The 22nd
Princeton Japanese Pedagogy Forum
PROCEEDINGS
May 9-10, 2015
Department of East Asian Studies
Princeton University
Princeton, NJ
22nd Princeton Japanese Pedagogy Forum
PROCEEDINGS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................... i
PREFACE........................................................................................................................ v
PJPF PROGRAM ........................................................................................................... vi
PAPERS
Nobuaki Takahashi (Elizabethtown College)
...................................................... 1
Noriko Yabuki-Soh (York University)
........................................................................................................................................... 17
Noriaki Furuya (Waseda University)
― ................................................................................................. 28
Noriko Hanabusa (University of Notre Dame)
.............................. 39
Ayumi Nagatomi (Japan Center for Michigan Universities)
............................................................. 49
Naoko Nemoto (Mount Holyoke College)
Wordpress
........................ 62
Shiyo Kaku (University of Pennsylvania)
............................................................................................. 74
Keiko Ono & Tomoko Shibata (Princeton University)
....................................... 94
Yoko Sakurai (Japan Foundation New York)
............................................ 106
Shinji Shimoura (Purdue University)
. ............ 124
Hisashi Noda (National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics, Japan), Ayako
Sakaue (Osaka University), & Eiji Nakayama (Osaka Sangyo University)
...................................................... 142
i
ChihTzu Kao (Columbia University)
OPI
...............................................................................................................................153
Shinji Kawamitsu (University of Massachusetts, Amherst)
........................................................166
Naoko Kurokawa (Duke University)
......................179
Hiroko Mishima, Mayu Miyamoto, & Shohko Yanagisawa (Purdue University)
...........................191
Yasuo Shimizu (Doshisha University)
......................................................................206
Nobuko Wang (Senshu University)
..............................................................................................214
Guohe Zheng (Ball State University)
Dual Enrollment and Its Impact on Japanese Education .................................................224
Ryoko Hayashi (Kobe University), Chiyo Kunimura (Ecole Universitaire de
Management of the University of Rennes 1), and Jumpei Kaneda (National Museum
of Ethnology)
CARAP
......................................................................................................234
Midori Inagaki (Waseda University)
..........................................................................................247
Yuko Kojima (University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee)
................................................................................................257
Itsuko Nishikawa (University of Washington)
--
...............................269
Sumiko Nishizawa (Kwantlen Polytechnic University) & Miki Niiyama (Kurume
University)
..............................................................................281
Reiko Sono (University of Massachusetts, Amherst)
A Case Study of Team-Based Learning in a Content-Based Japanese Course ...............291
Yasuko Matsumoto (Harvard University)
NHK
..........................................................................................................................306
Chihiro Kinoshita Thomson (University of New South Wales)
............................................................................................319
ii
Seiichi Makino (Princeton University)
........................................327
iii
PREFACE
We are happy to present the Proceedings of the 22nd Princeton Japanese Pedagogy
Forum held on May 9 and 10, 2015. This year the theme of the Forum was “Japanese
Language Education for the Global Citizen (
).”
We had twenty-seven presentations including fourteen poster sessions and around hundred
participants attending the Forum. I would like to thank all presenters, session chairs, and
participants for making this Forum so successful.
This year we had two keynote speakers: Professor Chihiro Kinoshita Thomson from
University of New South Wales, Australia and Emeritus Professor Seiichi Makino from
Princeton University. Professor Thomson gave a talk about “
.”
Professor Makino also kindly agreed to give a lecture on “
.” We would like to thank both keynote speakers. The Forum
invited a keynote from Oceania for the first time. We received very positive feedback after
the Forum. If you have any professors whom you would like to invite, please let us know.
The 22nd Princeton Japanese Pedagogy Forum was funded by the East Asian Studies
Program at Princeton University. We would like to express our deep appreciation for their
generous financial support. I would also like to thank our lecturers: Yukari Tokumasu,
Tomoko Shibata, Hisae Matsui, Rie Tameyori. Without their hard work, the Forum couldn’t
have been this successful.
Next year instead of the regular Princeton Japanese Pedagogy Forum in May, the
Japanese Language Program in cooperation with French and Spanish Programs will have a
special themed conference, “Language Education for Global Citizenship” conference in
April 22-23, 2016. The guest speakers will be Sebastien Dubreil (University of Tennessee),
Jennifer Leeman (George Mason University), Richard Kern (University of California,
Berkeley), Ryuko Kubota (University of British Columbia), Mills Nicole (Harvard
University), and Mastin Prinsloo (University of Cape Town). We hope that many people
will attend the conference next year.
Dr. Shinji Sato
Senior Lecturer
Director of Japanese Language Program
Princeton University
iv
The 22nd Princeton Japanese Pedagogy Forum
Japanese Language Education for the Global Citizen
May 9-10, 2015
Computer Science Building & Friend Center
Princeton University
SCHEDULE
May 9 (Saturday)
8:00 - 8:50 a.m. Registration and Breakfast @Computer Science Building
(Registration Fee is $40 ($30 for students). It is $30 ($20 for students) if you attend only on
Sunday, May 10. Credit card payment only. No cash or check will be accepted.)
8:50 a.m. Opening Remarks @ 104 Computer Science
....................................................................................................................................................
Chair: Naoko Nemoto (Mount Holyoke College)
9:00 - 9:30 a.m.
Nobuaki Takahashi (Elizabethtown College)
(
)
9: 30- 10:00 a.m.
Noriko Yabuki-Soh (York University)
(
)
10: 00- 10:30 a.m.
Noriaki Furuya (Waseda University)
―(
)
...................................................................................................................................................
15-minute Break (10:30 - 10:45 a.m.) Drinks and cookies will be served.
...................................................................................................................................................
Chair: Hisashi Noda (National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics,
Japan)
10:45 - 11:15 a.m.
Noriko Hanabusa (University of Notre Dame)
(
11: 15- 11:45 a.m.
Fumi Yamakawa (International Christian University)
(
)
11: 45- 12:15 p.m.
Ayumi Nagatomi (Japan Center for Michigan Universities)
(
)
v
)
...................................................................................................................................................
