Learning Learning

ISSN 1882-1103

学習の学習Volume 17, No.1 Spring 2010
Greetings ごあいさつ
From the LD SIG Coordinator - Hugh Nicoll!"#$%&#'()*+(,-./#01(23'455555555551
From the editors - Ellen Head & Alison Stewart
678-.///9:;2<=>?@AB;2CD1@(E5555552
From LD SIG members – Patrick Kiernan & Michele Ruhl!"#$%&#FG;H(/IEA=J2K@L;?MNO424(4PPPPPPPPPPPP5
Feature Articles フィチャード

アーテイクルズ

Scaffolding and Knowledge Construction in L2 Writing - Makoto
Abe
Q*RS;TFUVWXYZ[\CK]^_(4)S;T`abFU
cd//efg555555555555555555557
Standing in a New Place: Reflecting on Awareness andDevelopment: - Robert Moreau & Allen Lindskoog
新たなる立ち位置：気づきと成長を考える………………….16
hijOJEklWmnopqrsqt`WX8uFvwWXxy/jz{^2^|Q}E
Project-Based Science English Education: Reciprocal Learning
among Teachers and Students - Joseph Falout………………….
22
Reviews

書評

Mapping the Terrain of Learner Autonomy, edited by Felicity
Kjisik, Peter Voller, Naoko Aoki and Yoshiyuki Nakata –reviewed by Ellen Head~•WX€•‚ƒ„…†?^OAND2KNJ?‡(,(2^_:4?ˆ
‰Š‹?Œ•Ž•! !
•‘s9:;2<=>55555P5530
Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics: A Practical
Introduction, edited by Juanita Heigham & Robert Croker –reviewed by Alison Stewart’“”pWYZ[\•–—˜s™š›œ•#ž3(,2Ÿ*@ ?iH(E2Ji(¡(¢6£H4T:(¤2¥JMQ;¦§//•‘s@AB;2CD1@(E5555555555555555555534!

Looking back

報告

Local Get-together Report from Greater Tokyo – Masuko
Miyahara & Kay Irie!"#$%&#¨©9A@M(RS;Tª«#!›¬/-?#®¯°±‹PPPPP²³
LD SIG Forum at JALT National Conference: Snapshots:
Active mirror of identity - Masuko Miyahara´CL=h2Nz=Es@*);RSRS`µF@JR*¤¶·¸¹/#/®¯°±‹555555555555555540
Remembering Stephen Daviesº»sCRS(¤;2)(¼C5555555555555544
Looking forward 今後のイベント
Exploring self-assessment at Nakasendo, Saitama, June2010 - Andy Barfield½Œ¾¿ÀÁÂÁ#Ã#~Ä‘ÅF€•Æ#@;)*2H(^S(4>PPPPPP47
Teacher/Learner Development: a moveable feast:
collaboration with Teacher Education SIG and Osaka Chapter,
October 2010: Call for proposals - Steve Cornwell and Ellen
Head(H¤42^S(CEÇÈÉÊËÌÍÎ#ÏÎËÐÑÒsWX8)SÓihG;E€•
fÔ2qÕqr€•fÔ2Ö×!ØÙÚD]h,(UÛ¡;^|:;C¢ÜÝÞÝßÞÝàÞáâ#ãsÙÚWäÙW£//CRS(¤2'(;}O
4?9:;2<=>555555555555555555550
Metaphors we learn by: the LD Forum at JALT National
Conference, November 2010: Call for proposals - Andy
BarfieldWåFG,^|(ÜÝÞÝßæÖ×!ØÃçèpWqrWÔÃWX8)SÓi=hG;E€•fÔ^_(Q !
@;)*2H(^S(4>51
Grants for two first-time attenders of JALT National
Conference
WX8)SÓiéG;EfÔsÖ×!ØßêÙÔëìídî¢ï°ð£/
SIG matters

インフォメーション

AGM Report - Martha Robertson
Ö×!Ø#WX8)SÓihG;E#€•fÔÜÝÝñßêòÔ! ¥(ó2
iH(EB;55555555555555555555554
LD SIG Financial Report – Hiromi Furusawa
LD SIG ôõª«/ö÷øù5555555555555556
Contributing to Learning Learning「学習の学習」原稿募集………………………………………58

Learning Learning 17 (1) Spring 2010

Greetings
FROM THE LD SIG COORDINATOR! !
Greetings all,Now April, so I'm woefully behind schedule itseems. For the last few years, I've tended to wish
everyone well in this beginning of the new school
year here in Japan, and expressed the often vain
hope that SIG colleagues have managed torecover from the previous year. The emotions andexperiences that underlie those sentiments haven't
changed, but this time out I'll simply say I hope
you are all getting along, dealing with the variouspressures and challenges you face with grace,
good humor, and courage.
In March, I tried without success to explore
building a bilingual capable version of the SIG
website by experimenting with a short catalog ofcontent management system (CMS) platforms.
One problem of course is that we all seem to be
so busy that even keeping up with mailing list
discussions can be a challenge. I am, however,very interested in hearing from members on
suggestions (and/or offers to help) for making ouronline presence more interactive.
Ellen Head has recently polled the SIG
membership on the question of how we have
Learning Learning laid out on the web site, andinquired about member preferences regarding
password protection and download options. We're
discussing various options with the main aim of
improving communications and publishing
opportunities.
The year is off to an interesting start, andaccording to the Japanese Meteorological
Agency, we can look forward to a cool, rainy
spring. We can also look forward to the
Nakasendo Conference in June, an LD, Teacher
Ed, and Osaka JALT mini-conference in October,and our big get-together at the national
conference in Nagoya in November.
Best wishes to all in 2010!
Hugh

LD SIG コーデイネータより皆さんへ
４月も半ばにさしかかり、すでにスケジュールに大幅に遅れをとっているような気持ちです。ここ数年、年度始めの挨拶には皆さんが、前年度の疲れから回復していることへの微かな期待を込めていました。もちろんその気持ちに変わりはありま
せんが、今年は、欲張らず、皆さんが様々なプレッシャーと困難に、品位とユーモア、そして勇気を持って立ち向かっていらっしゃることをお祈りすることとします。
３月にCMSプラットフォームを使った日英バイ
リンガルのSIGホームページを作ろうと努力をしてみましたが、成功には至りませんでした。私達は皆忙しく、単純なメーリングリストでの意見交換ですらままならないことが現状です。しかしながら、どうすればSIGメンバー同士がインターネット
を介して積極的に交流しあえるのか、皆さんからご意見とともにアドバイスや支援を頂きたいと思っています。
最近、エレン・ヘッドが「学習の学習」のインターネットにおける閲覧システム（パスワードの有無、ダウンロードオプションなど）についてア
ンケートを行ってくれました。現在、SIG内のコ
ミュニケーション促進と出版の機会向上のため、
このアンケートの結果に基づいての変更を検討中
であり、そう遠くないうちに報告をする予定です。
気象庁によると、この春はいつもと違って肌寒
く雨が多いとのことですが、LD SIGにとっては、
６月の中山道カンファレンス、１０月のTeacher
Edと大阪JALTと共催学会、１１月の名古屋での年次大会での集まりなどイベントが目白押しの楽
しみな１年となりそうです。
2010年度がよい一年となりますように！

ヒュー・ニコル

Greetings
FROM THE EDITORS!!

!

!

!

編集者より

Are we reaching you? One of the perennial
themes of Learning Learning is connectedness.

私たちの声はもうお手元に届いていますでしょう

We hope the new way of sending out the“connectedness (関わり)”があります。発信方法がリ

Learner Development SIG newsletter will

ニューアルされたLLが皆さんの興味を刺激し、学

stimulate you to read it and that reading will both

習者として、教師としての毎日に刺激を与え、論

stimulate your learning/teaching life andencourage you to contribute an article, a report,

文、報告、書評、コラムなどを投稿する気になって

review or short point-of-view piece. There is

か。LL17.1で繰り返されるテーマの一つにいただけたら幸いです。

always a strong sense of connection and sharedinterests at LD SIG events, but wouldn’t it begreat to extend this to Learning Learning as
well? As members of the editorial team of
Learning Learning we are privileged to seeconnections between events and the research
explorations undertaken by various LD
members. It is fascinating to see the evolution
from research project, to workshop/presentation, to paper (not always in that orderof course).

Learner Developmentのイベントでは、毎回メンバー同士が強い関わりをもち、興味関心を共有していますが、それをLearning Learningに持ち込むことができれば素晴らしいと思いませんか？ LLの編集チー
ムのメンバーである私たちは、毎回のイベントがいかにメンバーによる研究の進展に関わっているかを見てきました。研究プロジェクトからワークショッ
プや発表、そして論文へ（この順番にことが運ぶとは限りませんが）発展していく様子を見るのはとても興味深いものです。
今号に掲載されている３件の論文はテーマである「関わり」を説明するのにふさわしいものばかりです。ロブ・モロー氏とアレン・リンズクーグ氏による論文「 新たな立場に立って」は昨年の中山道のThe three feature articles that are presented in

学会における”Creating a Classroom Presence”というthis issue are prime examples of this kind of

ワークショップとしてスタートしました。この論文

connectedness. “Standing in a new place” by
Rob Moreau and Allen Lindskoog started out asを意識することで教室に深い関わりをもたらし、そa workshop on “Creating a Classroom Presence”
at the Nakasendo conference last year. Their

は学生と私たち教員の行動、反応の仕方、感情など
れによって授業を変化、改善しようとすることの大切さを教えてくれます。阿部真氏による論文「模範paper encourages us to be more connected in

文を利用したライティングの協働学習におけるス

our classrooms by raising our awareness about
the actions, reactions and sensations of our

模範文との関わり、そして、習熟度の異なる学習者

キャフォールディングと知識の共構成」 は学習者がstudents and ourselves, so as to look for

同士がどのように関わりあうのか、そのプロセスに

opportunities to change and improve in each

関する興味深い知見を与えてくれます。この研究でmoment. Makoto Abe’s article “Scaffolding

は２人組の学習者のインタラ クションを注意深く
!

!

!!

!!

!!

2!

Greetings
FROM THE EDITORS!!

!

!

!

and knowledge co-construction in collaborative L2
writing using model texts” offers a fascinating

編集者より最適な条件を調査しています。教師と学習者の共同・相互学習というテーマはジョセフ・ファラウ

insight into the process by which learners with

ト・氏のtask中心の学習に関する論文 「プロジェdiffering levels of language ability connect with

クト型科学技術英語教育：教員と学習者間の相互model texts and with each other. His study takes

学習効果」でも扱われています。ファラウト氏は

a close-up look at pair interactions to investigate
the optimal conditions for productive

プロジェクト中心のカリキュラムを設計、実践しcollaboration. Collaboration and reciprocal

教師の間の相互学習について報告しています。

learning between teacher and students is a theme
pursued in Joseph Falout’s article on task-basedlearning,プロジェクト型科学技術英語教育：教員た経験をもとに、それに より生み出された学生とLearning Learningの読者の関心が強い2冊の本が2009年の終わりに出版されました。Mapping theと学習者間の相互学習効果 (“Project-BasedTerrain of Learner Autonomy (Kjisik, Voller, Aoki and
Nakata, 2009)は国内外における自律を促す実践の大Science English Education: Reciprocal Learning

枠と詳細な事例研究の観点から、さまざまな新しamong Teachers and Students”.) Joe reports on

い論点を紹介し、それらがどんな関わりをもって

his experience of designing and implementing a
project-based curriculum, and the reciprocal
learning between students and teacher that
resulted.
The close of 2009 brought the publicationof two books which readers of Learning Learning
are likely to find of great interest. Mapping the
Terrain of Learner Autonomy (Kjisik, Voller, Aoki

いるかを整理する1冊です。今号ではエレン・ヘッドによる同書の書評を掲載しています。もう1冊のJuanita Heigham 編 Qualitative Research in Applied
Linguistics の書評はアリソン・スチュアートが担当
しています。この本は質的リサーチの手法に関して
具体的、包括的に説明しており、私たちが学習

and Nakata, 2009) gives new perspectives and者、教師、そして学校に関するリサーチをおこな

makes new connections in terms of both the big

うことで言語学習により深く関わることができる

picture and detailed case studies of autonomybuilding practice in Japan and worldwide. The
book is reviewed in this issue by Ellen Head. A
second new book, Qualitative Research in
Applied Linguistics edited by Juanita Heigham
and Robert Croker, reviewed by Alison Stewart,

よう我々を導いてくれます。
様々な年間イベントにおいてメンバー同士の交流をもつのも、LD SIGにとって大切な関わりの一つです。この号は入江恵氏による最近の親睦会に関する報告と、宮原万寿子氏によるJALT 2009のLD

explains and exemplifies the full range of
qualitative research methods in a way that can

Forumに関する報告、そして来月から始まる楽しみ

enable and inspire all of us to connect more

６月に埼玉で開催される中山道の学会とJALT

deeply to language learning by conducting andNagoya 2010の Learner Development Forumに関して

publishing our own research on learners,

アンディ・バーフィールド氏がお知らせします。まteachers, and schools.
Some of the most important connections

た、Teacher Education SIGとJALT 大阪支部共催で

we make in LD SIG are with fellow members at

Moveable Feast”には、スティーブ・コーンウェル、

the various events that take place throughout theyear. We have reports on recent get-togethers by
Kay Irie and the LD Forum at JALT 2009 by
Masuko Miyahara, as well as information about

な共同イベントについてもお知らせします。今年

2010年10月17日に行われる１日限りのイベント “A
エレン・ヘッド並びに学会準備チーム一同、皆さんの参加を心からお待ちしています。学会にご参加いただく費用が高額になる上、所属機関からの

!

!

!

!

!

3

Greetings
FROM THE EDITORS!!

!

!

!

編集者より

three exciting collaborative events that are coming
up in the next few months – the Nakasendo

財政的援助を受けていないLDメンバーをサポート

conference in Saitama in June this year and theするため、40,000円の助成金を2口用意して いま

Learner Development Forum at JALT Nagoya
2010, both previewed by Andy Barfield, and a oneday event called “A Moveable Feast” with Teacher
Education SIG and Osaka JALT Chapter on
October 17th 2010, to which you are warmly
invited by Steve Cornwell, Ellen Head and theconference planning team. Of course, getting toconferences can be expensive, so in order to help
LD members who don’t receive financial help fromtheir employers, the LD SIG is offering two travel
grants of Y40,000. If you think you might beeligible, you can find out more details in this issue
and on the LD SIG website.
The connections we make with each other in LD
SIG often turn into friendships. It is thus with greatsadness and regret that we announce that our

す。ご自身が該当すると思われる方は、今号もしくはLD SIGのウェブサイトにて詳細な情報を参照ください。
LD SIGでの関わりから多くの友人関係が生まれます。今年1月に私たちの良き友、スティーブン・
デイヴィス氏が逝去したことをお知らせするにあた
り、悲しみと遺憾の思いに堪えません。今号はスティーブと彼の学習者の自律に関する才気溢れ、革新的なフィクション形式の論文に対してトリビュー
トを捧げます。今号に収録されているリンクをたどり、皆さんが彼の物語を今一度読み返し、ひととき
彼の思い出にひたっていただけたら幸いです。
Learning Learningとの関わりは、常に何かを学ぶ経験です。最近のLearner Development SIGのメンバーに関する調査によると、このニュースレターを

good friend Stephen Davies passed away in

実際に読んだり、執筆しているメンバーはごくわず

January this year. This issue includes a tribute to
Steve, and to his wonderfully inventive and今号を機に、それが変わることを願っています。今anarchic fictional takes on learner autonomy. We
hope you will take a moment to remember him andかなようです。装い新たにアクセスしやすくなった
回、小澤佳世氏を筆頭に、入江恵氏、宮原万寿子
氏、阿部真氏ら翻訳チームのサポートに毎回ながら

to re-read his stories by following the links provided

心から感謝します(そして自身の論文の翻訳を提供

within.
Involvement with Learning Learning is always aす)。SIGのメンバーがそのスキルを磨き、常に新たしてくださった素晴らしい著者の皆様にも感謝しま

learning experience. When we recently surveyed

な情熱と斬新なアイデアを持ち続けられるよう、編

members of our Learner Development SIG we

集の仕事は2、3号ごとに他のメンバーに引き継ぐ予

found that only a small proportion actually read and定です。ですから、編集、執筆、翻訳、校正などに

write for this newsletter, but we hope that this isgoing to change from this issue, with our new,

興味がおありの方は編集チームにご連絡を頂きます

more accessible format. As always we are veryン氏が投稿されてくる論文の校正をバックアップしgrateful for the support and commitment of ourてくれました。彼が次号においても編集スタッフのtranslation team, headed this time by Kayo Ozawa,

主力メンバーとして参加してくれることを心から歓with Kay Irie, Masuko Miyahara and Makoto Abe(thanks also to those wonderful authors who

迎いたします。

provided their own translations). The job of editing

りもお届けする時期が遅くなることをご容赦いただ

is one that we aim to pass on every two or three

き、私たちのニュースレターをより利用しやすくすようお願いいたします! 今号はパトリック・キーナ

現在、Learning Learningは転換期にあり、通常よるためにも皆さんのご意見を伺いたく思います。それでは、この春、夏もよろしくお願いいたします。
新しいLearning Learningの論文に関する感想、コメントを皆さんにお寄せいただくことを楽しみにしています。 "

"

"

"

"

4

Greetings
FROM THE EDITORS!!

!

!

!

issues, in order to develop this expertise among
members of the SIG, as well as to ensure a
constant supply of new energy and fresh ideas. So
please get in touch with one of the editorial team if
you are interested in editing, writing, translating or
proof-reading! For this issue, Patrick Kiernan has
been shadowing and proofreading the articles as
they come in. We are delighted that he will be oneof the lead editors for the next issue.

編集者より
Learning Learning is going through a period ofchange at the moment so please bear with us if
this arrives to you a little later than usual, andplease give us feedback as we work to make ournewsletter more accessible. We wish you all thebest for the Spring and Summer and we lookforward to hearing from you with your impressions
and comments and new articles for Learning
Learning.
Ellen & Alison
エレン＆アリソン

FROM LD SIG MEMBER PATRICK KIERNAN
Hello, LL readers! My name is Patrick Kiernan. I
joined the LD SIG last year and have found it awelcoming home for my personal interests innarrative and teacher and learner identity. I haveattended two meetings so far which were both sowonderful I found myself volunteering to do editing
work on future issues of LL (no arm twisting, I
promise.) After three exhilarating years teaching on
the English Language Program at Rikkyo
University I moved to Meiji University this April. I
am looking forward to finding new ways for my newlearners to develop and to meeting more of you
and hearing your stories of learner (or self)
development.

LD SIG のメンバー

パトリック2キアナン

LL 読者の皆さん、今日は。キアナン・パト
リックと申します。LDSIG のメンバーとなったのは去年でした。そしてこの研究部会で自分が興味を持つ物語論および教員と言語習得者のア
イデンテイテイについてより理解を深めることが出来ると感じたのです。今まで、二回ミーテ
イングに参加しましたが、どちらも素晴らしくて、将来のLLの編集を手伝うことを名乗り出てしまいました（別に圧力はありませんでした、
本当です。）立教大学の英語プログラムという恵まれた環境でわくわくしながら教えて３年経ちますが、この４月に明治大学に移りました。
これからは、この研究部会を通じて自分の生徒の英語力をさらに伸ばす方法を見つけることを期待しております。また、読者の皆様ご自身の言語習得体験談等もお聞きすることが出来ればと思います。

!

!

!

!

!

