A Peer Assisted English Learning Program（PAELP）

for the University Underachiever

Takao Hosoki

Abstract
The problems of the underachiever population have not been targetedin EFL classroom instruction or in EFL survey research， in spite of theimportance of English which is a required subject for all students and thus

affects the underachievers in freshman and sophomore years．

This paper first describes the problems of schooling for 'theunderachievers which the author has experienced and the English learning
difficulties confronted by such students． lt goes on to describe an English

program for the underachiever based on prevention， Peer Assisted English

Learning Program （PAELP） developed by the author throughout acurrent school year， in which quite a few such students were able to findthemselves successful， happy and even welcomed back into a regular class．

It focuses， in particular， upon some concrete examples of academic
implementation to EFL instruction． Some successful results are reported
and the implications discussed in a constructive manner．

lntroduction
Recent evidence that Japanese economy is successful in international
markets has promoted careful scrutiny of our system of higher education．

The educational authority reform reports have offered sweeping proposals
to reform and improve the present circumstances and the quality of higher

education in Japan． Many of the suggested changes would result in more

rigorous courses of study and higher standards of achievement for
students ．in universities．

Educators realize， however， that the poor ability of many students

has generated an academic outcry loud enough to be heard among

一181一Tokuyama Univ． Ronso

No． 41， 1994

universities． Educators who work with underachievers argue that morestrict standards will have serious repercussions for the growing number ofstudents who have not succeeded under current standards and are alreadyalienated from formal schooling． Frequently， these students feel thatthey can not experience success， happiness， and welcome in university．
Often， some are uncooperative， apathetic， alienated， and even abrasive totheir teachers， peers， and administrators． Some find themselves locked
into limited futures because of their underdeveloped skills and abilities．

The author's strong conviction is， however， that these students are

not born with negative tendencies ； these tendencies are fundamentallycreated in their academic situations． lt is not surprising that in auniversity that honors success， competition， and achievement， some ofthese students will see themselves， or be perceived by their teachers， peers，

and administrators，
as losers． The author defines such students as the'underachievers， not referring to any set of characteristics based on
intelligence． According to the author， typically， the underachiever is in

the bottom 10％ of the class as measured by teacher‑constructed reading
test achievement． Frequently， such students have failed courses and arebehind in acquiring the credits needed to be promoted and graduate．
Their attitude and conduct are likely to get them in trouble with theirteachers and administrators． The most frequent offenses committed bythose students are refusal to do academic work， being late for class，

staying away from school， and negligence． Negligence is the mostsignificant problem for the underachiever because it is likely to lead tofailihg courses， which in turn make promotion and graduation difficult．

Fortunately， there are educators， who understand the needs of theunderachievers who face learning difficulties and other problems， andthese educators are creating alternative programs for the underachievers
that stimulate their intellectual development． lt is only rarely that theunderachievers are offered alternative programs that provide affectively
and intellectually stimulating experiences．
Based on his English program developed for the undera'chievers， theauthor is convinced that it is possible to develop methods and experiences

which successfully involve the underachievers， that the university cancreate the kind of climate which does not result in alienation or

一182一

1994年6月 Takao Hosoki：APeer Assisted English Learning Program（PAELP） for the University Underachiever

indifference， and that it can have a positive impact on EFL teaching／learning environment， socialization， and future career orientation ofsuch students．
The author sees his own program not as narrow skill remediation， but

as providing an educational experience that can establish humanrelationship between teacher and student as well as the social andintellectual relationship between those two．
This paper provides 'educators， who work with underachievers， withsome insights into what kind of methods and strategies are likely to beeffective for them when EFL instruction is given in a regular classroom．

Reasons for the Underachievers
It was practically impossible for the author to obtain data andinformation regarding the underachiever populations from many
universities ； therefore by examining 53 students who， for the past three

years， were in the bottom 10％ of his English classes as measured byteacher‑constructed reading test achievement， the author identified them
the underachievers

in his university． The list below presents some of

the reasons given by such students． These reasons are presented in rankorder from the most commonly cited to the least‑often mentioned ：＊ lack of interest in class＊ loss of enthusiasm for learning＊ boredom with class＊ no motivation to study＊ lack of desired courses＊ excessive academic requirements＊ lack of efforts to study＊ no goal to achieve in student life