12:15 - 1:15 p.m. -- Lunch Break @Friend Center Lower Level (Room 004 & 006)
(Lunch is included in the registration fee.)
*Kinokuniya Bookstore Booth
...................................................................................................................................................
Poster Session A (1:15 - 2:00 p.m.) @Friend Center Lower Level (Hallway)
ChihTzu Kao (Columbia University)
OPI
Shinji Kawamitsu (University of Massachusetts, Amherst)
Naoko Kurokawa (Duke University)
Hiroko Mishima, Mayu Miyamoto, & Shohko Yanagisawa (Purdue University)
Yasuo Shimizu (Doshisha University)
Nobuko Wang (Senshu University)
Guohe Zheng (Ball State University)
Dual Enrollment and Its Impact on Japanese Education
...................................................................................................................................................
Chair: Noriko Hanabusa (University of Notre Dame) @ 104 Computer Science
2:00 - 2:30 p.m.
Yuka Akiyama (Georgetown University)
Task-based Investigation of Learner Perceptions: Affordances of Video-based eTandem
Learning (English)
2:30 - 3:00 p.m.
Naoko Nemoto (Mount Holyoke College)
Wordpress
(
)
...................................................................................................................................................
15-minute Break (3:00 - 3:15 p.m.) Drinks and cookies will be served.
...................................................................................................................................................
Chair: Noriko Hanabusa (University of Notre Dame) @ 104 Computer Science
3:15- 3:45 p.m.
Shiyo Kaku (University of Pennsylvania)
(
)
vi
3:45 - 4:15 p.m.
Keiko Ono & Tomoko Shibata (Princeton University)
(
)
...................................................................................................................................................
15-minute Break (4:15 - 4:30 p.m.)
...................................................................................................................................................
4:30-6:00 p.m.
Keynote Speaker @ 104 Computer Science
Chihiro Kinoshita Thomson (University of New South Wales)
(
)
...................................................................................................................................................
6:30 - 8:00 p.m.
Dinner Banquet
vii
May 10 (Sunday)
8:30 - 8:45 a.m.
Registration and Breakfast
...................................................................................................................................................
Poster Session B (8:45 - 9:30 a.m.) @Friend Center Lower Level (Hallway)
Ryoko Hayashi (Kobe University), Chiyo Kunimura (Ecole Universitaire de
Management of the University of Rennes 1), and Jumpei Kaneda (National Museum
of Ethnology)
CARAP
Midori Inagaki (Waseda University)
Yuko Kojima (University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee)
Yasuko Matsumoto (Harvard University)
NHK
Itsuko Nishikawa (University of Washington)
-Sumiko Nishizawa (Kwantlen Polytechnic University) & Miki Niiyama (Kurume
University)
Reiko Sono (University of Massachusetts, Amherst)
A Case Study of Team-Based Learning in a Content-Based Japanese Course
...................................................................................................................................................
Chair: Ayumi Nagatomi (Japan Center for Michigan Universities) @ 104 Computer
Science
9:30 - 10:00 a.m.
Yoko Sakurai (Japan Foundation New York)
(
)
10:00 - 10:30 a.m.
Shinji Shimoura (Purdue University)
(
)
10: 30- 11:00 a.m.
Hisashi Noda (National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics, Japan),
Ayako Sakaue (Osaka University), & Eiji Nakayama (Osaka Sangyo University)
(
)
...................................................................................................................................................
15-minute Break (11:00 - 11:15 a.m.) Drinks and cookies will be served.
viii
...................................................................................................................................................
11: 15- 12:45 a.m.
Keynote Speaker @ 104 Computer Science
Seiichi Makino (Princeton University)
(
)
...................................................................................................................................................
12:45 – 1:00 p.m. Closing Remarks
ix
THE IMPACT OF EXPLICIT INSTRUCTION OF ERROR CORRECTION
TECHNIQUES ON PAIRWORK:
UPTAKE AND TENDENCY FOR CHOSEN CORRECTIVE TECHNIQUES
Nobuaki Takahashi
Elizabethtown College
1
2005
1980
1990
1
2 Form-Focused Instruction (FFI)
2.1
1980
Krashen & Terrell, 1983
language teaching
Task-based
Ellis, 2003
Task-supported language teaching
Ellis,
2003
Focus on Meaning
Doughty & Williams, 1998; Swain, 1985
Ellis,
2008
Focus on form
1
FFI
Focus on Meaning
Focus on Form
Focus on FormS
Focus on FormS
Doughty & Williams
1
1998
Long & Robinson (1998)
Focus on formS
Focus on form
2
2.2
Loewen 2002
Focus on Form
Focus on Form
Focus on Form
Ellis, Basturkmen, &
Pre-emptive Focus on Form Reactive
2
Pre-emptive Focus on Form
Reactive Focus on Form
2.2.1
Negotiation for Meaning
Long, 1996
Negotiation for Form
Reactive Focus on Form
Lyster & Ranta, 1997
2
Ellis (2001)
Planned Focus on Form
3
Incidental Focus on Form
2.2.2
Lyster &
Ranta
1997
6
3
(1)
(2)
(3)
…
(4)
(5)
(6)
6
(2)
(5)
Lyster, 2004
, 2015
2.2.3.
