Learner Development SIG
Team Reports for the Annual General Meeting
Instructions
1. Use the links in the Table of Contents to locate you team.
2. Click on your team’s link.
In Editing or Suggesting mode, you’ll need to click on the #link that appears in the pop‑up.
3. Enter information for each of the items.
If you’d like to see the style and content of last year’s report, it can be accessed here.

Table of Contents
1. Co‑coordinators
2. Treasury Team
3. Membership Team
4. Programmes Team
5. Publicity Team6. Learning Learning
7. Learner Development Journal Steering Group
8. Web Team
9. Grants Team
10. Tokyo Get‑Together
11. Hiroshima Get‑Together
12. Kansai Get‑Together
13. Committee Members at large

1. Co‑coordinators(Submitted by Mathew Porter & Mayumi Abe)
Write a summary of all of the team reports for submission to the SIG Representative Liaison. These
reports are all submitted into the record at the LD SIG’s Annual General Meeting, which is held during
the JALT international conference.
1. Achievements:
The Learner Development SIG continued to fulfill its obligations to its members by providing
forums, both in print and in person, to discuss, research, and share various facets of learnerdevelopment. Our role as coordinators has been to support the teams that are responsible
for the different areas of the SIG, communicate with members, and represent the SIG and its
members at JALT national executive meetings. We would like to highlight some of the SIG’smajor achievements from November 2016 to November 2017:●

As of October 2017, the SIG has 223 members, an increase of seven since the last AGM at
JALT2016. The Membership Team continues to improve the process for contacting new,renewing, and lapsed members, as well as revising the contents of emails. In addition, the SIG
welcomed a new Publicity Chair, Nicole Gallagher, in February 2017, who began sending abi‑monthly news update directly to members. The Grants Team helped to award grants tomembers for three conferences and one research project, totaling 155,000 yen.

●

In July 2017, we received an annual grant from JALT National totalling 219,276 yen, and an
additional 52,338 from PanSIG shared revenue in August. This, along with the creation of aconservative budget in 2016 by the Treasurer, has left the SIG with approximately 300,000
yen in its account in addition to the 200,000 yen safety net the SIG is required to maintain by
JALT.

●

The SIG has continued to provide opportunities for members to meet in person to share anddiscuss learner development. The Program Team organized forums at JALT2017, PanSIG, and
JALTCALL, featuring 25 speakers. The Tokyo Get‑Together Team held six Get Togethers since
the previous AGM at JALT2016, typically with 11 participants, and encouraged collaborative
groups to form and discuss over several get‑togethers and start a shared project, withmeeting notes kept in a public Google Doc. The Kansai Get Together successfully held theirsecond Kansai to the World Student Conference in June. Through the use of a new mailingsystem, they have been able to welcome new participants to each of their monthly meetings.

In addition, the SIG co‑sponsored an event with FLP SIG and Nagoya JALT in March.
●

The SIG continues to provide supportive forums for publishing on Learner Development.
Learning Learning, under the direction of Arnold Arao since October 2016, published two
regular issues and one special issue, which featured 9 short reflective articles with reader
responses from the JALT2016 Learner Development Forum on Learner Transformation as
Personal Maturation and the 2016 Creating Community: Learning Together 3 informal
afternoon conference. The LL Team has also revised the contributor guidelines and createdan online system for submitting contributions. The Learner Development Steering Group
coordinated with the editors of LDJ vol1, Darren Elliott and Hugh Nicoll, to prepare for its
official release ahead of the AGM. The Group also established editorial teams and timelines
for volumes 2 & 3 of the LDJ, expanded Review Network to 11, and clarified review
guidelines. Finally, the online home of the LDJ is being constructed and managed by Darren
Elliott, who has agreed to take on the role of webmaster.

2. Unresolved Challenges: (Agenda)
a. Confirm 2017‑2018 committee members.
i.
Needed: coordinators, co‑treasurer, LL Grant Awardees Essays Coordinator,
Kansai GT co‑organizer
b. Use of existing fundsi.
75,000 one‑time grant to Hugh Nicoll for 25 years of uncollected web‑related
fees.
ii.
70,000 yen to sponsor member Chika Hayashi as a plenary speaker at
ILA2018 in Kobe.
c. Hosting for LD SIG and LD Journal websitesi.
Committee position email accounts
d. Restructuring of LD grants
e. 2019/2020 mini‑conference with JACET/CUE on Exploratory Practice/Inclusive
Practitioner Researchf. Attracting more participants to forums
g. Themes for LDJ vols 4 & 5
h. Managing LD Get‑Togethers

