鹿児島大学大学院

理工学研究科グローバル人材育成支援室
平成２9 年度活動報告書
Global Development Office
Annual Report 2017平成 30 年 4 月 1 日

鹿児島大学大学院 理工学研究科
グローバル人材育成支援室

はじめに
この報告書は、鹿児島大学大学院理工学研究科グローバル人材育成支援室（以下、支援室）が平成 29 年度に行った活動の報告である。
支援室は平成 26 年度に開設され、本年度は４年目に当たる。平成 29 年度は「大学院理工系イノベーションプログラム海外研修」（以下、GOES プログラム）として、９名の大学院生を米国に派遣した。派遣先はカリフォルニア州サンディエゴおよびサンノゼに加え、ニューヨークで実施した。いずれも、室長経験者である２名の副室長、支援室の２名の特任助教に加え、大学の事務職員、さらには本間理
工学研究科長の支援を得ることができ、着実な成果をあげることができた。旅行手配や現地支援に関する鹿児島大学消費生活協同組合との提携や鹿児島大学グローバルセンターとの連携も、GOES プログラムを実施する上で欠かせない成功要因である。
GOES プログラムでは約 10 週間の海外研修を行っているが、それに要する経費は支援室構成員による廉価に実施できる方法の開拓に加え、日本学生支援機構(JASSO)海外留学支援制度および鹿児島大学学生海外研修支援事業、鹿児島大学「進取の精神」支援基金学生海外派遣事業への申請が採択された。これらの経済的支援により、大学院生の負担が軽減されていることは GOES プログラム実施の上で、非常に重要である。
小さなトラブルは発生したが、その都度、支援室構成員や現地支援者の臨機応変な協力・支援により重大事になる心配もなく実施できた。帰国後は TOEIC の成績のほか、参加学生感想文集に掲載されている報告、報告会などを通じて、各学生の英語力向上、現地企業および研究室研修による世界的視野の認識、日常生活を通じた外国人との相互理解や異文化経験などを得たことがよくわかり、GOES プロ
グラムが成功しているとの確信を強めることができた。この報告書により、GOES プログラムがさらに発展し、グローバルな視野を持った理工系人材育成に寄与することを期待する。
これまでに GOES プログラムにご賛同、ご協力、ご支援をいただいた鹿児島大学理工学研究科各位と米国での学生指導に直接携わって頂いた大学や企業等の皆様にお礼申し上げると共に、今後も GOES プログラムへのご助言ご支援を賜りますようお願い申し上げます。

平成 30 年３月

Global Development Office Members:

理工学研究科グローバル人材育成支援室
室長 教授

室長
半田 利弘 教授
物理・宇宙専攻
趣味：SF、鉄道副室長

室員

小山 佳一 教授

Bo Causer 特任助教

物理・宇宙専攻教育専門（英語）

趣味：UFO キャッチャ

趣味：デザイン副室長

室員

木方 十根 教授

藤崎

文乃 特任助教

建築学専攻

学生係専門

趣味：料理

趣味：旅行

2

半田利弘

GDO ミッション: 鹿児島大学理工学研究科の学生と教員をグローバル人材になるため支援。

方法：
1. 海外研修の計画を発展する

3. ランゲージサポート

2. 海外研修支援•

英語学習サポート、イングリッシュワーク•

理工学研究科の海外研修支援（準備など）•

個人的な海外研修の相談（ビザ、生活など）•

理工系英語論文の校閲・発表支援•

教員と学生係に留学生サポートの支援•

理工学研究科内の英語事務通信支援•

理工学研究科内の国際交流支援

ショップなど目次:
業務 p. 4 ‒ 11

平成 29 年度グローバル人材育成支援室活動カレンダー ……………………………………………………

p. 4

理工学研究科グローバル人材育成支援室 活動経過 ……………………………………………………… p. 5 - 6
グローバル人材育成支援室会議 ………………………………………………………………………………… p. 7
GOES 参加学生対象用支援金 ………………………………………………………………………………

p. 8 ‒ 9

平成 29 年グローバル人材育成支援室予算執行状況 …………………………………………………………

p. 9

平成 28 年度 GOES 海外研修参加学生 大学院終了後の進路状況 ………………………………………… p. 10
平成 30 年度の事業計画 ………………………………………………………………………………………… p. 11
プログラム開発 p. 12 ‒ 28

Program Development Framework …………………………………………………………………

p. 12 & 13

Program Standardization ………………………………………………………………………… p. 12 & 14, 15
Asia-Pacific Preliminary Planning ………………………………………………………………

p. 12 & 16, 17

UWA Program Development …………………………………………………………………………

p. 18 ‒ 22

San Diego GOES Program Update …………………………………………………………………

p. 19 - 24

New York GOES Program Update …………………………………………………………………………

p. 24

Regional Development Activity ………………………………………………………………………

p. 24 ‒ 25

Recruitment ………………………………………………………………………………………………

p. 25 ‒ 28

英語教育 p. 29 ‒ 36

English Workshop, Games Month & Chat Time …………………………………………………

p. 29 - 30

Special English Projects ……………………………………………………………………………………

p. 30

English Academic Paper Check ……………………………………………………………………………

p. 30

Courses (Academic English for Global Science and Engineering Professionals) ………………

p. 31

English Lounge …………………………………………………………………………………………………

p. 31

GOES Study Abroad Support ………………………………………………………………………………

p. 31

Analysis of TOEIC scores for 2017 GOES Participants ………………………………………… p. 32 ‒ 36
室員感想文集 p. 37 - 40

3

業務
平成29年度グローバル人材育成支援室活動カレンダー

4

業務
理工学研究科グローバル人材育成支援室 活動経過
4月

・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2017】事前準備開始（授業説明、研修費・準備日程等説明、就業体験研修説明・英文履歴書作成、GOES2016 冬季
参加学生による成果発表）
・P-SEG【科学技術北米研修】説明会実施
・グローバル月例会議実施
・English Prep Work Shop 開始

5月

・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2017】事前準備（TOEIC IP テスト実施、在福岡アメリカ領事館での学生ビザ面接、就業体験研修説明・準備）・グローバル月例会議実施
・English Prep Work Shop 継続

6月

・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2017】事前準備（地域貢献活動・事前学習実施、サツマ酸素工業見学、GOES2016 参加学生からの渡航準備説
明等、GOES2017 壮行会開催、出発前オリエンテーション実施）
・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2016・冬季】地域貢献活動事後活動実施
・グローバル月例会議実施
・English Prep Work Shop 継続

7月

・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2017・カリフォルニア】開始（現地でのオリエンテーション実施）
・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2017・ニューヨーク】開始（現地でのオリエンテーション実施）・グローバル月例会議実施

8月

・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2017・カリフォルニア】継続
・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2017・ニューヨーク】継続・グローバル月例会議実施
・2018 年度海外留学支援制度・JASSO（協定派遣）プログラム案検討開始

9月

・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2017・カリフォルニア】終了
・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2017・ニューヨーク】継続・グローバル月例会議実施
・2018 年度海外留学支援制度・JASSO（協定派遣）プログラム申請

5業務
10 月 ・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2017・ニューヨーク】終了
・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2017】事後指導（授業、課題等提出、英語プレゼンテーション説明）・グローバル月例会議実施
・English Prep Work Shop 開始

11 月 ・【理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修・GOES2017】事後指導（英語プレゼンテーション実施、TOEIC IP テスト実施）
・第 2 回グローバル人材シンポジウム開催
・本学海外研修支援事業プログラム申請（大学院生対象プログラム、P-SEG プログラム）
・グローバル月例会議実施
・English Prep Work Shop 継続