5

Greetings
FROM LD SIG MEMBER MICHELE RUHL!
Hi – I’m Dawn Michele Ruhl, also known as
Do-n Mi’shieru Lu-lu in Katakana!
I’m taking over the LD SIG membershipchair post this year, replacing Jodie, who has
moved Down Under! Hope all is going well for
you Jodie!!
I work at Nagasaki University, teaching 1styear and some 2nd year English
Communication classes. I also teach an
English class to foreign students in the NISP
program at Nagasaki University, a chain
lecture on culture, an advanced English
certificate class and some volunteer classes.
I’ve been hugely influenced by what I’ve
read about FLOW in sports and everyday life.
Flow is the state of relaxed focus, describedby Csikszentmihalyi as absolutely necessaryfor enhancing quality of life. As a result, I’ve
have become fascinated with autonomy, andthe balance between “Wet” (right brain) and“Dry” (left brain) learning experiences that will
effectively propel our cycles of learning andmotivation. I realize how difficult it is to
manage my learning and maintain goodlearner habits in my hobbies and life work! I
believe that Miles Davis was correct when hesaid, “Do not fear mistakes; there are none.”
However, many learners, myself included,
have trouble finding their ways back to theright “key” on time! And so the job of learnerand teacher becomes more challenging
because we have to allow for the process oflearning from mistakes.
Compiling learner resources andprogressive assessments in order to make thelearning journey interesting and meaningful for
ourselves as teachers and our students is anever-ending task that I’m sure all LD SIG
members are familiar with.
Thanks to the LD SIG, I learn a lot from theaction research that members are involved inand feel inspired to try my action researchideas.

!

!

LD SIG のメンバーミシェル2ルール

こんにちは。私は、ドーン・ミッシェル・ルールと書きます。カタカナ読みの発音はこうなりますが、実際の名前の発音とは違います。 私は、今
年度、オーストラリアに移動したジョ ディに代わり、 学習者デベロプメント研究部会 のメン
バーシップ担当になりました。ジョディの仕事がうまくいきますように願っています。
私は長崎大学で１，2年生に英語コミュニ
ケーションを教えています。また、長崎大学留学
生プログラムの中で、留学生にも英語を教えています。その長崎大学留学生プログラムでは、文化に関する講義、英語上級クラス、ボランティアク
ラスも担当しています。
私は、 FLOWの理論に関する論文に夢中になっており、 多大な影響を受けています。 そして、 自律学習、私たちの学習サイクルや動機付
けを効果的に促すウエットとドライ学習体験のバランスに関心を持ちました。私は、 学習を自ら管理し、学習習慣を継続していくことがどんなに困難なことか認識しています。音楽家のマイル
ス・デイビスが「失敗を恐れるな。恐れていては何も生まれない。」といい放った言葉は正しいと私は信じています。しかし、多くの学習者は、自分に合った学習方法を探すのに苦労しています。そして、その仕事はさらに困難となってきていると思います。
LD SIGのおかげで、メンバーの方々が行っているアクション・リサーチから多くのことを学
び刺激を受け、自分の研究アイディアを実践してみようと思っています。

!

!

!

!

!

6

Learning Learning 17 (1) Spring 2010
Feature Article: Makoto Abe
Scaffolding and knowledge coconstruction in collaborative L2
writing
ライティングの共同学習におけるスキャフォー
ルディングと知識の共構成

Makoto Abe,
Poole Gakuin University阿部真（プール学院大学）

英語ライティングの指導は複雑で時間を要します。学生の自律的な学習を促すためには、教師が英作文を添削してあげるだけでは不足かもしれません。学生の自主学習をサポートするために、私は２つのことを考えました。一つは学生に模範文を渡すことです。自分の書いた英作文と模範文を比較することで学生はいろいろな言
語的な側面に気付き、ライティングの技術を向上させることができます。もう一つは友人と一緒に学ぶ環境を用意することです。同じ目標をもった学習者が共に英作文を書き、模範文と比較することで、言語への気づきだけでなく、対話を通して様々な知識や理解を共に作り上げていくことができると考えたのです。
本研究は日本の大学に通う２組４人の大学生による英語の共同学習のプロセスを報告します。題材となったライティングタスクは英検準１級の面接試験で使われる問題です。結果は、学生は模範文との比較をすることで、語彙や文法といった言語的な側面だけでなく、タスクがどのような解答を求めているのかという内容的な側面にまで細かくディスカッションできたことを示しています。本研究はさらに、習熟度に差のあるペアが自分の個性を発揮しながら、共にライティングタスクに関する知識を深めていくプロセスを分析、報告しています。

Introduction
This paper explores the interaction between
student peers as a source of learning support foreach other in the context of constructing anarrative based on a picture-story. There arevarious feedback tools in L2 writing instruction.
Traditionally, teachers’ correction was regarded
as superior to peer-feedback until the lateeighties, when research studies started to showthat students do not necessarily learn fromhaving their errors corrected directly by ateacher. (Ferris, 2003, p. 59). As the view oflanguage education has changed from favouring
explicit teaching to more implicit support, English
teachers need to think about the most effective
ways of supporting students to learn L2 writing
autonomously. The most accessible resource
may be a model text in textbooks for L2 writing
as a model text “encourages and guides learners
to explore the key lexical, grammatical, andrhetorical features of a text and to use thisknowledge to construct their own examples of thegenre” (Hyland, 2002, p. 88). Abe (2008) found

!

!

!

!

!

7

Makoto Abethat a model text gave opportunities to learners
to critically reflect upon their own writing, notice
shortcomings, and work out solutions. However,the lower the level of the learner, the less they
seemed to be able to utilize the model andderive any benefit from it. Combining a model
text with near-peer feedback might be a helpful
way to scaffold the novice writers’
understanding of the model. In this paper wewill explore the dynamics of noticing as they
evolved between two different pairs: one a highlevel learner with a low level learner, the othertwo high-level learners.
Collaborative learning: patterns of pairinteraction
The use of pair work in L2 instructional settings
rests on Vygotsky’s (1978) socio-cultural
perspective arguing that human cognition
develops through social interaction. According
to Vygotsky, there is a gap between what
individuals can do by themselves and what theycannot do even with help (Zone of Proximal
Development, or ZPD). Researchers such as
Wood, Bruner, and Ross (1976) called support
from adults or more knowledgeable others in
the ZPD “scaffolding”. Based on Vygotsky’s
theory, his followers have argued thatknowledge is constructed not in our minds but
through social interaction with others. This study
presents detailed analysis of the process ofscaffolding that occurs in pair interaction andthe co-construction of knowledge between two
individuals.
A number of recent studies havedemonstrated the positive impact of peer-peer
interaction on L2 writing (e.g., De Guerrero &Villamil, 2000; DiCamila & Anton, 1997; Swain &Lapkin, 2002). As far as L2 writing is concerned,
Donato (1994) found that collaborative writing
enables L2 learners to jointly pool theirknowledge to resolve their language problems.

Storch (2002) investigated the nature of peerinteraction in an ESL university-level class.
Using two indexes, equality (i.e., equal
distribution of turns, or equal contribution to thetask) and mutuality (i.e., reciprocity of turntakings), she identified four distinctive patternsof pair interaction: collaborative, expert/novice,dominant/dominant, and dominant/passive.
Collaborative interaction consists of highly
reciprocal turn-takings and equal contribution totheir joint activity, where two learners share theideas, discuss them, and are equally engaged
in the same task. On the other hand, althoughexpert/novice pairs are characterized by mutualinteraction like collaborative pairs, one more
knowledgeable learner leads the whole activity
and continuously invites the other lessknowledgeable peer’s contribution. Interaction
in dominant/dominant and dominant/passive
pairs is prone to lack of reciprocity. Dominant/dominant refers to an activity carried out withlittle negotiation, while dominant/passive
consists of an activity solely done by one
participant with little contribution from the otherparticipant. Storch (2002) demonstrated thatcollaborative and expert/novice patterns resultin more opportunities for transfer, coconstruction, and extension of knowledge about
L2 writing.
From the perspective of developmental
psychology, Granott (1993, 2005) specified nine
patterns of pair interaction using two indexes:
degree of collaboration and relative expertise(symmetric vs. asymmetric). This conceptualmodel was similar to that of Storch (2002) inthat pairs with more “mutuality” were morecollaborative and pairs with less “equality” werereferred to as expert/novice in Storch (2002).
Granott (1993) defined interactional patterns
between two collaborative participants withsymmetric expertise as mutual collaboration
and asymmetric expertise scaffolding

!

!

!

!

!

8

Makoto Abe(collaborative and expert/novice patterns
respectively in Storch’s study). However,Grannot’s (2005) comprehensive review ofscaffolding suggests that pair interaction withsymmetric expertise also create a ZPD andscaffolding.
Based on the literature review, the two
research questions explored in this study are as
follows:
1. What interactional patterns are identified
when a particular pair of Japanese EFL
learners compares their own composition witha model text?
2. Can we identify any difference in the natureof scaffolding between different partners withinteractional patterns?
Methodology
Data collection procedure
The participants were four Japanese EFL
university students (all females – Aya, Eri, Sae,and Ai, all names are pseudonyms) studying
English. The students’ majors were English,
early-childhood education, and intercultural
studies. Aya, Eri, and Sae held 2nd and Ai held
3rd grades of STEP Eiken. In this study, the 2nd
grade Eiken holders were regarded asintermediate learners and the 3rd grade holder
as a beginning learner. The students, who wereon friendly terms with each other, paired up into
two dyads consisting of a high-high dyad (Ayaand Eri) and a high-low dyad (Sae and Ai).
The study was conducted in a small,quiet self-study room, which the participants
were accustomed to using to prepare for the
STEP Eiken test. On this occasion, they wereasked to complete a collaborative writing task,
which was a new experience for all of them. The
data collection procedure consisted of threestages: writing, comparing, and revising. In thewriting task, the students were asked todescribe what was going on in a four-framed
picture (see Appendix A). The task was adopted
from a speaking task from the textbook for the
STEP Eiken test. Each pair of students was
asked to complete the writing task while
discussing it with each other. Both students
were asked to hold a pen to avoid unilateralcompletion of the task.
In the comparing stage, each pair ofstudents was provided with a model text, thesample answer for the task contained in thesame textbook (see Appendix B). Then, they
were asked to discuss what they noticed whencomparing their own composition with themodel text. As the participants’ speaking skills
were not very high, they spoke Japanese in
their discussion. After this, the participants ineach pair were asked to revise their text,
individually, based on what they noticed throughdiscussion with their partner.
Data analysis
The students’ interaction in the comparing
stage was tape-recorded, transcribed, andsegmented into language-related episodes(LREs). One LRE is equivalent to a segment of
the conversation discussing a particular featureof the text, such as the use of a particular wordor verb tense. Each LRE was translated andsorted into three categories: those related to
vocabulary (lexical), those related to grammar(form), and those related to content. In order tomeasure the quantitative aspects of “mutuality”
and “equality” seen in the participants’interaction, frequency of LREs initiated by each
student was also measured, along with thenumber of turns (per LRE), and the length ofspeech (number of words) were also measured.
Excerpt 1 shows a lexical LRE consisting of twoturns by Aya and Eri. Words that are underlined
represent phrases used in the model text.

!

!

!

!

!

9

Makoto Abe
Excerpt 1

Excerpt 2

Aya: The model says “because someone”.
Eri: Oh, “someone”.
Aya: What did we write instead?
Eri: It’s “unknown people”. I think it is OK.

L 14Aya: The model says “because someone”.
15Eri: Oh, “someone”.
16Aya: What did we write instead?
17Eri: It’s “unknown people”. I think it is Ok.
L 18Aya: “shutter”, yeah it is “shutter”. I thoughtthat “shutter” is Japanese English.
19Eri: I see. But it seems “shutter” is the mostappropriate word describing thispicture.
C 20Aya: yeah. Then, oh…yeah, “it was not thefirst time” the model says. We didn’t
mention this.
21Eri: Yeah. We should have… Maybe it is
not such a big difference.
22Aya: Hmmm…
Notes. L=lexical LRE; F=Form LRE; C=content
LRE.

This episode implies that Aya and Eri noticed
lexical aspects by comparing their originalcomposition with the model text. So, one
instance of “noticing” can be defined as
equivalent to a “language-related episode” forthis study. Below we will see how theinteractional patterns of the two pairs relate to
Storch’s patterns and explore the scaffolding ineach type of interactional pattern.
Findings
Students paired high-high: a collaborative
pairFirst, the data was globally analyzed based on
Storch’s (2002) four patterns of dyadic
interaction (collaborative, expert/novice,dominant/dominant, dominant/passive). As aresult of the analysis, Dyad 1 (high-high) waslabeled as collaborative and Dyad 2 (high-low)
as expert/novice pairs.
Excerpt 2 is an example of LREs
produced by Dyad 1, Aya and Eri (high-highpair). The two participants continuously
provided each other with comments andresponded to them using phatic utterances suchas “yeah”. This cohesiveness between theirturns is one of the most importantcharacteristics of collaborative pair work in thatit enables interaction to be more mutual (Storch,
2002). The number of turns was similar
between the two students as Table 1 shows,which indicated the high equality of contribution
to the pair work.

Table 1
The frequency of LREs, turns, and the length ofspeech in each dyadic interaction
Dyad 1 (H-H) Dyad 2 (H-L)
Aya - Eri
Sae - Ai
LREs (lexical/
22 (11/6/5)
24 (10/2/12)
form/content)
Turns
58 (30-28)
66 (35-31)
Length of speech 1035 (581-454)1738(n)(1254-484)
Length of speech(56-44)(72-28)(%)
Notes. H=high; L=low.
Students paired high-low: expert/novice pair
Excerpt 3 shows an example of interaction by
Sae and Ai (high-low pair), who were labeled anexpert/novice pair. As is obvious from both
Excerpt 3 and Table 1, Sae’s turns were more
frequent and the length of her speech was
longer than Ai’s.

!

!

!

!

!

10

Makoto Abe

Excerpt 3
C 6 Sae: We missed so much information
which should be included in our writing.
There were two solutions, right? Wewrote only one.
7 Ai: Two? Yeah, yeah.
L 8 Sae: How about vocabulary?
9 Ai: Vocabulary? “Graffiti”? Oh, it is “graffiti”.
10Sae: Yeah, we should have used “graffiti”.
We should have come up with thisword. What did we say?
11 Ai: “draw”…
12Sae: See? The vocabulary is better. It often
rephrases words. Here it says “picture”
but here it says “graffiti.” We repeated“drawing pictures, drawing pictures,
drawing pictures” so many times. Toomuch, isn’t it?
13Ai: Yeah. I see.
Scaffolding and knowledge co-construction:
collaborative vs. expert/novice
The results revealed that both collaborative andexpert/novice pairs were willing to actively
exchange their own ideas so as to co-construct
and share their knowledge. In this section, I willclosely examine how the two participants were
providing each other with scaffolding. The
following excerpt is from Dyad 2, Sae and Ai(high-low pair).
Excerpt 4
C 16Ai: We wrote “everyone was happy”. But
the model doesn’t.
17Sae: I see. “Everyone was happy”… This istheir emotion, right? The model writes
only what is going on in these pictures.
Maybe we shouldn’t use emotional
expressions in this kind of task.
18Ai: Really?
19Sae: Maybe. I don’t know…
(omission)

L 33Sae: Well, we repeated the same words
many times, didn’t we? The model
used more varied vocabulary. For
example, here it says “painted”, and itsays “draw”.
34Ai: Yeah.
F 35Sae: Here, it says “this gave her an idea”.
We wrote “she found a good idea”.
Non-human subjects can be used likethis sentence.
36Ai: Non-human subject.
F 37Sae: Here, again, it says “they were
upset”. Something “upset” thesepeople, you know? Same thing as
non-human subject.
38Ai: Is “upset” a verb?
39Sae: Yeah, it is a passive sentence.
40Ai: It looks like an adjective.
41Sae: Maybe, yeah. It can be used as an
adjective, too.
C 42Ai: But it’s emotion. Same as “happy”
43Sae: Right! So, we can use emotional
expressions in descriptive writing!
In Excerpt 4 Sae and Ai produced content LRE
questioning whether or not “emotional
expressions (kanjo hyogen)” such as “happy”
can be used in a descriptive writing task. This
was their common language problem which
they failed to figure out in the first content LRE(lines 16-19) but successfully solved afterward(lines 42-43). The second, third, and fourth
LREs (lines 33-43) in Excerpt 4 wereconnected. The lexical LRE stimulated thefollowing form LRE in which Sae noticed thatuse of “non-human subjects” in theircomposition would lead to “lexical variety”.
This and following form LREs were directly
related to a common point of “non-humansubjects” and Ai posed the question whether
the word “upset” is a verb. Ai’s question

!

!

!

!

!

11

Makoto Abe
triggered the more interactive form LRE, which
finally led to the following content LRE where Ai
deduced that it is possible to use the word
“happy” as an emotional expression. Here, theimportant thing is that, despite the smaller
contribution to the task, Ai played an importantrole in the dyadic interaction. She replied to her
partner, posed questions, and sorted out her
partner’s explanations, and noticed somethingthat her partner failed to notice by remembering
their common language problem. Sae led forthe most part in the task, attempting to involve
her partner in the interaction, while Aicontributed to their joint work by letting her
partner notice what she could not notice andattempting to extrapolate general points fromtheir ideas. In the revising stages, both Sae andAi revised their texts in accordance with what
they discussed (e.g., used non-human subjects)
and agreed on (e.g., used “happy”) in many
parts.
The other pair, Aya and Eri produced asubstantial number of LREs with a number ofcohesive turn-takings and phatic utterances. In
spite of the high mutuality of turn-takings andequality of contribution, their interactions
produced LREs which were relatively
disconnected from each other. The first half(lines 14-27) of Excerpt 5 shows that although it
seems that the two participants were activelytransferring their knowledge, their LREs were
not closely related to each other and there wasno sign of co-constructed knowledge. Although
the second half has the content LRE whichreflects their language problem accompanying
descriptive writing tasks (lines 55-58), there wasno resolution between them.

Excerpt 5
L 14Aya: The model says “because someone”.
15Eri: Oh, “someone”.
16Aya: What did we write instead?
17Eri: It’s “unknown people”. I think it is Ok.
L 18Aya: “shutter”, yeah it is “shutter”. I thoughtthat the “shutter” is Japanese English.
19Eri: I see. But it seems “shutter” is the mostappropriate word describing thispicture.
C 20Aya: yeah. Then, oh…yeah, “it was not thefirst time” the model says. We didn’t
mention this.
21Eri: Yeah. We should have… Maybe it is
not such a big difference.
22Aya: Hmmm…
L 23Eri: This model uses “discussion”, here.
24Aya: Yeah.
25Eri: I think it is okay to say “talk about”?
26Aya: Yeah, but don’t you think “discussion”
sounds appropriate when describing
this kind of meeting.
27Eri: Yeah, you are right. “Discussion” isbetter, here.
(omission)
C 51Aya: “the shop owners were talking”, yeah,
yeah, here, wait, it says “twosuggestions writing on the board” We
didn’t write this information.
52Eri: Look how the model describes it… We
couldn’t do this.
C 53Aya: And here, “the introduction of security
camera”. We should have written more.
54Eri: We wrote just what…oh, we just didn’t
write what the picture says in words.
C 55Aya: The model says “the woman was athome reading a book.”
56Eri: That kind of information is notnecessary. It is too detailed.
57Aya: But, maybe, in a picture-describing
task, we have to write everything in the
picture.
58Eri: Really? Who knows it is a “book”? It
may be a magazine.

!

!

!

!

!