3. Recommendations:

4. Items for the 2017‑2018 budget:

5. Goals for 2017‑2018:

6. Team members/roles for 2017‑2018
Koki Tomita (Tokyo) and Yoshi Nakai (Kansai)

2. Treasury Team
(submitted by Huw Davies)
1. Achievements: We are in the black. Also we received over 1,000/member from JALT this year,
and I think it’s safe to budget for this amount of income next year.
2. Unresolved Challenges: (Agenda) We have approximately 300,000 to spend. What is the mosteffective way to spend it that will benefit our community?
3. Recommendations: Not to keep large sums of money sitting in the bank. We can and should
use it.
4. Items for the 2017‑2018 budget: Please ask the attendees at the conference about any
expected expenses or revenues. Any books to be printed? Should we give any money out as
PR, like to PanSIG?
5. Goals for 2017‑2018: Have a representative at the big JALT conference ‑ sorry I can’t make itthis year.
6. Team members/roles for 2017‑2018: Please find someone to help me!!! I’m finding it toughto keep on top of this (so many other things going on) and our monthly report hasn’t been ontime or complete for a long time. Otherwise, Huw to soldier on.

Proposed 2017­2018 Budget (Mathew will input expenses as team reports are completed, also
it would help if anyone can think of any revenues that may change from this year)
Item

Description

Proposed

Allocated(2016­2017)

Tokyo GT room fees

20000

25,000Kansai GT room fees

20000

15,00015000

20,000Web (LDJ)

hosting/domain reg

Grant Fund

A single fund with a 195,000
single date for all
grant­funded
opportunities

195,000

AdminConference postage,
printing, etc.

10,00010,000Misc

Misc (it’s useful tokeep this in there)

10,00020,000One­time Grant

Hugh Nicoll

75,0000

ILA2018 Sponsorship

Chika Hayashi

70,0000

Total

415,000

257,000

3. Membership Team
(submitted by Ann Flanagan)
1. Achievements:∙○ Membership increased slightly (223) compared to October 2016 (216).
○ Compared to last year, updating and sending out letters went smoothly.
○ The membership update procedures were updated to make transitions smoothly.
○ Designed an online questionnaire for those members that let their membershiplapsed but haven’t received any responses.
2. Unresolved Challenges: (Agenda) ∙○ Need to try to get the letters sent out earlier in the month.
○ Have not been able to access the SIG’s Membership List for a while since JALT
changed it over to a new Membership Database. Hopefully it will be resolved by
November.
○ The Membership Due Dates have changed from the end of the year to it seems whenthe member joins. Wondering if we need to change the system of 1 month and 2
month letters.
3. Recommendations:○ Bring a friend to any of the LD SIG events. Maybe that will increase our membershipmore.
4. Items for the 2017‑2018 budget: None
5. Goals for 2017‑2018:○ Want to send out a questionnaire to the LD SIG members to see how we can improve
our SIG and make it stronger.
○ Try to increase the number of members who attend the Kansai Get Together Group.
○ Revise Welcome, 2 month renewal and 1 month renewal letters.
○ Continue regular mail‑outs, list updates, and personal communication whennecessary.
○ Set a goal of how many members we would like to have join our SIG by a certain
date.
○ Promote the LD SIG at different events.

6. Team members/roles for 2017‑201
Ann Flanagan (Chair) Barrie Mattie (LD SIG Membership Team)

4. Programmes Team
(submitted by Blair Barr)
1. Achievements:○ We managed to line up a small but great group of presenters for the PanSIG and
JALTCALL despite a late start to promoting these events.
○ We have 16 presenters lined up for the forum at JALT2017 in Tsukuba
2. Unresolved Challenges: (Agenda)○ Although we had a good group of presenters for the two smaller conferences at
PanSIG and JALTCALL, we did not have many attendees at these forums. This resulted
in a quick adaptation of the presentation plans so as to not have presenters standingby posters alone for extended periods. It would be nice if we could find a way to
attract more participants to these forums.
3. Recommendations:○ The programmes team should always be thinking ahead to the next calendar year
when JALT International approaches.
○ PanSIG takes place relatively early in the calendar year, so we should be getting
members thinking of their potential opportunities to present well in advance. In
2018, PanSIG will be in Tokyo (Toyo University), JALTCALL will be in Nagoya, and
JALT2018 will be in Shizuoka. It would be great if we could attract more presenterswith the more central locations in 2018.
○ It is not clear to us if these events are being promoted verbally at Hiroshima andKansai get‑togethers, so we would like to have a clearer communication line between
the programs team and those get‑together groups.
4. Items for the 2017‑2018 budget:○ A box of stationery for the programs team would be helpful○ Printing forum flyer to share with others while we are at conferences. (Perhaps one
way to attract more attendees)
5. Goals for 2017‑2018:○ Better promotion for all the events at an earlier stage, using Facebook and the LD
News mailing list more to inform members not only of submission deadlines, but also
the events themselves. We resolved access to the Facebook and LD News mailing list
relatively late last year, and this may have been a factor in the small turn outs for
PanSIG and JALTCALL.
6. Team members/roles for 2017‑2018○ Blair Barr (program chair for 2018), with Rob Morel, and, until PanSIG, Daniel Hooper