12 月 ・第 1 回 GOES2018 説明会開催・募集（参加学生面接実施）
・海外インターンシップ説明会開催
・グローバル月例会議実施
・English Prep Work Shop 継続

1月

・GOES2018 専攻別説明会開催・募集（参加学生面接実施）
・GOES2018 募集ブース設置、周知活動実施
・オーストラリア、パース現地調査開始
・グローバル月例会議実施
・English Prep Work Shop 継続

2月

・GOES2018 専攻別説明会開催・募集（参加学生面接実施）
・オーストラリア、パース現地調査実施
・English Prep Work Shop 継続

3月

・GOES2018 事前準備会開催
・グローバル月例会議実施

6

業務
グローバル人材育成支援室会議
おおむね、週１回ペースで開いている会議。室長および室員２名の計３名で直近の活動報告と直後の活動計画の確認を行った。平成 29 年度は３月 13 日までに 38 回行った。

グローバル人材育成支援室合同会議
おおむね、月１回ペースで開いている会議。正副室長３名、室員２名に加え、理工学研究科長がオブザーバ
ーとして出席している。支援室会議の活動計画の確認と修正を行う。平成 29 年度は３月 13 日までに 13 回実施。主な議題は以下の通り。
第１回 4/6 H28 年度残務処理。カリフォルニア研修準備状況。H29 年度新規計画の検討。
第２回 5/19 人数の都合で P-SEG は実施せず。H29 年度 GOES 実施予定確認。新研修先の検討。鹿児
島県工業倶楽部発表会での GOES2016 冬季参加学生発表を決定。
第３回 6/15 H28 年度冬季学生発表状況。GOES2017 の実行内容の確認。本年度予算の確認。
第４回 6/29 GOES2017 準備状況確認。GOES2016 教務善後策を教務委員会と検討。
第５回 7/20 GOES2017 引率報告。GOES2017 研修進捗報告。GOSE2017 冬の実施の可能性検討。
成果発表の扱い。
第６回 7/27 GOES2017 冬実施は断念。シラバス変更の検討。
第７回 8/25 事業計画および予算修正。新規研修先の検討。研修内容の議論。
第８回 8/30 シラバス改訂案の検討。研修内容 2 パターン並列の検討。
第９回 9/27 JASSO 申請書検討。グローバル人材シンポ内容の検討。シラバス改訂案の決定。新規海外としてトンブリー大学（タイ）の検討。
第 10 回 10/25 グローバル人材シンポ内容の決定。GOES2018 のスケジュール検討[新規渡航先の検討を含む]。報告書作製開始。
第 11 回 12/7 グローバル人材シンポ実施報告。GOES2017 学生成績。GOES2018 事業申請の検討とGOES2018 への案内の計画。新規研修先検討のための渡航検討。
第 12 回 1/12 GOES2018 の募集および内容修正。西オーストラリア現地調査の立案。H29 年度学生成績報告。P-SEG2018 募集原稿確定。感想文集の作製。
第 13 回 2/28 西オーストラリア現地調査報告と来年度の実施計画原案提示。GOES2018 参加希望者
現状報告。

7

業務
海外研修費用、および GOES 参加学生対象用支援金
2017 年度本海外研修を実施にあたり、実際の研修費用と参加学生を対象とした支援金は次のとおりになる。

１．海外研修費用 【研修費総額は支援金と学生負担額で賄っている】① 研修地域：サンディエゴ
・研修経費総額：1,091,270 円
・支援金総額：512,240 円

・学生負担額：579,030 円

研修経費総額には以下の経費を含む：サンディエゴ州立大学附属語学学校（ALI）規定の入学手続費、授業料、ホームステイ費（2 食付・6 週間）、就業研修期間の宿舎費（6 週間）、渡航ビザ（学生）、旅費、海外旅行傷害保険料、その他事務経費② 研修地域：サンディエゴ・サンノゼ
・研修経費総額：1,292,270 円
・支援金総額：512,240 円

・学生負担額：

780,030 円

研修総費用には以下の経費を含む：サンディエゴ州立大学附属語学学校（ALI）規定の入学手続費、授業料、
ホームステイ費（2 食付・6 週間）、就業体験研修先紹介費用、就業体験研修期間の宿舎費（6 週間）、渡航
ビザ（学生）、旅費、海外旅行傷害保険料、その他事務経費③ 研修地域：ニューヨーク
・研修経費総額： 825,717 円
・支援金総額：527,847 円

・学生負担額：297,870 円

研修総費用には以下の経費を含む：州立ニューヨーク・シティ大学附属語学学校規定の入学手続費、授業料、全研修修期間の宿舎費（12 週間）、渡航ビザ（交流訪問者ビザ）、旅費、海外旅行傷害保険料、その他事
務経費

8

業務
２．支援金内訳
本研修について受領した支援金は２つあり、それぞれ、以下の金額であった。
①鹿児島大学学生海外研修支援事業（タイプ B）
・授業科目名：理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修
・採択支援学生数：25 名
・受給人数：博士前期課程 1 年生 9 名・一人当たり受給金額：（研修地域：サンディエゴ）272,240 円（研修地域：ニューヨーク）227,847 円②海外留学支援制度（協定派遣）学生交流推進タイプ（B）短期研修・研究型
・プログラム名：大学院理工系イノベーション海外研修プログラム（カリフォルニア研修・GOES CA）
・奨学金支給割当人数：21 名
・受給人数：博士前期課程 1 年生 9 名
・支給月数：3 ヶ月
・一人当たり受給月額（研修地域：サンディエゴ）：80,000 円（研修地域：ニューヨーク）：100,000 円

平成 29 年度グローバル人材育成支援室予算執行状況

区分

予算額

執行額

総額

3,000,000

3,000,000

差額
-

内訳

備考

（運営費）

741,320

295,885（事業費）

2,120,680

2,415,131（設備費）

138,000

288,9849445,435 消耗品等
-294,451

プログラム実施経費、プログラ
ム開発経費等-150,984 棟共通経費、パソコン等一式

業務
平成 28 年度 GOES 海外研修参加学生 大学院終了後の進路状況【2016 年度 GOES 海外研修参加学生】大学院終了後の進路状況
専攻名

研修地域

大学院終了後進路

建築学

サンディエゴ株式会社 大林組

海洋土木工学

サンディエゴ株式会社 オリエンタルコンサルタンツ

地球環境科学

サンディエゴNEC ソリューションイノベーター 株式会社

機械工学

サンディエゴ・サンノゼ

大分キャノン株式会社

機械工学

サンディエゴ・サンノゼ

日産車体株式会社

化学生命・化学工学

サンディエゴ・サンノゼ

東レエンジニアリング株式会社

海洋土木工学

サンディエゴ・サンノゼ

株式会社建設技術研究所

海洋土木工学

サンディエゴ・サンノゼ

JX 金属株式会社

生命化学

サンディエゴ・サンノゼ

株式会社リニカル

生命化学

サンディエゴ・サンノゼ

池田糖化工業株式会社

生命化学

サンディエゴ・サンノゼ

鹿児島大学医歯学総合研究科

機械工学

ニューヨーク

NOK 株式会社

機械工学

ニューヨーク株式会社 ATOUN

機械工学

サンノゼ

トヨタ自動車九州株式会社

機械工学

サンノゼ

ヤンマーホールディングス株式会社

10

業務
平成 30 年度の事業計画

平成 29 年度の実績と準備を元に、グローバル人材育成支援室は、来年度、以下の事業を行う予定である。
１．

平成 30 年度 GOES ほか(ア)４月から６月にかけて、「大学院理工系イノベーション海外研修（GOES）」に参加
する大学院生に対して事前準備会を行う。
(イ)６月から８月にかけて、「進取の精神グローバル人材育成プログラム（P-SEG）」の１つとして、GOES と一部合同で実施する企画への参加学生を対象とした事前準備会を行う。
(ウ)６月下旬から９月上旬にサンディエゴ、７月上旬から９月中旬にニューヨーク、７月中旬から９月下旬にパースを目的地とした GOES を実施する。
２．

英語ワークショップ

理工学研究科の大学院生を対象とした英語の勉強会を行う。
３．

グローバル人材シンポジウム

10 月に「グローバル人材シンポジウム」を開催。
４．

平成 31 年度 GOES 説明会

10 月以降、４回にわたり、GOES の内容や授業科目「理工系国際コミュニケーション
海外研修」についての説明を行う。平成 29 年度と同様に、研究科共通や進学予定者対
象、あるいは専攻別など異なるやり方で実施する。加えて、１月に募集ブースを理工学研究科内の適地に開設し、説明と勧誘を行う。

11

プログラム開発
1.

