wanting
to avoid challenging work responsibilities (Yonezawa, 2014). Fuji Xerox Learning
Institute (FXLI) surveyed several Japanese multi-corporate employees in their twenties
and thirties on their views toward pursuing leadership roles. The results found that only 30
and 40 percent respectively wanted to pursue future leadership roles and FXLI concluded
that the problem exists because young employees did not exemplify a need ‘to want’ tobecome leaders. This could be due to deficits in the current higher education curriculum
which focuses on in the lack of training in leader -oriented sources such as ambition,
altruism, and responsibility (FXLI, 2017, p. 4). The report also shifted a greater focus on
student attitudes, openness, and autonomy.
MEXT took these warning signs into account in radical education policies
including the reform of the National Center Test for University Admission (Center Exam).
“The exams put more priority on examining students’ thinking ability, expression, andreasoning” (Kimura & Tatsuno, 2017, p. 14). This will open up opportunities for English
education reforms for improving students’ qualities and communicative capabilities rather
12than cognitive testing of knowledge. Other key shifts such as ‘active learning’ and ‘studentcentered’ approaches have been added to new teaching policies outlined in the MEXT’s‘Senior High School Course of Study on Foreign Languages’. The policy changes include
a “building up on the acquisition of knowledge, skills and development of thinking ability,
judgment ability, and expression of power” (MEXT, 2018, p. 18).
At first, these radical changes were welcomed and applauded for their top-down
approach in intensifying the speed for a change. However, student self-esteem issues havenot been completely resolved with these policy changes and also pressure on teachers has
intensified. Teachers were suddenly held accountable for implementing a new teaching
agenda through a communicative approach and needed to prepare their students on taking
the four-skills institutional tests. These changes have eschewed a shift to adopting morecommunicative approaches to English language teaching.
Moreover, it is important to mention self-esteem issues for both students andteachers are due to the Japanese mindset related to the native speakerism goals. The focus
on NES goals are commonly found in University English programs. Oda (2018) studied
the use of key phrases on eighty-four university English language program posters. The
results suggested the ideology of native speakerism in a majority of the programs with key
phrases including : Learning English in an ‘English only’ environment, Native Englishspeakers (NES), Learn authentic English, and a focus on such standardized tests as TOEIC,TOEFL and IELTS. These non-attainable and non-realistic goals have continued to hurt
self-esteem as students and teachers work to mimic a NES, ending in failure by fallingshort.
As a consequence of abolishing the Center Examination for English, Japanese
students submit scores from institutional tests (i.e., TOEFL, IELTS, TOEIC) for Japanese
university admissions. The policymakers and university admissions in Japan need toreconceptualize what kind of student will be successful in the university. Jenkins (2013)
discussed the issue of using standardized tests which focus on the NS norms. Her research
revealed how students recognized that the IELTS focuses on “one way to do English” andprepares students to communicate only with British people rather than for international
communication with a homogenous approach by expecting foreign students to only hear
British accents on campus – a criticism leveled also at TOEFL in respect of American
accents (p.179). Also, D’Angelo (2017) notes that Japanese students’ over-reliance on
grammatical accuracy based on NES norms, and the teaching of American pronunciation
is a disservice to the real needs of Japanese ELF users and they may be a root to thereported low-self-esteem problems. The reforms took out the Center Examination but
only to replace it with another test. The policy goal was to help increase global jinzai, but
it was only adding to further self-esteem issues with the new English admission policies.
1.2 Issues on university mobility policies
Japanese students are studying abroad at an average of 3.1 percent of all university students
accounting for 136,000 students in 2011. However, this falls short of the OECD 7.1 percent
average (Shimomura, 2013). In the past few years, Japanese universities have taken theinitiative to develop new inbound and outbound mobility programs with special MEXT
funding policies. MEXT also saw this as a way to increase Japan’s footing in international
13

reputation and rankings but also to promote the mobility of graduate students, researchers,
and visiting professors. International rankings go hand in hand with the number of scholarly
publications and the ratio of international students and faculty. This rapid growth came inseveral forms of tie-ups. For example, foreign universities established branch campusesin Japan (e.g., Temple University, McGill University, Lakeland University, Far EasternState University); dual degree partnerships between Japanese universities and foreign
universities (e.g., Keio University and Sciences Po, Ritsumeikan University and Australian
National University); and bilateral agreements between institutions for long/short-term
study abroad programs. Other programs are part of government-funded projects: Global
30 (inbound), the International University Exchange Project, the Top Global University
Project, the 300,000 International Students Plan (inbound), the Go Global Japan (primarily
outbound) and many other bilateral programs. Some programs are ambitious in numbers
such as Go Global which supports 120,000 Japanese human resources in the global fieldwith aims to improve Japan’s global competitiveness and enhance industry-academia ties
between nations (Ota, 2018; Shimomura, 2013).
However, problems have intensified as MEXT conducts regular checks on thesegovernment-funded programs. Universities are inclined to focus on reaching their quota
or key performance indicators (KPIs) as their first priority in order to continue to receive
funding. This focus takes away time from developing high quality programs. Instead,
universities are heavily relying on funding for its operational costs and raising questionsof whether or not the programs could sustain independently beyond the funding period.
Ota calls this ‘a kind of numbers game of KPIs’ so, it is not certain that the government
supported funds have increased international competitiveness and compatibility of Japanesehigher education as a whole” (Ota, 2018, p. 98). With this funding, many universities havedeveloped English as a medium of instruction (EMI) courses hastily and has taken atoll on its quality as many Japanese professors needed to suddenly shift their medium to
English without enough preparation time. At the same time, many Asian students that had
proficient Japanese proficiency opted to take mainstream courses in Japanese as a medium
of instruction rather than courses taught insufficiently by Japanese professors in EMI.
This is important to acknowledge because Japanese students (and teachers) still do nothave the ability to sufficiently communicate (or teach) in a classroom with international
students from different countries (D’Anglelo, 2017).
Other Asian universities have joined the race for higher global university rankings.
China's Ministry of Education claims it has surpassed Japan as Asia’s top producer of
local university and foreign university collaborations (Redden, 2018). Research anddevelopment activities are important in pushing up international rankings and reputation(Piro, 2016). However, cracks have emerged in the Chinese-foreign collaborations as the
Chinese Ministry terminated 220 contracts with foreign universities with more than ahundred of them since 2016 due to: 1) low instructional quality, 2) low student satisfaction,3) poor attractiveness, and 4) weak specialized programs (Redden, 2018). Also, China
aimed to recover its regulatory control of universities without foreign influence. Despite
these high risks, Japanese universities have continued to launch programs similar to China
and other Asian countries at exponential speeds with the support of MEXT policies. A
reconceptualization of policies with a fresh mindset is necessary in order to develop high14

quality and sound programs based on sustainable global jinzai development plan from an
ELF and a English as a business lingua franca (BELF) perspective.
2. RECONCEPTUALIZING POLICIES & MINDSET FROM A (B)ELF PERSPECTIVE
English is a vital part of the ‘workplace kit’ just like smartphones or laptops and it isinevitable to divert from using English in business especially since English is spoken
at a useful level by 1.75 billion people worldwide-which is one in every four people(Ehrenreich, 2011; Neeley, 2012). ELF researchers claim that native English speakerism
has been safeguarding the boundaries of English, which ultimately conflicts with thehybridity of English when the focus should be on creativity and pluralization of English
and rethink about what constitutes a harmonious, cohesive, integrated, and motivatedspeech community” (Kachru, 2006). This section will take a view that policies need to bereconceptualized with a need for a more open dialogue between industry, academia, andgovernment and looking at how English is being used in the global workplace.
2.1 Reconceptualizing low self-esteem from a (B)ELF perspective
How does a student increase their self-esteem and confidence in English? One way is toreconceptualize and help the student to build an awareness that English does not belong
to only native English speakers (NES) but it belongs to anyone in every corner of theworld. Mauranen (2016) researched the multilingual aspects of businesses and the roleof English in the wider framework of globalization and internationalization of businesspractices. According to Borzkowski (2017) and Neeley (2012), multinational corporations(e.g., Airbus, Daimler-Chrysler, Nokia, Renault, Samsung, SAP, Technicolor, MicrosoftChina, Sodexo, and Siemens) have started to mandate the use of English as their corporate
language to organize and collaborate globally.
In March 2010, Rakuten, a Japanese IT company, announced “Englishnization”
and became one of the “52 percent of multinational companies that had adopted a language
different from that of their originating country in order to better meet global expansion
and business needs” (Neeley, 2017. p. 17). Many other Japanese multinational companies
have already made plans to mandate English as their corporate language. As a result,
NNES will evolve exponentially in this globalized world, “it is unlikely to supplant local
languages in its function as a lingua franca, but to complement the linguistic diversity thatlives on locally and regionally” (Mauranen, 2016, p. 44) and the question of ownership ofEnglish is no longer viewed as a language that is not owned by only native speakers but it
is also a language owned by NNES.
2.2. Reconceptualizing mobility from a (B)ELF perspective
In Europe, universities have found mobility as a factor of success through the signingof the Bologna Process of 1999 which allowed the mobility of students, professors, andresearchers across the Pan-European community. Initially, twenty-nine countries in Europe(with 48 signatories in 2015) had a vision for a ‘One Europe’ education market approachand the integration of global education policy initiatives. European universities adopted
a regulatory system to recognize comparable degrees, to transfer credits, and promoted a15

European cooperation in high quality assurance (Piro, 2016) and create borderless fluidityof human resources for national and international economic growth.
China and India also connects study abroad to economic growth. These countries
have the largest exodus abroad and accounts for more than a quarter of all students studying
outside their home countries (Piro, 2016, p. 83), and Korea follows closely behind. Study
abroad initiatives are linked with industry-academia-government initiatives with goals to
infiltrate the global workforce. It is now expected that China will supply more than sixty
percent of the G20 workforce with qualifications in science, technology, engineering andmathematics (STEM) by 2030 (OECD, 2015).
However, Japan’s inbound and outbound policies still tend to be bilateralagreements between universities without a higher agenda linked to industrial initiatives.
Japan is lagging behind in STEM related mobility programs that directly lead toinnovation, leadership development, and job opportunities in new technology. These
successful benchmarks from around the world can give hints in ways to expand mobility
in not only a unilateral direction, but a cooperative approach with industries partneringwith universities and giving students internships and creating joint academia-industry
projects with chances to challenge their English communicative capabilities in a realworld situation. The reconceptualization of mobility must begin with a plan to help
students realize they are current ELF learners and are aiming to become competent ELF
users. These ELF users will be eventually aim to play important roles in multinational
corporations with multilinguistic and multicultural people. Thus, the goal is to become acompetent in BELF.
3. B(ELF)-AWARE PRACTICES FOR INCREASING COMMUNICATIVE CAPABILITIESWhat can university English classes do to promote ELF and BELF-awareness? First, Terauchi& Araki (2016) suggest that ELF learners will benefit from lessons on actual uses of ELF
found in both meaningful communicative settings and in business scenes. This will give
students an early exposure by having a clearer image of themselves acting globally in their
future, which will help them to develop their learning process. Such practice can also help
students’ self-esteem in English by understanding the changed role and status of English, andsee it as it is shaped by conventional use to revise the ‘ideologies and beliefs associatedwith the language’ (Seidlhofer, 2016). Also, university classes need to align their assessment
policies to ELF-aware understanding by not penalizing students for mistakes based on NES
standards. Effective communication can be achieved without having to conform to NES norms(Kirkpatrick, 2015; Seidlhofer, 2016) and this can be validated by the data of NNES natural
occurring conversations in the Asian Corpus of English (ACE). Students need to know “whatmatters is how effectively the speaker can make expedient use of linguistic resources toachieve a successful communicative outcome” (Seidlhofer, 2016, p. 27).
Teachers that are interested in ELF and BELF-aware pedagogy can also refer to‘The Model of Global Communicative Competence’ (Figure 1) by Louhiala-Salminen andKankaanranta (2011, p. 258). This model highlights the expanding areas of knowledge
elements that are needed in successful interactions in a business context known as global
communicative competence.
16

FIGURE 1. Global Communicative Competence Model in a Business Context, adapted
by Louhiala-Salminen and Kankaaranta (2011, p. 258)