5. Publicity Team
(submitted by Nicole Gallagher)●

Achievements:

●

●
●
●
●
●

From April 2017, we created a monthly/bi‑monthly LD SIG News & Events email
through collaboration with various SIG committee members. This mailing includes
information about SIG news and events and reaches all SIG members through thelistserve.
Unresolved Challenges: (Agenda) I have not been able to set up a regular schedule to ensurethat the email is sent out at the beginning of every month.
Recommendations: Set up a schedule to compile the information a week before the end of
the preceding month.
Items for the 2017‑2018 budget: None
Goals for 2017‑2018: send out an LD SIG News & Events email every month.
Team members/roles for 2017‑2018○ Nicole Gallagher (organizes the monthly LD SIG News & Events email)6. Learning Learning(Arnold Arao, Andy Barfield, Chika Hayashi, Hugh Nicoll, Daniel Hougham, Tokiko Hori, Yoshio Nakai,
Koki Tomita)
1. Achievements:
a. Published three issues in 2017 (including a summer special issue, with reader responses to shortreflective articles: This involved a large number of new members of the SIG from 2016, as well as 3
new members (Dominic Edsall, Trevor Rachiura, Sean Toland) working as co‑editors;
b. Expanded the editorial team with Tokiko Hori, Daniel Hougham, Yoshio Nakai, and Koki Tomita
joining;c. Discussed and agreed new guidelines for contributors about formats and lengths of writing
suitable for Learning Learning (see below). The intention is to make writing for Learning Learningtransparently accessible to LD SIG members as we want as many SIG members as possible tocontribute to LL. The formats and lengths are now explicitly different from the longer research
papers that The Learner Development Journal (LDJ) focuses on. The LL formats and lengths also
provide clearer possibilities for exploratory, reflective, and dialogic, texts, grouped as genres
under these headings:● Short articles on issues to do with learner/teacher development and autonomy /学習者と教師の成長・自律に関する小論● Reflective writing about learning for learner/teacher development and autonomy /学習に関する省察 ー 学習者と教師の成長・自律を目指して● Members’ voices / メンバーの声● Research & reviews / 研究 & レビュー
● Free space / フリー・スペース

