Quote:It may be possible to borrow Goodman’s terminology to describe English education in Japanese secondary schools as an ‘enormously elaborated, very expensive testing system’.

Quote:However, Table 2.2 is far more revealing in showing the total dominance of English over all other languages. The number of candidates taking other foreign languages is negligible; the category ‘foreign languages’, in fact, refers to English.

Quote:English is a required subject for almost all first and second year university students.

Quote:One explanation presented by McVeigh (2002) is that of ‘fantasy English’.
McVeigh argues that many university students of English have completely unrealistic
expectations of their English classes. ‘Fantasy English’ exists as a reaction to the English taught at the pretertiary level. Young people at the university student age (almost all university students in Japan are between the ages of eighteen and twenty five; mature students are very rare) are prone to dreams, hopes, and expectations. Since English at the pretertiary level has been stripped of its communicative function, it becomes a hollow vessel conducive to the fantasies of young people. Many young people enter university believing that English at this level will be an inversion of what it had been before; it will be meaningful, fulfilling, practical and fun. According to McVeigh, students ‘exoticize’ English at the university level and this leads to highly unrealistic expectations, such as people barely able to string a few words together holding genuine ambitions to become translators or interpreters.

Quote:Many of the problems associated with Japan’s education system can be traced to its post-war origins. The current education system is tainted by the stain of defeat and remains a host to a range of unresolved issues from that period.

jcdietz03 Wrote:

Quote:Many of the problems associated with Japan’s education system can be traced to its post-war origins. The current education system is tainted by the stain of defeat and remains a host to a range of unresolved issues from that period.

No idea where this comes from. Appearing in section 2.4, it is unsupported by the paper's content up to that point.

Quote:I began this research by wondering how to account for the ubiquity of ‘liking English’ as an explanation of intentions to learn English and I found that for some learners this constituted nothing more than a meaningless, socialised default response.

Quote:These comparisons indicated that the role of the learning experience in the motivation systems of learners was greatly affected by two key factors: the perceived urgency, or necessity, of successful language learning and the nature of the provision, or the dominant methodologies, of language education. This sensitivity to local cultural conditions is a vital component of the L2 self framework and one that I would argue sets it apart from many other models of language learning motivation; this participatory dimension locates the individual learner firmly within a social context.

Quote:Cosmopolitan outlook was found to be a primary component in the construction of learner ideal L2 self beliefs but the data also suggested that cosmopolitan outlook in itself did not lead to motivated behaviour.

Quote:cosmopolitan outlook only produces motivated behaviour when internalised through ideal L2 self beliefs.

Quote:The data showed the learning environment of Japanese learners of English to be riddled with conflict and contradictions with learners constantly having to balance these contradictory forces. On the one hand, there was an obvious social status attached to English abilities but in opposition to this there was a definite risk of the fluent English speaker being stigmatised, often based on a perceived conflict between
a sense of Japanese national identity and fluency in English.

Quote:A typical manifestation of the JET programme might be a team-teaching class in which a young native-speaker teaching assistant exists as model of correctness, of ‘real’ English, leaving the role of the Japanese teacher of English somewhat unclear in this situation; this Japanese teacher of English must surely represent a relatively successful learner of English, yet the degree of success attained by this Japanese learner of English must be in some way substandard – hence the presence of the native speaker – and not considered ‘real’ English. Viewed from a self perspective, this surely creates a dilemma in the mind of the young Japanese learner: Does the learner choose to identify with the non-Japanese speaker of English or the non-English-speaking Japanese teacher? Both in Japanese society as a whole and within its English classrooms, there is an obvious shortage of models of successful Japanese English speakers. A greater awareness of the importance of near-peer role models is called for; models that recognise the motivational benefits of positive images of Japanese speakers of English, of presenting language learning as a self-enhancing endeavour as opposed to a self-denying one.

jcdietz03 Wrote:I read most of those 20-odd pages except for the ~1 page section titled "Historical development and reform" on p20 because it seemed uninteresting. But that section does discuss post-war changes. I still think the "tainted by the stain of defeat" is unsupported. "Changed" would be better. "Changed for the worse" is the author's opinion; it is unsupported.

jcdietz03 Wrote:I'd prefer to believe the null hypothesis: The education system changed and we don't know whether it was beneficial, ineffectual, or detrimental. It's the null hypothesis so I don't need any proof. I'd be happy to look at some though.

The author cites "Schoppa, L. J. (1990). Education reform in Japan: A case of immobilist politics." Schoppa discusses the changes; he doesn't mention that the changes are good or bad.

jcdietz03 Wrote:

Quote:A typical manifestation of the JET programme might be a team-teaching class in which a young native-speaker teaching assistant exists as model of correctness, of ‘real’ English, leaving the role of the Japanese teacher of English somewhat unclear in this situation; this Japanese teacher of English must surely represent a relatively successful learner of English, yet the degree of success attained by this Japanese learner of English must be in some way substandard – hence the presence of the native speaker – and not considered ‘real’ English. Viewed from a self perspective, this surely creates a dilemma in the mind of the young Japanese learner: Does the learner choose to identify with the non-Japanese speaker of English or the non-English-speaking Japanese teacher? Both in Japanese society as a whole and within its English classrooms, there is an obvious shortage of models of successful Japanese English speakers. A greater awareness of the importance of near-peer role models is called for; models that recognise the motivational benefits of positive images of Japanese speakers of English, of presenting language learning as a self-enhancing endeavour as opposed to a self-denying one.

So then, should more Japanese classes feature Japanese second language speakers? Second language English speakers are many, but second language Japanese speakers are few. Also "The JET Programme is destructive." I put these words in the researchers mouth, but this is suggested by the language he uses. It should be noted the researcher may have been part of the program at some point.

jcdietz03 Wrote:He says in the first section of the paper, regarding "Where did the question addressed in this paper come from?" He says it was from his own teaching of English to Japanese students. Not the JET program specifically, I just made that up. That the JET program is harmful, it's there in the quote: "Viewed from a self perspective, [the presence of a native speaker] surely creates a dilemma in the mind of the young Japanese learner...."

If the researcher was in the JET program, he is less likely to argue against it. He does anyway, though, surprisingly. I'm calling this "participation bias," I don't know it's real name.

I'm saying if there was a finding that (for teaching Japanese) "L2 Japanese speakers make better teachers than L1 speakers," you can't act on that because there are not many L2 speakers of Japanese. There are plenty of L2 speakers of English, so for English education, the advice would be actionable.