LOOKING BACK

Looking Back㕔⼔

5th CEGLOC Conference: Autonomous and Interactive Practices in
Language Learning

Megumi Uemi
Toyo University
megumiuemi@gmail.com

Report on a Presentation at the 5th CEGLOC Conference: Exploring the Use of a
Learning Log to Introduce Critical Thinking in Remedial Japanese EFL University
Classrooms
INTRODUCTION

The present paper reports on a pilot study that was presented at the 5th CEGLOC Conference,
Autonomous and Interactive Practices in Language Learning, held by the University of Tsukuba,
CEGLOC Committee, in collaboration with the JALT Learner Development SIG and the JALT Ibaraki
Chapter on Dec 3rd, 2022.
The purpose of this online presentation was to share an idea of a teaching tool that I came todevelop as a result of my challenges in working with Japanese EFL students in remedial education.
It is an original teacher-guided learning log with which students reflect upon and share their ideas
about the class content with classmates through pair work activities. My main goal of creating sucha tool was to introduce students to the practice of critical thinking, which I roughly define here
as the skills to think and express oneself clearly and logically. What I shared in the presentation
was only a pilot study in which I started to test how the tool works with students, so the findings I
presented were limited in terms of their scope. However, I hoped that the students’ feedback that I
gained from the study could offer some insights into how teachers incorporate interactive methods
into EFL classrooms in remedial education and allow students to become autonomous learners andcritical thinkers.

REMEDIAL EDUCATION

To illustrate the background of the study, I first started the presentation by clarifying what it meantby the term “remedial education.” As you may know, it signifies a type of education given to thosestudents who need the “do-over” (yarinaoshi) (Ono cited in Chujo et al., 2012) of secondary or evenprimary education.
One may wonder, so in terms of English as a subject, what is the level that requires university
students to do the “do-over”? The Ministry of Education proposed that in theory, by the time
students finish junior high school, they should at least acquire the English proficiency of Eiken
Level 3. In terms of CEFR, this may be equivalent to the level of A1 or A2. For high school students,
Eiken Level 2 or Pre 2 (B1 to B2 in CEFR) are considered as desirable levels for the learners toattain by the time of their graduation (MEXT, 2002).
However, anyone who’s involved in remedial education knows how difficult it is to actually achieve
such goals in reality. According to a large-scale survey, more than 50% of students enrolled at bothnational and private universities (excluding those students who major in English) could only use

25

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(1)the English language at the level of no higher than Eiken Level 3 or even Eiken Level 4 (Ono citedin Chujo et al., 2012), although the situation might have seen improvements since the time of thesurvey; however, it may still be difficult for remedial-level learners to fully use, without a mistake,even some of the most basic grammar of the English language.
Several years ago, the media ironically reported that 中学英語 (Chugaku Eigo), the basic English
taught at the junior high school level such as the “be verbs” or the “third singular” has been
intensely taught even at university level (Kameyama, 2015). With this said, I shared that some of
my students in basic level classes, in fact, are challenged in telling the difference between the “beverbs” and the regular action verbs. They seem to not know how to use them correctly, let alone
use them appropriately for communication or maybe even spell them right.
With an era of “All-Entry’’ approaching, as we say “全入時代” (Zenyu Jidai) in Japanese, more
applicants to universities will be admitted to higher education without much screening, and quite
naturally, this will intensify what we already see as the decline of university students’ academic
level (Asahina, 2017; Benesse, 2008; Wanatabe, 2008). More teachers may be confronted with
the needs of those students who are not ready to learn adequately at college level. Given thisbackground, the presentation stressed that we, teachers, may need to adjust our language lessons
with the needs of the academically challenged students and that I hoped to do so in light ofhelping the learners get used to the practice of critical thinking.