See here for more details, with the new Online Contribution Form developed by Daniel Hougham.
e. Received quite a lot of submissions this year, involving a large number of different writers foreach issue:
Learning Learning 24(1): 26 writers
Learning Learning 24(2): 32 writers
Learning Learning 24(3): 23 writers(24 articles published YTD with 12+ articles in the winter issue; compared to 20 total articles in2016 and 18 in 2015 ‑ “article” refers here to a variety of different writing, including shortreflective articles, reader responses, grant awardee essays, book reviews, conference reports
and reflections, members' voices, SIG news updates, get‑together reports, among other things);
Our thanks go to everyone who has written for Learning Learning in the last year.
f. waiting on traffic data (access to articles) from Hugh but that looks to have risen as well.
2. Unresolved Challenges: (Agenda)
a. Have had a lot of contributions from different members of the LD SIG, but one challenge isbringing in new people to the editorial team who stay longer than a specific special issue. With
the increase in the number of writers contributing to LL it would be nice to secure morevolunteers who can commit to a longer time frame (understandable this is difficult withschedules and workloads but it is on our wish list)b. With the great work that Nicole has been doing with the email publicity announcements, and theupcoming launch of the Learner Development Journal, as well as the development in the SIG
regarding communication and publications (hats off to the Publication Team) it might be good todetermine the roles each publication should play within the wider communications strategy. For
our part, the LL editorial team will continue to look at keeping Learning Learning distinct frompublicity announcements and the LDJ.
c. Related to 2.a, we will need to find a replacement for Yoko Sakurai who stepped down as Grant
Awardees Essays Coordinator. A big thank you to Yoko Sakurai for coordinating SIG grantawardee essays the last two years. Arnold Arao will be taking on her responsibilities temporarily
until new people can step up to fill this role.
d. The editorial team is still developing its ways of working together, i.e., different team members
need to log consistently what they do in a shared Google doc, upload files to shared folders in
Box in a timely manner, and have an agreed schedule for the finalisation of each issue of Learning
Learning. These actions might help to improve the way that we work collaboratively as an
editorial team.
e. There has also been some discussion of email accounts for specific teams on the LD committee,
and whether any ld team email account belongs to/should belong to an individual or is/ should
be shared/co‑owned among the respective team. Some wider discussion of this seems warranted
at the present time.
3. Recommendations:
1. Nicole is doing a fabulous job with the LD Newsletter. So much so that there is overlap insome of the information we publish (LD Connect, LD events etc.). Both Nicole’s publicity
announcements and LL and source local and area information for events, it may be better tokeep events info to the publicity announcements and maintain LL as a forum for publications
with spotlights on JALT sponsored conferences (i.e., PanSIG, JALT CALL, JALT INTL) as well as
associated conferences such as JASAL, ILA20018, AILA World Congress as they are specificallyrelated to learner development and autonomy, and IAFOR(?).
2. Developing concrete roles and responsibilities so that volunteers can easily ”fit” into tasks
rather than having people “help out with ” . In this way, perhaps we can keep volunteers
longer.

～4. Items for the 2017‑2018 budget: N/A
5. Goals for 2017‑2018:a. 2018 Special Issue focussing on Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) (TBD)
b. Related to 5a, Arnold spoke with Christina Gkonou about submitting a short piece basedon her recent work with Sarah Mercer about the importance of SEL skills for English
Language Learning teachers; she will be presenting at JALT2017.
C. 2018 marks volume #25 so it would nice to aim for a “Special” Special Issue. Possibilities
include (a) inviting past editors and contributors (?) to write and reflect on theirexperiences with LD and LL and their observations on education, (b) reprinting different
writings from LL over the previous 25 years, (c) other ideas that emerge from discussions
about how to celebrate LL’s 25th year.
6. Team members/roles for 2017‑2018 (see note 2.c Unresolved Challenges above but in themeantime the following can be used as a reference):
Editor, Layout & Design, and LD Grants Essay Coordinator(temp): Arnold Arao
Members’ Voices and Editor: Andy Barfield
Japanese Translation Coordinator and Editor: Chika Hayashi
Japanese Translators / Editors / Reviewers: Tokiko Hori, Koki Tomita, Yoshio Nakai
Digital Content and Editor / Reviewer: Daniel Hougham

Learning Learning Webmaster: Hugh Nicoll

7. Learner Development Journal Steering Group
Submitted by Andy Barfield, Alison Stewart, and Tim Ashwell
1. Achievements●●

We’ve tried to keep contact with Darren and Hugh through the year and had discussions withthem by email and Skype about different questions to do with the production of the firstissue of the Learner Development Journal (LDJ). The first issue includes six papers, an intro byDarren and Hugh, and a concluding commentary by Alice Chik. Malcolm Swanson is doing thelayout for the LDJ, and Darren has agreed to be the webmaster for the LDJ website. A big
thank you to Darren and Hugh, the authors, and Malcolm, for all their work on the first issue.
We have also kept in contact with Masuko, Patrick, and Chika as Issue 2 has been coming
together. There are seven papers for Issue 2, with a contribution by Ann Burns (Aston
University, England, and University of New South Wales, Australia) to come. The editors are
expecting to see the first full drafts around now. A warm thank you to Chika, Masuko, andPatrick (and authors) for their ongoing work on the second issue.