3
Moroishi, 2001
2015
4
Focus on Form
Focus on FormS
Focus on Meaning
2.3
1970
Chaudron, 1977
Hendrickson, 1978
Krashen & Terrell, 1983; Truscott, 1999
Lyster & Mori, 2006; McDonough, 2005; Moroishi, 2001; Morris, 2002
Oskoz &
Liskin-Gasparro, 2002
, 2005
Long, 1991, 1996
Swain, 1985, 1995
Lyster &
Ranta, 1997; Moroishi, 2001; Sheen, 2010
3
3.1
5
1970
1990
1
Ohta, 1999
Hatasa & Fujiwara, 2011
McDonough, 2004
Yoshida, 2008
Face-Threatening Act
2
FTA
Loschkey & Bley-Vroman,
1993; Takahashi, 2003
Sato & Lyster,
2007; Takahashi, 2003
3.2
1
2
3
Sato & Lyster
2012
167
1
2
3
4
10
3
1
2
Sato & Lyster
6
4
3.3
4
(1)
(2)
Modified Output
(3)
(4)
4
4.1
2
12
1
3
9
18
1
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
S7
S8
S9
S10
S11
S12
19
19
20
18
18
19
21
19
20
18
21
20
Comp. Science
Actuarial Science
4.2
6
7
21
2
2
2
Lyster & Ranta
1997
6
4.3
4
Stimulated Recall Protocol
Sinclair & Coulthard
IRF Routine
1 Initiation
2
Response
I
1975
3
Follow-up
R
F
1
IRF
S1:
S2:
S1:
S2:
S2
1
…
1
Oh, do I say 1
Initiation
Response
? Okay, so…
Follow-up
S1:
0
1
1
0
Response
1
2
0
3
8
4
5
5.1
352
32
30
106
IRF
132
114
37
2
2
114
106
132
n = 352
(32.39%)
(30.11%)
(37.50%)
32.39%
37.50%
30.11%
5.2
1
1
3
9
3
3
6
1
105/114
69/106
37/132
9
n = 352
(92.11%)
(65.09%)
(28.03%)
100.00%
92.11%
80.00%
65.09%
60.00%
40.00%
28.03%
20.00%
0.00%
5.3
2
2
94.29
89.19
84.06
4
4
2
99/105
58/69
33/37
100.00%
94.29%
n = 211
(92.29%)
(84.06%)
(89.19%)
89.19%
84.06%
80.00%
60.00%
40.00%
20.00%
0.00%
5.4
3
10
94
89%
85
5
5
3
93/99
52/58
28/33
100.00%
93.94%
89.66%
n = 190
(93.94%)
(89.66%)
(84.85%)
84.85%
80.00%
60.00%
40.00%
20.00%
0.00%
5.5
4
4
5.6
Sato & Lyster
11
2012
1
•
•
2
•
3
•
•
FTA
6
6.1
Takahashi
2007
9
Swain 1985
6.2
12
1990
Scaffolding
Zone of Proximal Development ZPD
Ohta, 1995, 2001
Swain & Lapkin, 1998
4
7
Lyster &
Ranta 2013
4
Morris & Tarone (2003)
13
(1)
(2)
(a)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(f)
(g)
(e)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Languaging
Swain, 2009
(g)
(f)
(2005).
9, 119-130.
http://ir.library.tohoku.ac.jp/re/bitstream/10097/48299/1/AA111905379-119.pdf
(2015)
Chaudron, C. (1977). A descriptive model of discourse in the corrective treatment of
learner’s errors. Language Learning, 27, 29-46.
Ellis, R. (2001). Introduction: Investigating form-focused instruction. Language Learning,
51, 1-46.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
14
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H. & Loewen, S. (2002). Doing focus on form. System, 30, 419432.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Issues and terminology. In C. Doughty & J.
Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 1-11).
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hatasa, Y. & Fujiwara, Y. (2011). An analysis of task t ypes, L2 learners’ focus, and their
production in Japanese as a foreign language classrooms. Hiroshima Daigaku
Daigakuin Kyooikugaku Kenkyuuka Kiyoo, 60, 163-172.
Hendrickson, J. (1978). Error correction in foreign language teaching: Recent theory,
research, and practice. Modern Language Journal, 62, 387-398.
Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in
the classroom. Hayward, CA: Alemany Press.
Long, M. H. & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C.
Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language
acquisition (pp. 15-63). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology.
In K. de Bot, D. Coste, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language
research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language
acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language
acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Loschky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. In G.
Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and
practice (pp. 123-167). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Lyster, R., & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 269-300.
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399-432.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of
form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 3766.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (2013). The case for variety in corrective feedback research.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(1), 167-184.
McDonough, K. (2004). Learner-learner interaction during pair and small group activities
in a Thai EFL context. System, 32, 207-224.
McDonough, K. (2005). Identifying the impact of negative feedback and learners'
responses on ESL question development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27,
79-103.
Moroishi, M. (2001). Nihongo kyooshi no iinaoshi no shiyoo no koosatsu (Consideration
of the use of recasts by Japanese language teachers). Gengogaku to Nihongo Kyooiku
II (Linguistics and Japanese Language Education II), 237-252.
Morris, F. A. (2002). Negotiation and recasts in relation to error types and learner repair.
Foreign Language Annals, 35, 395-404.
Morris, F. A., & Tarone, E. E. (2003). Impact of classroom dynamics on the effectiveness
of recasts in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 53, 325-368.
15
Ohta, A. S. (1995). Applying sociocultural theory to an analysis of learner discourse:
Learner-learner collaborative interaction in the zone of proximal development. Issues
in Applied Linguistics, 6, 93-121.
Ohta, A. S. (1999). Interactional routines and the socialization of interactional style in
adult learners of Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 1493-1512.
Ohta, A. S. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning
Japanese. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Oskoz, A., & Liskin-Gasparro, J. (2002). Corrective feedback, learner uptake, and
teacher's beliefs: A pilot study. In X. Bonch-Bruevich, W. J. Crawford, J. Hellermann,
C. Higgins & H. Nguyen (Eds.), The past, present and future of second language
research selected proceedings of the 2000 second language research forum (pp. 209228). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2007). Modified output of Japanese EFL learners: Variable
effects of interlocutor vs. feedback types. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational
interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp. 123142). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sato M., & Lyster R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and
fluency development: Monitoring, practice, and proceduralization. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 34(4), 591-626.
Sinclair, J., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Sheen, Y. (2010). Differential effects of oral and written corrective feedback in the ESL
classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 203-234.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and
comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input
in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In Cook, G.
and Seidelhofer, B. (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in
honor of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (2009). 4 Languaging, agency and collaboration in advanced second language
proficiency1. Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and
Vygotsky, 95.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two
adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language
Journal, 82, 320-337.
Yoshida, R. (2008). Perception of corrective feedback in pair work. Foreign Language
Annals, 41(3), 525-541/
Truscott, J. (1999). What’s wrong with oral grammar correction. Canadian Modern
Language Review, 55, 437-456.
