Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES

Learning Learning『学習の学習』
Newsletter of the Learner Development SIG
Autumn 2018

LL 25(2)ISSN 1882-1103

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

1

GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES | 挨拶と近況報告
In This Issue 今号について .... Hugh Nicoll, Learning Learning editorial teamNews Update 近況報告 .... Koki Tomita & Yoshio Nakai
DEDICATION | 賛辞
Remembering Naoko Aoki Together .... Hugh Nicoll; Stacey Vye; Alice Chik; Lucy Cooker; Sarah Cotterall; David Little;
Leena Karlsson, Flis Kjisik; Garold Murray; Giovanna Tassinari; Tomoko Ikeda; Richard Smith; Tim Knowles; Ema Ushioda;
Sarah Toogood; Yoshio Nakai; Ellen Head; Masuko Miyahara; Peter Voller; Andy Barfield; Alison Stewart; Kay Irie
MEMBERS’ VOICES | メンバーの声
Reflecting on Motivation and Autonomy ..... Richard Knobbs
Finding a Better Way for High School Students in Japan ..... Miki Iwamoto
Reflecting on Reflecting ..... Paul Crook
A Brief Reflection on My Initial English Learning Years ..... Allen Ying
Learning to Teach, Teaching to Learn ..... Masayo Kanno
Learning Goal Orientation as a Precursor to Metacognition ..... James W. Thomas

3
7
10

23
24
26
27
29
30

SHORT ARTICLES | 小論
Fostering Reflection: Helping Language Learners (and Teachers) to Take (and Release) Control.... Richard J. Sampson
Learning by Teaching: A Meta-learning Program ..... Shu-wen Lin
Fostering Fluency through Wrong English: Working with What Learners Have ..... Joel P. Rian
Implementing Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) in the Japanese Classroom ….. Arnold F. Arao
FREE SPACE | フリー・スペース
Thinking About Learner Autonomy/Learner Development ..... Alison Stewart
The Learner Development Journal (LDJ): Problematising Practices ..... Tim Ashwell, Andy Barfield, Huw Davies, Darren
Elliott, Hugh Nicoll, Alison Stewart, & Koki Tomita
Tokyo July 2018 Get-together Reflections and Plans for 2019 ..... Andy Barfield, Martin Cater, Ken Ikeda, Kio Iwai, &Koki Tomita

32
36
40
45

50
52
59

RESEARCH & REVIEWS | 研究 & レビュー
Autonomy in Language Learning and Teaching: New Research Agendas. A Book Review ..... Hugh Nicoll
LOOKING BACK | 報告
JALTCALL 2018: Reflections on the Learner Development SIG Forum ..... Blair Barr, Neil Cowie, Daniel Hougham,& Brett Milliner

63
66

Reflections on the Independent Learning Association (ILA) Conference 2018, September 5th — September 8th,
2018, Kobe, Japan ..... Maria Giovanna Tassinari & Christian Ludwig

72

Reflections on ILA 2018 ..... Daniel G. C. Hougham

74

Learners about Learning Student Conference ..... Ann Flanagan, Agnes Patko & Katherine Thornton
LOOKING FORWARD | 今後のイベント
Call for Contributions: Creating Community Learning Together 4 (CCLT4)
Learner Development Sessions at JALT2018
SIG MATTERS | インフォメーション
Learner Development SIG Financial Report May to October 2018 ..... Huw Davies

76
80
81
84

Writing for Learning Learning『学習の学習』応募規定

85

Learning Learning Editorial Team88

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATESIn this issue | 本号について
There is a prophet within us, forever whisperingthat behind the seen lies the immeasurable
unseen.
̶Frederick Douglass, 1862

This issue of Learning Learning is dedicated to
Naoko Aoki, co-founder of the Learner
Development SIG, who died in July this year. I firstmet Naoko in June, 1994 at the Learner Autonomy
in Language Learning conference in Hong Kong. In
short, I have shared almost the whole of my timein JALT with Naoko as one of my oldest colleagues
and friends, and it is still a bit hard to imagine
that I’ll not have the chance to share time with
her again–whether here in Japan, or elsewhere, on
our shared conference and workshop journeys.
Please see the collection of tributes to Naoko's
memory in "Remembering Naoko Aoki Together."
Sadly, we lost Richard Silver, also a co-coordinatorof the SIG, in March this year, and published acollection of remembrances of him in issue 25.1.
This means that our 25th anniversary year has
been bookended by loss–of Richard, in the spring,and Naoko, this past summer. We are, however,taking this opportunity—as Naoko would insist that
we do—to celebrate the achievements of the year,
encourage a renewed commitment to learner andteacher autonomy, and make our classrooms alivewith possibilities and the power of critical hope.
In Members' Voices we are publishing writing by
new members Richard Knobbs, Miki Iwamoto, Paul
Crook, Allen Ying, Masayo Kanno, and James
Thomas. Although these six writers have different
backgrounds and a variety of study, teaching, andwork experiences, all of them focus on
explorations of identity, agency, and motivation,
and are concerned with two interrelated
questions: how to help students cope withdemotivating curricular and institutionalpressures, and how to support them in becoming
more confident and engaged learners and users ofEnglish. Please join us in welcoming these newmembers of the SIG.

Richard Knobbs reflects on the ways his
experiences learning Spanish and French as second
languages in the UK stimulated his interests inlearner motivation, learner autonomy, educational
design, and educational psychology, and on how
his experiences as an ALT in Chiba have led him tobecome a more reflective teacher. Miki Iwamoto, ahigh school English teacher in Hyogo, started a
Master's degree in TESOL and joined JALT and the
LD SIG to help her students overcome thedemotivating influences examination English.
Welcome, Richard and Miki.
Paul Crook, originally from the UK, has taught
in Japan, Australia, and Hong Kong. In his piece heshares his passion for literacy, and for education in
general (done right or, perhaps, authentically, i.e.,"learning to think for yourself") as the necessary
foundation for lifelong learning. In a narrative of
his English learning experiences, Allen Ying reflects
on the importance of having near-peer rolemodels, first from the perspective of a native
Cantonese-speaking HongKonger, then as anemigrant and L2 English learner in Australia, andfinally as a teacher researching and reflecting onlearner identity and beliefs here in Japan. Now
teaching in the Graduate School of Engineering inFukui, Masayo Kanno describes her journey from"reluctant learner of English to a teacher-learnerof English." And, finally, James Thomas shares thestory of his quest to apply research perspectives
on L2 motivation to his 13-year journey (so far) ofteaching EFL in corporate, eikaiwa, and juniorcollege settings.
This issue of Learning Learning also features
three short reflective articles from new members
Richard Sampson, Shu-wen Lin, and Joel Rian.
Richard, currently teaching at Gunma University,
brings—like many of us—a wealth of teaching andlearning experiences to his practice as a teacherresearcher. In his article, he shares his reflections(as teacher) on the importance of reflection tolearning itself, and on the challenges of
implementing a reflection project for learners.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

3

Shu-wen Lin is a member of the Sojo International
Learning Center faculty, and shares her thoughts
on "learning-to-learn"—and the "doctoral research
project on facilitating the development ofstudents’ meta-learning capacity" that her
understandings of the teaching-learning/learningteaching relationship grew out of. Finally, Joel
Rian, working in Hokkaido, reports on his
commitment to "Fostering Fluency through Wrong
English." Joel's piece is both witty and practical;
his "wrong English" approach an implementation ofa basic precept of learner-centered teaching,demonstrating the importance of starting from
where our learners are, and of helping themdevelop their abilities to use English in morenatural ways.
LD SIG research grant awardee Arnold Arao
shares his ideas on the importance of Social andEmotional Learning (SEL) in Japanese classrooms.
His essay reports on his presentation at the 2017PanSIG conference, and on the ongoing projectwork in SEL he is doing with the Kurashiki Board of
Education (Okayama) to address problems such as
bullying and school withdrawal.
The Free Space section in this issue includes
three pieces of writing that explore some of thefundamental paradoxes and puzzles in our field:
definitions of autonomy, practices in editing andpublishing practices in the SIG, and the role
informal sharing sessions can play in teacher
development. First up is Alison Stewart's
meditation on the often bedeviling topic ofterminology, specifically about how slippery thedefinitions of learner autonomy and learnerdevelopment can be. Alison's piece is followed by acollaborative dialogue among SIG members
involved with editing and publishing The Learner
Development Journal in the last few years. I hopethat this discussion will be of particular interest to
LD members who are thinking about getting more
actively involved in writing and editing, in many
ways the lifeblood of our shared academic andintellectual work. Finally, the Tokyo Get-Togethers
team share their July reflections and planning
discussions. For members in the Kanto, the Tokyo
Get-Togethers can be a wonderful opportunity todevelop ideas for research projects, and to simply
share stories about puzzles and themes of common
interest.
Next, in Research and Reviews, we include myshort review of Autonomy in Language Learning
and Teaching: New Research Agendas (2018),
edited by Alice Chik, Naoko Aoki, and Richard
Smith. The collection reports and reflects on
research agendas that were first explored on the
AILA Research Network of Learner Autonomy(ReNLA) mailing list, AUTO-L. Those discussions
formed the basis of the ReNLA forum held in
Brisbane, Australia in 2014; the ideas in thechapters were then further developed for
publication over the following two years. I am notconvinced that the agendas are by themselves“new”–views emerging indeed over the past half
dozen years to be sure, which I hope and trust willlead to further development. My book review isfollowed by a series of conference reviews. Blair
Barr, Neil Cowie, Daniel Hougham, and BrettMilliner share their reflections from the JALTCALLLD Forum, followed by three pieces reporting on
the ILA2018 Conference. IATEFL Learner Autonomy
SIG friends Christian Ludwig and Giovanna
Tassanari are up first. Christian and Giovanna
arrived early enough to be spared typhoon related
disruptions to their travel arrangements and reporton the whole of the conference, from preconference workshops through the dialogic plenary
by Leena Karlsson and Chika Hayashi to thestudent conference Learners about Learningorganized by Ann Flanagan, Agnes Patko, andKatherine Thornton. All in all, their report provides
a summary of the contributions of many LD SIG
members, including the fantastic organizing teamof Steve Brown, Ann Mayeda, and Hisako
Yamashita. Reading their report made me reallywish I could have joined everyone in Kobe in
September. Daniel Hougham also offers an
overview, and finally, Ann Flanagan, Agi Patko, andKatherine Thornton report on the Learners about
Learning student conference they organized in
Kobe as part of the ILA2018 conference.
Issue 25.2 concludes with our Looking Forward
section featuring previews of this year's Learning

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

4

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATESTogether: Creating Community 4 (CCLT4)
conference, scheduled for Sunday afternoon 16
December at Otsuma Women's University in
Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, and a list of Learner
Development related presentations at the
JALT2018 conference in Shizuoka. Outgoing SIG
treasurer Huw Davies ("Otsukaresama, Huw!")
reports on the SIG's finances in a brief one-page
summary. This is followed by an updated set ofInformation for Contributors pages. The Learning
Learning Editorial team members look forward toworking with you and other SIG members on theirwriting, and to publishing Learning Learning Vol 26
no 1 in the spring of 2019. Please do feel free tocontact us at any time at

Masayo Kanno、 James Thomasという6名の新しいメンバーの声を紹介しています。
６名のメンバーは、それぞれ異なったバックグラウ
ンドをお持ちで、研究や教育、実践経験も異なっているのですが、メンバー全員の関心が言語学習や言語教育におけるアイデンティティやエージェンシー、
学習動機にあり、相互に関連のある問いで共通する点ががあります。その問いは、やる気をそぐような
カリキュラムや教育機関のプレッシャーに立ちむかう学習者をいかに支援するのかということに加え、学習者がよりよい英語学習者／使用者になるのをいかに助けるのかということです。このような新しい<LLeditorialteam@googlegroups.com>.

メンバーの加入を編集チームともども非常にうれし

Hugh Nicoll, Learning Learning editorial team,
editorく思っております。

まずは、学習者ディベロプメントSIGの創設者の一人で、今年の7月にご逝去されたNaoko Aokiにお悔やみを申し上げます。今号のLearning
Learning では、 "Remembering Naoko Aoki
Together." の中でNaokoのたくさんの思い出が共有されています。このたくさんの思い出をNaokoにささげたいと思います。残念なことですが（Sadly,
this means that we are publishing a second, andthe final issue our 25th anniversary year,
remembering a colleague now gone. ）しかし、私たちは、NaokoもきっとそうおっしゃっているとRichard Knobbsは、イギリスでの学生時代に第二外国語としてのスペイン語とフランス語を学習した
経験がどのようにして学習者の動機づけ、学習者オー
トノミー、教育デザイン、および教育心理学への興味を刺激したか、また、千葉県でのALTとしての経験がより内省的な教師となることにどう繋がったかについて、振り返ります。
Miki Iwamotoは、兵庫県の高校の英語教師で、
TESOLの修士課程で学び始めました。そして、生徒たちが試験英語による動機減退を克服するのを支援するため、JALTとLD SIGに入会しました。
RichardとMiki、ようこそ。

思いますが、悲しんでばかりいるのではなく、

イギリス出身のPaul Crookは、日本、オーストラリ

LDSIGが25周年を迎えることができたことをお祝

ア、香港での教育経験があります。

いする機会とし、学習者や教師のオートノミーにコ

本号では、生涯教育に必要な基礎としてのリテラシー

ミットしながら教室を可能性と期待に満ちた生き生と教育全般（それが正しくなされること、すなわち、

きとした場へと創造していくことを目指していきた「自分で考えることを学ぶこと」）への情熱につい

いと思います。

て共有します。

Members' Voices では、Richard Knobbs、Miki Iwamoto、 Paul Crook、 Allen Ying、

Allen Yingは、自身の英語学習経験についてのナラ
ティヴの中で、広東語母語話者の香港人という視点

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>5

から、オーストラリアへの移民で第二言語としてのLD SIGの研究補助金受賞者のArnold Araoは、日英語学習者として、そして、現在は日本で教育に携

本の教育現場におけるSocial and Emotional

わりながら学習者のアイデンティーと信条について

Learning (SEL)の重要性について寄稿してくれまし

研究する教師として、身近なロールモデルがいるこた。本稿は、現在、彼が倉敷市教育委員会（岡山県）との重要性について振り返ります。

で取り組んでいるいじめや不登校などの対策として

Masayo Kannoは、現在福井県の大学院工科研究科のSELプロジェクトについて2017 PanSIG大会でので教えており、かつては渋々英語を学んでいた彼女

発表をまとめたものです。

が英語の教師兼学習者となった道のりについて述べFree Spaceは「オートノミーの定義」、「SIGています。最後に、James Thomasは、第二言語にの編集および出版」、「教師の成長にインフォーマ

おける動機づけ研究の視点をこれまでの１３年にわルな共有セッションが果たす役割」に関する3つのたる日本の企業、英会話学校、短大での英語教育に

原稿からなります。最初の原稿では、Alison

応用してきたことについてのナラティヴを共有しま

Stewartが学習者オートノミーと学習者発達の定義す。

が明確でない点について言及し、これまでThe

今号の Learning Learning では、3人の新メン

Learner Development Journalの編集・出版に携

バーRichard Sampson、Shu-wen Lin、Joel Rian

わったSIGメンバーとの協働的な対話を展開しておによる省察レポートもお届けします。現在、群馬大ります。ここでの議論は、執筆や編集を考えている学で教鞭をとるRichardは、（私たちの多くがそうメンバーに特に関心のある内容であります。最後にであるように）教師ー研究者としての実践に、教育

東京get-togetherのチームが、6月の会合の振り返と学習から得た豊かな経験を活かしています。今号

りと計画を共有しています。関東のメンバーにとっの記事では、学習自体に反映させることの（教師とては、東京のget-togetherは研究プロジェクトのア

しての）重要性と、学習者向けの省察プロジェクト

イディアや、悩みの共有また共通の関心であるテーの難しさについて語ってくれます。Shu-wen Linは、

マについて考える絶好の機会になるでしょう。

崇城大学のSojo International Learning Center教

Research and Reviewsでは、まず最初にAlice員で、「学習のための学び」に関する考察と、教育

Chik, Naoko Aoki, Richard Smith（編）と学習・学習と教育の関係性に関する彼女の理解のAutonomy in Language Learning and Teaching:

元となった博士課程研究プロジェクト「ファシリテー

New Reserach Agendas (2018)のレビューが掲載

ションによる学生のメタ学習能力開発」についてシェされております。この書籍はAILAのLearner

アしています。そしてJoel Rianは、北海道から「間Autonomyリサーチネットワークのメーリングリス

違った英語を通じて流暢さを育む」ことにかける様

トで最初に取り上げられた研究トピックを振り返り、子をレポートしてくれました。 Joelのレポートは、報告しています。ここでの議論は、2014年にオースウィットと具体性に富んでいて、彼の「間違い英語」

トラリアのブリスベンで行われたReNLAフォーラ

アプローチは、学習者中心の教育の基本的な指針をムの基盤となるものです。次に、Blair Barr, Neil

見事に具現化し、学習者の実際のレベルから始める

Cowie, Daniel Hougham, Brett Milinerの4名がことの重要性と、より自然な方法で英語を使う能力

JALTCALL LDフォーラムの省察を共有します。最を伸ばす手助けをする 大切さを教えてくれます。

後はILA2018の報告で、IATEFL LAの仲間である

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

6

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES
Christine LudwingとGiovanna Tasanari、Daniel
Houghmanがそれぞれ語り、Ann Flanagan, Agi

News Update 近況報告

Patko, Katherine Thorntonの3名がご自身が取りまとめを行った学生プレゼンテーションに関する報告をしています。
本号の締め括りはLooking Forwardです。ここでは来る12月16日（日）に大妻女子大学（千代田区）で開催されるLearning Together: Creating
Community 4 (CCLT4)と、静岡のJALT2018での学習者ディベロプメントに関する発表者のリストを掲載しております。また、SIGの財政局であるHuw
Daviesがまとめてくださった財政状況報告書と投稿に関する情報もございます。LL編集チームは2019
年春号の出版に向けて、皆様と協働的に取り組んでまいりたいと思っております。ご質問等は以下のア
ドレスまで。

<LLeditorialteam@googlegroups.com>.
Hugh Nicoll, Learning Learning editorial team,
editor

The autumn 2018 issue of Learning Learning isalmost ready for publication, but as I look backover the activities of the past year it is almost
shocking how quickly the year has passed. Indeed,
it seems like only yesterday that Koki and I
composed our first welcome message forLearning Learning Volume 24, no 2, and now our
SIG's 25th anniversary year is about to come to its
close.
During the year, SIG members participated in
the PanSIG2018 conference held at Toyo Gakuen
University, Tokyo, in May, and we also held a forum
at the 25th anniversary JALTCALL conference at
Meijo University, Nagoya in June. The PanSIG LD
Forum was organized by Rob Morel, and featured
presentations by Blair Barr, Kate Maher, Marnie
Mayse, and Joe Tomei. A collaborative review was
published in Learning Learning 25.1. <http://ldsig.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Back.pdf>
The JALTCALL Forum presenters -- Brett Milliner,
Blair Barr, and Daniel Hougham, joined by Neil
Cowie -- share their reflections in this issue.
In September, we were honoured to co-sponsor"Whose Autonomy? Voices and Agency in Language
Learning,” the Independent Learning Association2018 conference held at Konan Women's University
in Kobe. At ILA2018, Learning Learning editorial
team member Chika Hayashi gave a joint plenary
session with Leena Karlsson from the University of
Helsinki. I have very fond memories of being in theaudience as Chika and Leena shared stories fromtheir professional lives and histories, including
their passions and challenges as practitionerresearchers and teachers, which helped me reflect
once again on my own language learning andteaching journeys.
This November we will gather once again at
JALT2018 in Shizuoka. We want to offer ourcongratulations to this year's LD SIG Conference
Grant award winners Greg Lambert, Gretchen
Clark, and Miki Iwamoto. We look forward to theirpresentations later this month, and to the reports

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>7

we look forward to publishing in LL26.1 We also
look forward to discussing our research projects,
exploring the ways we can explore learner andteacher development together, and to welcoming
new members to the Learner Development SIG. I
hope that many SIG members will attend the LD
Forum at JALT2018, as well as the SIG's AGM andthe LD party on the Saturday evening of theconference.
Editing work on Volume 2 of The Learner
Development Journal: Qualitative Research into
Learner Development is nearly complete. I would
like to thank Masuko Miyahara, Patrick Kiernan andChika Hayashi for their work with contributors andfor all that they have done to get the second
volume of the LDJ ready for publication. I am
eager to read the final versions of those research
papers.
Although 2018 provided many opportunities for
us to celebrate our achievements together as
members of the SIG, the most profound event of2018 for me was the passing of Naoko Aoki, the cofounder of the SIG in 1993. Naoko was my PhD
supervisor, and I will always cherish the times weshared as research associates and for the ways
Naoko helped me learn what becoming a Japanese
Language teacher can mean. Naoko – and Naoko's
work – will be the compass I look to as I continue
my research and teaching journeys. Please joinwith me and other SIG members in honoring
Naoko's memory, and in exploring the pathways
she pioneered, in 2019, and in the years to come.
Finally, we look forward meeting and working
with SIG members in what remains of 2018 andthroughout 2019.

Learning Learning2018年秋号の刊行の運びとなりました。今号の刊行に当たり、これまでの活動を振り返ってみましたが、やはり何よりもまず驚いたのが
時の流れの速さです。2017年冬号において、コーディ
ネーターとしてお世話になりますというご挨拶をさせていただいたばかりですが、もう１年が過ぎようとしています。そして、時の流れに関して言えば、今年度に発行されている Learning Learningには25という号数がついておりますが、これはLDSIGが無事に25周年を迎え、四半世紀が過ぎたということを示しています。
これはひとえにメンバー皆様のご活躍とご支援の賜物であり、この場を借りてメンバーの皆さまのこれまでのご支援に改めて感謝の意を申し上げたいと思います。
本当にありがとうございました。
節目となる25周年の今年、PanSIGが5月に東京の東洋学園大学で、JALTCallの25周年記念大会が6月に名古屋の名城大学で開かれました。PanSIGのフォー
ラムは Rob Morelのオーガナイズのもと、 Blair
Barr、 Kate Maher、 Marnie Mayse、 Joe Tomeiによるプレゼンテーションが行われました。このプレゼンテーションについては Learning Learning 25.1.にそのレビューが掲載されています（http://ld-sig.org/
wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Back.pdf）。 そして、
JALTCALLでのフォーラムについてはBrettMilliner、 Blair Barr、Daniel Houghamと Neil
Cowieが今号においてそのリフレクションを執筆して下さっています。また、9月には2年に一度開かれる
Independent Learning Association（ILA）の大会、”Whose Autonomy? Voices and Agency inLanguage Learning”が神戸の甲南女子大学で開催されました。この大会はLDSIGも後援していましたが、ILA2018実行委員のSteve Brown、Ann Mayeda、

Yoshi Nakai

Hisako Yamashitaのご尽力のおかげで無事盛会のう(for Koki Tomita and Yoshio Nakai)

ちに終了しました。このILAではLDSIGのメンバーで

LD SIG co-coordinators
November 2018

あるChika HayashiがHelsinki大学のLeena Karlsson
とともにご自身の言語学習や教育の経験を語られました。私も参加させていただきましたが、研究的視点を持った実践家や教員としての人生とこれまでの情熱や挑戦など、お二人の貴重な経験を拝聴することで、自身の経験だけではなく、そこから言語学習や言語教育

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

8

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2):GREETINGS AND NEWS UPDATES
実践についての振り返りがもたらされる有意義な時間

Nakai にとっては、PhDの指導教官でもあると同時にとなりました。また、Kansai Get-Together Teamの研究・仕事仲間でもあったNaokoは日本語教育の実践

Ann Flanagan、Agnes Patko、Katherine Thornton

や研究における羅針盤のような存在でした。コーディ

がStudent Conferenceを実施し高校・大学で英語をネーターとしての自身の１年は、KokiやLDSIGの多く学ぶ学生さんたちの発表の場が提供されました。英語

くのメンバーからの温かく心強いサポートに甘えたまを使った生きたコミュニケーションの場は学生の方々まで、十分に貢献できずにいました。しかし、今回のにとって非常に貴重な実践の場となったことでしょう。

訃報とNaokoが大いに関わっていたLDSIGのコーディ

ILA2018での皆さまのご協力に改めて感謝申し上げま

ネーターをさせていただくようになったというめぐりす。

あわせを思うと、改めて心の引き締まる思いでおりま

そして、この11月には静岡でJALT2018で開かれます。今年度はGreg Lambert、Gretchen Clark、す。
2018年もあとわずかとなりましたが、2018年も、Miki IwamotoがLDSIGの研究助成を受賞されること

また、来る2019年も皆様にお目にかかれますのを楽となりました。ここで改めてお祝いを申し上げます。

しみにしております。

受賞者の三名の方には、JALT2018でのご発表もさることながら、Learning Learning 26.1への研究についてのご報告も期待しております。JALT2018では、学

中井好男、冨田浩起

習者や教師のディベロプメントに関する研究やプロジェ

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会コーディネーター

クトに関する活発な議論がなされることと思います。
そして新たなメンバーとの出会いなどを心待ちになさっ2018年11月ている方も多くいらっしゃるのではないでしょうか。
今回のJALT2018ではLDフォーラムに加えて、SIGの年次大会、土曜日の夕方にLDのパーティーを企画しております。これまで支援くださったメンバーの皆さ
まはもちろん、今後のLDSIGを支えてくださる新しいメンバーのご参加もお待ちしております。
また、現在、このLearning Learningの刊行と並行してThe Learner Development Journal Issue 2:
Qualitative Research into Learner Development の編集作業が進められています。投稿者の方々、並びに編集に関わっていらっしゃるMasuko Miyahara、
Patrick Kiernan、 Chika Hayashiのご尽力に感謝申し上げます。研究や実践の貴重な成果を拝見できることを楽しみにしています。
このようにLDSIGの１年をいろいろと振り返ってはみるのですが、LDSIGの設立にも関わったNaoko
Aokiがご逝去されたことがいまだに私の頭から離れず、
一番大きな出来事であったということを言わざるを得ません。今号ではメモリアルとしてNaokoの足跡や思い出などが記されているのですが、特に私Yoshio

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

9

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki

DEDICATION | 賛辞
Remembering Naoko Aoki Together
On the morning of 11 July, we received the shocking and sad news that
Naoko Aoki, a co-founder of the SIG and a long-time friend to many of us,
had passed away on 8 July and that a small group of family, former
students, and friends held a private farewell ceremony for her. Naoko wasgone.
The remembrances that we share here come from colleagues andfriends here in Japan and around the world collected in the weeks that
followed. Now in November as we finish editing this issue of Learning
Learning it remains difficult for me to imagine not being able to share atable and a strong coffee with her. I hope that our collective memories of
Naoko – with a silk scarf ‘round her neck, an impish grin, a serious
question, and always a ready laugh – will help readers to join in honoring her memory, and seek out her
writings as we continue our learning journeys together. Hugh Nicoll

My heart cries love for how much Naoko supported learning as teachers and learners. I met Naoko
mostly in Japan or Hong Kong, without a scarf unlike Hugh, then the serious question came, so I knew what
to do if she gave me the huge-smile. I do not know how else to explain this, but she guided me when I was
suddenly without my mentor. Last night not knowing of Naoko’s passing, I bought all six books of theJapanese kanji drill test books for primary students to get better at writing Japanese because I kept onthinking I was missing something. An immaculate professor can impact. Naoko got me! We need Naoko’s
huge-smile, inquiry, then laughter for learning teaching moments for learners’ self-efficacy and agency.
The learning world is a better because of Naoko! I will emulate this connection between learning andteaching. Thank you Naoko! Stacey Vye

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

10

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki
I first met Naoko at an autonomy conference in UTS, Hong Kong as a PhD student. It was my first
conference, and my first presentation. During that conference, Naoko was sitting at a table outside, having
a coffee and had streams of people sitting down to have a chat. I sat down for a chat, and she gave me somuch support and feedback. I thought I had given the worst presentation ever, but Naoko just told me topick myself up and look ahead. And some years later, I was really fortunate enough to have worked with
her as co-convenor and co-editor. She was forever patient, insightful, generous, and I really appreciated
how she created spaces and opportunities to support younger researchers. A huge thank you, Naoko. Alice(Chik)
I’m very shocked and saddened to hear this news. Naoko did so much to advance the awareness oflearner autonomy in Japan and beyond. She was always very supportive of me, as a young researcher inthis area. She was both bubbly and calm, down-to-earth and gracious. Sara, Garold and I invited her to bea keynote speaker when we organised the ‘Exploring Theory, Enhancing Practice: Autonomy across theDisciplines’ conference in 2007. It was wonderful working with her for that event and her presentation was
inspirational. Lucy Cooker

I was so very sad to hear of Naoko’s passing. I had got to know her through meetings at IATEFL andworked with her in the context of the AILA ReN. I remember her as being so kind and positive. Her
knowledge of the field of autonomy (and beyond) was expansive and she was generous in sharing her
insights with others and offering support where needed. She never made you feel like you didn’t know
something (which I very often did not!). Instead, she had a wonderful way of including you, valuing yourcontribution, and making you feel welcome. She has made a huge impact on the field and has inspired
many scholars and teachers. She will be very sorely missed. Sarah Cotterall
Like everyone else, I was shocked to hear of Naoko’s passing. I first met her in 1994, at the first Hong
Kong conference on learner autonomy – we got to know each other doing pair work at one of theworkshops. Fairly soon after that she embarked on a Ph.D. under my supervision. We mostly communicatedvia email, but every summer Naoko came to Dublin for a week or two of intensive discussion. She usually
stayed with us, encouraging our son in his passion for first-generation Pokémon; her Thai curry wasNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

11

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki
something we always looked forward to. Others have talked about Naoko’s lively calm, and I know what
they mean. But I shall never forget the gasp of astonishment prompted by her discovery of a feminist tract
on my bookshelves, and the disbelief with which she shrieked: “Have you read that?” (As a matter of fact, Ihad.) It’s a privilege to have known Naoko. She was always good company, rarely predictable, andinvariably challenging. May she rest in peace. David Little

My last meeting with Naoko was at the Nordic Autonomy Workshop in Helsinki last August. Like so manyof us, I remember her lovely warm smile and the big hug she gave me when we met and when we parted. I
will always cherish the last smile, the last hug in Helsinki, on a cool and windy day in August. I was always
inspired by her research, by the courage and skill she showed when writing her wonderful stories. She wasone of the early narrative researchers in the learner autonomy field and she was fantastically insightful andinspiring, and also exceptionally creative. As a practitioner-researcher I always felt she gave me courage topursue on my chosen road. She herself was a writer who took risks and brought joy to her readers. Naoko’spresent for me when we met in Nordic Autonomy Workshop in Bergen in 2009 was a beautiful kaleidoscope:
Naoko, we can still meet when my hand turns the kaleidoscope. I will miss you. Leena Karlsson

