Proceedings of the JALT Learner Development 20th Anniversary Conference

Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Learning Learning: Special Issue
edited by Tim Ashwell & Glenn Magee
Volume 22(2), October 2015LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

Contents
1

Community Outreach From Within: Bringing Service Learning to Language Classrooms via 1~ 7
Peer Tutoring, Sarah Lee

2

How Can We Motivate Students Through Our Non-Native Speaker Teacher Identities?,
Agnes Patko

8 ~ 18

3

A Case Study of a Social Education Class, Debjani Ray

19 ~ 31

4

Writing Center Challenges: A Case Study, Maho Sano and Ritsuko Rita

32 ~ 37

5

Making Graphic Organizers of Graph Vocabulary, Michael T. Sullivan

38 ~ 49

6

Promoting Self-reflection and Strategy Use with the Strategy Tree, Satomi Yoshimuta, Huw
Davies, and Mayumi Abe

50 ~ 59

Copyright
All pieces are copyright of their respective authors. Permission to reprint and/or reproduce online writing from
Learning Learning should be sought directly from the author(s) concerned. If arrangements are made for the
reprinting and/or re- production online of an article originally published in Learning Learning, we respectfully
request that the full citation reference for the original article in Learning Learning be included with thereprinted and/or reproduced online version.
To cite this volume: Ashwell, T. & Magee, G. (Eds.). (2015). Proceedings of the JALT Learner Development
SIG 20th Anniversary Conference: Exploring Learner Development Practices, Pedagogies and Research,[Special issue] Learning Learning, 22(2). Retrieved from http://ld-sig.org/2015-autumn-22-2/

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 1 September 20151

Foreword
The JALT Learner Development SIG's 20th anniversary conference, Exploring Learner Development:
Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research, was held at Gakushuin University, Tokyo on November 23-24
2013 to explore issues in learner development and to celebrate the achievements of the SIG over the previous
twenty years. Guest speakers included two founding members of the group, Naoko Aoki and Richard Smith, aswell as Kensaku Yoshida, Professor and Director, Center of Language Education and Research, Sophia
University, and Phil Benson, Professor in Linguistics and Director of the Centre for Popular Culture in the
Humanities, Hong Kong Institute of Education. In addition to the plenary sessions, more than 50 concurrent
sessions ran over the two days in presentation, colloquium, forum, discussion, workshop and poster formats.
The papers in this collection are written by presenters at six of these sessions and reflect the diversity of themes
explored at the conference and the range of interests among the LD SIG community.

The editors would like to thank all the contributors for their patience and hard work throughout the revision andproduction process. They would also like to thank James Underwood for formatting this special issue of
Learning Learning.

Tim Ashwell & Glenn Magee
September 2015

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 2015LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

Community	
  Outreach	  From	  Within:	  Bringing	
  Service	
  Learning	
  to	
  Language	  Classrooms	
  via	
  Peer	  Tutoring
Sarah LeeThis paper describes how a successful peer-tutoring program served as the framework for a service
learning project, with implications for potential use in Japan. The case discussed is a service
learning program at DePaul University in Chicago, Illinois. The program, initiated in 2006 andcontinuing today, aims at matching the needs of lower-proficiency language learners with moreexperienced learners in a peer-tutoring program. Experienced learners are introduced to theproject within the framework of a service learning project, encouraging reflection on their own
experiences and journey as language learners, while reinforcing the importance of service learning.
This model can be used as a transition to larger service learning projects while also reinforcing
language learners’ needs.
この論文は、ある成功したピア・チュータリングのシステムがどのようにサービスラーニングのフ レームワークとして役立ったか、そしてその日本での将来的な適用の可能性について論じる。議論さ れるのは、イリノイ州シカゴのデポー
ル大学において実施されたサービスラーニングのプログラムで ある。2006年に始まり今日も続くこのプログラムは、ピア・チュータリングにおいて、熟達度の高い 言語学習者が熟達度の低い学習者の必要に応じることを狙いとしている。熟
達学習者はサービスラー ニングの枠組みの中でこのプロジェクトに参加し、サービスラーニングの重要性を補足されるととも に、自分自身の経験と言語学習者としての遍歴の内省が促される。このモデルは、言語学習者のニー ズを強化するとともに、より大きなサービスラーニングのプロジェクトへの橋渡しとしても用いるこ とが出来る。

Introduction: The Importance and Relevance of Service Learning for ELLs
Increasingly, Service Learning (SL) programs are being implemented in higher education as a means ofproviding hands-on, experiential learning. These programs typically aim to bridge the gap between theacademic experience and real world experience outside of the classroom. In an SL program, students typicallywork and interact with a diverse population outside their academic frame of reference. SL programs generallySpecial Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 20151

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
involve organized volunteer (service) activities, which take place in a variety of venues, such as schools, seniorassisted living communities, food pantries (centers where donated food is collected for redistribution to those inneed), or community gardens. Among the expected outcomes are that SL experience will open students' minds,
promote respect for service and community involvement, and offer a broader range of contexts for learning andapplying knowledge.
The National Youth Leadership Council stresses that an effective SL program should provide a context-richexperience which is appropriate, accessible, meaningful and enriching. The experience is appropriate in thesense that the requirements for the activity should match the students’ language level and confidence incommunicating. An SL program for English Language Learners (ELLs) should be accessible in that it suits
their context, schedule and lifestyle. In terms of relevance, the project should correspond, on some level, to thestudents' interests and their course of study. Finally, the SL project should provide some degree of intrinsic
satisfaction, which could lead to deeper investment in the project as well as a more meaningful experience.
Incorporating SL methodology in the field of ESL/ EFL is becoming more common. Where in the past ELLs
were often the subjects or recipients of SL projects, it is now recognized that ELLs receive inherent benefit in
active participation in SL programs. In a diverse, context-rich learning situation, ELLs can experience theempowerment and autonomy which accompanies self-directed application of skills and knowledge in real world
situations. According to Bringle and Clayton (2012), service learning can promote critical thinking, academic
engagement and intrinsic motivation. Moreover, SL makes a meaningful contribution to local community
needs.

Implementing Service Learning in a Japanese University
While teaching at a Japanese university four years ago, I was asked to research, plan, and implement a SL
program for our study abroad students. Implementing SL in a rigorous academic English language program
such as an Intensive English Program (IEP) can pose challenges in time and resource allocation for SL
activities. Creating a SL framework which fits within a given curriculum can be time- consuming, andSpecial Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 20152

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
mobilizing administrators, teachers (particularly those on short or part-time contracts), and students can be alarge undertaking. Further, some might question the fundamental pedagogical validity in requiring students toparticipate in SL projects.
In conceptualizing a SL model for that particular program, I needed to take into account the students’ time
constraints, teachers’ schedules, intrinsic and extrinsic rewards, as well as an appropriate way to integrate theEnglish language component. Perhaps foremost, the SL program would need to offer students an opportunity todevelop their English communicative skills, which might increase the students’ motivation and participation.
However, finding SL opportunities in Japan which met this language criteria proved to be a challenge.
This conceptualization process led me to reflect on my prior participation in a successful peer- tutoring SL
program at DePaul University’s English Language Academy (ELA) in Chicago, IL. The ELA is an intensive
English program (IEP) which provides academic English courses for international students hoping to improve
TOEFL and TOEIC scores and to enter undergraduate and graduate-level degree programs. In the fall of 2007,
recognizing the potential value of both SL and peer tutoring, a small group of teachers initiated a Peer Tutoring
Lab as an SL project. I participated with the initial implementation of the program, which was conceptualized
and organized by Kathy Larson, the Associate Director for Curriculum at the ELA. Larson’s SL program strives
to address the aforementioned challenges of time and resource allocation, mobilization, and relevance. In
addition, it effectively meets the communicative language criteria. This paper will briefly outline the program’s
design, objectives, continuing success, and implications for use in Japanese universities.

Service Learning Case Study: The Peer Tutoring Lab
Several needs prompted the creation of this peer-tutoring program. The first was to address the students’ needs
in a fast-paced, rigorous IEP. A number of beginning/novice ELLs were not successfully progressing throughthe curriculum in one term, and many were repeating multiple courses. Teachers had limited ability to addressthese students’ needs through additional contact hours and conferencing. While these beginner ELLs struggled
to master course content, many advanced-level students were making no apparent progress in their language
Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 20153

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
development after reaching a certain language proficiency or TOEFL score. The outcome for some was a senseof being stuck at a given language level with no hope of appreciable development or growth. In addition toaddressing the needs of students and teachers, the peer-tutoring program aimed to integrate a meaningful SL
project into the curriculum of a rigorous IEP in a university which promotes service and community
involvement as one of its core values.
Larson’s concept for the Peer Tutoring Lab addresses ELLs’ needs by matching advanced students with
beginning students in a twice-weekly peer tutoring program. Students at all levels are able to practice andreinforce their language skills while participating in a voluntary service learning program. Training sessions areprovided for advanced students (tutors) prior to the sessions, which take place outside of regularly scheduledclass time during students’ personal study periods. Once the schedule is established, tutors volunteer once aweek on a rotational basis. Beginning students (tutees) are encouraged to attend tutoring sessions as often as
they like. Teachers from the ELA supervise the tutoring sessions on a rotational basis.
Tutoring sessions aim to create a relaxed but studious atmosphere where students can chat, become acquainted,
and study at their own pace. To promote the relaxed atmosphere, snacks and drinks are provided and tutees areallowed to choose their focus for the sessions. In some cases, this would be grammar, reading, writing, or justEnglish conversation.
One benefit of participation for tutees is that they receive additional language support from a near-peer tutor. A
secondary aim of this tutor–tutee relationship is to encourage and empower tutees who are learning fromsomeone who has experience as an ELL. By learning from their peers, students potentially become more
confident and optimistic regarding their language development. Finally, by attending tutoring sessions andhaving some meta-awareness of their own needs, tutees become more autonomous. Goals for the tutors areslightly more complex. The SL component is reinforced through selected readings about service learning aswell as weekly reflections. Reflection is an important element of effective SL programs, and tutors are
periodically asked to reflect on their tutoring experience through in-class writing assignments and discussions
Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 20154

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
as a part of their University Bridge research writing course. Additionally, by applying their knowledge ofgrammar and usage in a direct way, tutors are effectively reinforcing their own language ability and knowledge.
Finally, tutors can assume more responsibility and accountability by helping others, while also increasing theircommunication and social skills (Falchikov, 2001).
In general, the objectives of the Peer Tutoring Lab are mutually beneficial for the tutees and tutors. It has beensuggested that studying with peers can be more productive than studying alone (Falchikov, 2001), and thatstudents tend to retain more information in collaborative learning sessions while developing critical thinking
skills and motivation (Prince, 2004). In addition to these intrinsic benefits, there are a number of incentives inplace for participants of this program. Both tutors and tutees receive participation grades for attending tutoring
sessions. Tutors publish reflective essays in a class publication at the end of the term and receive certificates ofcompletion. Both tutors and tutees participate in an end-of-term party and award ceremony to celebrate theiraccomplishments and give some closure to the term.