CRITICAL THINKING

The presentation then touched upon the definition of critical thinking. I used Bloom’s Taxonomy
as the basis of critical thinking. It categorizes the individual’s learning process into six different
stages known as remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate and create (Anderson &Krathwohl, 2001). In the current literature of CT pedagogy, attention has been paid to develop
students’ higher-order thinking skills (Fujisaki, 2022; Rothman, 2017; Clark, 2019; Finn-Maeda,
2015; Nakagawara, 2015). While these pedagogical undertakings are insightful and deservingof our continuous attention, what I argued was that opportunities to enhance the lower aspectsof the thinking skills have relatively been neglected (Case, 2013; Gary & Clark, 2019). Especiallywith EFL students in remedial education, what I observe is that the students struggle with lowerorder thinking skills—skills to even “remember” or “understand” as shown in Bloom’s Taxonomy(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). In the presentation, I paid special attention to what the word
“understand” in Bloom’s Taxonomy signifies. In Bloom’s Taxonomy, understanding requires one
to be able to verbalize ideas and concepts by explaining, summarizing, interpreting, categorizingor paraphrasing (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). One may think these are the basic academic skills
which students must have as the premise to learn how to think critically or learn at college level.
However, with students in remedial education, these basic academic skills are some of the biggest
challenges, and the lack of these hinder the development of higher-order thinking skills (Uemi,
2020; Uemi, 2019; Uemi, 2018; Nakanishi, 2015). One content analysis of EFL students’ papers
written in Japanese show how much, in fact, students find it difficult to express their thoughts in a
logical, coherent form of essay (Uemi, 2018).
Rote learning, as one may know, has been an integral part of Japanese education, and students
are expected to show their “understanding” through memorization of facts and numbers. We canassume that Japanese EFL learners, regardless of their levels, may not have been brought up
with the proper training of verbalization skills (言語化能力: gengoka nouryoku) during the periodof secondary or even primary education (Lasker, 2007; Dunn, 2015; Smith, 2017; Uemi, 2018).
The presentation highlighted such linguistic aspects of lower-order thinking as the underlying
interpretations of CT. My argument was that the strengthening of these lower aspects is an
essential task for learners in remedial education to become competent, autonomous thinkers in a
fuller term.

26

LOOKING BACKMETHODS

In order to strengthen such basics of CT, what I did was to implement a learning log to help
students guide through the process of expressing their ideas and interpretations about theclass content clearly and logically. In exploring the effect of such a teacher-guided learning log,
I conducted a pilot study with 54 basic English level (CEFR A1 or A2 level) students at a juniorcollege in Tokyo. A teacher research approach (Borg cited in Takana et al., 2019) was adopted
using a mixed methods of quantitative and qualitative data collected from students’ questionnaire
responses. The study was done over an eight-week period within a 14-week semester in threedifferent types of English courses (a test preparation course, a communication course, and a writing
course). The classes met twice a week, allowing for 14 treatment sessions.
As part of a midterm feedback, a Google Forms survey was given to the students (a communication
course: N=16, a writing course: N=26, a test preparation course: N=12). The survey was conductedin Japanese, so that students would understand the intent of the questions accurately. At thepresentation, I shared the following the eight questions translated into English:
1. By using a learning log, I feel that it has become easier to remember vocabulary andgrammar points (Remembering).
2. By using a learning log, I understand the meaning of vocabulary or grammar points
better and I can summarize or explain the lesson content to others in my own words(Understanding).
3. By using a learning log, I feel like I can classify or put together vocabulary and grammar
points by myself (Understanding).
4. By engaging in interactive work with classmates or the teacher using a learning log, I cannow express my questions and thoughts better (Understanding).
5. By engaging in interactive work with classmates or the teacher using a learning log, I feellike I have become more active in participation (Active Learning).
6. By engaging in interactive work with classmates or the teacher using a learning log, I havebecome more motivated towards learning English (Motivation).
7. By engaging in interactive work with classmates or the teacher using a learning log, I havebecome more self-driven towards learning English (Learner Autonomy).
8. Please elaborate on your reflections considering how the use of a learning log may havehelped you with the skills of remembering and understanding the lesson content andincreasing your motivation and awareness as autonomous English learners.
The first seven questions asked the students to evaluate the effect of the learning log on a fourpoint scale (1=Strongly disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Agree, 4=Strongly Agree), in relation to how thelog helped with the lower-order thinking skills– “remembering” and “understanding” as definedin Bloom’s Taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001) as well as how the learning log helped raiseawareness as active and autonomous English learners. The last question asked the students tofreely comment on the effects of a learning log. A thematic analysis approach (Braun and Clark,
2006; Tanaka, et al, 2019) was taken to identify patterns in the students’ responses in the freewriting section.

LEARNING LOG IMPLEMENTATION

To demonstrate the implementation of the learning log, I showed one part of the learning log I
used in a writing course, one of the three courses I did this pilot study for, in a power point slide(Figure 1). I explained that the students were handed out this learning log as a worksheet for every
lesson. At the beginning of each lesson, I gave an overview of the lesson content, and while I
did that, the students would write down the lesson number, the lesson title, the date, their name,27

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(1)and their partner’s name in the upper part of the log as shown in Figure 1. I’d ask students to
say hello to their partner and exchange a few words with each other. The students were always
paired up with a partner, usually the same person, but sometimes with a different one dependingon the situational needs. When the students seemed like they wanted to work with someone
new, I’d shuffle them. When someone was absent, some people worked with a different student
or in a group of three. What is consistent, however, was that pair (or group) work was the core of
all the activities using the learning log; students would be asked to work with their classmatesinteractively and share their answers through dialogue quite often, for almost every item of thelearning log.

