This article has been retrieved
times since March 27, 2001
This article has been retrieved
Education Policy Analysis Archives | ||
Volume 9 Number 10 |
March 27, 2001 |
ISSN 1068-2341 |
|
Editor: Gene V Glass, College of Education Arizona State University
Copyright 2001, the
EDUCATION POLICY ANALYSIS ARCHIVES. Articles appearing in EPAA are abstracted in the Current Index to Journals in Education by the ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation and are permanently archived in Resources in Education. |
Japanese EFL Teachers' Perceptions of
|
|
Abstract
In recent years, the learning of English as a Foreign Language in Japanese high schools has become the focus of new educational policies applied at the national level. One of these is The Course of Study issue by the Ministry of Education, in which teachers are, for the first time in a long series of curriculum guidelines, adjured to develop students' "positive attitudes towards communicating in English." Another is the JET program, which has put thousands of native English speaking assistant language teachers (ALTs) into Japanese secondary classrooms for the purpose of team teaching with Japanese teachers. Data resulting from a survey project of 876 Japanese high school English teachers was used to provide empirical evidence of teachers' levels of approval of communicative, audiolingual and traditional (yakudoku) activities. Teachers were also asked to rate the strengths of a variety of influences on their instruction, including university entrance exams, and pre- and in-service teacher education programs. Teachers' perceptions of both activities and instructional influences were examined in light of teachers' length of career, type of school (private versus public, academic versus vocational), and level of contact with an ALT. The data revealed the complexities of imposing broad, national educational policies on a diverse group of teachers, and in an educational culture which likely precludes teachers' use of communicative activities. |
IntroductionIn recent years, the teaching of English as a Foreign Language in Japanese secondary schools has become the focus of a variety of new educational policies applied at the national level. In 1989, the Ministry of Education issued a new set of curriculum guidelines and course descriptions for the instruction of English in high schools, called The Course of Study (Ministry of Education, Science, and Culture, 1992). For the first time, descriptions for the mainstream, four skills English I and II courses in the new Course of Study included the startling injunction that high school teachers were to instill a "positive attitude towards communicating in English" in their students (McConnell, 1995).Another major change in foreign language education policy in secondary schools applied at the national level was the 1987 advent of the JET program, which brought native English speaking "assistant language teachers" (ALTs) into Japanese junior and senior high school English classes (McConnell, 1995; Wada & Cominos, 1994). The purpose of the JET program was to "provide increased opportunities for interaction in the schools between [ALTs] and Japanese teachers of foreign languages," and by extension, promote the teaching of communicative English (Wada & Cominos, 1994: 1). The JET program is well endowed, with an annual operating budget of US$222,000,000 (McConnell, 1995). The JET program is currently in its twelfth year, and employs 5,361 ALTs from numerous countries ("JET program," 1998). Given the conservative leanings of the Japanese education sector (Lincicome, 1993), these two policies are radical. However, there are several obvious aspects of the Japanese high school educational culture that work against teachers' acceptance of activities designed to promote students' communicative abilities (McConnell, 1995), implying a mismatch between this politically inspired plan and the realities of Japanese high school EFL education. Further, it is not even clear what Japanese high school English teachers believe about communicative activities. No empirical research on teachers' perceptions based on a generalizable sample has been done, even though The Course of Study has been in force in the majority of Japanese high schools since 1992. Observers note that the beliefs of the teachers have not have been taken into account in The Course of Study (LoCastro, 1996; Pomatti, 1996; Wada, 1994). There is evidence of this in the JET program as well. According to McConnell (1995), the decision to request ALTs for schools is often made at the prefectural level for political reasons. At the local level then, the day-to-day supervision of ALTs is often left to Japanese teachers of English, who resent the extra workload (Gillis-Furutaka, 1994; McConnell, 1995; Uehara, 1992). The traditional style of reform done by the Ministry of Education is well described by Markee's notion of the center-periphery model of innovation diffusion, in which teachers "merely implement the decisions that are handed down to them" (1997: 63). This lack of regard for teachers' beliefs about language teaching may be a fatal omission. In contexts in which educational innovations are being implemented, teachers' attitudes take on tremendous importance. Teachers' attitudes and beliefs are the single strongest guiding influence on teachers' instruction (Cuban, 1993; Doyle, 1992; Fang, 1996; Freeman, 1989, 1998; Reynolds & Saunders, 1987; Thompson, 1984). This article reports Japanese high school English teachers' approval of communicative and non-communicative activities through empirical data resulting from a recent nationwide survey of 876 Japanese EFL high school teachers in nine randomly selected prefectures. The article also describes teachers' perceptions of the circumstances