●

For Issue 3, Jim Ronald, Yoshio Nakai and Christina Gkonou have formed an editorial teamwith a thematic focus on Identities and Transitions. They are now preparing a Call for Papers
for the third issue. A big thank you to Christina, Jim, and Yoshio as they work on Issue 3
together.
Issue 1 Visualizing Learner Development
Editors: Darren Elliott & Hugh Nicoll
Publication date: November 2017
Issue 2 Qualitative Research into Learner Development
Editors: Chika Hayashi, Masuko Miyahara, & Patrick Kiernan
Publication date: October 2018
Issue 3 Learner Identities and Transitions
Editors: Christina Gkonou, Jim Ronald, & Yoshio Nakai
Publication date: October 2019●

Working with three editorial teams at different stages in the process of each issue has helped
us become clearer about the general timeline for producing an issue of the LDJ:

Year

PeriodStage

Who / Role

Collaborative Process

YEAR 1

July‑SeptONE

Co‑editors

Draft and develop a Call for
Proposals/ Contributions / CfP/CYEAR 2Oct‑Jan

TWO

Potential contributors

CfP/C sent out to various lists(co‑editors may respond toinquiries and give feedback on
draft proposals)

YEAR 2February

THREE

Co‑editors

Review of proposals and selection

YEAR 2

March ‑ April

FOUR

Contributor tocontributor / Editors
to contributors

Research development: Puzzles,
questions, outlines, plans, ideas

YEAR 2

July ‑ Sept

FIVE

Contributor tocontributor

Peer sharing and feedback oncomplete first drafts

YEAR 2Oct ‑ Nov

SIX

Review Network tocontributors

Reviewer feedback (with possible
assistance from eds)

YEAR 2‑
YEAR 3

Dec‑Feb

SEVEN

Editors tocontributors

Editor feedback; re‑drafting (withpossible assistance from
reviewers; could involve multiple
drafts)YEAR 3

March

EIGHT

Contributors to eds.

Final draft

YEAR 3

April‑JulyNINE(a) Editors & Review
Network

Proofreading; abstracts in English
and Japanese; key words; bios(b) Editors

Writing introduction piece(c) Guest expert(s)Writing closing commentary[(d) Book reviewers

Writing relevant reviews]

YEAR 3

July‑Sept

TEN

Design and layout

Finalisation for publication

YEAR 3October

ELEVEN

Website team

Publication

YEAR 3Post‑
publication

TWELVE

Feedback fromparties involved

Review●

We also confirmed Guidelines (see below) for the Review Network (RN) for Issue 2 of thejournal and expanded RN membership to 11 (Paul Beaufait, Steve Brown, Paul Collett, Ann
Mayeda, Fumiko Murase, Jo Mynard, Diane Nagatomo, Ted O’Neill, Colin Rundle, Akiko
Takagi, and Katherine Thornton, with Chika Hayashi stepping back from the RN for Issue 2).

Review Network Guidelines
1. Interest Does the paper catch the reader's interest? Why (not)?
2. Audience Does the paper address peers (teacher‑researchers and researchers)interested in learner development issues?
3. Context In what ways does the paper create a clear picture of particular learners or
particular groups of learners with reference to the learner development issue(s) that the
paper focuses on?
4. Voice Does the paper communicate to the reader a clear authorial voice, as well as
include other voices (e.g., learners, colleagues, cited work) about the issue(s) explored in
the paper?
5. Problematising stance In what ways does the paper raise interesting and relevant
questions about the issue(s) it focuses on, without being descriptive and distant?
6. Specific and clear focus Does the paper develop a specific focus of inquiry, addressand explore this with clarity throughout?
7. Reflective sense of learning In what ways does the paper construct and reflect on aprocess of learning by the author and the participants involved in the research about theissue(s) that is/are focused on?
8. Multi‑perspectives In what ways does the paper attempt to examine the question(s)/puzzle(s) /issue(s) that it focuses on from alternative perspectives, rather than from (asingle) conventional viewpoint(s)?

9. Knots Does the paper avoid easy answers and try to unravel knots that the writer
encounters in the practice, theory, and inquiry? How?
10. Criticality By the end, has the paper drawn out key issues, re‑framed these, andraised new questions for the reader to take away and consider?
●

●

●

●

Over the summer, we conducted e‑mail interviews with the editors of Issues 1, 2, and 3, andthe resulting articles are due to be published in Learning Learning shortly. We hope theseinterviews will familiarise LD SIG members better with the LDJ and encourage them to takepart in the future as authors and editors.
We also had an extended discussion among ourselves with all three editorial teams about
which languages the LDJ should feature for abstracts and keywords (‑> English and Japaneseas the default, another language if writers prefer), and which languages the website shouldfeature (‑> English).
More recently we have been trying to work through questions to do with finalising Issue 1,
deciding the web location for the journal, compiling texts about the journal for the website,
and understanding how to get an ISSN for the journal.
Take‑away: Three editorial teams, an expanded Review Network, and the widening
involvement of SIG members as contributors and of authors internationally. We are looking
forward to the (official? unofficial?) launch of Issue 1 ahead of JALT2017. Quite when exactly,
though, we don’t know. See Unresolved Challenges (Agenda).