The outer layer, ‘Business knowhow’, includes actual business abilities orcapabilities to do daily business tasks. This layer represents the actual day-to-day businessknowhow. The second layer, ‘Competence in BELF’, represents situations that are highly
specific to a context. The focus of includes communication that is dynamic, idiosyncratic
and tolerant of different varieties in order to focus on building rapport and trust. The inner
layer is ‘Multicultural competence’ and includes accommodation skills including respect
and tolerance toward ‘different ways of doing things’. All of the three layers are necessary
to reach the core which is “Global Communicative Competence”.
Japanese university students lack in opportunities to improve business knowhow
and multicultural competence in a sheltered classroom especially if there are no foreign
students. This model shows the importance of focusing on interactional skills, rapport
building, and the ability to ask for and provide clarifications. Teachers can expand students’repertoire by introducing case studies and hold business meetings and discussions. Also
project-based learning activities can simulates real-world communication providing
meaning communication practice. For developing ‘Multicultural Competence’, a teacher
could select intercultural and real-world authentic materials to study different cultural
aspects found in everyday and business situations in Japanese multinational companies.
One way to overcome low self-esteem is to incorporate NNES authentic materials
into the classroom through readily available materials on the Internet. Teachers can also
design materials by referring to and comparing several Corpus extracts (e.g., VOICE, ACE)
to study NNES speakers to give them a more achievable and meaningful examples of realworld listening. Björkman (2013) suggests incorporating listening and speaking materials
with a variety of native accents, and materials which encourage negotiation of meaning anduse of communication strategies, such as non-verbal cues, asking for clarification, asking
for more information, and communication strategies. This includes noticing the role ofrapport building, building trust and cooperation, and communication strategies focusing
on clarity, brevity, directness, and politeness (Kankaanranta & Louhiala-Salminen, 2013).
Furthermore, traditional forms of listening comprehension activities where17students are passive receptors of auditory input into dialogic events can be replacedwith more reflective real-world processes also known as proactive listening skills(Dimoski, Yujobo, & Imai, 2016, p. 69). Classrooms can provide explicit and implicit
use of communication strategies and compensatory strategies are needed for repairing
breakdowns and maintaining conversations to facilitate interactions. These activities cancontribute to the negotiation of meaning to achieve mutual understanding and to deal withuncertainty in ELF conversations (Björkman, 2014; Cogo & Dewey, 2012; Seidlhofer,2011). Finally, Kubota (2016) mentions the implications for education and policy toinclude a need to critically reflect on the promise of English to seek beyond linguistic
accuracy and fluency, and develop dispositional and strategic competence. Kankaaranta
and Louhiala-Salminen (2013) summarizes it up well by stating that rapid changes in work
environments, particularly advancing globalization and new technology, have highlighted
the need for expanding our knowledge of the elements that constitute communicativecompetence in global encounters.
4. FUTURE DIRECTIONS & CONCLUSION
It is hard to ignore the deepening symbiotic relationship emerging between industryacademia-government. The “global corporatization of education” (Piro, 2016, p. 32) is
not only happening in Japan, but it is a global phenomena whereby corporations influenceand pressure policy makers to shape the goals of education and human behaviors forthe corporate workplace. The clearing of the roadblocks in the path towards cultivating‘global jinzai’ will begin with a reconceputalization by: (1) solving self-esteem issues
through cooperative dialogue for education policies based on ELF and BELF-awareness,(2) developing lucrative mobility programs that are sustainable and linked to global
business development, and, (3) changing the mindset of NNES with the development of
global communicative competence through ELF and BELF-aware classroom practices.
Then the time will come when Asian nations cease to look at global jinzai with a national
agenda, and finally realize the true meaning of cultivating competent ‘global jinzai’ witha global agenda.
REFERENCES
Björkman, B. (2013). English as an academic lingua franca: An investigationof form and communicative effectiveness. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. doi:
10.1515/9783110279542
Björkman, B. (2014). An analysis of polyadic English as a lingua franca speech: A
communicative strategies framework. Journal of Pragmatics, 66, 122-138.
Cabinet Office Government of Japan. (2018) “What is Society 5.0”. Bureau of Science,
Technology and Innovation. Retrieved from https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/english/
society5_0/index.html
18

Cogo, A., & Dewey, M. (2012). Analyzing English as a lingua franca: A corpus driven
investigation. London: Continuum.
D’Angelo, J. F. (2017). The Status of ELF in Japan. In J. Jenkins, W. Baker, & M.
Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca (pp. 165175). London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315717173
Dimoski, B., Yujobo, Y. J ., & Imai, M. (2016). Exploring the effectiveness ofcommunication strategies through pro-active listening in ELF-informed pedagogy.
Language Education in Asia, 7(2). 67-87. https://doi.org/10.5746/LEiA/16/V7/I2/
A02/Dimoski_Yujobo_Imai
Ehrenreich, S. (2011). The Dynamics of English as a Lingua Franca in International
Business: A Language Contact Perspective. In A. Archibald, A. Cogo & J.
Jenkins (Eds.), Latest Trends in ELF Research (pp.11-34). London: Cambridge
Scholars Publishing.
FXLI (Fuji Xerox Learning Institute, Co.Ltd). (2017). Human Resources Development
research and insights for talent development. White Paper: 2017 edition.
Retrieved from https://www.fxli.co.jp/images/pdf/download/wp2017.pdf
Jenkins, J. (2013). English as a Lingua Franca in the International University.
The politics of academic English language policy. London: Routledge. doi:
10.4324/9780203798157
Kachru, B.B. (2006). World Englishes and culture wars. In B. B. Kachru, Y. Kachru &C. L. Nelson (Eds.), The handbook of world Englishes (pp. 446-471). Oxford:
Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9780470757598.ch25
Kankaanranta, A., & Louhiala-Salminen, L. (2013). What language does global businessspeak? The concept and development of BELF. Iberica, 26. 17-34.
Kimura, D., & Tatsuno, M. (2017). Advancing 21st Century Competencies in Japan.
Asia Society: Center for Global Education. 1-37. Retrieved from https://
asiasociety.org/files/21st-century-competencies-japan.pdf
Kirkpatrick, A. (2010). English as a Lingua Franca in ASEAN: A Multilingual model.
Hong Kong: University Press.
Kubota, R. (2016). Language is only a tool: Japanese expatriates working in China
and implications for language teaching. In K. Murata (Ed.), Exploring ELF in
Japanese Academic and Business Contexts. (pp.156-179). London: Routledge.
doi:10.118 6/2191-5059-3-4
19Ledger, S., Vidovich, L., O’Donoghue, T. (2014). Global to local curriculum policy
processes. Switzerland: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-09762-7
Louhiala-Salminen, L., & Kankaanranta, A. ( 2011). Professional communication ina global business context: The notion of global communicative competence.
IEEE Transactions on professional communication, 54(3). 244-262. doi:
10.110910.1109/TPC.2011.2161844
Mauranen, A. (2016). English as a global lingua franca. In K. Murata (Ed.), Exploring
ELF in Japanese Academic and Business Contexts. (pp. 29-45). London:
Routledge.
METI. (2009). About the indices to Japanese companies on their level ofinternationalizing human resource. Retrieved from https://www.meti.go.jp/
english/policy/economy/human_resources/management.pdf
METI. (2018). Develop global human resources through industry-academia-government
collaboration. In Global Human Resource Development Committee of theIndustry-Academia Partnership for Human Resource Development. Retrieved
from http://www.meti.go.jp/english/policy/economy/industry_academia/pdf/04.pdf
MEXT. (2018). Kotougakkou gakushu shido youryou kaisetsu. Retrieved fromhttp://www.mext.go.jp/c.omponent/a_menu/education/micro_detail/__icsFiles/
afieldfile/2018/07/13/1407073_09.pdf
MEXT. (2018). Society 5.0 nimuketa jinzai ikusei- shakai ga kawaru, manabigakawaru.
http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/other/detail/__icsFiles
afieldfile/2018/06/06/1405844_002.pdf
MEXT. (2009). Koutougakkou gakushuu shidou yoryo gaikokugo (Study of course
guideline for foreign languages in senior high schools). Retrieved fromhttp://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/newcs/youryou/eiyaku/__icsFiles/
afieldfile/2012/10/24/1298353_3.pdf
Neeley, T. (2017). The language of global success: How a common tongue transforms
multinational organizations. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Neeley, T. (2012). Global Business Speaks English, Harvard Business Review.
Oda, M. (2018). Beyond global English(es). In K. Murata (Ed.). English-Medium of
Instruction from an English as a lingua franca perspective: Exploring the higher
education context. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781351184335-15

20

OECD (2018), Job Creation and Local Economic Development 2018: Preparing for the
Future of Work, Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264305342-enOECD. (2012). Programme for International Students Assessment (PISA).
doi: 10.1787/9789264167872-2-en
OECD. (2015). “How is the global talent pool changing (2013, 2030)?”. Education
Indicators in Focus. doi: 10.1787/5js33lf9jk41-en
Ota, H. (2018). Internationalization of Higher Education: Global Trends and Japan’s
Challenges. Educational Studies in Japan: International Yearbook, 12, 91-105.
doi: 10.7571/esjkyoiku.12.91
Ouchi, W. G. (1981). Theory Z: How American business can meet theJapanese challenge. Group and Organization Studies. 6(3), 386-388.
doi:10.1177/105960118100600316
Piro, J. M. (2016). Revolutionizing Global Higher Education Policy. Innovation and the
Bologna Process. New York: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315725888
Redden, E. (2018) China's Ministry of Education approves termination of more than 200
Chinese-foreign cooperative program. Inside Higher Ed.
Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Seidlhofer, B. (2016). ELF: English in a global context. In K. Murata (Ed.), Exploring
ELF in Japanese Academic and Business Contexts (pp. 18-28). London:
Routledge.
Shimomura, H. (2013, September 2). Global 30 Universities. The Japan Times.
Retrieved from http://info.japantimes.co.jp/ads/pdf/20130902_global_30_
universities.pdf
Terauchi, H., & Araki, T. ( 2016). English language skills that companies need:
responses from a large-scale survey. In K. Murata (Ed.), Exploring ELF in
Japanese Academic and Business Contexts (pp.180-193). London: Routledge.
Widdowson, H. (2015). Competence and Capability: Rethinking the Subject English.
The Journal of Asia TEFL, 12 (1), 1-17.
Yonezawa, A. (2014). Japan’s Challenge of Fostering Global Human Resources. Japan
Labor Review, 11 (2), 37-52. Spring. Retrieved from http://www.jil.go.jp/english/
JLR/documents/2014/JLR42_yonezawa.pdf
21

Yoshida, A. (2017). Global Human Resource Development’ and Japanese University
Education: ‘Localism’ in Actor Discussions. Educational Studies in Japan:
International Yearbook, 11, 83-99.

22

How a ‘Leader-Led Discussion’ Task can be
Effectively Used in a Japanese University Setting
and Provide a Productive Method of Assessment
リーダーレッドディスカッション課題を使用する利点とどのようにEFLクラスで実践できるか
Richard Marsh, マーシュ・リチャード

Center for English as a Lingua Franca, Tamagawa University, Japanr.marsh@lab.tamagawa.ac.jp
ABSTRACTThe goal of this paper is to introduce the 'Leader-Led Discussion' task and outline its
benefits as a form of speaking task and assessment. This paper will also assess student
perceptions and offer insights and conclusions based on these findings. With a significant
difference from most ‘carousel’ speaking tasks, this paper aims to inspire and share
the benefits of this valuable teaching resource and explain the ways in which English
as a Lingua Franca (ELF) learners can benefit from this task. This article will discuss
the pedagogic rationale behind the task, how it can be successfully implemented in theJapanese ELF university classroom and other concerns such as suitable topics andgrading.
KEYWORDS: Assessment, Carousel speaking task, ELF, Leader-led discussion
1. INTRODUCTION
As English teachers in a Japanese university setting, we often have to deal with classes
where the learners are composed of those who are there out of compulsion rather thanchoice and where their levels of motivation and participation could perhaps at times be
improved. To engage a class for a sustained period of time and have students preparing at
home and actively participating in a clearly defined task would seem the ideal situation.
The 'Leader-Led Discussion' task, if properly implemented, promises to satisfy all of theabove criteria.
A key goal of the 'Leader-Led Discussion' task is oral fluency. Kellem (2009) andNation (1991) identify the following important features of fluency building in classroom
language tasks: preparation, time pressure, repetition, and familiarity with language andcontent. To establish the rationale for this paper I feel it is important to clarify how the'Leader-Led Discussion' targets these fluency-building features in turn. First, careful
preparation is required to carry out the task effectively. This will be explained more fully
23

later in the paper, and it is essential that each student independently chooses a topic andconducts detailed research about that topic. The time pressure element must be clear andall students should be aware of how long they have to prepare for their discussion, howlong their introduction should be and for how long they are expected to ask questions
and lead the group discussion. Repetition is a crucial stage of the task and students
will be expected to lead their discussion three to four times in groups, which, after the
carousel rotations have been completed, will include nearly every member of the class.
It is important to clarify that while the learners will mostly repeat their introduction anddiscussion questions, due to the alternating members of their discussion group, the groupdynamic and consequential conversation will often vary dramatically. While familiarity
with language and content cannot always be guaranteed, as the topics and questions
originate from the learners themselves, albeit with some guidance from the teacher, it canusually be assured that there will be some familiarity amongst the class with the themes
the individual students choose. While surprises and innovative topics are encouraged, thequestions themselves should be tailored to the audience and it must be emphasised thataccessible, intelligible questions are required to lead an active group discussion.
Another key element of the 'Leader-Led Discussion' task is that it strives toencourage student-centered fluency. As the focus of this paper is on teaching universityaged adults, it is essential that learners encounter challenging topics and are stimulated
to discuss these issues openly. In my experience, teacher-led discourses or discussions
in front of the whole class can often stifle some students. The 'Leader-Led Discussion'
avoids this as the students’ work in smaller groups and the teacher, while present, is
not directly part of any of the groups. Essentially, each learner chooses a topic of somecriticality (e.g., plastic surgery, terrorism, marrying a non-Japanese person, karōshi death from overworking) and their goal is to introduce the topic, its background, key
terms and their own research, before proceeding to ask questions to stimulate debate and'lead' the discussion. As Morgan (2012, p. 167) explains, ‘when students are guided toresearch information or recycle language about familiar and interesting topics such as
local/global issues, they must engage deeply with content, personalise their final productand so effectively expand their overall world knowledge.’ While perhaps not its primaryaim, a pleasing outcome of the 'Leader-Led Discussion' task is that it usually encourages
learners to engage with relevant global issues and most crucially, from an ELF point ofview, topics with some criticality encourage learners to behave as active world citizens.
This research paper is divided into the following sections: initially there will be aliterature review which will ground the 'Leader-Led Discussion' in the relevant academic
and ELF concepts. Secondly, the procedure will be clarified in detail to ensure readersof this paper will have a lucid and comprehensive picture of how to implement the task
in their classroom. This section will include some example topics, useful discussion
language which could potentially be introduced and a pre-task practice idea which canbe a fun stand-alone lesson. The overall goal of this paper is to introduce the 'Leader-Led
Discussion' task, identify some positive and challenging aspects and highlight why itshould have a prominent place in the pedagogic arsenal of ELF teachers.