The Peer Tutoring Lab Today
Now in its 7th year, the Peer Tutoring Lab at DePaul University continues to run successfully today, though myassociation with the program ended in 2009. Larson reports that the program is now somewhat self-sustaining,with “former tutors who help with the beginning of term tutor training... (and) talk about the benefits to theirown learning. Tutors also write reflections on their service learning and we ask them to share highlights of theirexperience” (K. Larson, personal communication, November 13, 2013). Of course, the program faces somechallenges. Initial investment in the program is critical, requiring buy-in from both tutors and tutees. Often,
Larson reports, the program is a hard-sell for beginning students, for whom interpersonal dynamics (i.e., being
matched with a tutor whom they can relate to) and motivation toward learning English can be determining
factors in their participation and success. Additionally, while tutors’ investment and participation in the programis essential, Larson points out that “Occasionally we do have tutors who resent the requirement, who are only
focused on getting through the program and into a university.” However, most tutors, according to Larson, areSpecial Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 20155

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
motivated, “holding themselves to more precise standards of what they know, but may not be able to explain/clarify for another, and to realize they DO know a lot already” (K. Larson, personal communication, November
13, 2013).
Despite these challenges, many participants in the program are able to acknowledge the benefits of theirinvolvement over the term, building meaningful relationships and developing cross- cultural understanding.

Implications for Japanese Universities
Within the context of higher education in Japan, would it be feasible to implement this type of SL program?
Certainly there are significant differences between the context in which this program was created and a typicalJapanese university. Most English classrooms in Japan, for example, lack the diverse, multi-lingual and crosscultural component which enriches the program at DePaul. Among administrators in Japan, there might be moreresistance to or lack of knowledge about service learning, as well as a lack of resources or facilities. Finally,
persuading students to spend more hours at school outside of their busy schedules and part-time jobs could
stymie the initial buy-in.
The perspective-broadening aspects of SL are needed in Japanese universities, and the potential for increasing
learner autonomy and motivation could be enormously beneficial to university students in Japan. Certainly
there is always a need for opportunities to communicate in English within authentic contexts.
While I was unable to successfully launch a peer-tutoring program described in this paper due to unrelated
constraints, I continue to actively consider its viability in a Japanese university. One possible approach would
be to pilot a tutoring program in a university with an established study abroad program. Study abroad returnees
are generally eager to maintain the language abilities they have acquired abroad. In this case, pairing returnees
with freshman students or novice English speakers could be mutually beneficial. In addition to language
support, it could provide mentoring and encouragement for beginning students, bolstering confidence in theircommunicative ability. In this way, study abroad returnees could become a valuable resource for universities
while also adding qualifications to resumes for their future job search.
Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 20156

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Programs such as the Peer Tutoring Lab at DePaul demonstrate that SL projects can be implemented
successfully with little cost and minimal resources. Initiating an SL project can be time- consuming, but the
program can become self-sustaining over time. In a diverse, context-rich environment, the SL experience canreinforce language skills and knowledge. On an interpersonal level, effective SL reinforces communication
skills and can position students to take a more active, autonomous role in their own language learning. More
importantly, the experience provides a meaningful, memorable accomplishment of service that can be carriedforward to enrich lives and careers in the future.

References
Bringle, R. G., & Clayton, P. H. (2012). Civic education through service learning: What, how, and why? In L.
Mcilrath, A. Lyons & R. Munck (Eds.), Higher education and civic engagement: Comparative perspectives (pp.
101-119). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bruffee, K. A. (1984). Collaborative learning and the "conversation of mankind". College English, 46, 635-652.
Falchikov, N. (2001). Learning together: Peer tutoring in higher education. New York, NY: Routledge Falmer.
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93,
223-231.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 20157

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

How	
  Can	  We	  Mo@vate	
  Students	  Through	
  Our	
  Non-­‐na@ve	
  Speaker	  Teacher	  Iden@@es?
Agnes Patko	
  Research has revealed the strengths and weaknesses of both native (NS) and non-native speaker(NNS) teachers and proved that native language is not the primary factor that determines ateacher’s efficacy. Nevertheless, in Japan, there are still many people who believe that the only
reliable source to learn a foreign language from is a NS teacher. This paper gives an account of theidentity of NNS teachers and introduces how they can benefit from their previous learning
experiences when teaching and motivating their learners. The aim of this article is to encourage thediscussion on native and non-native teachers, as well as how to make classes effective andmotivating.
研究はネイティブスピーカーと非ネイティブスピーカー教師両方の長所と短所を明らかにしており、 母国語が教師の能力を決定づける主要な要因ではないということを証明しています。それにもかかわ らず日本では、ネイティブスピーカーの教師から外国語を学ぶことが唯一の信頼できる方法であると 信じる人が
たくさんいます。この論文は非ネイティブスピーカー教師のアイデンティティーについて 説明し、彼らのこれまでの学習経験が、生徒に教える時、モチベーション
を与える時に、どのように 役立っているかを紹介します。この論文の目的は、ネイ
ティブ教師と非ネイティブ教師に関するこ と、さらに効果的で、モチベーショ
ンの出る授業をどのように作るかを議論することを奨励すること です。

Introduction
Back in Europe, I never thought about my non-native speaker teacher identity. There, it was evident that people
from various countries teach English. I never faced criticism, not even outside Hungary, just because I was nota native speaker (NS). However, in Japan, many people are surprised when they discover that I am an English
teacher in spite of the fact that I am not a NS.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 20158

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
In Japan, there are three types of English teachers categorized by their native language: Japanese English
teachers, English native speaker teachers, and non-Japanese non-natives (NNS). Although, widely recognised
and employed outside their home countries in Europe, NNS teachers are still facing criticism and rejection in
Japan (Akiyoshi, 2010; Sutherland, 2012). EFL teaching positions are generally advertised as positions forJapanese English teachers and NSs, which leaves very little, or no space for the NNS EFL teachers, andpresupposes that they are ineffective. National curricula and textbooks approved by the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) also assume native speaker norms, which affects learners’
attitudes and objectives. On almost every train there are advertisements for language schools merchandizingthemselves by having only native speaker teachers and thus adding to the impression that English can only bemastered from NSs. All these factors contribute to the Japanese general public’s preference for native speakers.
Living in Japan makes me think about who I am as a NNS EFL teacher and how I can use this initiallyperceived disadvantage to my advantage in motivating my students. In this paper I draw together some of theways in which I am trying to realize the benefits of being a NNS teacher. With this account I would like toencourage fellow NNS teachers to think about and make use of their potential, and, at the same time, I would
like to broaden the discussion regarding the perceived benefits of NNS and NS teachers.

Native and non-native speaker teachers
Research regarding NNS teachers started in the EFL context in the early 1990s. Since then NNS teachers’ selfperceptions, issues of their credibility, and students and administrators’ perceptions have been examined outside
the EFL context as well. The greatest field of research is ELT, due to the vast number of English language
learners and respective NNS teachers trained all around the world; however, it is not exclusive to it.
NSs are credited most for their communicative abilities, pronunciation, fluency and vocabulary, since these are
the areas of language competence and knowledge that NNSs find most challenging to master. However,difficult as it may be, it is possible to gain native-like competence. Educated NNSs may emulate the language
competence of many native speakers. Moreover, even NSs make ungrammatical utterances, might not know
Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 20159

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
how to pronounce unfamiliar words, or need time to think how to express themselves appropriately (Mulder &Hulstijn 2011).
Superior knowledge of language structures, grammar and the ability to teach learning strategies are attributed to
NNS teachers due to their own experiences of studying the target language. As one’s mother language isacquired unconsciously as a child; native speakers need to be trained to be able to understand the system andthe structure of their own language. Without such knowledge they might encounter difficulties when they are
expected to explain grammatical rules explicitly. However, those NSs who have a solid knowledge of language
structures, particularly those who have studied a foreign language themselves may just as well be aware andcapable of teaching language structures and learning strategies as NNSs teachers.
Training is crucial for both natives and non-natives. As early as 1992, Phillipson stated that the fact of being anative speaker of a language does not make one capable of teaching it and also that being a capable teacher
does not always mean the person is a native speaker. However, Braine (1999) found that course administrators
in Japan and Hong Kong still preferred unqualified native speakers to qualified non-natives.
Akiyoshi (2010) investigated whether parents had the same attitude as course administrators in order to learn
whether the preference for NS teachers in hiring practices is triggered by parents’ expectations. She discoveredthat parents of preschool aged children considered the teacher’s education and experience more important thanbeing a native. In other words, participants in her survey would rather have a trained NNS than a less-educated
NS. This may indicate the parents’ expectations will remain the same considering their children’s foreign
language education up to tertiary level, which does not justify course administrators’ hiring policies.
Students’ preferences have also been examined in various countries. At the beginning of a university EFL
course in the USA, Asian learners expressed more positive feelings towards NS than NNS instructors (Moussu
2002, cited by Braine 2005). However, their attitudes gradually changed and became more positive to NNS
teachers as well by the end of the course due to positive learning experiences in a NNS teacher’s classes. In

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201510

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
terms of non-ELT, specifically in a Spanish language teaching context, the same pattern of preferences was
identified by Meadows & Muramatsu (2007). They also discovered a link between the learner’s goal of
attaining NS fluency and a preference for a NS teacher.
It has been suggested (Medgyes 1992, Árva & Medgyes 2000, Meadows & Muramatsu 2007, Sampson 2012)that both NS and NNS teachers have their advantages and disadvantages, strengths and weaknesses and thatthey complement each other; therefore neither can be regarded as superior or inferior to the other. Language
proficiency alone is not enough to predict or prove a teacher’s effectiveness. Other factors, such as experience,education, empathy, training, and charisma are also important.
Individual differences between people have a far greater impact on their effectiveness as teachers than theirstatus as NNS or NS. Teachers are professionals, consequently, irrespective of being a native or not, they strive
to do their best to motivate their learners and create an environment where each learner can achieve theirlanguage related goals. There will always be teachers who are more effective or popular than others, yet it ishardly ever a result of their native language.

Motivation
Motivation is a key element in language learning. When foreign language education is made compulsory, there
tend to be a great number of uninterested learners. The mere presence of a NS teacher might be motivating formany learners (see Moussu, 2002; Madrid & Canado, 2004; Akiyoshi 2010), especially in Japan where people
like the ‘original’, the ‘perfect thing’ (e.g. respondents of Sutherland’s survey (2012) draw a parallel between
Japanese people’s desire to possess expensive designer products and their wish to obtain the accent of NSs.)
However, the initial eagerness to study may easily disappear if the lessons are boring, or the teacher is unable toraise students’ interest in English. Therefore, it is essential that teachers, whether native or not, create a
motivating environment, attend to learners’ needs and help to establish and meet students’ language related
objectives.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201511

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
There have been several conceptualisations of L2 learning motivation over the years. In the following section, I
refer to Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational Self System theory (2005, 2009), which has three components: the Ideal L2
Self, the Ought-to Self and the L2 Learning Experience. The Ideal L2 Self comprises of the aspirations one has
towards the L2. It needs to be attainable, possible and realistic within one’s particular circumstances (Dörnyei,2009). A strong Ideal L2 self aids goal setting and motivates one to persist in the activity. Role-models have a
crucial role in this. Dörnyei explains that one source of lack of L2 motivation might be the result of the absenceof a role-model on which one’s Ideal L2 Self can be based. Therefore, it is essential to help students create theirvision through awareness raising activities and presenting powerful role models.
Second, the Ought-to Self ‘concerns the attributes one believes one ought to possess to meet expectations andto avoid possible negative outcomes’ (Dörnyei, 2009, p. 29). Finally, the L2 learning experience is related to
one’s own learning experiences and the learning environment. Dörnyei claims that initial language learning
motivation might not necessarily come from one’s self image, but that the successful engagement with thelearning process has a significant role also.