12

Makoto Abe
From this, we can see that Eri and Aya,
unlike Sae and Ai, had difficulty assigning roles
in a way that would make their collaboration
productive. Although they noticed more varied
aspects of L2 writing than Sae and Ai (see Table1), they failed to share a common
understanding about what should be done tocomplete the L2 writing task. From a different
perspective, excessive attention to linguistic
aspects (lexical and form) may have been an
obstacle to sharing and co-constructing theircommon knowledge. Although several
refinements regarding linguistic aspects in theirrevised texts were added, the basic content of
their composition was untouched.
Discussion
The results show that the dynamics of noticing
various aspects of L2 writing in dyadic
interaction enable students not only to notice
the gap between their interlanguage and target
language but also to provide each other withscaffolding triggering co-construction of theircommon knowledge. Unlike Storch’s (2002)
study conducted in a classroom setting, only
two interactional patterns, collaborative andexpert/novice, were detected in this study. Thatmay be partly because this study was
conducted in a tutoring context, where thestudents were actively involved in the task. The
high “mutuality” of their interaction may also be
attributed to a particular cultural element,
namely, how Japanese people typically behavein pair work, while the observations in Storch(2002) were conducted in an ESL class withstudents from various cultural backgrounds. On
the other hand, the dimension of “equality” ofcontribution in their interaction can be explainedby the relative expertise as Granott (1993)
suggests, at least in this study, where Dyad 1(high-high) can be defined as collaborative andDyad 2 (high-low) as expert/novice
pairs.
Focusing on the similarity of indexes
adopted by Storch (2002) – mutuality andequality- and Grannot (1993) – degree ofcollaboration and relative expertise, this study
attempted to reveal what Storch’s model does
not explain. In these two case studies, all theparticipants indeed shared a common activity,
observation, and problems, but thecollaborative pair may have been constructing
their understanding independently of eachother. This indicates that the quantitative datasuch as frequency of LREs, turns, length ofspeech cannot necessarily determine aparticular interactional pattern. Hence, thenature of these patterns should be closely
analyzed by referring to what exactly is goingon in their pair work.
In the expert/novice pair, bothparticipants benefit from the interaction withthe partner. That seems to be consistent withthe finding of Dishon and O’Leary (1984) who
claim that group work in which heterogeneousparticipants are engaged has more possibilities
for collaborative learning than a groupconsisting of homogeneous participants. The
participants’ social roles which include initiating
discussion, posing questions, explaining
complicated issues, putting ideas together, andmonitoring their own strategies of L2 writing
may result from the heterogeneity between
participants in a pair. As greater proficiency inL2 skills does not necessarily mean greater
proficiency in other social skills, it is importantfor English teachers to take students’ gender,
personality, power relations, previous
interactions, and willingness to communicate
into account in considering the feasibility of

!

!

!

!

!

13

Makoto Abe
introducing pair work. Close examination of
students’ interactional moves enables English
teachers to grasp students’ levels of
understanding as well as their degree ofcollaborative orientation. Thus, collecting
protocol data such as students’ collaborative
dialogues is significant not only for research
purposes but for pedagogical reasons too.
References

Abe, M. (2008). Exploring the role of model
essays in IELTS writing test: A feedback
tool. MA thesis published in Asian EFL
Journal. Retrieved from http://www.asianefl-journal.com
de Guerrero, M. C. M., & Villamil, O. S. (2000).
Activating the ZPD: Mutual scaffolding in
L2 peer revision. The Modern Language
Journal, 84(1), 51-68.
DiCamilla, F. J., & Anton, M. (1997). Repetitionin the collaborative discourse of L2
learners: A Vygotskian perspective. The
Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(4), 609-633.
Dishon, D., & O’Leary, P. (1984). A guidebook
for co-operative learning: A technique forcreating more effective schools. Holmes
Beach, FL: Learning Publications.
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding insecond language learning. In J. P.

Granott, N. (1993). Patterns of interaction in the
co-construction of knowledge: Separate
minds, joint effort, and weird creatures. In
R. Wozniak, & K. W. Fischer (Eds.),
Development in context: Acting andthinking in specific environments (pp.
183-207). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Granott, N. (2005). Scaffolding dynamicallytoward change: Previous and new
perspectives. New Ideas in Psychology,
23, 140-151.
Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of interaction in ESL
pair work. Language Learning, 52(1),119-158.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it
through: Two French immersion learners’
response to reformulation. International
Journal of Educational Research, 37,
285-304.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. The
development of higher psychologicalprocesses. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard
University Press.
Wood, D., Bruner, J.S., Ross, G. (1976). The
role of tutoring and problem solving.
Journal of Child Psychology andPsychiatry, 17, 89-100

Lantolf, & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian
approaches to second language
research. (pp. 33-56). Norwood, NJ:
Ablex Press.
Ferris, D. (2003). Response to student writing:
Implications for second language
students. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.

!

!

!

!

!

14

Makoto Abe
Appendix A

Appendix B

You have one minute to prepare.

Sample answer

This is a story about a shop owner who wanted todeal with a graffiti problem.
You have two minutes to narrate the story.
Your story should begin with the following
sentence:
One day, a woman was in front of her shop
talking to another shop owner.

One day, a woman was in front of her shop
talking to another shop owner. They were
upset because someone had sprayed graffiti on
their shops’ shutters. The woman complained
to the other shop owner that it was not the firsttime it had happened. Later, at a shop-owners
meeting, there was a discussion about possible
solutions to the graffiti problem on the shopping
street. The shop owners were talking about twosuggestions written on the board – theintroduction of security cameras or street
patrols – but could not decide what to do. Thatnight, the woman was at home reading a book.
She was sitting beside her son, who was
drawing a picture of a house. This gave her anidea about how to solve the graffiti problem. A
month later, on the shopping street, the woman
and the other shop owner looked on as someyoung children painted pictures of animals on
the shutters of the shops.

From the pre first grade STEP Test in PracticalEnglish Proficiency, 2009. Used with permission
from the Society for Testing English Proficiency,
Inc.

!

!

!

!

!

15

Learning Learning 17 (1) Spring 2010
Feature article: Allen Lindskoog & Robert Moreau
Standing in a New Place: Reflecting
on Awareness and Development
新たなる立ち位置：気づきと成長を考える
Allen Lindskoog
アレン.リンズクーグ
Meguro Seibi Gakuen(目黒星美学園)
Robert Moreau
ロバート.モロー
The University of ElectroCommunications(電気通信大学)
本稿でモローとリンズクーグは、Immediacy
behaviour教員の近接行動）すなわち言語・非言語行動によるインタラクションを試みること
で、授業における教師の存在感とマインドフルネスを発展させる手法を提唱している。
Immediacy behaviourの例としてはアイコンタク
ト、ジェスチャー、生徒に対して名前で呼んだり意見を求めるなどの行為が挙げられる。われわれ教師が生徒とのインタラクション、つまり交流に目を向け、教師が教室内で醸し出す雰囲
気や習癖が影響を及ぼしていることに意識を向けるようになると、授業でのどのような行為が効果的か気づくことができる。
さらには、クラス内での様々な意思決定に関してより深く注意を向けることにつながる。教師が自己のImmediacy behaviourを内省するなど授業における意識を高める手法を採用することで活気あるスムーズな授業展開だけでなく、生徒の前向きな態度を引き出すことも期待できるだろう。
Krishnamurti (2000) states that the “teacher
who is really teaching is one who is growing,awakening intelligence in himself and thus isawakening intelligence in the learner” (p 86).
But how does a teacher grow when there is little
time due to lesson and test preparation,teaching a class or because ingrained habits
feel like the norm?

One answer could be by taking the time
to step out of our daily routine and develop
mindfulness and presence.
The impetus of this article came out of
our experiences outside of the teachingcontext. Both of us have experience as
meditation practitioners, and one of us has
been a musician and the other an actor. We
began to look at how these connected to ourteaching. The common threads we found wereconcepts such as presence, being in the
moment and mindfulness. One suchconnection was that fostering “mindfulness”
could help build meaningful relationships with
our students.
The concept of mindfulness, as it is usedin this paper, follows the two-component
model as defined by Bishop et al. (2004):
The first component involves the selfregulation of attention so that it ismaintained on immediate experience,
thereby allowing for increased
recognition of mental events in thepresent moment. The second component
involves adopting a particular orientation
toward one’s experiences in the present
moment, an orientation that ischaracterized by curiosity, openness,
and acceptance. (p. 232)
For example, as the well-known Vietnamese
Buddhist monk Thich Nat Hahn (2001) so
eloquently states: “When you drink tea inmindfulness your mind and your body are
perfectly united…When you sit in a café withmusic in the background and a lot of projects
in your head, you are not really drinking yourtea. You’re drinking your projects, you’redrinking your worries” (p 42). In the context of

!

!

!

!

!

16

Allen Lindskoog & Robert Moreau
teaching, we may be so focused on the factthat we don’t have time to get through theallocated portion of the textbook or lessonplan that we don’t really notice the fact thatthe students are smiling and enjoying theclass. To be mindful is to deliberately notice
our actions, reactions, and sensations, thoseof our students and the physical aspects ofthe classroom situation. If we are purposefully
staying with the experience of teaching thenwe are actively engaged in every moment.
With this background in mind, we began
our research journey looking for ways to
explore interactions in our classroom
environments in order to discover a means offostering professional development. What we
found were concepts such as reflection andbehaviors that increase positive affect in theclassroom, called ‘immediacy behaviors’,
which we will discuss in greater detail in thenext section of this paper.
Our next step was to take immediacy
behaviors and marry them together with theconcept of mindfulness and to try someclassroom experiments. From there we
introduced these experiments at various
conferences around Tokyo. One very simple
experiment, for example, was to ask
participants to sit in silence for one minute
focusing on their breath. This generated awide variety of feedback, from those who felt
completely comfortable, to those who felt
sleepy and to those who felt quite uneasy
with the experience. This has direct
implications for how we behave in theclassroom, in how we deal with silence andhow we may sometimes be manipulated by
students’ silence.
Another experiment involved“repetition”, a technique used by actors intraining in which one of the partners makes astatement about the other person. The

respondent has to repeat their partner’s
statement, changing only the pronoun (“Youlook cheerful.” “I look cheerful”.) Intonation andtiming can be used to question the meaning of
the statement. This activity forces participants
to focus on the feelings that exist between
them in the present moment. The feedback we
received varied from “I do not need to change athing, everything is fine” to “the approach is
fresh and new”. The one surprise we found wasthat the concept of immediacy was virtually
unknown to many language educators we
spoke to during the various conferences andwas one area we found that made theintangible concept of mindfulness tangible.
Immediacy behaviors and classroom
interactions
In Contrasting Conversations, Fanselow (1992)
states that there is no need to make drasticchanges in the classroom in order to exploreand develop our teaching practices. As an
example he recommends asking a question
with genuine interest as opposed to a neutral
tone of voice (p. 52). This could be considereda verbal immediacy behavior. Verbal
immediacy behaviors also include calling thestudents by name, finding out about theirinterests and opinions and incorporating theinformation into class activities, using self
disclosure in the classroom, as well as usinggroup reference, saying “we” as opposed to“I” (Bainbridge, Frymier & Houser, 2000; Witt &Wheeless, 2001; Kucuk, 2009). Additionally,
non-verbal immediacy behaviors include, but
are not limited to, eye contact, smiles, nods,
gestures and body orientation (Andersen,1979). As can be seen from these examples,
immediacy behaviors are communication
strategies that can help to bridge the teacherstudent divide and may serve to create more

!

!

!

!

!

17

Allen Lindskoog & Robert Moreau
effective channels of communication. They
are also, according to Gorham and Zakahi(1990), traits “which can be modified throughtraining and practice” (as cited in Rocca &McCroskey, 1999, p. 315). We feel therefore
that these micro-strategies of communication
behavior can make a good starting point forteachers to reflect on their teaching practice,develop mindfulness, and initiate change into
the classroom.
Andersen was the first to examine
immediacy behaviors in the context of theclassroom as a way of providing empiricalevidence on what constitutes an effective
teacher with regards to teacher-student
interactions (Andersen, 1979). In the 30 years
since then, research on immediacy has been
published dealing with such varied contexts
as students in cross-cultural situations (Parket al, 2009), the effects of immediacy on
student compliance-resistance in learning,(Burroughs, 2007) and teacher immediacy incomputer mediated education (Kucuk, 2009).
Research on immediacy has shown that thenon-verbal behaviors, which signal theteacher’s attentiveness to the students
produce consistently positive results withregard to students’ affect towards the teacher
and subject (Andersen, 1979; Frymier &Houser, 2000; Witt & Wheeless, 2001).
Verbal and non-verbal immediacy
behaviors could both be significant for the
EFL classroom where the teacher’s mannerof interaction plays an important role increating a classroom environment wherelearners feel safe to develop communicativeskills, as well as providing a language modelthat students will take with them outside of
the classroom. Students are likely to be more
motivated if their teacher is a good role model
as a communicator and seeks to develop
good relationships with them (Dornyei &Csizer, 1998). A further advantageof reflecting on immediacy behaviors is that it
can allow us a means to become more awareof the environment in which we teach. Being
mindful of how we communicate both verballyand non-verbally may also lead to anunderstanding of other people’s needs, andconsequently to a better working relationshipwith our students.
Teaching is both relational and content
driven. We know what we have to teach given
the curriculum, but how effective is the channelof communication within the student-teacher
relationship? Studies on immediacy behaviors,
as previously mentioned, provide a wellresearched pool of information that teachers
can draw on in order to look at their own
classroom interactions with a fresh perspective
or to perhaps discover some alternatives tointroduce into their practice. Experimentation in
the classroom can provide the opportunities weneed to explore and develop.
The classroom as an experimental space
We suggest treating the classroom like anexperiment, looking at the reactions of thestudents to our actions and movement andnoticing what works. Which of our behaviors
are mere habits and which are done withmeaningful intent? Teachers can take note ofthese results themselves or, if possible, have acolleague observe their behavior in order tooffer an alternative opinion or different
perspective. This can help raise awareness ofcommunication behaviors in a way that is
impossible for a teacher to do on their own(Croker, 2007).
By knowing our habits we can begin toreshape our presence in the classroom, which
will contribute to our growth as a teacher. For
example, in one of Robert’s classes, with eight
adult students, he found himself falling into thehabit of starting the class with the same

!

!

!

!

!

18

Allen Lindskoog & Robert Moreau
activity, mainly because it was easy andpopular with the students. Time was given forstudents to catch up with the people next tothem about their weekly activities. He felt,
upon reflection, that it was producing similarstatements from the students from week toweek and his role and interaction with thestudents felt stagnant. As an experiment,
Robert asked the students to stand andmingle with different partners away from theirchairs. Timing the students also allowed themto speak to more people. He joined various
pairs for a short time each, becoming more ofa conversation partner rather than a“traditional” teacher, thus somewhat changing
his role and relationship in the classroom.
This was a small change but Robert believedthat it helped to foster a stronger bond
between him and the students. In trying
variations on this activity and taking note of
the results Robert felt that he had developed
a sense of mindfulness about an aspect of
the classroom that had, in the past, gonelargely unnoticed thus opening the door for
future developments in the classroom.
Experimentation with an activity such as
this doesn’t have to stop at the first iteration.
For example, instead of only catching up on
weekly activities, Robert might want to ask
about the students’ opinions of classactivities, or ask for suggestions in order tomake the class more effective. Through small
modifications an activity that was at one time
merely a classroom habit can be transformed
into a more dynamic learning experience forboth the teacher and the students.
Allen conducted a simple experimentby standing in a new place when teaching.
He noticed that more often than not he stoodin one particular area, at the front of the room
behind the lectern. He tried moving out frombehind the lectern to different areas of the of
the classroom noticing how the changes

affected the students. He taught from the backof the room, sitting down in a chair, from the
opposite side of the room from the podium
location and circulating amongst the students.
What was evident right away was that teachingfrom the back of the room grabbed thestudents’ attention in a very different way.
Rather than focusing on Allen’s physicalpresence, there was a feeling that they were
paying attention to his voice. Sitting downbrought a sense of equality with regards topower, which was evident in the students’laughter, playfulness, lighthearted feeling andAllen’s sense of a closer connection to thestudents. Teaching from the opposite side of theroom from the podium actually raised the levelof attention and a feeling of inclusion of
students who had been originally the furthest
away from Allen. When circulating around theclassroom, there was less connection and moreof a sense of monitoring students.
The main objectives are to approach theclass in a spirit of experimentation, not knowing
quite what to expect but being open to what
occurs and fostering a sense of awareness andpresence. Additionally, it may not be sufficient to
try this just once. Trying a new behaviour anumber of times may be necessary to really feelthe different changes. In many cases classroom
dynamics may change right away.
Good intentions alone could becomecounter-productive if teachers are not aware ofwhat students will be comfortable with. If theteacher suddenly introduces too high a degreeof immediacy into the classroom, an
uncomfortable classroom atmosphere may
result. In a class of adult learners, Robertchanged the position of the students’ chairs into
a tight circle and he joined the group as anequal participant. Students in that class foundthis new configuration strange - the teacher wasjust too close for comfort. This was evident in
the body language of the students as well as
their uncomfortable silence. Later in the class
!

!

!

!

!

19

Allen Lindskoog & Robert Moreau
Robert resumed his place at the front of theroom with the students in a semi-circle infront of him, and the class interactions felt
different and went smoothly.
Knowledge of the students’ needs as wellas their classroom expectations can be
useful information that can guide our own
development as teachers. Sharing journals
with students, employing immediacy
behaviors, asking about past learning
experiences, as well as discovering what
students’ expectations are for the class can
all add to creating a base of knowledge fromwhich a teacher can be more mindful of theinteractions in the classroom. It is
experimentation in the classroom whichbrings this background knowledge to theforefront. Above all, the goal is to effectmeaningful change for development, notchange for change’s sake.
Conclusion
Everyone’s teaching journey is different andrequires a unique set of solutions for relevantchange. This paper recommends increasing
attention to immediacy behaviours as ameans of raising our awareness of ourinteractions with students and of the impact
our behaviors, moods and habits have on
these interactions. It is not intended as aprescriptive set of techniques for creating theideal student-teacher relationship; instead it
is a particular perspective from whichteachers can experiment in order to gather
information about what works and what
doesn’t work in the classroom so we can be
more mindful of the choices we make as
educators. Engaging in practices that
increase awareness of our classroom
situations, such as self-reflection on
immediacy behaviors, can help us develop a

fresh, flowing teaching style, and in theprocess, encourage a positive attitude in ourstudents toward their learning journey.
References
Andersen, J. F. (1979). Teacher immediacy as apredictor of teaching effectiveness. In D.
Nimmo (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 3.
New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books.
Bainbridge Frymier, A., & Houser, M. L. (2000).
The teacher-student relationship as aninterpersonal relationship. Communication
Education, 49(3), 207-219.
Baringer, D., & McCroskey, J. C. (2000).
Immediacy in the classroom: Student
immediacy. Communication Education, 49(2), 178-186.
Bishop, S.R., Lau, M., Shapiro, S., Carlson, L.,et al. (2004). Mindfulness: A proposed
operational definition. Clinical Psychology:
Science and Practice, 11(3), 230–241.
Chesebro, J. L., & McCroskey, J. C. (2001). The
relationship of teacher clarity and immediacy
with student state receiver apprehension,
affect, and cognitive learning.
Communication Education, 50(1), 59-68.
Croker, R. (2007). Teacher-directed reciprocal
peer observations: “Looking with” not“looking at.” Learning Learning 42(2).
Retrieved March, 15, 2010, from ld-sig.org/
LL/2007b.pdf
Dornyei, Z., & Csizér, K. (1998). Tencommandments for motivating language
learners: Results of an empirical study.
Language Teaching Research, 2(3),203-229.
Fanselow, J. F. (1992). Contrasting
conversations. White Plains, N.Y.: Longman
Gorham, J., & Zakahi, W. R. (1990). A
comparison of teacher and student
perceptions of immediacy and learning.
Communication Education, 39, 354-368.

!

!

!

!

!

20

Allen Lindskoog & Robert Moreau

Krishnamurti, J. (2000). Educating theimmediacy on Korean student satisfaction in

educator. Parabola, 25(3), 85-89.
Kucuk, M. (2009). Teacher immediacy
behaviors and participation in computer
mediated communication. Turkish Online
Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE

the US and South Korea. Communication
Education, 58(2), 189-212.
Rocca, K. A., & McCroskey, J. C. (1999). Theinterrelationship of student ratings of
instructor's immediacy, verbal

Retrieved September 1, 2009, from http://
tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/
Nat Hahn, T. (2001). Anger: Wisdom forcooling the flames. New York: Riverside
Books.

aggressiveness, homophily andinterpersonal attraction. Communication
Education, 48(4), 308-316.
Witt, P. L., & Wheeless, L. R. (2001). An
experimental study of teacher's verbal andPark, H. S., Lee, S. A., Yun, D., & Kim, W.
(2009). The impact of instructor decisionauthority and verbal and nonverbal

nonverbal immediacy and students' affective
and cognitive learning. Communication
Education, 50(4), 327-342.

!

!

!

!

!