Takahashi, N. (2003). Corrective feedback in peer-fronted and teacher-fronted JFL
classroom interactions. Unpublished Master’s thesis. The University of Iowa, IA.
Takahashi, N. (2007). The differential effects of perceptual saliency on recasts in L2
Japanese: Learners’ noticing, interpretation, detection, and subsequent oral
production. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.
16
EXPRESSIONS OF VIEWPOINT FOUND IN L2 LEARNERS’
WRITTEN NARRATIVES AND INSTRUCTIONAL SUGGESTIONS
Noriko Yabuki-Soh
York University
1.
1983
2.
1975
1978
1
1983
p. 78
1
1978
17
1992
1983
2006
p. 26
2003-2004 Ikegami, 2005
3.
1995
1996
1992
2
2001
2007
2012
2
2010
18
4.
4.1
18
18
B+
83
90
3
4.2
4.2
3
19
5.
5.1
1
4
1
(n=18)
11 (61%)
2 (11%)
4 (22%)
1 (6%)
10 (56%)
2 (11%)
4 (22%)
2 (11%)
(n=18)
2 (11%)
6 (33%)
10 (56%)
0
3 (17%)
4 (22%)
10 (56%)
1 (6%)
4
1
2
20
(1)
(2)
(1)
(2)
1995
1996
5.2
2
2
(n=18)
4 (22%)
0
0
14 (78%)
(n=18)
8 (44%)
5 (28%)
2 (11%)
3 (17%)
(3)
(4)
(3)
21
(4)
(5)
(6) (7)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(5)
(6)
(7)
2012
5.3
3
3
(n=18)
11 (61%)
5 (28%)
2 (11%)
(8)
(9)
(8)
22
(n=18)
3 (17%)
15 (83%)
0
(9)
(10)
(10)
2001
6.
6.1
5
5
Makino & Tsutsui (1986)
“Viewpoint”
23
6
1995
(11)
“send”
*
(11) Hanako sent me a package.
*
1995
6
Situational Functional Japanese Volume Two: Drills p. 124
24
p. 59
6.2
2012
(12)
(12) a.
b.
c.
2012
a
p. 56
b
c
2006
1989
(13)
(13)
The train came out of the long tunnel into the snow country.
2006
The train
25
p. 25,
(14) (15)
(14)
“ … She told me today you were here.”
(15)
“ … The porter caught me (and) scold(ed) me. …”
(14)
(15)
“scold”
(16)
(16)
…
(The woman) would be a good companion for his wife. … Just as he had arrived
at the conclusion that …, he abruptly switched to the occidental dance.
7.
26
(1983)
7-42.
(2003-2004)
(1)-(2)
No 3-No4.
(2006)
35/5, 20-27.
(1975)
(1989)
(1995)
67, 173-180.
29, 57-73.
(2007)
14, 31-43.
(1983)
132, 65-80.
(1947)
(2001)
109, 60-69.
11, 12-19.
(1992)
(1978)
(2010)
59, 289-298.
(1995)
85, 25-37.
(1992)
(1996)
(2012)
11, 57-71.
9, 51-58.
Ikegami, Y. (2005). Indices of a “Subjectivity-Prominent” Language: Between Cognitive
Linguistics and Linguistic Typology. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 3:
132-164.
Seidensticker, E. G. (1956). Snow country. New York: Vintage Books.
Tsukuba Language Group. (1994). Situational Functional Japanese, Volume Two: Drills.
Tokyo: Bonjinsha.
27
sp
i
How are Japanese Language Teachers Engaged to Organize an Environment for
Leaning Japanese Outside a Classroom?:
The Japanese Language Teacher as Mediator
FURUYA Noriaki
Waseda University
T
pr
2010
i
2015
w
T
i
k
k
T
i
_p
s
_p
1
w
pr2 T
T
s
T
_p
i
w
ip
w
k
k
1986
l
c
1990
i
2006
c
k
p
o
sp
a
k
a
_w
o
o
2
T
T
2008
c
2012
pr
i
T
i
T
w
r
T
2010
2011
2014
2014
s
2010
w
p
2007
p
e
1
i
d
ip
t
28
sp
p T pr
T
2014
w sp
k
p
i T
pr
w
i
s
k
ip
l
i
t
g
sp
i
k
k
w
k
cw
w
w
2014
i
_p
i
p
ip
k
o
w
ip
p
pr
i
11
i i
ip i
i
ip
k
2009
u_tt
w
S
i
i
4985
k
w
w
3
i
i
cw
p
k
w
pr
i
ipa
w
k
w
w_
kw
sp
a
k
i
i
g
T
p
k
d
p
i
T
k
ICC
d
i
k
sp
n
k
sp
oew
i i
pr
e
g
k
pr
w
pr
_
ip e
2012
c
i
i
T
k
c
w
i
e
2010
sp
4
3T2014
(
)
2014
11
1
< http://www.waseda.jp/cie/pdf/admission/date/201411_jp.pdf > 2015
5
8
4
ipT
p _p
T
u_
ip
29
itt
3.1.
2 w
p
pr 2010
T
S
e
i
k
w
k e
a
w_
ip
k
ip
T
k
i
s
i
w
k
b
S
3.2.
3.2.1.
T
k
e
_
c
c
pr
r
T
d
i
i
i
ip
i
T
ip
c
2011
g
p
i
cw
i
i
s
m
e
m
3.2.2.