in which they operate, and discusses what effects these circumstances likely have on teachers' approval of communicative activities. This juxtaposition of attitudes and circumstances is suggested by Ajzen (1988), who was concerned about the links between personal attitudes, intentions, circumstances, and personal action; and Markee (1997), who was concerned about the effects of an educational culture on teachers' acceptance of a language education innovation.The presentation and discussion of the data will be used to characterize, from the teachers' point of view, the current state of Japanese EFL education in high schools during a period of time in which sweeping, nationally applied policies have been instituted. Understanding Teachers' Attitudes: LimitationsBecause this study explores teachers' attitudes towards various types of instruction, it is necessary to clarify the relationship between teacher attitudes and actual behavior. For this purpose, Ajzen's model (1988) was adopted. Use of Ajzen's model in EFL/ESL research contexts has been reported in Kennedy and Kennedy (1996). According to Ajzen, an attitude is a person's "evaluative reaction" to some object of interest (1988, p. 23). Ajzen suggested that attitudes then "predispose" the person to creating a cognitive response (a belief) about the object, and a potential to act on the object (an intention). However, positive attitudes towards communicative activities and even positive intentions to do them in the classroom may be influenced by what Ajzen called "subjective norms" and "perceived behavioral control" (p. 133). Ajzen defined "subjective norms" as an influence on intentions arising from a person's "perception of social pressure to perform or not perform the behavior under consideration" (p. 117). Thus, for Japanese high school English teachers, sources of subjective norms would be their students, or colleagues.Ajzen defined "perceived behavioral control" as "the extent to which people have the required opportunities and resources" to do something (p. 127). Thus, teachers may be hindered in doing communicative activities by "internal" and external" factors of perceived behavioral control (pp. 128-130). Examples for Japanese high school English teachers would be adequate training in communicative methodologies, or textbooks that aided them in creating communicative activities. According to Ajzen's model, then, teachers' attitudes may not be predictive of their behavior. Even though they say they approve of particular types of activities, they may not actually do them in their classrooms. Thus, any data on teachers' attitudes must be interpreted carefully in terms of the realities of teachers' every day work. The Realities of Japanese High School English EducationThere are several aspects of current Japanese high school English education which constitute potential impediments to teachers' acceptance of communicative activities, and thus, the policies of Japanese educational authorities. These are: yakudoku, an entrenched traditional method of instruction; high stakes university entrance exams, and inadequate pre- and in-service teacher education programs.Yakudoku, a traditional method of foreign language instruction, focuses almost exclusively on the translation of English literary texts into Japanese, and direct grammatical instruction in Japanese (Bamford, 1993; Bryant, 1956; Gorsuch, 1998; Henrichsen, 1989; Hino, 1988; Law, 1995). Yakudoku has been characterized as an impediment to earlier efforts to change EFL instruction (Henrichsen, 1989, p. 104). In two yakudoku classrooms, Gorsuch (1998) observed strongly teacher-centered instruction focused largely on the translation of a difficult English text into Japanese. Both teachers in the study reported that they did not ask the students to produce their own original spoken or written English utterances or sentences, because it would be too "difficult" for students. Clearly, students' abilities to communicate in English could not be developed in such classrooms, in that one of the cornerstones of communicative activities is to create semi-realistic situations in which students can express intended meanings in the second language (Hatch, 1992; Richards & Rodgers, 1986; Terrell, Egasse, & Voge, 1982). There are historical reasons why yakudoku remains firmly in place. In postwar Japan during the late 1940s and early 1950s, English language education in secondary schools was marked by a real shortage of English teachers who could speak English and who had sound pedagogical training (Henrichsen, 1989). As a result of post-war teacher education policies designed to quickly increase the number of certified teachers in all fields, large numbers of college graduates who were not proficient in spoken English were made English teachers at secondary schools as a "stop gap measure" (p. 163). Such teachers likely used yakudoku, because this is what they knew, and did not have to speak English in order to teach it, a trend which continues today (Kawakami, 1993; Pomatti, 1996; Wakabayashi, 1987). University entrance exams in Japan are high stakes, and affect the lives of Japanese high school students in many school settings. Many observers have noted strong effects of university entrance exams on classroom instruction in Japan (Eckstein & Noah, 1989; National Institute for Educational Research, 1991; Rohlen, 1983), including English language instruction (Brown & Yamashita, 1995a, 1995b; Gorsuch, 1998; Hildebrandt & Giles, 1983; Kawakami, 1993; Kodaira, 1996; Koike & Tanaka, 1995; Law, 1994, 1995; Miller, 1998; Yukawa, 1994) and on teachers' attitudes towards communicative activities (Gorsuch, 1999a). Reportedly, Japanese high school English teachers feel they are expected to prepare students for university entrance exams by having