Figure 1: Powerpoint slide with a Learning Log sample
What is most interactive may be “Today’s Question for You,” which is a warm-up activity that I did
at the beginning of every lesson. I ask students a question that is relevant to the lesson topic, andthey write down their response in their learning log and share it with their partner in dialogue. They
keep a record of their partner’s answers in the log.
For example, in the writing class, one of the lesson topics was titled “Giving Encouragement.” The
textbook unit included an email written by a Japanese student to give her English-speaking friend
encouragement to do well on an upcoming job interview (Matsui and Hinder, 2017). The question I
asked students in this lesson was “Who gives you the best encouragement in your life?” Students
were shown some example answers with key expressions or useful words to write their own
sentences. The following are some example sentences given to the students:
1. My family gives me the best encouragement in my life. They support me with everything I
do. They always help me whenever I am in trouble.
2. I get the best encouragement from my favorite singer. His lyrics make me feel motivated anddo my best to achieve my goals.

28

LOOKING BACK

Students were allowed to create their own sentences based on the example sentences using a
dictionary. Some of the answers I got from the students were:
1. My friends give me the best encouragement in my life. When I am down, they always supportme.
2. I get the best encouragement from my favorite singer. Her songs are really good and always
make me happy.
3. I get the best encouragement from my favorite dancer. Her dance makes me feel motivatedand I do my best for my goal.
4. My mother gives me the best encouragement in my life. She always helps me whenever I am
in trouble.
5. My parents give me the best encouragement in my life. They always believe and help me a lot.
Students seemed to like this exercise a lot as it gave them opportunities to express themselves
freely in English. I made sure that they not only write down their ideas but also clarify reasons to
support their ideas. They especially seemed to enjoy the exchange of their answers with theirpartner because it enabled them to learn different perspectives and experiences regarding thequestion.
The rest of the items in the learning log varied depending on the themes of the textbook used in
the course. For the writing course, I’ve put “Today’s vocabulary,” “Today’s Key Expression,” “Today’s
Exercise,” and “Today’s Writing” as the items, but these could change depending on what theteacher wants to focus on based on the direction of the course. But what’s consistent is that I ask
students to do most of these activities interactively with their partner, sharing and showing theiranswers or teaching each other about the things that were new or unclear to them. When I’m notexplaining things with my powerpoint slides in front of the class, I’d go around the classroom andhelp pairs individually.

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

What became clear to me from the students’ feedback was that the items in the learning log
gave them a framework of what to pay attention to during the class, helping them to become
more focused, self-directed, and motivated to participate in class activities. With the learning log,
students were able to reflect upon the class content and practice verbalizing their understanding
clearly and logically in communication with their partner. Having a framework and making thelesson as interactive as possible, I find, were the two important factors that made the use oflearning log work well with the EFL students in remedial education.
In the presentation, I shared the following powerpoint slide with Table 1 showing the result ofstudents’ midterm feedback (Figure 2). I’ve put down the keywords to indicate the themes ofthe seven questions asked in the survey (Remember/Summarize and Explain/Classify/Express/
Active participation/Motivation/Learner autonomy). Table 1 shows that nearly 80% of the students
responded positively to each of the seven questions. Not much disparity in the percentages canbe seen across the seven questions, which means that students appreciated positive changes
somewhat equally in terms of all the different keywords.
I have also highlighted some differences, noting that question 2 resulted in a slightly lower
percentage (77.8%) compared to most of the other questions that averaged higher than 85%. Thismay be attributable to the fact that instructions asking students to “summarize” their understanding
were somewhat ambiguous, making them unsure about the improvement of their skills. I could
have been more explicit asking students to summarize a passage in the textbook or a story they
hear from their partner, etc.

29

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(1)Figure 2. Powerpoint slide with Table 1
Next, I’ve shared Table 2 as shown in the following powerpoint slide (Figure 3) to explain the twelve
different themes identified from the students’ short responses to the last question, some of which
included responses with multiple themes. The students’ short responses were examined using
a thematic analysis approach (Braun and Clark, 2006; Tanaka, et al, 2019). The twelve themes
were: remembering, reviewing, understanding the class content, improving English, participation,communicative English, test preparation, thinking by myself, concentration, not much change,note-taking, and enjoyable. What these themes indicate is that students found the learning log tobe practical in facilitating various aspects of their learning.
The learning log was surely an effective tool to reinforce their skills to remember the lesson
content (N=15). It also proved to be practical when it came to reviewing for lessons (N=14). Somestudents also felt it made them understand the lesson content more deeply (N=8).