2010
k
w
g
T
w
w
k
i
p
i
k e
k
k
w
g
p
spT
T
p
k
o
p
c
pr
a
c
p g
k
T
T
c
uc
T
i
p
k
a
p e ip
i
sp
3.2.3.T m
pr
S
i
T
k
k
w
ip T
T
30
p
T
w
w
T m
3.2.1.
w
ip
k
5
T
t
(1)
T
t
g
k
i
e
i
i
i
k
c
(2)
k
k
i
ip
w
k
w
w_
i
k
(3)
k
w
p
i
T
p
k
itt
e
pr
w
a
k
T
w
i
w
c
i
a
cw
p
spa
pT
T
e
s
i
i
_w
a T
k
s
p g
ip o
uc
i
sp
i
i
ip T
cp
ip ipe
t
i
sp
i
T
sp g
p
T
k
T
ip
_
c
e
w
5
T
i
https://www.facebook.com/waseda.nihongo.support >
< http://www.waseda.jp/cjl/support >
31
2014
T
e
T
facebook
WEB
<
T
3.2.4.
pr
s
_ c
_ c
ICC
sp
d
_ c
k e
k
t
ICC
i
i
i
i
i
s
i
p o
p i
i
_p
sp
w
pr
w
w
i o
T
_a
i
w
l
_pk
s
i
ICC
ICC T
T
p
ICC
oew
T
i
i
i T
i
f
g
ip
p e
e
g
t
c
sp
i
pe
a
_p
_
o
spe
c
T
k
T
e
w
i
i
i
spe
d
S
w_
d
k
pr
k
i
h
e
pr
k
e
k
i
i
c
sp
_p
o
t
T
ip
e
a
pr
e
i
32
i
e
_
k
w
1
2
T
_
c
T
T
T
c
c
m
1//
i
i
p
..4
T
m
T
N
N
N
m
6145T
m
9
:
C
T
o
g
: 9
9B
T
m
T
m
9
9B
g
9
C
3074 3 B
9
L
9AC9A
I
L
E
I 8
f
T m
NT m
N
N
N
T
T
TT
m
c
_
w_
i
t
33
T
T m
NT
T
N T
k
i
w
T
1//
T
m
9
T m
NT
N
3074 3 B
9
L
9B
I
L
I 8
w
T
k
T
V
T
m
p
W
tj
6145-
T
m
9
9B
T m
NT
2 L
NT
7122 79
T
T
p
T
V
3074 3 B
9
L
V
w
f
91
L
I 9 A
9 29
L9
ke
k
W
m
k
W
V
T
m
m
W
k
p
W
70.
V
W
T
T
I 8
w
T
m
TT
V
I
m
9
9B
c T
3074 3 B
9
L
34
I
L
I 8
1//
c
w
pr
T
s
_p
t
k
4.1.
pr
T
k
S
_
pr
ip
k
c
e
w
o
i
2
i
S
i
_
c
_p
sp
sp
k
_
k
c
T
T
ICC
4.2.
pr
T
knotworking
T
t
i
a
T
T
ua
gm
p.39
2008
s _p
m
k
w
k T
p
T
T
w
T
35
T
t
prw
f
o
g
p.40
sp
o
g
pT
a
w
t
k
a
i
p
k
j
i
pr
g
r
i
a
sp
eo
k
k
oi
e
g
m
4.3.
pr
AR
T
r
ua
i
d
2010
_p
T(1)
i
AR
i
k
cp
(2)
ip
k
p.13
2010
d
2008
k
k
k
k
k
AR w
cp
w
w
1)
k
(1)
i g
AR
T
p.173
w
p.174 w
w a
T
i
2008
s
p
i
T
AR
t
j
p
s
ip
2)
w
s
i
ip
w
w
i
w
e
w
T
w
ip
pr
w
a
i
k
t
_
36
c
e
i
i
p
w
i
i
k
T
2005
i
p
w
ip
NPO
i
c
tcp
k
c T
w
p.325
2005
t i
i
T
k
w
w
w
g
_p
i i
k e
p
_w
T
i
k
p
w_
i
2007 V
W tj
1990 V
p
c
W
2010 T
2009
c
V
W
p
pp.32-43.
l
2005 T
W47
V
p. 325.
2012 T
pp.7-23
V
37
W
2011 T
c
VWEB
W
http://www.nkg.or.jp/kenkyu/Forumhoukoku/2011forum/2011_P14_kurod
a.pdf
2014 T
k p
T m
VWEB
W
http://www.nkg.or.jp/kenkyu/Forumhoukoku/2014hokoku/2014_SF_sen.p
df
2006 T
V
p
Wpp.10-32.
Parker,Ian 2008 V
W
2004
e
2008 Ve
k
k
W
2010 V
k
W
2008 T
i
V
Wpp.1-57.
38
DOES EXTENSIVE READING CLASS PROMOTE AUTONOMOUS
LEARNING? A REPORT OF LEARNERS' SELF-ASSESSMENTS
Noriko Hanabusa
University of Notre Dame
1.
(1993)
(
1993)
2.
2.1
(
(
2010)
2012)
(
2002)
(
1999,
39
2000)
(
(
1999)
2000)
1999,
2.2
(2008)
(2002)
1.
2.
3.
(
2008,
2002)
(
2008,
2002)
21
Student Learning Outcome Statement
(2010)
(
(
1
1993)
2010)
(2010)
(2008)
(
2008)
3.
(
(Hardy 2013)
(2012)
1
40
2012)
2001
2002
(
2014)
NPO
2.
1.
4.
3.
(
2012)
0
5
CD
(
NPO
2012, NPO
)
4.
4.1
12,000
4
60
2
2
2012
2013
2013
1
2
2014
2
2014
2015
2
2
1
50
2
100
41
1
1-2
2014
16
60
2015
22
2015
Letter Grade
2
50%
1
Letter Grade
Pass/Fail
4.2
(Google form)
3
0
(2014)
4
2
5
Book Chat
3
Tadoku
4
42
5.
2
3
5.1
4.2
1
5
(Google Form Response Sheet)
(1
2
)
2015
4/9
2
0
Google form
Web
5.2
43
First, go to the Google form spread sheet and read your own reading journal
portfolio. Review which books you have read so far.
1. Do you enjoy extensive reading activities? Why?
2. How would you describe the outcomes (in terms of your language skills,
improvements, changes, etc.)?
3. What do you want to do/accomplish in the second half of this semester?
4. Do you have any idea for the end of semester 'mini-project'?
5. Please give us suggestions/feedback for the class/library to improve this
class.
5.3
1. About your own presentation on the project: What went well, and what
could be improved?
2. What did you think about the presentations by your classmates?
3. Any feedback about the format of the project
4. What is your overall impression about the Extensive Reading in
Japanese class this semester?