This was truly terrible news. Naoko was there
throughout my own career in autonomy and it’s hard to
imagine the community without her. I too first met her atthe 1994 autonomy conference in Hong Kong where I
tentatively gave my first presentation of the Helsinki
autonomy model (ALMS). Naoko and I started chatting on
a balcony on the beautiful HKUST campus overlooking
Clear Water Bay and this was followed by many wonderful
encounters at conferences all over the world, not least in
Helsinki last summer at the 13th workshop of the Nordic
Autonomy Group. Naoko then was as warm, bright andalive as ever. Her own work was always brilliant andinspiring and she offered incredible support to students,
researchers and teachers alike. I will never forget her
and feel fortunate to have known her as a friend andcolleague. Flis Kjisik

I was shocked and saddened to learn about Naoko’s
passing. I am deeply grateful to Naoko for her pioneering
work to promote learner autonomy in Japan. Through her
numerous contributions, she facilitated the efforts of
those of us who followed. I am especially grateful for theopportunities she created for my colleagues and I to haveour research published in the Japanese language. Her
death is a great loss for the learner autonomy community
in Japan and beyond. Garold Murray

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

12

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki
I first met Naoko in person in Brisbane, at the AILA World Congress 2014. Together with Hugh, she hadorganized the “autonomy party” in a Greek restaurant near the conference venue. She smiled and laughedand she welcomed me, as if we already knew each other. I will never forget it. Before this first meeting, I
was already inspired by her work. Her chapter “Affect and the role of teacher in the development oflearner autonomy” was for me a milestone and gave me the courage to address this topic in language
advising. I also treasure her “Can do statements for advisors”, read and read them again and let me inspire
for my advising practice.
Last time I met her was at the Nordic Autonomy Workshop in Helsinki, August 2017. As always, she was awonderful, magic presence, like a good fairy she had the right piece of advice for me, struggling with how
to motivate teachers to more autonomy. Her modesty, her brightness, her warmth and friendliness will bein my heart. Thank you, Naoko! Giovanna Tassinari

The news came so unexpectedly that I am still shocked and struggling to put together my thoughts
three days after I learned of Naoko's passing. I have to admit that I was not familiar with the concept oflearner autonomy when I agreed to be the 'English learner liaison' for a new newsletter called Learning
Learning (Richard invited me to get involved). I still remember the excitement I felt when its first issue
came out in 1994 mostly thanks to the joint coordinators' passion permeated in those pages. I also
remember how I loved it when Naoko quickly switched from Japanese to English (because she "could only
say that in English") at a conference in Tokyo (in 1994 or 1995?) to say, “We’re very proud of it [thebilingual newsletter].” I thought that was so charming! Since I sort of 'vanished' from Japan a few years
later and was out of touch, it was a nice surprise when Naoko contacted me about a book chapter totranslate after I returned to Japan. This time, I had the privilege of closely working with her and learned somuch - not only about the subject matter but also about scholarly sincerity and passion. Last time I met
Naoko was at a post-conference party in Nagoya in 2011. Although we had only seen each othersporadically over the years, I felt a sense of camaraderie that night, and I really appreciated it. Thank you,
Aoki-san. You will be sorely missed. Tomoko Ikeda
I first met Naoko in a crowded room at a party at the JALT
conference – probably in 1992 in Omiya. She was talking to a very tall
Englishman, maybe Tim Knowles, glass of wine in one hand, cigarette inanother, holding her own in a very animated fashion. I joined theconversation and started to argue with her myself, asserting the rights
of Japanese language learners to learn in Roman alphabet not inJapanese syllabary. We both stuck to our positions but I could see she
was at once a formidable intellectual opponent and very interested,
like I was, in language learners’ own perspectives.
(That’s how it began, then – our twenty-five years of off-and-on
collaboration – and that’s how it continued, full of radical challenge andfriendly argument but strong commitment to a common cause. At least
that’s how it was in the first three to four years I knew her, before wewent in different, though sometimes still-joining-up ways.)
In the same year, 1992, with Trevor Hughes Parry I started anewsletter for learners of Japanese in Japan (Learner to Learner) and,along with some other teachers of Japanese – Tomoko Ikeda included –Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

13

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki
Naoko kept in touch about it, but we only really started to collaborate very intensively in about 1993, when
I shared the idea with her of forming a new JALT ‘Learner Development’ SIG which would provide a home
for Learner to Learner, and both formalize and take further the connections that we’d been developing
between our selves as reflective learners and as teachers of different languages. Naoko agreed tocoordinate the SIG with me and from the outset we set about ‘doing things differently’, for example byhaving bilingual meetings and newsletters, and ensuring there were joint Japanese and non-Japanese SIG
committee members for every position (JALT was at the time a very English- and Anglo-dominantorganisation). We valued trust and consensus over bureaucracy and we had some great local get-togethers,
conference panels and lively parties. We were riding on the crest of a wave of new thinking, bringing
together all sorts of people with different backgrounds and interests and influences, but all with a sharedcommitment within the broad field of what we were calling ‘learner development’.
At the same time, we were beginning to make connections internationally, firstly in 1994 at a large
conference on learner autonomy that Naoko and I attended in Hong Kong, which led to an invitation to the1995 Nordic workshop in Denmark. We felt we were outsiders in Copenhagen, coming from Asia, and feeling
uncomfortable with a certain rather cold rationality and irritation among participants that we sensed on
the first day. We spent all night talking in Peter Voller’s room, all three of us feeling hurt, and trying toclarify to one another what we saw as our more humanistic, affective, even ‘Asian’ approach. Our not very
sober consensus was that we would assert ourselves by ‘taking over’ the workshop the next day andintroducing a more affective, ludic dimension, which Naoko proceeded to do by jettisoning her own
planned presentation (she was the first on the programme in the morning) and facilitating the threeworkshop activities we had planned in the early hours: (1) forming groups according to colour of one’s
underwear; (2) trust exercises involving holding a partner’s head (thus, I got to know Ema Ushioda); and (3)walking like a member of the opposite sex (David Little performed this task with particular aplomb). This
all broke the Copenhagen ice admirably and we were even invited back to subsequent workshops. Naoko
had well and truly arrived on the international autonomy scene and she went on to do her PhD with David,
while I’ve been Ema’s colleague for 15 years now. It’s good to hear that Naoko was meeting friends at theNordic workshops right up until recently.
I’ve probably lingered over this particular, perhaps rather childish memory because it seems to me atime when we were closely on the same wavelength – or perhaps because it was even the last time wewere so completely on the same wavelength. We carried on coordinating the SIG together but I was
getting distracted and communicating less, while in retrospect I can see that Naoko was developing a newfound confidence and independence which also meant we saw less and less easily eye-to-eye. In 1996 we
gave a presentation together at the AILA conference in Finland about learner autonomy in cultural context,
reacting against some of the essentialist views we’d been hearing about its possible lack of appropriatenessin ‘Asia’. But by then the cracks were appearing and our ‘band was breaking up’.
So, 1993–1996: just three or four years – some of the most intense in my life for the amount of work we
did and the amount I developed as a person and as a professional – so much of it in response to Naoko’s
intellectual, radical, humanistic, increasingly feminist influence and challenge – all those qualities she
went on to share with the autonomy community worldwide, through her innovative publications andpresentations.
We did other things together – quite a lot, really, in the eyes of the autonomy community perhaps, likeco-convening the AILA Research Network on Learner Autonomy 2011–14, for the last three years together
with Alice Chik, culminating in a publication we co-edited with Alice which appeared quite recently, inJanuary 2018. But this was all at a relative distance (me in the UK, Naoko in Japan), and our interaction
was quite ‘distant’ too, quite professional – it never had the intensity of the trail we blazed together in
1993–1996.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

14

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki
I don’t really know how she thought about those years, but for me they were ‘golden years.’ I sensed
they were at the time, but I also know that much more now, as I write this remembering Naoko. And
perhaps she did feel that too. Once, quite early on, Naoko told me that our co-creation and nurturing of
Learner Development SIG had brought her out of a ten-year period of professional stagnation, and that wasgood to hear. And when I once (fifteen years ago?) plucked up (Dutch) courage to ask her how she felt
about me, given quite a few critical judgments she’d previously shared, she simply said – ‘like a wayward
younger brother’. Finally, when we met for what was to prove the last time, at Learner Development SIG’s
20th anniversary conference in Tokyo in 2013, she seemed to commend me for having shared a ‘secret story’(i.e., affectively true, usually hidden story?) in my talk about our early collaboration. Her opinion always
counted for me even when I pretended not to care, and it was a relief to feel unjudged – perhaps evenforgiven – by Naoko again, as if I’d finally grown up.
So, with this further secret story, this is how I miss and honour Naoko – my older sister, radical,
innovative, assertive, fragile, caring, brittle, unbelievably gone. Richard Smith
Naoko Aoki? Wow, there’s a name that brings back memories. I think the first time we met was back inthe eighties when we were two of only three people to turn up in a rainstorm to a Tokyo JALT meeting. I
think it was about the Silent Way and Cuisenaire rods. We talked over beer after that and then met often
at teacher meetings. Richard Smith mentions me above, and I can well imagine the conversation we might
have been having. We were both enthusiastic about teaching and trying new things, and in those bubbledays, there was a lot of opportunity. Jobs were not scarce, and schools openly appreciated teachers withenthusiasm and ideas.
In those days, there were not many Japanese people who were ‘trained’ language teachers (I mean
‘trained’ in the conventional career/certification sense of the word). Naoko was one of the few, and she
provided our rather drunken ‘academic’ discourse with a refreshing insight into language learning from thepoint of view of a Japanese person. I admired her enthusiasm at the births of quite a few SIGs, particularly
the Teacher Education and Learner Development SIGs, and I remember a group of us, including Naoko and
Neil Cowie, belting the songs out at our very academically inclined karaoke meetings.
Unfortunately, our paths have not crossed much this century. I think Naoko moved on. I moved
sideways. Tim Knowles
I received word of Naoko’s passing just two weeks after losing my father. The dreadful news about
Naoko came to me from a Japanese family friend in Ireland who had attended my dad’s funeral and who
also happened to know Naoko (through meeting some years ago at one of the events organised by the
Association of Japanese Language Teachers in Europe, I think). I didn’t want to believe the news and,because I was still dealing with my own personal grief, I found it almost impossible to process … and still
do. My final memory of Naoko is from last September. We were both invited speakers at a symposium in
Cardiff on Applied Linguistics and Japanese Language Pedagogy. Perhaps because the event was focused onJapanese language teaching, we ended up conversing with each other mostly in Japanese rather thanEnglish … even when we went out to have coffee together at a local Costa. Interestingly, I always found myinteractions with Naoko to be quite different, depending on whether we chatted in English or in Japanese.
In English, I think she liked to be a bit provocative in what she said to me and to challenge my thinking attimes. In Japanese, however, she would adopt a much more intimate and informal tone with me, like twosisters sharing private conversations and secrets and looking at the world together. I will always treasure
those conversations and memories. Ema Ushioda

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

15

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki
Richard Pemberton introduced me to Naoko at my first international conference in Tokyo. I was awed
and inspired by the work going in Autonomy and Language Learning and not least a little star struck tomeet the authors of work I'd read. Naoko was immediately welcoming, so insightful and such an inspiration.
I was over the moon when she agreed to be a keynote speaker at our ‘Maintaining Control’ conference at
UST and HangZhou in 2004. She was brilliant, kind, funny and had such a beguiling smile. She will always bea shining light and inspiration to me. I had been in email contact with her over a project she was working
on and was wondering recently about the radio silence… When I saw Hugh and Fumiko’s email about
Naoko’s passing, shock and sadness left me cold and unable to quite process the loss of such a shining star.
Heartfelt condolences to all who love and miss her. I hope you are hanging out somewhere nice having agood time with Richard P., Naoko! Your smile and brilliance lives on and will always be an inspiration.

Sarah Toogood

It is still hard for me to believe that Naoko has passed away. It was 2005 when I met Naoko. At thattime, I was a graduate school student and at the same time I worked for a private Japanese language
school in Japan. I took her classes for research on second language learning and teaching. During herclasses, she changed my perspective of language learning and teaching through conducting qualitative
research she had been doing a lot of work on. Since I met her, she has guided me, first as a student andlater as a colleague, and helped me to find the best direction for me by giving me a chance to open new
avenues for research and teaching. There are still so many things I need to ask her and want to talk to her
about, but I trust that her smiling face will stay with me and she will keep guiding me in my heart. Yoshio

Nakai
Naoko was the person who asked me, “What’s going right with your teaching? Why do we always talkabout the mistakes, what’s going well?” I met Naoko at JALT in 2001 or so, when she was doing a workshop
about teachers’ stories of language learning. It was a revelation to me that I could be part of theconversation about my own professional development. Naoko was so tender and also so sharp. I mean in agood way, academically sharp but also kind. I visited her place for dinner just once in 2012 with a few
friends from LD SIG and she made us dessert with rose-water. I am always going to wish I could just haveone more conversation and one more hug. Ellen Head

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

16

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki
It is going to be almost a month since Naoko has passed away. It was a day after her passing that I heard
this dreadful news, and I am still trying to come to terms with it. Tears trickles down my face as I write
this….. The first time I met Naoko was, I think, at one of LD SIG meetings in Tokyo many years ago. It was
my first LD SIG gathering, didn’t know anyone, and was a bit nervous. Well, guess who approached me yes - Naoko ! Till this day, I still remember her gentle, friendly and supportive demeanour. Ever since she
has been my ‘guide’, especially, in my professional life as a teacher and researcher. She has given me
advice on my research by kindly making trips to Tokyo, and a few years back, she was one of the plenary
speakers at a symposium that I had organized with my research partners. She has never failed to give me
the appropriate guidance and support, but there are still so many things that I need to ask her and talk toher. I was fortunate to meet up with her this past March in Kobe. When she found out that I had only visited
Kobe on business, she picked me up at the station in her bright green beetle, and gave me a tour around
Kobe….. .. I miss her very, very much…. Thank you so much, Naoko! Masuko Miyahara

It is some weeks since Hugh emailed me with the news that Naoko had passed away. We met for what I
now know was the last time at the Serpentine cafe in Hyde Park in summer 2016, having met in themaelstrom of Speakers' Corner, listening to the committed trying to influence an at best skeptical public of
the validity of their beliefs. We retired to a bench and table by the lake to drink tea and eat cake. Naokogave me a packet of new crop green tea from Shizuoka, and promised to visit me in my new home in
Dulwich on her next visit to London. Well, now I am living in the Dulwich Kennel, and I feel so bereft that
she will never share this small space as my guest and friend. I still have some of that tea, now well past its
novelty, but still good to sip to remind me of her.
Thanks to Richard Smith for his memories of that Nordic workshop when Naoko, he and I disrupted inorder to connect and construct something that opened new possibilities for those of us who think that one
learns another language best by being autonomous, and understanding what that means. They were very
good years, those mid-90s ones, for understanding what learner autonomy could mean.
We met regularly after that, Naoko and I, at various autonomy conferences, and she got me through theediting of the Mapping the Terrain book, another example perhaps of disruption and construction, when I

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

17

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki
was feeling that I had little left to contribute to the autonomy debate. It contains that wonderful paper by
Naoko about the experiences of immigrants in Japan, full of humanity, and hope and sadness at the humancondition. Meeting you, Naoko, made me a better person.
The scent of green tea
Sipped with one who shares and cares
Sharpens the senses

Peter Voller

The news was utterly shocking and saddening for me. My last email contacts with Naoko were in
January, February, and April this year, and they were short but nothing unusual. She mentioned that she
was busy but would be a reader for the ILA2018 conference, putting her areas of interest as “collaboration,community, exploratory practice, identity, learning advising, learner autonomy, narrative, research, study
abroad, teacher autonomy/learning advisor autonomy, virtual learning spaces, voice.” What a wonderfulrange of interests! I can't say I knew Naoko in any way well, as she was a such a private person, but I'm
surprised at how what she wrote or said has stayed with me and had a significant impact. I am so gratefulto her for that, and I will always remember her smile, her playful laughter, and her thought-provoking - andthoroughly infectious – delight in learner development. Andy Barfield

I knew of Naoko long before I met her. People I knew always seemed surprised that I didn’t know her,and so when I did meet her, it felt like she was an old friend. I warmed to her instantly: she was so funny
and quirky and kind. I loved listening to her and reading what she wrote, and even if I didn’t always agreewith her, I was often inspired and stimulated by what she said. I realise that for each of the two
conferences and one symposium that I’ve been involved in organising, Naoko was a keynote speaker. I’m
grateful that she was always so accommodating and enthusiastic—such a pleasure to work with.
My brightest, fondest memories of Naoko: in Beijing in 2011, ordering food for a large group of fellow
conference-goers with her basic Mandarin and fluent body language; working with her in Japan and New
Zealand in 2012 to put together a colloquium on learner autonomy/personal autonomy with three of her
doctoral students, her tenderness with one of our participants who burst into tears during her talk; heradmission that she likes to say and write things that she believes will bring a smile to the faces of her
mentors, David Little and Phil Benson. Believes, believed. It’s so difficult to write of Naoko in the pasttense. Alison Stewart

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

18

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki
I can’t remember how and when I met her in person. But I do remember how I learned about her andwho she was within JALT LD SIG. It was on the ld-comm mailing list for the SIG officers when I took theposition of the co-publication officer with Alison Stewart around 2006. There was a discussion on the needto keep the newsletter bilingual as getting the translation done from English to Japanese was a burden on
some SIG members. At this point, Naoko was no longer the SIG member, but she expressed her opinion on
the mailing list. It was then I learned who Naoko was and the spirit of LD SIG to welcome anybody who isinterested in learning a language on their own initiative and supporting the development of learnerautonomy. And the policy of bilingual publication is to show that spirit of inclusiveness which made me
proud to be part of the SIG. I was also encouraged to carry that tradition despite the difficulty I was havingwith translation.
Since then I met Naoko and saw many times mainly at conferences overseas and was even fortunate tohave her write a preface to the book I co-edited. But my fondest memory of her was the dinner with her in
Beijing 2011 where we were there for AILA. She took a group of people from the conference including me
to a local restaurant near the conference venue. As soon as we sat down, she left the table to check out
what the local people were having. She ended up returning to the table with a customer who spoke English
and ordered everything for us. Naoko was so charming, friendly, and skillful all at once. And thanks to her,
we had a fabulous authentic Chinese dinner. She showed us the basics of language learning – the simple
desire to communicate and the fun of doing it.
Thanks, Naoko. I learned so much from you and wish I had more chances to work with you. I hope thechapter you requested me to write last year will be what you had in mind… 期待に沿えるようがんばります。Kay Irie******In Memory of Naoko Aoki, Inspiring
Andy Barfield & Hugh Nicoll
Note: We wrote this tribute to Naoko for the ILA2018 conference handbook and would like to share thiswith you in Learning Learning too.
“I am a teacher educator of Japanese as a second language and have been writing on topics related tolearner autonomy for the past 10 years or so….” is how Naoko introduced herself in 2003. Ten years later,
she wrote: “I currently work with pre-service and in-service teachers of Japanese as a second language at
Graduate School of Letters, Osaka University. I started writing about learner autonomy after the legendary
Taking Control conference in Hong Kong in 1994. At that time many people argued that learner autonomy
was not appropriate for Asian students. I was not happy with this trend because I personally didn’t want tohave the stereotypical image of Asians imposed on me. I wanted to refute this argument. Teacher
autonomy has also had personal meanings for me. I started off my career as a language teacher and landeda job in a university faculty. I had to forge a new identity, but doing traditional research didn’t seem right.
Expecting classroom teachers to carry out action research in order to get their work recognized also
seemed problematic. I spent some time to build an argument that teacher autonomy and action research
do not automatically connect with each other. Through that process I came to realize the value of narrative
for practicing teachers. I now think that to be allowed to think, talk and write narratively is an importantpart of teacher autonomy.”

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

19

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki
Through her original work and research, Naoko became a leader in the field and developed a supreme
capacity for writing plainly about her work through narratives. She made her points and raised provocative
questions with a smile and light-hearted laughter, encouraging (sometimes demanding) a fierce
attentiveness – of herself as much as asking others – in working for change, always optimistically, learning
how to feel, think and act differently.
Feeling. Voice. Narrative. Identity.
Naoko died on July 8th this year.
Neither of us ever expected that we would be writing an “In Memoriam” for her. We both knew her fornearly 25 years, and the news hit us with jolting unexpectedness. Earlier this year Naoko had been part of
the reading committee for ILA 2018 and was planning to present at the conference with her researchcollaborators. We all expected to see her here.
Whether as readers, seasoned conference participants, language advisors, graduate students orteachers new to inclusive research, we have lost an inspiring mentor, friend and colleague. We will,
however, continue to be inspired by Naoko in our own learning long into the future. In reflecting on her
lifework, we realize how much each of us has to thank Naoko for - enriching our journeys of learnerdevelopment, helping us imagine the world more compassionately but more critically, and encouraging us
to smile together now in sharing stories even though we shed quiet tears of sadness at her passing.
******

Naoko’s Academic Profile
Naoko was Professor in the Graduate School of Letters, Osaka University, from 2004 to 2018 where she
worked with pre-service and in-service teachers of Japanese as a second language (JSL). She had previously
been an Associate Professor at Osaka University from 1997. Before that, Naoko worked as an Associate
Professor in the Faculty of Education at Shizuoka University for 7 years from 1991. She completed her PhD
in 2003 at Trinity College Dublin on Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy and the process of becoming a
pro-autonomy teacher: Theoretical perspectives and life stories of six teachers of Japanese as a second
language. Her Master’s degree was in Applied Linguistics from Sophia University (1981-1983), and as anundergraduate she was awarded a BA in French Literature from Tokyo University of Foreign Studies in 1977.
Naoko was a co-convener of AILA’s Learner Autonomy Research Network from 2011 to 2014. Twenty
years earlier from 1991 to 1994 she had served as Japanese language editor for JALT’s The Language
Teacher. Members of the Learner Development SIG will always remember Naoko as the founding cocoordinator of the Learner Development SIG in 1994, and as an inspiring mentor, friend and colleague.

Naoko’s writing
Chik, A, Aoki, N., & Smith, R. C. (Eds.) (2018). Autonomy in language learning and teaching: New research agendas.
London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Aoki, N. (2017). 教えるのをやめる―言語学習アドバイジングというもう一つの方法― [Stop teaching: Language advising
as an alternative way]. 小出記念日本語教育研究会論文集 [Koide Memorial Japanese Education Workshop Papers],
25, 66-75.
Aoki, N., Rong, M., Guo, F., Liu, S., Wang, J., & Chung, A. (2017). 対面式タンデム学習における学び : 日本語学習者と日本語話者のやりとりにおけるLREを手がかりに [Language learning in face-to-face tandem learning : Looking at

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

20

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki
LREs in an interaction between a Japanese language learner and her Japanese-speaking partner]. 阪大日本語研究[Osaka University Japanese Studies], 29, 19-41.
Aoki, N. (Ed.). (2016). ことばと文字 [Language and Letters] Special issue on learner autonomy practice in thecontext of Japanese as a second/foreign/heritage language, 6. Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan.
Aoki, N. (2016). 21世紀の言語教育：拡大する地平、ぼやける境界、新たな可能性 [Language Learning in the 21stCentury: Expanding Horizons, Blurring Boundaries and Emerging Possibilities] Journal CAJLE, 17, 1-22.
Aoki, N., Wakisaka, M., & Kobayashi, H. (2013). 日本語教育と芸術学のコラボレーション：大阪大学文学部におけるCLILの試み [Collaboration of art and language teaching: A CLIL programme at Osaka University]. 第二言語としての日本語の習得研究 [Acquisition of Japanese as a Second Language], 16, 91-106.
Aoki, N. (2013). 外国語学習アドバイジング [Language advising: Designing your personal learning plan with advice fromexpert]. Kindle book.
Aoki, N. (2013). Learner autonomy for personal autonomy. In K. Dofs & M. Hobbs (Eds.), ILA Selections 2012 (pp.
165-167). Independent Learning Association.
Stewart, A., & 青木 直子 (2103). Interview with Naoko Aoki, Learner Development SIG co-founder.
Learning
Learning, 20(1), 52-59. Retrieved from http://ld-sig.org/LL/20one/AokiNaoko.pdf
Course, S., Lamb, T., & Aoki, N. (2013). Promoting teacher/learner autonomy and improving praxis. In A. Barfield & N.
D. Alvarado (Eds.), Autonomy in language learning: Stories of practice (pp. 140-149). Canterbury, England:
IATEFL.
Aoki, N. (2012). The role of stories in teacher development. In W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin, S. K. Bhatt & I. Walker (Eds.),
Perspectives on individual characteristics and foreign language education (pp. 241-254). Boston, MA: De Gruyter
Mouton.
Aoki, N. (2012). Can-do statements for advisors. In C. Ludwig & J. Mynard (Eds.), Autonomy in language learning:
Advising in action (pp. 154-163). Canterbury: IATEFL.
Aoki, N. (2011). Teacher stories to improve theories of learner/teacher autonomy. In C. J. Everhard & J. Mynard with
R. Smith (Eds.), Autonomy in language learning: Opening a can of worms (pp. 33-36). Canterbury, England:
IATEFL.
Aoki, N., & Nakata, Y. (Eds.). (2011). Gakushuusha autonomy: Nihongo kyooiku to gaikokugo kyooiku no mirai no tameni [Learner autonomy: For the future of Japanese language education and foreign language education]. Tokyo:
Hitsuji Shobo.
Aoki, N., & Osaka University Students (2010). A community of practice as a space for collaborative student teacher
autonomy. In B. O’Rourke & L. Carson (Eds.), Language learner autonomy: Policy, curriculum, classroom (pp.
63-79). Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.
Aoki, N. (2010). Gakushuusha autonomy gairon (An introduction to learner autonomy). In A. Nakajima & Y. Kito (Eds.),
Tout change! CECRL et autonomie de l'apprenant (pp. 61-77). Association des enseignants de japonais en France.
Aoki, N. (2010). Gakushuusha autonomy, jikoshudoogata gakushuu, Nihongo Portfolio, advising, self-access. Nihongo
Kyooiku Tsuushin, 38. The Japan Foundation.
Kjisik, F., Voller, P., Aoki, N., & Nakata, Y. (Eds.). (2009). Mapping the terrain of learner autonomy: Learning
environments, learning communities and identities. Tampere, Finland: Tampere University Press.
Aoki, N. (2009). Where learner autonomy could fail a second language user: Three-level analysis of social context. In
F. Kjisik, P. Voller, N. Aoki, & Y. Nakata (Eds.), Mapping the terrain of learner autonomy: Learning environments,
learning communities and identities (pp. 236-261). Tampere, Finland: Tampere University Press.
Aoki, N. with Kobayashi, H. (2009). Defending stories and sharing one: Towards a narrative understanding of teacher
autonomy. In R. Pemberton, S. Toogood, & A. Barfield (Eds.), Maintaining control: Autonomy and language
learning (pp. 199-216). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Aoki, N. (2008). Nihongo o manabu hitotachi no autonomy o mamoru tame ni [Defending autonomy of learners ofJapanese]. Nihongo Kyouiku, 138, 33-42.
Aoki, N. (2008). Toojisha no iibun kara shuppatsu suru curriculum [A curriculum based on what learners claim]. In
Communica Institute (Ed.), Seikatsusha to shite no gaikokujin no tame no module gata curriculum no kaihatsu to
gakushuu tuuru no sakusei [Developing corriculum modules and learning tools for for foreigners living in Japan](pp. 111-126).
Aoki, N. (2008). Teacher stories to improve theories of learner/teacher autonomy. Independence, 43, 15-17.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

21

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Dedication: Naoko Aoki
Aoki, N. (2008). Gakushuusha autonomy o sodateru kyoushi no yakuwari [Teachers' roles to develop learnerautonomy]. Eigo Kyouiku [The English Teachers' Magazine], 56(12), 10-13.
Aoki, N. (2006). Kyoshi ni totte no sei no shitsu (Quality of life for teachers). In Nihongo Kyoiku Gakkai (Ed.), 2006
Nendo Shuki Taikai Yokoshu [2006 Autumn Conference Preceedings].
Aoki, N. (2006). Kyoushi autonomy (Teacher autonomy). In K. Haruhara & S. Yokomizo (Eds.), Nihongo kyoushi noseichou to jikokenshuu [Development and Self-Training for Teachers of Japanese] (pp. 138-157). Tokyo: Bonjinsha.
Aoki, N. (2006). Teacher autonomy, commitment to the profession, and teacher's personal autonomy. In L. B. Wolff &J. L. V. Batista (Eds.), The Canarian Conference on Developing Autonomy in the Classroom: Each Piece of the
Puzzle Enriches Us All (CD ROM). Canarias: Gobierno de Canarias.
Aoki, N. (2006). 学習者ディベロプメント研究部会が二言語を併用することになったいきさつ. A brief history of thebilingual policy. Learning Learning, 13(2), 6-7. Retrieved from http://ld-sig.org/LL/20one/AokiNaoko.pdf
Aoki, N. (2005). Jiritsu gakushuu [Autonomous learning]. In Shinban Nihongo Kyouiku Jiten [Dictionary of Japanese
Language Education, New Edition] (pp. 773-775). Tokyo: Taishuukan Shoten.
Aoki, N. (2003). Expanding space for reflection and collaboration. In A. Barfield & M. Nix (Eds.), Autonomy you ask!
(pp. 189-196). Tokyo: JALT Learner Development SIG.
Aoki, N. with Y. Hamakawa (2003). Asserting our culture: teacher autonomy from a feminist perspective. In D.
Palfreyman & R. C. Smith (Eds.), Learner autonomy across cultures: Language education perspectives (pp.
240-253). Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Aoki, N. (2002). Aspects of teacher autonomy: capacity, freedom, and responsibility. In P. Benson & S. Toogood (Eds.),
Learner autonomy 7: Challenges to research and practice (pp. 110-124). Dublin, Ireland: Authentik.
Aoki, N. (2002). Teachers' conversation with partial autobiographies. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(2),152-168.
Aoki, N. (2001). Kyooshi no yakuwari [Teacher's roles]. In N. Aoki, A. Ozaki, & S. Toki (Eds.), Nihongo Kyooikugaku oManabu Hito no tame ni (For students of JSL pedagogy) (pp. 184-199). Kyoto: Sekaishisoosha.
Aoki, N. (2001). The institutional and psychological context of learner autonomy. The AILA Review, 15, 82-90.
Aoki, N. (1999). Affect and the role of teacher in the development of learner autonomy. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect inlanguage learning (pp. 142-154). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Aoki, N., & Smith, R. C. (1999). Learner autonomy in cultural context: the case of Japan. In S. Cotterall & D. Crabbe(Eds.), Learner autonomy in language learning: Defining the field and effecting change (pp. 19-28). Frankfurt am
Main, Germany: Lang.
Aoki, N. (1998). Examining definitions of learner autonomy. Handai Nihongo Kenkyuu [Osaka University Japanese
Language Research], 10.
Aoki, N. (1997). Doing and feeling autonomy. Learning Learning, 4(2), 2-3.
Aoki, N. (1996). Mirai no kyooshi no enpawaamento: gakushuusha to shite no jiritsu o mezashite [Empowering
future teachers: towards development of learner autonomy]. In O. Nakajo (Ed.), Ronshuu kotoba to kyoiku[Papers on language and education] (pp. 251-265). Osaka: Izumi Shoin.
Aoki, N. (1995). Empowering future teachers: a humanistic approach to developing learner autonomy. A reportsubmitted for the fifth Nordic Workshop on Developing Autonomous Learning, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Aoki, N. (1994). Introduction of self-directed learning to learners of Japanese language - Chihiro Kinoshita
Thomson, University of New South Wales. Learning Learning, 1(4), 6-8.
Aoki, N. (1994). Autonomy in Asia. Learning Learning, 1(4), 9-12.
Aoki, N., & Smith, R. (1994). “Welcome to the first issue of Learning Learning.” Learning Learning, 1(1), 1.
Retrieved from http://ld-sig.org/LL/1994a.pdf

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

22

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Members’ voices

MEMBERS’ VOICES | メンバーの声
Members’ Voices offers spaces for SIG members to
introduce themselves to other members of the SIG
in a variety of accessible and personalised text
formats and lengths.
“メンバー声”、ＳＩＧ会員皆様が他会員皆さんに向けて多様な形式・文体・長さで、ご自身考えや活動をご紹介していただくためスペースです。例え、以下のような様々な声を歓迎しています.