Using my NNS teacher identity to good effect

Relying on my language learning experiences
When I start teaching a new group of learners, I never hide that I am a NNS. Instead, I am trying to emphasisethat we are working collaboratively. We must accept that we will never cease to be learners of English. I do not
expect them to do anything that I have not done myself.
As a NNS, each aspect of the English language is connected to the memory of trying to learn it. As such, I am
constantly aware of possible difficulties that might not be apparent to a NS teacher. When planning a lesson,
NNSs can refer to their own encounter with the particular piece of language they are about to cover in class,and try to recall what they or their classmates found complicated.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201512

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Moreover, I also consider how that piece of language is used or in what situation it occurs in Japan (e.g.,
Japanese students usually find it difficult to comprehend the difference between adjectives such as embarrassed– embarrassing as there is no equivalent distinction in Japanese). Anticipating problems in this manner enables
me to present new language and activities in the easiest way for learners to grasp. To have students practice anduse the new language, NNS teachers can apply activities and games which they did as students. Furthermore,
we can introduce students to learning strategies we have discovered ourselves (e.g., how to differentiate
adjectives ending in -ed or –ing; how to remember the spelling of particular words; word order, and how tobenefit from our own and our peers’ mistakes).

Overcoming negative self-evaluation and language anxiety
When I see students struggling, I often tell them how I struggled with English and reveal what helped me
overcome it. For example, at beginner level, I was often stuck in the middle of a sentence because I did notknow how to continue. Therefore, I always had the feeling that I could not say anything in English. I have seen
my students in the same situation many times. In most cases the problem is either that they are trying totranslate something word for word from Japanese but they do not have the vocabulary or that they would like toconvey something that is more complicated than they are able to express in English. As a result, many of them
form a negative opinion about their own competence and level, which makes them lose confidence andmotivation. That is, they have unrealistic objectives and their Ought-to Self is too dominant.
I overcame this difficulty by changing my way of thinking in my native language. Especially at the early stagesof learning a foreign language, it is inevitable to strive to translate one’s thoughts. In our native language we
can fully express ourselves without much effort. By contrast, in the target language it takes considerable time tobecome able to do so. Therefore, if we stop being desperate about expressing all of our elaborate thoughts, wewill not be devastated by not being able to communicate them in the target language. With this technique, I
managed to protect my self-esteem and evaluate my progress positively, which were essential to me inmaintaining the balance between my current level at that time and my Ought-to and Ideal selves. I encourage

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201513

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
my students to try out such strategies as well as think about other ways in which they could cope with their own
difficulties.
Anxiety is present in every classroom to some extent and increased anxiety might decrease motivation(Dörnyei, 2001). A supportive learning environment and peers have always helped me to overcome anxiety andregain motivation when it was fading away. Therefore, as a teacher I put great effort into creating a cohesive
learner group and give time for students to get to know each other. I have found, as Dörnyei (2001, 2007)
suggests, this time to be extremely beneficial for a more conducive class dynamic. Although there areindividual and cultural differences between students in Japan and Hungary, particular activities, tasks or topics
can also increase or decrease students’ anxiety and motivation. My own learning experiences regularly help me
judge what activities will bring about a more positive effect.

Role-models aid goal-setting
Dörnyei (2005, 2009) argues that role-models have a crucial role in creating one’s Ideal L2 Self as it helps toattain one’s objectives. However, if one does not select the right role-models, it may also correspond to posing
oneself unrealistic goals. NNS teachers like myself, Japanese English teachers, senior students or L2 learners
from other countries can be ideal role-models of successful language learners. As NSs acquired the language
naturally through their ears from their direct environment as a child, they cannot serve as model English
language learners (Medgyes, 1994); instead, they can be English language models. If such distinctions are madeclear to students, they can be prevented from setting unobtainable Ideal L2 selves for themselves.
My role model as an English language learner is my high school teacher. I decided to become a teacher because
I wanted to be like her. Her vast knowledge of English and compassion for her students’ difficulties absolutely
impressed me. Now, as a teacher, I attempt to serve as a role model for my learners and motivate them to findtheir own, attainable objectives and approach them step by step as I did.
I introduce my own culture in class and emphasise how English has been a means of self- actualisation for me.
That is, if it had not been for English, I would not have had the possibility of making friends with foreigners
Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201514

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
visiting Hungary and I would not live and work in Japan now. In fact, to me, besides hoping to become ateacher, the major motivation to improve my English was to be able to keep in touch with my foreign friends –none of whom were native English speakers, yet the only way we could communicate was through English. I
attempt to call students’ attention to chances to use English in Japan, not only with native speakers.
Setting goals and building an Ideal L2 Self are key aspects to keep up one’s motivation. In class, I stress theimportance of goal setting and checking of the goals which have been achieved. It helps learners realise how
they are gradually getting closer to their ideal selves. Even if learners do not have a clear future goal, there areseveral opportunities to set goals in class, such as before activities (e.g., try to make a 2-minute conversation
without using Japanese), projects, or at the beginning of a new unit and so on. I often give examples of whatgoals I had when I was at their stage (e.g., not to make any mistakes in a vocabulary test, being able to speak
for one minute without stopping, trying to circumvent problems instead of stopping when not knowing specificwords). What is crucial is to check the achievement of these goals. Feedback from the teacher and peers, selfreflection, positive evaluation of the task and the learning process and feelings of achievement will gradually
increase learners’ motivation. In addition, I let students know my current objectives and disclose that even theteacher has space to improve her language abilities. Through this we develop mutual compassion towards eachother.

Speakers of English
I draw attention to world Englishes and to English as a Lingua Franca. As a NNS, I can effectively highlightand serve as proof that English is not only spoken by native speakers. Meisei University actively promotes
world Englishes: besides NSs, the International Studies Centre employs NNS EFL teachers from various
countries too. Students have the opportunity to encounter several accents of native, as well as non-native
English. In such an internationally diverse environment, students realise that there is not only one accent, andthey can become more confident in their pronunciation and more willing to engage in communication in
English. Furthermore, they can experience that English can bring people of various countries and cultures

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201515

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
together. Therefore, this learning environment can help to provide learners with further role-models who may
help them develop their views of their Ideal L2 Self. They also realize more easily that their Ideal L2 Self does
not need to be one which emulates only a native speaker’s language abilities.

Summary
Some people in Japan might think that NS teachers are the only reliable sources to learn a foreign language
from, but there is plenty of evidence that NNS teachers can be just as effective as NSs and can exploit their own
language learning experiences for the benefit of their students. Although motivation depends on various factors,
teachers – regardless of being a NS or not – are able to create an environment in the classroom where students
can more easily find and maintain motivation and set achievable L2 related objectives. Teachers need to assist
learners in goal setting and encourage self-evaluation. When creating one’s Ideal L2 Self, role models have agreat influence on what learners project or dream themselves to be. NNS role models might be as powerful if
not more powerful than natives. Furthermore, NNS teachers can attempt to make use of their prior English
learning experiences. We can use our own learning process as an example and introduce how we managed toovercome anxiety, how we set goals and take responsibility in our own learning. In addition, raising students’awareness of world Englishes helps them accept their own accent and makes them more confident inthemselves.
The aim of this article was to raise awareness of some of the characteristics of NNS speaker teachers. It did notmean to criticize or question the importance of NS teachers in any way.

References
Akiyoshi, A. (2010). Questionning the rationale for native speakers only in hiring practice: from parents’perspective. Polyglossia. 19, 13-25.
Árva, V., Medgyes, P. (2000). Native and non-native teachers in the language classroom. System. 28, 355-372.
Braine, G. (1999). NNS and invisible barriers in ELT. TESOL Matters, 2 (2), 14.
Braine, G. (2005). A history of research on non-native speaker English teachers. In Llurda, E. (Ed.) (2005).
Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201516

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Non-native language teachers. Perceptions, challenges and contributions to the profession. (pp.13-23).
Springer US.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and researching motivation. London: Longman.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language
acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Creating a motivating classroom environment. In Cummins, J, Davidson, C, (Eds.) (2007).
International handbook of English language teaching. (pp.719-731). New York, NY: Springer Dörnyei,
Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In: Dörnyei, Z. & Ushioda, E. (Eds.), Motivation, language
identity and the L2 self. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 9-42.
Madrid, D., & Canado, L. (2004). Teacher and student preferences of native and non- native foreign language
teachers. Porta Linguarum. 125-137.
Meadows, B., & Muramatsu, Y. (2007). Native speaker or non-native speaker teacher? A report of student
preferences in four different foreign language classrooms. Arizona Working Papers in SLA & Testing,14, 95- 109.
Medgyes, P. (1992). Native or non-native: Who’s worth more? ELT Journal, 46 (4), Oxford University Press
Medgyes, P. (1994). The non-native teacher. London: Macmillan.
Moussu, L. (2002). English as a second language students’ reaction to non-native English speaking teachers. In
Braine, G. (2005). A history of research on non-native speaker English teachers. In Llurda, E. (ed.)(2005). Non-native language teachers. Perceptions, challenges and contributions to the profession. (pp.
13-23). Springer US.
Mulder, K. & Hulstijn, J. (2011). Linguistic skills of adult native speakers, as a function of age and level of
education. Applied Linguistics. 32 (5), 475-494.
Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201517

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Sampson, A. (2012). A mare’s NEST?. English Teaching Professional. 81, 51-52.
Sutherland, S. (2012). Real English in Japan: Team teachers’ views on nativeness in language teaching Journalof English Studies, 10, 175-191.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201518

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

A	
  Case	  Study	  of	  a	  Social	
  Educa@on	  Class	  Debjani Ray
This paper is a case study of a social education class for senior citizens. It gives an account of thestudents and their relationship with their teacher and what motivated the teacher to do the study. It
tries to clarify what social education is and the relationship between that and adult learners. The
study was conducted using a questionnaire and follow-up interviews. The results of thequestionnaire and the interviews were analyzed and revealed many more and different outcomesthan expected. The results show that the learners mostly approved the content of the class, which
was the main concern of the teacher. They show that the learners were mainly interested in keeping
themselves occupied rather than in learning the language. The results also underline the necessityof using special social and communication skills to connect with older learners.
この論文は、シニア市民の社会教育クラスに関するケーススタディである。生徒について、生徒と教 師の関係について、そしてこのような研究を行ったきっかけについて述べている。社会教育とは何で あるか、社会教育と社会人学生の関係はどのような
ものであるかを明らかにしようとしている。研究 は、アンケートとインタビューによって行われた。結果の分析では、予想外の回答が多く得られた。 生徒のほとんどが、授業の内容を好んでいたことが分かった。また言語を学ぶことよりも、自身を忙 しくしておくことに興味があったことを示していた。さらに、高齢な生徒とは特別なコミュニケー ション、接し方が必要であることも明らかにされた。