5. What outcomes did you see? (improvement/changes in your language
skills, etc.)?
6. What are your goals in Japanese study for the coming semester and
beyond?
2
6.
6.1
2.2
(
2010,
2008)
1.
2.
3.
2015
44
(
22
)
xx
(8
(4
)
)
(2
(3
)
)
CD
(17
)
(9
3
)
3
22
13
(
59
)
• I hope to continue studying and practicing on my own so I can make the
most of my time in Japan next year.
• Since I will be graduating, I want to continue reading and practicing
Japanese on my own.
• I will continue to study Japanese in my graduate school.
• I would keep reading Japanese books and perhaps authentic materials.
• I will try to create opportunities to practice Japanese.
6
6.2
45
2
1
2
1
1
4.2
inspire
2
visual
POP
2
1-2
2
1
Scrap Book
46
1
7.
Fun, Enjoyable
64%
5
6
Language Center
7
Extensive Reading
8
5
NPO
6
7
Curate ND
8
Center for the Study of Languages and Cultures
Office of Digital Learning
47
2015
11
(2010)
38
http://www.jpf.go.jp/j/japanese/survey/tsushin/reserch/201003.html (2015
2 )
(2012)
NPO
Tadoku
http://ameblo.jp/setagayatadokuclub/ (2015 5 2 )
NPO
http://tadoku.org/learners/l-about (2015 5 2 )
NPO
[
]
http://tadoku.org/blog/blog/2015/05/02/1898 (2015
(2012)
(2014)
pp. iii-vi.
(2014)
5
2
5
)
pp. 15-46.
(2010)
pp. 1-17.
1993
1999
, 17-27.
2008
—
—
(2000)
136, 27-37.
107
— (2002)
pp. 172-187.
Hardy, Jane (2013) “Getting students to enjoy reading in a foreign language.” The
Language Educator, 8 (6), 37-39.
National Standards for Foreign Language Education
http://www.actfl.org/node/192(2015 5 2 )
21st Century Skills Map World Languages
http://www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/21stCenturySkillsMap/p21_worldlanguag
esmap.pdf (2015 5 2 )
48
REFLECTIVE LEARNING TO NURTURE LIFE-LONG LEARNING THROUGH
STUDY-ABROAD
Ayumi Nagatomi
Japan Center for Michigan Universities
1.
Richards
2008
As they move from the basic to intermediate to advanced levels in their language
proficiency, many second- or foreign-language learners will confirm that
language learning does not always follow a smooth progression. 1995
2010
ESL
2.
49
[
2008
]
Zimmerman and Schunk
2008
“defensive reactions
(e.g. helplessness, procrastination, task avoidance, cognitive disengagement, and apathy)”
2008
2012
Black and William (1998)
Focus on learning rather than performance
Build self-assessment skills vital for lifelong learning
Rest on a belief that all students’ learning must be supported
Make students aware that their beliefs about their own capacity as learners
affects their outcomes
Be aligned with teaching and learning practices
Generate self improvement
Separate feedback on learning from grading processes
Utilize a criterion or standards-based framework
Encourage reflective learning
3.
3.1.
50
16
3
3
2
300
3.2.
Can-do
3
Can-do
Can-do
20
0
10
Can-do
3.2.1.
A
A. I am better at understanding long clauses and separating important information.
51
à
B. “(Can-do
) Can make a well-organized, simple speech at a speech contest
and respond to anticipated questions, if one has prepared beforehand.” = 10
à(
)
8 … if I can prepare ahead of time, I can usually memorize my speech
very well, but responding to questions might be hard.)
à
)
I changed some points from previous time because I want to show the
improvements or previous points were higher than I actually was. I noticed
that I have to keep notes with me to write down Japanese I learned every
day.
C.
2010
3.2.2.
à
D. Can successfully order meal at a restaurant.
à Read and understand an article in a magazine.
E.
JLPT
à Eventually, but the first time either 2 or 3.
F. Study seriously every day.
à
N2
G. I need to work hard to improve.
à to improve my accuracy in grammar both in writing and speaking.
à Also practicing saying phrases out loud until they sound correct.
H. Work on my yomi/kaki skills.
à Practice reading Japanese, starting with easier materials and working towards
more difficult novels.
I. Study extremely hard and prepare to take one of the JLPT exams.
52
à I need to study more material outside of the classroom. Usually I approach
learning too systematically, which is good for kanji/vocabulary, but not good for
things that are less memory dependent.
D
E
F
G
H
I
3.2.3.
I try to avoid small mistakes (starting to review “Genki” now).
I tend to study only when and what want. Lately this has become more of a
problem. Also I need to try and speak Japanese more even if I am going to make
mistakes.
Towards the end of the semester, I have gotten better at studying and I should
have tried new ways to study earlier. I should not have panicked so often.
I believe my study habits for getting used to vocabulary, kanji and grammar
patterns has been sufficient so far. However I have lacked in preparing to
formulate spoken sentences as well comprehend listening material. I am trying to
look for resources which use natural Japanese to practice listening comprehension.
Additionally, with native-Japanese speakers staying at the dorm I will practice
sentence composition through dialogue.
3.3.
Dweck and Master 2008
53
k
p
Correcting my oral interviews was helpful to say the least.
I think the self-corrections in particular are very helpful. It can be embarrassing
and uncomfortable to listen to myself speak but hearing the way I speak helps a
lot with correcting myself in the future, as well as discovering my strengths and
weaknesses.
3.4.
3.4.1.
3
4
3.4.2.
16
3
54
A4
2012
e
Looking back at the first essay I wrote at the beginning of this semester and
comparing it to the final draft, I feel that there was quite a lot of improvement, but
not as much as I hoped for. While the final draft definitely uses more complex
sentence structures and incorporates many of the new grammar patterns, I think
that my main weakness in writing in Japanese lies in sentence structure.
This speech was very difficult for me to put together, and I am glad we worked on
it steadily over the course of several months. I think that approaching the speech
in this way instead of trying to write it all at once made it a stronger final draft,
55
and greatly reduced the stress on me as I wrote it…If I could go back and re-work
it one last time, I would probably include a stronger conclusion. I feel like the
opening paragraphs are very strong, but that the ending could stand to be refined
more and the grammar patterns strengthened through revision.