24

2. LITERATURE REVIEWAs Jenner (1997) makes clear, it is now fully accepted that, ‘we must bear in mind that
non-native users of English in the world today already greatly outnumber native speakers’(p. 13). With this in mind, I spend a great deal of class time conveying this point, forexample, if the learner travels, lives, works, or volunteers in a non-inner-circle country
they will normally have to converse in an ELF setting. I feel the 'Leader-Led Discussion'
demonstrates this practicality well for it allows learners to experience English language
immersion for a prolonged period of time, and this nearly all takes place without native
speaker input (i.e., any prolonged teacher-led instruction or direct participation).
Accommodations skills are also crucial to the task. Individual learners have agreat deal of subtleties in their overall English abilities including their vocabulary,pronunciation, grammar, confidence, motivation, and even their overall personality andcharacter (Dörnyei & Skehan, 2003). As such, it is fundamental that they work together
and support each other. Through working together to negotiate meaning, learners will
hopefully scaffold, accommodate, and teach each other to avoid a breakdown of meaning(Foster, 1998). While, as Foster openly admits, this often does not come naturally to
students, it is our job as language teachers to encourage the virtues of this and stressto the learners that it is not optimal to simply revert back to their L1 when they feelthey do not fully understand. The 'Leader-Led Discussion' will hopefully play a majorrole in stimulating this negotiation for meaning. As simultaneous groups take place atthe same time and repetition is a key factor, students are also less inhibited, and I feel
their fear of making mistakes is greatly reduced. As Walker (2010) makes clear, because‘accommodation skills will equip learners to actively adjust their pronunciation in orderto help their interlocutors […] they are important for ELF communication’ (p. 45). This
places a primacy on intelligibility rather than specifically on form or comparing their
linguistic repertoire to that of a native speaker (i.e., when they are conscious a teacher
is listening to them and assessing them). The heart of the matter is intelligibility andthe prioritizing of communication, rather than a strict adherence to native-speaker norms
forms the crux of the Lingua Franca Core and carries the overriding focus of groupaccommodation and a negotiation of meaning in non-native speaker interaction as its
goal (Jenkins, 2000). I feel the leader-led discussion fits very well with these values.
A great advantage of our classes at CELF (Centre for English as a lingua franca)
at Tamagawa University is that we meet two times a week for 100 minutes per class.
However, for Japanese university students, there may be very little additional exposure toor opportunities to communicate in the target language. As such, it is essential that fluencybuilding tasks are well planned with a coherent and sound pedagogical underpinning.
Kellem (2009, p. 9) introduces seven key values to be mindful of when implementing
fluency building tasks: (1) incorporate repetition, (2) increase speaking time, (3) prepare
before speaking, (4) use familiar and motivating topics, (5) ensure the task is set at an
appropriate level, (6) impose time limits, and (7) teach formulaic sequences. Throughout
this paper, it will be demonstrated, through both theory and practice, how the 'Leader-Led
Discussion' task addresses each of these principles directly.
As Doe and Hurling point out, with regard to developing ‘L2 speaking fluency,
25

there has not been a great deal of research into the effectiveness of speaking activities
that can be used in the classroom’ (2015, p. 256). However, I will now briefly discuss
the relevance of some studies which concern the merits of similar fluency-building tasks,
which are comparable to the 'Leader-Led Discussion'. Lynch and Maclean (2000) carriedout research pertaining to Japanese university students taking part in a poster carouseltask and noted that there were a great number of benefits regarding the repetition of thetask, including an improvement in learner content, language, self-correction, and theiroverall level of fluency. As they claim, ‘task repetition of the type reported here may be
a useful pedagogic procedure and that the same task can help different learners develop
different areas of their interlanguage’ (Lynch & Maclean, 2000, p. 221). In Arevart’s(1990) and Nation’s (1991) studies, it was reported that learners improved in accuracy,
fluency, and sentence complexity. They also found that there was an overall reduction in
their propensity to repeat themselves, make errors and hesitate when speaking. Nakamura(2008) also studied the effects of task repetition on a poster carousel task with Japanese
students and concluded that learners improved their fluency, especially with regards to adecrease in repetition and pauses and an increase in rates of speech.
3. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LEADER-LED DISCUSSION
As previously stated, the key aspect of the 'Leader-Led Discussion' is to build and improve
effective group communication and fluency. As a teacher, our role is to make it very clearthat this is not a presentation. Learners will receive a favorable grade for how they facilitateand encourage group discussion; it is not a pressured one-time delivery. The focus of thetask is on questions and leading the group discussion, not controlling and presenting
one’s own individual opinion. It is important for the leader, and all members of the group,
to encourage everyone to participate and ask follow-up questions. It is also an important
goal of the leader to help those who may not be so familiar with their topic and make itcomprehensible and accessible to all, by explaining any new, genre-specific vocabulary.
Leaders and participants are expected to encourage everyone to contribute and show
their own passion, motivation and leadership to inspire others to contribute. While thetopic may be critical and even intricate, their questions (5-8) should be accessible to allparticipants to encourage lively discussion for approximately ten minutes. Repetition is afundamental element of the task and it is important to encourage students to communicate
in a natural and uninhibited way. Each learner will repeat their leader discussion three tofive times. It should be emphasised that the focus is not on memory or reciting a pressured
one-time delivery, but of accommodating and supporting the group and adapting theconversation to the changing group members and its shifting dynamic.
For successful implementation of the 'Leader-Led Discussion,' each learner must
think of a suitable topic to lead a 10-minute group discussion. Example discussion topics
can be shown on a PowerPoint or drawn on the whiteboard with some elicitation to
help support students. Some example topics I may provide could be: Should tattoos beacceptable? Do Japanese people need English? Japanese people should visit more foreigncountries, or Smartphone use is bad for social interaction. It is important to give students
a wide variety of examples and make it clear that while a formal or more casual topic is26

acceptable, some level of criticality is certainly desirable. Initially, many learners willneed time to digest the topic, and it is important not to pressure them into a topic too early.
In my experience, the best ideas come from patient, considered preparation.
It may also be useful at this stage to provide learners with some examples ofsuitable discussion language (Appendix One). This can be typed out on a presentation
slide for the class or provided as a hand-out. However, it is vital that the sentences fit
the students’ learning style and can be used naturally. Additionally, it would be valuable
to elicit alternatives from the class as a mini exercise to emphasize that there are viable
alternatives to the ones provided. Next, it is essential that teachers provide each studentwith a hand-out to aid them in the structuring of their preparation. It will also give thema clearer idea of the different components of the task. An example hand-out for students
is shared in Appendix Two, and Appendix Three has an example of a student’s plan.
Initially, the learners must prepare a one to three-minute introduction with the optionaluse of a script or notes to justify why they chose the topic, why it is relevant to the classor Japanese, global society as a whole and make it accessible and inspirational enoughto encourage group discussion. The next stage, which is optional, is to explain new ordifficult vocabulary, to ensure all information is comprehensible and to demonstrateleadership skills by taking the initiative and teaching others about useful vocabulary. It is
important they do not use Japanese to explain the new vocabulary. Finally, preparing fiveto eight questions to generate a group discussion for the remaining part of the 10-minutecycle is the most important element of the task. How the students can anticipate theaudience’s understanding of their topic, respond to questions, and adapt to the flow of theconversation will go a long way to determining their overall success.
Once each learner has thought of a suitable topic and has adequate questions, theassessments will take place over two to three 100-minute classes. For example, if the classhad 20 students, then four 'leaders' would be chosen to start with four other participantsin each of the four groups, making four groups of five learners. The first rotation would be
an ungraded trial lasting approximately ten minutes, two to three minutes for the leaders’introduction and approximately seven minutes for group discussion based on the leaders’questions. The leaders then remain seated and the groups rotate to the next table and thisprocess is repeated until all groups have heard all the leaders discussions (four times intotal). After two or three classes, all learners would have played the role of the leader andall members of the class would have taken part in all the Leader-Led Discussions.
3.1 Pre-Task Practice
Alternatively, the teacher could forego this pre-task practice and use PowerPoint, thewhiteboard, or even a video or illustration demonstration to explain to the students how
the task will work in practice. However, I feel the best way, which reduces much teacherled, top-down instruction and encourages the most student engagement and interaction,is to have them do a mini leader-led discussion to demonstrate the task in practice. While
this is an optional stage, I feel it proves to be extremely useful for lower level students togain confidence and also understand the basic structure of the task in practice; especiallywith regards to the timed rotation of the group discussions and the concept that it is thegroup ‘leader’, not the audience who has to prepare the questions. This type of classroom
27

concept checking is important to ensure all learners grasp these essential elements of thetask.
The procedure of this pre-task practice lesson starts with having students choose
a simple topic (e.g., animal, city/country, sport). Then, they write between five to ten
facts or sentences to introduce their topic and five open-ended, accessible yet engaging,questions through which to lead a mini group discussion. Make sure to give students
adequate time to prepare and, depending on their level and motivation, it occasionallytakes time for some to think of a topic. They may also require some support thinkingof suitable questions. Often they will initially think of closed questions which will notgenerate the desired level of group discussion. However, this pre-task practice lesson
certainly does not need to be perfect as its primary function is allowing the class to become
familiar with leading a mini group discussion and rotating in a carousel formation. This
pre-task practice works as a great self-contained lesson and demonstrates key conceptsof the 'Leader-Led Discussion' efficiently while increasing learner output and minimizing
teacher-led explanation. It makes the implementation of the full ‘Leader-Led Discussion’smoother and ensures thorough understanding.
3.2 Grading
There are many different issues to address regarding the grading process of the 'LeaderLed Discussion', however, ultimately it is a relatively subjective process and eachindividual teacher is free to amend the below advice and instruction in the way they feel
is most appropriate. In my opinion, it is best if the teacher observes from the middle of theclassroom and, as the groups rotate naturally around the teacher, they will get the chance
to listen to all groups and leaders during the various repetitions of the task. Perhaps be
careful not to sit too close to the learners. I feel it is best to remain in a consistent seatedposition and position the carousel around you rather than walk around the class and standover different groups, as this may potentially fluster more reticent or weaker membersof the class. However, depending on the class and the teacher’s preference, this can be
tailored accordingly. Marking rubrics may vary in criteria and the weight of score whichis allocated to each individual element, but an acceptable example I feel would include:
preparation, introduction to the topic, introduction of new vocabulary (which could be
optional, or at least a lower weighting), questions, and leadership. Leadership shouldbe the most important of the criteria, as it is the main focus of the task, and includes
factors such as asking follow-up questions, helping more quiet members of the group to
participate and adapting the topic and questions to different groups. Other elements toconsider in this category are to what extent the leader dominated the group or was too
passive and lost control. Also, while some Japanese is unavoidable in this task due tothe level of the learners and the sheer length for which they are expected to speak, it isimportant to gauge the strength of which the leader encouraged the group to revert backto English. It is also possible to collect the learners’ hand-outs (See Appendix Two andThree) to more accurately mark certain elements such as preparation, etc.