Program Development Framework2.

Program Standardization

3.

Asia-Pacific Preliminary Planning4.

UWA Program Development

5.

San Diego GOES Program Update

6.

New York GOES Lab Program Update

7.

Regional Development Activity

8.

Recruitment

1. Program Development Framework
In order to facilitate the development of new programs, under new leadership, the following framework (p. x) was developed, and included
a list of roles. This is not prescriptive, but rather is a reflection of the process that has been occurring throughout the history of the Global
Development Office.
2. Program Standardization
In order to ensure that new programs would meet the requirements of the syllabus, it was necessary to standardize features of the programs.
P. x shows three patterns: a) Global Standard: this is a traditional 6-month or 1-year research or industry internship; b) Adaptation for GOES
(GS?): a 3-month program with the dual aims of language study and research; and c) GOES Beta: a minimum 10 week program combining
language study, summer school in science/engineering, and/or volunteer/community engagement. These patterns resulted in thedevelopment of the new syllabus (see p. x). In order to differentiate between types b) and c), they were respectively named GOES Lab 海
外研修 and GOES 海外研修.

3. Asia-Pacific Preliminary PlanningIt was decided to develop a new program for the Asia-Pacific region, based on MOU status with partner schools. First, information was
gathered from the websites of each potential program partner in the Asia-Pacific region. This data was listed on a comprehensive table
alongside data for USA programs past and present. In this way, it was easy to compare potential programs with existing programs. (See p.
x for data table). Based on their track records, it was found King Monkut’s University of Technology Thonbury, Thailand; Diponegoro
University, Indonesia; and the University of Western Australia, looked promising. Initially, there was talk of having students study English at
UWA CELT before moving to Thailand or Indonesia for a science/engineering program. Therefore, information about Perth and UWA wasgathered regarding transportation, accommodation, and language study. (See p. x)

12

1a. Program Development Framework13

2a. Program Standardization

14

2b. New Syllabus

15

3a. Asia-Pacific Preliminary Planning16

3b. UWA Language Study

17

プログラム開発
4. UWA Program Development
In parallel to the above activity, Dr. Ken’nichi Yoneda of the Faculty of Law was preparing the ground for an MOU between Kagoshima
University and the University of Western Australia. With this knowledge, it was decided to focus efforts on UWA and to put aside plans for
programs in Thailand and Indonesia, for development at a later date.
In order to establish a program at UWA, an investigative trip was planned. Dr. Yoneda was consulted in order to clarify the position and roleof GDO in helping to move his MOU project ahead. Due to the Sister City relationship between Kagoshima and Perth, Kagoshima City Hall
was also consulted. In addition, Mr. Toru Minami, one of the key members in establishing the original relationship between Perth andKagoshima, was consulted. It was discovered that the planned trip would coincide with the annual Junior High School exchange between
the cities, and this had an impact on the aim of the trip. (See trip report below.)
平成 29 年度第 1 回理工学研究科による GOES プログラム開発のための現地調査

渡航期間：2018 年 2 月 18 日（日）〜 2018 年 2 月 23 日（金）（2 月 18 日と 2 月 23 日は移動日）•

調査地域：オーストラリア 西オーストラリア州 パース•

調査メンバー
グローバル人材育成支援室室長（物理・宇宙専攻 教授）半田 利弘
副室長（物理・宇宙専攻 教授）小山 佳一
室員 ボウ・コーザー（特任助教）、藤崎 文乃（特任助教）

調査目的：本研究科にある授業科目『理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修』において、新しく研修先を開拓し大学院理工系イノベーション海外研修プログラム開発の可能性を探る。
（平成 30 年度実施を検討中）
本学と大学間交流がある西オーストラリア大学や電波天文学の分野において研究交流のある ICRAR（International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research）など他関係機関を訪問する。また、鹿児島市と姉妹都市であるパース市役所を訪問し、同市長の表敬訪問や同市における地域貢献活動に関する情報収集等も行う。

18

プログラム開発
1 西オーストラリア大学（University of Western Australia）
・調査日：2 月 19 日（月）（1） 西オーストラリア大学関係者との懇談
対応者
Kent Anderson【Deputy Vice ‒Chancellor,（Community & Engagement）】
Brendan Waddell【Deputy Dean, Faculty of Science】
Gia Parish【Associate Dean Research, Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Math】
Romit Dasgupta【Discipline Chair for Asian Studies, School of Social Sciences】
Tamas Zegrean【Manager University Partnerships, Office of the Pro Vice-Chancellor】

内容

当方から鹿児島大学および理工学研究科、大学院理工系イノベーション海外研修 GOES プログラムを紹介。
先方からは、西オーストラリア大学の状況、キャンパスツアーによる学生生活環境が紹介された。

（2）理学部（Faculty of Science）との打合せ
対応者
Martha Ludwig【Associate Dean, International (School of Molecular Sciences)】
Annabel Turner【International Development Manager, Faculty of Science】
Callum Cowell【Director, UWA Centre for English Language Teaching】

内容

GOES プログラムとして Microbiology のラボ技術修得の授業への参加の可能性が提案された。

（3）ICRAR（International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research）との打合せ
対応者
Lister Staveley-Smith【ICARA/UWA, Science Director】
Renu Sharma GAICD FLWA【Associate Director】
Andreas Wicenec【Director, Data Intensive Astronomy】
Maria Rioja【Research Fellow】
Kenji Bekki

19

プログラム開発
内容

ICRAR 組織の説明があった。GOES プログラム参加学生を ICRAR へ派遣した場合には、どのような研修行
うことができるかをディスカッションした。事前に想定していた協議の天文学のほか、電波天文学で用いられている画像処理技術や望遠鏡建設に必要な電気電子技術など工学系の研修も行える可能性があることがわ
かった。

（4）西オーストラリア大学附属語学学校（UWA Centre for English Language Teaching：CELT）との打合せ
対応者
Callum Cowell【Director】
Olivier Charpenay【Associate Director, International Business Development】
Matthew Kettell【Manager, Study Tours】

内容

同語学学校キャンパス見学。GOES プログラムのための語学研修の可能性、同校での学生アクティビティ、渡航中の居住の便、渡航ビザに関する情報を得た。

2 パース市役所（City of Perth）
・調査日：2 月 20 日（火）（1）パース市長表敬訪問
対応者
Lisa Michelle Scaffidi【Lord Mayor】
前田 和洋【Picture Yourself in Perth 引率者,鹿児島市市民局危機管理部危機管理課危機管理係】
内容