Introduction
The present study discusses the achievements and challenges of a social education class. Social education
classes present particular challenges for teachers because of the important role the experience and knowledge ofadult learners plays (Dewey,1938). Influenced by their past education and expertise, the adult learners bring avast experience to the class that needs to be considered while planning lessons for them (Knowles, 1980).
Knowles (1980, p.4) also notes that adult learners exhibit a higher degree of “internal motivation”.
This is a case study about the perception of their class by a group of retired professionals that I have beenteaching for over a decade at a community center in Saitama, Japan. This was quite a long time to teach a class,Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201519

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
with some old learners leaving and some new learners joining in. My teaching style was mostly the same
throughout this period, except for one time, around the third year, when I tried to incorporate some basic
grammar exercises into the teaching material, thinking it would be helpful to improve and raise their general
English level. It did not meet with much enthusiasm from the learners and after four times of trying hard, I
realized that they were not happy to do anything with grammar, even if it was only some easy grammar
worksheets to practice grammar in use, not any way teaching grammatical rules explicitly.
I decided to conduct this study in my eighth year teaching these students as I was curious over the way thelearners of this particular group might perceive their English class. I wanted to know their perception of theclass so that I could make any amendments that might be necessary to improve the class as the teaching style
was the same all along. Over this extended period I came to see that they were not really interested in
improving their English at all. Thus, my other intention was to throw some light on the underlying reasons fortheir joining and continuing the class. I tried to find out what they thought of the class and the class activities
and thought that this way the answers might lead to understand their motivation. I collected data through aquestionnaire to investigate about the group, and semi-structured interviews were conducted to more fully
understand the responses that were given.
Social Education
The term social education is a relatively new one and is easy to confuse with education for the society/social
uplifting. It encompasses everything within a broad spectrum of adult education. Adult education itself is not a
crystal-clear term and creates confusion. As McCullough (1980) puts it, it is difficult to determine if it is apractice or a program, a methodology or an organization, a ‘science’ or a system, a process or a profession andalso if it differs from the other forms of education, e.g., continuing education, vocational education and higher
education. He even goes as far as saying that adult education might be “everywhere and yet nowhere inparticular”. (McCullough 1980 quoted in Jarvis 1987, p. 3).

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201520

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Courtney (1989, p. 17-23) gives five basic perspectives on adult education, which overlap in some areas. The
perspectives are: 1. the activities of certain institutions and organizations, 2. a special kind of relationship, as
Brookfield (1986) explains, between the external conditions and the internal change in adults that is learning, 3.
a profession or scientific discipline, 4. it stems from spontaneous social movements with historical significance,such as the women’s movement and anti- colonial movements (Lovett 1988), 5. its goals and functions are
distinctly different than the other kinds of education. According to Darkenwald and Merriam (1982), threeelements exist in adult education: working with adults, learning for adulthood, and adults working to help
others (who might not be adults). The definition of adult education by Merriam and Brockett (2007, p. 8) iswell- rounded: it is “activities intentionally designed for the purpose of bringing about learning among those
whose age, social roles, or self-perception define them as adults.” Adult education is concerned not withpreparing people for life, but rather with helping people to live more successfully. Thus if there is to be an
overarching function of adult education, it is to assist adults to increase competence, or negotiate transitions. It
also supports people in their social roles (worker, parent, retiree etc.), to help them gain greater fulfillment intheir personal lives, and to assist them in solving personal and community problems. (Darkenwald andMerriam, 1982, p. 9)
In a nutshell, any kind of adult education, non-formal education, out-of-school education, or community-based
educational activities fit into the frame of social education. It is also called lifelong education and in the UK
and in Ireland, further education. Social education basically differs from formal education in that it does notcontain the educational activities of the school curriculum and it does not focus on competitiveness andemployability. Although, in some cases adult education is considered as a component of lifelong learning(European Commission, 2006), here both are treated as the same. The notion of lifelong learning that came into
prominence in the late 1960s has been emphasized in Japan in recent years. According to the Fundamental Law
of Education in Japan, the principle of lifelong learning is that, individual citizens can learn anywhere andanytime throughout their entire lives to have better personalities and to enjoy rich lives (MEXT, Japan, 2011).

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201521

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Moreover, it is a way of “community development and networking with participation and initiatives of local
people” (UNESCO).

Adult Learners
Different societies and cultures might have contrasting understandings of what it is to be an adult. The term
‘adult’ can be set against ‘child’. In between adult and child or overlapping between them, there may be an ideaof ‘youth’. At base adults are older than children. Therefore, a set of expectations automatically get attached toit. They are not necessarily mature, but ‘they are supposed to be mature, and it is on this necessary supposition
that their adulthood justifiably rests’ (Paterson, 1979, p. 13). Other scholars state that “psychological maturity
and social role” define an adult (Merriam & Brockett, 2007, p. 7). As Lindeman (1926, p. 4) puts it: “This new
venture is called adult education not because it is confined to adults but because adulthood, maturity, defines its
limits.”Andragogy, a well-known theoretical approach to adult learning by Knowles (1984), gives a five-point
framework regarding the characteristics of adult learners. One of them assumes that the adults bring vast
experience to the learning context that is a resource for learning/education.

Background
The learners in the English class which is the focus of this study join the class as a form of recreation in theirretired lives, as social education helps them in improving their lives with a range of useful activities to engage
in. The number of people in the class varies usually between 5 and 12 as some people leave and some otherpeople join. Members leave the class either because of fragile health and health-related problems or the death ofa spouse. Only one of the class members has attended throughout the ten years I have taught the class. The restof the members have been switched and at present they are seven in total. Almost all of them are retired
professionals and are of the same age group. Initially the title of the class, chosen by the members, was Silver
English Conversation. I was asked by a city hall employee to carry on with this class after their former teacher
had left Japan twelve years ago. Three years ago, in an effort to attract new and younger members, they decided
Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201522

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
to change the title of the class. The members put their heads together and after a long and heated discussion thetitle was changed to Friendship English Lounge. Unfortunately, it did not fulfil its purpose of attracting young/younger members but it did bring some young visitors to the class and finally two not-so-young members.
The class meets twice a month, the first and third Friday afternoon for an hour and a half. Depending on themembers’ schedule, the day and the time might change sometime. In class we generally engage in simple
conversation on a variety of topics, sometimes chosen by the teacher, sometimes by the students. Usually they
start with telling each other about what they did in the past week or weekend. The students never have ashortage of news as they really enjoy doing things. They do things individually or with their families and at thesame time they often go out with their classmates. In their outside activities with the classmates, going to themovies, eating out, having tea/coffee are common, next comes going to a garden or a park and going to aconcert or a play. Once in a while they might take trips as a group, although everybody might not join every
time. They might go to another place in Japan, like, Kyoto or Hokkaido, or a nearby country, like, Taiwan or
Singapore. When they have little to report, they talk about recent news or TV programs.
After they finish talking about their activities or the news, which usually takes about 30 minutes to half of theclass time, they usually do an activity that I have brought in. It might be a simple worksheet to read and write alittle or it might contain a little reading and then discussion. They are all college graduates and their level might
be the same as the present college students. Occasionally, someone starts saying something totally different andthe other joins in and they might get carried away. They basically keep talking in English, except for a few
Japanese words thrown in here and there.

The Study
The Questionnaire
The people who took part in this study were seven retired professional women over the age of sixty- five who
were taking the class with me at that time. I used a questionnaire consisting of seven questions. The questions
focused on what they thought of the contents of the class activities and how to make the class better for them toSpecial Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201523

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
enjoy the experience. They were asked to fill out the questionnaires distributed to them while they were in theclass and return it to me upon completion.

The Interviews
The other method used was semi-structured interviews, a qualitative method of inquiry, with pre- determined,
open-ended questions, conducted a few times over the course of six months. All of the people in the class wereinterviewed. I asked for their permission to let me interview them and they co-operated without a question. I
conducted the interviews in total three times after the class in a cafeteria. The purpose of the interview was toclarify the answers of the questionnaire and to get more information.
The data I collected consisted of the answers to the questionnaire and the notes that I took in the interviews. I
tried to gain consent for recording the interview but they said that they ‘did not like their own recorded voices’.
This way it was a lengthy process and the data organization, analysis and managing was difficult and time
consuming. The data was of a ‘nonnumerical kind’ expressed in words/non-numbers. This kind of data is very
useful in helping “to pin down the facts about people” (De Munck and Sobo, 1998, p. 16).
According to Bernard (1994), ‘Hanging out’ is the process through which a researcher can gain trust and is able
to establish a relationship with the participants over time. Hanging out is also proposed by DeMunck and Sobo
(1998) by which people might “get to know you outside your 'professional' role” (p. 41). I hung out with thegroup at the cafes close to the venue of the class over an extended period of time and did the semi-structured
interviews there. I was fully aware that they might not say anything unpleasant to my face, so I tried to makecareful questions and hide any strong attachments I had to them. I analyzed the data of their written and verbal
responses.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201524

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

The Findings
First I present the results of the questionnaire, then I discuss the information gleaned from the interviews. I
have chosen to present only the answers that were most revealing and most useful to me in understanding how
the students viewed this class.

The Questionnaire
The first question asked in what way they studied outside the class, if they did at all. The replies were all
positive, and the prominent ones were by watching English language TV programs (mainly news, almost everyday) and sometimes movies in English with/without subtitles, by listening to the English language radio
programs/music, from Japan and/or abroad, by reading easy books/graded readers written/translated in English,
singing English songs, and talking with foreigners.
In answer to the sixth question, which asked if they liked anything particular about the class, they said that they
liked the opportunity to use their English and the environment that was made of wonderful classmates and thecheerful and energetic young teacher. I was very flattered by this last comment. Some liked discussions onmusic, art, movies and culture in different countries and Japan. Most of them were not sure about acquiring
English or developing their English competency but they were happy keeping in touch with English through theclass. Some said they came to know a lot about other countries and cultures and even about Japan through some
activities and discussions in the class.
The last question asked what should be changed to improve the lessons. Some were neutral or had no opinion.
Overall, most of them felt nothing needed to be changed and a few felt that one area might be changed, but theresults differed as to which area should be changed.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201525

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

The Interviews
One of my queries, apart from the questionnaire, was why they were taking English lessons. The answer varied
but the main points were, for communicating with foreigners in Japan, for talking with local people while
traveling abroad and especially for ‘bokeboushi’ (guarding against senility).
I mainly tried to emphasize the same questions as in the questionnaire to clarify the answers I received. I got
mostly the same replies. The added information I got was that they were happy to attend the class because they
could make long-term friends through the class. Several people said that they did some talking in English with
their Japanese classmates before and/or after the class as well as during the class which could not have beenpossible if they were not classmates on friendly terms. They said that it helped them to keep up their English
because except for that they had very little chance of speaking in English in Japan.
About changes to improve the lessons, one asked for clarifications on grammar and another wanted to havetheir pronunciation ‘corrected’. What most of them did not like was doing the tongue-twisters as their ‘tongues
did not move’. The reason two of them gave was while practicing them they were awfully worried that theirfalse teeth might fall out.