283.3 Post-Task Activity
As you can see from Appendix Four and Five, there are two optional hand-outs which
could be used to give learners a follow-up task to assess their performance as a leader and/or participant to raise their awareness of their strengths and weaknesses and what they
have achieved throughout the whole process. As an additional task, the learners could
write this up for homework, and it could even potentially form a part of their overall
assessment. This could prove to be a useful exercise to consolidate their progress, as by
the end of the task they will have participated in so many different leader discussions
covering a huge range of topics and question, that an additional assignment to spend a
bit of time and contemplate the ‘Leader-Led Discussion’, should further strengthen theirimprovements made throughout the task.
4. CONCLUSION
Overall, I feel the 'Leader-Led Discussion' has an important part to play in any ELF
language syllabus. This paper has demonstrated how it provides a great many benefits
including task preparation, time pressure, repetition, developing accommodation skills,
and the potential to cultivate learner motivation, which will hopefully play some smallpart in inspiring them to learn long after the course is over. The 'Leader-Led Discussion'is student-centered and provides an opportunity to discuss a vast array of mature, often
thought-provoking topics, where the onus is on the leader, and all group members,
to scaffold and accommodate each other with limited teacher intervention. As young
adults, the 'Leader-Led Discussion' gives our learners the chance to think and prepare
independently and then take responsibility and leadership over a group of their peers
to critically discuss their topic. Whenever I have implemented this task, I felt a true
sense of achievement and even a very real notion of not only fluency building, but alsoof teamwork, enjoyment, criticality, and a clear engagement with the issues at stake.
Hopefully, this paper has been successful in its goal to explain the 'Leader-Led Discussion'and how to implement it in your classroom.
REFERENCES
Doe, T., & Hurling, S. (2015). Implementing speaking fluency activities. In P. Clements,
A. Krause, & H. Brown (Eds.), JALT 2014 Conference Proceedings (pp. 255263). Tokyo: JALT.
Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientations, and motivation in language learning:
Advances in theory, research and applications. Language Learning, 53(1), 3-32.
Dörnyei, Z., & Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning.
In C. J. Doughty, & M. H. Long (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language
Acquisition (pp. 589-630). Oxford: Blackwell.
29

Dörnyei, Z., & Kubanyiova, M. (2014). Motivating learners, motivating teachers:
Building vision in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Foster P. (1998). A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied
Linguistics, 19(1), 1-23.
Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as a lingua franca. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Jenner, B. (1997). "International English: an alternative view”, IATEFL Speak Out, 21,
10-14.
Kellem, H. (2009). Principles for developing oral fluency in the classroom. The
Language Teacher, 33(1), 9-11.
Lynch, T. & Maclean, J. (2000). Exploring the benefits of task repetition and recycling
for classroom language learning. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 221-250.
Morgan, J. (2012). Encouraging fluency through poster sessions. In K. Bradford-Watts,
R. Chartrand, & E. Skier (Eds.), The 2011 Pan-SIG Conference Proceedings.
Matsumoto: JALT.
Nakamura, E. (2008). Effects of task repetition in “Poster carousel.” In K. Bradford
Watts, T. Muller, & M. Swanson (Eds.), JALT2007 Conference Proceedings.
Tokyo: JALT.
Nation, I.S.P. (1991). Fluency and learning. The English Teacher, 20, 1-7.
Walker, R. (2010). Teaching the Pronunciation of English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

30Appendix A
Agreeing
That’s right. / You’re right. / You’re absolutely right.
That’s true. / That’s correct.
I couldn't agree with you more.
You're absolutely right.
Agreeing in partI agree with you up to a point, but...
That's quite true, but...
I agree with you in principle, but...
Disagreeing
I'm not sure I agree with you.
I don't agree. / I disagree.
(I'm afraid) I can't agree with you.
Asking an opinion
Why (do you think so)?
What do you think about X?
What does anyone else think about this?
Do you agree with me that Tokyo is more interesting than London?
Giving an opinion
My feeling is (that)....
Personally, I think (that) ...
It seems to me that ....
Referring to other speakers
As David said just, ....
I can’t agree with what David said.
But don’t you think, David, that .......
Giving an opinion
My feeling is (that)....
Personally, I think (that) ...
Generally speaking ...
It seems to me that ....
On the whole, Tokyo is more interesting than London.
Asking an opinion
What do you think about X?
What does anyone else think about this?
Do you agree with me that Tokyo is more interesting than London?

31

APPENDIX B

32

APPENDIX C

33

APPENDIX D

34

APPENDIX E

35

Three Bottom-up Listening Training Ideas for the
English as a Lingua Franca Classroom
ELF教室のための3つのボトムアップリスニングトレーニングの考え
Blagoja Dimoski, ディモスキ・ブラゴヤ

Center for English as a Lingua Franca, Tamagawa University, Japanbdimoski@lit.tamagawa.ac.jp
Brett Milliner, ミリナー・ブレット

Center for English as a Lingua Franca, Tamagawa University, Japan
milliner@lit.tamagawa.ac.jp
ABSTRACT
It has been suggested that second language (L2) listeners are the most under-researchedgroup of language learners (for example, see Harding, Anderson & Brunfaut, 2015;
Yeldham, 2017). This dilemma is further exacerbated by test-orientated approaches
taken by teachers which, by-and-large, are more interested in assessing learners’ level ofcomprehension (or lack of) rather than offering them specific instruction to develop theirlistening skills (Graham, Santos & Vanderplank, 2011; Siegel & Siegel, 2015). Recognizingthese issues, and our limited skills to teach L2 listening effectively, we embarked on anaction research project which began with giving listening greater prominence in our
teaching. We have begun by developing original teaching materials to address bottom-up
listening skills, which research has shown to be a more appropriate focus for developing
lower-level learners’ listening skills (e.g., Siegel & Siegel, 2015). This paper shares three
ELF-informed classroom activities that have been positively received in our ELF classes.
KEYWORDS: ELF, ELF-informed pedagogy, Bottom-up listening, L2 Listening,
Listening strategy training
1. INTRODUCTION
Coming into this project, the authors (experienced English as a foreign languageEFL instructors in Japan) matched the majority of classroom teachers who, according
to researchers (e.g., Chambers, 1996; Field, 2008; Graham, 2006; Graham, Santos, &Vanderplank, 2011; Siegel & Siegel, 2015) do not fully understand the processes that36

second language (L2) listeners use nor the abilities that L2 listeners possess. To be franker,
our roles when implementing listening in the classroom had resembled a DJ (who curated
and controlled the audio material) and comprehension checker. It was this lack of efficacy
which led us to question how we could become more effective teachers of listening, andhow we could better prepare our learners to be effective users of English as a lingua franca(ELF).
Listening is an integral and fundamental part of language development (Feyten,
1991; Mendelsohn, 1994; Nunan, 1998; Siegel, 2015; Siegel & Siegel, 2015) and, at thevery least, deserves a more strategic and research-based approach in classroom instruction.
To this end, this paper introduces three approaches to directly develop students’ bottomup (BU) listening skills that research has shown to be effective for L2 students.
2. LISTENING & ELF
The increasing frequency of ELF interactions in business, travel and social networking
flag the growing importance of excellent listening skills (Richards & Burns, 2012; Rost,
2016). To prepare L2 learners for listening in ELF interactions, some methodologists in
ELF have advocated including non-native speaker accents (Björkman, 2011; Björkman,
2013; Dimoski, 2016; Dimoski, Yujobo & Imai, 2016; Mackenzie, 2014; Magasic, 2016;
McBride, 2016; Walker, 2010) and, as Watterson (2008) suggests, examples which involve
speakers employing communication strategies to interpret and negotiate meaning. Anotherimportant consideration for listening training is Jenkins’ (2000) Lingua Franca Core, longconsidered the cornerstone of phonological intelligibility for ELF communication. ELF
Core identified key elements such as the aspiration of certain consonants, vowel length
contrasts and nuclear stress placement, as important features that ELF users need toconsider to maintain or enhance comprehensibility.
As ELF teacher-researchers, these considerations were at the forefront in ourdevelopment and implementation of the BU listening materials to be presented herein.
3. BOTTOM-UP LISTENING STRATEGY TRAINING
Arguably, the terms bottom-up and top-down (TD) processing may be the two categories
of listening instruction most familiar (even if only superficially) to L2 teachers. The
former refers to a focus on linguistic, grammatical and semantic signals, while the latterto utilizing one’s background knowledge, life experience, and world knowledge to help
ascertain meaning. To make sense of any verbal utterance, L2 listeners generally employ a
combination of both (i.e., BU and TD). And, listening teachers along with methodologists
are starting to agree that balanced attention to TD and BU is fundamental for good L2
listening pedagogy (Nunan, 2002). Nevertheless, contemporary surveys of L2 listening
instruction highlight a lack of attention towards BU training in most classrooms (Field,
2003; Graham, Santos & Vanderplank, 2011; Siegel, 2015; Siegel & Siegel, 2015). BU
skills are also neglected in most commercial textbooks (Field, 2003; Siegel, 2015).
This unbalance is particularly concerning as L2 listeners tend to lack BU processing
skills (Field, 2003; Lynch, 2006, as cited in Yeldham, 2017), and fundamentally speaking,37

L2 listeners need to master BU processing (i.e., decode spoken input) before they caneven start to call upon TD strategies to support comprehension. Therefore, BU training
is reported to be most beneficial for lower-level L2 listeners, and as Goh (2000) notes,
BU training activities enable learners to overcome phoneme, word recognition andsegmentation problems, which tend to frustrate learners at the lower levels.
In recognition of this research and our ELF-informed classroom teaching focus onlower level ELF learners, we have set out to create a catalog of activities that promote BU
processing skills. In the following section, we present three activities that have been wellreceived and effective at promoting our students’ listening fluency.
4. THREE LISTENING ACTIVITIES FOR THE ELF CLASSROOM
4.1 Discriminate between phonemes: A & ER /ɑ:/ & /ɜ:/This activity was drawn from a minimal pairs approach to teaching pronunciation (seeMilliner, 2012 for a detailed description). Therefore, this activity can be used to promote
intelligible pronunciation as well as listening fluency. Pronunciation research in ELF (e.g.,
Jenkins, 2000; Walker, 2010) has revealed that vowel quality does not need to be focussed
on when promoting learner’s intelligibility, thus many minimal pairs’ drills may not need
to be practiced in the classroom. However, the/ ɜ: / (er) sound is an exception as it canaffect intelligibility in ELF interactions (see Jenkins, 2000). To address this sound, we
designed the following worksheet. In total, the activity can take anywhere between 10 and
20 minutes to complete.
Figure 1 below is an example of the worksheet provided to students either as a
print or PDF file embedded in the Blackboard content management system. Students are
first introduced to the two sounds. In this case, they are A /ɑ:/ and / ɜ: / (er) sounds.
Teachers can then consider the following activities.
1.
2.
3.

4.

5.

38

Listen and repeat: teacher reads ~ students repeat.
Listen and repeat: student A reads ~ student B repeats.
Distinguish between phonemes activity: teacher or students read one word fromthe pairs ~ student(s) responds which group this is from. To promote physicalmovement, students could be asked to perform a movement to share their response.
For example, students create the A or U letters with their arms or raise their left or
right arms to indicate which word was read.
Tongue twister dictation: Either the teacher or student (A) reads the sentence
and student (B) transcribes the exact words they hear. This activity is effective indemonstrating to students (a) how intelligible their pronunciation is, and (b) how
accurately they can decode the incoming sounds.
Listening test. To conclude the activity and reinforce the focus on listening fluency
development, stage a short listening quiz. The teacher randomly reads one wordfrom each pair, and students mark which word was read. Some variations could
include the teacher using a recording made by another ELF speaker or asking
students to create a listening test for a partner.

A & ER - /ɑ:/ & /ɜ:/
bath
carve
hard
heart
pass
far
farm
barn
star
fast

birth
curve
heard
hurt
purse
fur
firm
burn
stir
first

Tongue Twister Dictation:
Although in his heart the hurt remained, Kurt let his mind return to thefirst day the barn on the farm burned down.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Tongue Twister:Stars burn hard far from the heart of the earth I have heard.

Figure 1. Example of a worksheet that is shared with students (n.b., all detailed
worksheets are shared in Appendix A)

This concludes the discriminate between phonemes: A & ER /ɑ:/ & /ɜ:/ activity.
The activity can be repeated for other minimal pair groups to develop BU listening skills,
but this example focuses on students effectively creating and distinguishing a soundidentified as being crucial for intelligibility. The activity has proved to be a very efficient,active and enjoyable approach for developing listening fluency and raising awareness ofintelligibility when using ELF.
4.2 Note-taking
Bjorkman (2011, p. 94) states that “authentic recordings can be turned into course
materials in which students test their listening comprehension and note-taking skills”
based on realistic situations that expose them to a variety of non-native accents. Since thenumber of non-native users of English greatly exceeds that of native speakers in the world(Graddol, 2003), and being aware that learners in higher education settings are, for themost part, preparing to enter a globalized workforce, it follows that an awareness of such39

accents and note-taking skills will be beneficial, and thus, worthwhile in ELF-oriented
pedagogy. To this end, the aim of the following activity is to expose learners to non-native
accents and develop their note-taking skills in a structured, yet realistic, ELF-type setting.
The note-taking activity described below is based on two Youtube video clips(See 1. <youtube.com/watch?v=ovdzy1ShKJ4> and 2. <youtube.com/watch?v=n2KpS6Pykc>) consisting of mock situations in which non-native (i.e., Indonesian) usersof English engage in giving and taking messages over the telephone in business settings.
Teachers should note that both of the videos (1. less challenging and 2. more challenging)are accompanied by closed captions, which appear at the bottom of the screen, and cannot
be turned off. Also, we recommend playing the video through good quality speakers, as
the quality of the audio is low.
Prior to commencing the activity, teachers may wish to pre-teach the points below<www.northshore.edu/support_center/pdf/listen_notes.pdf> to help develop students’note-taking skills:
How to take notes:• Illegibility: Write quickly. Do not be concerned with neatness - the notes are foryou (i.e., in the first section only).
• Missed points: Leave spaces in case you need to add information.
• Spelling: Do not be concerned with correct spelling (i.e., in the first sectiononly). You can check and correct it later.
How to distinguish important information:
Pay particular attention when a speaker:• Repeats information.
• Raises his/her volume or pitch of voice.
• Spends more time on a particular point.
• Uses certain body language.
• Uses direct statements (e.g., It’s very important because...) or signal 		words (e.g., have to, must, etc.) to indicate importance.
The worksheets (see Appendix B) consist of two sections. The first part provides
students with instructions and space below to take notes in a quick and ad hoc manner. To
create a sense of realism, we designed and added a letterhead of the fictional company thatthe videos are based on (Figure 2). For basic level students who may be overly challenged,a more scaffolded version of this worksheet was also created for video clip 1.