Figure 3. Powerpoint slide with Table 2

30

LOOKING BACK

It is worth noting that two students acknowledged progress in their thinking skills. The following
comments translated from Japanese exhibit a variety of positive feedback from the participants. In
fact, one student commented:
We do “Today’s Question for You” every time, so I felt that my skills to think of what I’mgoing to write about myself have been nurtured (Thinking by myself).
Another student commented:“Today’s Question for You” made us think by ourselves and pay attention to the
key words and phrases used in the exercises, which made it easier to remember(Remembering/Thinking by myself).
Some interesting comments were made under the theme of “participation” and “concentration” aswell. One student said:
Having a tool like this made me participate in class without thinking because I felt likeI had to write something down. Through writing, it has led me to remember important
points naturally (Participation/Remembering).
Another student said:
It has helped me pay close attention to words and expressions I have never hard ofwhen I participate in class (Concentration).
One example of students’ comments about “communicative English” is:I had to think of my own responses to a question and share it with my pair, so I feelthat my communication skills in English have improved (Communicative English).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONSThe positive feedback from most of the Japanese EFL students implies that the implementationof a teacher-guided learning log may be an effective tool to introduce CT in remedial classrooms.
The current study that I shared in the presentation focused on the development of the lower-order
thinking skills shown as remembering and understanding in Bloom’s Taxonomy (Anderson and
Krathwohl, 2001). Most students expressed that they felt the learning tool had been a practicalmedium to facilitate deeper understanding of the lesson content and raised their motivation andawareness as autonomous English learners. It’s important to acknowledge, however, that some still
felt less inclined to admit they acquired skills to summarize their understanding using their own
words. There is room for improvement in making sure that students feel more confident that theirverbalization skills are being trained properly. Including an activity asking students to summarize ashort passage from a textbook or a story they hear from their partner is one option. As I mentioned
earlier, this is only a pilot study that I started to test what works with students, so the findings I
shared through the presentation are limited in terms of their scope. Nevertheless, I am hoping that
this report of my presentation at the 5th CEGLOC Conference may give some teachers insights
into how we can bring in interactive methods to teach CT to Japanese EFL students in remedial
education.

REFERENCES

Anderson. L.W., & Krathwohl. D. R. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing:A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Abridged edition). Longman.
Asahina, N. (2017, August 3). “Kyouiku konnan daigaku” no amarinimo hidoi jyugyou fuukei [Tooawful class situations at “universities with educational difficulties.”] Toyokeizai Online. https://toyokeizai.net/articles/-/181672?page=231