2. Unresolved Challenges: (Agenda): Two unresolved challenges are:(a) Deciding the journal website and webmastering ‑ this has been a long ongoing discussion
since February this year, with changes along the way in the webmaster, the location of thewebsite, and unresolved questions about host servicing conditions. We are still not fully clear
about these at the time of writing in mid‑October. It should be easier for future issues (!), but
our best recommendation as of October 14th is to launch the LDJ on a platform under
Darren’s direct control so that the launch is possible ahead of JALT2017, and then decidelater whether to stay with this arrangement, or migrate the journal to the JALT server.
Migrating the whole LD website ahead of JALT2017 to the JALT server is simply not practical,
in our humble opinion, if the LDJ is to be launched in time.
(b) ISSN for the LDJ! Without a final decision about (a), we cannot apply for an ISSN via the JALT
Central Office for the LDJ. As of October 14th, time is getting very tight for this ahead of
JALT2017.
3. Recommendations:(a) The JSG should check in with each editorial team every 2‑3 months or so, allowing forvariations in people’s schedules and busyness.
(b) Editors should keep private the names of contributing authors and not share them with theJSG.

(c) The JSG could develop an ongoing discussion with editorial terms and RN members about the
Review Network guidelines and what these may entail for comments to, and interactions
with, writers about developing their writing.
(d) Launch the journal website without having to migrate the whole LD website first.
(e) LDJ website management should be done by at least two people, so that shadowing andshared learning are built in from the beginning.
(f) The JSG should continue working with the LDJ web team closely.
(g) The JSG should continue to report to the wider SIG committee every few months.
4. Items for the 2017‑2018 budget: 15,000 yen Some money will be needed for LDJ website costs.
At the time of writing (10/14) the host platform and server have not been decided, so the exact cost
is not clear.
5. Goals for 2017‑2018: We discussed possible themes and ideas for Issue 4 and 5 of the Journal andcame up with rough drafts of CfPs for the following:(a) Issue 4: Whose Autonomy? Conversations about Learner Development (ILA Japan
Conference‑related)(b) Issue 5: Exploratory Practice? Inclusive Practitioner Research? (AILA ReN: Exploratory Practice/
Inclusive Practitioner Research‑related).
However, upon reflection, we thought that it might be better for these to be ad‑hoc publications
separate from the LDJ that interested individuals or groups could gravitate towards. We thus need todevelop new themes and find new editorial teams for Issues 4 and 5 of the LDJ, and we hope to betalking about this with people at JALT2017 to see what interest there is.
6. Team members/roles for 2017‑2018: Darren will join the Journal Steering Group and Hugh the
Review Network. Alison, Andy and Tim will stay in the JSG for the next year and try to bring one or
two more people on board and help them fully understand the process of what the JSG does. We see
this as an ongoing process so that the membership of the Steering Group develops and rotates on aregular basis and more people can become involved in running the Journal. We also hope to have atleast one new person join Darren in managing the website for the LDJ.

8. Web Team
(submitted by )1. Achievements:(a) I have been keeping the ld‑sig.org web site up‑to‑date over the last year, and assisted
other members of the committee in updating their pages and menu items. I have also
served as a proofreader/editor and the upload coordinator for Learning Learning,and served as administrator for our SIG mailing lists.
2. Unresolved Challenges: (Agenda)(a) Finding a person to replace serve as web administrator for the SIG, ideally a team, is

3.
4.
5.
6.

the biggest challenge for the immediate future. In the meantime, because we will
also need to come to a collective decision re: where and how to host the SIG’s home
page, as well as the new LD‑SIG Journal, I plan on continuing in my role as web
administrator so as to assist members of the new team
Recommendations:
Items for the 2017‑2018 budget:
Goals for 2017‑2018:
Team members/roles for 2017‑2018