＊ dislike of instructors＊ poor academic records without efforts＊ dislike of a particular course'＊ problems with instructors and administrators＊ attendance problems

一183一Tokuyama Univ． Ronso

No． 41， 1994

＊ strictness of roll call＊ inability to adjust to university life

＊ poor learning environment＊ dislike of everything about student life

＊ parent's demand of good academic records＊ dislike of some physical features of the university＊ illness （including hospitalization）＊ demands of a part‑time job＊ 一dislike of discipline and rules＊ financial problems＊ peer problems＊ extracurricular activities＊ family problems＊ transferring to another institution＊ plan to withdraw for employment＊ studying abroad

According to the author's analysis， the underachievers with thereasons for their academic performance specified above are potential
dropouts who might be discharged from the university before graduation．

Some students who were actually withdrawn before completing theirrequired credits are defined as early leavers． Most Of them in theuniversity fit into behavior patterns that are classic of dropouts； they
exhibited poor attitudes toward the university， were likely to be failing，

were behind in academic progress， and had a lower grade‑point average．
Some were more likely to have slightly better than average grades， and tohave a slightly higher than average number of credits． Another group of
students， the intellectual elite， see their present attendance at university

as irrelevant． While this group of students was closest to completing
their academic requirements and often beyond their peers in accumulated
credits， they tended to quit the university voluntarily to transfer toanother educational setting． The author's data suggest that the great

majority of the underachievers in the university， who have normal
intelligence， wish to receive a fair share of educational benefits if they are
given an opportunity to一 do so．

一184一

1994年6月

Takao Hosoki ： A Peer Assisted English Learning Program（PAELP） for the University Underachiever

The Humanistic Perspective

In humanistic teaching， particular emphasis is plaeed upon self‑
awareness， self‑understanding， and self‑disclosure （Stevick， 1990）． From

this perspective， language learning is seen as an activity which involves

students as complex human beings， not simply as language learners．
Language teaching， therefore， exploits student's affective and intellectual

resources to the limit， and are substantial enough to provide students

experiences of the fundamental affective and intellectual developmentthat is essential to their life． The humanistic movement is relatively
new， and it has had an undeniable impact on language teaching practice．
This can be seen， for example， in affectively‑based learning activities，

alternative learning programs， and of experiential learning．

In practicing his English program of prevention with the under‑achiever， the author put special emphasis on some person‑centeredinstructions， referring to student interests and needs， interpersonal
sharings and self‑awareness which relates to student's motivation to learn

the language． The author believes that when the aim of teaching is
involved in profoundly enhancing each individual， learniBg is maximized．

He is convinced that educators must be committed to education toequalize opportunities from individual to individual so that human andhumane considerations are paramount．

The Curriculum Development Perspective
In recent years the underachievers have manifested problems thathave originated from the existing conventional academic system． These
academic problems can not be solved by the university alone， although theeducators often blame other educators and the university every time these

problems surface． Since the problems of today's underachievers are

academic， solving them requires academic changes； shake‑off fromtraditional curricula． From this viewpoint， the author considers that we

educators should create innovative curriculum design and supply
appropriate education to the underachievers． There must be some

一185一Tokuyama Univ． Ronso

No． 41， 1994

adequate system for increasing success for all these students rather thanthe current system that rations nurture according to ability to compete．
There must be equity in dealing with the underachievers．
Nunan （1988） has suggested that curriculum can be developed througha collaborative effort between teachers and learners， since learners will be

involved in decision on content and material selection， methodology， andevaluation． Particularly in person‑centered instruction， this differs fromtraditional， teacher‑led approaches which are impossible in helping
educators to exploit underachiever's learning potential．