40

Figure 2. Worksheet designed for student's note taking purposes

The next section requires students to review their notes and make them morecomprehensible. This means, after reviewing their notes, selecting information that ismost relevant and, in a concise and organized manner, transferring it to a ‘While You
Were Out’ form designed specifically for taking telephone messages (see Figure 3). For
the convenience of teachers, the transcript of video 1 is provided as an answer key.
4.3 Nuclear Stress
Nuclear (or tonic) stress refers to the emphasis a speaker places on a particular syllable
within a tone unit. An utterance can be made up of one or a string of words produced toconvey meaning. As such, it may consist of multiple syllables, which together as a wholeform a tone unit. Depending on the intention of the speaker, different meanings can beconveyed by placing prominence on certain syllables. Typically, with the word ‘Japanese’(/dʒæpəˈniːz/), a speaker would place minor word stress on ‘Jap’ and greater stress on‘ese’. In a longer unit such as ‘Actually she’s Japanese’, ‘Ac’ would carry the secondarystress while ‘ese’ would bear the primary stress (Patsko, 2014). While placing stress on
syllables can enhance intelligibility, misplacing it can potentially confuse the listener andresult in negative outcomes. Given this, Jenkins (2000) describes the misplacement of
nuclear stress as one of the “greatest phonological obstacles to mutual intelligibility” (p.

41

Figure 3. Form for taking telephone messages
Retrieved from <www.freepik.com/free-photo/message-pad_335772.htm>

155), and thus warrants attention in ELF-informed pedagogy. The activity below (seeAppendix C) was designed by the researchers to address this need.
The listening text for this activity is based on a Youtube video clip (Retrieved from
Elllo website: <elllo.org/video/M001/M017Introduction.htm>) in which a speaker from
Nigeria introduces himself. The clip was selected due to the speaker’s rhythmic speech
patterns. The activity contains the listening transcript in which we underlined certain word
items (see below). These items represent what we considered to be the locations of nuclear
stress. For the purpose of the activity, we also incorporated false items (i.e., items that did
not receive primary stress). While listening to the speaker, students must select only theitems which, they believe, bear the prominent stress and circle them.
Hello. I’m from Nigeria and I’m Mickey. Today I want to introduce myself to you
guys.
(Excerpt from nuclear stress worksheet)
After playing the video, multiple times if needed, students compare their results anddiscuss their choices. We wish to acknowledge that some items we identified as nuclear
stress in the transcript may be subjective, and thus, based on our own interpretations.
In the follow-up, students are asked to read the transcript aloud to their partners,
once by placing emphasis on the correct items (i.e., as in the answer key) and once on thefalse items. Then, in order to raise students’ awareness of how misplaced nuclear stress42

could potentially interfere with intelligibility, they can discuss how the two versions differ.
As a closing exercise, students form pairs and speak for one minute each, during which
they place nuclear stress on certain items they believe would enhance their intelligibility.
During this time, their partners must signal (e.g., by raising their hand) each time they
perceive the use of nuclear stress contributed to greater comprehensibility.
5. REFLECTIONS
Findings from Siegel and Siegel’s (2015) study of Japanese university English learners
showed that “learners not only thought that all of the [BU] activities were valuable interms of their listening development, but they also reported that they were enjoyable”(p. 655). Although there was no formal collection of student feedback to ascertain theeffectiveness of the activities presented in this paper, based on classroom observations,
we can report that students were engaged and appeared genuinely interested in developing
their listening skills, pronunciation, and becoming more intelligible.
The more proficient students, for example, appeared to enjoy the challenges thatthe core objectives of the skill training provided, while less confident students appeared toappreciate the challenges associated with pronunciation during the minimal pairs’ activity
and comprehending the accents of speakers in the video clips.
All in all, the observed outcomes were encouraging and motivate us to continue
our development of materials and practical approaches to promoting students’ listening
skills from an ELF-oriented perspective.
6. CONCLUSION
This concludes our introduction of three ELF-informed BU listening activities for the
ELF classroom. All handouts are shared in the Appendix, and we urge teachers to try theseout in their own classrooms. We are also looking forward to the next stage of our researchwhere we plan to solicit student perceptions and measure changes in students’ listening
self-efficacy after explicit listening training.
References
Björkman, B. (2011). English as a lingua franca in higher education: Implications for
EAP. Ibérica, 22, 79-100.
Björkman, B. (2013). English as an academic Lingua Franca: An investigation of formand communicative effectiveness. Boston: Walter de Gruyter.
Chambers, G. (1996). Listening, Why? How? Language Learning Journal, 14, 23-27.
Dimoski, B. (2016). A proactive ELF-aware approach to listening comprehension. The
Center for English as a Lingua Franca Journal, 2(2), 24-38. Retrieved from:43http://www.tamagawa.ac.jp/celf/research/pdf/celf_journal_final2-2.pdf
Dimoski, B., Yujobo, Y. J., & Imai, M. (2016). Exploring the effectiveness ofcommunication strategies through pro-active listening in ELF-informed pedagogy.
Language Education in Asia, 7(2), 67-87. https://doi.org/10.5746/LEiA/16/V7/I2/
A02/Dimoski_Yujobo_Imai
Field, J. (2003). Promoting perception: Lexical segmentation in L2 listening. ELT
Journal, 57(4), 325-334.
Field, J. (2008). Listening in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Feyten, C. (1991). The power of listening ability: An overlooked dimension in language
acquisition. Modern Language Journal 75(2), 173–180.
Goh, C. (2000). A cognitive perspective on language learners’ listening comprehension
problems. System, 28(1), 55-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00060-3
Graddol, D. (2003). The decline of the native speaker. In G. Anderman & M. Rogers(Eds.), Translation today: Trends and perspectives (pp. 152-167). Clevedon, UK:
Multilingual Matters.
Graham, S. (2006). Listening comprehension: The learner’s perspective. System, 34,
165-182.
Graham, S., Santos, D., & Vanderplank, R. (2011). Exploring the relationship between
listening development and strategy use. Language Teaching Research, 15(4), 435456. doi: 10.1177/1362168811412026
Harding, L., Anderson, J. C., & Brunfaut, T. (2015). Diagnostic assessment of reading
and listening in a second or foreign language: Elaborating diagnostic principles.
Language Testing, 32(3), 317-336.
Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language: New models,
new norms, new goals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mackenzie, I. (2014). English as a lingua franca: Theorizing and teaching English.
Oxon: Routledge.
Magasic, M. (2016). Becoming 'YouTubers': Using webclips in the ELF classroom. The
Center for ELF Journal, 2(1), 18-25.
Mendelsohn, D. J. (1994). Learning to listen. San Diego: Dominie Press.
44

McBride, P. (2016). An overview perspective on teaching ELF: Principles and practices.
Waseda Working Papers in ELF, 5, 186-197.
Milliner, B. (2012). Using smartphones to enhance minimal pairs drills and improve
pronunciation skills. JACET News, 183, 9-13.
Nunan, D. (1998). Approaches to teaching listening in the language classroom. In
Proceedings of the 1997 Korea TESOL Conference (pp. 1-10). Taejon, Korea:
Korea TESOL.
Nunan, D. (2002). Listening in language learning. In J.C. Richards & W.A. Renandya(Eds.), Methodology in language teaching (pp. 238-241). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Patsko, L. (2014). Understanding nuclear stress. Retrieved fromhttps://elfpron.wordpress.com/2014/03/03/understanding-nuclear-stress/
Rost, M. (2016). Teaching and researching listening (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Siegel, J. (2015). Exploring listening strategy instruction through action research. New
York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Siegel, J., & Siegel, A. (2015). Getting to the bottom of L2 listening instruction:
Making a case for bottom-up activities. Studies in Second Language Teaching andResearch, 5(4), 637-662. doi:10.14746/ssllt.2015.5.4.6
Walker, R. (2010). Teaching the pronunciation of English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Watterson, M. (2008). Repair of non‐understanding in English in international
Communication. World Englishes, 27(3‐4), 378-406.
Yeldham, M. (2017). Techniques for researching L2 listeners. System, 66, 13-26.

45

APPENDIX A
Discriminate between phonemes: A & ER /ɑ:/ & /ɜ:/A

A & ER - /ɑ:/ & /ɜ:/
bath
carve
hard
heart
pass
far
farm
barn
star
fast

birth
curve
heard
hurt
purse
fur
firm
burn
stir
first

Tongue Twister Dictation:
It is hard not to cry but he is firm in his belief that if he had heard
the fire he could have stopped it as it started.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Tongue Twister:Stars burn hard far from the heart of the earth I have heard.

46

B

A & ER - /ɑ:/ & /ɜ:/
bath
carve
hard
heart
pass
far
farm
barn
star
fast

birth
curve
heard
hurt
purse
fur
firm
burn
stir
first

Tongue Twister Dictation:
Although in his heart the hurt remained, Kurt let his mind return tothe first day the barn on the farm burned down.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Tongue Twister:Stars burn hard far from the heart of the earth I have heard.

47

APPENDIX B
Note taking activity

Note: Stage 1 (Higher levels)48

Note: Stage 1 (Lower levels)

49

Note: Stage 2

50Note: Answer key (Video 1)

51

APPENDIX C
Nuclear stress activity & Answer key

Note: Main activity & follow-up
52

53

A Report on Faculty Development and Research at
the Center for English as a Lingua Franca
ELF センター 2018 FDと研究活動レポート
Rasami Chaikul, チャイクル・ラサミ

Center for English as a Lingua Franca, Tamagawa University, Japanrasami.chaikul@lab.tamagawa.ac.jp
Brett Milliner, ミリナー・ブレット

Center for English as a Lingua Franca, Tamagawa University, Japan
milliner@lit.tamagawa.ac.jp
ABSTRACT
Faculty development (FD) plays an integral role in the development of the Center for
English as a Lingua Franca (CELF) program at Tamagawa University. The Center has ahiring policy that is not based on the native English speaking norm. As a result, the Centerhas welcomed a diverse mix of teachers from different cultural and language backgrounds(e.g., Bulgaria, Brazil, Finland, Macedonia, Ukraine, Thailand, The Philippines) who
bring rich authentic ELF resources and enhance the first-hand ELF-communication
experience for our students. In this report, we describe the different faculty training anddevelopment initiatives aimed at promoting effective instruction in our ELF classes. This
will be followed by a detailed report on the center’s research achievements in the 2018
academic year.
KEYWORDS: ELF, Faculty development, ELF teacher training, ELF research
1. INTRODUCTION
The Center for English as a Lingua Franca (CELF) offers ELF classes to students fromall colleges at Tamagawa University. Our Center consists of a very diverse group of 49
teachers from different countries of origin and backgrounds who were hired by the virtueof their qualifications. Their ethnic, linguistic and cultural diversity represents a valuable
resource for ELF teaching as well as faculty development as all teachers bring different
cultural, educational, and first language backgrounds (e.g., Brazil, Bulgaria, China,
Finland, Macedonia, The Philippines, Thailand). They serve to create a plurilingual
community and play a major role as authentic resources for ELF-communication. Core
objectives for the different faculty development lectures and workshops staged throughout
54the 2018 academic year included: provide a platform for CELF teachers to share ideas;
assess teaching methodology; promote growth as teaching practitioners; and, disseminate
contemporary research from the English language Teaching (ELT) field. Our paper reports
on such faculty development initiatives and the academic achievements of the CELF in
2018.
2. THE 2018 CELF-ELTAMA FORUM FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING
The 2018 CELF-ELTama Forum for English Language Teaching was held in the ELF
Study Hall 2015 on August 23rd, 2018. During this collaborative event, a total of 11
different talks, presentations and reports were given by CELF faculty (details in Table 1
below). This mutual event attracted approximately 70 attendees.
Table 1
Summary of the CELF-related talks at the 2018 CELF-ELTama Forum for English
Language Teaching
Type of Talk & Title
Plenary (In English)
Anything el(f) to do?: ELF program for the next five years

Author (s)Masaki Oda(Director of CELF)

Presentation (CELF Research Report)
Power, knowledge, surveillance, and ELF-informed pedagogy

Paul McBride

Presentation (CELF Research Report)
English-within-multilingualism in ‘monolingual’ university
classrooms

Tomokazu Ishikawa

Presentation (CELF Research Report)
Japanese learners’ self-perceptions of their English L2 user identity
development

Andrew Leichsenring

Presentation (CELF Research Report)
Training for, simulating, and assessing ELF-type interactions in theclassroom

Blagoja Dimoski

Presentation (CELF Concurrent Sessions)
L2 learners’ perceptions: Listening to music while reading in class

Andrew Leichsenring

Presentation (CELF Concurrent Sessions)
Listening strategy training for the English as a lingua franca (ELF)
classroom

Blagoja Dimoski &Brett Milliner

Presentation (CELF Concurrent Sessions)
Raising awareness of world Englishes
Presentation (CELF Concurrent Sessions)Useful activities for reviewing coursework in the classroom

Blair Barr
Blagoja Dimoski
55Presentation (CELF Concurrent Sessions)
Raising learners’ awareness of structures and genres: Pilot study
using process writing
Presentation (CELF Report)
CELF Report

Sachi Oshima
Rasami Chaikul &Blagoja Dimoski

The 2018 CELF-ELTama Forum for English Language Teaching was acollaborative effort between the CELF and ELTama. The event provided a collective
opportunity for current students (i.e., prospective English teachers) and alumni (i. e.,former graduates who are now English teachers) from the Graduate School of Humanities
at Tamagawa University, and a diverse group of language teaching professionals toshare and discuss their ELF and English language teaching research, methodology andclassroom practices.