Reflecting on Motivation andAutonomy
Richard Knobbs
Seitoku University
Email:<richard.knobbs@gmail.com>
Like many people raised in the UK, I studied
foreign languages at high school. In my case, those
two languages were French and Spanish, although
the experience of studying them couldn’t havebeen more different.
In French, we were given lists of vocabulary totranslate and remember, coupled with terribly
exciting tables full of verb conjugations. Our
experience of speaking the language was mainly
restricted to listen and repeat exercises, and ourteacher(s) mainly spoke English. As a result, I haveforgotten most of the French I studied, eventhough I spent time in France and was a huge fanof French films. We were told that if we studied
hard we could get a good grade, and knowing aforeign language would be good for our careers.
In Spanish, we were first given some facts
about Spain. This included listening to Spanish
music, watching clips of Spanish TV shows, andhaving real-life Spanish people come into our class.
The lessons were almost entirely in Spanish, andwe learned greetings and much more without evenrealizing we were studying them. We wereencouraged to experiment with the language, andthink of things we really wanted to talk and write
about. We ate Spanish food, celebrated Spanish
festivals, and learned that Spanish wasn’t justspoken in Spain, but around the world. It became
clear that if we learned Spanish, we could
effectively double our chances of making ourselves
understood in many places, and therefore greatly
improve our experience. We learned that it wasn’t
just a language, but a door to many people,
cultures, and countries. Unfortunately, I only
studied Spanish for two years in high school, but I
retained more than from my five years of French.
The approaches to teaching and learnerdevelopment were not only like night and day interms of style and content, but also in terms of
motivation and autonomy. In French, themotivating factor was clear: get a good grade andmaybe get a good job (a little premature for abunch of 13-year-olds, but there you go). In otherwords, our motivation was purely extrinsic.
Autonomy was almost non-existent. We simply
remembered and repeated. In Spanish, themotivating factors were not so expressly stated,
and were more for us to decide for ourselves. The
motivation was therefore far more intrinsic, only
amplified by our being encouraged to make thelanguage more personal.
Looking back, it’s clear that experiences likethese have shaped my own approach to teaching,and go a long way to explaining why my interests
lie in learner motivation, learner autonomy,
educational design, and educational psychology.
Yet it was only when I began my career as ateacher that I really began to reflect on my own
education. Although my first two teaching positions
were teaching law, language teaching in Japan,
first in an English school (eikaiwa) andsubsequently in public and private schools, often
jolted my memories back to high school.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

23

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Members’ voices
Such memories came fully to the fore while I
was working as an elementary school AssistantLanguage Teacher (ALT) in Chiba. Almost
immediately I noticed that the lessons I was being
asked to teach didn’t link, had no determinablegoal, and merely centred around a nebulous idea ofbeing ‘fun’. So I started engaging the students, andasking them what they were interested in. I took
note of the questions they were asking me, andtheir reactions to certain answers and topics.
These kids were young but they certainly weren’t
stupid, and it upset me that many people were sokeen to dismiss them as just wanting to playgames. What I found was that the students werevery keen to learn, but in many cases they justhadn’t been given the material or opportunity.
I began researching and finding things they had
in common, things they were studying in othersubjects, their learning styles, their interests, andmuch more. I spoke to teachers both in elementary
school and junior high school, wanting to learn
more from their experience and interaction withstudents. Within a year, I was putting together amini ‘curriculum’ with lessons that connected bothin language and themes. The problem was that I
rotated between five schools, so it was hard tomaintain the momentum when I might only visit aschool for a couple of weeks once a semester. To
overcome this, I submitted a plan to the Board of
Education to create an English curriculum for 5th
and 6th grade students, which was immediately
accepted.
For the following two years I researched,
designed, co-wrote and developed a full, tailormade English curriculum for elementary schools in
the city I was working in, which the city introduced
in 2013. We conducted a needs analysis which took
into account the location, students’ needs andlevels, teachers’ needs and levels, usability,
developmental levels, transition from elementary
school to junior high school, CEFR-J levels, andmore.Thematically, it included many suggestions
from students and teachers, including talking about
the local area, hobbies, club activities, their likes
and dislikes, Japanese culture, and more. The
language built naturally and incrementally, andincluded speaking, listening, reading and writing. It
was great to see the reaction not only from thestudents, but also from the teachers we consulted
who saw their ideas and suggestions reflected in
the materials. It was great to see students being
able to connect with the language because they
could relate to the content.
I continue to develop learning materials, and I
am continuing to pursue research into learnermotivation, learner autonomy, educational design,and educational psychology. I look forward tointeracting with everyone in the LD SIG!

Finding a Better Way for HighSchool Students in Japan
Miki Iwamoto
Email: <miki198611@gmail.com>

My name is Miki Iwamoto and I am
currently working on my master’s degree in TESOL
at Temple University. I am also now working at a
public high school in Hyogo prefecture. I started
teaching English at high school nine years ago.
Since I started working as a high school teacher,and because teaching is a very busy job, I haverealized that it is difficult to make time forstudying and improving my teaching skills and havefelt the gap between what I want to teach andwhat students need.
In my classes I want my students to expand
their knowledge and world view by learning asecond language. This idea is from my experience
as a student. When I was at high school myself, I
learned English only through intensive reading andgrammar translation methods: I did not like English
lessons because there was only one answer andstudents were nervous about making mistakes.
However, because I was interested in learning
about other cultures, I chose to study international

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

24

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Members’ voices
relations at university. While studying international
relations, I had opportunities to gather
informations for class and I realized I could get
more information by reading through articles orsearching the Internet in English. To collect the
information, I needed to use English and this was
the first time I used English as a tool for gathering
the information, not for studying English itself. In
addition, when I studied in Australia for one year inuniversity, I realized that what I want to tell isimportant and English is just a tool for conveying
my thoughts, feelings and ideas. From theseexperience in the university and studying abroad, I
realized that English is a tool for acquiringknowledge and I could understand the need for not
only learning English, but also using it in English
classes at school and university. Since then, I havebelieved that the accuracy of English is not asimportant as communicating effectively. I also
hope this way of thinking can decrease mylearners’ anxiety about making mistakes.
Therefore, I always tell my students not to focus on
the accuracy of their English too much and explainthat using language for their own purpose isimportant. To have students put this into practicefor themselves, I try to increase the opportunities
for them to express their own ideas in English in myclasses, and encourage them not to be scared ofmaking mistakes.
However, as a high school teacher, I need tounderstand the ultimate goal of teaching English inthis context is to improve students’ scores on
university entrance examinations and that is what
students need, too. Even though language teachingis highly dependent on the school curriculum andthe teacher’s approach, acquisition of a second
language depends on the learners’ interest andmotivation (Dörnyei, 2001). For instance, eventhough I want to encourage my students to focus
on expressing their thinking in English and notexcessively worry about grammatical mistakes too
much, there is a strong need from my students
themselves to work on English grammar or
vocabulary for preparing the entrance
examinations. Therefore, students tend to spend
more time to study grammar or vocabulary rather
than speaking or writing. This can be boring andstudents may become scared of making mistakes aswell as lose their motivation, but it is difficult tochange my students’ needs because they will need
the knowledge to pass the university entrance
examinations.
I have been trying to find an effective way tosolve these problems by attending seminars forhigh school teachers and sharing these difficulties
with other high school teachers. In the seminars, I
felt relieved when I found out that other teachers
have similar problems and because I could sharethe difficulty of teaching English for the entrance
examinations, but I also realized that I was lack oflearning about education and teaching English. I
could learn some effective and interesting
activities in the seminars, but I neither understood
why these activities are effective for students nor
how to develop my own way of teaching further.
From this experience in the seminar, I felt that I
need to study about teaching English from the
beginning.
From last fall, I started a master’s program of
TESOL and joined JALT to find effective ways toteach high school students and understand learnerdevelopment more fully. For now, I have started
understanding English education theoretically andpractically. For example, I have understood that
there are method and theories to approachteaching English based on empirical research, and I
can consider which method or theories are
effective to my students and my teaching context.
Learning about TESOL has changed myperception of teaching. I also have more
confidence in what I am doing in my lessons
because now I understand the effectiveness ofactivities and can tell my students why we focus onthem in the lesson. I am excited to improve myteaching style more and see the reaction of mystudents toward English classes, especially how
their motivation to English may change with some
activities. Since this school year, I have introduced
shadowing and dictation in my lessons. Against my
expectations, students have remained confusedand not that motivated very much, but I hope I can
increase their motivation by improving how I
introduce these activities and explain their

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

25

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Members’ voices
effectiveness. For now, I am interested in learners’
motivation and autonomy to learn language. I want
my students to become motivated to learn English
and try to study English outside of school, too. I am
looking forward to learning more from taking partin the Learner Development SIG and meeting other
SIG members.
Reference
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language
classroom. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Reflecting on Reflecting
Paul Crook
English Village
Email:<peregrine2424@yahoo.com.au>
A few years ago, while teaching in Hong Kong, I
was asked to deliver some workshops on Analytical
Reading. In order to graduate, all students wererequired to pass a course which required them toread important texts across many fields and thenwrite a number of essays. This might seem awonderful way in which to broaden students'
minds, but the sad truth was that the majority ofstudents found many of the texts extremely
difficult to comprehend, let alone write aworthwhile commentary about. (And in truth, I
wonder how many undergraduates today atuniversities in countries where English is themother tongue would be able to write somethingcogent and meaningful about Plato, Darwin, Hume,or others.)
In any case, a meeting was held after the firstworkshop and comments invited from those
professors and lecturers responsible for delivering
this course. Their comments were favourable
overall, but the one than most struck me was madeby one of the senior professors, who said that whatmost impressed him was the fact that I had advised
students to always ask questions about what they
were reading; to be active readers, in other words,
rather than passive.

I was glad he was glad I had made this point,
but at the same time, it remains inconceivable tome that any student at a supposedly well-reputed
university anywhere in the world should need to be
told this.
Picture, if you will, a classroom in the United
Kingdom in the 1960s. The room is full of children,
aged about five or six. They are in Form 2. The
headmaster of the school walks in one afternoon,excuses himself, and asks the teacher if he may
address the class for a few minutes. It turns out tobe about twenty. During this time he explains theimportance of education, and exhorts us, as young
adults, to do our best. Then, towards the end of histalk, he wrote one single word on the blackboard:
believe.
Then told us not to believe everything we weretold, not to believe everything we read in books ornewspapers, not to believe everything we saw on
TV or at the movies (and today, of course, theInternet would have been at the top of the list!).
Why?
And then he drew a circle around the threeletters in the middle.
Because, he continued, people will often lie toyou. Or tell you half-truths. Or they will twist thetruth. So it is important that you think for yourself.
As far as I was concerned, this was not news. I
was already a long-time convert. My father had
told me before I even entered school, at the age of
4½, not to blindly follow everyone else, but tothink for myself. Furthermore, this same mantra
was intoned by many of my teachers throughout myschool years. And it has stood me well, both as a
student and in other aspects of my life. (And no, I
won't bore you with examples!)For me this is educational bedrock. The very
foundation and purpose of a good, meaningfuleducation. And yet I worry about today. For aroundthe world, in far too many countries andinstitutions, there seems to be a growing focus onscores. Education, now, is a business. Students arecustomers, and as such need to be satisfied andNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

26

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Members’ voices
placated. Gaining an education, particularly atuniversity, is increasingly costly, and to keep these"customers" flocking they need to be made to feelthat they are getting value for money – or at least
what they perceive to be value for money. And thatmeans scores. Good scores. Great scores!

A Brief Reflection on My
Initial English
Learning Years

And so the focus is on tests. Anything notdirectly connected with the coming assessment isspurned. You want to teach me how to think formyself? Forget it. Just tell me what to do! How to
get top marks!!

Allen Ying
Faculty of Foreign Studies, Kyorin
University
Email: <ying.allen@gmail.com>

And so pedagogically driven teachers, or atleast those who are still around, can often findthemselves in a quandary. Do they just put up andshut up, knowing that they are failing theirstudents (even if their charges are singularly
unaware of this fact, and would probably not be
the least concerned if they were aware)? In turnthese less than optimally educated students willoften fail to meet the requirements and desires of
employers, and in this and other ways will
ultimately fail their respective societies.

Growing up in British colonized Hong Kong did
not automatically mean that I was a proficient
English speaker. Children in countries like
Singapore, where bilingualism was made into
official policy from the 1960s, were required tolearn English and their mother tongue, such as
Mandarin or Bahasa Malay (National Library Board
Singapore, 2016). Children in Hong Kong, who are
predominantly Cantonese speakers like myself, are
not required to learn English, and only private
schools and the top public schools provide
sufficient English lessons (Sheung, 2014). Thismeans that the majority of the Hongkongers,
especially those who attend public schools, do notreach high English proficiency, because English istreated as a subject and not used in other classes. I
myself was an example of this, as I had learned
some basic English in kindergarten and the 1st
grade, but seldom used English outside of class. So,
it was no surprise that I was unprepared to attend
regular 2nd grade classes in English when I arrived
in Melbourne, Australia, at the age of 7. I was
initially accepted into a 2nd grade class at a local
school in my neighborhood, but was placed in 1st
grade after the first day, because I was barely able
to understand my teacher. I was referred to a
nearby ESL school within 2 weeks and spent thenext 6 months there. It was through some kind ofcritical age magic that I was able to reach minimal
proficiency to get back on track after those 6months. The subsequent two years of immersive
education in English were formative years that
helped shape my learner beliefs about education,and retrospectively showing me the importance of
having near-peer role models (Murphey, 1995).

Though in looking at what is happening aroundthe world today, perhaps this is precisely what ourcountries' leaders want. If not, then why would
education be so chronically underfunded, andinstitutions forced to adopt business models in thefirst place?
I am so glad I was educated when and where I
was.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

27

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Members’ voices
I attended class with European and Asianstudents who did not speak the same L1 at the ESL
school, which meant that we had to communicate
in our shared L2, English. This gave us
opportunities to develop our L2 abilities throughtrial and error, fostering our self-efficacy andlanguage learning beliefs. Having the same low L2
proficiency as my classmates and seeing
perceptible progress in my English acquisition
helped me maintain a positive outlook on mylanguage abilities. This is a crucial factor for
language learning success according to KondoBrown (2006) and Mori (1999). Culturally, as a
Hongkonger, I was a believer in discipline, hard
work and not relying on talent, so I had a growthmindset and was not afraid to make mistakes(Dweck, 2006). Although I was mostly introverted,
gaining more vocabulary turned nerve-racking
activities such as show-and-tell into enjoyable
experiences, as they were good opportunities forme to use my newfound knowledge. My increased
proficiency and the acknowledgement from myteacher and peers helped me gain more selfefficacy, and I became more willing to use English
outside of class. Being able to leave the ESL schoolin 6 months was the confidence booster I needed,
and was probably what helped tie the idea of
persistence to achievability for me. My proficiency
level was still only at the Common European
Framework of Reference (CEFR) B1 level after 2
years, so I had issues with English composition andlacked the vocabulary to be an advanced English
user in middle school. However, when I returned to
Hong Kong and continued my education at an
American international school, I realized it was not
so different from my experience in Australia and I
would be able to make progress in language
learning as long as I worked hard and persisted. I
was required by my school to attend an elective
ESL course for the first 6 months, but using English
came naturally by that point. It probably took me
until high school to reach native-like proficiency,
but because all my courses were taught in English,
my language learning experience progressed much
more naturally compared to ESL or EFL learning.
Looking back now, I had the type of mindset thatDweck (2006) described as potentially leading tolanguage learning success.
With my willingness to work hard and persist, I
was also motivated to get back into a ‘normal’class by two individuals who I could call my nearpeer role models. One role model was the son of
our coincidental Hong Kong neighbor, who wasalmost the same age as me. He had studied inAustralia for only a few years and was seemingly
speaking English proficiently with an Australianaccent. He was the perfect example of success inlanguage acquisition to me and was the same age,gender and ethnicity as myself (Murphey & Arao,
2001). The second role model was my mother, who
put a lot of effort into studying English during herhigh school days to be a cabin attendant. She had ahigher English competency compared to my father,which meant that she was usually the parent who
socialized with the English-speaking neighbors andfriends. According to Murphey and Arao (2001),
children often learn from the people closest tothem, such as parents, relatives and friends, anddevelop efficacy beliefs from observing otherpeople’s accomplishments. The examples ofsuccessful language learning that I saw in thesepeople helped strengthen my growth mindset andreinforced the notion that English acquisition wasachievable through hard work and persistence. This
gave me the idea of a possible future self, which isanother motivator for language learning success(Dweck, 2006; Mystkowska, 2014).
In this brief reflection on my initial L2 English
learning years, I have discussed two factors which
had helped me eventually become a highproficiency English user. I was studying at a time
when the population in Melbourne, Australia, waspredominantly Caucasian and there was no Internet
or social media. The factors influencing English
learners in 2018 are undoubted different compared
to my experience in 1984, but I think learner
beliefs and near-peer role models are equallyimportant factors for language learning today.
References
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindsets: The new psychology of success.
New York, NY: Random House.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

28

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Members’ voices
Kondo-Brown, K. (2006). Affective variables and Japanese L2
reading ability. Reading in a Foreign Language, 18(1),55-71.
Mori, Y. (1999). Epistemological beliefs and language learning
beliefs: What do language learnings believe about theirlearning? Language Learning, 49(3), 377-415.
Murphey, T. (1995). Identity and beliefs in language learning.
The Language Teacher, 19(4), 34-36.
Murphey, T., & Arao, H. (2001). Reported belief changes
through near peer role modeling. The Electronic Journal
for English as a Second Language, 5(3). Retrieved fromhttp://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume5/ej19/
ej19a1/
Mystkowska, A. (2014). The role of mindsets in foreign
language learning: A person-in-context perspective. In W.
Szubko-Sitarek, L. Salski, & P. Stalmaszczyk (Eds.),
Language learning, discourse and communication (pp.
133-147). Basel, Switzerland: Springer International.
Sheung, R. (2014, June 4). Myth of the bilingual Hongkonger.
South China Morning Post. Retrieved from https://www.scmp.com/comment/article/1525187/mythbilingual-hongkonger
Sim, C. (2016, August 31). Bilingual policy. National Library
Board Singapore. Retrieved from http://
eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/
SIP_2016-09-01_093402.html

Learning to Teach, Teaching
to Learn
Masayo Kanno
Graduate School of Engineering,
University of Fukui
Email:<masayo_kanno@hotmail.com>
In this Members’ Voices piece,
I am sharing my journey from a reluctant learner ofEnglish to a teacher-learner of English. I appreciate
all the opportunities that have brought me to mycurrent profession. I have been both a good andbad learner of English. I enjoyed studying English
for exams and was doing well, but never had theopportunity to use English communicatively. Maybe
I was a typical Japanese school student at thattime. After I got in to a university as a law major, I
lost my interest in English and made just enougheffort to obtain the required credits (and wassometimes absent from a class).
As I was settling into my first job at agovernment organization, I thought I wanted tolearn ‘something’ and decided to study for the
TOEIC test. My long journey of being a learner anda teacher restarted here. I got married andchanged jobs, but was still learning English to
improve my communication skills. It was
stimulating to learn about cultural differences andbroaden my perspectives through the language I
had already studied but had never used.
I began to teach English before and after I had
children and became interested in one simple
question “How can Japanese people improve
English communication skills?”. To me, there wasan invisible barrier between those who could speak
English and those who couldn’t. When I was withthe little babies at home, I came across many
advertisements of English learning resources forkids. The question arose again and I pushed myself
into a teacher’s side to explore the answer. I
started to teach at a private English language
school. Then I expanded my interest too much andfinished my master’s degree in TESOL.
Now I am teaching undergraduate and graduate
students in the faculty of engineering at the
University of Fukui and am working on my doctoral
degree at UCL Institute of Education. My researchinterests lie in learner identity and agency. Most of
my students are quiet and look uninterested – justlike I used to be. But I do hope they will become
able to use English as an engineer. The interview
data for my current study has shown that most of
the students are aware of that, but few actuallytake time to study. I am analyzing the data to findout if there are any hidden meanings behind that.
My initial question “How can Japanese people
improve English communication skills?” turned out
to be too difficult to answer. But I think this has
been a central concern of recent curriculum reform
efforts by MEXT. I do believe a small effort brings
about a small difference. I am exploring betterways to approach my students through my research
as well as my experiences as a teacher and alearner. I hope I can be of some help to mystudents’ long journey to become a better user ofEnglish.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

29

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Members’ voices

Learning Goal Orientation
as a Precursor to
Metacognition
James W. Thomas
Kokusai Junior College, Tokyo
Email:<jaebez.thomas@gmail.com>
I have been teaching at Kokusai Junior College
for nearly three years after experiencing more thana decade teaching in corporate and eikaiwa
settings. Along this teaching journey, I attended
numerous seminars, workshops, and conferences onteaching English. A few of the topics and speakers
that stuck out were those addressing "the negativemindset" students tend to develop in junior highschool and high school that remains with themthroughout their English studies. Additionally,
professional workers would self-deprecatingly
comment on their poor English skills albeit having
invested long-term in studying English. For somereason, this topic resonated within me as a wakeup call to motivate those students who disliked
English. As a result, in 2010, I embarked on a
mission to consume all the relevant literature that
was applicable and related to language
learners’ (L2) motivation. I read the works of
Dörnyei (2005), Gardner (1985), Deci and Ryan
(1985), and Ushioda (2001). While these works
provided me lenses for viewing L2 motivation, I felt
they lacked practical tools for alleviating the ills
inherent in "the emotional baggage" language
learners brought to the classroom (Suzuki, 2017).
Additionally, Matsuno (2018) in the July / August
issue of The Language Learner presents her
research on when "students begin to like or dislike
English" and "the reasons associated with theirpreferences and motivation" (p. 19). These are theissues that I have been pondering for more than adecade: (1) Why the dislike of English? (2) How tomotivate students to learn English? and (3) Whatpractical approaches could be used in theclassroom to create a positive environment forlearning English?

Last year, I focused my research on creating a
positive mindset from the beginning of thesemester. Naturally, students who do not like
English are not motivated to learn English.
Unsurprisingly, a lot of research associated withlearning English and motivation has been
conducted in the last decade in terms of Likert
questionnaires to gauge students' favorability oflearning English. While the research seems to focus
on the attitudes of individual learners, I feel very
little research has focused on practical application
as it relates to curriculum design.
At the same time, I ran across Dweck's (2006)
research on how fixed mindset inclines to be
associated with a negative attitude toward learningin which a student’s dialogue of negative self-talk
could sound like, “I’m not good at English. I don’t
have the talent, and I’ll never be good at English.”
As a result, a teacher could only imagine thecountless "negative deposits" that have been madein the span of six years (from junior high school tohigh school) when students start to seriously learn
English(Suzuki, 2017; Matsuno, 2018). Given this"emotional baggage" that students are likely tobring to the college classroom, I decided from lastyear to design my classes to redress those students
who disliked English. While combing the research
related to English learning and goal-setting, I read
Harford (2008) in which she iterated that students
should take ownership of their learning throughreflection and goal-setting. In this regard, I
decided regardless of the students' background andprevious encounters in learning English, the firstclass is always about goal-setting for the semester,
the immediate future, and the long-term. The
reason, I mention the long-term, is a goal of "active
learning" is connecting learning to skills thatstudents' can home later in their lives.
Learning English is a long-term process thatinvolves a lot of trial and error. Through thisprocess, a systematic understanding of English
develops. If a learner wishes to master English,
they must be motivated and be willing to dedicate
countless numbers of years in order to reach thisgoal. In any given English course, students will havedifferent reasons for taking a course. While

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org/>

30

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Members’ voices
teachers set goals and objectives for their courses
to run and manage the classroom, it is the
responsibility of individual learners to define goals
and objectives above and beyond their current
course. Setting these long-term goals andobjectives could be the motivating force thatmoves learners toward a more positive learning
experience. Most important is that goal orientation
gets students to think about the big picture. It
provides an anchor for the semester's journey.
Thus, one means of creating a more positive
learning experience is having students individually
define and set learning outcomes in terms of goals
and expectations for a course and plans for future
improvements at the beginning of the course.
Doing this serves a few purposes: (1) It allows
students to define their sources of motivation; (2)It allows teachers to understand their students’needs in order to design a more positive learning
experience; and (3) It is a record as reminder forboth the teacher and the student on establishing a
positive learning environment.
Goal-setting at the beginning of a course isbetter for building on the framework for fostering a
student-centered classroom in which English as a
Foreign Language (EFL) is mainly taught, as somestudents may never have experienced a studentcentered classroom. Moreover, teachers andstudents can better understand expectations andshare the responsibility of creating a positive
learning environment and experience. Further,teachers can understand their students’ needs andattitudes about learning English at the beginning ofa course, so instructors can plan lessons tochallenge students with positive attitudes toward
English while simultaneously motivating students
with negative attitudes toward English. Finally,
progress happens little by little as goals areachieved and motivation builds. I believe goalsetting is a precursor for teaching metacognitive
skills. Thus, they are mutually inclusive. As aresult, goal-setting in tandem with acquiring
metacognitive skills for learning English, I believe,
could possibly be the silver bullets for
improvement and motivation. However, if students
are skewed toward fixed negative mindsets, it
might be in the best interests of instructors to view

learning goal orientation as a precursor andcatalyst for teaching metacognitive skills.
As of April 2018, I have embarked on thejourney of teaching metacognitive skills. This
process has taken the initial form of "getting
students to think about what they are learning" byfilling in an "English Learning Log" chart that I
designed, which is self-reflective and goal
orientated. The students near the end of each classreflect, discuss, and fill in their charts using
keywords. Before concluding the class, I will have arapid fire Q&A with the students about the
keywords they wrote. By acquiring metacognitive
skills, students gain learning strategies andmotivation that will gradually allow them tobecome autonomous learners. Ultimately, the goalof education is that autonomous learners become
lifelong learners.
References
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and selfdetermination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005) The psychology of the language learner:
Individual differences in second language acquisition.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: the new psychology of success.
New York, NY: Random House.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and language
learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London,
UK: Edward Arnold.
Harford. M. (2008). Ownership through reflection and goalsetting. English Journal, 98(1), 61-65.
Matsuno, S. (2018). Japanese learners' consciousness toward
English: When do they begin to like or dislike English? The
Language Teacher, 42(4), 19-23.
Suzuki, S. (2017). Emerged challenges for English education in
Japan: The emotional baggage of language learners. Apples– Journal of Applied Language Studies, 11(1), 5-11.
Ushioda, E. (2001). Language learning at university: Exploring
the role of motivational thinking. In Z. Dörnyei & R.
Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition(pp. 93-125). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii, Second
Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

31

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles

SHORT ARTICLES | 小論
Fostering Reflection: Helping Language Learners (andTeachers) to Take (and Release) Control
Richard J. Sampson
Gunma University, Japan
Email:<sampson@gunma-u.ac.jp>
This short reflective article provides a narrative of my experiences with the implementation of areflection project for English as a foreign language (EFL) learners. The project encourages students toreflect on their experiences and beliefs, and, hopefully, gain more control of language learning forthemselves.