In humanistic teaching contexts， considerable interest in person‑
centeredness can be drawn for the practical application． This idea seems
to be far more appropriate and effective for the underachievers to achieve

their affective， interactive， and cognitive demands than in conventional
practices． ln his English program of prevention of the underachiever， theauthor stresses the importance of basic elements which underlie person‑

centeredness．' These are：一Student involvement in deciding content of their material， inorganizing their activities， in developing the syllabus， and inassessing their performance‑Strategies for meeting specific needs and interests of all thestudents， regardless of their levels of ability‑Strategies for capitalizing on motivation， enthusiasm， andpositive feelings of all the students‑Constant establishment of close interpersonal relationships
betweeR the author and the students through frequent contacts‑Goal‑setting for self‑enhancing purposes‑Creation of self‑fulfillment of their dreams

The author believes that an innovative curriculum regarding EFL
instruction should be the movement toward person‑centeredness． ln therest of his paper， the author will describe ways that the underachievers
could be educated and the solution of their problems through his person‑
centered instruction．

一186一

1994年6月

Takao Hosoki ： A Peer Assisted English Learning Program（PAELP） for the University Underachiever

Program PlanningAn effective EFL program involves more than the development ofcognitive skills on facts， ideas and thoughts， the utilization of specificapproaches for mastering skills， and skill development materials andexperiences in some logical order． For the underachievers， the mostimportant of these variables is the teacher． lt is the teacher， more thanthe program， materials， skills sequences， or organizational patterns， thatis crucial in a humanistic program based on person‑centeredness．
In addition to the role of the teacher， there are other importantconsiderations for the program． Among these conditions‑which aredeveloped in this section‑are crucial aspects of the affective domain（attitudes and interests， needs， feelings， motivation， values， personal
images）， ways to establish close relationships between the author and thestudents， and ways to incorporate the need for a return‑to‑basics referringto the cognitive domain‑knowledge and skills．

Galyean （1979） notes that humanizing and personalizing classes
should be given high priority to language learning． ln the opinion of theauthor， the affective function is one of the basics that is badly in need ofattention for the underachievers． As the central construct of theauthor's English program for such students， this section focuses， in themain， on aspects of some components pertaining to humanistic
methodology． ln． his program， the students practiced structures thatenabled them to reflect upon their own attitudes and interests， needs，
feelings， concerns， values， actions and behaviors， so that each student wasable to share these with others． The author's constant attention on all

the practice was on these components． The implementation of thesecomponents will be discussed in the following．

1 ） Attitude Development and MaintenanceResearch on the factors that correlate with attitude development
and maintenance is limited ； however， the author views some factors

to be established as basic to comprehension of the underachievers．
These include； self‑concept， teacher's attitude and behaviors， peer

一187一Tokuyama Univ． Ronso

No． 41， 1994

relationship， intelligence， achievement， instructional practices andorganizational patterns， and learning environment． Each area will
be discussed below．

Self‑concept． There are many ways teachers can affect a student's
self‑concept positively which， in turn， many affect how he／she feels
about the learning situation． ln the regular class， the underachievers

usually perceived that their English ability was responsible for their
negative attitudes ； in such a situation， learning was not effective atall． The author， therefore， changed his behaviors and practices for

improving the students' attitudes． Behaviors displayed by theauthor， which seemed to be significant in influencing theunderachievers， are as follows ：＊ Keeping the program atmosphere one of trust by sharing＊ Accepting the student as a valued person＊ Engaging in affective shariBg with the students＊ Reducing negative comments＊ Emphasizing

aliveness' （Carrying the live exchanges ofcommunication）＊ Trying to nurture human relations with the students and foster

the same thing among the students themselves＊ Valuing their own feelings， enthusiasm， and ideas throughfrequent communication＊ Making the student's success known to others＊ Trying not to be just a good teacher， but also a supportive
adviser