21

Learning Learning 17 (1) Spring 2010
Feature article: Joseph Falout
プロジェクト型科学技術英語教育：教員と学習者間の相互学習効果
Project-Based Science English Education:
Reciprocal Learning among Teachers andStudents

ジョセフ2ファラウト

Joseph Falout（日本大学理工学部）

College of Science & Technology, Nihon
University
The Ministry of Education, Science, and Sports
issued a policy in 2002 that science andengineering students should receive practicaleducation for working in international contexts.
In response, many colleges are shifting fromclassrooms with template dialogue recitationand lecture-based learning to project-based
language learning (PBLL). Science subject
classes and science English classes offer
PBLL in workplace-like situations for students
to develop autonomous attitudes and social
skills, which are perceived to be lacking among
Japanese youth. This paper reports on one
teacher’s experience of collecting ideas andinformation for designing such a curriculum,
the difficulties of its implementation, thesolutions, and the reciprocal learning among
the teacher and learners that resulted.
Additionally described are a series ofmotivational strategy treatments to help
learners set their learning goals.

プロジェクト型教育
プロジェクト型教育は理工系技術分野の科学
実験等で利用されてきた。しかし、 2002年の文部科学省による国際的な活躍ができる科学
技術者の育成計画強化に伴い、理工技術系大学の英語教育重点目標が日常会話から理工技術系専門分野の実践的教育へと移行し始め、
東京大学、早稲田大学、慶応義塾大学、東京
理科大学、東京電機大学等が大学教育改革の一環として科学技術英語教育カリキュラムにおけるプロジェクト型の授業を採用した。東京
大学と早稲田大学ではその後更にカリキュラ
ムを発展させ、学科の枠組みを越えた統合型
カリキュラムを実現した。日本大学理工学部
でも理工技術系教員がプロジェクト型協調学
習を導入している。本稿では英語教員である私がプロジェクト型協調学習を如何に科学英語教育へ導入し、それが学習者の動機づけ、協調性、自律性の向上に与えた効果と影響、それに伴う英語学習者の変化を報告する。
プロジェクト型教育は従来の座学中心の教育とは対照的に、学習者が実践的な学習
活動に積極的に参加する能動的な教育方法である。学習者はプロジェクトを通して問題の発見と解決策の提案を行い、その過程で教員と学習者、学習者同士で活発な対話を行い、協調性、社会性、自律性、及び思考力を発達させるとされている (Beckett & Miller, 2006;
Galloway, 2008)。
学習者に学習の主導権を与えることは
自分の言動に責任を持たせることであり、自律性を発達させる目的がある。 多くの学習者
が座学座学経験者の殆どが自分の英語学習

!

!

!

!

!

22

ジョセフ・ファラウト
成果は教員の責任だと回答している半面(Falout & Maruyama, 2004)、自律学習を伴うグループプロジェクト経験者は自分の英語学
習成果は自分自身の責任だと回答しており(Hood, Elwood, & Falout, 2009)、この対照的な帰属原因から学習者が主導権を持つ自律
学習では他人からの強制感は希薄になり、学
習結果は自分次第だと認識し、自分の行動に責任感を持つようになるのではないかと思われる。
この主張を裏付ける理論にDeci & Ryan
(2002) が提唱する自己決定理論がある。これは人間は先天的に持っている3つの基本的心理
欲求が満たされると行動意欲が高まるという理論である。3つの基本的心理欲求とは自分の居場所となるコミュニティに属したいという帰属欲求、 自分自身の意思で物事を実行した
いという自律欲求、自分の能力を認めさせたいという能力誇示欲求である。グループプロ
ジェクト型の授業では、英語学習者はプロ
ジェクト作業過程にてグループ内で友達を作り（帰属欲求の満足）、プロジェクトの内容や進め方を自分達で決め（自律欲求の満足）、
お互いの理解不足を補い、長所を活かしあってプロジェクトを完成し、発表する（能力誇
示欲求の満足）ことで3つの基本的心理欲求が満たされ、学習意欲が高まると考えられる。
このような教育界での理想論と近年の多くの日本人学習者は対極的な状態にあるよ
うに見受けられる。社会生活における人間関
係の希薄化から若者の社会性や他人への共感の欠如が指摘され、大学生の引きこもりによる長期休学や退学が増加している。退学者の多い大学では入学者数の4割もが退学し（読売新聞, 2008a, 2008b)、文部科学省は大学別退学
者情報の公表義務化の是非について審議を始める (読売新聞, 2009) など深刻な問題となっている。

各大学では退学防止策に苦心しており, その解決策としてプロジェクト型の教育方法が注目された。これは日本だけの問題ではなく、世界各国では以前から理工系大学ではグループでの行動や協調性の発達に焦点を置いた教育が行われておらず、学生が就職する技術系企業のグループプロジェクトで必要とされる対人スキルが欠如していることが問題点として指摘されてきていた。90年代以降米国のノースウエスタ
ン大学を始め、多数の大学が技術系専門科目にコミュニケーション学習を組み込んだプロ
ジェクト型統合学習カリキュラムを採用し、対人スキルの優れた技術者の養成に尽力している(Galloway, 2008)。
このように従来は理工技術系の専門知識を伝授するための手段であったプロジェクト型教育が、学習者の人間性を高める教育方法
としての側面が注目されるようになり、学科を越えて英語教育へも導入されるようになってきた。本稿では日本大学理工学部での取り組みを紹介し、その運用を高める要素としての動機づけ教育と相互教授について論じる。
統合型科学技術英語教育カリキュラム
本学では理工技術系学科を中心にプロ
ジェクト型の協調教育が取り入れられ、2007
年にグループワーク室が建設された。グループ
ワーク室は様々な方法でコミュニケーションが取れるように構造上の工夫が施されている。複数の班を形成できるように学習者用の机が向かい合せに設置され、教員や学習者は自由に移動できる。キャスター付きの椅子の利用により、グループメンバーと話す際に学習者は着席状態のまま椅子ごと容易に移動できる。机上コンピューターは学習者同士の会話を妨げないようサイズは小さく、位置も低く設置され、不要時には取り外すことができる。電子ホワイトボードが多数配置されている。これらの構造上の特徴により、学習者の行動に目が届き、教員が指導しやすくなってい
る。
!

!

!

!

!

23

ジョセフ・ファラウト
プロジェクト型教育は理工技術系科目では学科レベルで実践されているが、英語教育
では個人レベルで行われている。入学直後の早い段階で学習者が履修できる入門レベルの科学技術英語コースを設計できれば、後年学習者が理工技術系専門科目で専門性の高いプロ
ジェクトを英語で行う基礎体験ができ、心的・習熟度の観点からも円滑な移行が可能になると私は思った。この考えに基づき、私は英語教育に理工技術系専門知識の要素を組み入れたシラバスの設計に着手した。シラバス草
案作成時に役立ったことは、私が以前から技術者から業務内容を聞き、大学教員や学生に専門学科の現行授業内容について尋ね、理工技術系専門学科教員の話を聞き、大学のニーズをある程度おおまかに理解していたことであった。
私が設計した科学技術英語コースの特徴は理工技術系学科の授業内容に密着している点である。私が収集した情報から科学技術英語
コースに利用できると思った点は、一年生が前期に理工技術系必修基礎科目でプロジェクトを経験する点である。例えば、社会交通学科
では学生が都市計画プロジェクトの一環として実際に街へ出かけ、その街の設計を分析し、問題点を指摘し、次に解決策を提案し、それらをレポートとして提出し、更にパワーポイン
トを用いた口頭発表を行う。土木学科では学生が自分で材質を選択して橋の仕様書に沿って模型を製作し, 建設学科の学生は自分で建物の設計図を作成し、それに沿って模型を製作する。精密機械学科の学生は仕様書を見ながら
CADで製品の設計図を作成する。海洋建築学
科では世界的に有名な橋の設計を比較し、様式美と機能についてレポートを作成する。電子情報学科ではコンピューターを分解し、部品や機能を分析してレポートを作成する。これ
らの専門学科の共通プロジェクト形式は学生が各種文書を作成し、口頭発表を行うことである。

つまり1年生の前期に日本語で行った理工
技術系学科のプロジェクトを、後に科学技術英語コースで今度は英語で行うことが可能なのである。1年生前期終了時点では学習者の理工系
専門知識は既に日本語で構築されているため、それ以降はそれらの専門知識を英語で文脈の中で使えるようにすることを学習目標にできる。
これによって理工系の学生は英語の専門用語はわかるが文脈で使えないという問題の解決を図ることができる。この学部レベルでのカリキュラムの特徴を利用し、段階的に難易度と専門性を上げるスキャフォルディング式の科学技術英語コースを設計した。各コースではプロジェク
トの進捗度を管理し、学習上の問題を解決するために学習指導面談を義務付け、面談予約をするための英文Ｅメール指導も行っている。
＜コース１＞ 1年生が履修対象者である。バ
イリンガル理工技術系教員からのアプローチで実現したティームティーチング方式の英語でのイマージョン授業である。学習者がネイティヴ
教員から英語で学習支援を受けることに抵抗がある場合に、理工系教員やティーチングアシス
タントが日本語で指導ができる点が利点である。この授業では学習者が国際学会で自己紹介をした後、研究発表をする状況を仮定して行われる。学習者は英語で履歴書と自己紹介を書き、口頭発表原稿へと発展させ、パワーポイン
トを使用した個人口頭発表を行う。口頭発表の内容は学科に関係のある関連組織のホームペー
ジに掲載されている情報を図やグラフと一緒に説明する。そのため、グラフ、図、方程式等の読み方や説明の仕方を学習する。
＜コース2＞ 2年生以上が履修対象者である。学習者各人の専門分野に関連のある既存物を分析し、長所と問題点を指摘し、改善策を考える。更にキャンパスの学生にアンケートを取り、アイディアを発展させる。

!

!

!

!

!

24

ジョセフ・ファラウト
させる。それを基に改善用の仕様書と宣伝・
マーケティング方法について、序論、仮説、方法、分析、議論、結論から成るショートペー
パーを執筆し、パワーポイントによるグループ
発表を行う。既存物の問題点となる背景知識が必要となるため、情報収集・調査方法を教える。仕様書作成時には計測・計量用語、図解の説明や物体の表現能力を学習する。コロケー
ション辞書, 類語辞典等の執筆補助教材の使い方も学習する。そしてキャンパスの学生から収集したアンケート回答をExcelワークシートへ入力し、図やグラフ等へ変換してデータを表示する。必要性に応じて、プロジェクトチームごとに統計学的分析方法を教えている。これによって学習者は適切なデータ分析とデータ解釈を行うことができるようになる。
＜コース3＞ 2年生以上が履修対象者である。キャンパスを利用してプロジェクトグルー
プがマーケティング調査を行い、需要の高い製品の調査とその需要を満たすために必要な科学技術に関して、序論、仮説、方法、分析、議論、結論から成るショートペーパーを執筆し、パワーポイントでグループ発表を行う。英文科学論文執筆指導に関しては、コース2と同様である。
動機づけ教育プロジェクト型教育の実践上で重要な点は学習目的の周知である。学習者の自律性がプロジェ
クトの成功を左右するために、目的意識無しには学習意欲も維持できず、プロジェクトが頓挫する可能性がある。本学の英語学習者の多くが英語学習に価値や目的を見出せず、英語学習の必要性を感じていないため、以前からの試みとして私は動機づけ教育を導入し、英語学習の必要性と目的を具体的に説明している。国際ビジ
ネスコミュニケーション協会 (ETS) のホームページには国際ビジネスに携わる関係者を対象に、職場での英語使用状況と必要とされる英語
技術についての調査結果がデータとして集計されており(ETS, 2007; 2009）、私はこれを配布
して学習者同士が内容を分析して話し合うこと
で、英語学習の目的を理解できるようにしている。さらに私は技術者の業務内容、問題点とその解決策等をまとめ、毎週1話ずつ学生に話している。企業の現場の声の収集は、友人、企業での勤務経験がある大学教員、卒業生、海外客員教授、学内イベントの出席者に私自身が質問して集めた。
また本学では学生や教員が研究成果を発表する学術講演会という学内研究発表会に卒業生や学外の研究者を招待し、仕事の内容や要求される能力について学習者へ直接体験談を語る機会が設定されている。また各理工技術系研究室
では毎年客員研究者を海外から招聘しており、客員研究者が自身の研究内容、自国と日本との関わりについて講演し、学習者が質疑応答を通して科学分野での英語の役割を理解する試みが行われている。本学の理工技術系教員の多くは海外で学位を取得して国際共同研究プロジェク
トに従事しており、授業やキャンパスでの学習者との日々の交流の中で各教員が英語の重要性を自分自身の経験から話す機会もある。
これらの動機づけ教育の目標は、学習者に将来なりたい自分の姿を具体的に設定させることである。具体的な将来の目標を持つこと
で学習者は困難に直面しても英語学習意欲を維持し、様々な解決策を見出すことができ、その方向性を見失わずに高い確率で目標を達成できるとされている (Dunkel & Kepelman,
2006; Markus & Nurius, 1986)。学習者が将来像をイメージし（長期目標）、その将来像に近づくために在学中にすべきことを具体的に考え（短期目標）、それらをレポートとして提出することを私は義務付けている。 そし

!

!

!

!

!

25

ジョセフ・ファラウトて、学習者が設定した目標を達成する過程の中
間目標の一つとして、彼らが現在履修している
科学技術英語の授業が位置することを説明している。 これは一部の日本企業の新人教育で実際に行われている動機づけ教育でもあり、私自身も自分のキャリアで実践して役立っているた
め、英語教育にも導入した。
この動機づけ教育が学習者にどのような意
識変化をもたらすか、8週間に三度のアンケート調査を行った。調査対象は2009年後期に私が理工技術系専門学科教員とティームティーチング
方式で担当した科学技術英語コースの一年生である。一回目の調査として授業初日に、学習者
は英語を学習する理由を日本語で回答した。こ
の日の授業の冒頭では理工技術系教員が、戦後の日本の復興に果たした技術者の役割と将来アジア諸国で日本の技術者が担うべき役割と英語の重要性について話した。学習者の回答分類結果は以下の通りである。

オランダ、イタリアの順となっている。2番目に多い回答に「仕事のために必要」とあるが、実際に仕事上どのように英語を使うのか具体的な回答はない。
二度目の調査は4週目に行われた。「国際ビジネスにおいて求められる英語力に関するア
ンケート調査結果報告」(ETS, 2007) を学習者に分析させ、日本語での感想を求めた。回答の分類結果は以下の通りである。

英語を学習する理由

多い
TOEFLを受験する会社員が 7 (7%)

回答合計数97 (複数回

(n = 70)
答有)外国人と話したい/友達 33 (32%)になりたい
仕事のために必要
26 (25%)
外国へ行きたい/住みた 15 (15%)
い世界中で使われている言 9 (9%)
語だから
英語/英語圏の文化が好 8 (8%)
きTOEICで高得点を取りた 4 (4%)
い
単位取得のため2 (2%)

表1「外国人と話したい/友達になりたい」という学
習理由が1番多いが、具体的に挙げられている国
名はアメリカが最多であり、次にイギリス、学習者のコメント(n = 70) 回答合計数98 (複数回答有)
海外出張者が多い
24 (24%)
将来における中国語の必要 16 (16%)
性
ビジネスでは英語が最も多 12 (12%)
く使われている
Ｅメールに英語が使われて 7 (7%)
いる
会社員はTOEIC高得点者が 7 (7%)

少ない
英検を受験する会社員が少 6 (6%)
ない
職場での英語使用頻度が高 6 (6%)
い
会社員は英語で苦労してい 5 (5%)
る
会社ではTOEICが必要だ

5 (5%)

員が多い
英語で電話をする

1 (1%)

急に英語が必要になる会社 2 (2%)

表2

この調査結果から学習者は職場での英語の使用状況を具体的に知り、日本企業で英語が予想以上に使用されていることと、要求される具体的なスキルの意外性に驚いたことが伺える。

!

!

!

!

!

26

ジョセフ・ファラウト
三度目の調査は8週間目に行われた。学習者
は7週目の授業でベトナムの客員研究者によるベトナムの国家プロジェクトと日本との関係の講演を英語で聞き、英語での質疑応答を体験した。この時、学習者は自分の専門分野を英語で学び、会話をすることを初めて経験した。つまり学習者は、国際的なプロジェクトに従事する際に起こりうる状況を体験し、将来なる可能性のある自分について考える機会を得たことになる。このアンケート調査で、学習者は学習目標の変化の有無とその理由を日本語で記入した。
調査対象者55人中、変化有りと回答したのは35人、変化無しは25人であった。変化がな
かった理由は、既にどの企業で何をしたいか具体的な目標があるためだった。学習目標に変化があった35人の回答の分類結果は以下の通りである（表3）。
学習者のコメント (n = 35)

回答合計数35（複数回答有）外国人と英語で話せるよう 9 (25%)になりたい
外国人と一緒に働けるよう 7 (20%)になりたい
外国へ行きたくなった
5 (14%)
リスニング能力を向上させ 3 (8%)
たい
TOEIC で高得点を取得した 3 (8%)
い外国で自分の専門分野で働 2 (5%)
きたい
クラスメイトの学習目標が 2 (5%)
わかった国土交通省で国家公務員に 2 (5%)
なりたいライティング能力を向上さ 1 (2%)
せたい
外国文化を知りたい

1 (2%)

表3

第一回目の調査結果（表1）と比較すると、回答が具体的になっている。漠然と「仕事に必要」と言うのではなく、具体的なスキルを挙げている点、英語能力を活かして働きたいと言う意識の変化が表れている。アジア諸国で科学技術を伝授したいと言う回答があったことも、日本の新政府によるアジア諸国との外交・経済関係の重点化、日本企業のアジア進出、中国の経済的台頭と中国企業の日本進出、日本国内企業での外国籍労働者の増加、アジア諸国での国家プロジェクトの日本企業の受注率の高さを考慮すると興味深い将来像であるかもしれない。海外に興味がなかった学習者が本コースで英語を学習するうちに、学んだ英語を試しに海外へ行きた
くなったことも興味深い変化である。
相互教授の意義
科学技術英語教育上の問題点として英語教員の科学技術分野の知識の欠如が挙げられ、これは私自身が何度も痛感している。また理工技術系専門科目の教員が指摘する学習者の問題
は、国際会議で英語での質疑応答が円滑にできないことである。学習者との個人面談によって判明した質疑応答を英語で上手にできない理由
は (1) 質問の英語自体が理解できない(英語能力の不足)、 (2) 質問の内容が理解できない(理工技術系専門分野の知識不足）、(3) 答えがわ
かっていても英語で表現できない（英語での発話能力不足）、(4) 極度の緊張で質問自体が頭に入ってこない(自信不足) がある。これらの問題への対応策が相互教授 (Schunk, Pintrich, &Meece, 2008)である。これはより高い能力のある学習者が他の学習者に理解できるレベルや方法で教えることである。
プロジェクトの一環として私との学習指導面談を義務付けているため、学習者はプロジェ
クト内容を私に説明し、レポートと口頭発表を改善しなくてはならない。自らの理工技術系専
門分野の知識を素人の私に理解できるように英語で説明することで、学習者は自分の専門分野
を英語で論理的に考え、話し、書く能力が向上
し、学習意欲と自信も増加することに気付いた

!

!

!

!

!