students translate English passages into Japanese, taking vocabulary quizzes, and focusing their instruction on developing students' linguistic knowledge at the expense of linguistic skills (Law, 1995; Miller, 1998). Many students at academic high schools seem to believe that the purpose of high school English education is university exam preparation (Kodaira, 1996; McConnell, 1995; Pomatti, 1996). Students may influence teachers' instruction through their expectations that teachers are supposed to prepare them for the exams, a phenomenon noted in Japan (Gorsuch, 1999a; Hildebrandt & Giles, 1983), and in other contexts in which high stakes tests are in place (MacDonald & Rogan, 1990; Madaus, 1988; Morris, 1985). Inadequate pre-service teacher education programs are a third impediment to teachers' acceptance of activities designed to develop students' communicative skills. Current EFL pre-service teacher education programs lack vision and depth of instruction in teaching methodology, and do not provide sufficient teaching practica experiences (Kawakami, 1993; Kizuka, 1997). Many would-be teachers get teaching certificates from universities that do not have an education faculty. Such programs may have little actual interest in teacher preparation (Kizuka, 1997; Kobayashi, 1993). In these programs for EFL teachers at "course approved" universities, would-be teachers need only take a minimum numbers of courses related to English, such as English literature or linguistics. They do not get enough courses which bridge "English language theory and practice" (Kizuka, 1997; National Institute of Educational Research, 1989). The result is a pre-service teacher education system that is inadequate to the task of supporting the development of fundamental changes in instruction implied by policies presented in The Course of Study and the presence of ALTs in high schools. Inadequate in-service teacher education programs are a fourth impediment. On the face of it, it does not seem likely that Japanese in-service programs can produce teachers who have the tools to analyze and change their own teaching, as proposed by Combs (1989), Lortie (1975), and Kanu (1996). Government mandated in-service teacher education in Japan consists of first year induction for new teachers, and very limited in-service courses for experienced teachers. Responsibility for the planning and execution of these programs along Ministry of Education guidelines is left in the hands of prefectural and municipal Boards of Education (Kobayashi, 1993). This has two implications. First, in- service teacher education varies widely in frequency and content from prefecture to prefecture. And second, first year induction and in-service programs are generally provided for public high school teachers, but not for private high school teachers. "Instructional technique" training for new high school English teachers in Kyoto consists of thirty days of "TEFL training" (Gillis-Furutaka, 1994, p. 34). In Fukui Prefecture, new English teachers at public schools have their teaching observed once by a "High School English Teacher's Consultant," who gives the new teacher "feedback and guidance." In addition, new teachers must undergo a two day seminar in which teachers "learn about game and activity design, motivational strategies, and teaching communicatively" (male Japanese prefectural English faculty in-service program coordinator, personal communication, December 4, 1997). Public high school English teachers are also required to undergo limited in-service training at later points in their careers. In- service programs can potentially promote the use of communicative activities in Japanese classrooms among senior teachers who may not have had the opportunity to receive training otherwise, and who are "farther away" from their university pre-service training than junior teachers. Indeed, Cohen and Spillane (1992) note that teachers' length of career can influence their attitudes towards instruction. In-service training, if effective, may change senior teachers' attitudes. Unfortunately, at least one observer, a high school EFL teacher herself, questioned the quality of board of education sponsored in-service education programs, and noted that such programs are offered only for short periods of time (Okada, 1997). Data provided by teaching consultants in Fukui, Nagano, Shizuoka, and Yamaguchi prefectures suggested programs that run from one to three days. The brevity of in-service training for Japanese teachers runs counter to the suggestions of Cohen and Spillane (1992) and MacDonald and Rogan (1990), who stated that effective in-service teacher education should be extended for long periods of time, and conducted while teachers continue their usual teaching schedule. Finally, due to budget constraints, some prefectures may not offer any specialized EFL in-service teacher education, as in the case of Toyama Prefecture, which discontinued their "English Teacher's Workshop" in 1997 (male Japanese prefectural English faculty in-service program coordinator, personal communication, February 25, 1998). It is apparent that specialized in-service teacher education for EFL teachers is not uniform at the national level. Data from this study may indicate whether teachers' length of career has an effect on their approval of communicative, or other activities, and whether teachers at different stages in their career report that participation in in-service programs influences their instruction. Diversity in Japanese High School EducationThe Japanese high school education system is surprisingly diverse, and The Course of Study, a broad national policy, and the JET program, a national level program, are being applied to it. In the research project used to generate the data for this article, teachers at both public