The instructional practices the author considered significant arecharacterized by ：＊ Minimizing differences among the student's work
＊ Practicing pair or group work as frequently as possible＊ Comparing the student's progress against him／herself rather

than with the pair or the group ・一188一

1994年6月 Takao Hosoki：APeer Assisted English Learning Program（PAELP） for the University Underachiever＊ Utilizing the interest perspective of each student for self‑enhancing purposes＊ Utilizing student‑offered materials from their choices and as totheir preferences＊ Utilizing diagnostic techniques in order to eliminate specificskill weakness

Teacher's attitudes and behaviors． There is little doubt that theteacher is often the most significant force in the development of
positive attitudes in learning， particularly to the underachievers．

Frequently， the teacher is a stronger motivating factor than thetechniques， practices， and materials used．

The author considered certain attitudes and behaviors conducive topositive learning attitudes in the underachievers． These include：

1． To value each student as an independent learner and respect
his／her efforts in attempting to become a better learner

2． To enjoy each student and to enjoy producing enthusiastic
learners through their needs and interests

3． To permit each student to freely express his／her complaints，
frustration， and dislikes even though they are directed toward
the author

4． To allow each student to devise unique ways of reporting onmaterials and practicing activities
5． To listen to their conversations， note their creative topics， andobserve free choices of learning attitudes

6． To convince each student he／she need not be afraid to makemistakes

7． To believe that each student can achieve some measure of
success

8． To change methods and materials whenever the student's
progress indicates the ・methods and materials being used are
not producing the desired results
9． To be aware of the effects that their nonverbal behaviors haveon the students

一189一Tokuyama Univ． Ronso
10．

No． 41， 1994

To encourage the students to have a friendly talk about various

problems through common topics
Some underachievers did not like to learn English， and at times

were reluctant to participate in activities although they were
frequently responsive to the author's suggestions and advice． The
encouragement in their learning of English is one of the author's mostdifficult tasks．

Peer re｝ationship． Students often wish to work together in peergroups， draw on each other's strengths， and assist each other incompleting a task． This method encourages supportive relation‑
ships， good communication skills， high‑level thinking abilities， andpromotes interests in learning． ln peer group work in the author's

program， the underachievers were responsible for their own learningand for assisting each other in attaining a common goal． ln theprocess most of them learned to appreciate the following ：＊ a feeling of mutuality＊ a sense of self‑worth＊ sharing of responsibility for learning＊ respect and trust within the peer group＊ self‑confidence （reducing negative attitudes）＊ improvement of regular classroom behaviors＊ confidence about their ability to interact and work with otherstudents＊ stronger motivation to achieve＊ better class attendance＊ a positive self‑esteem

Learning environment． The type of classroom atmosphere and thephysical environment the teacher establishes may be conducive to thestrengthening of interests in learning． ln fact， classroom collections（in the author's office） of many different kinds of English books，

magazines， newspapers， and pamphlets were really motivational at

一190一

1994年6月 Takao Hosoki：APeer Assisted English Learning Program（PAELP） for the University Underachiever

the underachiever level． Such collections suggested to the students
that English learning is important and interesting． The collections
were an excellent stimulus for giving them a chance to start learning

English， because they were all within the interest range of theunderachievers． The author provided them with adequate time forbrowsing， pleasure reading， or silent reading since interests in English

learning may often be promoted through voluntary participation．

The students were given opportunities to share various topics
common to each other． They voluntarily established a discussion

group and discussed topics． Peer recommendations were also
powerful forces in developing interests． ln addition to books，
magazines， and newspapers， phonograph records， CD's， radio and TV

programs， films and film‑strips， cassette tapes， and slides andpictures were， effective． All of them， which were available in theauthor's room， did trigger a desire and motivation to learn English
through topics related to their needs， hobbies， problems， experiencesin their life， academic goals， and future career．

Interest‑based peer grouping． Peer grouping based on common
interests is necessary to promote their interests in learning English．