Reflection and learning
For the better part of 20 years, I have been working in education contexts within Japan, from English
conversation schools, to elementary and junior-high schools, kosen (colleges of technology), and finallytertiary education. The work environments in which I have found myself have either encouraged thinking
about teaching and learning, or at least not hindered it. This “thinking about teaching and learning” hasgenerally come in the form of reflective activities conducted with my students or other teachers (see e.g.,
Sampson, 2012, 2016). Reflection has been part of my constant attempts as a practitioner to better
understand the young people with whom I work, and, hopefully, for them to understand themselves a little
better also.
Reflection is thinking about our experiences. One of the common summaries of John Dewey’s approachto education illustrates its importance to learning: We do not learn from experience; we learn fromreflecting on experience. In Dewey’s (1916/1944) reckoning, merely living through experiences is only going
halfway – it is the process of then thinking back on these experiences from which we can truly learn anddevelop. In essence, reflection can be thought of as a systematic, rigorous, disciplined way of thinking,involving a process of experiencing, describing experience, distancing and analysis of experience, andsubsequent intelligent action based on these deeper understandings (Rodgers, 2002). It is a meaning-making
process that can assist learners and teachers to move from one experience into the next with a deeper
understanding of its relationships with other experiences and ideas.
Recognizing a need for change
I began teaching at my current place of work – a small, regional university to the north of Tokyo – justover five years ago. One of my primary roles is overseeing a coordinated English curriculum for 550 first-year
students in the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) group. Courses in the curriculum
are largely based around the development of listening and reading skills. In the past few years, thecurriculum has seen marked progress in terms of academic outcomes measured by standardized tests. Thesescores are held up as evidence of the benefits of the curriculum for our students.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

32

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
Nevertheless, I have always felt unease at the compulsory nature of these courses. It seems to be taken
for granted that students will want to continue to study English even though it is not their major, or thatthey will have absorbed societal messages about the necessity of English (Sampson, 2017a) to such a degree
that they will persist (meekly endure?) with study. However, no thought is given to the potential lack of selfdetermination in their learning (Ryan & Deci, 2002). For instance, at the commencement of every academic
year, my colleagues and I conducted an orientation session about the compulsory English courses for theentire first-year STEM group. The session was devoted to providing an overview of the "how" of students'
learning at a small scale, without zooming out to any explication of why they were going to be doing this. I
was asked to present parts of this outline, yet I had a strong feeling of "frustrated authenticity" (Vannini &Burgess, 2009), a deep sense of conflict due to acting in ways that ran against my own values. I wanted towork more with learners to examine the interrelationships between their past and present learning
experiences, their evolving identities, and their motivation to engage in lessons and develop as English
users. While they were producing scores on tests that satisfied the University's need for measurable
outcomes, what did my students think and feel about the meaning of their English learning?
Over the last five years, as I have become more accustomed to this work environment, I have also
become better able to engage with my colleagues to gradually make changes that help learners to reflect.
We conducted a needs analysis with potential employers of our STEM students (Sampson, 2017b), and now
introduce findings regarding practical uses of occupational English and advice from company managers at
the initial orientation session. I have been using reflective activities in action research with my individualclasses, such as asking learners to reflect on the sources of their feelings when conducting LINE text chatwith students from an Australian university. Notwithstanding, while these small-scale efforts certainly havetheir benefits, I also wanted to further encourage my fellow teachers to have students think more deeply
about what they are learning, how they are learning, and what difficulties and successes they experience.
And, crucially, at all of these stages, why.
Introducing a pilot reflection project
To this end, I sent out a call to my colleagues in the spring break before the 2017 academic year to
discuss the possibility of using the Moodle online learning management system to provide reflective prompts
for students. Three teachers responded. We commenced the project as a pilot from the spring semester of2017 in nine of our classes. The reflections draw on the recognition of the importance of identity and self inlanguage learning (Dörnyei, 2009). Prompts include such topics as learners’ past experiences with English,
ideas about effective language study and hopes for the actions of classmates, the felt expectations of others
and messages from society about English, and future prospects of English use. At the end of each semester
there is also a more general reflection about students’ experiences in lessons, their perceptions of thereflection project, and their goals for near-future English study.
Over the course of their first year at university, students are prompted to write these eight reflective
passages as homework assignments. They are given the choice of writing in English or Japanese. Personally, I
encourage my students to write in English, as I feel it important to respect and foster their emerging English
identities. Perhaps due to this nudge, all of my students construct their passages in English, although someinsert an occasional Japanese word here or there. These passages are then brought into the classroom
through interactive activities. For instance, students mingle to find similarities in their past experienceswith English; critically discuss whether they agree or disagree with societal messages about English; choose
a hope for action elicited from their classmates and set it as their goal for a lesson; create short videos
showing a future failure with English and how to overcome this potentiality.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

33

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
Some initial feedback
Since piloting, we have found that reflection gives learners a valuable chance to think about themeaning of their English studies, encounter new ideas from their classmates, discover that other students
are motivated to study English, think about their actions in lessons and how they could improve, and topractice writing authentically in English. Here is some feedback we have received from the semester two,2017 reflections (names are pseudonyms):

It was also good that we shared our own idea with each other. Some classmates have ideas which I
did not come up with. I could know those ideas. On the other hand, I could know that most all ofclassmates have enthusiasm about English. Those two points stimulate me. (Moe)

When I wrote reflection project, it was able to teach me the importance of objective view. I
noticed my weakness in English lesson, so I made an effort to overcome the weakness. I also noticedclassmates thought out a method or a way to use English. For example, the one was making a note
while listening to teacher’s words. I thought it might be useful and I sometimes made a note in English.
In addition to them, I was able to review what I learned in the class. In this way, reflection projectreminded me of what I felt in the English class. And more reflection project I wrote, less distresswriting English was. When I was high school student, there was few opportunity to write my reflection
in English so I was happy to have chance to write English now. (Hiro)As these two extracts hint, these reflective activities have provided our students with spaces to makerealizations and connections, some of which might destabilize a current status quo - such as when Hironotices and tries to overcome his weakness in English. Moreover, while we often mistake reflection as
individual introspection, Dewey (1916/1944) argues that it needs to happen in community, in interaction
with others. Sharing affirms the value of one’s experience, allows us to see things anew from theperspectives of others, and provides support to engage and act (Rodgers, 2002). The power of sharing is also
evident in these two extracts from learners, as when it assists Moe to realize that her classmates are
motivated, or prompted Hiro to notice that his classmates "thought out a method or way to use English."Working with other teachers has naturally presented its own challenges and rewards. As the following
comments from my colleagues attest, at times we have struggled to incorporate the project into the regularcurriculum, yet we have also gained insights to students that previously went unnoticed:
I feel very embarrassed that I didn’t read students’ reflections as they wrote them. I was just too busy.
That’s my goal for the second semester. (Terry)
It was really refreshing, to give students a chance to discuss this in class. I could get a feel for what
students are going through. (Brian)
I can tell that the reflection project has had a positive impact on the students and has changed theirperception of the purpose for studying English. …Thank you again for this special gift to our students.
(Brian)Conclusion
As this reflection project is an ongoing work-in-progress, the jury is still out on its effectiveness. While
the feedback we have received from participants has been predominantly positive, there are students forNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

34

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
whom the process of writing reflections - whether they be in English or Japanese - is challenging and attimes tedious. Equally, it is my experience that some students find it difficult to understand why they arebeing asked to reflect, and why the related sharing activities take up English class time. These areundoubtedly points that we will need to refine in our rationales at the introduction of the project.
Nevertheless, based on student comments to date, the reflective tasks do seem to assist them to take more
self-determined control of their English learning. From another perspective, the project has prompted
colleagues to try to understand more deeply the learners with whom we are interacting in our teaching.

References
Dewey, J. (1944). Democracy and education. New York, NY: Free Press. (Original work published in 1916)
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity
and the L2 self (pp. 9–42). Bristol, England: Multilingual Matters.
Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at Dewey and reflective thinking. Teachers College Record,104(4), 842–866.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic dialectical perspective. In E. L.
Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3-33). Rochester, NY: University ofRochester Press.
Sampson, R. J. (2012). The language-learning self, self-enhancement activities, and self perceptual change. Language
Teaching Research, 16(3), 313–331.
Sampson, R. J. (2016). Complexity in classroom foreign language learning motivation: A practitioner perspective fromJapan. Bristol, England: Multilingual Matters.
Sampson, R. J. (2017a). Openness to messages about English as a foreign language: Working with learners to uncoverpurpose to study. Language Teaching Research, Online First, 1-17.
Sampson, R. J. (2017b). Expectations and dreams: Industry and student ideas about future English use. OnCUE Journal,
10(1), 21–38.
Vannini, P., & Burgess, S. (2009). Authenticity as motivation and aesthetic experience. In P. Vannini & S. Burgess (Eds.),
Authenticity in culture, self and society (pp. 103-120). Farnham, England: Ashgate Publishing.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

35

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles

Learning by Teaching: A Meta-learning ProgramShu-wen Lin
Sojo International Learning Center, Sojo University, Kumamoto
Email: <slin@m.sojo-u.ac.jp>

Prior to my teaching career at higher education in Japan, I had 8 years of TESOL experience at highschool level in Taiwan. The students I was teaching had had at least four years of experience learning English
at the elementary level. They would have had three to four 45-minute English classes every week at thejunior high level, and four to five 50-minute classes at the senior high level. The average English class hours
Taiwanese students have per week are similar to those in Japan. During these initial years of teaching I had
been accustomed to preparing my students for high-stakes examinations by accumulating enough English
vocabulary and grammar knowledge. However, I also became afraid that my students would not be flexible
enough to face the challenges of the rapidly changing knowledge society, which resulted in my increasing
interest in developing their cognitive skills and learning strategies.
My interest in “learning-to-learn” skills stemmed from my anecdotal observations of and experiences in
Taiwan’s high school education system, as well as the emphasis of the latest education reform in Taiwan ondeveloping students’ “learning-to-learn” abilities. I observed during my own learning and teachingexperiences that, in a high school classroom setting, there was often a lack of learning about one’s own
learning, such as learning goals, strategies, and strengths and weaknesses. Reflection on the course of myown study in school revealed that I had been learning primarily for the purpose of obtaining the higher
possible score on the high-stakes, paper-and-pencil, and one-off Joint Entrance Exam, which determined not
only the admission to university but also to a specific department. The learning environment was rather
monotonous. My time in school was often filled with various types of tests and exams, with excessive time
allotted for mechanical practice to memorize subject content. Teacher-directed instruction was the norm,and prescriptive, teacher-determined answers were viewed as the only “standard” answers.
Soon after I started my teaching career, I began to grow increasingly dissatisfied with my teaching. It
was becoming a reproduction of my own school experience. Although the joint examination system had been
replaced with multiple assessment methods and entrance schemes, students’ and teachers’ thinking about
learning was limited because of the content-packed curriculum and large class sizes. My own students wereused to being dependent on me for directions for learning. For example, they often asked me how to scorehigher on English tests, expecting that I knew the “single best correct” answer. Having been stimulated by
the students’ questions, such as “Why do I constantly forget the vocabulary I have learned?” and “How do I
find the meaning of a text?”, I began to think about how I myself learn. This was a question that I had never
explicitly thought about when I was a student. I could not help but speculate how my students would be
affected if they were in my place, i.e. being asked to solve learning problems or make learning decisions.
In addition, around the time I proposed my thesis plan, the Taiwan Ministry of Education updated thecurriculum guidelines for high schools, with a new emphasis placed on logic and critical thinking, creativity,
reflection, and learners’ self-management (Ministry of Education, 2009). Some researchers and practitioners
in Taiwan (e.g., Chen, 2012; Cheng, Yeh, & Su, 2011; Dai, 2011) studied or addressed such an emphasis.
Despite the acknowledgement of the emphasis on thinking skills and learning process as the feature of theguidelines, teachers experienced difficulties in putting it into practice (Chen, 2012; Cheng, Yeh, & Su,

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

36

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
2011). Furthermore, newspaper reports (e.g., Chen, 2015) indicated that, after the implementation of thecurriculum guidelines, high school students in Taiwan remained weak in planning for, monitoring, andreflecting on their own practices.
Inspired by the foregoing, I decided to carry out my doctoral research project on facilitating thedevelopment of students’ meta-learning capacity. Meta-learning centers around students being aware ofthemselves as learners and taking control over their learning strategy selection and deployment (Biggs,
1985). Doing this can contribute to their success in difficult and demanding learning situations and theirdevelopment as independent learners (Norton, Owens, & Clark, 2004; Ward, Connolly, & Meyer, 2013). The
concepts of meta-learning and reflection and the links between them served as the basis for developing andevaluating the meta-learning program in my study. Other researchers (e.g., Lizzio & Wilson 2004; Tarricone2011) had suggested that meta-learning can be developed through reflection in problem-solving contexts. In
my research, I drew an analogy between the meta-learning–reflection relationship and the science of sonar
technology (see Figure 1): Learners who are more deeply and critically reflective can attain greaterawareness and control over their own learning.

Figure 1. Relationship between meta-learning and reflection.
To enhance the development of students’ reflection and meta-learning capacity, I adopted a coordinatedsociocultural perspective of learning for the design and development of the meta-learning program. The
pedagogical strategies I used were informed by social constructivist and emancipatory theories of learningand teaching as well as Dewey’s philosophy of experience. These theories posit that students’ uniqueexperiences with the world serve as a catalyst for reflection, and suggest that relationships and interactions
among students and between students and teachers lead to deeper, critical reflection. The meta-learning
program included a service learning component. This involved the students assuming the role of a teacher
and teaching English to younger children. It was a pedagogical strategy for promoting conceptual change inlearning because it stimulated me and my students to step out of the customary hierarchy and engage inconversations on a more even footing, as reciprocal members of a shared community.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

37

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
I designed the meta-learning program to be a yearlong EFL elective course. It was offered to grade 10
students, aged 15–16 years, in a private high school in Taipei, the capital city of Taiwan. The program
comprised term-time activities including an orientation session, a film viewing, the observation of teacher
demonstrations, group teaching practices in class and in local churches, as well as a one-week servicelearning experience during summer vacation in a remote area in Taiwan. Throughout the program, reflection
activities such as discussions and journaling were assigned to aid the students in developing a habit oflearning by examining their own and others’ experiences. The students responded to the questions prompts I
gave related to the theme of each term-time activity and the service-learning experience. This metalearning program was characterized by a rethinking of the roles of students and teachers, an interdependentand reciprocal partnership among the students and between the students and teacher, a contribution tocommunity service, an emphasis on practical experiences in relation to learning, and a focus on reflection
on practices.
My doctoral study suggested that drawing analogical or contrastive links between various learning
experiences could stimulate students to become aware of perspectives on learning in addition to their own.
For example, a comparison and contrast between my students’ approaches to learning and those of film
characters or their role models helped raise the students’ awareness of their own strengths or weaknesses inlearning and of effective learning strategies. The following excerpt illustrates this point:
There are some similarities between my sister and me. We both love to read English novels
and watch English movies. When there are some good sayings or slang, we will pause thevideo and ask my mom about it. One difference is how good we can memorize thevocabulary or sayings. My sister can remember them all, but I will forget them easily. In
addition, my sister speaks English with full confidence, and she can read English quickly. So
she learns English better than I do. (2nd semester_S13)
Furthermore, some questions were used as prompts to unpack the students’ perceptions of their priorexperiences of learning, and then to compare and contrast these understandings with current tasks in classor field. The students found that tasks at different levels of English learning, such as elementary, juniorhigh, and senior high, differ noticeably in complexity and in how they can be effectively completed. For
example:In elementary school, my English teacher always played games and sang songs with theclass. Elementary school English was easy because I had learned what was taught inkindergarten…. My junior high school teacher used mnemonic phrases to help us remember
vocabulary words. After teaching the class the words and their uses, the teacher would
have us read the text in the textbook. Whenever we encountered a vocabulary word, weread the use of the word once again. We practiced the words many times, in the text and in
the workbook, so I learned the words by heart. I didn’t have to make special efforts injunior high school…. In senior high school I have to depend on myself to study English mostof the time. Without the teacher’s help of repeating the vocabulary words and their
meanings, I can barely memorize the vocabulary. I almost always fail the English tests. (2ndsemester_S03)
The above activities and question prompts imposed a structure that facilitated identifying connections
between past and personal learning experiences and learning events in the present and the future, as wellas the learning experiences of other students. This student, in particular, contrasted vocabulary teaching
and its effects at different levels on her English development. Students at lower learning levels appeared toexperience more lively teaching strategies and more learning support. Students at a higher learning level,on the other hand, might be expected to learn independently. However, as with the above learner, students

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

38

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
seem often to experience a lack of guidance in strategic learning, which might be one reason why they failin English. If the student had realized the cause of her past achievements and connected this to her present
needs, this might have encouraged her to actively devise learning strategies or seek assistance from others.
The mechanisms of comparison and contrast of the meta-learning program helped the students to perceive
their experience as coherent, connected instead of discrete, isolated occurrences.
Additionally, the students who assumed a teaching role transformed their perspectives and practices fromthose that they were conventionally socialized to identify with, and they became inclined to perceive
greater responsibility for and commitment to learning and to exercise more control over learning activities.
For example, a student (S18) became aware that the children she taught learned more effectively within agroup. It could be inferred that she might be more likely to employ interdependent learning strategies in her
own learning. Some other students explicitly stated, for example, “When I was teaching the children, I could
finally empathize with my teachers and realize what their expectations were for us” (S01_2nd semester)and, “Returning to the role of student, I can identify with what my teachers emphasize.” (S19_2nd
semester)
It is difficult for me to replicate the meta-learning program in my current context considering thecurriculum structure and student characteristics. The institute where I teach now is an international
learning center in a Japanese university. My duties include teaching English communication skills to the firstyear students of undergraduate level and after-class speaking practice with the students. The English
communication course I teach uses a relatively rigid curriculum in order for the students to “develop theability to conduct conversations on everyday topics,” such as family, leisure, and education. The students’English level is basic (A1~A2). It is necessary that I support their meta-learning processes, such as planning,monitoring, and evaluating, with their first language. The fact that I have limited Japanese-language
proficiency adds to the challenges that I face in implementing the meta-learning program. However, I hopeto adopt and adapt, in present circumstances, the pedagogical principles outlined in my thesis, namely (a)fostering a break with hierarchical student–teacher relationships, (b) developing a community that
appreciates interdependence and connection, and (c) facilitating reflective practical experiences throughwritten/oral activities, such as journaling and discussion. I am looking forward to collaborating with otherpractitioner-researchers in the Learner Development SIG and beyond to uncover alternative approaches tolearning to learn.
References
Ministry of Education, Taiwan. (2009). 普通高級中學英文科課程綱要補充說明 [Guidelines of English instruction in secondary
schools]. Retrieved from http://web.ylsh.ilc.edu.tw/course/files/990504/03.pdf
Biggs, J. B. (1985). The role of metalearning in study process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 55(3), 185–
212.
Chen, C. (2012). Teachers’ and student’s perceptions of the competence indicators in national curriculum guidelines
for senior high school English (Master’s dissertation). Retrieved from https://etds.ncl.edu.tw
Chen, Z. (2015, April 7). 國高中生反思不足計畫能力弱 [Taiwanese secondary school students lack reflective skills and weakin planning]. The United Daily News. Retrieved from http://udn.com/news/story/6915/819728
Cheng, Y., Yeh, H., & Su, S. (2011). Planning, implementation, and expected impact of the 2010 curriculum guidelines
for senior high school English: Teachers’ perspectives. English Teaching & Learning, 35(2), 91–137.
Dai, M. (2011). Constructing an L2 motivational model of planned learning behavior (Doctoral thesis). Retrieved fromhttps://etds.ncl.edu.tw
Lizzio, A., & Wilson, K. (2004). Action learning in higher education: An investigation of its potential to develop
professional capability. Studies in Higher Education, 29(4), 469–488.
Norton, L. S., Owens, T., & Clark, L. (2004). Analysing metalearning in first-year undergraduates through theirreflective discussions and writing. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41(4), 423–441.
Ward, S. C., Connolly, R., & Meyer, J. H. F. (2013). The enactment of metalearning capacity: Using drama to help raise
students’ awareness of the self as learner. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 50(1), 14–24.
Tarricone, P. (2011). The taxonomy of metacognition. Hove, NY: Psychology Press.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

39

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles

Fostering Fluency through Wrong English: Working with
What Learners Have
Joel P. Rian
Hokkaido Information University
Email: <rianjp48@do-johodai.ac.jp>
Teaching English at Japanese universities is one of the most challenging jobs I have ever had. It has also,
by far, been the most rewarding. I taught first as a full-time contract teacher at Sapporo Gakuin University,and am currently tenured at Hokkaido Information University (HIU). I also teach part-time at Hokusei
Gakuen University.
Among the variety of classes I have taught—including presentation skills, academic writing, seminars, andmy all-time favorite, English Language History—I have mostly taught compulsory EFL classes to non-English
majors: so-called “general English” classes that are required for graduation by students in all majors. These
classes, as many of my colleagues who teach the same classes have similarly observed, tend to be populatedwith students of lower levels of proficiency. Their attitude toward being in these EFL classes varies, but it isfair to assume that, above all, they are there because they have to be.
Teachers’ motivation to teach general English classes varies too. Over time, some teachers succumb todemotivation. They slog through them for the same reason as some of their students: because they have to.
I have only been teaching at university for 10 years now, but in that short time, I have learned how to relishgeneral English classes. My students are—for the most part—talkative, engaged, and they use English for themost of the class. Understandably this surprises some of my colleagues. A few have asked what kind of magic
I use. One thing I love to do in class, I respond, is to encourage wrong English.
Wrong is not the right word. What I mean is, I deemphasize accuracy. I want what so many of us as EFL
teachers want: for my students to talk in English, to each other, in class. So, I simply redefine what
acceptable English is. I embrace a philosophy of anything-goes-as-long-as-meaning-is-negotiated: as long as
one person tries to convey meaning, and as long as the other person tries to understand. For example:
A: You. . . free. . .
B: Free?
A: Free time. . . you. . . are you. . . free time?
B: Are you . . . what mean?
A: You are. . . you have. . . free time. What you do?
B: Ahh! Game.
A: Oh! Game! Me too!

This is a perfectly acceptable rendering of a more native-like exchange:
A: What kinds of things do you like to do in your free time?
B: I like to play video games.
A: Oh! Me too!

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

40

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles

Teachers of compulsory English classes at Japanese universities routinely—and accurately—point out
student resistance to engaging in English conversation in class. The literature on Japanese university
students’ EFL anxiety reflects these observations (see Williams & Andrade, 2008; Cutrone, 2009; King 2013).
Getting students to engage in English conversation may seem a particularly herculean task in someclassrooms—ones that many of us are familiar with: non-English majors in compulsory classes withcollectively low proficiency and low motivation (e.g., McVeigh, 2002; Kikuchi, 2015).
So when I find myself not dreading these classes like some of my colleagues, sometimes I doubt myself.
For the most part, my students are awake, engaged, and use a lot of English with each other in free
discussion on a given topic.
I’m not feeling the same disenchantment as some of my colleagues are. I must be doing something
wrong. I have fun watching my students have fun, as they fumble with their rudimentary proficiency,
inadvertently bending, twisting and fracturing the rules of English that other teachers sweat so hard toteach. It seems like my classes aren’t serious enough.
The truth is, I take my job very seriously. For lower proficiency learners in compulsory classes at a nonprestigious university, the reality is that they have had a lot of English language forms pushed upon them,again and again, in order to get through high school. Now, here they are at university, and who am I to getthem all to use the “be” verb perfectly? Not that that’s bad, but I would simply rather not. Instead, I wantthem to use what they know right now. This is usually more than they collectively think, and when I getthem to realize it, the magic starts.
How do I get them to reveal what they know? By virtually doing away with requirements on form. In the
research there is a long-standing debate about how and what kinds of language form are ideallyincorporated into EFL classes (see e.g., Ellis, 2016). My classroom design a significant departure from thetraditional prescription of language forms. That departure is summarized below.
A topic is introduced to the entire class. I do this every two weeks. It can be any topic that can be talked
about from opposing viewpoints. Fast food tends to work well as a starter topic. Arguably, fast food ischeap, convenient and fast, but (again, arguably), it’s unhealthy. My HIU students tend to love the topic ofvideo games. Potentially, they’re a communication tool. You can learn things from them. They’re fun. But
they’re also addictive, eat money and time, and not the real world.
Students are put into groups of three. They have an all-English (or mostly English) conversations forabout 10 minutes. The rules: (1) all English, but just use whatever you can; don’t worry about grammar; (2)not all members can take the same position (e.g. fast food is good, fast food is bad); and (3) keep theconversation going.
Groups change members about every 10 minutes, and the conversation starts again. Sometimes I walkaround and listen in on conversations. Occasionally I join them if I feel like it, or if I see them struggling too
much. Between rotations, I elicit some of the language the students used, and write it on the blackboard.
Sometimes I suggest other phrasings or introduce vocabulary and simple phrase structures. Or, I offer
phrases that other classes have come up with over the years. Frequently, I observe groups coming up withideas and expressions that are passed along to other groups when they change members. Students borrowand recycle them when they join other groups. This act of pilfering and recycling words is something that I
heartily encourage.
There are two conversation tests per semester. I prefer to call them performances, not tests. In
randomly chosen groups of three or four, on a given topic with arguable viewpoints (e.g., “Video games are

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

41

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
good or bad?”), students have to navigate an all-English conversation for about 10 minutes. They can use
halting, clumsy utterances with mime galore if they want. If the others get the main idea, it’s OK. If not,they can ask for clarification. And even if they can’t convey exactly what they mean, or if the conversation
stalls, they can reset it using something like “Anyway, I think (video games are not good, because…)” andcontinue the conversation.
A 20-minute writing performance precedes the conversation performances. Each student writes afictional conversation between two people on a given topic, each from an opposing viewpoint. They cannot
use any Japanese, but they can use sloppy grammar and horrible spelling if they want. I don’t care. I’minterested in the ideas they come up with. In some cases even I won’t understand what they wrote. In thatcase I’ll mark it with “What do you mean?” Grades of A, B, C, D are holistic: The more they talk and/or
write, the better their grade.
Amid the wreckage of atrocious spellings and helter-skelter grammar, some truly amusing exchanges ofphrases and ideas emerge. Here are a couple of in-class group discussion excerpts from spring 2018:

A: “Do you like English?
B: “No.”
A: “Why?”
B: “English is difficult. I don’t like grammar.”
A: “Oh. Grammar. Me neither. But. . . I like talking.
B: “Oh. I don’t like talking.”
A: “Why?”B:“I can’t speak English.”

A: “. . . But . . . you talk English now. . .”B: [smiles sheepishly]

A: “I think video game is good. I like play video game. You?”
B: “No.”
A: “No?”
B: “No.
A: “What mean no?”
B: I think . . .no touch game. I think video games is. . . should. . . don’t touch.”
A: “Don’t touch game?? Why? What do you mean?”
B: “I think video games is perfect. So . . . wonderful. It’s god. God is no touch. God is...” [makes handstogether praying gesture, bowing head]
A: [pointing, emphatic] “You. . . pray video games??” [praying gesture] “Not play??” [using gamecontroller gesture]
B: “Yes! Game is god. God is pray. [praying gesture] God is don’t touch.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

42

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
A: [laughing] “You are crazy!”This kind of language is what comprises the bi-semesterly performances, as well as the in-class practice.
Groups rotate frequently, and students practice navigating conversations with different partners each time.
There is some irony in the approach I have taken toward my EFL classes. My background with language
learning had been very forms-focused. As an undergraduate at the University of Minnesota who doublemajored in English and Latin, I spent years—happily, I will add—fussing over translations of Latin, Old English
and Middle English. For my undergraduate major project I wrote a poem in Latin—a tongue-in-cheek lament
about how it ‘devolved’ into the Romance languages—in dactylic hexameter, the same meter Virgil’s Aeneiduses.
The only living language I formally studied in college was Japanese. I took two years of it, and I was goodat parsing verbs and memorizing kanji. As I recall, there was very little free conversation practice. I had
wanted to visit Japan since I was in middle school, but it was around that time that my dad developed earlyonset Alzheimer’s, which contributed to my putting long-term international travel plans on hold.
So I engaged in other, domestic pursuits. One of these included making my way into proofreading—firstpart-time at the University of Minnesota’s newspaper, the Minnesota Daily, and later full-time at a financial
document printing company, proofreading prospectuses and other finance-related documents. The 1990s
U.S. economy was doing well, and I often got to travel to branch locations within the country often. I even
got to go to London once. Proofreading can be tedious, but I was thankful to get paid to work with language.
I might have continued that, had I not taken a chance to travel to Japan for a 10-day vacation. I so instantly
fell in love with it that I vowed to come back on a one-way ticket, and not as a tourist.
Several years later, I did just as I said I would. What happened after I got over the rainbow (or rather, thePacific Ocean) was yet another challenge. I had only ever really worked with language forms. I studied
them, I memorized them, I manipulated them. But when it came to conversation, I was tongue-tied. All I
could see around me were seasoned veteran expats whose Japanese gushed effortlessly from their mouths.
It felt like everyone around me could fold beautiful origami cranes, while I could only make ham-handed
paper airplanes that dove straight downward despite the mightiest of arm-swing launches.
I wrestled to unravel my tongue. I bought piles of study materials and banged my head against them.
After all, I had gotten decent grades in college. I had landed a job working with English. I was supposed to
be good at language. Now, suddenly, my communicative competence seemed infantile. I felt inept, uncouth,
enfeebled.
All I could manage for the better part of my first year in Japan were awkward, bungling utterances.
Those around me were so kind. They encouraged and complimented me on my efforts. But I was
unconsolable. I couldn’t say what I wanted to, couldn’t understand what I needed to, no matter how many
notes I jotted, or how vehemently I flung myself at my study materials. Why was this taking me so long, I
wondered. I had to do something.
The first thing I did was relinquish the Japan Exchange and Teaching (JET) Program job as an ALT, which I
had worked so hard to get, after just one year. I joined an intensive Japanese one-year study program at
Nagoya Gakuin University, then returned to Hokkaido as a private ALT. I then pursued a Master’s degree in
TESOL through a distance program at Macquarie University in Sydney. That is what helped me understand thefoundational background of how languages are taught, learned, studied, and acquired. In turn, thatknowledge helped me finally to accept the good advice that so many kindly Japanese people around me had
been hinting to me all along: What else can you do, before you become fluent and gain confidence, but use
crappy Japanese? It’s all you can do for the time being. If you and another person understand one another,
then whatever you said to each other was, for that instance, good enough.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

43

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
It was a matter of learning to work with what you have. That was something my dad used to say. It has
also become what I most want my students to experience: to use what they have; to find out what they
have by trying to use it, and in the process add to what they have through observing and interacting withothers. Certainly their reasons and their motivation to learn English may be different from mine. Most will
not jump continents to start an entirely new life on the other side of the world. However, the principle isthe same: You can never really get a sense of what you can do until you try doing it. And through doing it,
you get better at it.
What many of my students have is, in truth, rudimentary. It is clumsy, halting, awkward, and far fromwhat textbooks would have us think we should be speaking. In actual conversations, sometimes it doesn’twork. Through personal experience, I can totally empathize. But when it does work, when meaning is
successfully negotiated, even amid the grainiest of word arrangements, I get to share in their enthusiasm.
That is the joy I find in teaching “wrong” English. For me, it is the right thing to do. At the same time, likemy fellow LD SIG members and teaching colleagues, I am continually learning about learning. In that sense,
learner development could refer to us as well as to our students. We develop through feedback anddialogue, and I look forward to anything that you, the reader, are willing to offer.
References
Cutrone, P. (2009). Overcoming Japanese EFL learners’ fear of speaking. Language Studies Working Papers, 1, 55-63.
Ellis, R. (2016). Focus on form: A critical review. Language Teaching Research, 20(3), 405-428.
Kikuchi, K. (2015). Demotivation in second language acquisition: Insights from Japan. Bristol, UK: Multilingual
Matters.
King, J. (2013). Silence in the second language classroom. Clevedon, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
McVeigh, B. (2002). Japanese higher education as myth. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Williams, K., & Andrade, M. (2008). Foreign language learning anxiety in Japanese EFL university classes: Causes,
coping, and locus of control. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 5(2), 181-191. Retrieved from http://
e-flt.nus.edu.sg/v5n22008/williams.pdf