Discussion
The purpose of this study was to determine the learners’ opinions about the class. The results show the learners
were motivated and practiced English outside the class (once a month or more) and were supportive of thecontent of the class. Most felt there was no need to change the materials used or the way of using them. They
thought the skills they were developing were speaking and some listening. Most of them thought getting thechance of ‘keeping in touch’ with English was very useful for them. They did not dislike much of the practicesof the class except for doing tongue-twisters for some special reason. All of them liked the environment of theclass that supported their language practices (see Table 1).
The findings of the interviews reinforced the results of the questionnaire survey. I tried to identify and interpretthe common and recurrent themes and analyze prominent patterns in the themes. The reasons why they wereSpecial Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201526

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
studying English became clear. Many of them described it as useful for communicating with foreigners, inJapan and abroad. Moreover, all strongly felt it was an effective way of giving some exercise to the brain to
keep it active, so it was helpful to their actual life.
Table 1.
Response Analysis
Learners practice English outside the class
Learners like the materials used in the class
GeneralLearners like the environment of the class
Learners develop speaking & listening skills through the class
Learners think that English is useful for communication with foreigners in and out of Japan
Specific
Learners think that learning English is specifically important for them for keeping their brains active

This study tried to find out the perception of the learners of their class regarding its activities and materials,
which directly connects to the teacher. It is difficult to feel confident to be the teacher of a group where
everyone has a good level of education along with immense life experience. I discovered some things that I was
not expecting and I feel that I have obtained a greater insight into these learners' motivations for attending theclass as well as some insight into how I as a teacher need to adapt to their learning styles.
Bohonos (2013) says that understanding the life experiences of adult learners is particularly important. I learned
many things from the group, especially, regarding social skills and communication strategies to be used while
dealing with older people. For example, when I suggested that we talk about our weekends, they reminded mepolitely that, they did not have any weekends anymore. As retired people they could not differentiate between
their weekdays and weekends. On another occasion, when they were talking about having special discounts forthe movies, I bluntly commented on that as a great opportunity. They grimly told me that they would rather
have their youth than having discounted movie tickets. Having discounted tickets was not a happy thing forthem as that comes with aging. Again I was reminded to be careful when talking with the elderly.
From this study it is hard to tell if the class and the materials used have any major impact on the learners’
English communication skills, but it might have became clear that more than their linguistic performance thisSpecial Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201527

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
group of learners put emphasis on spending quality time in a nice environment and in good company, and thatthey are more concerned about keeping their minds lively and are eager to remain active members of thecommunity. I hope that the story of my journey to this greater appreciation of the needs of a social education
class might be of some potential interest to other teachers.

References
Bohonos, J. (2013). Appreciating the experiences and expertise of adult students. Journal of College
Orientation and Transition 20, 133.
Brookfield, S. D. (1986). Understanding and facilitating adult learning. A comprehensive analysis of principles
and effective practices. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Courtney, S. (1989), Defining adult and continuing education, in S. B. Merriam and P. M. Cunningham (eds.)
Handbook of adult and continuing education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Darkenwald, G. G. and Merriam, S. B. (1982). Adult education. Foundations of practice. New York: Harperand Row.
DeMunck,V. C. & Sobo, E. J.(Eds) (1998). Using methods in the field: A practical introduction and casebook.
Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Jarvis, P. (1987). Adult learning in the social context. Beckenham: Croom Helm.
European Union Law. Communication from the commission-Adult learning: It is never too late to learn.
Retrieved from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/%20ALL/?uri=CELEX:52006DC0614
Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy. N.Y.:
Cambridge Books
Knowles, M. (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lindeman, E. C. (1926). The meaning of adult education. Norman: University of Oklahoma.
Lovett, T. (Ed.) (1988). Radical approaches to adult education: a reader. Beckenham: Croom Helm.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201528

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
McCullough, K. O. (1980). ‘Analyzing the evolving structure of adult education’ in J. Peters (Ed.) Building aneffective adult education enterprise. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B. & Brockett, R. G. (2007). The profession and practice of adult education: An introduction.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), Japan, Trends and Developmentin Education, Science and Technology Policies Summary. Retrieved fromhttp://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/html/hpab201101/detail/1330512.htm
Paterson, R. W. K. (1979). Values, education and the adult. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
UNESCO. Komonkan-CLC International Conference: Community Based Human Development for Sustainable
Society. Retrieved from http://en.unesco.org/events/kominkan-clc-international-conferencecommunity-based-human-development-sustainable-society

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201529

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

Appendix
Questionnaire
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Do you study English outside the class? If yes, what and how do you do?
Does this class help you to acquire English or any kind of knowledge?
Do you think the class materials are appropriate for you?
Does this class help you to develop the skills you want to develop?
Was there anything ever that made you feel uneasy during the class?
Is there anything you particularly like about the class? If yes, what is it?
Is there anything you think needs to be changed to improve this lesson?

Questionnaire Response Analysis

English classes among the 158 Language Classes
held at Saitama City Kominkan

1. Ways English is Studied Outside the Class

English Classes for kids among the 91 English Classes
mentioned above
Courtesy: shogaigakushu center, Saitama City, Saitama

2. If and How the Class Helped in Learning
EnglishSpecial Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201530

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

3. If the Class Material were Appropriate

4. If the Class Helped in Developing any Skills

5 If the Class caused any Uncomfortable
Moments

6. If and What they Liked about the Class

7. If and What to Change to Make the Lesson
BetterSpecial Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201531

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

Wri@ng	  Center	
  Challenges:	
  A	
  Case	  Study	  Maho Sano and Ritsuko Rita
Acquiring English academic writing skills is challenging for many learners. A self-access writing
center was established at a private university in Tokyo and offers one-on-one sessions wherelearners can consult more proficient tutors, discuss their writing issues and gain advice. The
Writing Center has helped many learners improve their writing skills such as coherence andcohesion as well as linguistic issues, functioning as a valuable place where students can learn how
to improve their writing skills outside class. However, some operational issues have arisen. Afteroutlining some logistical challenges, this paper introduces some measures that the Writing Centerhas taken in order to ensure that quality sessions are provided to learners.
学術的なライティングスキル習得は多くの学習者にとって努力を要するものである。
京の私 立大学にある東京の私立大学にあるライティングセンターでは、高い語学力を持つ学生 チューター高い英語力をもつ学生チューターに相談し、ライティングの問
題点を話しあいア ドバイスを得ることのできる1対1のセッションを提供している。このライティングセンター は言語的な課題にとどまらず、文の整合性等、学術文章スキルの向上において多くの学習者 の手助けをし、授業外において学習者イティ
ングスキルを磨く価値的な場として機能してき た。しかしながら、センターの運営においてはいくつかの問題も生じている。本稿では、運 営面での問題点の概要に触れ、当センターがセッションの質の確保のために実施してきた対 策を紹介する。

Introduction
Acquiring the skills of English academic writing is a challenging task for many learners. In order to overcome
some of their difficulties, university students can consult more experienced tutors in a dedicated writing center(Cassidy, Gillespie, Glasgow, Kobayashi and Roloff-Rothman, 2011). In recent years, writing centers havebecome places where writing issues are discussed and advice is provided, in contrast to traditional ones that
focused on error correction (McKinley, 2010). This paper will discuss some of the common challenges
experienced at a self-access writing center at a private university in Tokyo. In the Writing Center, there is afocus (heavy emphasis) on cohesion and coherence as part of academic writing conventions in general because
these are both common areas which challenge university learners. The Writing Center was established to help

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201532

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
university EFL learners to write academically. However, there are several operational challenges that the
Writing Center needs to overcome in order to provide quality sessions for learners. After briefly introducing theuniversity’s Writing Center, this paper will outline several operational challenges that the Writing Center isfacing and what measures have been taken to address those logistical problems.

About the Writing Center
The Writing Center at our university was established in 1999 as a part of the university’s self-access programswith the purpose of helping learners improve their academic writing skills. Japanese EFL learners of elementary
to intermediate proficiency levels mainly visit the Writing Center. Learners often come to the sessions toimprove their paragraphs or essays that are assigned as homework in their English classes. Many of the learners
coming to the Writing Center have linguistic problems in their writing such as mistakes in certain aspects ofgrammar and the use of informal language in their academic writing. Although those linguistic challenges aredealt with in the Writing Center sessions, the Writing Center focuses more on the conventions of English
academic writing. For example, the correct usage, in writing, of cohesion and coherence is challenging formany Japanese EFL learners. The Writing Center is an internally funded self-access program holding sessions
from Monday to Friday, and each session runs for a duration of 30 minutes. The Writing Center tutors are paid
undergraduate students, graduate students, and international students who work two to three shifts a week. In
order to have a session, students make a reservation online. When students come to the Writing Center sessions,they bring their writing and get feedback on it. The language of instruction in the Writing Center sessions iseither Japanese or English depending on the tutors. Thus the Writing Center functions as a place where learners
can improve their academic writing skills outside class. However, in terms of the operation of the Writing
Center, there are several challenges that need to be overcome if the Writing Center is to better help learners be
more successful in their English academic writing.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201533

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

The Writing Center’s Operational Challenges
The first challenge is the recruitment of new Writing Center tutors. Currently, half of the tutors are Japanese
students and the other half are international students. Ideally, it would be better if the Writing Center could hire
Japanese tutors with high English proficiency and a background of formal academic writing instruction, orinternational students who have received formal instruction in academic writing and have a good command ofJapanese. In reality, however, sometimes the Writing Center has no choice other than to employ all applicants
when the number of positions available and the number of applicants are equal. In this situation, the Writing
Center cannot choose based on the experience and education of the applicants.
The most compelling issue at the Writing Center is the inconsistent quality of the sessions conducted bydifferent tutors. First, the sessions conducted by Japanese tutors and international tutors vary considerably. Oneof the primary problems is that learners often do not understand the feedback provided in English. Currently,
half of the staff are international students, including native English speakers and those who speak English as
their second or third language. Most international students are in the process of learning Japanese, and their
Japanese proficiency is not necessarily high. Therefore, many conduct sessions in English or mix English andJapanese. However, even if they mix languages, it is often difficult to provide explanations and comments in acomprehensible way because tutors need to be familiar with certain vocabulary or expressions used in
discussing writing and grammar. Some students have difficulty expressing where they need help because of
their low English proficiency.
Another cause of inconsistency between Japanese tutors and international tutors stems from whether or not they
have experience of writing in a second language themselves For those who have no experience of second
language writing, it is often difficult to understand the difficulties that students are facing. Indeed, the Writing
Center coordinator also is of the opinion that those tutors who have received English writing instruction seem tobe able to offer more effective feedback on learners’ writing.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201534