鹿児島市役所がパース市役所と行っている交流事業：Picture Yourself in Perth のセレモニーに出席した。
ここでは、鹿児島市中高生 5 名が派遣されており、パース市長と交流の機会があった。
（2）パース市役所職員との打合せ
対応者
Steven McDougall【Economic Development Principal】
Rosmund Ashling【International Engagement Officer】

20

プログラム開発内容

パース市で行われているボランティア活動の取り組みやボランティア活動を通じた地域コミュニティーとの関わり方について情報を収集した。現在、パース市ではボランティア活動はあまり活発に行われていないが、今後パース市としては、積極的にボランティア活動に取り組んでいこうとしている意欲があることが分かった。

3 在パース日本国領事館（総領事表敬訪問）
・調査日：2 月 21 日（水）対応者
平山 達夫【総領事】
松尾 篤史【副領事】

内容

本研究科で行っている大学院理工系イノベーション海外研修 GOES プログラム概要の紹介。パースでの海外研修実施時における日本領事館としての緊急時等の対応や現地の治安関係の情報提供、日本の高校や大学等のパースにおける海外研修実績状況の説明。西豪州日本会事務局の紹介。また、同日、日本国領事公邸で開催された“Reception for the Promotion of Exchange Between Japan and WA at Local Levels”に招待された。
レセプションでは、西オーストラリア州内の地域と日本との姉妹都市関係を結び、交流をされている方や関係者の方々が出席していた。パース市をはじめとする西オーストラリア州内の地域において、日本にある各地域と積極的に国際交流を行う志気が高いと感じた。
【レセプション詳細】【出席者一覧】

21

プログラム開発
4 九州電力パース事務所(Kyushu Electric Australia Pty Ltd, Kyushu Electric Wheatstone Pty Ltd)
・調査日：2 月 21 日（水）対応者中野賢一【Director】

渡辺

章太郎【General Manager】

内容

パースにおける事業の概要説明。同事務所では、福岡にある高校の修学旅行生やスーパーサイエンスハイスクール、スーパーグローバルハイスクールからの生徒や教員への事業説明や見学も受入れている。本研究科からの就業見学等の学生受け入れは本社九州電力の判断等によると思われる。同事務所が入っているビルには他日系企業（富士通オーストラリア、関西電力、三菱商事、三井住友銀行、東京ガス）もオフィスを構えている。

5 現地生活調査
・調査日：2 月 22 日（木）市内の状況、生活の便などを実地確認した。治安や日常生活に特に問題はなく、学生が便利に安全に暮らせると判断できた。

As a result of the trip, it was possible to produce the following tentative outline for further program development:
Component

Content

Time

Language

University of Western Australia

5 weeks

Study

Center for English Language Teaching

June 10/12~July 15

Science study

Participate in a UWA technical course that teaches all the 4-6 weeks, following

Existing program(bio/chem)

fundamentals of lab practices for microbiology.

Participation

Science study

Contribute your math/programming skills at ICRAR, to help with Undefined

possible(IT/ physics)

data processing for astronomy research.

Volunteering

There may be some possibility to job-shadow through City Hall (ie: Yet to be discussed

Existing program
Participation
confirmed

Not yet existing,Participation
possible

civil engineering, urban planning, heritage & preservation etc.)

CELT course

22

Homestay
Arrangedbyin detailBusiness study There may be some possibility to have a lecture from Japanese 1~2 times
business people located in Perth (Kyuden, etc.)

Housing

UWA
CELT

プログラム開発
5. San Diego GOES Program Update
From 2015, each component of the GOES San Diego program required some adjustment. While the language study portion of the program
remained the same, the engineering study and volunteer work experience changed:
Weeks

1

2

3

4

2015

Orientation

ALI 語学学校

2016

5

6

7

8

9

10

Robotics

Volunteer

ALI 語学学校

Robotics

Volunteer

2017

ALI 語学学校

Volunteer

2018

ALI 語学学校

Robotics

11

12

13

14

Volunteer

SDSU Engineering Robotics program:
Problems:

Results:

4 x 4 hours robotics lab (16•Lab lessons were cut short by TA’s (3~3.5 hours)

GDO staff gave critical feedback to Dr. Moon andhours total)•lab experience not applicable to students’ field of

he offered to refund some of the program fee, to be

study

more involved in the program for the following year,

English level too hard for students to understandand to provide some kind of language support inlessons welllab lessons.

2015
•

•

Held in the afternoon, after
ALI classes••$1500 per student

Results:

2016

Problems:

GDO decides to create a P-SEG program•

Full 2-week program held prior to the start of ALI

for undergraduate KU students, based on•

Robotics lab 4 x 4 hours

this iteration of Dr. Moon’s program.

•

4 x English & culture lessons•

Takes time away from volunteering•

Peer exchange & language support•

Peer support is from HS/1st year•

Local field trips•$1500 per student

students’ field of study•

Student numbers too low; program is canceled

2 week Robotics program offered as P-SEG course for undergraduates•

SDSU agrees to run the program even with small numbers of participants

2 week Robotics program offered to both graduate students, and•KU agrees to staff parts of the program to reduce costs

as P-SEG course for undergraduates in order to increase•

Scheduled to take place after exam week

2018•

Fun, but lab experience not applicable toundergraduate students

2017
•

•

participant numbers

23

プログラム開発
Volunteer
In 2015, the volunteer period was mainly supported by a placement agency, and the 7-week duration was good for both the students andthe agency.
In 2016, in order to hold the full SDSU Engineering program, the volunteer time was reduced. This made finding placements harder for theagency, and students found they had only just gotten used to the daily routine, when they had to leave.
In 2017, the 6-week volunteer placement was suitable for the agency and the students, but the language school, which issued the F1 student
visa, expressed reservations about the length and type of volunteering, especially if the SDSU Engineering program was not a component.
Therefore, for 2018, it was decided to reduce the volunteer portion and combine it with “地域貢献活動” (a minor component of the 2017
program, where students compared an industry in Kagoshima with an industry in the USA), and the terms of the SDSU Engineering program
were reviewed and the program reeinstated.
6. New York GOES Lab Program Update
On Jan. 19, 2018 Dr. Masahiro Kawaji of City College New York, City University New York, Grove School of Engineering, visited Kagoshima
University Graduate School of Science and Engineering. He met with the members of GDO to discuss the future of the New York GOES Lab
program. It was decided to keep the program content the same. Dr. Kawaji also offered to introduce other faculty at CCNY if students withdifferent study areas from those covered by the Energy Institute were interested in a short-term student internship at CCNY CUNY.

7. Regional Development Activity
地域貢献実施活動について

平成 28 年度より実施している本海外研修プログラムでは、グローバルな視点からローカルな課題解決に取り組むことができるグローカルな人材の育成を目指している。
ここでは地域貢献活動の一環として次のとおり実施した。

o

平成 28 年度冬季実施サンノゼ海外研修

参加の学生はサンノゼ・シリコンバレーで実施した海外研修の成果をもとに鹿児島県工業倶楽部
84 プラザ 6 月の例会において講演を実施。

・日時：2017 年 6 月 12 月曜日
・講演者：本研究科学生 2 名・講演題目：①「労働人口減少に対するシリコンバレーの動向」②「シリコンバレーの経済システム」
・出席者：鹿児島県工業倶楽部 84 プラザ所属企業の方

24

プログラム開発o

平成 29 年度実施海外研修

参加の学生は、事前調査として専門分野に関連し関心のある鹿児島県内企業を事前に選択し訪問や工場見学等を通じて、企業の事業内容などの情報収集を行った。本海外研修開始後、参加の学生は事前調査時に訪問した企業と現地にある企業との比較を行った。
参加の学生は、ここでの成果をグローバル人材シンポジウムでの発表や事前調査で訪問した企業への調査報告等を実施した。
参加学生・専攻