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(1)Benesse. (2008, August 28). “Zennyu jidai no daigaku kyouiku wa dounaru” [What will happen to
university education in the All-Entry-Era?]. https://benesse.jp/kyouiku/200808/20080828-4.html
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology, Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3(2), 77-101
Chujo, K., Yokota, K., Hasegawa, S., & Nishigaki, C. (2012). Identifying the General English
Proficiency and Distinct Grammar Proficiency of Remedial Learners, Journal of the College ofIndustrial Technology, Nihon University, 45, 43-54.
Case, R. (2013). The unfortunate consequences of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Social Education, 77(4), 196-200.
Clark, G. (2019). Methods for developing expression of critical thinking in small group discussions.
Critical Thinking and Language Learning, 6(1), 1-20.
Dunn, J. (2015). Critical thinking in Japanese secondary education: student and teacher perspectives.
Critical Thinking and Language Learning, 2(1), 28-38.
Finn-Maeda, C. (2015). A Multifaced approach to integrating critical thinking skills in oral communication
classes. Critical Thinking and Language Learning. 2(1). 19-28.
Fujisaki, S. (2021). Nurturing Japanese university students’ critical reading skills in English classes
using a check sheet. Critical Thinking and Language Learning, 8(1), 50-83.
Gay, S., & Clark, G. (2021). Revisiting critical thinking constructs and what this means for ELT. CriticalThinking and Language Learning, 8(1), 110-148.
Kameyama, H. (2015). A Study of Remedial Education at Universities Based Upon the Attitude Survey of
Learners at Tohoku University of Art and Design. Tohoku Geijyutsu Kouka Daigaku Kiyou, 22, 102-110.
Lasker, B. (2007). Critical thought and literature in the Japanese university EFL classroom. The
Journal of Kanda University of International Studies, 19, 159-169.
Matsui. T., & Hinder. P (2017). An Introductory Course in Writing College English E-Mail, Nan’un-Do.
Nakagawa, H. (2015). Critical thinking instruction in ELL classrooms. Critical Thinking and Language
Learning, 2(1). 1-18.
Nakanishi, C. (2015). Shikouryoku wo ikusei suru eigo rimediaru kyouiku wo mezashite. [Toward
English Developmental Education that Fosters Thinking Skills]. Proceedings of 4th Kanto
Konshietsu Conference. Japan Developmental Association. 14-15.
Rothman, R. J. (2017). Expanding the textbook: group projects for promoting critical thinking. CriticalThinking and Language Learning, 4(1), 49-63.
Smith, G. (2017). Building a base: critical thinking skills and a question habit. Critical Thinking andLanguage Learning, 4(1). 1-11.
Tanaka, T., Takagi, A., Fujita, T., Takaizawa, Y., and Sakai, H., (2019). Eigo kyoushi no tameno jissenkenkyuu gaidobokku [A guidebook to teacher research for English teachers]. Taishukanshoten.
Uemi, M. (2018). An analysis of students’ essays based on Bloom’s Taxonomy: The importance ofdeveloping students’ ability to “think, evaluate, and express.” Journal of Kokusai Junior College, 33. 61-82.
Uemi, M. (2019). Probing into the possibility of controlled active learning: relationship between
students’ increased motivation for learning English and the implementation of learning logs.
Journal of Kokusai Junior College 34. 59-79.
Uemi, M. (2020). Reflecting upon an attempt to introduce critical thinking to EFL students inremedial education. Leanring Learning. 27 (2). 21-27.
Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching (n.d), Bloom’s Taxonomy. https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guidessub-pages/blooms-taxonomy/
Watanabe, A. (2008). Zennyu jidai no daigaku kyouiku wa dounaru. [What will happen to university
education in the All-Entry-Era?]. https://benesse.jp/kyouiku/200808/20080828-4.html

32

LOOKING BACKOther reflections about the 5th CEGLOC Conference

Sarah Deutchman
Waseda University
sarah.deutchman@gmail.com
In my current position, I teach academic writing and discussion at Waseda University to first-year
political science and economics majors. The course can prove challenging for students as it is an
all-English course, which requires students to write different types of essays and have discussions.
The final assignment is a 1,500-word research paper and a presentation on their findings. For the
research paper students are able to choose their topic. However, many students find the research
paper difficult because it requires paraphrasing and summarizing skills, which means that students
must be able to understand academic articles and books on their topic. This context served as thebasis of the puzzle I presented. How could I help students with the vocabulary load that comes withreading academic papers? For the paper, students must look up any words they are not familiar
with and do research on their own. As a result, I am interested in learning how to develop learnerautonomy. I found this conference interesting because each person could present a puzzle basedon their own context which fostered open communication. Jon Thomas’ puzzle about developing
learners’ autonomy was interesting. He pointed out that learners sometimes did not have a clear
idea of the purpose or aim of an assignment, which made me realize that I am not always clear
about these points. I also thought I should spend more time explaining the importance of thetechniques I try to teach them and the importance of continuing to improve their English skills after
the course has finished.
Additionally, Jon Prevatt’s puzzle about creating an environment where students felt comfortableenough to discuss ideas openly but not too casually where the classroom environment wascompletely lost had me reflect on my teaching practices. In my classes, I try to create anenvironment where students feel comfortable working together on tasks and expressing
themselves in English. However, I sometimes worry that creating a more relaxed atmosphere will
make students not take my class as seriously as their other classes. This could lead to students not
devoting additional time outside of class to work on autonomous skills.
Participating in this forum and learning from my peers in a more relaxed environment was arewarding experience. The teacher workshops were beneficial and made me reflect on myattitudes and teaching practices.

Rena Shirasagi
Keisen University
k21ec034@keisen.ac.jp
Participating in this event made me want to do my best to convey my opinion to others. I
participated in this CEGLOC conference because my teacher introduced me to it and I wanted to
be in an environment where I could speak in English. At first, I was worried whether my English
would be understood by others. Also, I was worried if I could understand the other person in
English. After actually participating, I thought I really need to acquire more English listening skills
and the ability to express myself. It was so difficult for me to convey my opinion to others.