Particularly for the underachievers， this type of grouping was
effective． Although the achievement levels of each student werequite low， motivation came from sharing a common interest in
learning English． They worked harder than in their regular class，
they experienced success， and they felt good about themselves． One

disadvantage to this group lay in the easy change or waning ofinterest in any given topic， so that the author had to continue toprovide advice， suggestions， and assignments as frequently as
possible， which involved considerable time and energy in preparation．

In reality the author had to provide books and learning material
covering many different levels of interest for each student． The
experience in establishing such interest groups was to put together the
students with multi‑age levels， freshmen to seniors， thus providing afamily‑type of experience in the university． The older students withenthusiasm for specific areas were to help the younger ones and were

一191一Tokuyama Univ． Ronso

No． 41， 1994

to serve as models for them． The author believes that this experienceis needed in learning how to cope with everyday and adult life．

2） Study Skills
English is a required subject in the liberal arts and important to all

the students． English is a difficult and unattractive subject for theunderachievers． ln reality all of them are having a lot of trouble andexperiencing boredom while learning English． To aid eachunderachiever to be able to attain an acceptable level of mastery or

proficiency， study skill instruction is very important． The author
has realized the significance of study skill instruction through the
day‑by‑day contact with such students．

Techniques of study skills‑their time for study， taking notes，organizing and scheduling， preparing or writing reports， organizing，

remembering， reviewing， memorizing， and preparing for examina‑
tions， which can be categorized as English learning skills， must be

incorporated into lesson plans everyday． Study Skills were taught

and practiced in a particular area concerning actual materials in
English． This motivated each student to learn English， because they

could see that the skills really were useful． The rate which theunderachievers learned various study skills varied with individual

students． The underachievers seemed to be at a slower rate inmastering the study skills than average or above average students．
The study skill instruction was effective in raising their desire to
study to a voluntary response level． A few skills which were used in
English reading instruction were as follows ：Selection skills． These skills， which are basic to higher leve1s ofcritical reading， can help students learn how to derive meaningfrom what they read． All printed materials may have some kindof organization； topic development， classification， time order（sequence）， comparison‑contrast， or cause‑effect． 一 Following thesepatterns enables students to learn to look for key words in sentences

and key sentences in paragraphs， and select main thoughts andsupporting details． Using to these skills， the author provided the

一！92一1994年6月 Takao Hosoki：APeer Assisted English Learning Program（PAELP） for the University Underachiever

underachievers students with various practice experiences of theskills to help them understand printed materials． ln fact someunderachievers were able to deal with author opinions， viewpoints，and biases to reconcile these with their own thinking．

Organizing skills． Organizing skills are important for students tolearn when they need to sort and classify objects into categories． The

author used the following skills in organizing information to increase

comprehension and result in better understanding of English readingmaterial．

1．

Selecting the sentence that best expresses the main thought ofeach paragraph●n∠QU4﹁0ρ0Selecting the sentence that contains supporting ideas
Putting whole ideas into outline form

Summarizing paragraphs
Completing outlines
Writing a reaction to what is read

Choice of Teaching Style

For many years the author has been interested in finding out how tohelp the low‑ability English learners． Of particular interest to theauthor have been the forgotten bottom ten percent， those he calls
underachievers， because these students typically have experienced great
difficulty and frustration in learning English in a conventional teacher‑
1ed instruction．

Let's take an honest look at sorne of the current realities of the

English teaching／learning scenes． Students can usually pursue instruc一りtional goals
in three ways：competitively， individually， or cooperatively．

In a competitive setting， students work against each other and theirperformance is compared． Some students experience failure in thissetting， resulting in loss of self‑confidence， self‑esteem， and sometimes innegative feelings toward their teachers， higher‑achieving peers， or

administrators． There are many teachers who are unwilling to
一193一Tokuyama Univ． Ronso