Figure 1. Plenary speaker Dr. Masaki Oda the director of CELF giving
his talk on the future direction of ELF program at the 2018 CELFELTama Forum for English Language Teaching56

Figure 2. Vice-Chair for the ELF Center, Paul McBride sharing his research at the CELF
ELTama ForumThe event also provided a valuable opportunity for CELF faculty to showcase theirresearch achievements and discuss future directions with fellow researchers and members
from the general public.

Figure 3. Blagoja Dimoski giving a presentation in the ELF Lounge, Active learning
zone

57

Figure 4. CELF faculty giving the CELF Report in the Tamago LoungeThis collaboration between the CELF Forum and ELTama has enabled a diverse
group of language teaching professionals to share and discuss a wide spectrum of topics
related to research and classroom practices concerning English Education and ELF.
3. LOCAL ELF WORKSHOPS & TRAINING FOR CELF TEACHERS
Throughout the academic year, the CELF staged a number of informal training andworkshop events for teachers. Most events were held at the end of the workday between
17:00 and 19:00. A short report for each event is provided below.
3.1 ELF Teacher Orientation
Two weeks prior to the commencement of 2018 classes, an ELF faculty orientation wasstaged on March 28th. An orientation session for new ELF faculty was arranged in themorning (10:00~12:00) before a general briefing about class management and operations
for all ELF teachers in the afternoon (13:-00~14:30). After the general briefing, allteachers participated in a series of parallel discussions. These sessions, led by full-time
faculty focused on:• Blackboard, UNITAMA & e-learning• Research activities• Extensive reading• Teaching & textbooks• Evaluation & assessment
After the meeting, teachers toured the ELF Study Hall 2015 and other areas ofinterest on the university campus.

58

Figure 5. CELF teachers gathered for the 2018 Teacher Orientation Meeting on March
28th. Retrieved from http://www.tamagawa.ac.jp/celf/news/detail_006.html

3.2 Blackboard CMS Training
As all teaching resources and administrative information for CELF classes are hosted on theuniversity’s Blackboard course management system (CMS), and the CELF is committed
to training faculty to actively utilize this learning portal. The CELF staged two workshops
at the start of the academic year (April 16th and 17th) which focused on managing
classroom assignments, student assessment, and blended learning. In their review of CELF
faculty’s digital literacies and computer skills, Cote and Milliner (2018) established that
CELF teachers had a relatively high degree of skills and most are confident about using
technology in their ELF classrooms. Unfortunately, however, this level of confidence does
not appear to be transferring over to the teacher’s application of the Blackboard system.
In their review of Blackboard usage logs, Milliner and Cote (2018) highlighted that CELF
teachers tended to use the system in limited or unsophisticated capacities. To be more
specific, most teachers were only using Blackboard for basic administrative functions (e.
g., accessing textbook materials and creating class announcements) rather than practicalapplications that could promote student’s use of English outside of the classroom (e.g.,
online quizzes, blogs, vlogs, digital feedback, embedded media, and online discussions). To
mediate this concern, future Blackboard training will work to promote more sophisticatedapproaches to using the CMS and provide practical examples of how Blackboard is being
used by CELF teachers to augment instruction and facilitate better learning outcomes in
ELF classes.

59

Figure 6. A CELF workshop on the Blackboard course management system (CMS).
Retrieved from http://www.tamagawa.ac.jp/celf/news/detail_006.html

3.3 ELF Pedagogy Workshops
Continuing the Center’s work to raise awareness and understanding of ELF-informed
pedagogy, a variety of ELF-informed pedagogy workshops were staged in 2018.
3.3.1 ELF Workshop - Current thinking and research in ELF: A focus on pedagogyMay 25th and 28th, 2018
Dr. Tomokazu Ishikawa gave two talks on current thinking and research in ELF. He
described important ideas and concepts relating to ELF research and concluded with acomment on the future directions for ELF research and pedagogy.

Figure 7. Current thinking and research in ELF: A focus on pedagogy. Retrieved fromhttp://www.tamagawa.ac.jp/celf/news/detail_006.html

60

3.3.2 ELF Workshop -Using Internet Resources and Mobile Technology to Promote
ELF Awareness- June 26th - 27th, 2018
Facilitated by Rasami Chaikul, this workshop focused on using internet resources andmobile technology to promote ELF awareness. Chaikul introduced a number of authentic
online materials which can be used to enhance students’ ELF awareness in the classroom.
The practical, hands-on approach to the workshop enabled participants to gain valuable
experience concerning the utilization of technology in the language-learning environment.
3.3.3 ELF Assessment Workshop November 16th & 19th, 2018
Led by Blagoja Dimoski and Paul McBride, two interactive workshops focusing on ‘ELF
Assessment’ were staged in fall semester. Issues covered included: overall assessment in
ELF classes, how to conduct speaking assessments, and how to use the Center’s speaking
and writing assessment rubrics more effectively.

Figure 8. Assessment workshop led by Blagoja Dimoski in November, 2018

3.3.4 Informal Discussion for CELF Teachers- December 6th and 8th, 2018
Paul McBride and Rasami Chaikul moderated two informal discussion sessions between
CELF teachers that focused on sharing teaching ideas and any issues relating to the ELF
classroom. Some of the issues discussed included dealing with unmotivated students,
designs for effective group work, and the creative use of textbooks.

61

Figure 9. Participants at the informal discussion for CELF teachers on December 8th,2018. Retrieved from http://www.tamagawa.ac.jp/celf/news/detail_002.html

3.3.5 Campus-wide University FD/SD Training Day- February 22nd, 2019
Andrew Leichsenring, facilitated a two-hour workshop for full-time faculty and visitors
entitled Introduction to teaching: The development of teacher identity in professional
learning communities. Participants learned how identity is constructed, and thedevelopment of professional teacher identity.
3.4 Guest Speakers and Visiting Scholars
The center welcomed a couple of prominent scholars in the field of language educationin 2018.
3.4.1 Dr. Nitida Adipattaranan -Teacher Education in Thailand: What Thai Students
Study to Become an English Teacher- July 13, 2018.
The CELF was pleased to welcome Associate Professor Nitida Adipattaranan (Ph.D),
Director of Doctor of Education Program in Curriculum, Teaching, and Learning
Technology at the Faculty of Education, Chiang Mai University, Thailand, to our Center.
Dr. Adipattaranan shared a talk titled ‘Teacher Education in Thailand: What Thai students
study to become an English Teacher’. Various aspects of English language teaching andEnglish teacher training were highlighted. The discussion after the presentation built a
deeper understanding of teacher training in another expanding circle country.

62

Figure 10. Dr. Nitida Adipattaranan with her team from Chiang Mai University and ELF
teachers and participants after her presentation at CELF on Teacher Education in
Thailand: What Thai students study to become an English Teacher- July 13, 2018

3.4.2 Dr. Jana E. Moore -Working with Special Needs Students in the Language
Learning Environment- October 10, 2018
On October 10, 2018, a special lecture was given by Dr. Jana E. Moore, the ELL Coordinatorfrom Moanalua High School, Hawaii, USA, on ‘Working with Special Needs Students in
the Language Learning Environment’. In attendance were Tamagawa University teachersand other staff, as well as participants from outside the university. The presentation on thespecial needs students in the language-learning environment proved to be an important
issue for discussion between participants following her talk.

Figure 11. Dr. Jana E. Moore presents at CELF on October 10, 2018. Retrieved fromhttp://www.tamagawa.ac.jp/celf/news/detail_006.html

63

3.4.3 Research and Faculty Development Special Winter Workshops 2019. Hosted
by CELF, Dr. Tomokazu Ishikawa and JACET ELF SIG. The special winter workshops
2019 are a collaborative effort between the CELF (as hosts) and Dr. Tomokazu Ishikawa’s
Kakenhi (No. 18H05585), with additional support from the JACET ELF SIG.
Two ELF scholars were invited to share their insights and expertise on two
occasions January and February 2019.

Figure 12. Dr. Fan Fang from Shantou University, China presents at CELF on January
18, 2019

Figure 13. Dr. Koun Choi from University of Cambridge, U.K. presents at CELF on
February 12, 201964

3.4.4 Honorable Visitors to CELF
It was our pleasure to welcome Honorary Prof. Henry Widdowson and University
Professor Barbara Seidlhofer from Vienna University to our Center for English as a
Lingua Franca (CELF). The casual visit to the center was made after their plenary talks
and panel discussions at the Diversity in CLIL in Plurilingual Communities of PracticeSymposium at Sophia University and the 8th Waseda ELF International Workshop andSymposium on Applied Linguistics - Broadening a perspective at the Waseda University.
The causal visit and informal discussion about ELF-related topics and issues marked
an exciting opportunity to engage in professional conversations with two of the mostdistinguished eminences in the ELF field. After the discussion, a group photo in front ofProfessor Widdowson’s quote found on the wall in the ELF Lounge was taken for theTamagawa Academy magazine "Zenjin" and the CELF is looking forward to welcoming
both professors to the center again in the future.

Figure 14. Professor Henry Widdowson and Professor Barbara Seidlhofer from Vienna
University and Dr. Oda Masaki, the director of CELF, seen in front of Dr. Widdowson’s
message (1994, p. 384) to language learners, “Real proficiency is when you are able totake possession of the language, turn it to your advantage, and make it real for you.”

4. CELF RESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTS
In 2018, CELF faculty were once again actively engaging with the academic community
and working hard towards the expansion of academic knowledge and classroom teaching.
In this section, we share the faculty’s multifaceted achievements in academic research,both domestically and abroad.
65

4.1 Academic Presentations
In 2018 CELF faculty presented their research both domestically and internationallyon 62 separate occasions. Information pertaining to these presentations is shared in thefollowing sections.
4.1.1 Domestic Presentations
In all, CELF faculty made 41 presentations across Japan consisting of an invited workshop
and panel presentations, numerous paper and poster presentations (see Table 2). Of
particular note, Blagoja Dimoski was invited to lead a workshop on developing effectiveclassroom materials and activities from lingua franca research at Bunko University in
Hiroshima, and Paul McBride and Tomokazu Ishikawa were invited panelists at the Aichi
University Forum. Brett Milliner was also an invited panelist at JALT CALL 2018 in
Nagoya.
The CELF also values collaborative research, not only among colleagues withthe same affiliation but also with non-affiliated researchers. This is evidenced by CELF
faculty’s extensive involvement in collaborative research projects with scholars fromoutside of Tamagawa University. These included collaborations with researchers affiliatedwith Waseda University, Keio University, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA),
Rikkyo University, Sophia University, Tokai University, Hiroshima Jogakuin University,
Okayama University, Tokyo Medical University, Kogakuin University and Musashino
University.
Table 2
Summary of CELF faculty's domestic presentations (n=41)
Location
Type, Title, & Event

SendaiSendaiPresentation
The Discourse of ‘Quality Assurance’ in
ELT
The 57th JACET International Convention

Symposium Discussant“Assuring Quality Outcomes in English
Education”
The 5th AILA East Asia Symposium at The
57th JACET International Convention
Invited Talk

Fukuoka66『ネイティブスピーカー主義後の大学英語教育：プログラムの設計と運営を中心に』
大学英語教育学会九州沖縄支部、第190回東アジア英語教育研究会
Seinan Gakuin University 西南学院大学

Author(s)Masaki Oda
Panelists: Junkyu Lee
Shaoquian Luo, Atsuko
Watanabe
Discussants: Haemon
Lee
Xingwei Miao
Masaki Oda
Chair: Chitose Asaoka

Masaki Oda

Tokyo

Tokyo

Tokyo

NagoyaNagoyaPlenary
Anything el(f) to do?: ELF program for the
next five years
2018CELF- ELTama Forum