訪問企業一覧

機械工学、物理・宇宙

サツマ酸素工業株式会社

建築学

株式会社設備設計 鹿児島

建築学

東条設計株式会社

化学生命・化学工学

西薩クリーンサンセット事業共同組合

化学生命・化学工学

株式会社 オキス

生命化学

鹿児島市科学館

8. Recruitment
募集活動について
平成 29 年度は以下の３種類の募集活動を行った。

1. GOES Symposium ＋ 交流会
平成 29 年第二回 GOES Symposium を 11 月 21 日に行いました。
午前：講演と海外研修 GOES 参加者報告会。参加学生は 10 名。
午後：交流会および海外研修ワークショップと平成３０年度 GOES 海外研修説明会。参加学生は 14 名（平成30 年度 GOES への参加希望者５名、過去の GOES 参加者９名）。

2. 説明会
募集のために、海外研修説明会を行いました。
A）

11 月 21 日の GOES Symposium に続き実施。参加者は 14 名。

B）

12 月６日に単独で実施。参加者は 9 名。

C）

12 月 13 日に地域コトづくりセンターが主催する「研究インターンシップ報告・説明会＆海外インターンシップ説明」の一部として実施。参加者 29 名。

25プログラム開発D）

１月 29 日〜２月２日専攻別説明会を実施。参加学生は 40 名。
(物理・宇宙専攻、電気電子工学専攻、化学生命・化学工学専攻、情報生体システム工学専攻、地球環境科学専攻）

E）

４月２日の大学院入学オリエンテーションでも実施予定。

3. 募集ブース設置
１月 11 日、１月 16 日、１月 17 日の３日間、海外研修を説明するためのブースを設置し、海外研修パンフ
レットを展示すると共に、室員２名が時間帯を決めて担当し、学生や教員からの質問・相談などに応じた。第
１日目と 2 日目は工学部共通棟１階の休憩スペースで、３日目は理学部１号館１階の玄関口ホールで行った。
学部３、４年生、および院生にパンフレット合計 130 枚を配布した。

4. その他o

平成２９年度 GOES 参加学生感想文集を 630 冊印刷。
平成３０年度理工学研究科進学予定者に配布。

o

平成３０年度春発出、鹿児島大学英語ニューズレター「KU Today」の記事を書きました。
テーマは「GOES 海外研修」です。

1. GOES Symposium ＋ 交流会

26

プログラム開発
シンポジウム案内

グローバル人材シンポジウム

11/21 （火）

時間

案内

場所

8:30~8:50

受付

建築学科棟 01

8:50~9:00

挨拶、開会の辞

9:00~9:30

星野一昭（かごしまＣＯＣセンター 特任教授）『英語は度胸と好奇心』

新永浩子（理工学域理学系 物理・宇宙専攻 准教授）『Be Global, Be Ambitious』

9:30~10:00

10:00~11:00

GOES 参加者報告

4名

11:00~11:10

休憩

11:10~12:30

GOES 参加者報告

12:30~14:00

昼食・交流会

14:00~15:30

GOES 参加者海外研修ワークショップ

14:00 ~14:10

自己紹介

5名
工学部
共通棟 101

語学学校
ホームステイ
保険・銀行・携帯・など
ボランテイア
時間の使い方
15:15~15:30

Q/A

15:30~16:00

GOES 2018 説明

16:00~16:30

閉会の辞
片付ける

27

プログラム開発
2. 地域コトづくりセンターで、海外インターンシップ説明会

3. 海外研修ブース&パンフレット
p

28

英語教育
From April 2017, Global Development Office offered the following English language education support:
1.

English Workshop, Games Month & Chat Time

2.

Special English Projects

3.

English Academic Paper Check4.

Courses (Academic English for Global Science and Engineering Professionals)

5.

English Lounge

6.

GOES Study Abroad Support

7.

Analysis of TOEIC scores for 2017 GOES Participants

GDO English Support
Spring EW

Support Type

Rainy Season EW
Autumn 1 EW
Autumn 2 EW
Winter EW
Games Month
Chat Time
Special ProjectEng. Paper Check
AEGP Course
0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 11 12 13 14 15

Number of Participants

1. English Workshop & Chat Time:
This year, five sessions of English Workshop were held: Spring English Workshop; Rainy Season English Workshop; Autumn English
Workshop 1 & 2; Winter English Workshop. Each session ran for four weeks, meeting once a week for an hour. The Spring and Autumn
Workshops were divided into Beginner and Advanced Levels. In previous years the beginner level class had been popular, but this year
only the advanced level had sign-ups, therefore the beginner level sessions did not run. The two Autumn sessions were the most popular,
with 6 members. Spring had 5, Rainy season had 3, and Winter had 4. In previous years, workshops held at the beginning of the semester
were the most popular, and this held true in 2017. Attendance declined as end-of-semester assignment deadlines neared. Due to schedulingconflicts with the GOES program, no summer sessions were held, but a September Games session was planned, for students to have an
opportunity to use English in a relaxed setting during vacation time, but there was no interest. Chat time was scheduled, but mostly occurred
outside of scheduled times, as the main participant scheduled his own sessions.
29

英語教育
The sessions were advertised with posters for each department, and posted on department bulletin boards. They were also listed on the
GDO website. Mails were not sent out, because the process for sending them out was onerous, and as students receive between 5-10
promotional e-mails/day from various on-campus organizations, it was decided not to add to the burden.
2. Special English Projects:
Special Projects are individual requests for assistance with English which fall outside the other categories.
A. In 2017 three graduate students who were attending international conferences came to GDO to practice for their presentations. Assistanceincluded checking their scripts and slides for errors, providing a recording of their presentation for them to shadow, and listening to theirpresentations and giving advice on pronunciation, intonation, gestures, eye contact, and stance.
B. Two students aiming to spend a year studying abroad came for help with TOEFL/IELTS study, and a study plan was created. The student
studying for TOEFL also participated in English workshop, but was unable to continue with the supported sections of the study plan. It is
unknown whether the rest of the study plan was followed. The student studying for IELTS is continuing to follow through with their independent
study, and visiting for help.
C. An English Word Bank of common terms used in writing syllabi was created at the request of the Dean of the Graduate School, to facilitate
the creation of English syllabi within the Graduate School.
D. On several occasions various faculty and administrative staff requested minor assistance checking the content of various documents
which needed to be issued in English. Some of these documents were of a confidential nature and therefore none of them will be discussed.
3. English Academic Paper Check
Six professors requested checks on 8 papers, and two students requested checks on two papers. A check typically involved reading andcorrecting the grammatical errors in the paper, and then meeting with the authors to make sure that the grammatical changes did notinterfere with the intended meaning. Several students also came to have abstracts or short written pieces of work checked.

Academic Papers Checked
Information Science
Biology
Chemical Engineering
Physics
Architecture
0

1

30

2

3

4

英語教育
4. Courses
In addition to supporting the academic component of the GOES programs (理工系国際コミュニケーション海外研修科目), from2017 the Graduate English course “Academic English for Global Science and Engineering Professionals” was designed and taught through
GDO. 12 students enrolled in and completed the course. The course theme was “What is Innovation?” and this theme was investigatedthrough the lens of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Students learned to identify the six orders of critical thinking common to the scientific method, througha project that examined the development of a technological innovation, as chosen by the students.
One course of B4 English for Engineers, Mechanical Engineering, was also supported by GDO.
5. English Lounge
The English Lounge found its permanent home in the Architecture building in October, 2017. In its new location on the first floor, in a newbuilding, it is now easier to access than previously, and since October GDO has been keeping track of visitors, by department. Visitors
include all students and staff seeking English language support, or study abroad advice.