No． 41， 1994

demonstrate a variety of ideas and techniques necessary to improve theperformance of underachievers， and what is worse， they ignore them inEnglish teaching． Most of these teachers are simply satisfied to continue

their conventional practices in highly competitive classrooms． Theirteaching methods cause student isolation， loss of confidence， interest，
motivation， individuality， and even produce hostile climates． ln fact theunderachievers take it for granted， in such a learning environment， thatmost of them have no desire to study English and that studying English isa boring， painful， and distasteful task． ln the highly competitive andlearning‑imperative environment， the underachievers are compelled totake English courses merely to fill a graduation requirement， ordinarily
by simply accumulating a certain number of passing credits in English，

not by enjoying studying English or by demonstrating proficiency until
graduation． The teachers do not give the underachievers a feeling thatthey can achieve， be motivated and encouraged to learn English．
In contrast to most university English instruction mentioned above inwhich individual students compete with each other， and in which mostteachers have not been interested in finding out how to help theunderachievers， the author designed a program rich enough and versatile
enough to accommodate a broad range of learning needs， interests， andlearning styles． This program is one of the teaching styles which involves

combination of individualized instruction with cooperative learning（Slavin， 1987）． Following are brief explanations of this approach．

Peer Assisted Learning English Program （PAELP） was carefully
structured to maximize the possibility of academic success， self‑
confidence and self‑esteem， and provide skills in dealing with personal andsocial problems faced by the students at school and in their relations withpeers． ln matters of attendance， the students must make up the time andsome lost ground toward promotion and graduation． Assignments must
be done and， generally， they must be done correctly before credit isgiven ； follow‑throUgh by the author on this standard was a high priority

item． Program participation in discussions or in peer group assignments

was mandatory； the students were never permitted to become self‑
seeking． Reading was emphasized by having the students read at least
once a week， usually in a few newspaper articles that most interested

一194一1994年6月 Takao Hosoki：APeer Assisted English Learning Program（PAELP）for the University Underachieverthem， and by having them write at least once a month， in a diary that

described their own daily personal experience． All of these standards
were designed to build student self‑confidence in their ability to perform

academically and succeed by graduation．
The basic premise of this program was that the students can moveahead at their own pace in peer groups of three to four members． First，

the students were interviewed and placed in an appropriate point in an

individualized program． The students worked independently according totheir own level and pace， and did their own assignments． Then the stu‑
dents met in peer groups， where they exchanged papers， they read to one

another， checked comprehension， helped each other collect information， tocomplete their own homework assignments， and to improve their own
past performance． The author provided assistance or follow‑up discus‑
sion if the peer group members were unable to help each other． This

program emphasized interdependence among peer groups so that they
could share any work and exchange any information． They took quizzes
individually， covering all of the topics when they determined they wereready． These quizzes were not competitive． Individual improved scores
were recorded when a current quiz score exceeded a past score． Bothindividual students and peer groups that reached a certain criterion levelor had a higher improvement Score than a past one received reward
る
certlficates．

In addition to working with peers， the author's role in PAE：LP was tointroduce major concepts using direct instruction prior to the students
working on their individualized units． At times the author did whole peergroup instruction on such skills as critical thinking， problern‑solving， self‑

evaluation procedure， maximum use of the university library， goodcommunication， and supPortive relationships．

Characteristics of PAELP
There were sQme characteristics that contributed to success with theunderachievers． The following list of these characteristics is provided tQ

help prospective educators begin the task of constructing a program forunderachievers and to work toward success in their program with this

一195一Tokuyama Univ． Ronso

No． 41， 1994

type of student．

Program Size． The program was small ： ten to twelve students． ln

general they were divided into three groups． Management of such asmall‑sized program was more flexible， more personal， and more
efficient． The a．uthor was more responsive to the needs of students．

Meetings to plan activities， projects， and assignments were easilyarranged． The students could undertake an individual task and group
tasks with a feeling of mutuality， and felt a need to do their own part forthe benefit of each group member as well as the entire group． Frequentverbal interchange easily took place between the students and the author．
Each student learned to take personal responsibility for learning material

and to master certain material with support and assistance in attaining
the mastery level which the author determined through discussion with anindividual student and the entire group． Critical to the success of thisprogram were such skills as knowing how to communicate effectively andhow to develop respect and trust within the group． They learned suchskills through author's guidance in how to follow as well as to lead．