33

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(1)My team was four people. Our team members could speak very fluently. And they listened to
my English with all their might. Some of my team members could speak in French. A question
was asked: How to explain to someone from another country and culture about something thatis outside of their experience? We talked about flavors of food, accents, and pronunciation. My
answer is we try to imagine each unknown word’s meaning and guess how to say the words.
Others answered that we should paraphrase it into simpler words and consider the feelings ofsecond language learners. Different intonations of words can cause misunderstandings. For
example, a question in Japanese that can be misunderstood is, “Isn’t this keychain cute?” If you
don’t raise the pitch of your voice at the end, it will have the opposite meaning. It is the same inother questions such as, “Don’t you think it’s delicious?” And so on. So I think talking and explaining
about words is important. At this event, I was not able to speak in English so as to be understoodvery well by the others. But it was fun to hear the stories from various people.
I wanted to become more proficient in English after attending this meeting. I also decided to takean English certification test to extend my listening and reading skills, which I feel are still immature.
I am now working hard on my studies. It was stimulating and fun for me to talk with other people atthis CEGLOC conference.

Rina Suzuki
Keisen University
k21is068@keisen.ac.jp
I wanted to join this CEGLOC conference because I wanted to think about my English problem of
my lack of vocabulary and bad grammar and find solutions. I thought I should go to environments
such as CEGLOC where I must use only English. My teacher and classmates are always trying tolisten to and understand my terrible English at Keisen University. Usually, because my vocabulary
is so poor and I do not know the correct grammar, I almost do not speak in English. I search forimages and use gestures and other means to explain. I am always trying to get people aroundme at Keisen University to understand me. For these reasons I wanted to speak in only English
and listen to faster English at this CEGLOC conference. Joining this conference was so good forme. Our team members were from different countries. Talking with them made me want to learn
languages other than English too. I had only studied English before joining CEGLOC. I tried not tolearn other languages until I spoke enough English. However, now I want to learn other languages
and know about other cultures after I joined the conference. It is because I could meet people
from other countries’, and I spoke a common language, English. As a result of this conference, I
have started learning French and German in English by using an app. It is very exciting because I
can understand French and German words in English and I practice English grammar when I learn
these languages’ grammar.
In my team at the CEGLOC conference, the other members knew about Harry Potter, so webecame excited to talk about Harry Potter and Hogwarts’s student housing. This time was
enjoyable as I am a big fan of Harry Potter. I think famous books and movies have a lot of fans allover the world. I think I can make a friend to talk to about movies and books. I want to know a lot ofthings about movies, anime, and history so that I can easily talk with other people.
Our team also talked about autonomous learning. We talked about how to improve ourautonomous learning and we discussed what is good for autonomous learning, such as whether
flash cards and listening to music is good or bad while studying. For me, if the music is not

34

LOOKING BACKin Japanese or English it’s ok, so I might listen to K-pop or some music in French, or simple
background music. Talking about autonomous learning was fun.
After this conference, I decided to buy a grammar book to study English grammar more. I think I
should find these types of events like this CEGLOC conference to use my English. I am going toEngland during this spring holiday and I will continue to practice the English of Harry Potter that I
love so much.

Miu Sudo
Otsuma Women’s University
b2020232@cst.otsuma.ac.jp
I participated in the 5th CEGLOC conference. My purposes for participating in this conference wereto get some hints for better research, to improve my English communication skills and to share my
opinion connected to my ongoing research topic.
This conference was held online on Zoom. Participants were some foreign language learners,
Japanese students, professors and staff. Both English native speakers and non-native speakers
discussed and shared their own opinions together. I shared my daily habits of studying English.
Some English effect of listening to music while studying” was one of the popular topics discussed
among groupmates.
As for me, I don’t listen to music or news while I study because I can not concentrate on this.
Among my groupmates, they brought up some of their own ideas for listening to music. During acouple of discussion times, we brainstormed our own autonomous learning methods. In addition,
we made a mind map including what we talked about in some groupworks such as our own
recommended music for study or work, study places and some images for learning autonomy at
the same time.
I again realized brainstorming is one of the best ways to carry out collaborative learning.
Incidentally, I have been thinking about efficient ways to organize student opinions since I belong
to the teacher training track at my university. When it comes to a situation of teaching and giving
lectures at school, (or trial lessons as well) I think what teachers need to do is to consider how
students can create and transfer (share) their own knowledge or ideas in collaborative learning.
This is why I realized again about the importance of brainstorming this time.
However, I think I couldn’t expand my topics as I liked. I realized that I need to speak and thinkin English logically. In addition, I had some internet connection problems. At the end of thisconference, I couldn’t say a few words of thanks, so I sent an email to the organizer to say “thankyou” instead. If it’s possible, I would like to participate in this conference face to face so that all
participants can appreciate the effects of discussion and the significance of having a dialogue.
I am thankful to my professor for giving me the opportunity to participate in this great conference. I
am sure that what I learned will influence my next research project.