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

44

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles

Implementing Social and Emotional Learning (SEL)in the Japanese Classroom
Arnold F. Arao
Kurashiki Board of Education
Email: <arnoldarao@gmail.com>“Why do some students thrive, while others struggle just to keep pace?”
Many educators and researchers have tried to answer this question by looking at factors such as
motivation and affect, and developing strategies to improve engagement, accessibility and enjoyment.
Having worked as a teacher-trainer and coordinating professional development workshops, I have always
been interested in ways to improve language learning classrooms and facilitate content delivery. Strategies
to make lessons fun, engaging and enjoyable often produce significant benefits, whether it is exciting
activities, efficient instruction or effective classroom management. However, I felt that such strategies
were somehow “missing the point” and that there were some deeper factor not being addressed, particularconcerning students who continued to struggle. Moreover, classroom strategies that aimed to improve the“fun factor” of lessons, or to increase access to content and communication density tended to be short-term
interventions where benefits did not persist beyond the current course. What happens, for example, tothese students when they move on to different classes or different teachers? Do these practices explain why
students experience peaks and troughs in their academic development or why some students can engage
wholeheartedly in language learning only to dread English language classes later in their schooling?
As I pursued my own answers to these questions in my research, it seemed that such practices weredeveloped with a focus on academic achievement rather than learner development. The goal being to help
students achieve academic standards by improving access to material. By examining practice andimplementing strategies to help students engage with and understand lesson content, it is hoped that the
majority of students can meet academic expectations. However, what if students do not have the ability totake advantage of the learning opportunities being provided? The reality is that although such initiatives are
beneficial for many students, there are those who still fall behind. Moreover, there are students who
manage to keep pace but are still “at risk” of falling behind, particularly when faced with increased
academic press or changes to their environment (such as when transitioning between primary, secondary andtertiary schooling and entering the workforce). Regardless of how well teachers teach or lessons aredelivered, some learners still did not know or have not developed the skills needed to take advantage ofthese learning opportunities. Perhaps rather than looking at ways to help students meet academic
standards, educators need to examine how to help students realize their learning potential. This is the basic
distinction between the traditional practices of educational equality and those rooted in educational
equity.
Equity assumes a more holistic approach to education, shifting focus from teaching methods to learning
strategies. Within this framework, social and emotional learning strives to facilitate learner development ofcompetencies that allow learners to capitalize on learning opportunities regardless of the environment they
are in, both in and out of school, now and in learners’ futures.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

45

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
What is Social and Emotional Learning?
Social and emotional learning (SEL) is defined as the “process through which children and adults acquireand effectively apply the knowledge, attitudes, and skills necessary to understand and manage emotions,set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive
relationships, and make responsible decisions” (CASEL, 2015, p. 1). Generally speaking, this process involves
recognizing and managing one’s emotions, and understanding the perspectives of others and working todevelop positive relationships. These abilities culminate in the ability to overcome challenges and takeadvantage of learning opportunities in one’s environment. Within the Collaborative for Academic, Social,
and Emotional Learning (CASEL) framework, these “skill sets” are defined as competencies: self-awareness,
self-management, social awareness, social skills and responsible decision-making.
As learning depends heavily on interpersonal relationships and because affect determines attitudes
toward school and schooling, a variety of SEL programs have been developed and implemented. The successof these programs to assist students’ learning as well as behaviour in the classrooms has been documented,
most notably by Durlak et al. (2011) who indicated that SEL programs not only improved problematic
behaviour, such as class disruption, ineffective social interactions, truancy, and school withdrawal, but also
appeared to contribute to academic gains on standardized achievement tests of up to 11 percentile points.
In addition, the competencies acquired through SEL are pertinent to the workplace, where employers placea high value on such qualities as good social and communication skills, responsible decision making and theability to manage oneself to work independently.
Despite growing interest, to date, little has been done to implement SEL programs into Japanese
education, leaving SEL implementation to individuals and organizations, such as the SEL-8 programs(Koizumi, 2018). For the most part, SEL components can be found in special education environments where
there is a particular emphasis on social skills training (SST) and emotional regulation. In Japanese general
education settings, especially in subjects such as social studies and moral education, concepts such as social
responsibility, positive social interaction and responsible decision making are couched in thematic units/
topics covering responsible citizenship, bullying and preparation for school events. However, what
distinguishes successful SEL programs is that, rather than functioning as a side note or corollary,competencies are explicitly taught and practiced. Unfortunately, creating/finding opportunities to practicethese competencies as well as a lack of familiarity, discourages teachers from integrating SEL instruction
into an already full curriculum.
With communicative activities and a focus on learner affect, language learning classrooms lendthemselves to SEL implementations. In fact, language learning significantly depends on processes that occur
within and between learners; therefore, it is important that language educators look for opportunities todevelop these social and emotional competencies (Gkonou & Mercer, 2017).

The SEL Project
SEL has proven successful for students in many other countries and I was interested in whether or notsimilar programs would benefit Japanese students, given the differences in culture and classroom
environments. Moreover, was it possible to implement an SEL program that wouldn’t disrupt teachers’
already full schedules? With this question in mind, I began to develop a project with the aim of creating an
SEL program that could be integrated in the existing curriculum of upper elementary and lower secondaryclassrooms. This is a particularly vulnerable time for adolescents as it is a time of transition, when issues ofsocial status, peer relationships and self-identity come to the fore. It is also a developmentally challenging

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

46

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
time both physically and emotionally. Often, students who are unable to manage nascent emotions andstrained and awkward relationships act out negatively.
I felt that this would be beneficial not only for students but also for faculty, and was something worth
investigating and with guidance and support from the Education Guidance section, I was allowed to pursue
this in my schools, so long as teachers were willing to participate. Despite a lot of interest, teacher buy-inproved to be the biggest challenge to implementing this program. Not only did teachers lack the time to
implement this program, but they also didn’t have the confidence to effectively manage student concerns
within such a framework, and (to be honest) didn’t have the confidence that such an approach would be
effective. Providing resources helped to address this situation, in particular material related to mindset, gritand social skills training. Drawing from the grant fund, books in Japanese were distributed and shared. Aswell, resource material (i.e. charts, cards, worksheets etc.) were purchased that could be used to support
instruction. Five teachers (three in upper elementary and two first year junior high school English teachers)
decided to try out the program. I held two half-day workshops where teachers could better understand andpractice SEL concepts. Participants also used this time to voice concerns and discuss questions and strategies
for overcoming challenges. Together, we tweaked the program into a form that everyone felt comfortable
implementing.
In order to make implementation easier, the program echoed a practice already in place in many
elementary and junior high schools, where educators remind students of expected behaviors and attitudes
with classroom “mottos” prominently displayed at the front of the class. The SEL competencies laid out by
CASEL were distilled into teachable topics for which lessons and material were developed to support
instruction. These topics included: practice Kindness (social skills), practice Active learning (selfmanagement), practice Respect (social awareness), practice Mindfulness (self-awareness), and practice
Ambition (responsible decision-making). Overarching the five competencies of SEL was the emphasis onpractice, which communicated that not only were mistakes unavoidable, they were expected. Additionally,
these topics together form the acronym K.A.R.M.A. a unifying theme involving the idea of reciprocity andresponsibility. Self-knowledge extends from the individual through to responsible social agency, with theunderstanding that there is a natural flow of cause and effect. This places agency and responsibility of
behaviour (and learning) in the hands of the individual student and asks everyone (students and teachers) tobe responsible for their actions.
Narratives, roleplay and resulting discussions are effective ways for students to engage with ideas on a
personal level, where the absence of right and wrong answers, affords students the chance to participate
without losing face. Special education, in particular, use these techniques to present potentiallycomplicated social concepts like empathy and responsibility in a way that is relatable and that can be
manipulated by students. It is not surprising that many effective SEL programs incorporate these practices tosupport lesson delivery. Drawing from these practices, lessons were presented in scenarios framed by thequestion, “What does 〜 look like?” In these scenarios, students could practice appropriate skills and wereasked to think about the reasons behind particular behavior. English content, in a sense, assumed a“secondary” role. It served as the context with and within which students would engage with the SEL
competency. For example, a common language lesson is feelings / condition (e.g., hungry / sad / thirsty /angry / happy etc.). For the lesson focusing on Mindfulness, this topic was expanded, asking students tothink about underlying causes. That is, “I am happy because …”; “Because he lost the game, he is …”;“There is a test on Friday, so I feel …) understanding the antecedents of behaviour (i.e. emotion) is an
essential component to being able to understand and regulate behaviour, as well as to recognize andunderstand the motives of others (i.e., theory of mind).

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

47

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
Deeper learning was encouraged by asking students to keep a reflective journal of activities andsituations outside of class where they were able to exercise what they had learned and observations about
how successful (or unsuccessful) they were. These were fed back to myself and the homeroom teachers,
who allocated time to go over journal entries. Follow-up classes also allowed for further roleplay activities
and discussion for particularly problematic or common concerns. In addition, posters were prominently
displayed reminding students of KARMA and to which teachers could refer throughout the day to remind andencourage students’ expected behaviour.
The program consisted of 10 scheduled classes over the fall term with additional time for follow-up
classes left to the homeroom and English teachers’ discretion. Though no one dedicated a full class toaddressing student concerns, teachers did report that they spent time addressing student concerns
especially when presented with overlapping topics in other subjects such as social studies or moral
education. By the end of this trial period, teachers commented that they felt more comfortable counsellingand guiding students, especially when there was a framework to which they could refer. They also noticed agreater sense of learner autonomy in that students seemed more involved in regulating themselves andothers. It was not uncommon, for example, to hear “practice kindness” or to read a student’s
contemplation of the motives behind a friends’ actions. Although disruptive behaviour did not disappear
altogether, teachers observed that classes seemed easier to manage and more importantly that when it
came to discussing challenges with students, it was easier to work with a common “language” (i.e.,framework, terms and expectations). For their part, students enjoyed the lessons, particularly the storytelling aspect, where they could determine the outcome of situation (for better or worse!). They alsocommented that it was easier to “see” their emotions and the reasons behind their own actions and theactions of others.

Looking Back and Moving Forward
The scope of this project was ambitious and it came from the desire to better understand how thedifferences of the Japanese educational environment would affect the implementation of a program thathas seen dramatic success in other parts of the world. In hindsight, a more systematic and robustintervention would have provided an interesting foundation from which to build. For example, it would
have been informative to have established standardized academic, emotional and behavioral baselines andto have implemented the intervention over a longer period of time. That said, this experience provided, notonly myself but also the teachers and students involved, a better understanding of SEL and its potential forclassrooms, language learning or otherwise. Three of the participating teachers continue to implement SEL
in their current classes, modifying content around issues that they feel need more focus (e.g., academic
responsibility and peer relationship). For myself, this project helped me better understand the concerns ofteachers that need to be addressed before other similar programs can be developed and implemented. It
provided insight into how SEL programs can be structured to support existing curricula and how SEL
competencies are manipulated by students as they addressed issues such as いじめ (bullying) and 不登校(school withdrawal), issues that are of particular concern in Japanese education. I don’t doubt the benefitsof SEL for students and teachers. However, implementing ideas, even the best ones, into practice is always
difficult. Building from this experience, it is my hope that more effective SEL-based programs can be
integrated into existing curricula to help educators prepare our students for successful outcomes both in andout of the classroom. In closing, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to the JALT LD SIG. The
possibility of this program and the insight gained would not have been possible without the support of the
JALT LD SIG, whose grant helped secure the materials and resources used to make this program a reality.
Thank you.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

48

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Short Articles
References
CASEL (2015). Effective social and emotional learning program - Middle and high school edition. Chicago, IL:
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). Retrieved from http://
secondaryguide.casel.org/casel-secondary-guide.pdf
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing
students' social and emotional learning: a meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child
Development, 82(1), 405-432.
Gkonou, C., & Mercer, S. (2017). Understanding emotional and social intelligence among English language teachers.
ELT Research Papers 17.03. London, England: British Council. Retrieved from https://
englishagenda.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/attachments/
g211_eltra_gkonou_and_mercer_paper_final_web.pdf
Koizumi, R. (2018). SEL & SEL-8とは [What is SEL & SEL-8?]. Retrieved from http://sel8group.jp/information.html

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

49

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free Space

FREE SPACE | フリー・スペース
Thinking About
Learner
Autonomy/Learner
Development
Alison Stewart
Gakushuin University, Tokyo
Email: <alison.stewart@gakushuin.ac.jp>
What is “learner autonomy”? What is “learnerdevelopment”? I love thinking about thesequestions, but I don’t believe there is any
definitive answer to them. I tend to go back andforth on what I think they might mean. One of thereasons I enjoy being a member of the LD SIG isthat it brings me into contact with other people
who are thinking about these questions too andwho are finding new ways to envisage learnerautonomy and learner development and to realise
them in their practices of learning or working withlearners and other teachers. Similarly, I am
attracted by an inclusive practitioner research
approach, such as Exploratory Practice (Hanks,
2017), because it involves collaborating withlearners to understand what puzzles them. My
understanding is always evolving from myexperience with learners, as well as from what I
learn from my peers in the LA/LD community. My
understanding of learner autonomy and learnerdevelopment—these terms which I can’t exactly
define—is also shaped continuously by the insightsthat come to me from my wider reading in the fieldof applied linguistics and even wider reading ofanything (novels, poetry, journalism, popularscience, biographies etc etc) that looks interesting
and that opens my eyes to new ways of seeing
myself and others and the world we live in. Dick
Allwright and Judith Hanks propose that the aim ofinclusive practitioner research is to understand the“quality of life” in the classroom (Allwright &Hanks, 2009). Reflecting on my first experience of

exploratory practice with my seminar students(Stewart, Croker, & Hanks, 2014), I questioned thenwhether this might not be too broad a term, andsuggested that “quality of learning” might be more
appropriate. But now I’m not sure. I think I like theopenness and inclusiveness of “quality of life”
better.
In my current thinking, learner autonomy andlearner development are not quite the same thing.
Autonomy, to me, conjures up notions of freedom,
agency, power, identity—notions that warrant a
critical, problematising stance in research andpractice. Development, as I see it, focuses more on
the individual learner and their change and growth.
But actually, since all individuals live in a society,this also entails being critical. A few years ago, Tim
Ashwell and I came up with this definition oflearner development:
Learner development entails the development(in all senses: intellectual, emotional, social,physical, spiritual) of the individual. As
individuals, we are responsible to ourselves
and to others. And as adult members ofsociety, we have a responsibility to ensure that
our society is just and fair and that it provides
opportunities for the development of every
individual living in it. We are responsible forpassing on the knowledge that we have gained
through experience in the same way that weare responsible for reaching out to others tolearn from their experience. (Stewart &Ashwell, 2014, p. 22)
At the time, this felt like a bit of a stretch. To
be honest, we were attempting to justify acollaborative practice of learning, which was thefocus of an anthology of research articles of which
we were two of the editors (Ashwell, Miyahara,
Paydon, & Stewart, 2014). Our formulation echoes
elements of previous definitions of autonomy: the“Bergen definition” of learner autonomy (Dam etal., 1990), for example, alludes to the
responsibility of learners, while the “Shizuoka

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

50

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free Space
definition” of teacher autonomy (Barfield et al.,2001) sees learner-teacher autonomy as acontinuous project that teachers undertake incollaboration with their learners to develop andunderstand their own autonomy. However, because
we were defining learner development, our focus
was on individual learning or cognition, as much as
it was on social practices. Moral responsibility was
the solution Tim and I came up with then to bridge
the gap between the individual and the social, but
I still wonder whether or to what extent thisentails collaboration between learners. The notionof collaborative learning seems like an ideal way tomanage classroom relations, but does it actually
capture the experience of learning or of learnerdevelopment?
Talking to Chika about the connection between“collaborative learning” and “learnerdevelopment” while writing this piece, she makes
the point that through collaboration students get
to engage in shared affective experiences. In
Chika’s view, “Both teacher and students in aclassroom try to maximize their positive emotions
and minimize negative ones through interaction
with others and this will affect how much theyshare their knowledge as well as how to negotiatewith others.” In this way, collaboration has toenhance the quality of learning/teaching. I would
agree that affect is much more important incollaborative practice as our emotions are
infectious (negative as well as positive ones). But I
think collaboration is about more than justemotions. When we collaborate, either we aresimply sharing knowledge we have already acquired
for a common purpose, or we subordinate our will
to others and agree to something someone elsesuggests. Power is a dimension that I wanted tohighlight, and that is something that is quite
different to affect. Thus, collaborating in aclassroom practice that is designed to facilitate
learning might not in fact lead to either learning or
autonomy.
As this last point suggests, I believe that learnerautonomy cannot be understood without taking
issues of power into consideration. Since myresearch focus is more on teachers than learners,

I’ve recently been reading and writing about
concepts such as power/knowledge (Stewart &Miyahara, 2016) and agency (Stewart, forthcoming)in a way that actually questions the existence ofautonomy. This isn’t to say that I don’t believeautonomy exists; rather, what I’m thinking atpresent is that it’s more interesting to explore
where new practices, new ideas, and neworganisations come from.

References
Allwright, D., & Hanks, J. (2009). The developing
language learner: An introduction to exploratory
practice. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ashwell, T., Miyahara, M., Paydon, S., & Stewart, A.
(Eds.). (2014). Collaborative learning in learnerdevelopment. Tokyo: JALT Learner Development SIG.
Barfield, A., Ashwell, T., Carroll, M., Collins, K., Cowie,
N., Critchley, M., Head, E., Nix, M., Obermeier, A.,& Robertson, M. C. (2001). Exploring and defining
teacher autonomy: A collaborative discussion. In A.
Mackenzie & E. McCafferty (Eds.), Developing
autonomy. Proceedings of the College andUniversity Educators' 2001 Conference, Shizuoka,
Japan (217-222). Tokyo: The Japan Association for
Language Teaching.
Dam, L., Eriksson, R., Little, D., Miliander, J., & Trebbi,
T. (1990). Towards a definition of autonomy. Third
Nordic Workshop on Developing Autonomous
Learning in the FL Classroom. Bergen, University ofBergen, Norway. Retrieved from http://
www.warwick.ac.uk/go/dahla/archive/trebbi_1990
Hanks, J. (2017). Exploratory practice in language
teaching: Puzzling about principles and practices.
Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Stewart, A. (in press). Using Actor-Network-Theory to
problematize agency in teacher identity: The case ofFilipino English teachers in Japan. In H. Kayi-Aydar,
A. Gao, E. Miller, M. Varghese, & G. Vitanova (Eds.),
Theorizing and analysing language teacher agency.
Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Stewart, A., & Ashwell, T. (2014). Clarifying terms. In T.
Ashwell, M. Miyahara, S. Paydon, & A. Stewart(Eds.). (2014). Collaborative learning in learnerdevelopment. Tokyo: JALT Learner Development SIG.
Stewart, A., Croker, R., & Hanks, J. (2014). Exploring
the principles of Exploratory Practice. In A. Barfield& A. Minematsu (Eds.), Learner development
working papers: Different cases, different interests

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

51

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free Space(pp. 127-145). Tokyo: The Japan Association for
Language Teaching (JALT) Learner Development SIG.
Stewart, A., & Miyahara, M. (2016). Language teacher
associations in Japan: Knowledge producers and/or
knowledge disseminators. ELT Journal, 70(2),137-149.

The Learner Development
Journal (LDJ):
Problematising Practices
Tim Ashwell, Andy Barfield, Huw Davies, Darren
Elliott, Hugh Nicoll, Alison Stewart, & Koki Tomita
The following discussion between members of
the LD SIG committee focuses on publicly
documenting the ongoing development of The
Learner Development Journal (LDJ) and shedding
light on important questions about the future
direction of the journal.
Launched in November 2017, the LDJ is the
Learner Development SIG’s online, open-accessjournal. It is published once a year and is devoted
to practitioner-driven research, reviews andinterviews exploring learner development issues insecond language education. The inaugural issue of
the The Learner Development Journal on“Visualising Learner Development” (issue editors:
Darren Elliott & Hugh Nicoll) appeared in November
2017. A year later the second issue on “Qualitative
Research into Learner Development” (issue editors:
Chika Hayashi, Masuko Miyahara, & Patrick Kiernan)
is approaching publication, while writers for Issue 3of the LDJ on “Learner Identities andTransitions” (issue editors: Christina Gkonou, Jim
Ronald, & Yoshio Nakai) are currently sharing firstdrafts with the journal’s editors and Review
Network members for open or blind peer review.
Looking ahead, the first Call for Papers for Issue
4 on “Exploring the Supervision Process AcrossDiverse Contexts: Collaborative Approaches” (issue
editors: Sabine Little and Michelle Golledge) wentout in September 2018, and in early 2019 theJournal Steering Group (JSG) will be appealing for
editors to tender proposals for Issue 5 and to bring

together a group of contributors to explore adifferent learner development theme.
Unlike most other journals, the LDJ iscommitted to group-based professional
development and shared exploration where
members of the SIG and others can inquire into
specific learner development themes in acollaborative and supportive environment. Not
unsurprisingly, this shared commitment does notcome without a bewildering array of challenges—
and opportunities—for writers, reviewers, andeditors, as well as the Journal Steering Group (JSG)that oversees each issue.
We hope that this discussion—which took place
online between July and October 2018—helps
readers of Learning Learning and all the membersof the Learner Development SIG become morefamiliar with the range of concerns that people
working on the LDJ currently have, and why.
We warmly encourage you to share yourthoughts and questions in response to this
discussion (in the next issue of Learning Learning).
We hope too that SIG members will step forward
and take part in future issues of the LDJ as writers,
reviewers, editors, or steering group members.
We’re looking forward to hearing from you!
Discussion
Alison (founding member of the Journal
Steering Group): We wanted to let you know that
the Call for Proposals for Issue 4 of the Learner
Development Journal resulted in 4 proposals, all ofthem from outside Japan. We have now accepted a
proposal by Sabine Little and Michelle Golledge at
the University of Sheffield on Learner Developmentin Supervisor/Supervisee Relationships, and arelooking forward to meeting them on Skype in thenext week or so. We have also invited the authorsof another proposal to send in their proposal again
next spring for consideration for Issue 5.
Meanwhile, Issue 2 is coming on apace and we havejust received copies of all the articles for
proofreading.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

52

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free SpaceIn our discussions with each other and other
SIG members, we've come up against some issues
that we feel merit some wider discussion by the
SIG. We wonder what your views are on thefollowing:
1. Should we be trying to give priority to SIG
members in choosing editors? In fact, for Issue
4, there were no LD or Japan-based proposers,
but we wondered whether we should try to
promote grass-roots proposals from themembership in general and from the gettogethers in particular? Or is the LDJ a more"international" publication, where the main
criteria for acceptance are the quality of the
proposal and likeliness of the editorial team to
attract good researchers and to manage theproject to completion in accordance with thecollaborative principles that we haveestablished?
2. Where we do accept non-LD members as
editors, should we ask that the editors join the
SIG for the duration of the project (since it's
possible to join a SIG without joining JALT)?
Should this include editors in teams where one
or two of the other editors are in fact LD
members?
3. Should we ensure that all steering groupmembers are always SIG members? Could thisrole be opened up to previous editors who are
not members of the SIG?
Basically, what is at issue here is to what
extent we see the new journal as an independent
publication, albeit one that promotes LD SIG values
and collaborative practices, or as a publicationthat benefits members of the SIG first andforemost.
Koki (SIG co-coordinator): Thanks for thequestions!
1. I personally do not know the history behindthe start of LDJ, so my contribution to this topic is
minimal. From PR and administrative perspective, I
feel that the promotion of the journal can be donein both domestically and internationally. JALT has
been facing the decline of members and failing to
explore new members for the past few years. This,

as a result, put us into debt for the last fiscal year.
So, I found that appealing to the world is awonderful idea to keep the standard andexpectations of the journal high (Hopefully they
will become a JALT and LD SIG member in the
future). In the meantime, we need to think about
ways to energize our local members and encourage
their contributions to the SIG in any shape or form.
I believe that writing articles to the journal is partof their contributions to the SIG, which might leadthem to be more involved in JALT and SIG
administration. Local members’ articles/proposals
might get rejected in the screening process, butthey can re-submit them to other journals or the
JALT international conference or Pan SIG.
2 & 3. Just a quick question, can non-JALT
member join a SIG? As far as I know, SIGs are madeof JALT members. Please go to the URL for yourreference https://jalt.org/main/sigs.
Sounds like we are facing a tricky situation. Do
non-LD members want to pay and join the SIG
temporally for their volunteer work? Maybe only afew. Should we pay their membership fee to join
the editorial team? I don’t find any particular riskof paying their fees from our budget. Any thoughts?
Huw (SIG treasurer): To be a member of the
SIG, a person needs to be a member of JALT.
However, we can sell an annual subscription which
is a way to satisfy what Alison suggests (see p. 13of the new treasurer handbook). The only problem
with doing this from overseas is that they would
need to pay from a Japanese bank account or in
cash, which makes it quite an annoying process.
Andy (founding member of the Journal SteeringGroup, SIG publications co-chair): Alison, thank you
for raising these questions. I've been trying toimagine how the LDJ would work if its anchors to
the LD SIG were cut. I guess it might become
something like Innovation in Language Learning
and Teaching https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/
rill20/current or The JALTCALL Journal https://
jcj.jaltcall.org/index.php?journal=JALTCALL, eachwith an editorial board and standardised editorial
procedures - but little linkage to local practices
and members of a SIG investing their interests,

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

53

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free Space
time, and efforts to explore particular themes andissues together.
Looking at, for example, at (a) the aims andscope of the LDJ, (b) the LDJ peer review process,and (c) and the explanation to potential editors,
we have something different from most otherjournals, but it's also an approach that needs
further commitment from members of the SIG to
make it sustainable. So, although it's not without
its own challenges and difficulties, my initial
response would be that it's worth talking together
more about what can be done to make the LDJ
work better as originally intended, rather thanraising the anchor and setting sail for theapparently glistening seas of globalised academic
publishing ...
Darren (co-editor of Issue 1 and Journal
Steering Group member): Let me join with mythoughts on the main three questions.
1. Should we be trying to give priority to SIG
members in choosing editors?
Yes, but practically speaking we have to go
outside. The SIG has 200 (?) members, many ofwhom do not play an active role. The editors job isfairly demanding, and although we want to support
less experienced editors through the steeringgroup, it is inevitable that there will be a limited
number of SIG members who want to take on theposition.

positive and inclusive practice. However, in sending
our message outside Japan, does the use ofJapanese become alienating or limiting? To someextent we are positioning ourselves as a regional
journal, as opposed to an international journal.
This is a difficult question, and I am not entirely
comfortable with it, but I feel I should ask.
Looking back at the aims and scope, none ofthose ideas necessitate any connection to the SIG.
That doesn’t mean we should ‘cut anchor’, but I do
think we should allow ourselves to be open. It is
not the fact that the journal is an LD SIG
publication that makes it special. It is that it
follows LD SIG principles of collaboration,
supportiveness, and community.
2. Where we do accept non-LD members as
editors, should we ask that the editors join the
SIG for the duration of the project (since it's
possible to join a SIG without joining JALT)?
3. Should we ensure that all steering groupmembers are always SIG members? Could thisrole be opened up to previous editors who are
not members of the SIG
Practically speaking, Huw has alreadyaddressed the difficulties in temporary SIG
membership.

Probably the best way of addressing this is totake a more proactive stance in recruiting by
approaching potential editors directly. (That’s how
I became editor of issue one!) Whilst I don’t wantto cut ties with the SIG, I do believe that opening
up to the outside world is very healthy. We cancertainly gain new insights into our own beliefs andpractices by explaining them to a reader /reviewer / editor who is not familiar with ourcontext.

As for the SIG membership and the steeringgroup, emphatically yes. This is how we maintainties to the SIG, and maintain some institutional
memory and consistency. The three of us (me,Alison, and Tim) are still learning, but I think eachissue is benefitting from the mistakes we havemade previously. However, I feel that there is adanger we end up operating in a bubble. I’m notsure how well most of the SIG understands us andwhat we are doing. Sadly, I have to say that part ofthat is probably down to lack of interest. But wealso have to take responsibility for notcommunicating loudly and clearly enough.