and private academic and public vocational and night high schools were surveyed, in order for the data to be generalizable to the population of high school English teachers in Japan. Combined teachers' lists for the nine prefectures revealed that Japanese English teachers at public vocational schools constituted a sizable minority, 783 (12.7%) of all 6,167 teachers in the nine prefectures. Private high school English teachers accounted for 21.8% (1,345)(Gorsuch, 1999a).From the prefectural teachers' lists, it is apparent these high schools are located in urban areas, and are university-preparation oriented. There is essentially no literature extant focusing on EFL instruction in private academic high schools as specific contexts. There is more literature extant on public vocational and night high schools, although still virtually nothing on EFL programs and teachers specifically. Unfortunately, what there is describes a system of schools which currently have no clear purpose, and where the students have been labeled "low ability." While vocational education at the upper secondary level has been historically intended to fill the labor needs of commerce and industry, vocational and night high schools later became the territory of students who could not successfully compete for admission into colleges or universities (Cantor, 1985; James & Benjamin, 1988). Of direct relevance to high school teachers, Cantor stated "vocational courses find it difficult to recruit good, well qualified teachers" and "both teachers and students suffer from low morale" (p. 71). James and Benjamin (1988) painted an equally stark picture, suggesting that the Ministry of Education creates guidelines (The Course of Study) that keep high school curricula "hard" and fast paced. The guidelines thus act as a screening mechanism to place high school age students in secondary schools appropriate to their academic abilities, as defined by their ability to score well on examinations. The effect of applying a difficult, unitary set of guidelines on a whole population of students with varying abilities in test taking is that high schools in which "low ability" students are concentrated "are given little leeway to address the needs of these students" (39). This may also be true for EFL teachers in vocational high school settings. The data presented in this article may indicate whether such teachers constitute a unique group which responds to the needs of a specific group of students. The data may also indicate whether The Course of Study is really applicable to students in vocational and night high schools. Assistant Language Teachers: The JET ProgramThe overt purpose of the JET program is to have the assistant language teachers (ALTs) and Japanese teachers of English (JTEs) interact in English and raise JTEs' awareness of English as a communicative medium (Wada & Cominos, 1994b: 1). As such, the JET program offers a powerful potential for instructional change among Japanese teachers of English. Yukawa (1992, 1994) documented changes in the teaching of a male JTE at a high school as a result of team teaching with an ALT. Generally, the JTE stopped using the traditional yakudoku translation method and began using communicative methods in class. When the JTE and ALT's teaching relationship ended, however, Yukawa found that the JTE reverted back to teaching in traditional ways. It is possible that the JTE, without the support of the ALT, "disconfirmed" his previous decision to use an educational innovation, in this case, communicative activities (Markee, 1997). Futher research on the persistence of the effects of ALTs on JTEs' instruction seems in order.It should be noted that team teaching with ALTs is not universally available, or applied. ALTs in the JET program are sent only to schools which formally request them (male Ministry of Education JET functionary, personal communication, September 26, 1997). This means that teachers in some prefectures have more opportunities to teach with ALTs than in others. For example, heavily populated Kanagawa Prefecture has 62 English speaking ALTs in the JET program, while less populous Shizuoka Prefecture has 152 (Ministry of Education, 1997). In addition, schools schedule ALTs for classes in quite different ways, with some schools sending ALTs to a new school every day ("one-shot visits"), to schools that have JTEs and ALTs maintain a regular thrice weekly team teaching schedule in one classroom. Purpose/Research QuestionsThe Ministry of Education Course of Study has been applied at a national level to Japanese high school EFL teachers at different stages in their careers in very different types of schools, and with variable access to ALTs. It is important to document teachers' responses to the communicative ethos of The Course of Study in light of these three variables, and to learn more about their attitudes towards activities associated with other language learning approaches known to be in use in Japan. The research questions are:What teaching activities associated with communicative, audiolingual, and yakudoku approaches to foreign language instruction will Japanese high school English teachers report as being appropriate or not appropriate for English I and II courses? Will teachers' responses differ according to teachers' length of career, type of school, or level of involvement with an ALT?In addition to documenting teachers' attitudes towards various language learning activities, it is necessary to document teachers' perceived circumstances. Elements of teachers' circumstances would include: teachers' perceptions of the strength of influence of university entrance exams, students' expectations, colleagues' expectations, pre- and in-service teacher education programs, etc. (For a full description of postulated influences