When responsibility for learning was shared， students encouraged eachother to complete the assigned task． They knew how to ask for assistancewhen they needed it． Each student realized that spending even a shortamount of time with the author in such a small program was much more
beneficial to the student than spending longer periods of time in regularclass． The major focal point of the program was the individual
conference ： the author could meet often with the student on a one‑to‑one

basis to discuss the material the student had been studying， to checkstudying skills， and to discuss school life and future career．

Program Autonomy． This program created its own identity byhaving a unique name， PAELP， called only among the underachievers
and by having its own space and facility for making arrangements forvarious activities in order to establish a positive learning environment．

Autonomy was evident in this program． Admission and dismissal，material offerings， independent study， cooperative learning， unique credit
arrangements， criteria for success， and group processing were controlled．

一196一

1994年6月 Takao Hosoki：APeer Assisted English：Learning Program（PAELP） for the University Underachiever

Program autonomy was important because it gave the author a sense of

program ownership． The author felt empowered and had control overimportant factors that allowed him to be effective with students． The
author had the mandate to take initiative and respond to students in waysthat were either not usually practiced， not considered appropriate， or not

possible in the regular class． PAELP has empowered the author withboth the authority and the responsibility to solve a number of problems
other teachers have not been able to solve．

Teacher expectation． The author assumes that a competent andprospective teacher can be effective in educating all the underachievers，and that being effective with these students is perceived as an academic
and social necessity． The author is optimistic that those who have failed

and become disenchanted can be turned around．
In PAELP， there was the extended role of the teacher． Some studentsbrought to PAELP problems that might have originated in the campus or
the community but nevertheless interfere with the student's success in theuniversity． The author often helped the students think through theirproblems， and occasionally to be an advocate for the individual who wasin conflict with their peers， teachers， parents， and their university．

Through an experience of PAELP， the author was able to consider it

necessary for teachers to have high academic expectations about student
success． lt was clear from his realistic judgment of the academic abilities

of individual students． For some students， passing a high‑school‑
graduate level English reading was a high expectation． For others， it was

reasonable to expect some tasks at a sophomore level English reading or

writMg．
There was a more uniform set of expectations regarding behavior．

Attendance， punctuality， completion of assignment， and demonstrating

responsibility and fulfilment were expected of every student who
participated in the program． Rules on these matters were enforced
firmly and fairly． Of special interest was the expectation that thestudents of the program would try to get more positively involved in theregular class activities than other regular students． While the academic
and behaviQral expectations were unique and great， all the underachievers

一197一Tokuyama Univ． Ronso

No． 41， 1994

commented that they found studying in the program much moresatisfying and enjoyable than learning in the regular course．

Peer Culture． According to the PAELP students， the single mostvalued characteristic of the program was the family atmosphere． Mostof the students volunteered that they liked and enjoyed the program
because they felt comfortable and settled with their peers who had thesame troubles during university life． ln the program there was an
accepting and encouraging but not uncritical atmosphere． There was alsomuch conversation， discussion， and criticism offered in a constructive
manner． The students saw this as quite different from the attitudes theyencountered in regular classrooms． Many students reported that they
really could care about the people in their groups．

Cooperative learning was a characteri'stic of this program． Most of

the students reported that they found this aspect of the program very

important in learning． They did not prefer the competitive， self‑
centered， and teacher‑led atmosphere they found in many regular classes，
because they have not been successful in such classroom． The cooperative
effort encouraged each student to admit need for help and seek out a peeror teacher for help． Some of this cooperative spirit was promoted
through two to three students' learning together． The emphasis wasalways on such cooperation and sharing．
Another important characteristics of the program was the supportive

peer relationshiP that developed concerning the rules and goals of the
program． The students tended to believe that the rules， goals， andrequirements were in their interest， so that these made the task of theauthor much easier． PAELP played an important role in establishing andmaintaining a positive set of attitudes among the students throughmutual support．