This is slightly tangential, but I think related.
As I have mentioned, I find the necessity forJapanese abstracts a little limiting - I know that
the SIG was founded with the bilingual principle ascentral, and in general SIG business (“Learning
Learning” and so on) I believe it is still a very

Tim and I were talking about “jumping off theroundabout” at some point. At the moment wehave three issues in progress at different stages,
and that will be the norm now we are up andrunning. So where is the line of succession. The SIG
has always been very good at bringing people inNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

54

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free Spaceand keeping the organisation fresh (without losing
sight of the ways things have been done). Who is
up next for the Steering Group?
Hugh (co-editor of LDJ, volume 1, and Review
Network member): I'm going to have a go atanswering Alison's 3 questions regarding therelationship of editor and steering committee roles
to SIG membership all in one go, as I see them assomewhat overlapping.
A first principle for me is that SIG members
have some role in editing all issues of the journal,
though I would add the caveat that I see no
problem in having editors and/or steeringcommittee members from outside the SIG (mostlikely from "outside Japan") participate as equal
partners, so long as we maintain a primarycommitment to a dialogic and/or inclusive practiceas the key aspect of the journal's identity/agency/
founding principles and praxis.
Alison concludes the primary questions section
on what is now page 2 with the summative
exploration "to what extent we see the new journal
as an independent publication, albeit one that
promotes LD SIG values and collaborative
practices, or as a publication that benefits
members of the SIG first and foremost." Having
read ahead, I think Darren's notion that we "haveto" go outside the SIG in recruiting editors isgermane here as both a practical and philosophicalframing of what "benefits members of the SIG firstand foremost." The answer/perspective that seems
most useful to me here is that our publications
should simultaneously encourage/support SIG
members' development as writers but also
(inevitably, perhaps) and simultaneously help SIG
members connect with the discourses on
autonomous learning and teaching, criticalpedagogies, reflective practice, exploratory
practice, etc. in non-Japanese or moreinternational settings.
Andy: On the language question that Darren
raises, I’d like to refer back to a discussion withthe editors of LDJ1 and LDJ2 in August and
September 2017. At that time, both editorial teams
recognised the value of having a third language

option (English + Japanese or a third language), butraised practical concerns about how an editorial
team would be able to check the quality of
abstracts and key words written in a third languagethat they were not academically proficient inthemselves.
From this, we thought that abstracts andkeywords should be written in English and Japaneseas the default option, with writers having the
choice of writing the abstract and keywords in athird language, if they wish. We felt it is probably
unlikely that many writers would choose the thirdlanguage option, so it would be interesting if andwhen writers did do that. Our position, in the end,
was that it's important to have the “thirdlanguage” option there, rather than completely
excluding it.
My sense would be that, as a number of people
involved in LD publications are willing to help withtranslation from English into Japanese andJapanese into English, having bilingual keywords
and abstracts remains very much do-able. I guess
you and I see things differently here, Darren, andthat’s quite OK. I find discussing the question of
language(s) really central to the imagined identity
and readership of the LDJ that we each have.
Hugh: The language question is always
somewhat vexing, but my nutshell take is in 2
parts: (1) As we are based in Japan, it is bothpractical and politic (realpolitik?) to continue tooffer abstracts in Japanese, as that may help inindexing, getting LDJ noticed in Japanese
university settings, and may (yes I know this is astretch) but just may help the journal contribute toeducation policy discussions that have some weightin the broader community. Such abstracts, forexample, just might help progressive Japaneseteachers of English share the SIG's narratives withteachers that might not ordinarily pay attention to
the arguments we have to contribute.
And, (2) an anecdote: a month ago I enjoyed apost ILA lunch and chat with Jo Mynard, Christian
Ludwig, and Giovanna Tassanari. They are planningon publishing a multilingual collection of papers onlearner autonomy in part to honor the readers/

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

55

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free Space
speakers of non-English as L1 researcher/writers byencouraging them to publish in their own first
languages. When Christian asked what I thought of
the idea, I gave my support immediately. While
English is the dominant lingua franca in our
globalizing world, I am grateful for every chance topuzzle over non-English texts for the learning
experience on offer, and feel that given the easy
access we have to online dictionaries, translations
engines, etc. that we should be as open to puzzling
and learning together as possible.
Andy: That’s a great project that Christian,
Giovanna and Jo are planning to do. Looking to the
future with the LDJ, what practices (writing,editing, reviewing, and “steering” practices) doyou each see as important to focus on with Issues/
Volumes 3 and 4, and why?
Tim (founding member of the Journal SteeringGroup): I am a little late to the party here, but Ivery much concur with what has been written so
far regarding what the Journal is, what it does, andwhat is should be. Personally, I would very much
like the LDJ to retain strong and clear links to the
SIG and for editors to principally come from amongits membership although I fully recognize Darren’s
point that a limited number of people are likely to
step forward. One of the main parts of the ethos of
the LDJ, and something that distinguishes it fromother journals, is that it actively seeks to nurture
people as writers and editors and we hope to beable to provide a framework in which people new
to writing and editing feel they can hone theirskills. Without a strong Steering Group of SIG
members, I fear this direction might be lost and we
end up with a journal which is every bit as remoteas all those other journals out there.
Darren and I discussed whether it might be agood idea, as a rule of thumb, to try to ensure
that, if we continue to get more proposals for issue
editorship from overseas than we do from within
Japan, we at least alternate between an issueedited by overseas editors and an issue edited by
SIG members. At the same time, I think we need tostrongly encourage as many SIG members as
possible to consider contributing as writers and totarget SIG members who could be persuaded into
editing an issue.
On a very practical note, and resulting fromexperience with Issues 1 and 2, I think that theSteering Group (SG) members really need to see
the first drafts of papers as soon as they aresubmitted to the editors and at the same time as
the Review Network (RN) members so that we cancheck that there are no major problems withpapers at that early stage. We would then be able
to nip these problems in the bud and iron them out
with still 10 or 11 months until publication (asopposed to the 4 months or so we presently get).
Another thing we can do is to go back andrevise the guidelines for reviewers. I have thefeeling that our advice to them is a little too
idealistic and that we need to strongly urge themto take a robust, critical stance when reviewing
papers in the interests of pushing the writers to up
their game. Of course. we want the feedback to besupportive and constructive and, if possible, to beoffered in a collaborative way, but if it doesn't holdthe writers and editors to account, it isn't, in myview, doing its job.
Darren: I agree with Tim in regard to tightening
up the reviewers’ guidelines. One problem is thatthe reviewers are not operating on the usual“accept/accept with changes/reject” system. All
these papers will be published, so earlierintervention would be better for both writers andeditors. Hopefully, getting the steering groupinvolved sooner will help us to guide authors more
effectively. Late rewrites are too stressful foreveryone….
Alison: It’s very helpful to talk openly about
these problems. As Tim and Darren have said, sometweaking of the process, such as earlier
involvement of the SG and tightening up of thereviewer guidelines would be some good practicalmeasures we can adopt from the next issue. Andy,
you bring up the identity of the journal: it seems tobe that this involves not only the finished productthat we send out into the world, but also the roles
and identities of people involved at every stage ofthe production process. At present, I would say

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

56

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free Space
that the names we have given these roles are
actually misnomers. In particular, the Journal
Steering Group has been doing a lot more than juststeering up to this point; the journal’s reviewers
are not gatekeepers, as they would be in a
traditional journal. I’m sure that people come into
the journal with beliefs and expectations about
their roles that are mainly formed by their previous
experiences. This might help explain why, evenwith clear written principles and procedures, we
still find it difficult to keep reviewers and editors(and sometimes authors too!) on track. Hopefully,building up a community of practice is the answer,
as I think we may have said in the past. But I
wonder if it’s also worth considering changing thename of the role “reviewer” to something that’s
closer to what we intend? Mentors, perhaps?
Darren: But is that the intended role? I see thereviewers as ‘outside eyes’ who offer a fresh
perspective. Asking any more of them is unfair. The
editors are the mentors, ideally… but this hasn’t
been working. Expecting less experienced editors
to mentor less experienced writers is unrealistic…..
Hugh: I would hope that the intended role ofeditor for the Journal could include the concept ofsaid editors as peers/collaborators – perhaps
extending almost to co-author to the extent that amentor is like a midwife in the learnerdevelopment/writer developing process and/or
practices. There will always be tension between
what Andy is referring to below as a conventionallyorganised academic journal and the more
improvisational processes/practices of what
Pennycook frames as “a cultural alternative.” This,it seems to me, is a principle of learnerdevelopment, of what we do when we learn
together with our students as well as with our
fellow researchers -- messy, yes, but inspiring in
the ways that dance, music, and theatre are inboth practice and performance.
Andy: Yes, the way we label what people do
and what happens with the LDJ is really important
for thinking about the questions that come up andunderstanding what can be done. It strikes me thatin this discussion we are perhaps focusing on gaps
in what we imagined would happen (i.e., what

editors, reviewers, writers, the journal steeringgroup would be doing) as we created “a cultural
alternative” (to use Pennycook’s phrase) to how an
academic journal usually functions and isconventionally organised.
While everyone is committed to creating aviable cultural alternative, we are realising all thetime just how complex it is to create and sustain it
when so many different “actors” are involved, eachwith their own understanding of what they are
doing within the general framework that has been
set up for the LDJ. Without some minimal andongoing dialogue with all the different parties, I
guess gaps are likely to continue to come up
between what is planned/imagined and what
happens, in any case.
Is there some way for the journal steeringgroup to have a set of interactions with each groupof actors for each issue at particular points in the
production of an issue (with the editors for therespective issue cc-eed on the interactions thattake place)? For example:●

Year One May: with writers?

●

Year One July/August: with editors?

●

Year One October: with members of the
Review Network?

●or ... Year One July-October: with all three(see further below)?

Alison, you mentioned finding a different namefor what Review Network members do—yes, you’reright, the label needs to have a better fit, but theidea of mentoring may be putting an extra layer onthings, as Darren points out. Would calling this key
process something like “Reader Responding/Engaging with the Writer” help? Isn’t that whatbasically “[alternative] reviewing” involves in apeer-equal, collaborative community of practicewith writers and readers? The assumption is thatthe reader’s primary goal is to engage with what
the writer is saying, make sense of it, respond as
fully as possible with the development of thewriter’s writing, for example:

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

57

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free Space●

What is the writer trying to say here?

●

How is this engaging me (or not) as areader?

●What responses and questions are coming
up for me as I read this?

●How can I share those responses andquestions with the writer in a criticallyminded/supportive, empathetic way?

●

What questions do I have for the writerabout the further development of theirresearch and writing?

Perhaps these kinds of question help to frame astance and position where a reviewer might
concretely achieve an appropriate quality of reader
responding and engagement with the writer?
Would that go some way to “holding toaccount”, as Tim mentioned, reviewers and editorswith writers, as well as to setting a direction for
dialogue with writers, reviewers and editors about
how to engage with writers about their texts? If so,a primary process for the Journal Steering Groupwould be then not to focus first on identifying“problems”, but rather on talking with writers,
editors, and reviewers about responding andengagement. That may be the kind of common
meta-process that we are missing as a sharedpractice, as an area of mutual interest, activity,and negotiation, if you will, and which it might begood to bring more into focus?
One other thing that strikes me is that it may
be helpful to question the expectation that writers
should produce a full-first draft by the end of Julyof the first year. It could be that requiring writers
to do so at that point is in some ways counterproductive. I wonder whether it would be better tolimit the length here and say “an incomplete firstdraft of 2000-2,500 words that you will then sharewith (a) other contributors to the same issue, (b)the editors, and (c) members of the Review
Network, during the period August to October, anddevelop into a full draft by the end of December ofthe first year.” Might that help to (a) underline anincremental developmental process of writing,responding and engagement, (b) guard against

writers following conventional genres too narrowly
and prematurely in the writing process, and (c)encourage experimentation with genre by writers?
That might be another way to help create astronger sense of community of practice, dialogue,
responding, and engagement for all the parties
concerned, which I feel this discussion is trying tograpple with.
Darren: It has been very difficult to get fulldrafts from the writers at the same time due to thenature of the journal. Some of our moreexperienced writers, and those who have beenworking on a topic which happens to match thetheme, have submitted well-developed papers oncompleted research at the very first stage.
However, we have also been encouraging people tosubmit more speculative works in progress, andthese writer-researchers have often required a lot
more support. This is not something I think weshould change, but it is something that we (aseditors and ‘steerers’) need to work around. Andy,
your suggested process makes sense in that regard.
Tim: Apologies for using the dreaded word
“problem” above. What I perhaps should have said
was that it would really help if the Steering Group(SG) can see the writing in its early stages (forexample, when it is sent out to the Review
Network) so that they can provide comments to theeditors when necessary if they feel the writing
lacks clarity, coherence, or direction, for example,
because the piece of research has not been fully
conceptualized. I think it is difficult for editors
sometimes to be able to step back and look at thewriting dispassionately when they have spent along time developing a relationship with thewriters working on their Issue. At one step
removed, the SG can offer supportive feedback
which it might be difficult for the editors
themselves to provide.
To add one more idea that has come up in our
various discussions, it may be better for us to think
about inviting more people to join the Journal
Steering Group (JSG) so that more of their work as
secondary reviewers and proofreaders can beshared around.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

58

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free Space
Andy: One other idea for the mix is creating on
the LD website some “publication resources” withlinks to different kinds of exploratory writing about
learner development - within different SIG
publications and in the wider field. Those kind ofnear-peer role models could be a useful reference
for helping writers to break into new kinds ofwriting. “Developing (multi-interactive)
communities of exploratory writing, responding andediting practices” seems a rich area for ongoing
discussions - and feels closely connected to moving
beyond reifying “full-length papers” as therequirement for first drafts by LDJ contributors.
Hugh: (not feeling sure if he wants to give theappearance of having the last word) . . . but as I
read/scroll through this lengthening text, am
grateful for the wide-ranging scope of the
discussion, and the fact that after several weeks ofdevelopment, this document has grown more andmore dialogic. We have, for example, Darren
pointing out the practical difficulties for editors as
writers with different experiences and histories of‘academic’ writing contribute to the journal, andthe challenges that are the inevitable result. This
perspective, considered in relation to Tim’s andAndy’s observations (above), suggest to me thatsome practice/perspective of expansion (ofinclusiveness?) is the key to meeting the ideals weare struggling to articulate and realise as we work
towards the publication of volume 2 and focus on
the necessary next steps in bringing volume 3
towards completion. Though it remains difficult for
all of us to allocate time and energy – and tocoordinate the efforts our SIG projects require, themodels of co-operation (of “working in teams”)
both in the SIG as a whole, and on finalizing
individual publications, offer the best models ofpractice for the future. Perhaps the Google Docsmodel we’re using to work on Learning Learning
offers one simple solution to the “near-peer rolemodels” approach Andy describes as a practicalway forward in the development of “multiinteractive communities of interactive writing (andediting).”

Tokyo July 2018 Get-together
Reflections and Plans for2019
Andy Barfield, Martin Cater, Ken Ikeda, Kio Iwai, &Koki Tomita
Note: These reflections focus on discussions at the July
get-together about learners’ linguistic repertoires andplans for the get-togethers in 2019.

Koki: I joined the Get-together a half hour late.
The members had already started their discussions
about Andy’s ongoing research. It was pleasant to
see that the research has evolved since Andy
shared it with us during the April Get Together. The
main topic was Andy’s student research
participant’s language identity and her perceptionsof standard Japanese and her Japanese dialect.
Here, Lee talked about the hard time he had in hischildhood in formulating his identity in the U.S. asa son of an Australian mother and an American
father. This involved selecting “appropriate”
lexicon and avoiding deviating from social norms toblend into the culture and the society. Ken also
shared a story from his childhood where his teacher
in the U.S. told his parents to use only English intheir household to improve Ken’s English
competency because Ken was not linguisticallyfunctioning well at school at that time. Both cases
exemplify how much the standard language(s)pushes off other politically, socially andeconomically weak dialects or deviated languages
in a society.
In the second half of the meeting, we talked
about the continuity of future Tokyo Get-Togethers
and CCLT4. We agreed that we need morecommunication and a different way to attract moremembers to come to the get-togethers. One of theways to achieve the goal is dividing the meeting
into the input and discussion parts. In the input
part, we will have a few presenters and get themto share their research-oriented or practical handson presentations to the audience, and discuss thecontent with more depth.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

59

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free Space
In considering our plans for CCLT4, we came tothe conclusion that local LD SIG members can use
each Get-Together as a chance to generate a topic
that they can present at the CCLT 4 which they canreceive various feedback from the professionals in
the field. It will be wonderful to have more officers
and members join the organization of the
December event. I am very excited to create theevent with Ken and other members in the SIG.
Andy: Around the discussion of the gettogethers we came to the conclusion that it would
help if each person attending the get-togethers
made a commitment to leading a discussion/presenting on their learner development interests
in an interactive style for (part of) one of the gettogethers in the year. Kio’s suggestion was that this
“input” should be 10 minutes or so at most in
length and be aimed at fostering discussion among
participants. So, the proposal is to have mini-inputs
for leading discussions of 30 minutes or more at
get-togethers. The difference will be to ask
everyone to make a commitment to giving one such
input and leading one such discussion one time in acalendar year, with a view to (hopefully) having
everyone take part in an end-of-year informal halfday conference in the final get-together in
December, i.e., Creating Community: Learning
Together. (On reflection participants should also
have the choice not to do this if they prefer not to… something to discuss further in any case.)
A big thank you to everyone for a highly
stimulating discussion of the “I-poems” that I
shared from an interview with a student about her
linguistic repertoire and use of language in her life.
The “I-poems” were created from theinterviewee’s use of “I” in a 60-minute interview,so each I-poem brought together a cluster of “Istatements” around a particular topic orexperience that the interviewee talked about inthe interview. Extracting the I-statements in orderfrom the interview and creating poems from themis intended to help the interviewer (and readers) todevelop a “more sensitised” understanding of theinterviewee’s “linguistic repertoire lifeworld.”

When I hear local languages
when I hear local languages or just when I saw
Nagano or Azumino I feel happy
I feel happy if there is some posters or the letterin another areas, then “oh my hometown isoutstanding”
I feel connected with these lettersafter I came to Tokyo
I found my hometown is kind of special
I didn’t think my local perspectives are kind of
special before I came to Tokyo
I went many cities
I’ve never told this feelings
I felt “ahh here is my hometown or here is where I
want to live or where I want to spend time”
I don’t feel anything from the languages thatpeople use here
I started to stop using dialect
when I came to Tokyo I had strong bias like thepeople from other areas can’t use their own
languages dialects
I felt a little bit nervous to use that word thenwhen I came to not just Tokyo also like big cities
I started to stop using dialect
sometimes I use Nagano’s dialect without any
special reason
that’s why I put this in my center
I didn’t know that’s dialect then I just speaking
that way
そんなことしなんでいいよ

しなんでいいよit’s not correct
it’s not 標準語
I don’t know why I feel negative feeling to use
local language
just not cool

Here are three of the I-poems that we looked atand discussed at the get-together:

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

60

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free SpaceI have to use keigo to senpai
often feel I should use
I have to use keigo to sempai often sempai
sometimes I can use not keigo to teacher
but for sempai I can’t
I think it’s strongly connected with my experiencein my junior high school age
I joined volleyball cluband these sports club have strong hierarchy system
if younger people doesn’t use keigo to senior
peoplesenior people just angry for not using keigo
I think it’s stupid
but I just get used to this way of using keigo
because I have gap age when I entered thisuniversity I was worried
I was worried for using keigo to third years student
because they’re same age to me
I just want to use keigo
I think it’s from my experiencethat’s why I can’t use the straight Japanese
I just use keigo
but it’s not the sign of respect
I didn’t show respect to him
but I just use keigo
Our discussions of these and the other I-poems
covered a wide range of issues. One was the use of
方言札 / hōgen fuda for eliminating use of local
languages or local dialects/varieties in different
education systems. The standard language ideology
had strong resonances for all of us, with Ken’s storyof forced assimilation particularly astonishing for
all the complex and long-lasting consequences that
followed from his elementary school teacher’sinterdiction. In my interviewee’s case, she gives
voice to a sense of conflict about using her local
dialect in her new student life in Tokyo. She feelsthat she should avoid using it, but is unsure why
she has this sense (“I started to stop using dialect“
and “I don’t know why I feel negative feeling to
use local language”). In effect, she is experiencing
how her use of her local variety of Japanese has

become/is being stigmatised and dislocated. This
ongoing transition brings her to identify more withthe branding of her local area for tourism (“I feel
happy if there is some posters or the letter inanother areas, then “oh my hometown isoutstanding”) than with using her local dialect inher own life.
Ken: I’ve told my vignette before, but its importseems to have resonated much more in the context
of Andy’s student’s “I” poem. As I was growing up
in Los Angeles, I recall being told by my parents
that my well-meaning homeroom teacher had
asked them to use only English at home with me sothat I could pass the 2nd grade in my elementary
school. This may seem unfathomable to bothpresent-day thinking about respecting the homelanguage, equally unthinkable in Japanese schools
from grades 1-9 of the possibility of being heldback one year. But in those days, even on the heelsof the civil rights movement in the United States,
my parents’ acquiescence with my teacher’s
proscription was likely along the lines of ‘when inRome, do as the Romans do’. My mother was a real‘kyoiku mama’, so everything the teacher told us
was the gospel to her. By the end of my 2nd grade,my language problems at school straightened out.
My teacher was pleased, but her decision had
destroyed the language fabric in my family. English
was my mother’s first love, but my father neverdeveloped a facility with the language, having notstudied it at all until he came to the States as a
war refugee (he sojourned in northeast China in his
youth and teen years). My mother became theintermediary between my father and I,
transmitting messages back and forth in Japaneseand English. For the next forty years, my father
and I never had a long conversation with eachother. It was only after my mother passed away, mywife coaxed me to speak with him, which broke thewall of intransigence (maybe old-fashioned
machismo of not wanting to admit one’s
stubbornness) that had built up between us. As I
reflect on the wonderful conversations with myfather in the remaining ten years of his life, I canalso sadly imagine how cut off he must have been,feeling not at liberty to express his thoughts to his

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

61

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Free Space
eldest child in so many life moments: my highschool graduation (he himself was unable tocomplete his secondary school education as he wasdrafted into the Japanese army during WW2), myuniversity graduation, wedding, getting job
acceptances, etc. How unfathomable are theadverse consequences created by the blithe
decisions of others.

amazing how wide a range of topics these "I-poems"of one student brought about: language varieties
and standard language, language shift, language
policing, learners' rights, student's perception of"global", etc. Not only did the "I-poems" generate
lively discussions, but they also inspired me tothink about my own background of learning andteaching languages.

Andy’s explanation about the social oppression
hougen fuda resonated with poignancy a few days
after our get-together meeting when I was having alunchtime discussion with one of my students. Oneof the students she has interviewed for her thesis
research spoke of having been sorely stung by her
English pronunciation instructor’s remark during
her freshman year in university. She was told herEnglish speaking was “inaka kusai”, that of acountry provincial. I happened to know that thisparticular student comes from the city of MinamiSoma which was severely afflicted by the
Fukushima nuclear reactor debacle. The student
was so deflated by the insulting remark that she
dropped out of the English teacher certification
program and gave up on English learning. But she
has regained interest in English in her final year inuniversity after being told receiving her job offerthat she needed to use English in the workplace.
She has been motivated to speak it by participants
who encouraged her at an international barbecue
gathering.

This is a big reason why I supported Koki's
suggestion to introduce some kind of presentations
into our Get-Togethers. It would be nice if two or
three members interactively shared their on-goingprojects, thoughts or ideas related to learnerdevelopment in the first half of each Get-together,and everyone could discuss the topics either insmall groups or in a big group in the latter half of
the Get-Together. Members would get a chance to"bring something" to the Get-Together and get
feedback from other members. What does
everyone think?

I welcome Koki’s and Kio’s suggestions to steer
this get-together in new directions that could very
well stoke interest in discussions, spawn research
directions and encourage members to come andparticipate. Koki’s willingness to help with thecoordination of a possible CCLT4 could kick-start
the nature of future get-togethers. Kio’s idea of
having participants tell what they are doing in theirteaching situations, share learners are experiencing(as expressed in Andy’s I-poems). I hope thosereading our reflections can get excited thinking ofprospects in these get-togethers.
Kio: We had substantial discussions with allparticipants sharing their own stories on variety of
topics. I would especially like to thank Andy forsharing his "I-poems" project with us. It was

Martin: I particularly enjoyed the first part ofthe session, consisting of discussion of the I-Poems.
The thoughts and feelings the student had about
dialects and discrimination were very familiar tome, as I think many people from the UK have had
similar experiences. I was also interested in theperception of “English as global language”,
something the interviewee felt particularly positive
about, compared with their perceptions of otherlanguages. It was a stimulating discussion; I would
certainly be keen to examine more of these poems
at a later date, including They-Poems from theseinterviews or other sources.
After a short break, we discussed the future of
the Tokyo Get-Togethers, which have seen a
reduction in participant numbers over the past
couple of years. Ideas of how to shape thegatherings into 2019 were put forward, which havebeen described above by other participants in thiswrite-up. I am in agreement that members shouldtake responsibility for leading a session however
they choose, offering some kind of input which
would lead to discussion. There are not a large
number of sessions in the calendar year; I think it
would be feasible for volunteers to step up andlead one discussion during the period.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

62

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Research and Reviews

RESEARCH & REVIEWS | 研究 & レビュー
Autonomy in Language Learning and Teaching:
New Research Agendas. Alice Chik, Naoko Aoki, & Richard Smith, 2018.
Palgrave Macmillan UK, 137 pages, ISBN 978-1-137-52998-5, Hardcover￥7,245, eBook ￥5,795.
Hugh Nicoll <hnicoll@gmail.com>

Autonomy in Language Learning and Teaching:
New Research Agendas (hereafter dubbed ALL&T),
edited by Alice Chik, Naoko Aoki, and Richard
Smith was published in early 2018, but had its
origins in the RenLA Research Agenda Project firstoutlined in December 2012. At that time, Alice,
Naoko, and Richard were just a year into their 2011
to 2014 roles as co-conveners of the AILA Research
Network on Learner Autonomy (RenLA). The
Research Agendas in their 2012 versions are stillavailable online here <https://ailarenla.org/lall/december-2012/>, a web page essential to thecontemplation of how difficult and poignant our
research and publication efforts so often turn out
to be.
First, and most obviously, ALL&T became one of
Naoko's final publications; second, the project's
first public expression took place at AILA2014 in
Brisbane, and it took an additional four years to
shepherd the chapters through to publication, andfinally, the 2012 ReNLA web page includes acollection of tributes to Richard Pemberton, who
had died in January of that year. This, in a sense,brings us full circle to this issue of Learning
Learning, to our remembrances of Naoko, and tothe continuing challenges of research, scholarship,
writing, and publishing in the face of what may
often seem literally insurmountable obstacles todevelopment, progress, and sustainability in boththe personal and public spheres of our lives asteachers, academics, and researchers.
For most of this year I have been reading andre-reading ALL&T, in a rather disorderly fashion.
Throughout these now many months I have been
puzzling over several questions:

1. Are our efforts as researchers andwriters–perennially thinking about how todefine "learner autonomy" and "learnerdevelopment" merely Sisyphean (see Alison
Stewart's essay, this issue) , particularly
when we try to apply our tentative
definitions to the task of understanding
where the field has been and where it's
going?
2. Is attempting to identify and argue for"new research agendas" a similarly difficult,perhaps even a presumptuous effort?
3. Is there a special value to new ideas ineducation research and practice, or, do ourattempts at timeliness trap us in bandwagon
effects? Do the obstacles to freshness
inherent in the time it takes to edit andpublish a collection of chapters represent afurther, and perhaps final confirmation of
the dangers of pedagogical and theoreticalarrogance?
4. Yet, aren't these efforts at surveying afield, making generalizations about trends,
directions, and agendas an essential andinescapable aspect of our roles as
academics, researchers, and scholars?
5. And finally, what are the practicalobstacles (and the obstacles in the current
political economy) to getting our work into
the hands of readers who may benefit fromour efforts, assuming, that is, that mostclassroom teachers are not too burned out
to devote some time to reading and thinking

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

63

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Research and Reviews
about theoretical and practical puzzles in afield of study?
As I am now a retired professor living in
Miyazaki, far from an academic and commercial
hub, availability and price of books and research
papers are foremost among these concerns for me.
There are also, I should acknowledge, a number ofother equally personal issues at play, that led me
to look forward to the publication of the ALL&T
collection. First, and now sadly, is the fact I met
both Richard and Naoko shortly after they founded
the LD SIG together, sharing our first discussions oflearner autonomy in Hong Kong in 1994. I followed
their work over the years, and took great interestin Richard's work in the practical and theoretical
approaches to the literature on and practice ofteaching in difficult circumstances, and in Naoko's
explorations of learner identity, narrative, andvoice, and genre-challenging approaches toacademic writing. I was also fortunate in that I
could attend the ReNLA symposium in Brisbane in2014, where I had a symposium participant's
interest in seeing how the proceedings would be
published. In many ways, the ALL&T collection does
stand as a testament to the ways the editors' andcontributors' work helped to both confirm thecritical hope that learner autonomy/autonomous
learning and teaching began with (see Paulo Freire,
1970, 1994, and Henri Holec, 1979, to cite onlytwo), and helped to expand the community of its
authors and practitioners. I was, I have to admit,
somewhat disappointed, therefore, on two counts:(1) The time it took to actually bring the essays
into print, and (2) the cost of the publication itself.
Eventually, as I thought over these questions
through this year, I wrote to Richard and Aliceasking if they still felt the five chapters sufficientas an articulation of "new agendas" for the field,
and if they had any comments on the publication of
the collection and on its price, and thus its
relative inaccessibility to teachers and research
practitioners with limited funding and/or access tomajor research libraries. Both Alice and Richard
were gracious in their responses, agreeing that
open-access (i.e., free) publishing models have
many virtues. Happily, chapter 2–“Learner

Autonomy in Developing Countries”– is open accessthrough Springer, <https://link.springer.com/
content/pdf/10.1057%2F978-1-137-52998-5_2.pdf>.
Richard mused in retrospect on whether including'New' in the title was a good idea, particularly
given that project took so long to complete. With
those caveats aside, however, both Alice andRichard feel the chapters can continue to prove
themselves valuable to readers.
The collection itself opens with an introductory
chapter by the editors, arguing that “new research
agendas” are needed to respond to “changing
perspectives on language teaching and learning.”(p2) The five main chapters focus on "Learner
Autonomy in Developing Countries" (Smith, Kuchah,and Lamb), "Language Teacher Autonomy and Social
Censure" (Xuesong Gao), "Learner Autonomy andGroups" (Palfreyman), "Learner Autonomy andDigital Practices" (Chik), and "Researching theSpatial Dimension of Learner Autonomy" (Murray).
For me, the threads that bind the individual
chapters together return us to a cluster of familiar
themes:– Constraints on autonomous learning andteaching – chapters 2, 3, and 4 especially;– The central paradox of the independence/
interdependence puzzle (all chapters, perhaps);– The affordances of digital practices - chapters
2 and 5, in particular; and,– Learning environments ('the spatial
dimension'); whether our focus is on classrooms(or the lack thereof) and the attendantconstraints, virtual spaces in a variety ofcontexts, or the use of dedicated learningspaces such as self-access centers and othersocial learning spaces (most explicitly, Garold
Murray's chapter).
What I have gotten most from musing on theseissues is that our primary commitment as teachers
must be to pedagogies and the development ofpublication models that support the construction of
democratic classrooms. I am particularly interested
in further teasing out the relationships between(and potential lessons in) chapters 2, 3, and 4, allNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

64

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Research and Reviewsof which explore quality of life questions forlearners and teachers in our shared and troublingtimes. The fact that the book has raised so many
hard-to-answer questions for me about learnerautonomy/autonomous learning suggests that
ALL&T is well worth reading for those of us
interested in puzzling through some of the knots
that engagement with pedagogies and research forlearner autonomy/autonomous learning necessarily
confront us with. I wonder whether others wouldfind this too? I therefore hope that readers of
Learning Learning will encourage your libraries topurchase the collection. In addition, I would like toshare the book with member(s) of the Learner
Development SIG with a view to creating acorrespondence around any ideas and issues thatcatch the interest of and/or challenge fellow
readers of this book.
My shared review proposal is this then: that you
contact me, and I will send you the book to readand respond to. You send me your response to boththe book and this incomplete review and we theninvite others to share their views in response sothat a continuing and collaborative review can be
published in the next issue of Learning Learning in
2019. (And please do return the book to me once
you have written your review!) Naoko, I feel, would
enjoy a co-constructed and on-going review anddiscussion of one of her parting gifts to us.