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
A second area of inconsistency is that some tutors only focus on grammar and vocabulary issues whereas some
focus on the organization and structure of learners’ writing. In the university academic English writing courses,
the focus of instruction is to help students understand the organization and structure of academic writing.
Therefore, tutors are expected to help students with these higher level issues. However, despite the Writing
Center mission to help learners to be autonomous, some tutors just check grammar and vocabulary during thesessions. This inconsistency between classroom instruction and Writing Center sessions affects the trust
between instructors and students. Indeed, the Writing Center has received some complaints regarding this issue
from both teachers and students. For example, there was a case where a student came back from a Writing
Center session with their grammar mistakes fixed but not the organizational or structural issues which shouldhave been the focus of the Writing Center session. Because many students bring their course assignments to the
Writing Center, this issue can affect students’ academic grades.
The third inconsistency is the difference in motivational level among tutors, a problem which the Writing
Center coordinator himself recognizes. Some tutors are very keen, motivated, and serious about the sessions.
However, some tutors seem to consider themselves as just ‘part-timers.’ Their level of dedication to the work is
not as high as expected. This results in inconsistent quality of feedback. Such motivational and attitudinaldifferences can influence the quality of the sessions.
Another inconsistency among sessions is time management. In the Writing Center, each session is 30 minuteslong, and there are four sessions back to back each day. The last five minutes are usually used for signing the
Writing Center log sheets that students bring, sending students off, recording session logs for Writing Center
administration purposes, and calling the next student in. As a result, there is only 25 minutes to work on thestudent’s writing. Within this 25 minutes, the tutors ask students what their assignments are and what theywould like to improve upon, read the student’s writing, make comments and suggestions, and have time forquestions and answers. Completing these tasks within 25 minutes is very challenging, and tutors are required towork efficiently. Some tutors, especially novice tutors, sometimes go over time or cannot check students’Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201535

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
writing entirely. The Writing Center coordinator explains that if tutors only check a part of students’ writing,many students feel dissatisfied and worry about their writing.
The last operational challenge that the Writing Center is facing is that some students reserve Writing Centersessions, but then they do not show up. This means that students who really want to attend the Writing Centersometimes lose a chance to have a Writing Center session. In the current system, students make a reservation
online in advance. Since the Writing Center offers one-on-one sessions, if a student reserves a session online,
other students cannot make a reservation. There are a number of students who come to the Writing Center as apart of their English course requirements. As proof of their visit to the Writing Center, students can get one
stamp per session on their Writing Center attendance log. However, since students sometimes skip their
sessions without canceling their reservation online, other students who need to have Writing Center sessions
cannot make a reservation. Therefore, the Writing Center receives complaints regarding its session availability.

Addressing the Challenges
To solve the issues related to the inconsistency of session quality, the Writing Center holds training sessions
several times throughout a semester. The purpose of the training sessions is to standardize tutoring sessions asmuch as possible so that there is consistency in terms of the quality of sessions. In the training sessions, tutors
have opportunities to share difficulties they face during the tutoring sessions, suggest solutions, and discuss
time management techniques. In addition, tutors have an opportunity to provide feedback on sample writing
and compare what kind of feedback they have given on the sample written work. Then, with the Writing Center
coordinator, tutors check what should be focused on in giving feedback. The training sessions can positively
affect the issue of feedback inconsistency among tutors and moderately influence time-management issues.
However, issues related to motivation and language proficiency are hard to directly address during the training
sessions because those issues depend on personal factors rather than on their skills.
As a way to address the issue of students’ no-shows that negatively affect other learners who really need toattend the Writing Center, it has been requested that the Writing Center should increase the number of sessions
Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201536

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
so that the center can better accommodate learners. However, student no-shows affect what percentage of the
Writing Center shifts are actually used. Since the Writing Center staff are paid part-time workers, increasing thenumber of sessions offered necessitates an increase in the budget for the Writing Center. Consequently, theWriting Center has faced a dilemma. The Writing Center wishes to offer more sessions, but if the session’s
utility rate is lowered due to student no-shows the Writing Center cannot increase the number of sessions. To
solve this problem, the online reservation system has changed: if a student does not show up, the student will belocked out for 2 weeks and will be unable to use the center.

Conclusion
The Writing Center has been facing several operational challenges. The biggest challenge is the inconsistency
in feedback quality arising from various factors such as tutors’ linguistic and writing- related educational
background, and time-management. Training sessions have been held as a means of assuring greater
consistency in feedback quality. Other minor issues such as the varying experience and education of Writing
Center tutors and students’ no-shows have been pointed out. Nevertheless, the benefits for students far
outweigh these operational challenges because the Writing Center offers students vital opportunities for them toimprove their academic writing skills outside class. Therefore, although the Writing Center is currently facingthese challenges, it will continue developing its sessions in order to better support learners in their English
academic writing.

References
Cassidy, P., Gillespie, S., Glasgow, G., Roloff-Rothman, J. & Kobayashi, Y. (2011). Creating a Writing
Center: Autonomy, Interdependence, and Identity. In K.Irie, K. and A.Stewart (Eds.). Realizing
Autonomy: Practice and Reflection in Language Education Contexts (pp. 141-153). London: Palgrave
Macmillan.
McKinley, J.(2010). English language writing centers in Japanese universities: What do students really need?
SiSAL Journal 1(1), 17-31.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201537

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

Making	  Graphic	
  Organizers	  of	  Graph	
  Vocabulary	
  Michael T. Sullivan
This study investigated the use of a modified version of the Frayer model as graphic organizer toimprove the vocabulary comprehension of Japanese university students. Students were separated
into test and control groups. Pre- and posttests on graph vocabulary comprehension wereadministered to both groups. The test group alone used model cards with the modified framework,
but both groups completed the assigned graph exercises. A questionnaire was then administered toassess student feelings of the modified model’s usefulness. Although results showed improvement inboth groups, the test group showed a larger gain in mean scores, and they found the model helpfulin graph vocabulary comprehension. Findings suggest the modified Frayer model has potential tohelp students better understand graph vocabulary.
日本人大学生による語彙の理解を高めるためのグラフィックオーガナイザーとして、修正したFrayer modelを使用することについて調査した。学生を試験群・対照群に分け、両群に対し事前と事後にグ ラフ用語の理解度を測定するテストを実施した。両群は指定されたグラフ演習を行ったが、試験群の 学生だけが修正された枠組みに従ってモデルカードを使用した。演習後、修正モデルの有効性に対す る学生の反応を調べるためにアンケートを実施した。両群ともに理解度の向上が認められたが、試験 群の平均値がより大きく上昇し、学生は、グラフ用語を理解するのに本モデルの使用が有効であると 感じていた。これらの結果から、修正したFrayer
modelの使用によって、グラフ用語に対する学生の 理解を高められる可能性が示唆される 。
This paper came about in part from my talk at the 20th Anniversary Conference, Tokyo in an attempt to develop
a student-generated approach that would improve learner comprehension of graph vocabulary. In my short talk,I introduced a word card based on the original Frayer model for vocabulary acquisition, providing participants
with reasons why the model as graphic organizer was developed, and a step-by-step procedure on how to create
and use the model effectively in class. As in my talk, I start this paper by defining a graphic organizer, by
explaining the original Frayer model word card and why it should be corrected, and by introducing a modified
Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201538

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
version of the Frayer model. This is followed by an outline of my study which sets out to determine theusefulness of my version of the Frayer model word card for learners. Finally, I draw some conclusions from thestudy, reflect on the model’s relevance to learner development and then go over how use of the model has
impacted classes since the conference talk.

Introduction
A graphic organizer is defined as a two-dimensional visual framework that presents conceptual relationships(Rice, 1994; Vaughan, Vos, & Schumm, 2007). The basic structure of an organizer has boxes or circles, or both,with connecting lines that can visually represent the ways in which ideas link with one another and how words
can be classified and described.
The Frayer model word card is one type of graphic organizer. It assists students in describing vocabulary indetail. The model (see Figure 1) is a large square made up of four quadrants with a circle in the middle. Insideeach quadrant is a category by which the given word can be described (Greenwood, 2002; Nessel & Graham,2007), and these categories help explain which characteristics relate and do not relate to a concept (Frayer,
Frederick, & Klausmeier, 1969).

Relevant Attributes- measured in grams- property of all matter- an object’s weight is different from its mass

Irrelevant Attributes- static forces- projectile motion

ExampleAn American penny has a mass of 2.50 grams

Non-Example
A carton of milk contains 1 liter (volume, notmass)

Figure 1. Example of original Frayer model.

When used in the original model, the irrelevant attributes and non-examples of a math concept (such as yard) ora social studies concept (such as states’ rights) were found to be as useful for student comprehension as theterm’s relevant attributes and examples (Monroe & Pendergrass, 1997; Peters, 1974). However, could the sameSpecial Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201539

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
model apply to abstract vocabulary used to describe graphs, such as slightly? I assumed that the model might
not work because many possible non-examples and irrelevant attributes of a graph word could exist—for
example, the representation of the concept slightly may vary based on perception (Wiemer-Hastings & Xu,
2005)—and therefore, the model would not necessarily promote a clearer, deeper understanding of the targeted
graph vocabulary. It seemed that the original Frayer model may be somewhat incompatible with abstract graphterms, and so a modified form was deemed more appropriate.

The Study
The purpose for developing an alternative graphic organizer based on the original Frayer model was to find an
effective way of helping students comprehend abstract graph vocabulary. In the modified version of the Frayer
model, new headings were assigned to each of the four quadrants. That is, it retains the original box-likestructure of the original, with a circle in the middle, but the categories in each box differ (see Figure 2).

Definition (in own words)

Synonym/Antonym

Visual Representation

Example Sentence (in own words)

Figure 2. Example of graphic organizer based on original Frayer model.

Research Questions
1.

What effect would this modified graphic organizer based on the original Frayer model have on
student comprehension of graph vocabulary?

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201540

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
2.

Would the students find this modified version of the Frayer model useful?

Context
The study was conducted in two compulsory English Technical Writing classes for first-year Masters Chemistry
students at a university in western Japan. The students met once a week for 90 minutes. Thirty-six students
participated in the study and were divided equally into two classes (based on pre- existing class allocations) atroughly the same, relatively low English proficiency level. The study took place near the end of the second halfof the term during the two-week unit on describing graphs.

Procedure
For the purposes of the study, students were divided into two groups: the test group and the control group.
Twenty graph vocabulary items (Figure 3) were chosen for the study. The targeted words were selected because
they were required terms for the final exam and were neither used nor discussed in any previous units in the
textbook (Mann & Wever, 2007). All vocabulary items were chosen to have the same relative language burden
for students (see Nation, 2006). One way to assure this is to restrict the words by grammatical category(Dodigovic, 2013), so verbs and adverbs were chosen as they represented the majority of words to be tested.
Figure 3. List of graph vocabulary words
Both the control group and the test group were given the same multiple-choice test on the targeted words before

and after the graph unit (see Appendix). Between these test sessions, the instructor gave both groups identicalgraph description exercises to learn the graph vocabulary. In addition, both groups were given the time andencouragement to study the targeted vocabulary.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201541

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
After the pretest, each student in the test group was given 20 word cards based on the new version of the Frayer
model, on each of which was written one of the targeted graph terms. These students were instructed to fill out
the cards. They were also encouraged to write L1 equivalents on the cards (in the Definition quadrant), as it
would support a form-meaning link between the L2 word and the L1 word already present in memory (Nation,2001). Once completed, the cards were examined by the instructor to check that all quadrants were filled. Upon
examination, all test group students had written information in each quadrant. However, some only wrote
single-word entries for three of the four quadrants (excluding visual representation), while others provided
more details (e.g. short lists). For each graph exercise (e.g. a pair work graph description exercise using no
numbers) over the course of the unit, the students were asked to refer to their own model cards to help themdescribe/explain the graph data.
At the end of the unit, a multiple choice posttest was administered to both groups. The questions on the posttest
were identical to those on the pretest. Afterwards, a questionnaire was distributed to all test group students todetermine if they felt the model cards were useful.