35

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(1)JALT 2022 Learner Development (LD) Forum
Theme: Reflecting on challenges and achievements in diverse learning environments
Fukuoka International Congress Centre, Saturday, November 12th (12:45 PM – 2:15 PM), 2nd Floor
Lobby

Szabina Ádámku, Akiko Takagi, Eileen Yap
JALT 2022 LD SIG Forum Programme TeamFORUM ABSTRACT

The forum provided opportunities to reflect on challenges and achievements with learnerdevelopment in different learning environments. We examined topics such as the inclusion oflearner development in curriculum reform and syllabus planning, environmental dynamics that
nurture learner interaction and autonowmy, different kinds of learning relationships (for example,
learner-teacher, learner-learner, near-peer), innovative approaches to learner-centred assessment,
as well as key social and emotional aspects of learning. Contributors from diverse educational
contexts were warmly encouraged to take part from elementary through to secondary school andtertiary education, as well as language school, adult learning, and graduate study environments.
Through sharing personal narratives, learning practices, reflections, and/or practitioner research,presentations and discussions explored challenges and achievements with language learning andlearner development from multiple and original angles. Both presenters and participants wereinvited to interactively share their thoughts and reflections at the forum, as well as in the Learner
Development SIG’s newsletter, Learning Learning.

PRESENTATION TITLES AND PRESENTERS

Using stimulated recall to analyse experiential learning: curriculum development for a self-directed
modulePhillip A. Bennett (Kanda University of International Studies)
Yuri Imamura (Tokyo Kasei University)
Challenges and achievements of undergraduate TAs through their hybrid identities
Ken Ikeda, Arisa Minami, Rana Sato (Otsuma Women’s University)
An observational inquiry into a Japanese language support group for students with foreign roots
Michael Kuziw (Jin-ai University)
Empowering university English learners through paired research projects
Sakae Onoda (Juntendo University)
From fax machines to zoom sessions: Keeping the aged engaged in a time of COVID
Steven Paydon (Rikkyo University)
Robert Dilenschneide (Jichi Medical University)
Supporting learner autonomy with online Scrabble
Katherine Song (University of the Ryukyus)
Effective use of self-reflection activities to enhance students’ learning using Socrative as a tool
Yuki Togawa, Naeko Naganuma (Akita International University)

36

LOOKING BACK

Establishing an all-day International Saturday School
Michael Wilkins, Frances Shiobara, Louisa Green (Saint Michael’s International School)
Tracing the emotional currents in the construction of one learner’s English L2 identity: A narrative
case study approach
Amelia Yarwood (Research Institute for Learner Autonomy Education RILAE)HIGHLIGHTS

Taking place in a large lobby of the conference center, the LD SIG Forum session reached a lot ofviewers actively initiating insightful knowledge-sharing discussions face to face. There were a totalof 8 amazing poster presentations this time. After a short briefing with the Forum coordinators,
the presenters began to set up their posters on the poster boards before the Forum started.
Throughout the session, participants engaged with each presenter to discuss their work and areasof interest. This was followed by Emily Choong receiving the LD SIG Grant Award (JALT 2022
Conference Participation) for her valuable contributions and achievements. Finally, both presentersand participants had a chance to reflect on the Forum. We believe that the audience and thepresenters came away from the forum with new insights and a range of practice and researchideas to implement or further explore in diverse learning environments.