Voluntary Component． Cooperation and sharing can foster
initiative and responsibility in the underachievers． Moreover， theattraction for the underachievers of experiencing mutuality can be a
powerful incentive to participate fully and voluntarily in the program．

PAELP utilized the voluntary components through the program activities

and after successful completion of these components， the students

一198一

1994年6月、Takao Hosoki：APeer Assisted English Learning Program（PAELP） for the University Underachiever

progressed to promotion and graduation． PAELP impressed on thestudents that they needed to establish an attitude of voluntary learningwhich convinced potential students they were competent and reliable．
In the operational phase of the program， there were some techniques，
some of which are related to humanistic methods of teaching， utilized formaking the best of the voluntary components．

＊ Some activity was individualized so the students could work
independently at their own pace．

＊ Some activity was self‑imposed and clearly achievable．

＊ Some activity was designed to stretch the students beyond thebasics toward problem solving， abstract thinking， and criticalthinking．

＊ Some activity was designed to help the students work with eachother to be able to have a broad range of opportunities for success．

＊ Some ，activity dealt with social responsibility and social issues（Parker， 1985）．

＊ Some activity was reinforced with attendance check， skill
achievement drills， credit achievement drills， and competency test．

＊ Some activity was extremely concerned with a．sense of challeng‑ing， hopefulness， support， accQmplishment， and a positive view ofself．

Conclusion
Research conducted by Johnson and Johnson （1987） has reported anincrease in academic achievement when cooperative learning is used incollege level classes as well as with all age levels in a variety of subject

areas． Newmann and Thompson （1987） point out， however， thatcooperativ'e learning approaches may be less acceptable to secondary
students， and that students at this age are less responsive to rewards andother forms of recognition． Since their previous high school experiences

taught them to value individual achievement and to be competitive

for passing university entrance examinations， cooperative learning
approaches have not been in wider use in university language classes． The

一199一

Tokuyama Univ． Ronso

No． 41， 1994

major reasons may be that university teachers have not understood suchapproaches， have doubted the results claimed for them， have riot had
the time， the energy， or the means to devote to them， or simply have beensatisfied to continue their traditiona｝ practices， hoping for the best．

Given these constraints， the author did implement cooperative
learning in his university． lt took a considerable amount of time to teachcooperative skills and to orient the underachievers in order to get themaccustomed to their new learning environment and to replace it with an
attractive， supportive one by giving them a feeling that they could achievethrough group processing． They learned by cooperating not competing．
When peers helped each other with learning tasks， they felt that each
student could receive a fair share of educational benefits．
Based on his study， the author is convinced that it is quite possible

for the university to develop courses and experiences that successfully
involve the underachievers and to create the kind of climate that does not

result in alienation， boredom， negligence and hatred for those students
and teachers． The author believes that we educators will be able to makea difference in the lives of the university underachievers．

References
Galyean， Beverly， 1979． A Confluent Design for Language Teaching．
TESOL Quarterly， 11：143‑156．
Johnson， D． W．，and Johnson， R． T．1987．五eαrning Togetherαnd Alone：
Cooperation， Competition， and lndividuali2ation． Englewood Cliffs， N．
J． ： Prentice‑Hall．

Newmann， F． M． and Thompson， J． A． 1987．

Effects of Cooperative

Learning on Achievement in Secondary Schools： A Summary of
Research． Paper from National Center on Effective Secondary
Schools， University of Wisconsin， Madison．

Nunan， D． 1988． The Learner‑centered Curriculum． Cambridge；
Cambridge University Press．

Parker， R． E． 1985．

Small‑Group Cooperative Learning： lmproving

Academic， Social Gains in the Classroom．

NASSP BuZletin （March） ：48‑57．

Slavin， R． E． 1987．
Cooperative Learning and lndividualized lnstruction．
Arithmetic Teacher （November） ： 14‑16．

Stevick， E． 1990． Hurnanism in Language Teaching． Oxford： Oxford
University Press．

一200一