Firstly, I am impressed that I have progressed from my composition at the
beginning of the semester to being able to write the report above. I believe my
writing was easily understandable aside from incorrectly using new grammar
patterns, however, the content of my sentences was very thin. The sentences lack
the ability to show my true opinion about a topic thoroughly but concisely. I am
confident in my ability to show my opinion now using more academic styled
sentences … At times during this essay, there is too much repetition of words and
also too much reliance on direct translation to English. It would have been better
to explain in Japanese some of the words even if they are somewhat complicated.
One of the main differences I notice between the recording of my speech at the
beginning of the semester and that of my final presentation is my reduced
hesitation in speaking… Speaking - and especially listening - are not as
intimidating as they were before I came. I've found myself able to hold long
conversations in Japanese even when I don't understand everything that my
partner says … The mental fortitude to not get overwhelmed by full-speed
natively spoken Japanese is one of the most valuable things I've gained.
When I first came to Japan, despite having taken prior classes and having studied
another foreign language, I still was extremely nervous. However, while I still
make mistakes from time to time, this is a natural part of the learning process for
many. Accepting this has reassured me and helped me to become to be able to
confidently convey what I wish to say to others in Japanese. Therefore, despite
stuttering in a few places and saying the wrong words in certain areas due to
nervousness, I still think I have come a long way from when I started this class.
It has been a huge challenge for me these entire three and a half months, so much
that I oftentimes just wanted to give up… By no means am I near my goal with
speaking but listening to my final product has given me some peace of mind. This
wasn't all for nothing. I am getting better... I definitely could improve on many
aspects. Pronunciation is one of them, particularly on complex conjugations like
causative-passive. Endurance in speaking too - I notice I get a little tired towards
the end and my delivery gets sloppy.
4.
56
e
Can-do
2009
40
“…makes things more complicated”
2005
2012
57
“What your instructor could do to improve this course?”
“Not make homework questions quite so specific (for example, sometimes there are so
many blanks that we have to fill in in a sentence that it's hard to tell what the sentence is
about, which makes it hard to fill in the blanks)”
“I just wish that there was a clearer understanding between me and the teacher between
when I truly don't understand the material and when I simply don't understand what the
particular question is asking.”
Atthesametime,please
reflectontargetpatternsandmaintopics,and atthislevel,itwouldbeagood
ideaforvariousstrategiestobeemployed(asinreal-lifesituations–asanon-native
speaker,youneedtoendure“ambiguity.”Howaboutcheckingnewlyintroduced
patternsand/orvocab(atthislevel,expressingthesameideainvariouswaysis
veryimportant)?
“In the middle of this semester, there were times when people didn't know what to say or
what were the questions about. However, I could tell that people in our class now fully
understand what the teacher is expecting us to say, which is usually by using the new
vocab words and grammar patterns that we just learnt. Although it was tough at the
beginning, I'm actually enjoying the class right now.”
2009
58
2012
e
e
2005
1995
—
27 – 28.
—
:210 – 224.
—
125:126 – 135.
I
7
118:
Can-do
https://jfstandard.jp/cando/top/ja/render.do
2013
40
2008
—
136: 27 – 37.
2009
2010
2010
—
[1 ]
85 – 101.
2010
Proceedings, the 24th JLTANE 2010.
http://sites.williams.edu/jltane/files/2010/09/Henstock_JLTANE2010.pdf
2012
e
e
: 24 – 41
A
2012
—
e
: 2 – 23
Black, P. and D. William 1998 “Assessment and classroom learning.” Assessment
in Education: Principles, Policy & Practices. 5 (1): 7 – 74.
Dweck, C. S., and A. Master. 2008 “Self-theories motivate self-regulated
learning.” Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning: Theory, Research, and
Applications. D.H. Schunk, and B.J. Zimmerman (Eds). New York, NY, USA.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: 31 – 52.
Richards, J.C. 2008 Moving Beyond the Plateau: From Intermediate to Advanced
Levels in Language Learning. New York, NY, USA.
Zimmerman, B. J., and D.H. Schunk. 2008 “Motivation: an essential dimension of
self-regulated learning.” Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning: Theory,
Research, and Applications. D.H. Schunk, and B.J. Zimmerman (Eds). New York,
NY, USA. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: 1 – 30.
59
Can-do
60
1.Mostmemorablemomentinmy“Japanese-languagelearning”history:
2a.IfIwerefluentinJapanese,Iwouldliketo…
b.Inorderfor2a.toberealizedinthefuture,whatIshoulddowhileinJapanis…
3.Myown“Can-do,”ifany(e.g.,“Passlevel3JapaneseLanguageProficiencyTest”):
61
WordPress
“CONSULTATION” ACTIVITIES BETWEEN TWO CAMPUSES VIA WORDPRESS
Naoko Nemoto
Mount Holyoke College
“authentic”
Project Based
Learning
“authentic”
Larmer (2012)
Fully authentic’ means students are doing work that is real to them-it is authentic
to their lives-or the work has a direct impact on or use in the real world.
Larmer (2012)
authentic
Larmer (2012)
WordPress1
2
1http://www.wordpress.com/
2
https://ja.wordpress.org/
62
WordPress
Moodle Sakai Blackboard
WordPress
Administrator, Editor, Reader
Administrator
(invite)
Administrator
Editor
63
J-CAT3
4
Larmer (2012)
3TheJapaneseComputerizedAdaptiveTest.http://www.j-cat.org/
4
(2014)
64
Google Forms
(2014)
Q1: Do you think sharing blogs with students outside this course affected your
performance?
Scale:
NO
A LOT
2
4
3
3
Q1
5
Q2
Q2: Are you interested in sharing class activities with students outside of the college?
NO
0
YES
10
5
GoogleForms
1,2,3,4
NO DIFFERENCE
2
“scale”
65
Q3:
How were the class blog (consultation) activities?