Results
Research Question One
Table 1 shows the results of the pre- and posttests of 36 test and control group students.
Table 1 Results of Pre- and Posttests Evaluating Graph Vocabulary Comprehension
Note. Tests were on 20 multiple-choice vocabulary items. The maximum score for each test was 20.
According to the results of paired sample (2-tailed) t tests, carried out to judge whether the students improved

their comprehension with or without the new version of the Frayer model, a statistical significant change
Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201542

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
between the pre- to posttest scores for both the control group and the test group resulted: t(17) = -5.958, p < .05
for the control group and t(17) = -6.882, p < .05 for the test group.
Although the test group’s pretest and posttest mean scores were lower than those of the control group, there wasa larger gain in mean score on the posttests by the test group than by the control group. This is further evident
after examining the test data in histograms (Figures 4 and 5), which show a greater positive shift in test scoresfor most of the students in the test group compared to the control group.

Figure 4.
Pretest scores of test and control groups (n = 18).

Figure 5.
Posttest scores of test and control groups (n = 18).

As for the standard deviation of both groups, the test group experienced a greater deviation from the averagescore on the posttest than the control group, implying that some students in the test group scored much better orworse than the average. In fact, two-thirds of the test group students—the very students who wrote many moredetails than the others in each of the four card quadrants—made significant improvement gains (50% or higher)
on their test scores, while the rest made smaller increases or none at all (see Table 2).
As for the standard deviation of both groups, the test group experienced a greater deviation from the averagescore on the posttest than the control group, implying that some students in the test group scored much better orSpecial Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201543

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
worse than the average. In fact, two-thirds of the test group students—the very students who wrote many moredetails than the others in each of the four card quadrants—made significant improvement gains (50% or higher)
on their test scores, while the rest made smaller increases or none at all (see Table 2).
Table 2
Results of Individual Test Group Pre- and Posttest Scores

Research Question Two
Table 3 shows the results of a two-part student feedback questionnaire, completed by test group students only atthe end of the graph description unit. In answer to the first question, all students in the group affirmed they had
a better understanding of the vocabulary. As for the second part, all feedback on card use was positive, mainly
focusing on the card’s usefulness in aiding comprehension and recall of the graph vocabulary.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201544

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Table 3
Questionnaire Feedback from Test Group on the use of new model cards
Question
Yes
No
1.
18
0
Do you have a better understanding of the
vocabulary using the cards?
2.
Sample Feedback:Write feedback on the use of the graph• Definition and illustration are useful for me
cards.
• Graph cards (have) many words, so I can
explain graph details• I can also understand synonyms• I understand meaning of graph vocabulary• Easy to remember using graph cards• I can study not only definitions (of the word)
but also synonyms

Discussion
Results from this study provided evidence to help answer the two research questions. The first question asked
what effect this modified graphic organizer based on the Frayer model would have on the learner’s
understanding of the graph vocabulary. Results revealed that based on posttest mean scores, the test group using
this modified version based on the Frayer model with graph-related textbook exercises did not do better incomprehending concepts than the textbook-focused control group. Yet, in considering the size of the
improvement between the two groups, the test group showed slightly more improvement in mean score than thecontrol group, lending (partial, at least) support to Peters’ (1974) claim that the Frayer model helps facilitate theunderstanding of concepts (p. 108).
The second research question asked if the students found the modified version of the model to be useful. The
students responded positively to the modified graphic organizer based on the Frayer model and appreciated its
usefulness in deepening their knowledge of the vocabulary, and this matched teacher expectations. What may
have accounted for this positive feedback was that each student’s set of model cards was developed by thestudent him- or herself, and that they were encouraged to use, share, and discuss card information with otherstudents while doing graph-related activities in class.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201545

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

Conclusion
The findings in this study suggest that the use of my alternative graphic organizer based on the Frayer model tohelp students themselves understand graph vocabulary has potential. In studying this modified version of themodel’s usefulness to students and its effect on their comprehension, it is fair to conclude that (a) the test groupstudents found the modified version of the Frayer model useful, largely because this model aided them inarranging, describing and explaining, and remembering a great deal of known and new lexical information
about each graph word, that (b) the student group using the cards made relatively greater improvement in theircomprehension of the graph vocabulary than the group using textbook exercises alone, and that (c) the test
group students who made the greatest improvement on the posttests had written the most information in eachquadrant on their word cards.
Upon reflection, I feel the model presented in this study had relevance to the learner development group andconference. Despite the criticism that the model is laborious and a large use of student time (Greenwood, 2002),
the model is learner-generated and learner-directed. The number of details the students write on each of theirown cards depends on student input and interest; the teacher merely serves to give feedback on what they havewritten and provide activities that encourage the use of the model cards. Second, in line with the theme of theLD20conference, the model presented a somewhat different perspective or way of thinking—in this case, on
vocabulary comprehension. This alternative graphic organizer based on the Frayer model is unlike a dictionaryor simple word card entry, as it encourages students to efficiently compile a great deal of appropriate,
meaningful and detailed information about a (graph) term on a single card.

Post Script
Since presenting this study at the LD20 conference, my modified graphic organizer based on the original Frayer
model has continued to positively impact on student comprehension of the targeted graph vocabulary. My
current students are required to give a presentation (general or technical) using graphs, and so, to better
understand graph language, these cards have been both created and used by the students. What I have found, as

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201546

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
before, is that with the help of the cards, all of the students improved in graph-related exercises in the graphdescription unit and in their explanations of the graphs in their own presentations at the end of the class term.
Several students have reported to me that although it took time for them to write out details on the graph model
cards for themselves the cards have been useful in more fully comprehending the targeted vocabulary. Moving
forward, I plan to keep using these cards as self-study aids for students to help them remain engaged in thelearning process. I would further encourage the students to create other categories if they wish in order to better
understand the key terms.
References
Dodigovic, M. (2013). Vocabulary learning with electronic flashcards: Teacher design vs. student design. Voicesin Asia Journal 2013, 1, 15-33.
Frayer, D. A., Frederick, W. C., & Klausmeier, H. J. (1969). A schema for testing on the concept mastery(Technical Report No. 16). Madison: University of Wisconsin Research and Development Center for
Cognitive Learning.
Greenwood, S. (2002). Making words matter: Vocabulary study in the content areas. The Clearing House, 75,
258-263.
Mann, D., & Wever, S. (2007). Advanced technical writing in English. Osaka: Nippon Steel & Sumikin
Intercom.
Monroe, E. E., & Pendergrass, M. (1997). Effects of mathematical vocabulary instruction on fourth gradestudents. Reading Improvement, 34(3), 120-132.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, I. S. P. (2006) Vocabulary: Second language. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language andlinguistics (2nd ed., pp. 448-454). Oxford: Elsevier.
Nessel, D., & Graham, J. (2007). Thinking strategies for student achievement: Improving learning across thecurriculum, K-12 (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201547

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Peters, C. (1974). A comparison between the Frayer model of concept attainment and the textbook approach ofconcept attainment. Reading Research Quarterly, 10, 252-254.
Rice, G. (1994). Need for explanations in graphic organizer research. Reading Psychology 15, 39-67. Vaughan,S., Vos, C. S., & Schumm, J. S. (2007). Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk (4th ed.).
Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Wiemer-Hastings, K., & Xu, X. (2005). Content differences for abstract and concrete concepts. Cognitive
Science 29, 719-736.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201548

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Appendix
Graph Vocabulary Comprehension Test
Graph Vocabulary Test Name: _____________________ Class #:____ Score: _____
Task: The following 20 words are used in describing graphs. For each of the words below, circle the definition that best describes its
meaning.
1. Swiftly
11. Crash
a. to move slowly
a. to decrease slowly
b. to move quickly
b. to move up and downc. to move at a constant ratec. to decrease sharply
d. None of the above
d. None of the above
2. Fluctuate
12. Soara. to move slowly
a. to increase little by little
b. to move up and down
b. to decrease sharply
c. to move quickly
c. to increase sharply
d. None of the above
d. None of the above
3. Level off
13. Flatten out
a. to move slowly
a. to move up and down continuously
b. to move up and down continuously
b. to go up slowly
c. to move quickly upward
c. to go down quickly
d. None of the above
d. None of the above
4. Substantially
14. Dramaticallya. to make a very large change
a. to make a very large change
b. to make a large change
b. to make a large change
c. to make a small change
c. to make a small change
d. None of the above
d. None of the above
5. Abruptly
15. Shoot up
a. to move sharply
a. to increase little by little
b. to move slowly
b. to increase sharply
c. to move at a regular pacec. to increase then decreased. None of the above
d. None of the above
6. Plunge
16. Moderately
a. to decrease sharply
a. to make a very large change
b. to increase sharply
b. to make a large change
c. to decrease little by little
c. to make a small change
d. None of the above
d. None of the above
7. Steadily
17. Climb
a. to move up and down
a. to go down slowly
b. to move quickly
b. to go up
c. to move slowly
c. c. to move up and downd. None of the above
d. None of the above
8. Considerably
18. Graduallya. to make a very large change
a. to move sharply
b. to make a small change
b. to move slowly
c. to make a large chargec. to move suddenly
d. None of the above
d. None of the above
9. Slightly
19. Significantly
a. to make a small change
a. to make a very small change
b. to make a large change
b. to make a very large change
c. to make a very large change
c. to make a large change
d. None of the above
d. None of the above
10. Bounce back20. Collapse
a. to increase slowly
a. to decrease sharply
b. to move sharply
b. to move up and downc. to decrease sharply
c. to decrease slowly
d. None of the above
d. None of the above“A different version of this article first appears in JALT2013 Conference Proceedings, published by the Japan Association for
Language Teaching.”