9. Grants Team
(submitted by Kristen Sullivan)
1. Achievements:a) The grants were advertised via the SIG homepage (http://ld‑sig.org/grants/), mailing list,
membership letters and the SIG News & Events mailout, and the results were communicatedto SIG members via the mailing list.
b) A list of past recipients, together with links to the articles they contributed to Learning
Learning, was added to the SIG homepage:
http://ld‑sig.org/grants/ld‑sig‑grant‑past‑recipients/c) The following grants were offered/awarded:
PanSIG Conference Grant ‑ 1 x 40,000 yen ‑ 3 applicants ‑ Recipient: Farrah Hasnain
JALT CALL Conference Grant ‑ 1 x 40,000 yen ‑ 2 applicants ‑ Recipient: Daniel Hougham
Research Grant ‑ 1 x 25,000 yen ‑ 1 applicant ‑ Recipient: Arnold Arao
Project Grant ‑ 1 x 20,000 yen ‑ 1 applicant ‑ No recipients
JALT International Conference Grant ‑ 1 x 50,000 yen ‑ 1 applicant ‑ Recipient: Imogen
Custance
So far there have been no inquiries or applications for the Subscription and Membershipgrants.
2. Unresolved Challenges: (Agenda) The issues we faced this year include:a) What we have seen over the last couple of years is that while some grants are applied for bymultiple members, other grants only have one or sometimes zero applications. The trend as
to which grants have more or less applicants changes year by year (for example there were
zero applicants for the PANSIG conference grant in 2016 but three in 2017).
b) How to deal with applications from previous grant recipients: should the fact that an
applicant has received grants in the past, and the timing of the most recently received grant,
be taken into consideration during the review process?
3. Recommendations:a) Instead of offering several specific grants (i.e. PANSIG conference grant x 1, JALT CALL
conference grant x 1, International JALT conference grant x 1, project grants x 2, research
grant x 1) with their own individual budgets (40,000 yen, 40,000 yen, 50,000 yen, 20,000 yen
x 2, 25,000 yen), have one overall grant budget and allow members to make an application

b)

4.
5.
a)
b)

6.

for the grant that they need (i.e. purpose and amount).
i)
The purposes for the grants should still be limited to those currently on offer (JALT
conferences which traditionally have an LD SIG forum‑‑PANSIG, JALT CALL,
International, research, projects).
ii)
A maximum grant amount should be set (i.e. 40,000 (or 50,000?) yen for
conferences, 25,000 yen for research, 20,000 yen for projects); however, applicants
can request a grant for less than this amount.
iii)
Applicants will need to more specifically give the reasoning for the amount that they
are requesting in their applications.
iv)
Applications will still be judged on merit basis based on the criteria outlined on the
SIG website.
v)
There will only be one grant application deadline which will be early on in the year to
be in time for the PANSIG conference.
vi)
It is hoped that this change will make better use of the SIG’s funds by ensuring thatthe grants are better meeting the needs of members.
vii)
It should be noted that this idea was first suggested by Joel Laurier at the 2016 LD SIG
AGM.
No longer offer Subscription or Membership “Grants” (note that these are not actually grants
but membership trials for JALT/non‑JALT members not currently members of the SIG) as
there have been zero applications/inquiries over at least the last two years.
Items for the 2017‑2018 budget: We suggest setting the grant budget at around 195,000
yen, the same as for 2016‑2017.
Goals for 2017‑2018:
Decide what to do concerning Recommendation a) above.
Continue to advertise the grants, not only among current members but among potential
members, as the grants are definitely one way to attract new members. This will require
cooperation with Membership (which is already going smoothly) and other teams.
Team members/roles for 2017‑2018: Jenny Morgan, Kristen Sullivan, Satomi Yoshimuta