English Lounge Visitors
物理・宇宙専攻
海洋土木…
機械工学専攻
数理情報…

2月

情報生体…

1月

電気電子…

12月

地球環境…

11月

化学生命・…

10月

生命化学専攻
建築学専攻
0

5

10

15

6. GOES Study Abroad Support
6/9 GOES 2017 participants enrolled in the “Academic English for Global Science and Engineering Professionals” course, which was held
in Q1 before departure. Students also set individual self-study goals, and met weekly for preparation lessons, part of which were held in
English and/or included specific lessons on vocabulary and phrases they would need in daily life in America. They were required to keep
an online diary, although due to technical difficulties, this time most students did not submit the diary until they returned. Students were also
given assistance in preparing their post-trip presentations. The diary and presentations contributed to the evaluation of the students’progress in English ability. TOEIC testes were also administered prior to and following the GOES program. The analysis of the results canbe seen below.
31

英語教育
Analysis of TOEIC scores for 2017 GOES Participants
The following is a brief analysis of the results of the 2017 GOES students’ TOEIC results. Factors thought to have had an impact on the
results are also discussed. It is important to remember that test results can be impacted by a wide variety of confounding factors, including
the background and self-beliefs of the learner, their physical, emotional and mental condition not only on the day of the test, but also in the
period during which learning occurred. In the following cohort, 4/9 students had lower test results upon return (previously only one student/31
had the same drop in score, and that was a result of poor physical condition on the test day). Of the 4 students, two achieved higher listening
scores than pre-departure, meaning that their loss occurred through reading, and two lost ground both for reading and listening. One of thestudents who achieved higher results actually dropped slightly for listening but improved significantly for reading. While reading was not a
focus of this program, given that so many students achieved lower results on the reading test, it is possible that the November test was
objectively more difficult than the May test. In previous cohorts, only 4 students lost points for reading, and in each case those students
were not thought to be strong readers to begin with. Suggestions for strengthening reading skills will be discussed at the end of this report.

TOEIC GOES 2017
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

A

B

C

Total
(5/17)

Total(11/13)

Listening(5/17)

D

E

Listening(11/13)

Reading(5/17)

32

F

G
Reading(11/13)

H

I

Speaking(11/13)

Writing(11/13)

英語教育
Discussion of Student Results
A-san’s initial score of 505 was felt to be an accurate measurement, in relation to performance in B4 and M1 English classes: A-san’s main
weakness was a very poor grasp of grammar. Vocabulary was quite good, but attempts to translate sentence structure directly fromJapanese, coupled with misunderstanding about how to do so, resulted in confusing and nonsensical sentences. A-san’s listening andreading comprehension was acceptable, because they could understand the vocabulary and could often guess the meaning intended fromcontextual clues. However there was often a delay in comprehension of spoken English, when the grammatical construction was notunderstood. A-san’s return score dropped by a total of 25 points, but while listening improved by 30 points, reading dropped by 55 points.
On the day of the return test, A-san overslept and ran to the test room from home after being called by a classmate from the test room. They
began the test, but were flustered, and it is felt that this had an impact on the results. Casual interaction in English demonstrated that Asan’s listening had improved significantly while overseas, but the listening test score was lower than expected. The reading score wassignificantly lower than for the pre-departure test. On the other hand, the afternoon Speaking/Writing test had strong results, demonstratingthat A-san’s grammar had improved significantly. Evidence of grammar improvement was also borne out in the Wiki assignment. It istherefore thought that the main factor in the low reading score was possibly due to not having enough time to complete the reading.
Subsequent discussion with A-san confirmed that reading speed was a problem during the test. The TOEIC test taken one month later
showed a modest 30-point (+30 points for listening; no change in points for reading) improvement over the pre-departure score (not shownon graph).
B-san’s initial score of 535 was felt to be slightly lower than performance in B4 and M1 English classes would indicate. B-san had strong
vocabulary and grammar, but was overly reliant on translation, sometimes resulting in unnatural English. Classroom interactions indicatedstrong listening skills, satisfactory speaking and writing skills, but indicated that reading was weak. B-san’s return score dropped by 15
points, although listening improved by 15 points, and reading dropped by 30. Overall it is thought that this result was affected by B-san’s
confidence that they had improved by virtue of their overseas experience. While the overseas experience had a demonstrable impact on Bsan’s confidence in their ability to communicate in English, and B-san no longer hesitated or worried about trying to think of the perfecttranslation, their actual grammar and vocabulary did not show any great shift either in the Wiki assignment, the presentation, or casualinteractions. Once again, the drop in reading score is thought to have been affected by reading speed, and B-san also felt that this was themain problem during the test. The TOEIC test taken one month later showed a small 25-point (-20 points for listening but +75 points forreading) improvement over the pre-departure score (not shown on graph).
C-san’s overall score improved by 45 points, although their listening score dropped by 10 points and their reading score improved by 55
points. C-san’s performance in B4 and M1 English classes indicated that their main weakness was a lack of vocabulary. Sentence structure
was less of a problem and reading was understood with the help of a dictionary. Through the Wiki assignment and presentation, it wasevident that C-san’s English vocabulary had improved significantly, and casual interaction showed a strong development in colloquial
33

英語教育
English. Since TOEIC does not test colloquial English, and since C-san had few opportunities at their volunteer placement to listen to
workplace English, it’s not especially surprising that the listening score dropped. The speaking/writing test results were weak. Overall, notjust in English class, but in general, C-san is more comfortable learning from real-life practical hands-on experience, rather than simulations,so while they were able to pass the real-life test of living abroad and functioning in an English-speaking environment, it is felt that their TOEIC
performance didn’t capture their communicative ability accurately.
D-san showed a slight overall improvement. D-san had a strong knowledge of English prior to their overseas experience, and it is thoughtthat the classes at ALI and the volunteering experience provided the opportunity to consolidate that knowledge rather than lead to a large
improvement. D-san achieved high reading and writing scores.
E-san was one of two students who named specific concrete goals at the outset of the overseas study period. They also scored high on
their placement test at ALI and were put in a higher-level class than the other Kagoshima University students, one which had fewer Japanese.
E-san also made a strong effort to socialize with new people, so it’s not surprising that they achieved a significant improvement in their
TOEIC score. Prior to departure, E-san’s English level was strong, but very schooled. The overseas experience allowed them to build uponthis scholastic groundwork, and E-san did so to the best of their ability.
F-san made an overall improvement of 45 points, with a 65-point improvement in listening, and a 20-point drop in reading. F-san’s speaking
and writing scores were close, but lower than expected. F-san has commented that they take longer to process information than otherstudents, although performance in M1 English class demonstrated that when they are able to take their time, F-san’s results are good.
However, this characteristic is penalized on tests, and it is not surprising that results were low in general. However, in this case, the large
improvement in listening indicates that both F’S vocabulary and grammar have improved, as they were more certain of what they heard.
G-san dropped by 45 points, losing 30 points for listening and 15 points for reading. G-san had a strong writing score, but a very weak
speaking score. In casual interactions, G-san seems less certain of their English ability than before departure. Part of the reason for this may
be due to the fact that G-san spent a lot of time with Japanese students at ALI, and mainly spoke with non-native speakers at the homestay
and at the volunteer placement, where Spanish was used as often as English. This seems to have had the effect of creating some confusion
for G-san about how to speak ‘correctly’, whereby they are unsure whether the phrases they used with their friends are correct. Since thevariety of accents that G-san was exposed to are not similar to any of the accents used in the TOEIC test, this may explain the drop in
listening score. As for reading, G-san also cited time as being a problem. G-san’s strong writing score indicates that their concern about
correct English is largely unfounded. The TOEIC test taken one month later showed a small 20-point (-15 points for listening but +35 points
for reading) improvement over the pre-departure score (not shown on graph).