in teachers' instruction see Cohen & Spillane, 1992; and Gorsuch, 1999a). In order to compare these data effectively with the results of research question #1, teachers' responses will also be examined in the light of the three variables of teachers' length of career, type of school, and level of involvement with an ALT. What influences on instruction will Japanese high school English teachers report as being strong or weak? Will teachers' responses differ according to teachers' length of career, type of school, or level of involvement with an ALT? MethodParticipantsThe participants for this study were 876 Japanese high school English teachers at public academic, public vocational, and private academic high schools in nine randomly selected prefectures (Fukui, Kanagawa, Nagano, Saga, Shizuoka, Tokushima, Toyama, Yamagata, and Yamaguchi). Teachers' names were sampled using a systematic random sampling procedure from nine teachers' lists obtained from prefectural boards of education, and from high school teachers in the prefectures. The number of 876 represents a 85% return on the target sample size of 1,035. 340 of the respondents were public academic high school teachers, 277 were public vocational and night high school teachers, and 259 were private academic high school teachers.MaterialsThe main data collection instrument providing data for this article was a Japanese-language questionnaire (for the English-language version see the Appendix). The questionnaire had four subsections. Subsection A was designed to capture teachers' attitudes towards classroom activities associated with communicative, audiolingual, and yakudoku approaches to foreign language instruction. All three approaches are known to be in current use in Japanese high schools. Teachers were asked to respond to twelve activities in terms of their appropriateness for English I and II courses they were currently teaching by circling a score from 1 ("strongly disagree") to 5 ("strongly agree") under each questionnaire item. To develop the construct validity of the items in this section, eight EFL educator panelists (four of them Japanese, four of them native speakers of English) were asked to categorize a list of 30 activities into the three approaches. Only those items which the panelists were able to unanimously categorize were included in the questionnaire.Subsection B was designed to establish the grouping variables for the study: teachers' length of career, type of school, and level of involvement with ALTs. Teachers responded to the items by checking one category for each item that fit their situations. For length of career (B1), the three categories were 0-8 years of experience, 9-16 years, and 17+ years. For type of school (B2), the categories were public academic high school, public commercial or industrial high school, public night high school, and private academic high school. Teachers' responses to public commercial, industrial, and night high schools were combined and treated as one category (public vocational high schools). For level of involvement with ALTs (B3), the three categories were teaching English I or II with an ALT at least once a week, less than once a week, and not at all. These grouping variables and their categorical breakdowns were suggested by the literature (Cohen & Spillane, 1992) and a pilot survey conducted by the author (Gorsuch, 1999a). Subsection C provided the researcher with additional information about the teachers, including their educational experiences. Subsection D was designed to capture teachers' perceptions of the strengths of various influences on their instruction in English I and II classes. On seventeen items, teachers were asked to rate their agreement that a given influence influenced their instruction on a scale from 1 to 5, with 1 indicating "strong disagreement" (a weak influence) and 5 indicating "strong agreement" (a strong influence). The items were inspired by Cohen and Spillane's (1992) notion of "instructional guidance," a model designed to enumerate all possible influences acting on teachers' instruction. The items included in the main questionnaire were items that displayed an adequate degree of construct validity through the earlier pilot survey. The five page questionnaire was mailed out to teachers in the nine prefectures in three successive waves during spring and summer, 1998, about three weeks apart. Included in each of the first wave of questionnaire envelopes were the questionnaire, a postage paid addressed return envelope, and the gift of a pencil. Teachers were not asked to provide their names when returning the questionnaire. Teachers' responses to items were coded and the data were entered into a MacIntosh PowerBook 5300cs computer on a statistical program, StatView 4.5 (1995). All analyses were conducted using StatView 4.5. Questionnaires with missing data were not included in subsequent analyses. AnalysesDescriptive statistics for all items in questionnaire subsections A (activities) and D (influences on instruction) (k = 29) were calculated including means, standard deviations, skewness coefficients, minimum/maximum scores, and modes. Descriptive statistics for each item split by the three grouping variables (teachers' length of service, type of school, level of involvement with ALTs) were also calculated. Factoral ANOVAs were calculated for each of the 29 comparisons per grouping variable with statistical significance set at p < .0017 (.05 divided by 29) to check for significant differences in mean scores on subsection A and D items based on teachers' group memberships. Cronbach's alpha was used to estimate the reliability (internal consistency) of subsection A and D items.ResultsDescriptive statistics for Subsection A are in Table 1. They have been reported from highest mean to lowest.