27

ジョセフ・ファラウト(Falout, 2008)。この現象はSwain (2006) が第二言語習得に効果的だと提唱するlanguagingと言う概念に合致する。Languagingとは学習者がスピーキングやライティングを大量に行うことで、自分の中間言語知識を何度も再構築して
言語習熟度を高める理論である。私と理工技術系英語学習者の相互教授によるlanguagingでは、私の質問に学習者が英語でアウトプットを行うことで、学習者は知識不足（理工技術系専
門分野の知識と英語能力）に気づき、次回のlanguagingに備えて自主的に学習する。この過程で英語学習者は知識の再構築を何度も繰り返す。教科書を丸暗記した説明しかできなかった
学習者がlanguagingを繰り返すうちに、自分の言葉で柔軟な説明を多角的視野から即興的にできるようになり、人前で話すことへの抵抗感も減少し、学習者の英語能力とプレゼンテーショ
ン能力の向上を私も学習者自身も実感する。
学習者が報告したlanguaging の利点には、文法への意識の高まり（語形変化、時制
等）、英単語の発音、イントネーション、論理的な考え方と話し方がある。また理工技術系の学習者には素人の私からの質問は意外な視点から提起された内容である場合が多く、自分の研究を異なる角度から考え直し、理解を深める機会になったとの報告もある。私は学習者から様々な科学技術専門分野の知識を基礎レベルから丁寧に教えてもらい、それらが他学習者を指導する際に役立つため、私にとっても利益のある相互効果的な教授法である。学習者から教わる理工技術系専門知識、彼らの研究への情熱と志の高さを知るたびに、私自身が仕事や研究に対する姿勢を内省する機会となっている。
学習者の変化本学の英語学習者の多くは英語学習意欲や自信が低く(Falout & Maruyama, 2004)、グループでの
英 語 学 習 経 験 が 殆 ど な い と 報 告 さ れて い る(Hood et al., 2009)。学習者を観察すると、プロジェクト上の問題点を学習者同士が相談して解決し、互助することでグループが結束力を高め、グループ内での自律学習活動が活発化するように見受けられる。Hood et al. (2009)の調査結果によると、プロジェクト型英語教育の利点として学習者595人の回答総合計数666中88% (回答数292) が英語能力とスキルの向上、80% (回答数269) が英語学習への情意の改善,
32% (回答数105) 実践的な授業内容を挙げた。
具体的には「実際に英語を使える」「コミュニケーションの勉強になる」「他人の意見やアイディアを聞くことで沢山のことを学べる」等が挙げられている。さらに上級学年生ほどこの授業形式に対する評価が高く、グループ内の人間関係問題も減少することから (p. 36)、プロ
ジェクト型英語教育の経験が対人スキルを向上させるように思われる。学習者を観察していると、プロジェクト型教育の経験者が未経験者を支援して作業を進めている。これは過去のプロ
ジェクト経験を通して、達成感と自信を得た(Bandura, 1997) ことが要因の一つであるように思われる。一年目には口数が少なく、目を伏せて脅えた様子で身を縮めていた学習者が二年目にはリーダーとして積極的にプロジェクトを進め、教員に助言を求め、渋るメンバーに指示を出すまでに変化した。この学習者に激変の理由を尋ねたところ、英語学習の必要性を具体的に理解するようになったこと、理解できるまで教えてくれる教員がいると知ったこと、授業を通して得た自信が変化の理由だと答えた。事実、キャンパス内の様々な関係者からの話で、この学習者があらゆる学習支援を最大限に利用している様子を後日知ることができた。これは一年目のプロジェクトチームでリーダー格の学習者が行っていたことであり、変化を遂げた学生が課題を完成させるためにこのリーダーと行動を共にして、プロジェクトの進め方や支援の受け方を学んだように見受けられる。グループ
プロジェクトを経験したことによる情意と学習

!

!

!

!

!

28

ジョセフ・ファラウト
態度の改善に関しては、授業に関するフィード
バックや面談を通じて学習者から報告されており、Hood et al. (2009) の研究結果とも合致している。
結論
本コースで習得した科学技術英語は卒業必修
単位の取得だけでは終わらない。カリキュラム
外では学術講演会と呼ばれる学内の研究発表会が毎年開催され、学習者は英語での研究成果発表と口頭論文発表原稿の出版ができる。更には海外の国際学会での口頭発表と国際学会誌への論文投稿へと、具体的な目標へ段階的に挑戦できるように連携しており、学部全体でこのような徹底した学習支援体制があることが、継続的英語学習への支援要因となる。しかし、現行カ
リキュラムでは英語と科学の学科の枠組みを越えた統合的な教育体制が実験的に一部で実施されているのみである。本学は段階的なカリキュ
ラム改定の過程にあり、前述のコース内容も流動的である。シラバス、教科書、教授方法をも厳密に統一化する大学も存在するが、強制的にクラスと担当教員を割り当てられた学習者が教授法や教育内容を嫌悪し、学習意欲を喪失する
話しをよく聞く。そのため、英語学習者が好む学習方法、多様化した学習目標と目的を社会的ニーズと照会して考慮し, 各教員の持ち味を活かした教授法を用いた多様性のある内容豊かなコースが混在するカリキュラムの実現が望ましいのではないかと私は思っている。そして学習者自身が自分の学習目標・目的に合ったコース
を自由に選択し、履修上限単位を設けないことも私は望んでいる。そのためには私自身も含
め、教員が常に学習と教育経験を積み重ね、
年々多様化する英語学習者と社会のニーズに柔軟に対応できるスキルと知識を身につけるよう心がける必要がある。
謝辞
Special thanks to Mika Falout for her inspiration andsupport.

参考文献
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.
New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Beckett, H., & Miller, P. C. (2009). Project-based secondand foreign language education: Past, present, andfuture. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Handbook of selfdetermination research. Rochester, NY: Universityof Rochester Press.
Dunkel, C., & Kepelman, J. (2006). Possible Selves:
Theory, research and applications. New York: Nova
Science Publishers.
ETS. (2007). 「国際ビジネスにおいて求められる英語力に関するアンケート調査結果報告」
Retrieved August 4, 2009, from http://
www.toeic.or.jp/info/img/003/questionnaire.pdf
ETS. (2009). 「TOEICテストと英語力コミュニケー
ション力」Retrieved November 24, 2009, fromhttp://www.toeic.or.jp/toeic/data/katsuyo_2009.html
Falout, J. (2008). Emotional scaffolding through editing
conference. The Language Teacher, 32(12), 9-14.
Falout, J., & Maruyama, M. (2004). A comparative studyof proficiency and learner demotivation. The
Language Teacher, 28(8), 3-9.
Galloway, P. D. (2008). The 21st-century engineer: A
proposal for engineering education reform. Reston,
VA: ASCE Press.
Hood, M., Elwood, J., & Falout, J. (2009). Student
attitudes toward task-based language teaching at
Japanese universities. Asian Journal of English
Language Teaching, 19, 19-47.
Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves.
American Psychologist, 41, 954-969.
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. (2008).
Motivation in education: Theory, research, andapplications (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson Education.
Swain, M. (2006). “Oh, I get it now!” From production tocomprehension in second language learning. In D.
M. Brinton & O. Kagan (Eds.), Heritage language
acquisition: A new field emerging. Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
読売新聞(2008a). 「大学の実力：教育向上への取り組み調査 上」2008年7月20日. pp. 1, 27-28.
読売新聞(2008b). 「大学の実力：教育向上への取り組み調査 下」 2008年7月21日. pp. 29-30.
読売新聞(2009). 「中退率など大学公表を・・・文科省が義務化狙う」 http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/
national/news/20091106-OYT1T00103.htm
年11月6日アクセス)
!

!

!

!

(2009

!

29

Learning Learning 17 (1) Spring 2010
Review: Ellen Head
Mapping the Terrain of Learner Autonomy,
by Felicity Kjisik, Peter Voller, Naoko Aoki
and Yoshiyuki Nakata#$%&'()*+,-Hフェリシチ・キ
シク、ピーター・フォレ
ル、青木直子、中田賀之

Reviewed by Ellen Head, Poole Gakuin
University
エレン・ヘト、プール学院大学

Mapping the Terrain of Learner Autonomy !"#$%&'()*+,-./0#$%&'(12345367+895:;3<=>0?@AB
CDEFGHIA123JK=>LM:;3<=>04=L'(ANOP+QR=>-SME
LTUVFDWXYMZIA[02007 \3]^_`a%XbcdS5ILAXAe;fAghi
jklmnofpqghprstSHuv3
w95xAXYMZ IAyzA{3|}fS
5a~-•F95%&€•3‚ƒM„…'(3†K‡Mˆ‰ŠAy‹0ˆnlmn!Œ•Ž•/XYGH•A‘’“lmnX”•dS>L
MZ"#$%&'(A–—A˜G™Gš=>›
œ.H"#$%&„…•.H"pžŸq ‰H
j¡n’¢‰H£¤¥¦§¨.š=>"#$%&'(A©ª3‹L>.ZIA[01970\«3%&;¬‰-®¯‰+°3±f=}>-S5'(;Holec3²M³´3²GµtMZHolec3²
ME%&0 £¶3²M·?3²M%&!a¸0£¹º/EH·?3»fFL%&¼½¾¢¿!£¹_/31ƒMIEruÀMZÁ;AÂÃ
0%&;A"ÄÅÆAÇÅ.E=>‚ÈGHª;0%&;A"#$.+ÂÃE=>LMZ[
DX0IAÉ;AÊËf=L•+:ÌIErX
~MZdf3HÍ[A£ÎÏÐ3‚ƒMÈ#$%&AÑÒ+ÓÔ=>LM{^A³´0HÕÖ
FrfH%&;‚²×£¶A#$0Í[A£ÎÏÐ3‚L>ØÙFxAXYMr„Ñof0ÚÛÜLxAÝEÞß>LMZš=>HàáAâãÃF³´0#$%&'(AdfFMäåA5}H%&+¥ßMæç´èAéê+ëì1íî
A¯“½ïðñòói®¾¢ôh‰õöò÷ø
Ã'(î+ùÌúûïðñHæç´üÃFŠ“½ïðñHFÛýþFïðñA'(+ÿ>!"‡MØÙP+#ß>LMZ
Mapping the Terrain of Learner Autonomy cameinto being “to initiate Japanese language
speaking teachers into the field” and “to have avision for the future” of where learner autonomy
studies might be heading. (p.7) The book,published in both English and Japanese, wasthe result of conversations between the editors
at the 2007 ILA conference at Kanda University,
Tokyo. Some of the papers are very close to thepapers given at the conference, while others,
like Aoki’s and Nakata’s, have been written
subsequently for the book. It struck me assomewhat ambitious to expect the same
volume to provide an orientation for those new
to autonomy studies and a challenge to those
who have been in the field for some time, but in
effect the book succeeds in fulfilling both
functions. It is divided into four sections,“Looking back and taking stock”, “Examples”,“Advisor, counsellor and teacher development”
and “Looking ahead”..
The book brings together accounts oflearning in widely different settings, and thistension is one of the principle themes of thebook. Holec introduces a distinction between
what he calls “state 1”, instruction-basedlearning, and “state 2”, non-instruction-based,
learning programs.

!

!

!

!

!

30

Ellen Head
Personally, I find this division somewhat
artificial, particularly when Holec goes on to saythat the aim of “state 1” education is “toincrease the learners’ responsibility…producing
independent learners” in contrast to “state 2”
which aims “to produce autonomous learners”.
I feel that now that Japan has someuniversities, such as Kanda University ofInternational Studies and Akita University, which
are committed to “state 2” style programs, there
is great potential in opening up dialogue
between those engaged in language advisingand those working in a classroom setting. I
wonder if such dialogue can best be facilitatedby concentrating on what separates us rather
than looking at the continuity between the aims.
To do him justice, Holec does provide an
excellent and detailed account of aspects ofimplementation of “state 2”, with somestimulating suggestions for learner training andteacher training, all of which I would suggest
are also relevant to “state 1”. He makes thepoint that learners often conceive goals in termsof materials and can benefit from interaction
with an advisor who helps them to interpret theirgoals in relation to activities and skills. He also
provides a lovely new metaphor: “rigging”: “innon-instructed learning, the help received may
best be described as not so much of thescaffolding type as of the rigging type: its
objective is equipping learners with theknowledge that they require to fulfill theirdecision making needs.” (p.29). As a metaphor,rigging, i.e., the ropes and connections needed
to extend the sails of a boat and position themto catch the wind, suggests that learning is avoyage and the learner is moving forward like aboat, carrying not only the equipment but theability to adjust the equipment.
In the second section of the book,“Examples”, there are three case-studies: Little,
focusing on the European Language Portfolio in
Ireland, Schwienhorst, contrasting a successful

and an unsuccessful implementation ofautonomy in a computer based course, andMurray, describing a “learning structure” whichforms the basis of study in a self-accessenvironment at Akita University. I foundSchwienhorst’s paper refreshing as hechallenges some entrenched assumptions:“Why do publications speak of CALL but notbook-assisted, classroom-assisted, teacherassisted, peer-assisted, television-assisted,mobile-assisted…language learning?…On its
own [the computer] does not create newopportunities for learning, but certainly facilitatesa variety of communication scenarios, a variety
of authentic language input, a variety ofintelligent CALL…applications and a variety of‘cognitive tools..’. (p. 101). Making an analogy
with jazz, he identifies reflection, interaction andexperimentation as possible hallmarks ofdeveloping autonomy (pp. 89-91). However he
immediately follows up with “Concepts such asreflection, interaction and experimentation
should not be seen as inherently beneficial tolanguage learning nor should the application oftechnology be viewed as inherently
beneficial.” (p. 103). This is a salutary reminderof the need for detailed attention to process andcareful evaluation of any initiatives which aresupposed to encourage learner autonomy. His
contrasting examples, entitled “How to failmiserably in implementing learner autonomy
principles”, (pp. 104 – 105), let us see how theaddition of preparatory and follow up work plus
some scaffolded pair work, turned a computerbased class from a failure into a success. He
introduces the term “affordance” (Gibson, 1979),
to describe the potential actions supported by alearning environment, and explains how
additional tools, such as transcripts of students’conversations, can increase the affordancevalue of an environment. (pp. 107 – 109).
The following two papers focus on the artof advising students: Gremmo takes a very

!

!

!

!

!

31

Ellen Headhonest look at the interaction between advisor
and advisee to see how much impact theadvice had, while Karlsson and Kjisik analyze
the importance of learner histories. My interest
was caught by the use of Eva Hoffman’s term,“the fracture between language andexperience” in the latter paper. Karlsson andKjisik suggest that these “‘fractures’ between
language and experience can be made into thebuilding blocks by the process of writing andsharing stories.” (p. 186). This seems to me toencapsulate the benefits of language histories,
or indeed any kind of reflection on an
experience of the gap between what was aimed
for and what was achieved, very elegantly.
In my opinion, Nakata’s overview of thecurrent state of play in implementing autonomybuilding strategies in Japan, would fit better inthe final section “Looking Ahead” rather thanwith “Advisor, counsellor and teacher
development”. Nakata’s commitment to proautonomy teaching is clear, and he makes nobones about the need for smaller class-sizes
and teacher-development, but without touchingon the socio-political background it is (in myview) difficult to give the whole story.
Aoki makes up for this deficit in her
paper “Where learner autonomy could fail asecond language user: three level analysis ofsocial context.” (pp. 236-257). I would havebought the book for this paper alone, as it isboth incisive and grounded in examples full ofinterest. The first section consists of discourse
analysis of contrasting contexts, one where anative-speaker interlocutor assists the learnerand one where the reverse happens. (One point
for a future edition would be to translate thetranscriptions into English.) Aoki makes thepoint that [untrained] “native speakers often
tend to sacrifice forms for the sake ofcommunication when a second language
speaker is struggling to formulate what s/he has
to say.” (p. 244)

I have experienced this and agree with Aoki
that it is not easy to find friends or volunteer
teachers who will put up with providing
scaffolding rather than instant answers. This iswhat Aoki calls the “micro-level” context. Her
next example (“meso-level”) concerns identity
construction in L2, as revealed by a Korean
woman who experienced difficulty expressing
her true self in Japanese to her critical husband
but gained confidence when speaking
Japanese at a swimming club and also with aJapanese friend she had known back in herhome country. Aoki comments “Learnerautonomy alone would not be enough forsecond language learners to sustain old social
identities and forge new ones of their choice…
success depends on who they come into
contact with.” (p. 249). Finally, for the “macrolevel”, taking the example of an adult maleBrazilian learner of Japanese, she addresses
the “structural conditions, be they economic,
social or political…that support or restrictlearner autonomy as a capacity.” (p. 250) She
shows how the system has failed to help thisman despite his eagerness to study, mainly due
to the harsh economic conditions he is under.
She calls for “more balanced, holistic
approaches that situate individual capacity inthe social context and focus on all of its threelevels”, those levels being, discourse analysis,
ethnography and the macro level of “politics,
demography and economy”. (p. 254). She talks
about the challenge of future research, whichmight draw on all three levels, “solving” of the“paradigmatic contradiction” between them. In
the JSL (Japanese as a second language)
context, she suggests the need for a moreequal relationship between teacher andstudent, a more sophisticated attitude in
relation to learning materials and resources
such as study centres for JSL. Aoki’s argument
is of practical importance because Japan willneed more guest workers to deal with the aging
population in coming years. In the wider
!

!

!

!

!

32

Ellen Head
context of applied linguistics research as awhole, her challenge to carry out research withgreater awareness of various researchparadigms makes a thought-provoking finale to“Mapping the Terrain”, which is both inspiring in
its call to mixed methods research, andempowering as an example of how it can be
done. In contrast, Benson’s paper, (which
precedes Aoki’s in section 4) seems to me to beweighed down by a determination to
problematize the relationship between
instructed and non-instructed learning. As
mentioned above, the creation of two separate
categories of analysis might tend to work as a
distraction from fruitful collaboration between
classroom teachers, advisors and learners.

However, the diversity of views andexperiences encompassed in the book as awhole, bears testimony to the variety of learnerautonomy studies and their practicalapplications, especially in university foreign
language learning settings today.
References
Gibson, J.J., (1979). The ecological approach
to visual perception. Boston MA: Houghton
Mifflin
Hoffman, E. (1998). Lost in translation: a life ina new language. London: Vintage. (Original
published in 1989).

!

!

!

!

!

33

Learning Learning 17 (1) Spring 2010
Review: Alison Stewart
Qualitative Research in Applied
Linguistics: A Practical Introduction(2009), edited by Juanita Heigham andRobert Croker, published by Palgrave
Macmillan（4567089:;<=>?#@AB
CD (2009), ,EF(GH$I/J
K-.(LJ-MNODKPQRS(TLUV'WX

Reviewed by Alison Stewart, Gakushuin
University!"#$%&'()*+,-./0123
0
Qualitative Research in Applied
Linguistics: A Practical Introduction （応用言語学における質的調査：実践入門）
は、初心者にも親切である、既に経験のある研究者にとっても有益なアドバイスや示唆に富んだ実践的ガイド本となっている。
本書はナラティブ調査、ケーススタディ、
エスノグラフィー、混合法など質的調査法を網羅し、観察・インタビュー・記述式ア
ンケートなどのデータ収集方法、質的アプ
ローチ、口述データや日記の分析、会話分
析などの分析方法についての章を含んでいる。最終章は研究倫理と質的調査論文の書き方が論じられている。調査方法の一般的枠組みと体験談の絶妙なバランスは実際に調査を行っている研究者による共著ならではである。質的調査実践者及び、始めたいと考えている人に是非読んでもらいたい一
冊である。

For many practicing teachers, the idea of
research can conjure up a whole host ofnegative associations. Doing it takes time andenergy, both of which are often limited in ourbusy lives. It may involve disrupting or
imposing on our students or our colleagues, orrisk the disapproval of our bosses or others.
Worst of all, the way into academic research is
guarded by fearsome gatekeepers, such as
publishers and supervisors, who dictate therules, the specialized knowledge and knowhow about conducting research and the highflown language in which it is written up, andwho determine who shall pass and who shallnot. But research is increasingly a part of our
professional lives, and the rewards of doing it
include personal as well as professional
development and growth. One of the best
books I have come across to provide guidance
and inspiration to newcomers and practicing
researchers alike is Qualitative Research in
Applied Linguistics: A Practical Introduction,edited by Juanita Heigham and Robert Croker.
This is a hands-on, user-friendly guide toqualitative research, with chapters by bothsome of the major figures in qualitative
research and teacher-researchers living andworking here in Japan.
The book is arranged and written in a
way that is intended directly to appeal to andengage novice researchers. An overview withchapters by Robert Croker and Donald
Freeman provides very simple explanations ofwhat qualitative research is, and what makes
research ‘qualitative’. Very simply, qualitative
research is an attempt to “create a full and richunderstanding of the researchcontext.” (Croker, p.3-4). Unlike quantitative
research, which relies on numbers andstatistics to support claims about the worldthat are generally true, qualitative researchers
!

!

!

!

!