10. Tokyo Get‑Together
Submitted by Andy Barfield, Ian Hurrell, and Jenny Morgan, with Ken Ikeda
1. Achievements: The Tokyo get‑togethers aim to provide a flexible, supportive, and convivial
environment for exploring learner development according to people’s particular interests andconcerns. We welcome the participation of teachers from diverse teaching contexts – including
elementary school, junior high school, senior high school, university, distance learning & graduate
studies, and language school settings – and teachers teaching languages other than English.
After holding the Tokyo Get‑togethers at Otsuma Women’s University for 5 years, the get‑togethers
moved to Rikkyo University Ikebukuro campus from April 2017. This year we have tried to focus onbuilding continuity between get‑togethers by encouraging the creation of collaborative groups tomeet and discuss over several get‑togethers and start a shared project. We also tried to follow amore explicit structure for running the April to June get‑togethers and have discussed at length what
scaffolding is appropriate for structuring each get‑together.
To further encourage continuity between get‑togethers, each group created their own Google Doc torecord the content of their discussions and develop together a narrative of their collaboration thatthey might refer to from one get‑together to another. Links to the groups’ Google Docs have been
published in the general write‑up of the get‑together on the LD website so that they can be viewed
publicly (see http://ld‑sig.org/2017‑tokyo‑get‑togethers/).
The number of “repeat attendees” has fluctuated from one get‑together to the next; attendance has
been typically around 11 for most sessions, dropping in June, then coming back up in September(January: 14, February: 11, April: 11, May: 11, June: 4, September: 15). We understand that LD SIG
members have a strong interest in discussing learner development issues, but many are increasingly
busy and find it hard to attend get‑togethers regularly. This has made it difficult to cultivate
collaboration and continuity between get‑togethers, which is the primary purpose of the meetings.
As a result, we decided to put on hold the December Creating Community: Learning Together 4(CCLT4) informal afternoon conference.
2. Unresolved Challenges: (Agenda): How to create better continuity of participation andcollaboration over the year: This is an ongoing challenge, so we are not sure whether it is ever likely
to be resolved! The paradox is that, with fluctuating and variable participation, it is difficult todevelop together research projects over the year. Perhaps a blended approach for the get‑togethers
might help here. We could try combining face‑to‑face get‑togethers in the first few sessions of theyear (say January, February, April, and May) with decentralised small‑group meetings from May to
September, and whole‑group meetings in October and December. This might lead to bettercollaboration over the year. We are currently discussing this and other ideas for the 2018
get‑togethers. We would love to hear from the Hiroshima and Kansai groups how they try to deal
with continuity and collaboration questions.
3. Items for the 2017‑2018 budget: 20,000 JPY We are not sure whether we will be continuing the
get‑togethers at Rikkyo University or returning to Otsuma Women’s University, or using a
combination of both sites. While Rikkyo does not charge for room rental, there are limitations onroom availability in the second half of the year, so it may be necessary to use Otsuma too (which
does charge).
4. Goals for 2017‑2018: Trying to develop a more flexible blended approach for the get‑togethers in2018 (see above). Remain open‑minded about holding CCLT4 or not.
5. Team members/roles for 2017‑2018: Andy, Ian, and Jenny are planning to continue. Ken will
rejoin after his sabbatical (April 2018). We welcome others to the coordination team so that we canshare different ideas, discuss, and learn together.

11. Hiroshima Get‑Together(submitted by)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Achievements:
Unresolved Challenges: (Agenda)
Recommendations:
Items for the 2017‑2018 budget:
Goals for 2017‑2018:
Team members/roles for 2017‑2018

12. Kansai Get‑Together(Submitted by Agnes Patko)
1. Achievements:
After the very successful first Kansai to the World Conference in the Autumn of 2016 the groupdecided to organise the event again. This year it was held in June as the venue had already been
booked by one of the SIG members for another event, which had been cancelled. As result, therooms became available for us. We received positive feedback from both presenters and participantsof the conference.
Apart from this, we have held our meetings every month at a community centre in Kyoto andprovided continuous professional support to each other . Due to our new email communication
system, we managed to inform all members of the SIG in the area about our activities. We have had
new participants almost every month.

2. Unresolved Challenges: (Agenda)
The biggest challenge is to attract people to the get‑togethers. Even though we get new participants,
it is hard to keep them active. Compared to people in the Tokyo area, people in Kansai are less willingto take an hour or longer train ride to attend the get‑togethers.
Discussing current issues related to teaching does not seem to satisfy members. We have beentalking about joint research plans but owing to various factors, such as different teaching contexts
and research interests, and inconsistent participation in meetings, we have not managed to make any
concrete decision yet. Participants have expressed interest in holding mini presentations orworkshops in which they can introduce a classroom activity or report about their most recent
research results.
Organising the student conference was much easier and quicker than last year; however, we feel that
if discussions about that take a considerable time of the get‑together, it may prevent a number ofpeople from attending due to a lack of interest in the event. We also wonder when and how weshould organise the event next year. Although, there is an obvious student interest, we do not wantto concentrate solely on event organisation, yet regular get‑togethers do not seem to trigger active
involvement in the group.

Finally, having talked to the regular participants, I propose that bi‑monthly meetings with a set
theme or agenda would be more successful in terms of participation. We could send out a call forpresentations and/or workshops at the beginning of the year.
3. Recommendations:
4. Items for the 2017‑2018 budget:
20,000 JPN for Kansai to the World Student Conference for room rental and refreshments.

5.
‑
‑
‑
‑

Goals for 2017‑2018:
Attract more people and make them regular participants
Organise Kansai to the World 3
Hold regular presentation/ workshops
Joint research

6. Team members/roles for 2017‑2018
Agnes is going to continue as coordinator and she is looking for someone to join her.

13. Committee Members at large