Table 1
|
| Item | Approach/Skill | Description | Mean | SD | Skew |
| A12 | Communicative Reading | Students unscramble sentences to make a paragraph. | 3.893 | .759 | -1.15 |
| A11 | Communicative Reading | Students match pictures to a story. | 3.892 | .727 | -.97 |
| A5 | Audio Lingual Listening/Speaking | Choral repetition of minimal pairs. | 3.773 | .844 | -.81 |
| A3 | Communicative Listening/Speaking | Information gap. | 3.659 | .896 | -.59 |
| A6 | Audio Lingual Listening/Speaking | Students recite memorized sentence patterns. | 3.619 | .802 | -.56 |
| A8 | Audio Lingual Listening/Speaking | Students practice memorized dialogs in pairs. | 3.579 | .828 | -.56 |
| A10 | Yakudoku Reading | Students unscramble an English sentence suggested by a Japanese translation of the sentence. | 3.543 | .823 | -.83 |
| A1 | Yakudoku Reading | Students translate English text into Japanese for homework. | 3.463 | .952 | -.59 |
| A9 | Communicative Listening/Speaking | Opinion gap. | 3.376 | .939 | -.34 |
| A2 | Communicative Writing | Students write predictions of the ending of a picture strip story. | 3.372 | .900 | -.49 |
| A7 | Communicative Writing | Students write letters to each other. | 3.364 | .885 | -.37 |
| A4 | Yakudoku Reading | Studentsrecite their Japanese translations in class. | 3.080 | 1.065 | -.30 |
| Item | Description | Mean | SD | Skew | Min/ Max |
Mode |
| D16 | Students' English speaking abilities. | 4.318 | .652 | -1.03 | 1/5 | |
| D12 | Number of students in class. | 4.026 | .800 | -.86 | 1/5 | |
| D2 | University entrance exams. | 3.905 | .987 | -.94 | 1/5 | |
| D15 | Students' expectations. | 3.855 | .770 | -.90 | 1/5 | |
| D3 | Textbook. | 3.701 | .839 | -.80 | 1/5 | |
| D17 | Teacher's English speaking ability. | 3.620 | .846 | -.57 | 1/4 | |
| D6 | Teacher's English learning experiences. | 3.558 | .986 | -.78 | 1/5 | |
| D7 | Colleagues. | 3.094 | .925 | -.30 | 1/5 | |
| D11 | Locally written syllabus. | 2.986 | .907 | -.19 | 1/5 | |
| D1 | Monbusho Course of Study. | 2.961 | .927 | -.06 | 1/5 | |
| D14 | Parents' expectations. | 2.634 | 1.00 | .18 | 1/5 | |
| D5 | In-service teacher education. | 2.462 | 1.19 | -.51 | 0/5 | |
| D4 | Pre-service teacher education. | 2.379 | .956 | .29 | 1/5 | |
| D13 | Assistant language teacher. | 1.879 | 1.88 | .20 | 0/5 | |
| D8 | Principal. | 1.782 | .840 | 1.04 | 1/5 | |
| D9 | Teacher development courses taken privately. | 1.401 | 1.72 | .61 | 0/5 | |
| D10 | Academic organizations. | .587 | 1.27 | 2.60 | 0/5 |
| Item | Item Description | Significantly Different Cells | F-Value |
| A1 | Yakudoku reading activity | 1 (M=3.312) vs. 3 (M=3.596) | 6.43 |
| A3 | Communicative information gap activity | 1 (M=3.821) vs. 3 (M=3.524) | 7.90 |
| D6 | Influence of English learning experiences on instruction |