34

英語教育
H-san improved by 155 points, with a 85 point improvement in listening and a 70 point improvement in reading. H-san also had a solid
writing score, although their speaking was average. H-san spent very little time with Japanese while overseas, and needed to use English
exclusively in language school, their lab, and their dorm. Significantly, their accommodation in a single-gender dorm created many
opportunities to make friends, and the fact that H-san was the only Japanese staying in the dorm was thought to have a greater impact on
their language skill than either the language school or lab experience, as evidenced by their Wiki entries. In addition, the location of H-san’s
study abroad period meant that they were surrounded by highly motivated people, and this contributed to an increase in their own motivation
as well as opening their eyes to new possibilities.
I-san’s score dropped by 55 points, with a 25-point drop in listening and a 30-point drop in reading. While I-san’s English level had been
low from the beginning, this result was not thought to be consistent with their actual ability based on casual interaction, performance in M1
English, their Wiki, and the post-return presentation. Consultation with I-san revealed that they had a major presentation in their lab after the
test, and they were thus unable to concentrate well on the test. The TOEIC test taken one month later showed a 70-point (+85 points forlistening but -15 points for reading) improvement over the pre-departure score (not shown on graph).
Discussion of Teaching English Reading
The aim of the GOES program is to improve communicative competence, which means that reading is not a focus of the program. Students
participate in a reading class at the overseas language school, but this class is different from the general Japanese-taught reading class inJapan. In both approaches, large amounts of input are needed to develop reading fluency, but whereas the Japanese-taught approachrelies on the memorization of grammar patterns, the native-taught approach requires that students internalize the function of grammaticalstructures.
Japanese-taught English reading classes tend to focus on grammatical analysis of the sentence, with considerable time and effort given totranslating clauses into Japanese. This means that most ‘successful’ readers have found a way to memorize patterns and apply them in asimilar way to machine translation. As with machine translation, the results can be mixed, sometimes leading to correct understanding, andsometimes leading to mistaken understanding, depending largely on the reader’s translation skill and grammatical knowledge. The
Japanese-taught approach does not require a grammatical hierarchy since any pattern can be memorized, regardless of its complexity. In
practice, students who have memorized complex patterns may not be able to read and understand an unknown pattern, even if it is simple
relative to the memorized patterns. Students who are capable of memorizing grammatical patterns are often capable of reading a specific
type of writing at a very high level, but students who don’t have strong memorization skills, or who have other processing difficulties withreading, struggle with lengthy or complex texts.

35

英語教育
In contrast, reading classes taught by native-speaking English teachers do not rely on grammatical analysis, nor do they focus on the clauselevel, except to note clause breaks where doing so helps with comprehension. The approach is to have students make meaning throughcontextual clues in the writing. This approach aims to develop the students’ ability to negotiate the meaning of unknown structures basedon previous experience negotiating meaning. Without an internalization of simple structures, it is almost impossible to make meaning fromcomplex structures. While this type of lesson is catching on in Japanese classrooms, it has not yet reached a critical mass.
One problem that both approaches face is getting enough input to develop speed, which is critical in understanding texts of any length, as
it’s important to be able to read fast enough to remember the meaning at the beginning, by the time the end is reached. This means it’snecessary to read writing which is ‘easy’; that is to say, writing which uses grammar structures that the student has already memorized orinternalized. This is highly individual, especially in the case of Japanese learners who have studied for many years, but who have not hadmuch experience with output, which is necessary to consolidate and internalize learning. The study-abroad program helps by providing
ample opportunity for output, and it would be natural that there would be some lag in reading comprehension as the consolidation is recent,and what has been consolidated is also highly individual. (For those who focus on daily conversation, the grammatical structures internalized
will not necessarily be helpful in the context of a TOEIC reading passage.) In addition, since the reading classes at the language school use
an unfamiliar approach, the students may struggle to adjust their perception of how to learn.
One strategy which has proven effective, is that of Graded Readers. Initially offered by Oxford University Press, but now available throughmost publishers, Graded Readers are books which are written using linguistic understanding of lexical and grammatical hierarchies, so thateach level of book becomes increasingly complex. By progressing through each level, students internalize the structures while reading forpleasure. However, despite their effectiveness, Graded Readers are not particularly popular in Japan, and part of this may be due to theunfamiliar pedagogical approach. Generally, we read using various strategies and for various reasons in our native language, whereas our
experience reading in a second language comes mainly from classroom experience where the focus is on answering questions about the
text. Thus, we don’t have pleasurable memories of reading in the second language, and tend to view it as a chore. Reading graded readers
can be pleasurable, if there is no test or assignment attached to it. Yet without this extrinsic motivator, students are unlikely to read due totheir negative impression. English teachers at high schools or universities and colleges who have set minimum limits for number of graded
readers read, but without any comprehension tests attached, have reported good results, although much of this is anecdotal as it’s difficult
to stage a large-scale empirical study to establish proof. Based on personal experience with graded readers, in addition to anecdotal
evidence from other teachers, and in light of published studies about their effectiveness, in 2015 GDO purchased several sets of graded
readers: story books, factual books, and books based on Pixar movies. To date, students who are introduced to the readers get excited
because they can read them easily, but are not motivated to come and read the books of their own volition. Some kind of contest or otherextrinsic motivator seems to be necessary. GDO would be happy to develop this kind of activity if there is a demand for it, as well as working
with professors in developing motivational English reading lessons for their classes.
36

室員感想文集2017 年度グローバル人材育成支援室の活動から思うこと
特任助教 藤崎 文乃

2015 年に大学院理工系イノベーション海外研修ＧＯＥＳプログラムを開始し、今年度を含む 3 年間で本研究科 40 名の学生達をアメリカ・カリフォルニア、ニューヨーク、ノースダコタへ派遣することができました。本プログラムの実施に際して、毎年、全てが順調に進むことはありません。今年度も幾つかの困難がありましたが、学生達全員が無事に帰国できたことに安堵しております。
2014 年、支援室がまだ準備室であった時、何もないゼロの状態からカリフォルニアでの現地調査が始まり、試行錯誤を重ねてプログラム開発をしておりました。当時は将来を見据える余裕もなく、現在の本プログラムの有り様や 40 通りの海外研修が行われることは想像もしておりませんでした。それから 3 年が経った今年度、海外研修を希望する学生の選択の機会、新しい研修先（国）のさら開拓を開始しました。2018
年 2 月、大学院理工系イノベーション海外研修プログラム開発の展開の可能性を探るため、オーストラリ
ア・パースでの現地調査も実施しております。
毎年、海外研修期間中において共通して感じることは、参加学生は現地でどのような状況も充実した時間に変え、自身の経験として積み上げていることです。支援室では、参加学生の安否確認のために、参加学生には毎週末に 1 週間の感想を短いコメント形式で提出することを課しております。そのコメントを見ると、言葉や文化の壁に戸惑い、圧倒されつつも、自身でそれらと折り合いをつけ現地で必死に生活をしている彼らの強さが伝わりました。毎週ごとの参加学生の意識変化や課題解決に取り組む姿勢には頼もしさがありました。
今後も、より多くの学生に本プログラムや海外での活動に関心を持ってもらうための活動を進めます。しかし、学生目線で考えると日本学生支援機構（JASSO）や本学海外研修支援事業の支援があるとは言え、学生自身の希望や費用の確保、保証人や指導教員の同意など参加の決断に至るには、多くのハードルがあるこ
とも事実です。
支援室は、本プログラム実施における研修費用の軽減や海外での危機管理などの課題に、試行錯誤をしな
がらもなんとか解決してきました。今後も 1 人でも多くの学生が海外で有意義な活動できる機会を提供できるように努めて参りたいと思います。
そして、一緒に本プログラムに携わるボウ先生、研究科長をはじめとする本支援室長、副室長、指導教員、関係事務職員、現地受け入れ大学教員や鹿児島大学友好大使らのご協力があり、本プログラムを継続し毎年実施できました。ご協力、ご支援をいただいた皆様に心より御礼を申し上げます。