34

Alison Stewart
base their claims on their interpretation of
the finely detailed but often messy detail thatis generated in an exhaustive investigationof a small number of people or contexts, oreven of individual cases.
The ‘meat’ of the book is the two
middle sections, Qualitative Research
Approaches and Qualitative Data Collection
Methods. Each of the chapters in these two
sections is arranged according to acommon, reader-centered scheme. Startingwith pre-reading questions, the chaptersprovide illustrative examples - some real,some fictional - of an approach or method inaction, an overview, a “What is…?” section,a “Why use…?” section, and sections on
how to collect, organize, and interpret data,
how to present findings and how to improve
the quality of your research. Each chapter
ends with a summary of the main ideas,
post-reading comprehension and discussion
questions, tasks that give hands-on practice,and further readings, as well as a detailed
bibliography. A final section deals withpractical issues concerning ethics and thebusiness of writing up the finished research.
The book ends with a comprehensive
glossary, which lists and defines all theterms covered.
Since one of the main aims of thisbook is to encourage teachers new toresearch to jump in and try it for themselves,the chapters begin with those approaches
that are most ‘do-able’ and these areillustrated with research inquiries that areprobably quite similar to those we might ask
in our own work situations. Garold Murray’s
chapter on Narrative Inquiry is illustrated
with his own experiences of collecting
learners’ life histories. Michael Hood’s on
Case Study draws on a hypotheticalexample of a teacher who wants tounderstand why so many ESL students dropout of university despite

completing a preparatory Intensive English
Program. Juanita Heigham and Keiko Sakuibase their chapter on Ethnography around aquestion about why student dynamics in a Self
Access Center vary from year to year. Anne
Burns on Action Research offers a vignette ofa teacher in Indonesia looking to gain a better
understanding of student interaction in her
communicative English class. The final chapter
in this section, Mixed Methods by Natalia
Ivankova and John Creswell, draws on a
published study in which researchers firstcollected quantitative data from a large
number of students, and then focused on threehigh-level learners and three low-level learners
in order to gain a more nuanced understandingof the difference in their employment oflearning strategies. Interestingly, in a chapter
which deals with a quantitative approach, I feltthat the encouraging and friendly tone
established in the previous chapters was not
as apparent, and that the authors were making
a case for specialized expertise in this dual
approach that some novice researchers mightfind off-putting. I also wondered about theirclaim that the “’mixed methods approach’ isstill a relatively new phenomenon but will be
used more in the future”. When I started mydoctoral studies twelve years ago, it was theidea of doing a qualitative study alone without
quantitative triangulation that was regarded as
daring and new.
Moving onto the section on Qualitative
Data Collection Methods, the first two chapterstake us right back into the qualitative
paradigm. Neil Cowie’s chapter on
Observation, illustrated by a participant
observation study of an English class ofdisaffected high school girls in Japan, andKeith Richard’s on Interviews, enlivened by his
description of a study of the problems
experienced by ESL students adjusting to a

!

!

!

!

!

35

Alison Stewart

new school, both provide excellent andengaging discussions on the methodology
and also, in my view more interestingly, on
problematic issues regarding theinterpretation of this kind of data. Making
sense of what we see and what we hear isn’t
necessarily as straightforward as it seems.
Richards, in particular, refers to work done bysocial psychologists (e.g. Wooffitt &Widdicombe, 2006) which points to theimportance of how we and our interviewees
position ourselves and what difference thatmakes to what we say and how it might beinterpreted.
The next two chapters, OpenResponse Items in Questionnaires by James
Dean Brown, and Introspective Techniques bySandra Lee McKay deal with data collection
methods that are perhaps more commonly
associated with quantitative traditions ofSecond Language Acquisition. Brown
illustrates his overview and discussion withthe story of Kazuko who decides to survey
fellow teachers in order to “understand what
her colleagues are thinking in their own
terms” (p.201). McKay includes in her chapter
the now somewhat unfashionable method of
verbal reports, or verbal protocols, with themore popular method of diary studies, both ofwhich could provide evidence of thoughtprocesses and mental states of teachers andlearners. The final chapter in this section,
Discourse Analysis by Anne Lazaraton,
provides an example of a study which
focuses on repair episodes by learners, inwhich precise transcription is essential tosupport claims about what the learner and theteacher actually say and do. Credit is due toLazaraton for condensing this method into achapter of similar length and scope as theothers in this book. I would argue, however,that discourse analysis is an approach as
much as it is a method of data collection.
Perhaps, it is for this reason that this chapter
is located at the end and the edge of thiscollection of qualitative studies.
The final section of the book deals withethical issues, in a chapter by Sharon Rallis
and Gretchen Rossman, and writing up, in a
final chapter by Christine Casanave. It is quite
typical to find chapters on these matters at
the end, but they are both vitally important foranyone doing research, and need to beconsidered fully from the outset, not as anafterthought. On the other hand, following theprinciple of leaving best to last, Casanave’s
chapter is the ideal way to finish the book.
One of the things that many new researchers
find most daunting about qualitative researchis that it seems to depend much more than
the quantitative paradigm on an ability to write
well. Casanave does not exactly argue thecontrary; good writing is important toqualitative research and she offers sensible
advice on how to develop your writing. But
good writing is not an end in itself; the reason
for it is so that we can “represent research inways that are rich, persuasive, and (…) do
justice to our topics and our research
participants” (p. 302). This, I believe, could
very well sum up the aspirations of all theauthors in this book.
This is a book that has obvious
application as a textbook on Applied
Linguistics and TESOL MA courses on
methodology, and as such, it is probable thatmost readers will pick and choose from it

!

!

!

!

!

36

according to their research interests. Readingfrom cover to cover, however, there is aconsiderable amount of duplication, or
perhaps, more charitably, recycling ofconcepts, terms and key references. One
instance that bothered me a little was thecitation of Shirley Brice Heath’s (1983) famous
book-length study, Ways with Words, as aprime example of a case study, only to read in
the following chapter that the same study
constituted an exemplary model of theethnographic approach. Niggling aside, someoverlapping of chapters in a review ofqualitative research is probably inevitable andexcusable.
A few years ago, I found myself
embroiled in a debate with a colleague overwhich was better, quantitative or qualitative.
Neither of us would concede to the other, andin the end, we concluded that our preference
must be mainly aesthetic: he liked numbers, I
liked words. Reading Qualitative Research in

Applied Linguistics, I can see more clearly that
it is more than aesthetic; it is ethical too, basedon a desire to treat individuals as individuals,
to celebrate diversity and exceptionality. This
principle comes through strongly and clearly ineach of these chapters. This book is more thanjust a practical introduction, though it is that
too. It is also a model and an inspiration.
References
Heath, S. B. (1983) Ways with words:
language, life, and work in communities andclassrooms. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Wooffit, R. & Widdicombe, S. (2006).
Interaction in interviews. In P. Drew, G.
Raymond, & D. Weinberg (Eds.), Talk andinteraction in social science researchmethods (pp.28-49). London: Sage
Publications

!

!

!

!

!

37

Learning Learning 17 (1) Spring 2010LOOKING BACK
Report on the Tokyo Get-together
LD SIG 東京エリアミーティング報告(January & March 2010)
Greater Tokyo local get-together
coordinators
Kay Irie (J.F. Oberlin University)
入江 恵(桜美林大学)
Masuko Miyahara (International Christian
University)
宮原万寿子(国際基督教大学)
１月と３月に東京エリアミーティングが開かれ、集まったメンバーとゲストは各回のテーマを出発点にディスカッションを行った。１月のテーマは視点の取得(perspective
taking)、３月は２月初めに亡くなったス
ティーブ・デイヴィスの人柄と功績を偲び、今年の部会の活動について話し合った。
隔月の第二土曜もしくは日曜に行われるこの東京エリアミーティングはお知らせのメールが東京近郊会員には送られています。参加してみたい方、興味のある方は、
是非入江もしくは宮原までご連絡ください。自律的な学びについての様々な問題やアイディアをリラックスした雰囲気の中で一緒に話し合いましょう！
January Meeting (January 24th, Sunday)
Attended by: Rob Moreau, Kazu Endo, Kayo
Ozawa, Colin Rundle, John Fanselow,
Shoko Kojima, Allen Lindskoog, Masuko
Miyahara
Topic: Perspective Taking
At the end, there were eight of us, but the
turnout was sporadic as people tended to go

in and out of the room. Our initial intention was
to talk about what "perspective taking" meant tous, and how it was related to our daily teaching,
but we ended up talking about how wonderful
Chris Casanave's presentation at JALT was on
this topic. What interested us most was the factthat her presentation did not follow the usual
convention of a power point presentation, butinstead consisted of a series of beautiful
picturesque slides of photographs accompanied
by one short sentence or phrase related to the
topic. The novelty of this presentation had theeffect of creating a “space” (or “ma” inJapanese), into which the audience weredrawn. As the slides were clicked one byone, we soon realized that we were sharing thesame space as the presenter. Perspective
taking, we thought, in short, is precisely this:sharing the same space and been able to put
oneself in the other's shoes. This is actuallyeasier said than done! (Miyahara)
March Meeting + Social Dinner (March 13th,
Saturday)
Attended by: Alison Stewart, Andy Barfield,
John Fanselow, Kayo Ozawa, Kazuko
Unosawa, Patrick Kiernan, Shoko Kojima,
Stacey Vye, Kay Irie
Topic: Remembering Steve Davies,
brainstorming for events and presentations
As it was the first formal LD gathering after
Steve Davies’ tragic death, we spent the firsthour sharing memories of him. Together, weread the first episode of the Adventure of
Magenta M., which led to an interesting
discussion on the irony of “required” extensive
reading for autonomy in language programs.
We decided to put together a section in thisissue of Learning Learning to honor his

!

!

!

!

!

38

Looking backcontribution to the SIG. In the second half ofthe meeting, we went through the list of
upcoming SIG related events and opportunities
for publication. Andy, who is the LD SIG
representative/coordinator for the forthcoming
Nakasendo conference, explained that selfassessment would be the theme this year.
John and Patrick suggested the idea ofwatching short video clips of students doing
self-assessment in action. We also talked
about and generally were in favor of the idea ofcarrying on the theme of self-assessment for
the LD Forum for JALT 2010 as having a focus
for a year or a certain period of time would
encourage us to engage collectively andcollaboratively in important concepts of learner/
teacher development.
After the meeting, all of us enjoyed getting
to know each other more over dinner at a
nearby Nepalese restaurant, where we werejoined by Colin Skeates. We would like tothank Stacey for organizing such a pleasantevening (although she had to leave early).
(Irie)
Tokyo get-together is a bimonthly meeting heldat Teachers College Columbia in Suidobashi.
An email notice with the theme of discussion
will be sent to all members who are in thegreater-Tokyo area. However, anybody
interested in joining the get-together iswelcome.
Please contact Kay Irie (kayirie@mac.com) or
Masuko Miyahara (MasukoM@aol.com) for
more information.

As a token of our thanks, we are pleased torecommend the M.A. in TESOL program at
Teachers College, Columbia University,
Japan Campus:
The Teachers College, Columbia University
Japan Campus has been successfully offering
graduate courses in Suidobashi, Tokyo for the
past 21 years to provide teachers with thesame quality graduate studies as the New York
campus.
The M.A. in TESOL program provides
opportunities to earn a graduate degree parttime by attending weekend classes. This
program offers degree concentrations fornovice and elementary school teachers, as partof its generalist degree for teachers in other
English teaching contexts. Applications are
accepted throughout the year, allowing
students to start in the fall, spring, or summer
semesters. The cooperative nature of the
program emphasizes systematic analysis ofactual practices, in relationship to key theories
in language teaching and learning, and theopportunity for students to be observed byprofessors in their schools in order to explore
teaching ideas.

For more information on this and otherprograms visit www.tc-japan.edu or contact the
TC Office (Phone 03-3221-9771 or Email<office@tc-japan.edu>)

!

!

!

!

!

39

Looking back

JALT LD SIG Forum: Snapshots: Active
Mirror of Identity「スナップ・ショット：アイデンティティとそのアクテイブな鏡像」
Masuko Miyahara, International Christian
University
宮原 万寿子 （国際基督教大学）
2009度の学習者ディベロプメント研究会発表テー
マはアイデンティティです。教師からみた学習者のアイデンティティ、または学習者からみた教師のアイデンティティなど、鏡を通してみる像によって、様々な角度からいろいろなことを垣間見ることができます。スナップ・ショットでは、教師、生徒の教室内、教室外のアイデンティティだけではなく、現在、過去、未来のアイデンティティをポスター、写真、ビデオなどの様々な媒介を通して発表しました。教師や生徒のアイデンティティ

1. Pre-Service EFL Teachers’ Professional
Identity Construction: Collaborative,
Metacognitive, and Reflective Learning
Processes
英語教員志望者の教職アイデンティティの形
成：協働的・メタ認知的・省察的学びのプロセス
Hideo Kojima, Hirosaki University#
úû/oü/ÇøýÙWÒ
In this forum, I introduced my teacher
education program that aims to develop new
EFL teachers’ professional identities andteacher-learner autonomy. Taking theparticipants’ comments into consideration, I
was able to propose the following:!

について、大胆、かつ創造性に満ちたあふれた取り組みがそろいました。フォーラムは、各々のプ
レゼンテーション後、発表者によるパネル・デイ
スカションという形式をとりました。以下、発表者のコメントの一例です。

The 2009 JALT LD SIG Forum took the topic
of identity as its central theme, and focused on
exploring teachers’ representations of theirstudents, and students’ representations of
their teachers. Understanding “snapshots” asa way to capture and present learner andteacher identities, both in and out of theclassroom, in the present, past and future, atotal of seven presenters gathered to discuss
the matter from a variety of perspectives andusing a variety of media. Throughpresentations, activities and discussion, we
explored how perceptions of ourselves andothers shape our learning experiences. The
session was facilitated by Masuko Miyahara,
Alison Stewart and Martha Robertson, andchaired by Steve Brown. Here are somereflections and comments from the presenters:!

!

New teachers’ professional identities arereconstructed both inter-subjectively andintra-subjectively in the collaborative,
metacognitive, and reflective learning
processes.
In each ELT context, Japanese and nonJapanese teachers need to promote mutual
recognition from which their identity orcommunity membership arises.
EFL teachers need to clarify their teaching
philosophy, to take responsibility for theirinstruction, and to develop theirprofessional identities and autonomy
through positive interdependence inlearning and teaching communities.

2. The Electronic Dictionary: Changing
Perspectives and Identities
電子辞書：教師と学習者の立場と主体性の変革
Jim Ronald, Hiroshima Shudo University
ジム2ロナルド (広島修道大学)
How does the language classroom change if
each student brings an electronic dictionary toclass? What if they share one between two? Or

!

!

!

!

!

40

Looking backone between three? How about if the teacher
does or doesn’t bring a dictionary to class?
What if no one does?
For many teachers, at least from highschool onwards, the electronic dictionary may
be so much part of the furniture that thesequestions do not come to mind. There may
also be a sense of conflicting interests forteachers wondering if they should intervene inlearners’ dictionary use; after all isn’t this amodel of learner independence? Yet, at thesame time, teachers may question the effects
of some learner dictionary use. Learners, too,
may look to their teachers for guidance in how
best to use this familiar yet complex language
learning tool.
One aim of this contribution to the LD
Forum was to challenge us to reflect on how
the distribution of dictionaries may affectidentities, roles, and learning in the language
classroom. Related to this was theconsideration of the teacher’s role in this
distribution. A further fulfilled aim was for me
to learn from your reflections – thank you!
Based on these, next semester I’ll be asking
my speaking class students to teach us about
a different feature or function of theirelectronic dictionary, and to discuss thesequestions.
3. Snapshots of Significant Others in
Language Learning
語学学習に重要なもう一人の学習者
Alison Stewart, Gakushuin University
アリソン2スチューワート (学習院大学)'Snapshots' was an inspired and inspiring
choice of theme for the LD SIG
Forum, eliciting a very varied group ofsubmissions. Learners' and teachers'
representations of each other and themselves
were explored in a variety of ways, many ofthem designed to be interactive 'events' asmuch as 'posters'.
The theme prompted me to explore
something I have often noticed in my students'
language learning histories. Many learners
describe a person, usually not a teacher, who
has had a significant influence on theirdevelopment as speakers of other languages
and even on their identity more generally. This
resonated with my own experience, so I
started to ask my students and colleagues for
specific examples of significant others relating
to their language learning. Some of thesedescriptions were displayed on my poster, andI encouraged participants to write and add
their own to the collection.
It struck me that surprising little attention
has been paid to the factor of personal
influence in language learning and identity
formation. During the Forum, I wanted to
introduce the work of the literary theorist,
René Girard, who has developed a theory of'mimesis' as an explanatory account of humandesire and motivation. Girard has applied his
theory to the fields of literature, religion, mythand politics, but his work work seems to bepractically unknown in Applied Linguistics.
Since the Forum, I have been reading more of
Girard's work and trying to understand his
ideas and their possible application tolanguage learning. My thinking about this is
still far from coherent, but I'm grateful to theForum for giving me the initial impetus, and to
all the participants who responded so
encouragingly to this idea.
4. Expressions Through Cinquains:
Snapshots of Current and Future Selves
五行連による表現: 自分の現在と未来をみつめて
Kay Irie, J.F. Oberlin University›¬/-/ÇþùÿÙWÒ
Following the theme of the forum, I gave aposter presentation on Expressions Through

!

!

!

!

!

41

Looking backCinquains: Snapshots of Current and Future
Selves in which I explored how the second
year university students who returned from ashort-term study overseas program perceived
their current and future selves through writingcinquains, simple pattern poems. As I said at
the forum introduction, poetry writing was partof the unified syllabus I had to follow. However,I discovered pattern poetry could function as atool of reflection and self-expression andprovide opportunities to experience the target
language in personal and meaningful ways.
Participating in the forum also provided mewith an opportunity to assess what I did withmy students and revisit their work.
On that day, at the forum, I was excited toshare my students’ work. Everybody whocame to see my poster gave me not only
encouraging comments but also thoughtful
suggestions which will help me modify the way
I use cinquains in the classroom next time.
Some people said they would also try pattern
poetry with their students. This is the merit of
having a theme-focused poster session.
Although the time given was limited, it brought
people who were interested in the theme andwilling to exchange ideas. My only regret wasthat I didn’t get to talk to other presenters andsee their posters!
5. Snapshots of Teachers’ Shared Learning
Journeys
共に学ぶ教師たちの探求――スナップ・ショット（ビジュアル・イメージ）の共有
Stacey Vye, Saitama University andTeacher College Columbia Tokyo
ステイシー2ウ“イー (コロンビア大学ティー
チャーズカレッジ日本校、埼玉大学）

to work commitments. I felt well informed by
the organizers, Masuko, Alison, and Martha, inthe months preceding the event, and had agood grasp of what was expected of me.
During the presentations I had remarkableexchanges with participants. When I described
the Teachers College Autonomy Workshop
Course, the autonomy-inspiring activities Nanci
Graves and I facilitated with our in-service
teachers, and the teachers’ perceptions of theirautonomous journeys, four participants
naturally shared their classroom practices that
resonated with what we were doing. This
meant I had ‘Active Mirror of Identity’ dialogue
exchanges with these participants, whichhappened to be the theme of the forum.
Lastly, I enjoyed Steve Brown being theguest MC, because he asked questions that
helped participants to consolidate what they
got from the posters, and those actions
seemed to draw out reflective responses for us
all to ponder. Then he guided us into the wrapup by highlighting salient themes andcommonalities the presenters shared. My only
regret is that I couldn’t view the otherpresenters’ posters as a participant.
Organizers, thank you very much.
6. Looking in the Mirror: Difficult Teachers
鏡に自分を映してみる：とっつきに教師像
Miguel Sosa, International Christian
Universityミゲル2ソーサ (国際基督教大学)
Our session began with a series of questions
printed on a hand-out. Those questions
provided us with a “mirror” we could look into inorder to reflect on our practices. On the one
hand, the mirror showed that it is very difficult
to evaluate our beliefs and methods, because

It was refreshing to participate in the LDForum after a couple of years of absence due

!

!

!

!

!