1 (M=3.696) vs. 3 (M=3.431) | 5.319 |
| D7 | Influence of colleagues on instruction | 1 (M=3.263) vs. 3 (M=2.973) | 5.85 |
| D9 | Influence of privately taken teacher development courses on instruction |
1 (M=1.058) vs. 2 (M=1.619) | 7.397 |
| D15 | Influence of students' expectations on instruction |
1 (M=3.962) vs. 3 (M=3.751) | 5.633 |
| Item | Item Description | Significantly Different Cells | F-Value |
| A1 | Yakudoku reading activity | 2 (M=3.3) vs. 3 (M=3.564) | 6.216 |
| A3 | Communicative information gap activity | 1 (M=3.762) vs. 3 (M=3.471) | 8.479 |
| A4 | Yakudoku reading activity | 1 (M=3.009) vs. 3 (M=3.367) 2 (M=2.899) vs. 3 (M=3.367) |
14.595 |
| D2 | Influence of entrance exams on instruction |
1 (M=4.162) vs. 2 (M=3.451) 2 (M=3.451) vs. 3 (M=4.054) |
48.427 |
| D5 | Influence of in-service EFL teacher education on instruction |
1 (M=2.724) vs. 3 (M=1.977) 2 (M=2.596) vs. 3 (M=1.977) |
33.711 |
| D7 | Influence of colleagues on instruction | 1 (M=3.209) vs. 3 (M=2.965) | 5.258 |
| D8 | Influence of school principal on instruction |
1 (M=1.674) vs. 3 (M=2.058) 2 (M=1.657) vs. 3 (M=2.058) |
20.631 |
| D11 | Influence of locally written syllabus on instruction | 1 (M=3.079) vs. 2 (M=2.827) | 6.530 |
| D12 | Influence of class size on instruction | 2 (M=4.123) vs. 3 (M=3.869) | 7.599 |
| D13 | Influence of assistant language teacher on instruction |
1 (M=2.168) vs. 3 (M= 985) 2 (M=2.361) vs. 3 (M=.985) |
47.167 |
| D14 | Influence of students' parents' expectations on instruction |
1 (M=2.656) vs. 2 (M=2.397) 2 (M=2.397) vs. 3 (M=2.857) |
14.641 |
| Item | Item Description | Significantly Different Cells | F-Value |
| A3 | Communicative information gap activity | 1 (M=3.876) vs. 3 (M=3.518) 2 (M=3.879) vs. 3 (M=3.518) |
17.440 |
| D13 | Influence of assistant language teacher on instruction | 1 (M=3.601) vs. 3 (M =.856) 2 (M=3.327) vs. 3 (M=.856) |
380.547 |
This questionnaire is designed for teachers who are currently teaching English I and/or English II. If you are not teaching these courses this year, please give this questionnaire to a colleague who is teaching English I and/or English II this year. Thank you!
Please read the activity descriptions below and write a circle or check in the blank that best describes your level of agreement. Please consider each activity carefully, and let your response reflect your true impression about the appropriateness of the activities for your current English I or II classes. If you choose "5" for example, this means you would be strongly willing to use the activity in your class. If you choose "1", this means, you would not be at all willing to use the activity. Please choose only one response.
Items are rated on a 5-point scale from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree with "Don’t Know" as the middle option.