POST-FORUM REFLECTIONS OR COMMENTS

Emily Choong (Niigata City Board of Education)
This was my first time attending an LD SIG forum. I managed to have a chat with Katherine Song,who presented on Scrabble Go. It was an insightful presentation knowing that a family andfriends game can be turned into a classroom activity to support learner autonomy. I found thisa meaningful way to involve English learners in games that allow them to grow not only their
vocabulary, but also engage with the language in a classroom setting. During the reflection at theend, my group ended up discussing other games to bring to the classroom such as Boggle. This
forum made me realise that there are times where we can go back to basics, such as using fun
board games, and involve our learners in paving their own way through their language learningjourney.
Ken Ikeda (Otsuma Women’s University)
It was great to co-present with my students, Arisa and Rana. I am happy for them that they wereable to convey in their written and oral presentations their hybrid experiences as students andteaching assistants. Although I felt obligated to stick close to my poster, I was fortunate to talkwith a few presenters of other posters. In particular, Katherine Soong told me how she was able
to expand on her poster using Scrabble as a means for inspiring student interaction. She solicited
student reactions after we had shared thoughts at the LD online get-together before the JALT
Conference. I am deeply grateful to the LD Forum organizers who gave their all to ensure ourpresentation was brought into actuality after these past years of being online.
Patrick Kiernan (Meiji University)
I really enjoyed the forum and was reminded of what a great format posters can be for sharing
research and ideas for developing learners. As ever, I could not visit all of the sessions but reallyenjoyed the sessions that I visited and the follow up discussions afterwards. Two that caught myattention were those involving the students and so fitting the theme of the conference and the
SIG. I was impressed to see that Ken Ikeda had managed to bring two of the students from his
project exploring the hybrid identities of TAs. One of these presenters, Rana Sato, explained not
only her role in the project but also how her experience both as a TA and trainer at Starbucks had
helped her decide on a long-term goal of becoming a flight attendant trainer. Phil Bennett also had

37

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(1)his student Yuri Imamura join the session which introduced his study of her experiential learning
through the facilities at KUIS. A great opportunity for me to learn from students and teachers alike
and an encouragement to involve teachers. All the sessions looked fantastic though and I’m sorry
not to have heard the details from everyone.
Michael Kuziw (Jin-Ai University)
I had a great time joining the Friday presentation by two presenters who talked about introducing
drama/role playing into the classroom. I want more of these interactive opportunities outside thepresentations and forums (like the Swingball corner). I want to see something in action that draws
me in, as opposed to scanning the presenter list and trying to assess the presentation that aligns
with my interests simply by reading a title or abstract. For future conferences, I suggest setting up
a modified classroom setting, with pre-recorded presentations set up around the convention space
where people can casually gather and observe something appealing, while also interacting withmembers of the same of other SIGs.
Arisa Minami (Otsuma Women’s University)
Our presentation title was “Challenges and Achievements of Undergraduate TAs through
Their Hybrid Identities”. As one of the TAs, I presented my struggles, interesting experiences,
and achievements to the participants. I’ve never experienced poster presentations, but I was
honored that I could present our experiences and achievements in person to some people asundergraduate students. It was a very refreshing, precious, and meaningful experience for me.
Although I didn’t have a chance to see and listen to other presenters’ posters, I talked with a few
presenters and I could learn about some presentations a little bit. When I talked with some otherpresenters and told them about my presentations, they empathised with my experiences andstruggles, and they gave me some useful advice. Also, I could have a deep conversation with
one of the participants about my presentation topic. This experience not only gave me a sense ofaccomplishment but also motivated me to study English more. (Thank you very much for reading
this long comment.)
Naeko Naganuma (Akita International University)
This was my first experience presenting at the LD forum in the form of poster presentations. I was
happy to welcome many people and answer their questions about our research. I really enjoyeddiscussing our thoughts and future directions with peer researchers who came by on the topic of
my interest and was able to develop some new ideas out of the casual conversations during theallocated time. One thing I would suggest if we continued a similar format for the LD forum is tohave 2 rounds of poster presentations, as originally planned, because I wanted to take a closer
look at the other posters, but unfortunately I did not have enough time to do so. Thank you forproviding this opportunity for us!
Michael Wilkins (Kwansei Gakuin and St. Michael’s International School)
Thank you so much. The change of format due to the location was no problem. As a presenter I
only got to talk to one other presenter (Katherine Song) at length but her presentation and poster
were great. The location was good in the sense that we had people wander in and talk to us that
may not have come to the LD Forum if it was in a specific room. I hope to be able to come to Kyoto
on the Pan-SIG.
Amelia Yarwood (Research Institute for Learner Autonomy Education)
The forum was an enjoyable experience in which I was able to share my passion with others. Afterseveral years of online conferences it was wonderful to actually engage face to face with people-to see their eyes sparkle, to have that easy back-and-forth flow of conversation. Personally, I
enjoyed creating and joining opportunities to talk to other presenters before JALT to get feedback

38

LOOKING BACK

on our posters and to practice fielding questions. More opportunities to do so would be greatly
welcomed. One thing I noticed about the LD forum presentations was that learner voices weregenerally foregrounded in people’s research/practice. Passing on knowledge is great but I would
love to see more co-constructed, co-analysed research in future classrooms, self-access centersand outside of university contexts.

GALLERY

39

LEARNING LEARNING『学習の学習』30(1)40