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201549

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

Promo@ng	
  Self-­‐reﬂec@on	
  and	  Strategy	
  Use	
  with	  the	  Strategy	  TreeSatomi Yoshimuta, Huw Davies, andMayumi Abe
This paper describes follow-up practice of the tool for language learners the authors developed, theStrategy Tree. It consists of a tree with roots, water and the sun, which is drawn by learners. Eachpart of the drawing represents self-perceptions of affective, cognitive, and sociocultural/ interactive
second language ability, detailed by Oxford (2011). In order to foster self-regulation, it is shown
how a three-phase strategy cycle can be followed with the help of a teacher or MKO. A case study ispresented, which describes both the potential of the Strategy Tree, and its limitations, in a language
school setting. Finally, the paper reflects on feedback from workshop participants at the LD20
conference.
本発表は、私達が発案した学習振り返りツールであるStrategy Treeの追実践である。Strategy Tree は、学習者が描く木を模した絵である。その絵には、樹木、根、水、太陽が描かれる。各パーツは、 オックスフォード(2011)のaffective, cognitive,
sociocultural/interactiveストラテジーについての 学習者の認識を反映したものである。
Self-regulationを育むためには、MKOとしての教師の助けに基 づいて三段階のストラテ
ジー・サイクルを踏まえる必要がある。それにのっとった語学学校のケース スタディでは、Strategy Treeの可能性と限界を報告する。最後に、本論はLD20 conferenceにおける ワークショップ参加者のフィードバックについて述べる。

Introduction
In our LD20 presentation, the audience was introduced to the “Strategy Tree”, a visual tool created by theauthors (see Abe, Davies & Yoshimuta, 2014; Davies, Yoshimuta & Abe, 2014). It was designed to givelearners a wide-ranging view of their second language ability, and is based on the Strategic Self-Regulation(S2R) model of language learning (Oxford, 2011). This paper introduces Oxford’s theories, and then looks at
how strategies might be implemented into everyday tuition. Next, we describe the Tree’s use in language school
and university settings, before finally describing how our thinking about the Strategy Tree has developed sincegiving our presentation.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201549

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.

The Strategy Tree
The Strategy Tree consists of the images of a tree with subterranean roots, water from a pitcher, and the sun,which relate to Oxford’s (2011) affective, cognitive, and sociocultural/interactive strategies respectively (seeAbe et al., 2014). Oxford divided the principal language learning strategies into these three dimensions. The
affective dimension is mainly related to motivational strategies such as creating positive emotions and attitudes,
and maintaining motivation to learn the language. The cognitive dimension includes strategies such as
constructing, transforming and applying knowledge to L2 learning. The sociocultural/interactive dimension isrelated to communication skills across cultures and contexts (Oxford, 2011). Additionally, in our Tree, the trunk
represents pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar and the branches embody the four skills of listening, reading,speaking and listening.
In pedagogical settings, learners are encouraged to draw their own tree based on their reflections on their L2
ability and learning strategy use. If the learners decide that they have insufficient grammatical knowledge, thatpart of the trunk becomes narrower, and if learners believe that they lack in reading proficiency, the branches
representing reading do not look fully vegetated but hollowed out. Affective traits are illustrated by roots so that
if the learner has strong motivation, the root becomes prominent. As for the sociocultural/interactive dimension,
the perception of use of English in communicating with people is depicted by the width of the sun’s rays. If
learners believe that they have acquired good social skills in the L2, the light becomes more powerful. The
three dimensions are mutually influential, and meta-strategies orchestrate and manage them.
When we used the Strategy Tree for the first time in our teaching settings, learners were describing their levelsof proficiency and visualizing their strengths and weaknesses. However, Oxford details many other uses ofstrategic reflection.
Strategy assessment can serve as a baseline description, a source of predictions, a diagnostic tool, afoundation for deciding what strategies to teach, or a pre- and post-instruction measure to evaluate
strategy instruction (2011, p.140).
Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201550

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Focus on strategies need not be limited to one area, and should be revisited to satisfy a range of teaching andlearning objectives.

The role of strategies in the learning cycle
According to Oxford (2011, p. 25), language learners typically follow a sequence of three phases for doing atask or solving a problem: strategic forethought (Task-phase 1), strategic performance (Task- phase 2), andstrategic reflection and evaluation (Task-phase 3). In Task-phase 1, learners gain a general view of the task or
the problem, set a goal and make a plan. In Task-phase 2, they implement the plan and monitor progress. In
Task-phase 3, they reflect on the overall process and the outcomes. Additionally, each learning strategy in the
S2R Model is likely to be useful in a certain phase; for instance, strategies related to planning are frequently
used in Task-phase 1. With this in mind, we feel that language learning strategies can be learnt effectively
within the three phases when teachers and learners select some learning strategies to use at each phase. Making
strategic adjustments to planned strategies at each phase can foster self-regulation, which is the ability to makedecisions on learning so that it becomes “something they do for themselves rather than [...] something that isdone to or for them” (Zimmerman in Benson, 2001, p.41).
Learning strategies can be acquired with the help of others (Oxford, 2011, p.27). When a more knowledgeable
other (MKO), like a teacher, advisor or classmate, is planning to help learners adopt a new strategy, she caninstruct in the following way. First, during Task-phase 1, the MKO introduces a new strategy to learners andhelps them understand the idea of the strategy and consider how and when to use it. Since this phase is forstrategic forethought, it might be helpful to encourage the learners to utilize strategies such as paying attention
and planning to provide learners with the means to tackle future problems independently. During Task-phase 2,
the learners monitor whether the strategy is working effectively when they use it. At this time they can use
strategies such as implementing plans and orchestrating strategy use while trying out the new strategy. At Taskphase 3, the learners assess the value of the strategy and make a decision whether they will use it again in their
future learning, utilizing the learning strategy evaluating at the same time. In short,

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201551

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
learners can learn a new learning strategy in the process of the three phases while applying some other learning
strategies that they are already familiar with.

Case study: a language school student
This case study was chosen because it illustrates the need to consider all phases of learning when discussing
strategy use. The teacher was focused on Task-phase 2, performance or monitoring, while the learner desired
assistance with Task-phase 1, planning.
Davies’ learners in a language school setting were instructed to produce a baseline description of their current
English performance, which was intended to be used as a diagnostic tool to highlight suitable strategies that
could be fostered inside and outside the classroom. In an extension to their biannual counseling sessions, which
form part of their course, adult learners drew their own Strategy Trees, based on a template (see Figure 1), andan example drawn by the teacher, which was a self-reflection on his own second language ability (see Figure 2).
In the week prior to the counseling lesson, learners were asked to fill out a questionnaire designed to facilitate
the creation of their own Strategy Tree. They were encouraged to focus on what they were able to do in English
at that time and the drawing of the Trees was supplemented by one-to-one discussion with the teacher as thedrawing was taking place.

Fig. 1: Template(Click here to see full size)

Fig. 2: Teacher’s example(Click here to see full size)

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 2015

Fig. 3: Shigeru’s tree
(Click here to see size)
52

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
One learner in particular, Shigeru (a pseudonym) who was a retired gentleman in his late-60s studying in a preintermediate group class, seemed not to engage so well with the task, and in discussion with the teacher gave
minimal detail regarding his own feelings about his own ability. Initially it was felt that the activity had been oflittle benefit to him, and that he had not realized the opportunity to self-reflect.
On closer inspection, however, it became clear that Shigeru used the Tree activity to set his own language
learning goals. The outcome of this activity was that Shigeru externalized his reasons for study: wanting to readan English newspaper, wanting to be able to write a letter in English, and to be able to speak to foreign people
and travel abroad. Goal setting is an element of Task-phase 1, strategic forethought (Oxford, 2011), and by
expressing his intentions, Shigeru, aided by the teacher, was able to formulate a learning plan. This also ensured
that future lessons were centered on his needs.
The counseling sessions were introduced to both encourage and develop learner self- reflection, and to help
each learner and teacher agree on a personalized learning plan for the next six months. Therefore, asking
Shigeru to draw his Tree raised his awareness about strategies, both strategies he was using at the time– like
listening to NHK radio programs and studying pronunciation – and ones which would enable him to achieve hislearning goals. The Strategy Tree use here is, therefore, related to Task-phase 3, strategic reflection andevaluation.
However, perhaps because counseling is only done twice a year and strategy instruction does not feed into thesyllabus, this activity seems not to have led to greater self-reflection from Shigeru. One puzzle moving forward
is how long-term strategic performance can be encouraged.

Workshop at our LD 20 Presentation
Much like the language school and university students who had produced Strategy Trees in our teaching
settings, it seemed the LD20 audience was motivated by the activity and excited to draw with colorful pens.
Participants said the process was a lot of fun, very interesting, and the swells and bumps of the tree helped themrealize the strong and weak points of their English proficiency.
Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201553

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
One of the participants who taught at a language school commented, “It seems the idea of a Strategy Tree canbe applicable to my workplace. Like others I really enjoyed drawing my Tree and it is helpful to recognize thecurrent status of my English proficiency and is as well effective in discovering goals in language learning. It
can surely be used at educational settings.” Another audience member, who works in a university, contacted us
to say how enjoyable and motivating his students had found the Strategy Tree for reflecting on theirimprovement at the end of the semester. Looking back at the presentation, discussion with the audiencereminded us that drawing the Tree for the purpose of promoting self-reflection could engage and motivate
learners in a variety of settings.

Conclusions: promoting strategy use
In university and language school settings, learners reported that the Strategy Tree was useful in aiding theirself-reflection, and in developing their awareness beyond the four skills. Some university students expressed intheir feedback that it was valuable for promoting the affective and sociocultural/interactive dimensions oflearning English. As a result, they developed an interest in finding strategies in different dimensions. However,
although we provided some direct strategy instruction in our classrooms, as Oxford suggests, it was not
sufficient (2011, p. 174). The instructor could not ensure the learners became aware of, discovered or recycled
any strategies in the limited time frame of the school settings. The same pattern emerged in the language
school. We feel that a concerted effort is needed by the teacher over time to introduce and implement strategies
at each phase of learning. use. We feel that this will be far more effective than one-off activities. However, we
are also aware that in many teaching settings, teachers do not have the authority or individual time with thelearners to accomplish this.
Another option to encourage strategy use, which we discussed with visitors to our presentation, is to revisit theStrategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL), a 50-point questionnaire produced by Oxford (1990).
Introducing parts of the SILL, a few points at a time in line with learner needs revealed by the Strategy Tree,might encourage awareness about learning strategies and develop greater range in our students’ approaches toSpecial Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201554

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
learning. In asking our learners to draw their Trees for the first time, we found all of our learners used language
learning strategies, though many of them were unaware they were doing so.

References
Abe, M., Yoshimuta, S. & Davies, H. (2014). “Now maybe I feel like trying”: Engaging learners using a visualtool’. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 5(3), 277-293. Retrieved fromhttp://sisaljournal.org/archives/sep14/abe_yoshimuta_davies
Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow: Pearson Education.
Davies, H., Abe, M. & Yoshimuta, S. (2014). The strategy tree for language learners. In Hurrell, I., Abe, M.,
Brown, P. S., Bruce, S., Capouilliez, J., Chen, J., Davies, H., Kojima, H., Landicho, P., Opitz, T., Ray,D.,Taferner, R. H., Vye, S., Yoshimuta, S., LD SIG forum: Transitions in the lives of learners andteachers.In N. Sonda & A. Krause (Eds.), JALT2013 Conference Proceedings (pp. 52-53). Tokyo: JALT.
Retrieved from http://jalt-publications.org/proceedings/articles/3977-ld-sig-forum-transitions-liveslearners and-teachers
Oxford, R.L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston: Heinle.
Oxford, R.L. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Harlow: Pearson Education.

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201555

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Fig. 1: Template

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201556

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Fig. 2: Teacher’s example

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 201557

LD20 Exploring Learning Development: Practices, Pedagogies, Puzzles and Research.
Fig. 3: Shigeru’s tree

Special Issue of Learning Learning, Volume 22, Issue 2 October 2015

58