References
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New
York, NY: Continuum.
Freire, P. (1994, 2014). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving
pedagogy of the oppressed. London, UK:
Bloomsbury.
Holec, H. (1979). Autonomy and foreign language
learning. Strasbourg, France: Council for Cultural
Cooperation.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

65

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Back

LOOKING BACK | 報告
JALTCALL 2018: Reflections on the
Learner Development SIG Forum
Blair Barr, Neil Cowie, Daniel Hougham, & Brett Milliner
On June 10, 2018, the Learner Development(LD) SIG Forum was proud to continue a longstanding relationship with the JALTCALL annual
conference at Meijo University in Nagoya. This is aunique opportunity for Learner Development
members, as we are the only JALT Special Interest
Group (SIG) to stage a forum at this event every
year. This year’s forum was titled Navigating
Language Development: How are learners evolving
with language learning technology? It attracted asmall but dynamic and interactive group of
attendees, and it featured innovative approaches
for facilitating independent learner developmentusing technology in the classroom and beyond.
First, Brett Milliner (Preparing Language Learners
for Extensive Listening Online) reported on student
engagement with extensive listening exercises andlistening logs. Next, in his presentation titled
Online Quizzing/Testing with Immediate Feedback
through Quizlet, Google, and Flubaroo Add-on,
Daniel Hougham presented survey findings onlearners’ perceptions of a vocabulary-learning
program incorporating Quizlet and online
vocabulary quizzes (Google Forms and the Flubaroo
add-on). Finally, in a presentation titled The Many
Uses of Quizlet and Co-creating with Students,
Blair Barr demonstrated how one particular groupof learners in a university Business and TOEIC classengaged in the co-development of Quizlet
flashcard sets for both in-class gamification andindependent-study for TOEIC and vocabularydevelopment. Each presentation was followed by adiscussion period where participants reflected andshared their own research experiences, puzzles,
and questions about learner development using
technology.

Brett Milliner, Tamagawa University
Although attendance was small (which wasprobably a reflection of the early Sunday morning
time-slot), this year’s LD Forum proved to be mymost worthwhile experience of the entire
conference. Quite often at CALL related events
presenters will talk about the potential of newtechnologies, whereas, in this forum the presenters
drew upon their day-to-day use of online
applications in their language classrooms.
Moreover, all participants had intimate experience
using each application, hence discussions focussed
on the practical applications of these tools forlanguage learning, and not on the technology.
To reflect on the individual presentations, I was
impressed to see how balanced Daniel Hougham’s
approach to vocabulary learning has become.
Daniel includes both an incidental (using extensive
reading) and deliberate learning component thatutilizes Quizlet flashcards and regular vocabulary
quizzes created in Google Forms (and graded using
the add-on, Flubaroo). He also dedicates time tocarefully training his students on how to create
their own flashcard sets in Quizlet and how to set
up a self-evaluation step in this learning process(via the online tests). Daniel is also auditing theeffectiveness of these online learning activities,
and he shared some encouraging results. So far, hisstudents appear to really like the Quizlet
component and they appreciate receiving
immediate feedback (conducted via Flubaroo) for
their formative vocabulary tests. I look forward toreading some of the research output he is planning
concerning correlations between TOEIC test
focussed vocabulary study (using Quizlet) andactual TOEIC scores.
Following Daniel’s evaluation of student

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

66

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Backperceptions for his vocabulary training activities,
Blair Barr shared a range of approaches for using
Quizlet in the EFL classroom. Some these ideas areshared in Blair’s reflection below, but what struck
me was that flashcards are not necessarily
restricted to vocabulary learning, rather there ispotential to use this tool for speaking and listening
practice. I was also interested in Blair’s creative
approaches to getting students to create card sets.
When Nation (2013) highlighted flashcards were thefastest approach to acquiring new vocabulary, healso recognized the value of students manuallycreating each card. One problem I have had when
implementing an online flashcard system was how I
could make the card creation process moremeaningful and how I could train students to utilize
some of the affordances of this online, digitalformat (e.g., incorporation of multimedia, images
and example sentences found on dictionary
websites such as alc.co.jp).
In my presentation I introduced the Google
apps, Google Forms, Google Sheets and YouTubeand how I utilize them to manage extensive
listening components in my university-level EFL
courses (see Milliner, 2016 for an introduction to
Google apps; and, Milliner & Barr, 2017 for an
introduction to Google Forms-based testing). As
members of the audience were familiar with theseapps, the presentation focussed on managing thelistening component. During the discussion period,
important points included how to protect against
students cheating with a self-reporting or honestybased approach, and how to create comprehension
quizzes in Google Forms that embed YouTube or
PDF media (see Figure 1.).

Figure 1. A listening quiz created by students using
Google forms
Overall, I was happy that we had a smallergroup attend this forum. As I mentioned in myintroduction, all participants were experienced
teachers and CALL users, which made for someenlightening discussion concerning the practicalapplication of online tools for language learning. I
found myself in the week following the conference
looking into how to use Flubaroo, instructing mystudents on how to create online flashcard sets
more effectively and looking into how I can catch
instances of cheating (e.g., using sophisticated text
filtering in Google Sheets) in my extensive listening
component.
To conclude, I wanted to thank Blair and Daniel
for the invitation and their well-prepared,
insightful talks. Also, thank you to the LD SIG for
the opportunity to present in their forum.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

67

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Back
Daniel Hougham, Hiroshima Jogakuin
University
I really enjoyed Brett Milliner's presentation on
using extensive listening logs. Brett explained how
his high-level university students have been given
the guidance and autonomy to choose listening
texts from websites such as TED, BBC, andYouTube. It was great to see that students wererequired to record information about their selfselected listening texts and experiences in an
Extensive Listening Log, via a Google Form, andwere given access to a shared spreadsheet (Google
Sheet) where all of this data including their own
reflective comments could be seen by the teacher
and students. Giving students access to theirclassmates' responses in this way seemed to beproviding them an excellent opportunity to see
what their peers were listening to and thinking
about, thus creating the right conditions for themto learn from each other's experiences.
It was interesting to learn that TED, YouTube,
VoiceTube, and ELLLO were the most popularsources of self-selected listening material among
his students. When asked by an audience member
how he might adapt the extensive listening activity
for lower-level learners, Brett responded that hewould guide the students to visit the following
three select websites where they can self-selectgraded listening material suitable for lower-levels:(1) ESL Fast (eslfast.com), (2) English Listening
Lesson Library Online (elllo.org), and (3) News in
Levels (newsinlevels.com). Providing lower-level
students with such a limited but carefully selectedchoice of websites is arguably providing guided
autonomy, which most lower-level students seemto need.
It was also great to learn that his students wereencouraged to create quizzes using Google Forms,
where they could embed high-quality YouTube
videos and images, to aid with comprehension andenjoyment of high-interest content. One example
he showed was a student-created Ed Sheeran
Carpool Karaoke Quiz (see Figure 1. above) inwhich a student had embedded an image ofMaltesers to aid with comprehension of thequestion “How many Maltesers could Ed Sheeran fit

in his mouth”? Encouraging students to use Google
Forms in this way was an excellent example ofapplying one of Hubbard’s (2004) five principles for
CALL learner training: Give learners teacher
training and enable them to take responsibility for
their own learning.
My own presentation was on the topic of Online
quizzing/testing with immediate feedback throughQuizlet, Google, and Flubaroo add-on. I talked
about how my 1st-year low-level Japanese
university students were given some basic technicaland strategic training in the use of Quizlet to study
word cards using a variety of engaging activities,
and were given weekly vocabulary quizzes with
Google Forms and Flubaroo. The courseimprovement survey results I shared suggested thatlearners find Quizlet very useful and easy to use,
and that they want to continue using it in the
future.
After my presentation, attendees raised some
important questions for discussion, including thequestion of whether I have found that my students
actually use Quizlet independently. Although I havecollected plenty of student study data which showsthat many students do use Quizlet sets to complete
assigned activities for homework on their own, I
have found that only a small number of students
continue to create their own Quizlet sets and use
them to study English and/or other subjects
independently outside the classroom. This
discussion prompted a shared realization among acouple of participants that there is a need to
conduct interviews with students who have become
successful independent Quizlet users to find out
more about their Quizlet usage patterns and habits
and how they became proficient at using it. The
discussion also solidified my realization that there
is a need to create better learner training
materials— screenshot tutorials in particular—which
will make it possible for students to more quickly
learn how to create and study using Quizlet toachieve their study goals independently, outside
the classroom. It also solidified my awareness ofthe need to focus on helping students improvetheir TOEIC scores, using Quizlet with TOEIC
materials, and the need to investigate theNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

68

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Backrelationship between the use of Quizlet with a
TOEIC word list and TOEIC score gains.
I also enjoyed a really stimulating presentation
by Blair Barr who similarly shared some cuttingedge strategies and techniques for helping
Japanese university students take more control of
their learning. Blair talked about how he uses
Quizlet to increase participation among his
students, in particular, he adjusts the options
within Quizlet study sets so that they are editableby certain classes. He then gets his students tocollaboratively edit a shared Quizlet study set for
homework, which he then checks for accuracy
before class. It was really interesting to learn that,to enable this activity, Blair puts each students’first name (on the definition sides of each card,
respectively) in a set so that each student knows
which card to edit and can do so in an orderly
fashion. Once the set is created, his class could use
it in a variety of ways including playing a variationof Quizlet Live called "11". “11” is a variation
where all teams must stop when they get to 11
points, so that all other teams have more
opportunities to participate and finish the game
(Brandl, 2017).
I greatly enjoyed participating in the LD SIG
Forum at JALTCALL in Nagoya, and came away withmany good ideas on how to use powerful tools—
Google Forms, Sheets, and Quizlet in particular—to
promote class participation and enable learners totake more control of their learning. Although thenumber of attendees was not large, discussions
with them turned out to be one of my mostintimate and useful experiences at the conference.
Special thanks to Blair Barr for organizing the
LD SIG forum again this year.

Blair Barr, Tamagawa University
As usual, I really enjoyed taking part in another
Learner Development SIG Forum. This year, I got towatch presentations by Brett Milliner and Daniel
Hougham before giving a presentation about myown learners Quizlet usage. In this reflection, I
would first like to review the presentations by

Brett and Daniel, as well as present some lingering
questions that I have about their experiences. After
that, I will try to summarize my own presentation,and then end by showing some other points thatcame up after my presentation.
Brett Milliner’s presentation introduced us toonline Extensive Listening diaries that he has set up
for some of his more advanced English as a Foreign
Language (EFL) classes. Students were required tochoose online materials to listen to on a regularbasis, and then, after listening, they were required
to complete a Google Form with details and asummary of the listening. This information would
then be stored in a shared location for students to
use as a potential database of listening materials.
This way students could find materials that otherstudents enjoyed. I thought this was an interesting
resource for students, but I was left with one
lingering question about cheating the system. I
would suspect that some students would simply
copy summaries from the resource and then submit
these as their own work without strict teacher
reviews. However, Brett also showed us how his
students are creating Google Form quizzes basedon listening/video materials that are embedded in
the online form. I was excited by this idea, and I
see great potential that these quizzes could
provide the teacher with an increasing set oflistening content that could be used to confirm
comprehension. I have started to consider using
such student-generated online content for some of
my own classes. I look forward to learning more
about Brett’s experiences with these online quizzes
in the future.
Next, Daniel presented a course-improvement
survey from his students about their use of Quizlet
in his classes. Being a frequent user of the online
flashcard sets myself, I am always interested inwhat findings Daniel has to present. As expected,
he finds that students are satisfied with thevocabulary learning program he uses in his classes.
In his class in particular, he uses the flashcards togenerate quizzes for learners to review thelearning from Quizlet. After watching Daniel’s
presentation, I realized that it would be interesting
to do some student interviews with learners about

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

69

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Backhow they actually use Quizlet outside of class. I
personally find that it is a tool that students enjoy
using in the class, but they do not necessarily makeuse of it on their own time (Barr, 2016). I would
love to learn more about this at an individual level.
Finally, I presented on my own implementationsof Quizlet. In particular, I was talking about how
my students use it in a more advanced class on
Business Issues and TOEIC. In this class, students
are expected to do TOEIC self-study, which means
much of this work becomes homework. As a part oftheir self-study, every student in the class must
contribute to shared sets of Quizlet vocabulary
flashcards online. Basically, I use the appendix ofthe assigned TOEIC textbook (Successful Keys to
the TOEIC® Listening and Reading Test 3 4th
Edition by Mark D. Stafford) to create Quizlet setswith vocabulary from each unit. Each week, thestudents must contribute to a Japanese-English
card set and a gap-sentence card set. These
contributions are due two days before class, sothat I can lock students’ editing privileges, thenreview and edit their contributions. Once finalized,
we can use the set in class to play games in class,such as Quizlet Live. In addition, the sets become aresource for students to refer to again and again,even after the class is complete. The students
really enjoy doing these exercises as I often get
requests to use the material in class more. One
student, in particular, attributed a 200-point jumpin his TOEIC score to this vocabulary resource. I
have not done an evaluation of student’s data to
uncover any support for such claims, but it would
certainly be an interesting research project tocarry out.
After my presentation, I got a lot of interest
from the participants. In particular, there wasinterest to learn more about the different kinds offlashcards sets I have created over the years.
Although I only presented about word-translationand gap-sentence flashcard sets in thepresentation, I ended up showing other kinds ofsets that I have created for different classes, suchas question-response cards (e.g. https://
quizlet.com/197527832/qa-fh2-unit-02-flashcards/) that I use in speaking classes. Participantsalso showed a great deal of interest in audio sets
(e.g. https://quizlet.com/296110006/qa-fh2unit-02-audio-flash-cards/), where I record aquestion on one side of the card and provide asample answer to the question on the reverse. I
hope to be publishing more about these in the
future.
I would like to thank everyone who took part in
the forum at JALTCALL 2018. I realize that it was asmall crowd, and I think I have learned that wereally need to incorporate the tools presented in
the title for future forums at JALTCALL. This is ahigh-tech crowd with specific interests, so weshould really cater the forum to that in the future.
That said, it was still an enjoyable and interactive
group, so I hope everyone got something from theexperience. I certainly will be looking into studentgenerated listening quizzes for the future.

Neil Cowie, Okayama University
I have been attending JALT CALL conferences
since about 2005 and always come away with many
practical ideas to use some form of digitaltechnology in my classes. This year was no
exception and the LD SIG Forum in particular was
extremely helpful. In reflecting on the three talks,rather than focus on one at a time I’d just like tomake a few general comments which apply to all.
It seemed to me that there was a common
cycle which underpinned each of the threeteaching approaches. Firstly, each teacher would
select a digital tool or resource (i.e., listening
websites, Quizlet, Google Forms) and show theirstudents how to use it; then, the students would‘play’ with the tool or resource in order to see how
it functioned and what uses they could make of it
for their language learning; once students knew
what to do with the tool or resource they would
then ‘add value’ to it (give commentary on alistening website; create their own quizzes; create
their own vocabulary lists) and share with theirclassmates.
I think this cycle of show, play, add value, andshare can be a really powerful way for teacher andNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

70Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Backstudents to collaborate to create a rich learning
environment for all. The students benefit as they
have access to their classmates’ work; and theteacher benefits as they can be the recipient of agreat deal of useful materials which they canrecycle into future lessons. I think a challenge forthe teacher is to curate these materials and add
even further value by critiquing what students
produce. This could also be done by the students
themselves in one form or other; although they are
already working hard!
Digital technology has an amazing number ofaffordances to allow students to work in a selfregulated manner, to construct their own
meanings, and to reflect on what they havelearned. Technology is also ubiquitous, usually free,
and of a very high quality. Like any teaching tool,technology can be used inappropriately, but the LD
SIG Forum showed innovative and effective ways touse it. Thanks!

English as a Lingua Franca Journal, 2(1), 36-48.
Retrieved from http://www.tamagawa.ac.jp/celf/research/pdf/celf_journal_final2-1.pdf
Brandl, M. (2017, March 28). Teacher tip: Playing Quizlet
live "11" [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://
quizlet.com/blog/teacher-tip-playing-quizlet-live-11
Cowie, N. (2018). Student transcription for reflective
language learning. ELT Journal, https://doi.org/
10.1093/elt/ccy010
Hubbard, P. (2004). Learner training for effective use of
CALL. In S. Fotos & C. Browne (Eds.), Perspectives on
CALL for second language classrooms (pp. 45-68).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Milliner, B. (2016).The Google Educator accreditation
process for language teachers. The Language
Teacher, 40(3), 22-24. Retrieved from http://jaltpublications.org/node/27/articles/5164-google-educatoraccreditation-process-language-teachers

References

Milliner, B., & Barr, B. (2017). Computer assisted
language tests for the English classroom:
Blackboard® tests and Google Forms. The Center for
ELF Journal, 3(1), 67-79. Retrieved from http://libds.tamagawa.ac.jp/dspace/handle/11078/474

Barr, B. W. B. (2016) Checking the effectiveness of Quizlet
as a tool for vocabulary learning. The Center for

Nation, P. (2013). What should every EFL teacher know?
Seoul, South Korea: Compass Publishing.

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

71

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Back

Reflections on the Independent Learning Association (ILA)
Conference 2018,
September 5th — September 8th, 2018, Kobe, Japan
Maria Giovanna Tassinari

Christian Ludwig

Freie Universität Berlin

University of Education
Karlsruhe

Email:<giovanna.Tassinari@fuberlin.de>
Academics attend conferences for manydifferent reasons: to meet like-minded colleagues
from all over the world, build a professional
network, or present their ideas and work; the main
reasons for us to go to conferences are to expand
our knowledge and keep up with the latest
research. Furthermore, as (language) teachers,
high quality teaching is important for us to grow as
professionals and individuals and to be reflective
and informed is also vital for the success of ourstudents. The ILA2018 conference, Whose
Autonomy? Voices and Agency in Language
Learning, tackled exactly these issues by urging us
to critically reflect on the collaborative anddialogic nature of learning and teaching, and think
about the different voices engaged in autonomous
learning environments from the classroom and selfaccess centres to virtual learning environments.
The conference organisers, Steve Brown, Ann
Mayeda, and Hisako Yamashita from Konan
Women’s University, Kobe, did a tremendous job in
putting together a varied and inspiring programme,
encouraging us to appreciate others’ voices and, atthe same time, making our voices heard.
The three-day conference offered everythingfrom the academic programme, including symposia,
workshops, talks, and plenaries as well as sharing
and poster sessions. For those who already arrived
on the day before the conference, three annual
JASAL SAC tours provided a unique opportunity tovisit local self-access centers in the Kobe area. In
addition, the two parallel pre-conference
workshops by Joseph Tomei, Kumamoto Gakuen
University, Towards an L2 metaphor pedagogy:

Email:<christian.ludwig@phkarlsruhe.de>multimodality and the EFL writer and Maria de la
Paz Adelia Peña Clavel, School of Language,
Linguistics and Translation-UNAM, Teletandem
language learning right out of the box, were astimulating way to get started with the conference.
This successful day was concluded by the official
welcome reception on the premises of theuniversity.
The following days offered a diverse conference
programme, including a broad range of topics
related to the conference theme. To mention afew, presentations on learner dialogues, flippedclassroom environments, effective discourse,
collaborative professional development throughdigital media, such as video games, in foreign
language learning, were only some of the many
aspects touched upon during the conference. The
sheer number of presentations would make it
impossible to review each contribution to theprogramme individually and in great detail. In thefollowing, we will therefore concentrate on two of
the plenaries, the student conference, one
workshop as well as one individual presentation
held at the conference, pinpointing the general
direction of the event.
In their joint plenary, A Collaborative
Reflection on Our Professional Journeys with
Learners' Voices, Leena Karlsson and Chika Hayashi
gave an insightful example of how they promote
the development of their learners as teachers andcounsellors. Opening an authentic dialogue withlearners and sharing their own personal stories,
they encourage learners to find their own (inner)
voices (Hayashi & Karlsson, 2018, p. 33) both asNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

72

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Backlanguage learners and as individuals. In thisrespect, learner development means supporting
learners to start a reflective journey in a creativeand personal way, for example, through life stories,
creative writing or art work, enhancing awarenessof their unique individuality in a “parallel process”
and mutual relationship between learners andteachers as co-learners (ibid.). Leena and Chicka’s
preparation of their talk is a unique example ofsuch a reflective journey as the “textual
friendship” (ibid.) they developed through theirvirtual and textual communication illustrates.

For the first time, JASAL included a student
conference “Learners about Learning”, organised
by Ann Flanagan and Agnes Patko, with the supportof Katherine Thornton, which gave local andinternational students the opportunity to talkabout their own individual learning experiences.
The posters prepared by the students showed avariety of learning pathways and strategies andstimulated a fruitful discussion. The innovative
structure of the conference as well as the
dedication of both the organisers and students
turned it into a unique experience.

While engaging in this kind of learnerdevelopment, Leena Karlsson and Chika Hayashi
also pursue research, drawing on narrative inquiry
to shed light on how language learning can become
transformative. Their plenary was much more thanpassing on knowledge and raising questions as they
let the audience participate in their very personal“process of re-storying [their] professional pasts aspractitioners, researchers and persons” (ibid.: p.
34).

One of the workshops we would like to describe
here in more detail is the workshop by Satoko Katoand Jo Mynard, who was also the third plenary
speaker of the conference. Language advising is a
powerful tool for learner development. Taking up
the topic, their workshop Practical advisingstrategies for promoting reflective dialogue,
illustrated the principle of their approach toTransformational Advising. Drawing on their longexperience as language learning advisors at the
SALC of Kanda University of International Studies(KUIS), they introduced the principles of theirapproach to advising and let the participants
practice some of the strategies to promotelearners’ reflection and metacognition. To support
the learner trajectory from getting started to
becoming aware towards transformation, they
identified four essential steps in the advisingprocess: 1) prompting action, 2) broadening
perspectives, 3) translating awareness into action,and 4) assisting transformation. Thus, the learner isat the heart of the advising process, experiencingthat their voice is important in a personal andprofessional relationship of mutual respect andtrust. Although specific to the advising context,
some of these strategies can also be adopted in theL2 classroom, promoting transformation inlearning.

In the last plenary of the conference, Hearing
Voices: Collectividuals and Agency in the Language
Classroom, James Lantolf introduced the audience
to recent developments in sociocultural theory andto preliminary considerations on how thesedevelopments offer new approaches to language
teaching and learning. Starting with the assumptionthat autonomy and agency can be considered assynonymous, Lantolf stressed that individual
agency is inseparably connected with thesociocultural environment in which it is occurs. As
individuals, we are all formed by the sociocultural
rules we learn to identify from our childhood
onwards. In this indivisible dynamic construct ofindividual activity and society, the socioculturalenvironment is the source of our development as
individuals. Drawing on these premises, Lantolf
advocates promoting L2 agency in the language
classroom through developmental education. From
this point of view, learning and teaching are
inseparably linked in a dialectical continuum,
aiming at a balance between mediating conceptual
knowledge and promoting use of this knowledge toact as authentic individuals in the L2.

The presentation by Yoshio Nakai (Doshisha
University), Learner autonomy as sociallyconstructed agency: Eva’s language learning
history, focussed on tracing the Japanese language
history of a student from Hong Kong. The presenter
showed in a very hands-on way how social

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

73

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Back
interaction is conducive to the development oflearner autonomy and how the learner herself
attempted to become aware of what Nakai
referred to as her “ideal L2 self” through social
interaction. The digital media, such as the video
game Doko Roko, used by the student during her
learning process, illustrated the multifaceted rolethat digital media can nowadays play in thelanguage learning process.

motivation during her studies but that interactingwith some of the participants and experiencing thevivid atmosphere at the conference has given her a
new push. It is comments like this which show us
how important it is to listen carefully to eachother’s voices. We can only say that we deeply
enjoyed attending such a great event. It was greatto hear so many new voices and to listen to ourown voices from a new and fresh perspective.

In addition to the theoretical and luckily oftenvery practical as well as interactive events, theconference offered a varied social programme,
including a Sake tasting and a dinner at a
traditional Japanese Izakaya. During the final
sharing session, one of the student assistants said
that she had lately experienced a lack ofReferences
Hayashi, C., & Karlsson, L. (2018). A meeting ofhearts and minds.
Learning Learning,25(1), 32-35. Retrieved from http://ld-sig.org/
learning-learning-25-1/

Reflections on ILA 2018
Daniel G. C. Hougham
Hiroshima Jogakuin University
Email: <d.hougham@gmail.com>
This was my first time to go to an ILA
conference, and I thoroughly enjoyed theexperience. In April this year I started a newteaching job, and going to Kobe for ILA2018 was arefreshing break for me ahead of the Autumn
semester. The thought-provoking title of theconference—Whose Autonomy? Voice and Agency inLanguage Learning—had me thinking long and hardabout the meaning of voice and agency and how
important they are within the development ofautonomous learning processes. The way theconference was organised also led me to reflect on
individual learners and how I can help them makechoices and take responsibility for their learning. I
felt encouraged to find new ways in my work topromote autonomous learning inside and beyond
the classroom.
One of the main takeaways from ILA2018 forme was the importance of advising and reflective
dialogue to help learners develop autonomously. In
her plenary titled Supporting Learning ThroughDialogue Within and Beyond the Classroom, Jo

Mynard talked about the importance of advisingwhich she emphasized is the most powerful tool for
helping students as it can facilitate meaningfullearning beyond the classroom. She touched on
Kato and Mynard’s (2016, pp. 9-18; see also Mynard
2018, p. 28) transformational advising approachthat goes beyond simply giving learners hints andtips: It supports them through a process ofintentional reflective dialogue that aims topromote deeper critical reflection on learning andlead to major shifts in thinking, improvements inlearning, and learner autonomy. Later on in theconference, I attended Kato and Mynard’s
workshop on Practical Advising Strategies for
Promoting Reflective Dialogue, where participants
had an opportunity to do some face-to-facepractice advising sessions. Working in pairs, weenjoyed trying out various basic yet very practicalstrategies such as repeating and summarizing
what a learner has said, focusing on the learner’s
tone of voice and words expressing emotions.

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

74

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Back
Another main takeaway for me was theimportance of creating a space where students
have opportunities to find and develop their
passions and interests, not just their immediate
language requirements, so as to nurture their longterm motivation. Fortunately, I was able to attend
the pre-conference tour of three self-accesscenters (SACs) in the Kobe area and learn about thedifferent features of these centers. Konan Women’s
University e-space was particularly impressive inthat it includes a large and well-organizedcollection of graded readers, thus offering
opportunities for students to find interesting andsuitable reading/listening materials. e-Space also
provides students very good opportunities to takeownership of the spaces, for example, by creating
specific places on the walls where students canpost a note expressing what their motivation is andwhat their goals and visions are.
I also had a chance to speak with someexperienced SAC-practitioners who kindly sharedstories of practice and transformation in selfaccess facility design and management (e.g.,
Taylor, 2014; Thornton, 2015). As a result of these
serendipitous encounters, I soon searched andfound that there is a wealth of recent and relevant
literature (e.g., Carson, 2015; Chavez & Pena
Clavel, 2015; Rubesch & Barrs, 2014; Werner & Von
Joo, 2018), containing a lot of practical advice andsuggestions on what to consider and what questions
to ask when looking into developing self-accesslearning environments. At my university I am
hoping to create some self-access learning
opportunities such as more of an online presence tosupplement in-person learning opportunities, so I
was fortunate to make such connections and findthese resources.
I was impressed by how very well everything
was organized: The conference team did a
fantastic job of putting together a varied
programme that aimed to highlight learner voices
and promote reflective understanding of how they
relate to the development of learner (and teacher)agency and autonomy. The 3-day programme
included a pre-conference tour of three nearby
SACs, two solo plenaries, one collaborative plenary,symposia/workshops, a model United Nations, aparallel student conference, an online “video
voices” pilot project, and a large number ofinteractive poster sessions and interestingpresentations on a wide range of topics related tothe conference theme, including autonomy/agency
in self-access centers and in the classroom,
motivation, peer reflective dialogues, learning
strategies, and advising strategies. The preconference SACs tour was an inspiring experience,and I attended numerous interesting presentations
that it would be impossible to cover in a brief
conference reflection. I am glad, however, to havethe opportunity to elaborate on some of my
ILA2018 experiences in a Collaborative Reflections
piece with my fellow attendee, Naomi Fujishima(forthcoming in the ILA Proceedings on the ILA
website in Spring 2019). To conclude, I would liketo express my thanks to the organizers—especially
Steve Brown, Ann Mayeda, and Hisako Yamashita—
for hosting ILA2018 at Konan Women’s University.
The well-designed conference handbook(downloadable from http://ila2018.org/news/
handbook) is a testament to the professionalismand dedication that went into creating such a great
event. I would also like to thank everyone who took
part in the conference for contributing to it inmany and various ways.

References
Carson, L. (2015). Human resources as a primaryconsideration for learning space creation. Studies in
Self-Access Learning Journal, 6(2), 245-253. Retrieved
from http://sisaljournal.org/archives/jun15/carson
Chávez Sánchez, M., & Peña Clavel, M. (2015). The
development of CELE-UNAM mediateca. Studies in
Self-Access Learning Journal, 6(2), 219-230. Retrieved
from http://sisaljournal.org/archives/jun15/chavezpena
Kato, S., & Mynard, J. (2015). Reflective dialogue:
Advising in language learning. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Mynard, J. (2018). Supporting learning through dialogue
within and beyond the classroom.
Learning
Learning, 25(1) 26-31. Retrieved from http://ldsig.org/learning-learning-25-1/
Rubesch, T., & Barrs, K. (2014). Supporting a physical selfaccess center with a virtual presence.Studies in Self-

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

75

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Back
Access Learning Journal, 5(1), 42-49. Retrieved fromhttp://sisaljournal.org/archives/mar14/
rubesch_barrs
Taylor, C. (2014). The transformation of a foreign
language conversation lounge: An action research
project. Bulletin of Shotoku Gakuen University(Faculty of Foreign Languages), 53, 1–16. Retrieved
from http://www.shotoku.ac.jp/data/facilities/
library/publication/gaigo53-1.pdf

Thornton, K. (2015). Sharing stories of practice in selfaccess facility design and management. Studies in
Self-Access Learning Journal, 6(2), 216-218. Retrieved
from http://sisaljournal.org/archives/jun15/thornton
Werner, R. J., & Von Joo, L. (2018). From theory topractice: Considerations in opening a new self-accesscenter. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 9(2),116-134. Retrieved from https://sisaljournal.org/
archives/jun18/werner_vonjoo

Learners about Learning Student Conference
Ann Flanagan, Ritsumeikan Junior and Senior High School, Email: <ann@fkc.ritsumei.ac.jp>
Agnes Patko, Kyoto University of Foreign Studies, Email: <a_patko@kufs.ac.jp>
Katherine Thornton, Otemon Gakuin University, Email: <katherine-t@otemon.ac.jp>
In conjunction with the 8th Independent
Learning Association Conference, “Whose
Autonomy? Voices and Agency in Language
Learning held at Konan Women’s University in
Kobe, Japan, the Kansai Get Together group of the
JALT Learner Development SIG, held the 3rd Annual
Student Conference entitled Learners about
Learning. In this short review, we describe andreflect on the event, share student feedback andoffer suggestions for those interested in holding
similar events simultaneously with teacher
conferences.
The JALT LD SIG Kansai Get Together Group has
previously held two student conferences called theKansai to the World Conference (K2W) (Aden et al.,2017). They were aimed more towards university
students focusing on global related issues facing
Japan.
This year’s conference, Learners about
Learning, held at Konan Women’s University in
Kobe, Japan was organized by Agnes Patko, Ann
Flanagan and Katherine Thornton. It aimed atproviding an opportunity to local and international
senior high school and university students todiscuss issues of and share experiences and ideas
about their language learning. In preparation forthe poster conference, students were asked tothink about their language learning experience andwhat made it meaningful to them. They wereencouraged to include ways that helped them tostudy language like:•study resources (YouTube, movies, music, Apps,
online resources, chats ...)•

language opportunities (English conversations,activities with international students, events at
school or your self-access center ...)•

study abroad experiences•

projects in class•any other activities or projects or ways of
studying English.