37

室員感想文集
GDO 2014-2018: Looking Back
Bo Causer, March 9, 2018
As the GDO completes its third cycle of study abroad programs, and prepares to launch its fourth, it is a good time to take stock and reflect
on what has contributed to our success stories, and to our stories of challenge. Although there have been ups and downs, and tempers
have sometimes been frayed, on the whole there has been a strong sense of teamwork and cooperation. Despite our differences andpeculiarities, we have grown to care deeply for each other. And through it all, I believe we have all become better people.
1. The Room for Supporting the Nurturing of Global Human Resources
This is the literal translation of グローバル人材育成支援室, and in English it sounds quite dystopian. The main problem is that
‘supporting’ and ‘nurturing’ are warm, caring actions, yet referring to a person as a ‘human resource’, like they are some kind of disposable
object to be used, is cold and uncaring. We settled on using “Global Development Office” in English, as it was neutral, and vague enoughto encompass whichever kind of globally-related activity we might need to carry out. In truth, our small actions have had larger consequences,and in the end “Global Development Office” may be more accurate than “The Room for Supporting the Nurturing of Global Human
Resources”.
2. What is Global Jinzai?
The definition of global jinzai is often quite personal, relating to individual experiences, however, I have always interpreted it to mean
someone who has the skills to interact with people in many places, from many cultures. It requires open-mindedness, acceptance ofdifferences, and the willingness to make an effort to find common ground. Viewed this way, communication skills are more important thanlanguage skills, accepting and learning from mistakes is more important than being cautious and avoiding them, and supporting growth ismore important than providing patterns to follow.
3. Communication vs Language
Globally, engineers, and to a lesser extent, scientists, are stereotyped as having poor communication skills, despite having good language
skills. This stereotype may apply in some cases, but as with all stereotypes, it’s not particularly helpful. As students move through the school
system, those that excel in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) subjects come to view their other skills as inferior,through false comparison. By the time they reach university, these self-images are fairly set, so when they find themselves needing to interact
with the world at large as they near graduation, having spent years specializing, they are understandably unsure of themselves. Some havedeveloped their communication skills through extracurricular activities such as clubs or part-time jobs, but the feeling that they are ‘not goodenough’ often remains.

38

室員感想文集
Therefore, the main hurdle to overcome is the students’ self-image: simply put, they need to have experiences that help them believe inthemselves. In this sense, the GOES study-abroad experience builds their confidence in various ways. First, the language school increases
their basic language skills, but more than that, the behaviouralist and transactional approach to language education taken overseas, focuseson task achievement over accuracy, and helps students believe in their own ability to use the English language. (This is in stark contrast to
the mainly constructivist approach to language learning common in Japan, where language is viewed as an isolated entity which can bemastered through the addition of more units of knowledge.) The students also gain confidence as they negotiate daily interactions at theirhomestay, in the community, and between new friends. This is reinforced in the next phase of their study abroad, where they enter the labor start job-shadowing, having to take on new challenges and perhaps complete unfamiliar tasks. Each success demonstrates to the studentthat their communication skills, and moreover that they themselves, are not inferior at all.
4. Learning From Mistakes
It would be remiss to think that only students benefit from the activity of GDO. In fact, by facing the challenges in building international
relationships, GDO staff and faculty benefit and become more ‘global’ in their thinking, and that puts us in a better position to serve ourstudents. When I started, a senior faculty member told me to throw away all my preconceptions, and that I was starting from zero. This was
useful advice, since much of what we needed to do had not been attempted before. Since 2014, we’ve managed to create a moderately
successful overseas program, but along the way no end of mistakes were made. It’s been stressful, and we’ve all shed tears or spent nights
laying awake, trying to unravel a misunderstanding or find a way around a roadblock. Perhaps the most important lesson I have learned
came from our first dean, Dr. Kondo, who taught me that success is not some gleaming abstract prize in the future. Success is the ability torecover when we wipe out, crash into the sideboards, land flat on our face in the mud. We’ve had many crashes, but each time we figuredout how to recover, and that is the secret to our success. It’s also a message we try to share with our students before they depart. To borrowthe motto of our first GOES cohort: Don’t Be Shy, Don’t Be Afraid.
5. Supporting Growth
The replication of successful patterns is highly useful in fields like engineering, where the responses of physical materials are fairly fixedand predictable. However, results involving humans can rarely be replicated since humans are not replicable. Even genetic clones cannot
occupy the same space at the same time, and will have different experiences which will shape them differently. What inspires someone on
Monday may depress them on Tuesday. When developing educational programs, we need to keep in mind that it’s not merely a case of
replicating successful patterns. Each program needs to be negotiated on its own terms, each study abroad cohort will need different kindsof support, and each day will bring its own problems and pleasure. Even when we’re using previous programs as templates, we need to besensitive to the ways in which the template will need to be changed. This requires frequent and open communication between staff, faculty,
and students.

39

室員感想文集
Many of the mistakes and miscommunications that have occurred have been a result of lack of information. In some cases, nobody has hadaccess to some key piece of information. Then mistakes are inevitable, but it is fairly easy to unite for the recovery once the information is
known. In other cases, there has been a gap between what the faculty know and what the staff know. While the faculty have been incredibly
supportive, and have done their utmost to communicate important information, the fact remains that staff are not allowed to participate infaculty meetings. As a result, it is difficult to form a clear picture of the fundamental direction of the Graduate School, and small but necessary
pieces of information are sometimes not passed on. It also limits the staff’s participation in the decision-making process. Since the staff areones carrying out the daily operations of the GDO, they are the ones who are in the best position to make decisions. GDO faculty play afundamental role, but have other priorities and responsibilities. They hold the bulk of the responsibility to make decisions, but are not always
in the best position to judge the best course of action. With effort, faculty and staff can cooperate to make good decisions, but much effort
could be saved if staff were able to access the same information as faculty, through participation in faculty meetings.
Finally, it’s important to keep in mind that developing overseas programs is part of curriculum development. It is a teaching position, andwithout regular contact with a wide cross section of students, it’s nearly impossible to assess their needs and capabilities. It is therefore
necessary that the program coordinator also be teaching as a member of faculty. Voluntary participation programs such as English Workshop
only attract students who are already interested in English or study abroad. The number of participants is consistently low, and as a result,it’s not possible to develop a sense of what might appeal to a broader range of students. Teaching would allow the program coordinator todevelop stronger relationships with the students, and this would lead to better programs. It’s necessary for the university to find a way to redefine this position so that the person holding it can have full access to the many resources they need to support the international growth of
the students and school.
After 2018, the future of GDO seems to be uncertain. Despite recent geopolitical events that have made study abroad seem a little lessappealing, causing a drop in participant numbers, the need for skilled global professionals who can communicate with others and bridge
cultures is more important than ever. As old alliances destabilize, new alliances need to be made, through business, between governments,
and across society. Scientists and engineers in particular, need to have the capability to communicate their expertise in ways that contributeto a brighter future. This requires commitment, not just from staff, not just from faculty, but from the institution as a whole.

Don’t Be Shy, Don’t Be Afraid.

40