42

Looking backit often means evaluating the paradigms thatmake us who we are. On the other hand, themirror showed that a shift of perspective - trying
to see what it is like to be a student in our own
classes - is a humbling experience. The mostimportant memory I have from the session isthat kindness has unexpected benefits for both,students and ourselves.
7. Learner and Teacher Roles: Developing a
Writerly Consciousness
学習者と教師の役割：書き手としての意識を発達させることHugh Nicoll, Miyazaki Municipal University
ヒュー2ニコル (宮崎公立大学)
During the forum at JALT 2009, I presented"snapshots" of my students as learners, with afocus on their images of themselves as aslearners and in their relationship with me asteacher and academic advisor. Now, fivemonths later, I feel as if my classroom data
was/is/will always be inadequate to thechallenge of empowering students in thedevelopment of their academic literacy andwhat I called in my presentation a "writerly
consciousness." My primary goal in the writingclasses for first year students and with myAmerican studies seminar students is tointegrate the use of literary texts into the work
we do together in developing their language
abilities. In the coming year, I am going to workon improving my strategies for gatheringclassroom data, in the forms of (1) reflective
writing by students, and (2) in video-taped selfassessments, interviews, and group
discussions. It seems like a very long (butworthwhile) row to hoe.

!

!

!

!

!

43

!

R E S TI N

P E A C E!

S T E PH E N J . DAV I E S

LEFT: STEVE DAVIESABOVE: AT LD/CUE/TC DINNER,
NOVEMBER 2008, AT PINK COW
IN SHIBUYA

Please join us in remembering Steve...
追悼：スティーブ・デイヴィスを偲んで...
Steve Davies of Miyazaki
International College, a long time
Learner Development SIG member,passed away early February. He not
only wrote the Adventure of Magenta M
series (Learning Learning, 2008, (15) 1 2009, (16) 2), but also contributed his
views on learning and teaching in bothAutonomy You Ask! (2003) and More
Autonomy You Ask! (2006) , taking aunique approach of blending fiction andtheory. This section of Learning
Learning is dedicated to honor andcelebrate Steve’s work and life.

セクションではスティーブの功績と人柄を偲びたい。

Memories of Steve[from Stacey Vye]

Steve was one of a kind and I think
if!someone had had a chance to meet
him -even just once- he!was that kindof person!you!would never!have beenable to forget. When I hung out withhim at JALT conferences, he'd either
have this impeccable timing to be able
to deliver a funnier-than-anything
cynical joke!and ask the right questions
長年に渡り学習者ディベロプメント部会 for me to spit out a funny joke right
メンバーとして活動されてきたスティー back; kind of like a 'manzai' team
ブ・デイヴィス（宮崎国際大学）が２月 without an audience. In fact,!I didn't
realize I could be humorous and!I
初旬に母国・英国にて永眠された。彼
continually!wonder how could heは本誌・「学習の学習」における「マジェンタの冒険」シリーズのみならず、 draw!that kind of cynical banter!rightout of my mouth. But!my best memory
部会発行の論文集 「Autonomy You Ask!
of Steve is when!he and Hugh Nicoll(2003) 及び[More Autonomy You Ask!」(2006)にフィクションと教育理論を融合 got their!return flight!time after a JALT
conference in Tokyo back to Kyushu off
させた独創的な論文を発表した。このby a couple hours,!so they had to rushfrom the venue!in order to!catch theirflight. When!Hugh realized the time
glitch and told Steve the situation,
Steve!playfully laughed, packed up his
gear, smiled,!waved,!and ran for thedoor as!he!said goodbye to me like alittle kid with his bags and luggage
waving about. It's a memory that reallysticks with me because he drew one of
the biggest smiles from me instead of a
joke!!Well Steve, I want to tell you ajoke now, but instead my heart!issending you!a lot of!smiles, love,!andlight your way.!May you rest in peace
buddy.

STARGAZING STEVE

Please join us in remembering Steve...
追悼：スティーブ・デイヴィスを偲んで...
[from Andy Barfield]
I didn't really know Steve D. until theAutonomy You Ask! (AYA) project, andthen we didn’t meet for a while because
he didn’t make it to the Writers’
Retreat in Osaka. Steve had, though,sent in a draft of his chapter, and people
at the Retreat wrote feedback to his
draft, which was then faxed to him a
few days later. Steve also joined us inwriting the Preface to AYA and in
helping to fashion an ironic and playful
tone to the opening of the book (toning
things up… and quite definitely
sideways, too, I hasten to add).
I have a very happy memory of Stevestanding in front of a wall-size poster inan LD forum, a few years ago, theposter an extremely large version of
one of the drawings from his AYA
chapter. Slightly shy, a little lost, looking
almost like he would prefer to be
painting, Steve just stood there with anironic smile and those deep, sometimes
sad, shining-with-warmth eyes, as if
saying 'Come on guys things are awhole lot more wacky than that!'!Steve had a great sense of mischief
there and interest in authoring theworld in!different quite idiosyncraticallycreative ways.
He delighted in noticing the quirkinessof life around him, as in this short PS
from an email message he sent lastNovember from England:“PS Very cold this morning. Below
freezing. Ice on puddles. Frost. So why
was that geezer de-icing his car in a teeshirt?”
He also wrote about joining a writers’group in Cheltenham:!“We sit scribbling in the back room ofa pub called the Beehive where they
have these hideous low wattage bulbs. It

has a real Dickensian feel, not that it
seems to help the quality of the writing
much. At least the ale is up to the mark,but at £3.00 a pint it ought to be.”I smile and almost chuckle each time I
read those vignettes. At least the beerwasn’t Dickensian, either, and neither
was Steve. Creative to a fault, sad eyes,
warm smile, dry humour, laconic senseof the absurd. Steve.!

AT LD/CUE/TC DINNER, 2008

[from Amanda Bradley]
I worked with Steve from 2000-2007
when I left our common workplace. On
my arrival I had met with an unforseen
cultural challenge for which all my skills
were useless. Steve would offer me
blackcurrant tea and comforting chat.
He talked about things and ways backhome, London Uni, and joked about thetwo great social menaces of our nation(in the past that is!)...Oxon and Cantab.
When I left, Steve alone bad me
farewell and insisted on helping me
move, carrying my most treasured
books to a new office and a new life ina place of greater beauty and peace
where I will finish my career. Stevemused on the empty office and how it
would take on a life. It has now. The
books we carried and arranged are thereflection of myself and all that is dear

to me. And until now only Steve wasparty to this.
Steve was the mercurial emissary for
my journey as a teacher. He will always
be special to me.!

[from Ellen Head]
I got to know Steve through working on
the AYA and MAYA anthologies. I
remember him being surrounded by agroup laughing at the illustrations of theweird creatures in his article – theClarissa, Naals and Metakins. The
creatures had fairly obvious symbolic
relationships with stereotypical actors
in the story of language learning inJapan, which made me uneasy eventhough I couldn’t suppress a laugh: “The
Naal had always been a home-loving
species, fond of complicated mindgames and rarely going anywhere…
They took delight in composing
elaborate written texts before slippingback into biostasis.” (Davies 2003, p.
234) The story becomes a framework
for looking back at material related to
Steve’s own teaching, but at the sametime setting the story in a future sci-fi
world allows him to question the verybasis of classroom teaching: “TheMetakin have no need for education
since…they have learned how tosurgically enhance their own brains.” (p.
234). If this paper was a disturbing but
amusing read, the next one was evenmore so. For MAYA Steve wrote a
medieval murder mystery, and I was
lucky enough to be paired with him as“reader-responder”. I enjoyed the
melodrama of the medieval setting, usedhere to highlight the paradox that when
we monitor someone else’s work, we
may be infringing on their creative
freedom. Of course this is what
teachers do every day by asking
students to show us their writing, butPlease join us in remembering Steve...
追悼：スティーブ・デイヴィスを偲んで...
we hope that in the context of atrusting pedagogic relationship, suchmonitoring is not a violation. Not soamong the power-hungry monks ofthis story, who make life a misery for
their subordinates and stick at nothing
to take the credit for their work. The
rebellious scholar in this story refuses
to work at the pace and within theparameters demanded. Asked to selfevaluate, he writes “I am a multiple ofselves and all of them is me.” (Davies
2006, p. 209). This poses the question“Can you honestly say you are neverin the role of the pressurizing,
hypocritical overseer?” I have known
Steve mainly through his writing sothat is what I have concentrated on
here. During the time when he wrote
the Magenta M detective serial for LL, I
would often be caught laughing wildly
in my office late at night as a new draft
arrived. Thank goodness we have
Steve’s writing. If you haven’t readthem yet, check out the Magenta M
stories and the AYA and MAYA pieces.
His blending of fiction and linguistic
theory was unique and brought not
only humour, but underneath it astrongly critical!voice to our group. I
wish I could have got to know him
better. I also wish we had his criticaland witty voice still with us reacting to
the things that are going on now.

and investigates these teachingproblems on various distant planets.
For instance, she goes to this planet
where the women learn to read
English, but the men just want to stickto their old alien hunting practices.""Erm...""I was thinking of another episodewhere the heroine - I'm thinking ofcalling her Magenta - has to interact
with robotic pets who are more
intelligent than humans. That would be
more a critique of research methods
in academia. Then there's another on
motivation: what does this mean whenbeings from other planets havecompletely different value systems?""That sounds ... interesting.""Science fiction is a great way to think
about critical issues like inter-galactic
communication and the ethics ofimposing our language and culture on
another planet. I've got some otherideas too: how about learnerautonomy and missionaries in theSouth Pacific? Or a language learningand mind-reading? Or the Wild West,or ....."
Steve was a true inspiration: creative,
funny, wacky, thoughtful, irrepressible,
original. I'm grateful to have had thechance to know him a little.

[from Alison Stewart]
I first met Steve at the LD/CUE SIG
party in the Pink Cow in 2007. "I've
got some ideas for a series of articles
in Learning Learning", he said.

Steve’s Contribution
to LD Publications
Anthologies

Davies, S. (2003). Learner portfolios:
Who is at the controls? In A. Barfield& M. Nix (Eds.), Autonomy You Ask!:"Well, it's a fictional treatment oflanguage teaching issues. It's set in the Learner and Teacher Autonomy in Japan
1. Tokyo: Japan Association for
future in an inter-galactic language
Language Teaching Learner
teaching center. The main character isa kind of troubleshooter who goes out Development Special Interest Group.
"That's great! Tell me more."

Davies, S. (2006). Sebastian’s journal: A
short story about the darker side oflearner autonomy. In E. Skier & M.
Koyama (Eds.), More Autonomy You
Ask!: Learner and Teacher Autonomy inJapan 2. Tokyo: Japan Association for
Language Teaching Learner
Development Special Interest Group.

The Adventure of Magenta M
SeriesEpisode #1, The Adventure of Magenta
M. Learning Learning, 2008,Vol. 15 (1),32 - 37.
http://ld-sig.org/LL/15-1toc.html

Episode #2, The Strange case of Lady
Camilla Blemley, Learning Learning,
2008,Vol. 15 (2), 27 - 34.
http://ld-sig.org/LL/15-2toc.html

Episode #3, Dinner for two, Learning
Learning, 2009,Vol. 16 (1), 35 - 37.
http://ld-sig.org/LL/16-1toc.html

Episode #4, Mandroids, fembots, and thepower of learner literacy, Learning
Learning, 2008,Vol. 16 (2), 40 - 47.
http://ld-sig.org/LL/16-2toc.html

Learning Learning 17 (1) Spring 2010
Looking ahead
Exploring Self-assessment at
Nakasendo 2010

『中仙道２０１０ - 自己評価の研究』

Andy Barfield
アンデイ・バーフィールド
学会へのご招待
英語教育研究集会「中山道２０１０」は今
年の６月２０日に東京家政大学で開催される。「中仙道２０１０」の研究集会の特徴
は、メンバーの多様性を誇りとし、共同作業の精神に基ついた英語研究集会である。
様々な分野、文化、教育的背景を持つ人々が一同に会する場であり、世代、様々な英語教育の研究会、そして様々な語学教育の分野の違いを超え、交流を深めることを目的としている。
今年の学会のテーマは「学習者としての教師、教師としての学習者」であるが、JALT
学習者デベロップメント研究会（LD SIG）,
Framework and Language Portfolio (FLP),
教師教育研究部会(TE) の新たな協力により、学会は開催される。FLP SIGの佐藤洋子
は、「大学へ導入可能な自己評価表およびチェックリスト:挑戦と調整」という題のワークショップを行う。また、学習者デベ
ロップメント研究会（LD SIG）はアンデイ・バーフィールドがまとめ役となり、ワー
クショップ「自己評価に対する複合的見解」を主催する。
このワークショップにはルーシー・クッ
カー、アニー・マーロー、ピーター・水木、
ヒュー・ニコル、ブレンダン・バン・デユー
セン、宇野沢 和子、ステーシー・ヴァイの７人が発表者となる。このワークショップで取り上げられるテーマはQ方法論からビデ

オ分析による自己評価と様々である。教師教育研究部会(TE)が取り上げるテーマについては近日中に発表される。詳細また事前登録方
法等については「中山道２０１０」のホームページをどうぞご覧になってください。アドレズは以下のとおり：http://
nakasendo.freehostia.com/nakasendo2010/index.html 皆様の参加をお待ちしております。
Introduction
Nakasendo is taking place on Sunday June
20th this year at Tokyo Kasei University, and if
2010 is anything like last year’s conference, itwill be a very high-energy day, with a lot ofinteresting sessions and discussions. One
reason why the Nakasendo series ofconferences has got off to such a good start isthat it has set out to bring many diverse
groups in language education together around
its annual conference. Nakasendo bills itself
as “an ever-expanding, multi-organizational
English conference based on mutual support
and collaboration” and as “a dynamic cooperative dedicated to promoting positivechange in English language learning andteaching in Japan through collaboration”. The
Nakasendo co-operative tries to crossgenerations, teacher groups, and sectors oflanguage education in Japan, and prides itself
on its diversity (“educators from different
contexts, different cultures and different
educational backgrounds”) and collaborativeedge. It has that same kind of hybrid buzz andactivity that groups like the Learner
Development SIG had in the 1990s when they
were full of ideas for doing things differently,
and teacher education hadn’t yet becomecommodified into 20-minute Powerpoint
knowledge transmissions, with five minutes forquestions at the end…
!

!

!

!

!

47

Looking ahead
Focus on self-assessment
This year’s conference theme, Teachers as
Learners, Learners as Teachers, suggested
some possibilities for putting together asequence of workshops on self-assessment
between the Learner Development SIG, theFramework and Language Portfolio SIG and
the Teacher Education SIG. The three groups
are each doing something different. Here I
report on plans by the FLP SIG and LD SIG
only, as Teacher Ed had yet to finalize its
session at the time of writing.
FLP SIG workshop
For the FLP SIG, Yoko Sato is doing aworkshop entitled “Introducing a selfassessment grid and can do checklists into
Japanese university EFL classes: Challenges
and adaptations”. Her presentation is basedon a one-year classroom study, and she isplanning to discuss with participants:(i) typical problems encountered in the initial
implementation of these tools in general
English classes(ii) subsequent modifications made(iii) awareness-raising and practice activities
incorporating these tools(iv) the positive impact of the reflective
practice on students’ self-awareness andattitudes to learning observed at the endof the year.
Sato will consider, in particular, theimportance of providing regular learnertraining on reflection.
LD SIG workshop
In contrast, the Learner Development SIG isdoing what has evolved into a multi-session
workshop called Multiple Views on Selfassessment. The workshop involves six

presenters, using poster, materials and videoloop displays, where participants will have achance to rotate and mingle according to theirinterests, with pair, small-group and wholegroup discussions included. The areas of focus
taken by each individual presenter are as
follows:
Lucy Cooker (poster), University of
Nottingham, England
Towards a learner-generated tool for the (self-)
assessment of learner autonomy
In this presentation, I will explain how I used
Q-methodology (a research method whichallows for the systematic investigation ofsubjectivity, and one which incorporates both
qualitative and quantitative elements) and indepth interviews to investigate learners’
perceptions of the non-linguistic outcomes ofautonomous language learning. I will thendescribe how these learner-generated
understandings have been used to develop atool to support learners in the formative
assessment of their autonomy.
Anni Marlow (Powerpoint & video loop),
Meiji University
Value of peer review for individual selfassessment in the writing classroom
I explore the management and role of peer
review in a first year undergraduate science
English writing class for science, engineeringand medical students, where peers were theadvisors, critics and facilitators driving thedevelopmental process of redrafting andconsequently the self-assessment of theindividual writers’ work.
Peter Mizuki (poster), Nihon University
Self-assessment in the learning processThis is a report on an intensive Academic

!

!

!

!

!

48

Looking ahead

English Course. This course focused on thefour skills and emphasized autonomous
learning activities in the form ofpresentations. The students filled out short
self-evaluation forms after finishing two
presentations; according to their comments,
this helped give them confidence and selfawareness of how to improve their language
skills. In this report I will give an outline of
the course and discuss the results of thestudents’ self-assessments.
Hugh Nicoll (poster with laptop),
Miyazaki Municipal University
Video self-sssessment in an American
studies seminar
In this presentation I will describe the use ofvideo recordings and self-assessment
protocols with students in my American
studies seminar. The members of theseminar are working on developing
academic reading and writing skills forresearching and responding to literary texts,
but are personally interested in developing
workplace English competencies. The
presentation will focus on video recordingsof group discussions and individual
presentations to help learners focus on bothpractical language skills and strategies for
improving their academic literacy.
Brendan Van Deusen (poster), Nagasaki
International University
Learner strategies and success
The “good language learner” is an enduring
if elusive concept with intuitive appeal. I will
discuss the results of university students’

self-assessment on learning strategies as alocalized investigation of “good language
learner” qualities. I will also identify students’areas of success and further need, and discuss
relationships to other research.
Stacey Vye (poster), Saitama University
Multi-purpose self-assessment
I would like to share self-assessment in action
through the daily reflection sheets I use with mystudents at Saitama University. The students
reflect on and write about what they learned
and what their learning goals are. The reflection
sheet has morphed into a multi-purpose tooland quintuples as a self-assessment device, aname badge, a classroom language suggestion
guide, a forum for sharing new vocabulary andreflections, and a chance to communicate withme each week.
Some further connections
For me it’s been fun to put together a focus on
self-assessment for the Learner Development
SIG and to see different proposals come in andevolve together into a multi-session workshop.
At the LD Tokyo Area Get-together in March
this year we talked about trying to create ahighly participatory session for Nakasendo, andI am looking forward to seeing how it works out
on the day on June 20th. It’s good seeing
different groups serendipitously start up andwork collaboratively, before they morph into
new groups that take these explorations further.
They offer some interesting paths for us to take
together to explore learner development this
year.

!

!

!

!

!

49

Looking ahead

Teacher Learner/Development: A
Moveable Feast, Sunday, October 17,
a one-day conference with Learner
Development SIG, Teacher Education
SIG & Osaka JALT Chapter, October2010 at Osaka Gakuin University
Save Sunday October 17 in your schedule
book! This fall the Learner Development SIG,
the Teacher Education SIG, and the Osaka JALT
chapter are collaborating on a Teacher
Development Day at Osaka Gakuin University.
Think ahead to the fall: leaves’ colors arechanging; days are getting cooler, we’re back inthe swing of things after the summer break, inmany places harvests are in, delicious autumn
cuisine is being served. Staying with theharvest/food image, we are calling the event:
Teacher/Learner Development: A Moveable
Feast. We think the day will be quite a feast, as
one organizer mentioned, “offering vitalnutrition for our teaching lives!” Teacher/
Learner Development “A Moveable Feast” willfeature plenary sessions with Charles Adams andChuck Sandy, and workshop led by Deryn Verity
and Steve Cornwall, and presentations on themes
related to Teacher Development and Learner
Development. As a Feast, this event is intended
to provide refreshment for and celebration of ourteaching and learning lives. More detailed
information will be sent to our discussion lists
very soon, but in the meantime, if you have an
idea for a workshop or presentation, please get intouch with one of us right away!
Ellen Head <ellenkobe@yahoo.com>
Steve Cornwell <stevec@gol.com>

ムーバブル・フィースト(Movable
feast)：学習者ディベロプメント研究部会・教師教育研究部会・JALT大阪チャプター共催カンファレンス（2010年10月17日 於：大阪学院大学）
研究発表公募のお知らせ
１０月１７日（日）は今からカレンダーに!！「まだ新学年度は始まったばかり、夏にもなってないのに．．．」と思っていらっしゃるかもしれません

が、この秋、教員と学習者ディベロップメントをともに考えるため、学習者ディベロプメント研究部
会・教師教育研究部会・JALT大阪チャプターが一日
カンファレンスを共催します。

夏休みも終わり、木々が色づき始め、ようやく涼し
くなってくる頃を想像してください。各地での収穫と秋の味覚をモチーフに、今回のイベントをTeacher/Learner Development: A Movable Feastと名付けました。ある実行委員は「教員にとって必要な栄養を提供しよう！」とコメント。このカンファ
レンスではCharles AdamsとChuck Sandyによる基調講演、Deryn VerityとSteve Cornwellによるワーク
ショップ、そして教員と学習者ディベロップメント
に関する発表が行われる予定です。祝宴(feast)にふ
さわしく、私たちの教員活動、学習活動をともに祝い、新たな栄養を得る機会となるよう企画されています。そしてその祝宴が移動可能（movable）とは
私たちの教えと学びが柔軟であり、環境に反応し、時に挑戦するものであることを示しています。単独
で個々の団体が開催するよりも、この３つの団体が共催することにより、多様な参加者が協力し合い、
新しい考え方や視点を構築する一日となるでしょう。詳細はメーリングリストなどにて近日中にお伝えしますが、ワークショップや発表のアイディアをすでにお持ちの方は、メールを待たずに是非実行委
員の私たちにご連絡ください。
エレン・ヘッド

スティーブ・コーンウェル

!