Before the conference began, students hadlunch together which gave them the opportunity to
get to know each other in an informal situation as
well as calm those presentation jitters. Afterlunch, Agnes Patko and Katherine Thornton lead
fun ice-breaking activities to get students to learn
more about each other since they were fromdifferent schools in Japan.
At the beginning of the conference, students
placed their posters on tables or hung them on thewall. They then did a 20-minute “Gallery Walk”
where students toured the room to read theposters and write questions on Post-It notes which
presenters could include when they gave theirpresentation. This was led by Ann Flanagan. Thiswas very effective because it gave weaker students
the time needed to engage with text and have theNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

76

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Backchance to ask questions without feelingoverwhelmed. It also helped support the presenterswhen they were giving their presentations.

Gallery Walk

The conference was divided into three poster
sessions. The participants rotated every 6 minutes
to new posters, allowing them time to listen to
most of the presenters. At the end of eachrotation, participants were able to ask questions.
Next, students formed groups in a reflective
activity to discuss what they learned or what theyfound was the most helpful or most interesting.

After the poster session activity, students had achance to enjoy cake and relax before doing a oneminute Pecha Kucha about their poster in the Main
Auditorium in front of the participants at the ILA
Conference. Sharing the students’ voices with all
the attendees at the ILA conference gave everyone
the chance to listen and reflect on learners’
diverse perspectives on language learning.
To conclude the conference, student presenterswere given certificates of achievement and a group
photo was taken at the end. ILA participants wereinvited to look at the posters and have further
discussions with the students.Also, student
presenters were asked to write a 500 to 2500 word
paper for the ILA Conference Proceedings.

Participants engaged in the poster session

Presenters at the Learners about Learning Conference
September 2018

Student voices

Posters designed by students

After taking part, students filled out an online
questionnaire (see Appendix A). However, in the
future, it would be better to do a paper-basedquestionnaire to ensure that we get everyone’s
response after the conference. The survey results
confirmed our sense at the time that theparticipants rated the conference as excellent and

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

77

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Backvery good. In addition, they were extremely likely
to recommend a friend to participate in a future
conference held by the LD Kansai Get-together
Group.
Many students said that they were inspired byother participants. Many university students
commented how they enjoyed having the highschool students participate because they learned alot from them and they wished that they had had
the same chance when they were that age.
As always, students offered some good advice
for the next conference. They would like to havemore time to give the presentation. They would
also like to have more non-presenting students toparticipate in the event. Furthermore, they would
like to encourage more university students topresent about their projects and research. Overall,
the results were positive and gave the organizers
some food for thought when they plan the next
event.

Reflections
The student conference organizers as well as
the ILA Conference organizers reflected on the
success of the student-centered event by email.
Everyone was impressed by the quality of work
presented and the level of engagement theparticipants had throughout the conference. Since
the students were able to share their personal
experience with language learning, the interaction
between students and teachers seemed morerelaxed and meaningful.
Some of the challenges of the conference were
finding participants. Since the conference was held
during the summer vacation, many university
students were not able to participate. In the
future, we need to publicize the event better byusing Facebook or contacting the publicity chairs of
the Kansai Area JALT Chapters so that more
students can take part.

give a conference. The teachers involved would
give support with the facilitation of the event.

Our closing thoughts and looking to the future
The Learners about Learning Student
Conference was a great way for students tostrengthen presentation skills, build confidence
and form new friendships. They had an opportunity
to inspire and connect with other students as wellas get feedback about the work they presented.
It is the hope that we can hold the conference
again from next year and find other schools at boththe secondary and tertiary level to participate.
They would like to increase the number ofparticipants and get more teachers involved. It isclear that the conference offered a rich learning
experience for all participants. In addition, having
a joint conference was very beneficial to allparticipants.
Overall, this year’s conference could not have
happened without the tireless efforts of Steve
Brown, Ann Mayeda, Hisako Yamashita, Agnes
Patko, Katherine Thornton and Ann Flanagan andthe hard work of all the participants. We lookforward to using the feedback we received andapplying it to the next student-centeredconference in 2019.

Reference
Aden, A., Flanagan, A., Nakai, Y., Narita, S., Patko,A., Teeter, J., & Thornton, K. (2017). Kansai To
the World: Promoting learner engagement about
international issues through a student conference.
Learning Learning, 24(1), 34-38. Retrieved fromhttp://ld-sig.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/
Kansai_24.1.pdf

The Kansai Get-Together Group is also exploring
the possibility of having a student-led conference.
This would give students the occasion to plan andNewsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

78

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Back
Appendix A
Learners about Learning Student Conference at Konan
Women’s University Feedback Survey

6. Were the following activities helpful in encouraging
communication among participants?
extremely

very

somew slightly
hat

not at
all

lunch

○

○

○

○

○

ice-breaking
activities

○

○

○

○

○

gallery walk

○

○

○

○

○

poster anddiscussion
session #1

○

○

○

○

○

poster anddiscussion
session #2

○

○

○

○

○

poster anddiscussion
session #3

○

○

○

○

○

pecha kucha

○

○

○

○

○

Dear Participants,

Thank you very much for participating in the Learners
about Learning Student Conference. We appreciate all
your hard work for making this a successful event. Your
feedback is very important to us. Please fill out theform below.

Circle:Male

FemaleGender Neutral

High School 1st Year / 2nd Year 3rd Year / 4th Year
University 1st Year / 2nd Year / 3rd Year / 4th Year
Graduate Student

Exchange Student

How likely would you recommend this event to aclassmate?

7. Did the conference fulfill your reason for coming?
Yes, absolutely
Yes, but not to my full expectation

not all likely -----* -----* -----* ----- extremely likelyNo

2. Overall, how would you rate the quality of theconference?

8. Which topics would you be interested in learning
about or presenting about at a future conference(Learning Languages, Global Education, Global Issues,
Local Issues, Human Rights Issues, and so on)?

Excellent / Very Good / Fairly Good / Mildly Good / Not
good at all

9. Which month(s) would be the best for you to join afuture Student Conference?

3. What did you like about the event?

4. What could be improved about the event?
5. How organized was the event?
Extremely organized / Very Organized /Somewhat
Organized / Slightly Organized/ Not at all Organized

10. Please write any additional comments or feedback
that you would like to give us:***********
Thank you very much for participating in the Learners
about Learning Student Conference.
We greatly appreciate your feedback. It will be very
helpful when we plan next year’s event.
The Learners about Learning Conference Organizers

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

79

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Forward

LOOKING FORWARD | 今後のイベント

Call for Contributions
Deadline: November 19th 23:55!
For more details: goo.gl/s7pdMB“Creating Community: Learning Together 4” (CCLT4) is an informal, relaxing afternoon Learner Development SIG
conference taking place on Sunday December 16 12:00-17:00 at Otsuma Women’s University, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo.
「コミュニティの創造：共に学ぶ4」は、12月16日（日）12:00-17:00に大妻女子大学（東京，市ヶ谷）で開催される午後のインフォーマルで和やかな学習者ディベロプメントSIGの 学会です。
We warmly invite proposals from students and teachers interested in sharing
their work on learner development issues that interest them, for example
autonomy, motivation, L1-L2 use, literacy, identity, critical pedagogy, creativity,
Exploratory Practice, qualitative research (e.g., focus groups, interviewing,narrative research), content-based learning, (learner) use of technology, student
research projects, goal-setting, self-assessment, self-evaluation, visualizing
learner development, multilingualism, teacher learning, and so on.
オートノミー、モチベーション、第一言語・第二言語使用、リテラシー、アイデ
ンティティ、クリティカル教育、創造性、Exploratory Practice（探究的実践）、
質的研究（フォーカス・グループ、インタビュー、ナラティブリサーチ等）、コ
ンテント中心学習、（学習者の）テクノロジー使用、学生の研究プロジェクト、
目標設定、自己評価、学習者の成長の視覚化、多言語主義、教師の学び等、学習者ディベロプメントに関するご自身の研究を共有することに関心のある学生や教員の方々からの申し込みを募集しております。
The conference offers opportunities for teachers and their students to takepart and, if they want to, give poster/digital display presentations, as well as
have conversations and discussions, about various issues to do with learnerdevelopment.
当学会では、教員や学生が参加し、学習者ディベロプメントに関する諸問題について、ポスター・プレゼンテーションやデジタル・プレゼンテーションを行ったり、参加者との対話や討論を行ったりすることができます。

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

80

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Forward

Learner Development Sessions at JALT2018(1) Learner Development SIG Forum Saturday 12:45 PM - 2:15 PM, Room 1003
Bringing Learners Together Forum moderator: Barr, Blair Ashwell, Tim - Komazawa University; Arnold, Lee;
Barfield, Andrew - Chuo University; Gallagher, Nicole - Rikkyo University; Kojima, Hideo - Bunkyo University; Onoda,
Sakae - Juntendo University; Ronald, Jim - Hiroshima Shudo University; Salazar, Javier; Sandu, Roxana; Morgan, Jenny- Wayo Women's University
Keeping with the 2018 JALT International Conference theme of “Diversity and Inclusion,” this year’s LD SIG Forumon “Bringing Learners Together” will focus on what happens when learners take the opportunity to interact and connect
with others both inside and out of the classroom. This year’s topics will include learner explorations of diversity,
student fieldwork abroad, peer assessment and feedback, social learning spaces, sociocultural approaches tounderstanding culture, and other challenges and possibilities with learner development. Timed rounds of poster
presentations will be followed by a discussion period where participants will be given an opportunity to reflect on thepresentations while sharing their own research experiences, puzzles, and narratives about learner growth coming fromencounters and interaction with others.
(2) The Learner Development SIG AGM Saturday 3:45 PM - 4:30 PM, Room 908
The SIG’s annual general meeting is a valuable occasion for SIG members and officers to review together the SIG’s
activities in the last year, make plans for the coming 12 months, and raise questions for discussion that members of the
Learner Development community have. Please come along and take part in planning LD grants, activities, events, andpublications for 2019.
(3) Learner Development SIG Party at JALT2018 Saturday 23 November 2018 from 8pm - 10pm
Please join us for some delicious Nepalese-Indian food, a drink or two, and a great time at the Learner
Development SIG party at JALT2018! Venue: Namaste Nippon (21 minutes on foot from the station). Party fee: 4500
yen (including nomihodai - both alcohol and non-alcoholic drinks - as well as vegetarian options) per person. Pleasesign up here by November 16 2018. Many thanks!

Saturday, 24th November
11:00 AM - 11:25 AM, Room 906 Reflections to Encourage Student Development Tsukamoto, Mizuka - Rikkyo
University
11:00 AM - 12:30 PM; Tenji Gallery (6F) Exploring Learners' Multilingual Repertoires Barfield, Andrew - Chuo
University
11:00 AM - 12:30 PM; Tenji Gallery (6F) Designing for Diversity the UDL Way Dickinson, Paul - Meijo University
11:35 AM - 12:00 PM; Hikae 2 (2F) Case Study of Changes in Oral Proficiency Kanda, Makiko - Osaka University of
Economics and Law
12:10 PM - 12:35 PM; Practice Room 4 (B1) Effects of Translanguaging in Planning EFL Writing Turnbull, Blake Kyoto University
12:45 PM - 2:15 PM; 1003

Bringing Learners Together

Ashwell, Tim - Komazawa University; Arnold, Lee; Barfield, Andrew - Chuo University; Gallagher, Nicole - Rikkyo
University; Kojima, Hideo - Bunkyo University; Onoda, Sakae - Juntendo University; Ronald, Jim - Hiroshima Shudo
University; Salazar, Javier; Sandu, Roxana; Morgan, Jenny - Wayo Women's University
12:45 PM - 1:45 PM; Hikae 2 (1F) Effectiveness of Team Teaching in High Schools Hasnain, Farrah - Hamamatsu
Higashi Senior High School
1:20 PM - 1:45 PM; Practice Room 3 (B1) Multimodal Analysis of Learners' Own L2 Production Kindt, Duane Nagoya University of Foreign Studies
3:45 PM - 4:30 PM; 908 Learner Development SIG AGM All SIG members welcome
4:40 PM - 6:10 PM; Tenji Gallery (6F) Learning is Not Futile Nagasaka, Tats Paul - Rikkyo University
4:40 PM - 6:10 PM; Tenji Gallery (6F)Supporting Learner Autonomy in a Language Exchange Morikawa, Sarah Chiba University; Nishizumi, Kanako - Chiba University
4:40 PM - 6:10 PM; Tenji Gallery (6F) Learning How to Learn: 24 Time Management Tips Digiulio, Anthony - Kanda
Institute of Foreign Languages; Matusmoto, Yuko - Kanda Institute of Foreign Studies; Bartelen, Herman - Kanda
Institute of Foreign Languages

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

81

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Forward
5:15 PM - 5:40 PM; Practice Room 3 (B1) Mindful English Learning in Japan Stringer, Thomas - Konan University
5:50 PM - 6:15 PM; 1001-2 Personalization in an Impersonal World Hughes, John - National Geographic Learning
5:50 PM - 6:15 PM; A/V Hall (2F) L1 Transfer and Explicit Instruction in SLA Koike, Yuko - Fukuoka Prefectural
University
7:00 PM - 7:25 PM; Kaigi Hall [Wind] (11F) Community-Oriented Approach to Learner Development Yamamoto, Kie Kanda University of International Studies; Osada, Atsuki - Kanda University of International Studies; Oba, Eri - Kanda
University of International Studies

Sunday, 25th November
10:25 AM - 11:25 AM; Kaigi Hall [Wind] (11F) Three Strategies for Fostering Learner Resilience O'Loughlin, Judith B.
- Sponsored by JALT and Soka University
12:30 PM - 1:30 PM; 1201 Eliciting Student Answers: Finding What it Takes Paton, Stephen - Fukuoka University
12:30 PM - 12:55 PM; 904 Embracing Autonomy by Semi-Flipping the Classroom Verla Uchida, Adrianne - Nihon
University
12:30 PM - 2:00 PM; Tenji Gallery (6F) Integrating SEN Students Into the JHS Classroom. Pratt, Laura - British
Council Japan
12:30 PM - 2:00 PM; Tenji Gallery (6F) Include Student Voices: Peer & Self-Assessment Haga, Satchie - Seikei
University
12:30 PM - 2:00 PM; Tenji Gallery (6F) Remedial Learner Needs and Inclusivity Goetz, Thomas - Hokusei Gakuen
University
12:30 PM - 2:00 PM; Tenji Gallery (6F) Study Habits of University Students Landsberry, Lauren - Nagoya College
12:30 PM - 2:00 PM; Tenji Gallery (6F) Using Comic Life & iMovie for Cultural Exchange Lambert, Greg - Kumamoto
Gakuen University Fuzoku HS

1:40 PM - 2:40 PM; 907 Self-Directed Learning for Teachers and Learners Underwood, James - Gakushuin
University; Hayashi, Gota - Gakushuin University
1:40 PM - 2:05 PM; Hikae 1 (2F) Interventions to Improve Inclusivity and Learning Johnstone, Scott Clark Memorial International High School; Gray, Scott - Clark Memorial International High School; Chang,James - Clark Memorial International High School; Ishii, Atsuko - Osaka University
2:15 PM - 2:40 PM; 904 Sentence Tennis: Pushing Complexity in Production Custance, Imogen - Kwansei
Gakuin University
2:15 PM - 2:40 PM; 908 Deconstructing the Myth of the Native Speaker Devitte, Wayne - Tokai University
2:15 PM - 2:40 PM; 910 Task-Based Approach to Research Presentation Nakamura, Eiko - Okayama
University; Nakamura, Ian - Okayama University
2:50 PM - 3:15 PM; 907 SALC? Less "SA," More "LC," Guided-Access Arrives Berman, Shari Joy - Hirosaki
University; Tada, Megumi - Hirosaki University
2:50 PM - 3:15 PM; 908 Co-Researching Learner Agency and Identity Nicoll, Hugh - Miyazaki Kouritsu
Daigaku; Iwata, Riko - Miyazaki Kouritsu Daigaku
4:35 PM - 6:05 PM; Tenji Gallery (6F) Connecting Diverse Students at Language Tables Ueno, Yukako International Christian University
4:35 PM - 6:05 PM; Tenji Gallery (6F) Outcomes When Student Groups Self-Select Topics Porter, Rich Nagoya University of Arts and Sciences
5:10 PM - 5:35 PM; Hikae 1 (2F) High School Students as Key Practitioners Hiratsuka, Takaaki - Tohoku
University
5:45 PM - 6:10 PM; 1202 Building Agency With the Sound of One's Own Voice Kirchmeyer, Branden - Sojo
University

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

82

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Forward
5:45 PM - 6:10 PM; 904 Positive Pedagogies of Well-Being Champion, Stuart - Kanda University ofInternational Studies; Hirosawa, Emiko - Waseda Jitsugyo; Murphey, Tim - Kanda University of International
Studies
5:45 PM - 6:10 PM; 909 Overcoming L2 Communication Anxiety at SALC Matsuoka, Yaoko - Kokugakuin
University
6:55 PM - 7:20 PM; 1202 Developing a Career Vision With English Takaoka, Sachiyo - Tsuda University
6:55 PM - 7:20 PM; 908 Communities of Practice in Social Learning Spaces Hooper, Daniel - Kanda
University of International Studies

Monday, 26th November
9:15 AM - 9:40 AM; 1003 Recursive Practice Effects on EFL Learner Beliefs Bowyer, David Scott - Nagoya
Gakuin University
9:50 AM - 10:15 AM; 1003 Successful Implementation of Group and Pair Work Sano, Maho - Kyoto Sangyo
University; Tomita, Koki - Gakushuin University
10:25 AM - 10:50 AM; 1003 Flipped Classroom Scaffolding for EFL Kaiser, Meagan - Kobe
11:00 AM - 11:25 AM; 1003 Fostering Growth Mindset Through Goal-Setting Standlee, Philip - Kanda
University of International Studies; Stevenson, Rob - Kanda University of International Studies
11:35 AM - 12:00 PM; 1003 A Chorus of Voices in a Self-Access Language Space Tanaka, Toshiyuki - Nara
Medical University; Bolstad, Francesco - Nara Medical University; Mathieson, Paul - Nara Medical
University; Blodgett, Michael - Nara Medical University
12:10 PM - 12:35 PM; 1003 Effects of Intrinsic Motivation on L2 Learning Onoda, Sakae - Juntendo
University
12:45 PM - 1:10 PM; 1003 Classes for Low-Level Learners Kajiura, Asako - Niigata University of
Rehabilitation
1:20 PM - 1:45 PM; 1003 Maintaining a Self-Directed Learning Classroom Wongsarnpigoon, Isra - Kanda
University of International Studies; Imamura, Yuri - Kanda University of International Studies
1:55 PM - 2:20 PM; 1003 LEP Graduate Students' Journey to Academic Success Chaisuriya, Arnon Chulalongkorn University Language Institute2:30 PM - 2:55 PM; 1002 Habit Formation in Long-Term Language Study Cole, Tony - Yamano College of
Aesthetics
3:05 PM - 3:30 PM; 908 Sociocultural Perspective: A Short Story Koch, J. C. Jr - Sapporo Gakuin
University; Takashima, Risa - Hokkaido University

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

83

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Looking Forward

SIG MATTERS | インフォメーション
Learner Development SIG Financial Report May to October 2018
The SIG’s finances are currently in very good health. The reimbursement of 75,000 JPY to Hugh Nicoll for numerous
costs incurred over a 15-year period (and longer) of webmastering for the LD SIG will be processed shortly. Additionally
there will be some outstanding costs related to the JALT Conference, but we are on course to break even for the year.
Revenues: May – October, 2018 /収入: 2018年5月−10月
Annual grant from JALT National

150,269PanSIG participation dividend

86,689Return of PanSIG conference grant

40,000

Balance / 合計

272,614

SIG fund balance, October 21, 2018 / SIG資金残高2018年10月21日
Balance in bank account / 銀行口座の残高

643,370

Reserve liabilities / JALT本部預け金

200,000

Cash on hand / 現金

866

Balance / 合計

843,928

Expenses: May – October, 2018 / 支出: 2018年5月−10月
PanSIG conference grant(40,000)

Tokyo get-together room rental fee(2,592)

Tokyo get-together room rental fee(1,944)

Bank transaction fee(308)Tokyo get-together room rental fee(1,944)

Sponsorship of Chika Hayashi as plenary speaker for ILA 2018(28,700)

Balance / 合計

(75,488)

One concern from this year is that the amount received from JALT in our annual grant (150,269 JPY) is considerably
smaller than in 2017 (219,276 JPY) despite having a similar number of members. Fortunately, the effect of this waslessened by receiving more than usual from our share of PanSIG profits. However, receiving less than 1,000 JPY per
member from JALT National is something that looks like becoming the norm.
That said the SIG will carry plentiful funds forward into 2019, so discussion is needed on how this is best spent. Ideally
we should not be hoarding funds, but spending them for SIG members‘ benefits, so I am sure the SIG committee will
welcome your ideas for projects.
I will be stepping down from the role of SIG treasurer at the AGM in November. If you are at all interested in taking
over, individually or as part of a team, please get in touch. Many thanks.
Huw, SIG Treasurer
Email: <h.davies1@gmail.com>

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

84

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Sig Matters

Writing for Learning Learning『学習の学習』応募規定
Deadline for Contributions to the Spring issue: February 15th
Learning Learning is the Learner Development SIG newsletter and is published online bi-annually, in the
Spring and Autumn. It has a specific ISSN number (ISSN 1882-1103), and features cutting edge articles invarious formats that relate to people’s ideas, reflections, experiences, and interests to do with learnerdevelopment, learner autonomy, and teacher autonomy. Many different SIG members contribute to eachissue of
Learning Learning, and, by doing so, create a sense of shared community and learning
together. Please feel free to contribute too and make connections within the SIG and beyond. 『学習の学習』はLD SIGのニュースレターで、年に２回（春と秋）オンライン出版されています（ISSN 1882-1103）。学
習者の成長、学習者と教員の自律に関するアイディア、省察、経験や興味に関連したさまざま形式の原稿を収録しています。SIGの多くのメンバーが『学習の学習』に寄稿し、共同体の意識を築き共に学習しています。どうぞ奮ってご投稿され、SIG内でのまたそれを超えた繋がりを築いてください。

Contributions / 寄稿
We encourage new writing and new writers and are happy to work with you in developing your writing.
We would be delighted to hear from you about your ideas, reflections, experiences, and interests to do withlearner development, learner autonomy, and teacher autonomy. これまでにない形式のもの、また新しい方々からのご投稿をお待ちしております。内容についてもぜひご相談ください。みなさまのご意見やお考え、
ご経験、そして学習者の成長、学習者と教師の自律性に関することなど、ぜひお聞かせください。For moredetails about formats and lengths (形式と長さ) of writing suitable for Learning Learning, please see below.
To upload your writing to the editorial team of Learning Learning, please use this link.

Formats and lengths / 形式と長さ
Learning Learning is your space for continuing to make the connections that interest you. You are warmly
invited and encouraged to contribute to the next issue of Learning Learning in either English and/orJapanese. In order to provide access and opportunities for Learner Development SIG members to take partin the SIG’s activities, we welcome writing in different formats and lengths about issues connected withlearner and teacher development, such as:『学習の学習』は会員の皆様に興味ある繋がりを築きつづけるス
ペースです。次号の『学習の学習』への日本語（もしくは英語、及びニ言語で）の投稿を募集しています。メンバーの皆様にSIGの活動にご参加いただきたく、形式や長さを問わず、学習者および教師の成長に関する以下のような原稿をお待ちしております。

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

85

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Sig Matters
Short articles on issues to do with learner/teacher development and autonomy /学習者と教師の成長・自律に関する小論#1: short individual articles (1,200 – 2,500 words)： 小論（単著） (約3,600-7,500字)#2: short group-written articles (1,200 – 4,000 words)： 小論（共著）(約3,600-12,000字)

Reflective writing about learning for learner/teacher development and autonomy /学習に関する省察 ー 学習者と教師の成長・自律を目指して#1: particular puzzles that you and/or your learners have about their learning, practices, development,
autonomy, and so on, and inviting other Learning Learning readers to respond (1,000 words or more)：ご自身や学習者の悩み（学習、実践、成長、自律など）に関して、LL読者と一緒に考えましょう。(約4,000字)#2: dialogue with (an)other SIG member(s) (1,000 to 2,000 words)：SIGメンバー同士の対話 (約4,000字-8,000
字)#3: stories of learners becoming autonomous (about 500 to 1,000 words)： 自律・成長する学習者に関する話(約2,000字-4,000字)#4: stories of your learning and teaching practices: success and failure (about 500 to 1,000 words)：学習・
教育実践の成功談・失敗談 (約2,000字-4,000字)

Members’ voices / メンバーの声#1: a short personal profile of yourself as a learner and teacher and your interest in learner development(about 500 to 1,000 words) ：学習者・教員としての自身のプロフィールと学習者の成長に関する興味 (約2,000字-4,000字)#2: a story of your ongoing interest in, and engagement with, particular learner development (and/or
learner autonomy) issues (about 500 to 1,000 words) ：学習者の成長や学習者の自律に関する興味や取り組み(約2,000字-4,000字）#3: a short profile of your learner development research interests and how you hope to develop yourresearch (about 500 to 1,00 words) ：学習者の成長に関する研究内容と今後の研究の展望 (約2,000字-4,000
字）#4: a short profile of your working context and the focus on learner development/learner autonomy that a
particular institution takes and/or is trying to develop in a particular curriculum (about 500 to 1,000
words)：教育環境の紹介、所属機関やカリキュラムにおける学習者の成長や自律に関する取り組み (約2,000
字-4,000字）

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

86

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Sig Matters

Research & reviews / 研究 & レビュー
#1: summaries and accounts of new graduate research (1,200 – 2,500 words) ：大学院での研究内容の要約やその振り返り (約2,400字-5,000字）#2: proposals for a joint project/joint research (about 500 to 1,000 words)： 協働プロジェクト・リサーチの提案 (約2,000字-4,000字)#3: reports (of a conference presentation, research project, particular pedagogic practice, and so on, to dowith learner development) (about 500 to 1,000 words)： レポート（学習者の成長に関する学会発表、研究プ
ロジェクト、教育実践など）(約2,000-4,000字)#4: reports of research in progress (about 500 to 1,000 words)： 研究中間報告(約2,000字-4,000字)#5: book, website, article reviews (about 750 to 1,500 words)：書籍、ウェブサイト、論文の批評(約3,000
字-6,000字)

Free space / フリー・スペース#1: photographs, drawings, and/or other visual materials about learner development, and/or related tolearner autonomy：学習者の成長や自律に関する写真、絵、視覚資料#2: activities and tips for learner development/autonomy (about 500 to 1,000 words) ：学習者の成長・自律を促す活動やヒントの紹介 (約1,000字-2,000字)#3: some other piece of writing that you would like to contribute and that is related to learner development：その他の学習者の成長に関する執筆#4: poems… and much more： 詩、その他。

学習者ディベロプメント研究部会 <http://ld-sig.org>

87

Learning Learning 『学習の学習』 25 (2): Sig Matters

Learning Learning Editorial Team
editorial team <LLeditorialteam@googlegroups.com>
Those working on Learning Learning share a commitment to working together in small teams. We aim tolearn together about writing, editing, responding, and/or translating, for our shared personal andprofessional development. Some areas where we would like to encourage SIG members to take part andwork together on Learning Learning include:• Layout and Design: working on the formatting and preparation of finalised content for online
publication• Members’ Voices (co-)coordinating: contacting news members of the SIG and working with them todevelop their writing in a variety of formats and lengths as a first step to taking part in the SIG’s
publication activities;• Looking Back (co-)coordinating: working with contributors writing on events related to learnerdevelopment (conferences, forums, get-togethers, workshops, both face to face and online) for
publication in Learning Learning;• Research and Reviews (co-)coordinating: encouraging potential contributors to send in summaries
and accounts of research, as well as reviews (of books, journal articles, materials, or web resources
relating to learner development), and working with them to develop their writing for publication in
Learning Learning.Learning Learning
If you are interested in any of these areas of working together (and/or you have other areas of interest)
and would like to discuss your interest and ideas, please email any member of the Learning Learning
editorial team:
Andy Barfield: <barfield.andy@gmail.com> (editor, members voices)
Chika Hayashi: <c-hayashi@hotmail.com> (editor, translation coordinator)
Tokiko Hori: <thori@tsoka.ac.jp> (editor, translator)
Ken Ikeda: <kodanuki@gmail.com> (editor, grant awardee essays)
Fumiko Murase: <fumikomurase@gmail.com> (editor, grant awardee essays)
Yoshio Nakai: <uminchufunto@gmail.com> (editor, translator)
Daniel Hougham: <d.hougham@gmail.com> (editor, digital content)
Hugh Nicoll: <hnicoll@gmail.com> (editor, webmaster)Sean Toland:<seanhtoland@gmail.com> (editor, grant awardee essays)
Koki Tomita: <tomita.koki@gmail.com> (editor, translator)
James Underwood: <jamesmichaelunderwood@gmail.com> (editor, layout)
Many thanks!

Newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG <http://ld-sig.org>

88