Presentation
English as a lingua franca: A paradigm shift
in English language policy at a university in
Japan
JACET Language Policy SIG
Presentation
The power of growth mindset in language
learning: Enhancing perseverance ofuniversity students
PLL3
Panel Discussion
Navigating Language Development: How
Are Learners Evolving with Language
Learning Technology?
JALT CALL 2018
Presentation
Computer-assisted language testing andlearner mindsets
JALT CALL 2018

Masaki Oda

Rasami Chaikul

Mitsuko Imai

Brett Milliner, Blair Barr
& Daniel Hougham

Brett Milliner & Blair
Barr

Presentation

Hokkaido

IbarakiTokyo「問題なし」評価による応答をすること

The 44th Annual Meeting of the Japan
Society of Health and Medical Sociology

Poster Presentation
Discursive transfer in connecting eventsin Japanese/English bilingual children’s
narratives
LinguaPax Asia International Symposium

Presentation
Japanese learners’ self-perceptions of their
L2 English user identity development
International Conference on Education,
Psychology and Learning, ICEPL Summer
2018, Tokyo

Satomi Kuroshima

Yuri Jody Yujobo,
Satomi Mishina-Mori, &Yuki Nagai

Andrew Leichsenring

67

KyotoToyohashi

Toyohashi

Presentation
Integrating ELF within EFL: A focus onliteracyFirst JACET Summer (#45) and English
Education (#6) Joint Seminar
Invited Panel Presentation
EFL and ELFing: Friends, foes or‘frenemies’?
Aichi University Forum (IRHSS)

Invited Panel Presentation
Overcoming ideological inertia with ELFaware teaching practices
Aichi University Forum (IRHSS)

Tomokazu Ishikawa &Paul McBride

Tomokazu Ishikawa

Paul McBride

Poster Presentation

Tokyo

シミュレーション教育実践における学習達成の効果とその基盤
ー会話と動線の分析からー

Satomi Kuroshima

The 50th Annual Meeting of Japan Society
for Medical Education
SendaiSendaiSendai

Tokyo

Tokyo

68

Presentation
On the use of a membership categorization
device in ELF contexts
The 57th JACET International Convention
Presentation
The effect of positive psychology in SLA:
From fixed mindset to a growth mindset
The 57th JACET International Convention

Presentation
ELF (English as a Lingua Franca) SIG
The 57th JACET International Convention

Research Report
Power, knowledge, surveillance, and ELFinformed pedagogy
2018CELF- ELTama Forum
Research Report
English-within-multilingualism in CELF
classrooms
2018CELF- ELTama Forum

Satomi Kuroshima

Mitsuko ImaiPaul McBride & Miyuki
TakinoPaul McBride

Tomokazu Ishikawa

Tokyo

Tokyo

Tokyo

Tokyo

Tokyo

Research Report
Training for, simulating, and assessing ELFtype interactions in the classroom
2018CELF- ELTama Forum

Presentation
Listening strategy training for the ELF
classroom
2018CELF- ELTama Forum

Presentation
L2 learners’ perceptions: Listening to music
while reading in class
2018CELF- ELTama Forum
Research ReportJapanese learnersʼ self-perceptions of their
L2 English user identity development
2018CELF- ELTama Forum

Presentation
Useful activities for reviewing courseworkin the classroom
2018CELF- ELTama ForumTokyo

Research Report
CELF Report
2018CELF- ELTama Forum

Saitama

Poster Presentation
Telling stories in the socially non-dominantlanguage: An analysis of referring
expressions among Japanese-English
simultaneous and successive bilinguals
JSLS 2018 (Japan Society for Language
Sciences) 20th Annual International
conference
Presentation (Kakenhi)

Osaka

購買活動における「価値」概念の記述のされ方
ー会話分析と行動経済学による一考察ー
日本認知学会第35回大会

The 35th Annual Meeting of the Japanese
Cognitive Science Society

Blagoja Dimoski

Blagoja Dimoski

Andrew Leichsenring

Andrew Leichsenring

Blagoja Dimoski
Blagoja Dimoski,
Rasami Chaikul,
Tomokazu Ishikawa,
Paul McBride, Yuri
Jody Yujobo & Satomi
Kuroshima
Yuri Jody Yujobo,
Satomi Mishina-Mori,
Yumiko Kawanishi &Yuki Nagai

Satomi Kuroshima,
Yutaka Kayaba &Takanobu Omata

69

KyotoPresentation
Assessing students English from an ELF
perspective: Developing an ELF oriented
speaking rubric
全国英語教育学会第44回京都研究大会

Rasami Chaikul, Ito
Yasuko, Tsuchihira Taiko

JASELE Conference 2018

Panel Presentation
Tokyo

Tokyo

Fukuoka

Shizuoka

Shizuoka

Shizuoka

Hiroshima

70

日本の応用言語学とJAAL-in-JACETの今後の役割

The Japan Association for Applied
Linguistics (JAAL) in JACET

Poster Presentation
Language minorities: Education andlanguage issues
The Japan association of applied linguistics(JAAL) in JACET SIG
Conference 2018
Presentation
Talking with L1/L2 English speakers:
Japanese L2 English users’ self-perceptions
International Symposium on Education,
Psychology and Social Sciences
Presentation
Factors of perseverance in bilingual
education
JALT 2018 International Conference

Presentation
Exploring curriculum design on world
instructional development standards
JALT 2018 International Conference

Presentation
Diversity and ELF awareness: Thai teaching
EnglishJALT 2018 International Conference

Presentation
Migrant Voices of Filipinos Teaching in
Japan
The 4th Philippine Studies Conference inJapan

Masaki Oda

Rasami Chaikul, Toshiko
Sugino & Michiko
SasakiAndrew Leichsenring

Mitsuko Imai

Yuri Jody Yujobo

Rasami Chaikul

Tricia Okada

TokyoTokyo

Hiroshima

FukuokaTokyo

Presentation
ELF & ELT: Where are we now?
8th Waseda ELF International Workshop
and Symposium

Presentation
The initial stages of planning anddeveloping resources for teaching andassessing communication strategies in ELFinformed pedagogy
8th Waseda ELF International Workshop
and Symposium
Invited Workshop
Developing effective classroom materials
and activities from lingua franca research
The Faculty of Global and Community
Studies, Shudo University, Hiroshima

Presentation
L2 learners’ preferences: Listening tobackground music while reading
International Symposium on Language,
Linguistics, Literature, and Education(ISLLLE)

Presentation
Applied Linguistics, Language Policy andAcademic Discourse: A Reflection
JACET Language Policy SIG

Tomokazu Ishikawa

Blagoja Dimoski, Yuri
Jody Yujobo, Satomi
Kuroshima, Okada
Tricia, & Rasami
ChaikulBlagoja Dimoski

Andrew Leichsenring

Masaki Oda

4.1.2 International Presentations
During 2018 CELF faculty presented their individual and collaborative research projects
to international audiences in numerous locations around the world, including in Europe,Asia, Oceania, and North America. In total, 21 international presentations were madeduring this period (see Table 3). Among them, individual and group presentations weremade by Paul McBride and Yuri Jody Yujobo at the Asia TEFL conference in Macau,
while Blagoja Dimoski, Tomokazu Ishikawa and Paul McBride all presented at the ELF11
conference in London. The director of CELF, Dr. Masaki Oda, was invited to give a plenary
and lead a workshop at the ICE3LT International Conference in Yogyakarta, Indonesia.

71

Table 3
Summary of CELF faculty's international presentations (n=21)
Location
Type, Title, & Event

Macau, China

Macau, China
Yogyakarta,
Indonesia
Yogyakarta,
Indonesia
Yogyakarta,
Indonesia
Surakarta,
Indonesia

Macau, China

London, UK

London, UK

72

Presentation
Exploration into curriculum design and thechallenges for primary to tertiary English
programs
The 16th Asia TEFL International
Conference

Presentation
Language tests in the news
The 16th AsiaTEFL, 1st MAAL & 6th HAAL
2018 International Conference
Invited Lecture
Language testing, politics & mass media
Universitas Negri Yogyakarta

Plenary
Groundless beliefs: Language learners andmass media
ICE3LT International Conference

Invited Workshop
Learner beliefs: Planning your own research
ICE3LT International Conference

Invited Workshop
Designing Research Project in ELT
Universitas Sebelas Maret

Symposium
Rethinking “correctness”. In M. Oda (Chair)
Issues in Academic Writing Instruction.
The 16th Asia TEFL International
Conference

Presentation
Power, knowledge, surveillance, and ELFinformed pedagogy
ELF11

Presentation
Training for, simulating, and assessing ELFtype interactions in the classroom
ELF11

Author(s)Yuri Jody
YujoboMasaki Oda

Masaki Oda

Masaki Oda

Masaki Oda
Masaki Oda

Paul McBride

Paul McBride

Blagoja
DimoskiLondon, UK

London, UK

Suzhou, China

Loughborough
University, UK

Philadelphia, US

Toronto, Canada

Honolulu, US

Presentation
English-within-multilingualism in‘monolingual’ university classrooms
ELF11
Invited Plenary Panel
New voices and new faces in ELF
ELF11Presentation
Japanese university students and digital
literacies: Preparing for the study abroad
context
GLoCALL 2018

Presentation
Perception in the work of identification ofhuman anatomy:
A case of medical reasoning in surgicaloperations
5th International Conference on
Conversation Analysis (ICCA)

Presentation
Perception in the work of identification ofhuman anatomy:
A case of medical reasoning in surgicaloperations
113th Annual Meeting of the American
Sociological Association (ASA)

Presentation
Mobile bodies: The gender performanceand migration experience of Filipino transwomen entertainers in Japan
XIX International Sociological Association(ISA) World Congress of Sociology

Presentation
Methods to enhance classroom management
and promote learning autonomy
The IAFOR International Conference on
Education

Tomokazu
Ishikawa
Tomokazu
Ishikawa
Travis Cote &Brett Milliner

SatomiKuroshima

SatomiKuroshima

Tricia Okada

Blagoja
Dimoski73

Wollongong, NSW
Australia

Adelaide, Australia

Phnom Penh,
CambodiaSouthampton, UK

Singapore

Presentation
Teacher Development in a Multicultural
English Language Program
Applied Linguistics Association ofAustralia 2018 Conference @ University of
Wollongong
Presentation
Exploring business and ELF-informed
curriculum development for global
competence
ACTA Conference 2018 English Language
Learning in a Mobile World

Presentation
Materials for improving ELF-informed
communication strategies and BELF
(Business) competence
The 15th Annual CamTESOL Conference on
Language Learning
Presentation
EMF awareness: A pedagogic application of
EMF, transculturality, and transmodality
University of Southampton’s Centre for
Global Englishes Seminar
Presentation
ELF-aware pedagogy: Speaking and critical
writing utilizing Internet videos
54th RELC International Conference and
5th Asia-Pacific LSP and Professional
Communication Association Conference

Masaki Oda

Yuri Jody
YujoboYuri Jody
YujoboTomokazu
Ishikawa

Paul McBride

4.2 Academic Publications
In 2018, CELF faculty published their research and shared teaching ideas across a range ofdomestic and international publications. Most publications were peer-reviewed, appearing
in books (as chapters), journals, conference proceedings, and in other forms. We wish tohighlight Tomokazu Ishikawa’s review published in the highly respected ELT Journaland his contributions to the 2018 Waseda Working Papers in ELF. Also, Travis Coteand Brett Milliner published their review of English language teachers’ digital literacies
in the European Journal for teaching English with technology. And lastly, we want tocongratulate Dr. Masaki Oda on publishing chapters in the recently released books (1)Criticality, Teacher Identity, and (In)equity in English Language Teaching: Issues and
Implications, and (2) English-Medium Instruction from an English as a Lingua Franca
Perspective: Exploring the Higher Education Context.
74

Table 4
Summary of publications by CELF faculty (n=18)
Type (○=Peer-reviewed) & Reference

ArticleMilliner, B., & Dimoski, B. (2018). A report on faculty development
and research at the Center for English as a Lingua Franca. The Center
for English as a Lingua Franca Journal, 4, 56-81. Retrieved fromhttp://www.tamagawa.ac.jp/celf/research/pdf/celf_journal_final4_06.
pdf
Book Chapter 〇Oda, M., & Toh, G. (2018). Significant encounters and consequential
eventualities: A joint narrative of collegiality marked by struggles
against reductionism, essentialism and exclusion in ELT. In B. Yazan& N. Rudolph (Eds.), Criticality, Teacher Identity, and (In)equity in
English Language Teaching: Issues and Implications (pp. 219-216).
Cham: Springer.
Book Chapter
Oda, M. (2019). Beyond Global English(es): university English
program in transition. In K. Murata (Ed.), English-Medium
Instruction from an English as a Lingua Franca Perspective:
Exploring the Higher Education Context (pp. 259-270). London:
Routledge. 259-270.
Article (○)
Oda, M. (2018). A Post-EFL approach to the administration ofEnglish language programs. JACET ELF SIG Journal, 2, 30-38.