!

!

!

!

50

Looking ahead
Looking ahead to the LD SIG Forumat JALT 2010
2010YZJALT-[\70]^0_-01`abcJdef'.g_hi-VI

Metaphors we learn by
0jkfFhlCALL for PAPERS
mnop
Deadline 15th May, 2010
qr：2010Y5s15t

The Learner Development SIG Forum at theinternational JALT conference in November
this year is an opportunity for us to explore
different ways of thinking about learning.
Many ways of thinking about learning arefamiliar to us: learning is growth, a struggle, ora journey. Learning can be seen as a solitarypath, though we might prefer to see it as aroad that is shared with others.
今年１１月に行われる、JALT年次大会でのLD SIGフォーラムは、我々にとって、学習についての新しい考え方を切り開く貴重な機会です。様々な学習に関する考え方があります。学習とは成長であり、葛藤であり、はた
また旅であるとも表現されます。学習は孤独な小道であるとも見ることができますが、仲間とともに歩む道として捉えることもできるでしょう。

Do the metaphors that we use open up ourunderstanding, or are they so familiar that we nolonger see the different associations that they
once invoked? What metaphors do we and ourlearners use about learning and learnerdevelopment? These are some of the different
questions that we would like to explore with you in
The Learner Development SIG Forum at
JALT2010.
If you are interested in presenting at the LD Forumat JALT 2010 In Nagoya, please send yourproposal by May 15th to Ellen Head<ellenkobe@yahoo.com> and Andy Barfield<barfield.andy@gmail.com>. Send your proposal
as a Word file, including the following information:

•
•
•
•

•
•

your first name and family nameyour affiliation
the title of your presentation
the type of presentation: workshop activity/
activities, poster presentation, other(please specify)
the proposal itself (250-300 words)ua short summary of your presentation(75-100 words)

JALT2010における学習者ディベロップメント部
会フォーラムでの発表に興味をお持ちの方は、下記の申込み内容を明記の上、2010年5月15日までに、エレン・ヘッド<ellenkobe@yahoo.com> アンディー・バーフィールド<barﬁeld.andy@gmail.com>まで、お申し込み下
さい。
＜申込み内容＞
・氏名
・ご所属
・発表のタイトル
・発表形式（ワークショップ、ポスター・プレゼンテーション,その他
明記して下さい。）
・発表内容（英文250­300語程度）
・発表概要（英文75-100語程度）
We would like to make the Forum highly
participatory and interactive, so please keep thatin mind when submitting your proposal.
Many thanks – we’re looking forward to hearing
from you.
たくさんのご応募お待ちしております。
Ellen Head & Andy Barfield
エレン・ヘッド＆アンディー・バーフィールド
!

!

!

!

!

51

Looking ahead

Two Learner Development SIG
Conference Grants:
40,000 yen each
The Learner Development SIG would like tosupport the attendance of two LD SIG
members at this year’s JALT International
Conference in Nagoya, 19–22 November,2010. Two 40,000 yen grants are available
this year.
The SIG would like to award these grants to
LD members who are willing to write aconference report, a report about theexperience, or another piece of writing to be
published in Learning Learning after the
conference.
The two grant recipients can use the money
to cover their travel, hotel, and/or conference
fees for the 2010 JALT conference.
We are particularly keen to support andencourage new members of the SIG, newcontributors to our LD discussions, and/or LD
members researching autonomy in language
education. If you are interested in applying
for a grant, please consider whether you
meet more or less the following criteria:•

publication in Learning Learning
shortly after the conference.
You are relatively new to the field andhave not published much before on
autonomy in language education (asour goal is to support and encourage
new researchers/contributors tolearner development discussions andactivities).

If you more or less fit these criteria (we wish
to be as flexible as possible), please send ina minimum 500-word essay on how you viewthe development of learner and/or teacher
autonomy in your own work or study
situation and/or how you see the story of
your own engagement with learnerautonomy issues in language education.
Send this essay to Andy Barfield, Kay Irie,
and Alison Stewart as a rich text format MS
Word attachment. In your covering email
message, please introduce yourself to us aswell.
We hope that, if you are interested, you willconsider applying for these grants, and weare looking forward to hearing from you by
July 31st 2010.
Best wishes,

•

•

•

You do not have access to researchfunds or conference travel grants fromyour employer(s).
You can attend the 2010 JALT
Conference in Nagoya, 19–22
November.
You are willing to write a conference
report or another article suitable forAndy Barfieldbarfield.andy AT MARK
gmail.com
kayirie AT MARK
mac.comstewart_al AT MARK
hotmail.com

Kay Irie
Alison Stewart

!

!

!

!

!

52

Looking ahead
学習者ディベロペメント部会：•大会後まもなく、大会レポート、あるいはJALT年次大会参加助成金（４万円）

ニュースレターLearning Learning

Learner Development SIGは、今年11月19日•この研究分野の活動を始めて比較的日が浅" 22日に名古屋で開催予定のJALT年次大会

く、言語教育における自律に関する発表をまに出席する二人のLD SIG会員をサポートしたいと考えています。 今年は４万円ずつ、2名分の奨励助成金が利用できます。
SIGでは、このカンファレンスのレポート、
またはそこでの体験について書いてくださる
LD会員、あるいはこの年次大会の後、ニュースレターLearning Learning「学習の学習」の為に論文を書いてくださる方々にこの助成金を進呈したいと考えています。助成金を受ける2名の方々は、このお金を2010年
JALT年次大会にかかる交通費や宿泊費、大会参加費として使うことができます。我々は、特にSIGの新規会員の方、LD SIGのディ
スカッションへ新しい貢献をしてくださる方、または言語教育の場で自律学習を研究しているLD会員をサポートし、奨励したいと考えています。
この助成金ご興味がありましたら、まず、以下の基準を（ほぼ）満たしているかどうかをご確認ください。
•ご自身の雇用主からの研究費または出張手
当を受け取るすべをもっていない。
•2010年11月19日" 22日に名古屋にて開催予定のJALT年次大会に出席することが可能。

（学習の学習）にふさわしい論文の提出が可能。

だあまり行っていない。（我々の目的は学習者育成とこの分野における新しい研究者をサ
ポート、奨励することです。）
あなたがこれらの基準をほぼ満たしているな
らば（できるだけ柔軟に対応したいと考えています）、2010年7月31日までに、ご自身の仕事・研究状況における、学習者および教師の自律に関する考えを500語以上の英文エッセ
イにしてリッチテキスト形式のMS Wordファ
イルにてアンディー・バーフィールド、アリソ
ン・スチュワート、もしくは入江恵宛てにお送りください。
奨励助成金に興味のある方は、是非申込みをご検討頂き、2010年7月31日までに申込みをいただけることを楽しみにしています。
よろしくお願いいたします。
アンディー・バーフィールドbarfield.andy AT MARK gmail.com
入江恵
kayirie AT MARK mac.com
アリソン・スチュワート
stewart_al AT MARK hotmail.com

!

!

!

!

!

53

Learning Learning 17 (1) Spring 2010
LD SIG MATTERS
JALT Learner Development SIG 2009
Annual General Meeting,Granship, Shizuoka, Japan.

II. LD Communication List Issues
LD SIG list members have not been not been
receiving messages consistently and some messages
have been abbreviated. Hugh will work on setting up
a new network system with a new email address.

2009年度JALT年次大会期間中、１１月２１日に部会コーディネータであるヒュー・ニコル司会のもと20名のメンバーが参加し、学習者
ディベロプメント 研究部会の年次総会が行われた。この会議では、2009-2010年の役員、予算、イベント、出版、メールリスト、SIG
ホームページにおける広告などについて話し合われた。

III. Budget
Treasurer, Hiromi Furusawa, was unable to attend themeeting. Hugh reported the LD SIG to be 300,000
yen in the black. Hugh and others suggested thatmoney be spent for events rather than publications as
there is a possibility to obtain funding for
publications from other sources.

JALT 学習者ディベロプメント 研究部会2009
年次総会
於：グランドシップ静岡

The Learner Development SIG Annual General
Meeting was held Saturday, November 21 from
5:45pm until 6:45pm during the 2009 JALTInternational Conference on Language Learning
and Teaching at Granship Conference Center,Shizuoka City, Shizuoka–ku, Japan.
Hugh Nicoll, LD SIG Coordinator, chaired themeeting. Approximately 20 members were present.
Agenda:Officer Roles for 2009-2010
BudgetEvents/ LD Cooperation with other groups
Publications
LD communication list Issues
Advertising on ld.org site
I. Advertising on ld.org site
Allowing Lexica advertising on ld.org site could
bring LD SIG 30,000 yen per year. Andy Barfieldquestioned whether LD SIG needs the money, andwhether any sort of dependent relationship with afor-profit organization is advisable. The groupagreed to discuss the matter further on–line.

IV. Cooperation with Other Groups
LD SIG is exploring the possibility of collaboration
with other groups to hold the following events:
Kanda University will hold a 1-day miniconference on advising and self-access in October,
2010, and has invited LD SIG to be a sponsor. Amongthe possibilities are for LD to sponsor a speaker or
pay for a reception or dinner. [Note from editors: Thisconference has been postponed until 2011 due tounavailability of key speakers].
CUE will not have a mini conference in 2010,
but wants to cooperate with LD and other groups tohold an event in 2011 on the theme of Motivation.
Nakasendo Mini-conference will be held inlate June 2010 in Tokyo or Saitama.The theme is
Reflective Learning: Reflective Teaching.
LD SIG will collaborate with the Frameworkand Language Portfolio SIG to make a joint
contribution at Nakasendo. (See the Looking Ahead
section of this issue for details).
Hugh suggested that a group site be added to the LD
Communications list and a collaborative workspace
be added so that members can discuss these events
further. Ellen Head has been talking with thesegroups, and it is hoped that she will continue to be theliaison for these efforts.

!

!

!

!

!

54

LD SIG Matters
V. Publications
Work is progressing on LD SIG’s third anthologyof learner autonomy papers, Realizing Autonomy.
The book will be out in 2010. Alison Stewart and
Kay Irie are investigating potential funding
sources. [Update: The book will be published by
Palgrave Macmillan in 2011].
VI. Officer Roles
Membership – Jodie Sakaguchi is stepping down.
[Thanks Jodie, for all your hard work!] Michele
Ruhl, who has been shadowing Jodie, will takeover as Membership Chair.
Treasurer - Hiromi Furusawa will continue as
Treasurer.
Programs - Martha Robertson will continue as
Program Co-chair, with Ellen Head’s assistance.
(Ellen will concentrate on LL Editorship.)Publications Chair: Alison Stewart and Kay Irie
will continue as Publication Chairs
Coordinator – Hugh Nicoll will stay on as LD
SIG Coordinator, with Martha Robertson andEllen Head assisting.
Local Get-together Coordinator - Stacey Vye is
stepping down. She will stay on to train the new
person.
International Liaison - Andy Barfield willcontinue as International Liaison.
VII. LL Editorial TeamJim Ronald and Ellen Head are heading theeditorial team. There is a need for a layout person(shadowing role) and a bilingual person in a key

position. Masako Miyahara suggested that, ideally,
three bilingual persons are needed for the editing
team, along with the two chief editors.
Jim would like to step down, so there is a call fora Co-editor.
Alison Stewart will work with Masako Miyahara
to get a team organized to produce the newsletter.
Alison suggested that editors should rotate, threeissues being the term of service.
VIII. International Speakers
Andy Barfield advised LD Sig to avoid sponsoring
the same international speakers. He is concernedthat this practice will lead to a small “in-group” ofspeakers being recycled around the world. Freshperspectives are needed, Asian perspectives inparticular. Andy recommended Angel Lin, City ofHong Kong University professor and editor of
Identities and Agencies; Decolonization/
Globalization, as a potential invited speaker for LL
events.
IX. Miscellaneous
LD SIG Constitution
Hugh was informed that the LD Constitution needs
to be updated to be in compliance with NPO
regulations. Stacey Vye said the Constitution was
updated and submitted in 2005. She will resurrect
the copy and send to Hugh.

!

!

!

!

!

55

LD SIG Matters

LD SIG財務報告 2009年9月 - 2010年1月 LD SIG Financial Report Sep 2009 - Jan 2010
Sep 2009
Oct 2009
Nov 2009
Dec 2009
Jan 2010
2009年9月 2009年10月 2009年11月 2009年12月 2010年1月
Balance in bank account $%口座のÕ
372083372086372089381092375045&
100000100000100000100000100000

0

0

0

500

0

Balance carried forward !"472083472086472089481592475045

Total revenue liabilities収入負債の総額

0

0

0

0

0

Total revenue 総収入

3

3

9503

2303

3

Total expenses 総支出

0

0

0

8850

0

Total expense liabilities '()*+

0

0

0

0

0

End balance !"472086472089481592475045475048

Balance in bank account $%口座のÕ

372086372089381092375045375048&Reserve liabilities本部預け金

100000100000100000100000100000Cash on hand現金

0

0

500

0

0

LD SIG balance 残高

472086472089481592475045475048Reserve liabilities 本部預け金
Cash on hand 現金

Major expenses ,F()È
Sep 2009 to Jan-2010
Shipping LD materials for JALT2009È.È
JALT2009ç/0ALD12342
Major revenue ,F5@Sep 2009 to
Jan 2010
Publication sales by SIG -SIGADW6
7

8550

9500

2000

8 We sold five copies of AYA and four copies of MAYA at JALT 2009.
8 We also sold a copy of AYA and MAYA at JALT2009, but the buyer has not paid yet (2500yen).
8 JALT 20093>9:9E;9:9+šS<S=z>‘z67=t=5Z
8 t5HJALT 20093>9:9E;9:9+šS<S?z67=t=5rH«@0ABLX‡CDEFF
GHZ

!

!

!

!

!

56

LD SIG Matters
Active balance Feb 20th, 2010- I¨Õ&2010\1J31Í-375,048
I¨Õ&2010\1J31ÍPLANNED EXPENSES March to August 2010- 2010\2J- 8JKL()
Table Rental for JALT2009 -ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈJALT2009XA
16,500ˆ‰MñNO2Shipping LD materials to Nakasendo2010 -ÈNakasendo2010ç/0ALD
6,000
12A342
Co-sponsoring the October Mini conference-10J¯PjnôQïni†c
40,0003•M)RCo-sponsoring the Nakasendo conference- NakasendojnôQïni
30,000†c3•M)R
Grant for 2 SIG members to attend JALT national conference
80,000SIGç¤ST0AJALT\•açUV)W•
PLANNED EXPENSES TOTAL- KL()XY -172,500
PROJECTED REVENUE March to August 2010 -2010\2J-8JKL5@Publication salesDW67
Membership(April-Dec 2009) 113 members
12J)

10,000SIGç)È113Z1(2009\4[\]E,500

PROJECTED REVENUE TOTAL- KL5@XY + 185,500

Projected active balance August 31st 2010-2010\8J31ÍKLÕ&388,048

LD Reserve liabilities (held by JALT National) August 31st2010 2010\8J31ÍLD*+^_@!JALT[`/

100,000

Hiromi Furusawa ab-cd
LD SIG treasurer-LDSIGef

!

!

!

!

!

57

LD SIG Matters

Contributing to Learning Learning
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 ineither English and/or Japanese. We welcome writing in different formats and different lengths
about different issues connected with learner and teacher development, such as:•articles (about 2,500 to 4,000 words)•reports (about 500 to 1,000 words)•learner histories (about 500 to 1,000 words)•stories of autonomy (about 500 to 1,000 words)•book reviews (about 500 to 1,000 words)•letters to the SIG (about 500 words)•personal profiles (100 words more or less)•critical reflections (100 words more or less)•research interests (100 words more or less)•photographs•poems… and much more…

We would like to encourage new writing and new writers and are also very happy to work withyou in developing your writing. We would be delighted to hear from you about your ideas,
reflections, experiences, and interests to do with learner development, learner autonomy andteacher autonomy.
We hope to publish the next issue of Learning Learning in October, 2010. Ideally, we would
like to hear from you well before September 1st, 2010 – in reality, the door is always open, so
feel free to contact somebody in the editorial team when you are ready:Alison Stewart
Ellen Head
Patrick KiernanJames Ronald
Kay Irie
Masuko Miyahara
Kayo Ozawa

stewart_al AT MARK hotmail.com
ellenkobe AT MARK yahoo.com
kiernan AT MARK meiji.ac.jp
jamesmartinronald AT MARK yahoo.co.jp
kayirie AT MARK mac.com
masukom AT MARK aol.com
kayo AT MARK ta2.so-net.ne.jp

Learning Learning is the newsletter of the JALT Learner Development SIG. We aim to publish
twice a year in April and October. All pieces are copyright of their respective authors.
Permission to re-print writing from Learning Learning should be sought directly from theauthor(s) concerned.

!

!

!

!

!

58

LD SIG Matters

uuuuuuu//#「学習の学習」原稿募集「学習の学習」は会員に興味あるつながりを構築する空間です。次号「学習の学習」への和文（もしくは英文、及び二言語での）投稿を募集しています。形式や長さを問わず、学習者及び教員の発達に関連した以下のようなさまざま文章を歓迎しています：
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

論文 (約4000字−10000字)
報告書 (約2000字−4000字)
学習者のヒストリー (約2000字−4000字)
自律性に関する体験談 (約2000字−4000字)
書評 (約2000字−4000字)
SIGへの手紙 (約2000字)
個人プロフィール (約400字)
クリティカル・リフレクション (約400字)
研究興味 (約400字)
写真
詩
その他

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、そして学習者の発達、学習者の自律性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。
次号「学習の学習」は2010年10月に出版の予定です。ご興味のある方は、最終入稿日2010年
9月1日よりずっと前に余裕をもってご連絡いただければ幸いです。受け付けは常にいたしておりますので、アイディアがまとまり次第、遠慮なくいずれかの編集委員にご連絡ください。
@AB;2CD1ž(E9:;2<=>IEA=JPK@L;
jO( C2iL4>›¬/®¯/°±‹
ú!#"#

ÐÑÎ$Ë%Ñ&ËÍ#×Ø#È×'(#)ÉÑ*Ë+ÍP,É*ÎÍÍÎ-.ÉÌÎ#×Ø#È×'(#/Ë)ÉÉP,É*.+Î%-Ë-#×Ø#È×'(#*Î+0+P,ÉP010Ë*ÎÐ*Ë%Ñ+-%É-ËÍ2#×Ø#È×'(#/Ë)ÉÉP,ÉP01.Ë/+%+Î#×Ø#È×'(#*Ë,P,É*P*ËÐ3.É*#×Ø#È×'(#ËÉÍP,É*.Ë/É#×Ø#È×'(#ÑËÜPÐÉÃ-ÎÑP-ÎP01「学習の学習」はJALT学習者ディベロプメントSIGの会報です。年2回4月と10月に出版予定です。全ての原稿の版権はそれぞれの執筆者にあります。「学習の学習」の文章を他の出版物に使う場合は直接その執筆者の許可をもらってください。

!

!

!

!

!

59