A-1. The teacher asks students to translate English phrases or sentences into Japanese as preparation for class. I think the above is an appropriate activity for my English I or English II classes: SA A DK D SD
A-2. The teacher has students look at a page that has a "picture strip story." Students can uncover only one picture at a time. Before uncovering the next picture, the students predict, writing the prediction in English, what will happen in the next picture. Students can then look at the next picture to confirm or disconfirm their predictions. I think the above is an appropriate activity for my English I or English II classes:
A-3. The teacher has the students work face to face in pairs. One student sees a page that has some missing information. The other student sees a different page that has that information. The first student must ask questions in English to the other student to find the missing information. I think the above is an appropriate activity for my English I or English II classes:
A-4. The teacher asks students to translate English phrases or sentences into Japanese in preparation for class. Then in class, the teacher calls on individual students to read their Japanese translation of an English phrase or sentence, and the teacher corrects it if necessary and gives the whole class the correct translation with an explanation. I think the above is an appropriate activity for my English I or English II classes:
A-5. The teacher has students chorally repeat word pairs such as sheep/ship and leave/live. I think the above is an appropriate activity for my English I or English II classes:
A-6. The teacher has students memorize and practice a short English sentence pattern. The teacher then gives the students a one word English cue and has the students chorally say the sentence pattern using the new word. I think the above is an appropriate activity for my English I or English II classes:
A-7. The teacher pairs off students. Then the teacher asks the students to write a letter in English to their partner. I think the above is an appropriate activity for my English I or English II classes:
A-8. The teacher has students memorize an English dialog and then has the students practice the dialog together with a partner. I think the above is an appropriate activity for my English I or English II classes:
A-9. The teacher has pairs or small groups of students ask each other and then answer questions in English about their opinions. I think the above is an appropriate activity for my English I or English II classes:
A-10. Students read a sentence in Japanese, and then see an equivalent English sentence below where the words been scrambled up. The students must then rewrite the English sentence in the correct order suggested by the Japanese sentence. I think the above is an appropriate activity for my English I or English II classes:
A-11. On one page students see a picture. Underneath the picture are several short English stories. Students have to choose which story they think best matches the picture. I think the above is an appropriate activity for my English I or English II classes:
A-12. On a page, students see an English paragraph in which the sentences have been scrambled. The teacher then asks the students to put the sentences into order so the paragraph makes sense. I think the above is an appropriate activity for my English I or English II classes:
A-13. What activity do you feel is most effective for your students in your English I or II class? Please write a brief description here: (Optional)
Please answer the following questions by writing a check next to
the most correct answer. Choose only one response.
B-1. How many years have you been teaching in high school?_____ 0-8 years_____ 9-16 years_____ 17+ years
B-2. What kind of high school are you currently teaching in?_____ public academic high school_____ public commercial or industrial high school_____ public night high school_____ private academic school
B-3. Are you currently teaching English I or English II with an ALT (Assistant Language Teacher)?_____ Yes, at least once a week._____ Yes, but less than once a week._____ No, I do not teach English I or English II with an ALT
Please read the sentences below and write a check in the blank that best describes your level of agreement. Choose only once response.
C-1. My English speaking ability is good enough for me to use in class.
C-2. As a student I studied English primarily through translating English stories, essays, or literary works into Japanese.
C-3. I think the pace we have to teach English at my high school is:much too fast____ fast____ about right____ slow____ much too slow____
C-4. The average size of my English I or English II classes is:over 50____ 40-49____ 30-39____ 20-29____ below 19____
Please read the sentences below concerning your current
instruction in English I and II classes and write a check in the
blank that best describes your level of agreement. Choose only
one response.
D-1. The Monbusho guidelines for English I and English II influences my classroom practice.
D-2. College and university entrance exams influence my classroom practice.
D-3. The textbook my students are using influences my classroom practice.
D-4. The teaching license program I completed at university influences my current classroom practice.
D-5. In-service teacher education specifically designed for
English teaching offered by my prefectural or
municipal board of education influences my classroom
practice.
In-service teacher education for English teaching is not
available from the Board of Education for me.
D-6. The way I learned English as a student influences my current classroom practice.
D-7. My English teaching colleagues influence my classroom practice.
D -8. The principal at my school influences my classroom practice.
D-9. Teaching courses I have taken privately influence my
current classroom practice.
_____ I have not taken teaching courses privately.
D-10. My membership in a private academic organization
influences my classroom
_____ I am not a member of an academic organization.
D-11. The English I and English II syllabus used at my school influences my classroom practice.
D-12. The number of students in my English I or II classes influences my classroom practice. (i.e., Would you teach differently if your classes had many students or few students?)
D-13. The ALT I teach English I or II with influences my
classroom practice.
_____ I do not currently teach English I or English II with an
ALT.
D-14. The expectations of my students’ parents influences my classroom practice.
D-15. My students’ expectations about how to study English influences my classroom practice.
D-16. My students’ abilities in English influences my classroom practice.
D-17. My level of English speaking ability influences my classroom practice.
D-18. What is one influence not listed above that you feel strongly influences your instruction of English I or English II? (Optional)
Copyright 2001 by the Education Policy Analysis ArchivesThe World Wide Web address for the Education Policy Analysis Archives is epaa.asu.edu General questions about appropriateness of topics or particular articles may be addressed to the Editor, Gene V Glass, glass@asu.edu or reach him at College of Education, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-0211. (602-965-9644). The Commentary Editor is Casey D. Cobb: casey.cobb@unh.edu . EPAA Editorial Board
|