Article (○)
Milliner, B., & Chaikul, R. (2018). Extensive listening in the ELF
Classroom with ELLLO. The Center for English as a Lingua Franca
Journal, 4, 36-50. Retrieved from http://www.tamagawa.ac.jp/celf/research/pdf/celf_journal_final3.pdf
Article (○)
Okada, T. (2018). Voices of language learners in improvisations. The
Center for English as a Lingua Franca Journal, 4, 26-35. Retrieved
from http://www.tamagawa.ac.jp/celf/research/pdf/celf_journal_
final4_03.pdf

Author(s)Brett Milliner&
Blagoja
Dimoski

Masaki Oda＆ Glenn Toh

Masaki Oda

Masaki Oda
Brett Milliner&
Rasami
ChaikulTricia Okada

75

Article (○)
Mishina-Mori, S., Nagai, Y., & Yujobo, Y. J. (2018). Cross-linguistic
influences in the use of referring expressing in school-age JapaneseEnglish bilinguals. In A. B. Bertolini & M. J. Kaplan (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Boston University Conference on
Language Development, Volume 2 (pp. 546-557). Boston, USA:
Cascadilla Press.
ArticleMishina-Mori, S., Nagai, Y., & Yujobo, Y. J. (2018). Referent
Introduction and Maintenance in the English Narratives ofMonolingual and Bilingual Children. Intercultural Communication
Review - Rikkyo Graduate School of Intercultural Communications,16, 5-16.
Article (○)
Ishikawa, T. (2018). From native-speakerism to multilingualism: A
conceptual note. JACET ELF SIG Journal, 2, 9-17.

ArticleIshikawa, T. (2018). Cutting-edge research 英語教育研究最前線 第13回 English within multilingualism for transcultural communication.
The English Teachers’ Magazine 英語教育 (Taishukan 大修館書店),
6, 70-71.
Article (○)
Murata, K., Ishikawa, T., & Konakahara, M. (2018). Introduction:
ELF and assessment. Waseda Working Papers in ELF, 7, 1-10.
Article (○)
Ishikawa, T. (2018). Review: The Routledge Handbook of English
as a Lingua Franca. ELT Journal, 72(4), 455-458. Doi: https://doi.
org/10.1093/elt/ccy032.

Article (○)
Leichsenring, A. (2018). Japanese learners’ self-perceptions of their
L2 English user identity development. International Conference on
Education, Psychology and Learning, ICEPL Summer 2018 (pp. 1730). Tokyo, Japan: ICEPL.

76

Satomi
MishinaMori, Yuki
Nagai & Yuri
Jody Yujobo
Satomi
MishinaMori, Yuki
Nagai & Yuri
Jody Yujobo
Tomokazu
Ishikawa
Tomokazu
Ishikawa
KumikoMurata,Tomokazu
Ishikawa& MayuKonakahara
Tomokazu
Ishikawa

Andrew
LeichsenringArticle (○)
Mishina-Mori, S., Kawanishi, Y., Nagai, Y., & Yujobo, Y. J. (2018).
Telling Stories in the Socially non-dominant language- An analysisof referring expressions among Japanese-English simultaneous andsuccessive bilinguals. JSLS 2018, 188-189.

Satomi
MishinaMori, Yumiko
Kawanishi,
Yuki Nagai& Yuri Jody
YujoboDanielArticle (○)
Hougham,Hougham, D., Barr, B., Milliner, B., & Cowie, N. (2018). JALTCALL
Blair Barr,
2018: Reflections on the Learner Development SIG forum. Learning
Brett Milliner
Learning, 25(2), 66-71. Retrieved from http://ld-sig.org/wp-content/& Neil Cowie
uploads/2018/11/LL25.2_WHOLE-ISSUE.pdf

Article (○)
Yujobo., Y. (2108) When ELF Meets BELF: Building business
communication into ELF-informed curriculum. In S. Madya, F. A.
Hamied, W. A. Renandya, C. Coombe, & Y. Basthomi (Eds.), ELT in
Asia in the Digital Era: Global Citizenship and Identity: Proceedingsof the 15th Asia TEFL and 64th TEFLIN International Conference on
English (pp. 153-160). London, England: Routledge. Doi: https://doi.
org/10.1201/9781351217064

Article (○)
Cote, T., & Milliner, B. (2018). A survey of EFL teachers digital
literacy: A report from a Japanese university. The Journal of Teaching
English with Technology, 18(4), 71-89.

ArticleMilliner, B.(2018). Foreword to special issue-JALT Yokohama
Technology MyShare. Accents Asia, 11(1), 1-1. Retrieved from http://
www.issues.accentsasia.org/issues/10-2/Milliner%20.pdf

Yuri Jody
YujoboTravis Cote &Brett Milliner

Brett Milliner

4.3 Contributions to Academic Societies
In addition to publishing and presenting, faculty members of the CELF were also active
volunteers across a range of academic organizations. Faculty fulfill a total of 40 voluntary
positions (compared to 24 in 2017; see Milliner & Dimoski, 2018) in domestic andinternational, academic societies and their affiliates, making contributions in a variety ofroles and capacities including board member, director, editor, Ph.D examiner, reviewer,
treasurer, vice president, and many more (see Table 5).

77

Table 5
Summary of contributions by CELF faculty to academic societies in 2018 (n=40)
Society
Position
Name

Asia TEFL
JACET

Journal of Language and
Identity in Education

Critical Inquiry of Language
Studies
Asian Englishes

AILA Language Policy
Research Network
TEFLIN Journal

Lingua Pedagogia (Universitas
Negeri Yogyakarta)

University Technology Sydney
University of Southern
Queensland

Department of Sociology,
Indiana University-Purdue
University, USA
JACET Kanto Journal
JACET ELF SIG

JACET Kanto JournalInternational Conference on
Education, Psychology andLearning, ICEPL Summer 2018
The International Academic
Forum, Journal of Language
Learning
JALT Post Conference
Publication

78

Vice President for Membership

Masaki Oda

Editorial Board Member

Masaki Oda

Reviewer

Masaki Oda

Reviewer

Masaki Oda

Advisory Committee Member

Masaki Oda

Reviewer

Masaki Oda

Editorial Board Member

Masaki Oda

Ph.D. External Examiner

Masaki Oda

Ph.D. External Examiner

Masaki Oda

External Evaluator (for Academic
Promotion)

Masaki Oda

Journal Editor

Paul McBride

Director of Academic Affairs

Masaki Oda

Contributor to SIG Website

Paul McBrideInternational Committee member

Andrew
Leichsenring

Reviewer

Andrew
Leichsenring

Copy Editor

Andrew
Leichsenring

Journal Editor

Mitsuko Imai

The Language Teacher (JALT)

Copy Editor & Proofreader

The International Academic
Forum, Journal of Language
Learning

Andrew
Leichsenring

Reviewer

Andrew
Leichsenring

Cambridge University Press

Textbook Advisory Panel Member

Proceedings of the fourth
Extensive Reading World
Congress

Andrew
Leichsenring

Proofreader

Brett Milliner

Copy Editor

Brett Milliner

Treasurer

Brett Milliner

Special Issue Editor

Brett Milliner

The Journal of Extensive
Reading
JALT CALL

JALT Yokohama

Accents Asia JournalIntersubjectivity in Action
Conference 2017

Publications Chair

Scientific Committee Member

Journal of Pragmatics

Reviewer

The Japanese Association ofSociolinguistic Sciences

Treasurer

Englishes in Practice (DeGruyter)International Journal of Applied
Linguistics
Language and Intercultural
Communication

Journal of Multilingual andMulticultural Development

Editorial Board Member
Reviewer
Reviewer
Reviewer

JACET

Seminar Committee Member

JAAL in JACET

Academic Exchange Committee
MemberJACET ELF SIG

Steering Committee Member;
Public Relations Committee
Chair; Membership
Administration Committee Vice
Chair

JACET ELF SIG Journal

Reviewer

JACET Kanto Journal

Reviewer

Brett Milliner
SatomiKuroshima

SatomiKuroshima

SatomiKuroshima
Tomokazu
Ishikawa

Tomokazu
Ishikawa

Tomokazu
Ishikawa

Tomokazu
Ishikawa

Tomokazu
Ishikawa

Tomokazu
Ishikawa
Tomokazu
Ishikawa
Tomokazu
Ishikawa

Tomokazu
Ishikawa
79Eighth Waseda ELF
International Workshop &Symposium (Jan. 2019)

International Lake District
Conference on English
Linguistics, Teaching andLiterature (Burdur)
FIEP JAPAN

Scientific Committee Member;
Volume Co-editor

Tomokazu
Ishikawa

Scientific Committee Member

Tomokazu
Ishikawa

Board Member & Public
Relations Chair

Rasami Chakul

4.4 Research Grants Received by CELF Faculty
Reported in Table 6 below, members of CELF faculty are involved in a total of eightresearch projects funded by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research through the Japan
Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS Kakenhi). We want to congratulate Blagoja
Dimoski (primary investigator), and co-investigators Yuri Jody Yujobo, Satomi Kuroshima,
Rasami Chaikul, and Tricia Okada for securing funding for their project which aims todevelop resources for teaching and assessing communication strategies in ELF-informed
pedagogy, and Dr. Masaki Oda (principal investigator) who secured funding for his projectthat aims to investigate the development of university-level English programs after native
speakerism. In addition, we applaud Tomokazu Ishikawa on securing funding for his
project titled: English and transcultural education towards a multilingual global society ina 'monolingual' context. The CELF has already started to benefit from Tomokazu’s projectwith Koun Choi (University of Cambridge) and Dr Fan Fang (Shantou University, China)
visiting the CELF to provide public workshops in early 2019.
Table 6
Summary of research grants received by CELF faculty (n=8)

Grant
JSPS
Kakenhi

JSPS
Kakenhi80

TypeGrants-in
Aid for
Scientific
Research(C)

Grants-in
Aid for
Scientific
Research(C)

LengthProject

04-042016
同時バイリンガルナラテ〜03-31- ィヴにおける言語間相互作用の2019
04-01「ネイティブスピーカー主2018
義」後の大学英語教育プロ〜03-31- グラムの開発
2022

Recipient
Yuri Jody Yujobo(Co-Investigator)

Masaki Oda(Principal
Investigator)

Grant-inAid for
Scientific
Research(C)

04-01原発避難からの帰還地域
2017における希望と不安の社〜03-31- 会論理
2020

Satomi Kuroshima(Co-investigator)

Grant-inAid for
Scientific
Research(A)

04-01日常場面と特定場面の日本
2017
語会話コーパスの構築と言〜03-31- 語・相互行為研究の新展開
2021

Satomi Kuroshima(Co-investigator)

JSPS
KakenhiGrant-inAid for
Scientific
Research(C)

Developing resources forteaching and assessing
communication strategies
04-012018
in ELF-informed〜03-31- pedagogy: An empirical2022
approach based onlearners’ communicativecompetence

JSPS
KakenhiGrant-inAid for
Scientific
Research(C)

Blagoja Dimoski(Primary
Investigator)&
Satomi Kuroshima,
Yuri Jody Yujobo,
Tricia Okada,
Rasami Chaikul(Co-investigators)

04-01英語授業内活動における認2018
識性交渉の会話分析とタス〜03-31- クデザインの提案
2022

Satomi Kuroshima(Co-investigator)

04-012017
若者の就労支援活動におけ〜03-31- る相互行為の分析
2021

Satomi Kuroshima(Co-investigator)

JSPS
Kakenhi

JSPS
Kakenhi

JSPS
KakenhiGrant-inAid for
Scientific
Research(C)

JSPS
KakenhiGrant-inAid for
Research
Activity
Start-up

単一言語的環境下での多言語グローバル社会に向けた英語及び異文化教育

08-242018[English and transcultural〜03-31education towards a2020
multilingual global society
in a ‘monolingual’ context]

Tomokazu
Ishikawa(Primary
Investigator)

5. CONCLUDING REMARKS AND PLANS FOR 2018
In this report, we have described the different faculty development lectures and workshops
staged throughout the 2018 academic year. We hope that these initiatives have promoted81the fluid exchange of ideas between our diverse faculty and promoted their growth asteaching professionals. The CELF has also published and presented extensively, andsecured a number valuable research grants this year, which all points towards a very bright
future for research in the CELF in 2019.
REFERENCES
Cote, T., & Milliner, B. (2018). A survey of EFL teachers digital literacy: A report froma Japanese university. The Journal of Teaching English with Technology, 18(4),71-89.
Milliner, B., & Cote, T. (2018). Faculty adoption, application and perceptions of a
CMS in a university English language program. In B. Zou & M. Thomas (Eds.)
Integrating Technology Into Contemporary Language Learning and Teaching(pp.161-175). Hershey PA: IGI Global.
Milliner, B., & Dimoski, B. (2018). A report on faculty development and research at theCenter for English as a Lingua Franca. The Center for English as a Lingua Franca
Journal, 4, 56-81. Retrieved from http://www.tamagawa.ac.jp/celf/research/pdf/
celf_journal_final4_06.pdf
Widdowson, H. G. (1994). The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 28(2), 377-389.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3587438

82