Scale:
DISLIKE
MY FAVORITE
0
Q4:
3
NOT AT ALL
GREATLY
0
0
6
3
2
Did the replies that you received in class blog (consultation) help you solving
your problems?
Scale:
NOT AT ALL
GREATLY
1
5
Do you feel that you helped your blog mates through giving suggestions and
encouragements in class blog (consultation) activities?
Scale:
Q5:
4
2
4
66
2
2
Q6:
Did the class blog (consultation) activities help you to improve writing?
Scale:
NO
YES
0
Q7:
Scale:
Scale:
5
7
When you were assigned to write essays (e.g. class blogs, mid-term exam), you
received the guidelines for assessment. Did you read them carefully before
submitting your essays?
NOT AT ALL
VERY CAREFULLY
0
Q8:
0
1
5
6
Do you think assessment guidelines helped you to improve your writing?
NOT AT ALL
VERY HELPFUL
0
0
5
7
(Phase)
Martin & Rose (2007)
6
6
Genre Theory (Martin & Rose 2007, among others)
stages
Rose & Martin (2012)
“We came to formulate our characterization of genres for
67
Phase I
Stages for Consultation genre Phase I:
(a) Orientation: Introduction of the writer’s circumstances (such as gender, age,
occupation, etc.)
(b) List of events: description of facts, more detailed circumstances
(c) Clarification of your problem
(d) Solicitation of advise (Most important)
7
Stages for Responding genre Phase I:
(a) Salutation (optional)
(b) Personal experience and/or your thoughts
(c) Suggestions or Instruction, and/or encouragement (Most important)
8
Phase I
Phase II
i)
ii)
iii)
Phase I
teachers as ‘staged, goal-oriented, social process’ (p.54)”
Teaching Assistant
7
(2015)
8Appendix
68
Phase II
(Key stage)
9
Phase I
Phase III
10, 11
Phase III
PhaseI
20
PhaseII
25
PhaseIII
34
J-CAT
X
Y
117
X
J-CAT
X
“MY FAVORITE”
X
Y
Y
(A)
(A)
Y
“DISLIKE”
WordPress
=(A)
=(D)
(D) X
X (D) Y
125
=(B)&(C)
(B)
X
(C)
Y
Y
(B)
(B)
9Appendix
10Appendix
11
(Hatasa, Hatasa, Makino
11
2011)
CH
69
(A)
X
Phase I
(B)
Y
Phase I
(C)
Y
Phase II
(A)
karicraftwings
X
Phase III
(A)
70
pensivepenchant
omaeumasoudana
,
benignmonsterrr
Y
(B)
(A)
(C)
(A)
(C) Phase II
Y
Phase I
B
C
Phase II
Phase III
B
X
(A)
(D)
Phase III
(C)
(D)
(D)
(B)
71
(C)
Hatasa, K., & Y. Hatasa & S. Makino. (2011). Nakama 2 Intermediate Japanese:
Communication, Culture, Context. Second Edition. Boston, M.A.: Cengage
Learning.
Larmer, John. (2012). “What does it take for a project to be ‘authentic’?”
The Buck Institute for Education Blog May 24, 2012.
http://bie.org/blog/what_does_it_take_for_a_project_to_be_authentic (Accessed
5/5/2015)
Martin, J.R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause.
London: Continuum.
Rose, D., & Martin, J.R. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge
and pedagogy in the Sydney School. Bristol, C.T.: Equinox Publishing. Ltd.
(2015).
To appear
nd
in the Proceedings of 22 Princeton Japanese Pedagogy Forum. Princeton
University (this volume).
(2014).
In the Proceedings of 2014
Canadian Association of Japanese Language Education Annual Conference.
pp.94-103.
Appendix:
Phase I Rubric
Staging
(4pts)
Excellent
Address all the
necessary
stages
Grammar
(2pts)
A good range
of patterns
Vocabulary
(2pts)
A good range
of vocabulary
Formal accuracy
(2pts)
Effective use
of kana and
learned kanji
throughout
Good
Address some
of the
necessary
stages
A moderate
range of
patterns
A moderate
range of
vocabulary
Effective use
of kana and
learned kanji
most of the
time
72
Passing
Fail
Address at
No identifiable
least the most
stages
important stage
A limited
range of
patterns
A limited
range of
vocabulary
Ineffective use
of kana and
learned kanji
Not enough to
evaluate
Not enough to
evaluate
Not enough to
evaluate
Stages for Phase II Consultation Genre:
(a) Opening: appropriate greetings to seek help
(b) Orientation: introduction of the writer’s circumstances, information that might be
helpful for the readers to imagine the situation and give advice, such as gender,
age, occupation, etc. (do not include unnecessary information)
(c) List of events: description of facts, more detailed circumstances
(d) Clarification of your problems.
(e) Give a list of the reasons why the given facts/circumstances is problematic for the
writer. (Key stage)
(f) Seeking advice. (key stage) (Appropriate greetings:
)12
Stages for Phase II Responding Genre:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Salutation (optional)
Personal experience
Suggestions or instruction, and/or encouragements (key stage)
Support your suggestions/instructions or encouragements (key stage)
Final greetings
Stages for Phase III Responding Genre:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Salutation (optional)
Personal experience
Suggestions or instructions, and/or encouragements with conditions (key stage)
Supports of your suggestions, instructions, or encouragement (key stage)
Final greetings (including Season’s greeting: end of the year)
Stages for Phase III for responding to reply to one’s consultation Genre:
a) Salutation (optional)
b) Reasons why one agree or disagree with suggestions/instructions that one
received from replies (key stage)
c) What you did or will do (key stage)
d) What happened after your post (optional)
e) Final greetings
12
73
N
JAPANESE LEVELED-READING AND RELAY STORY PROJECT
IN THE FIRST YEAR JAPANESE LANGUAGE COURSE
Shiyo Kaku
The University of Pennsylvania
N
N
N
N
N
2012
N
NPO
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
74
N
N
N
N
N
(Bell, 1998) (Day, 2003)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
75
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
ACTFL
N
N
Vol. 1
Basic Kanji
Book Vol. 1
N
N
APPENDIX A.
N
APPENDIX B.
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
76
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Language, Content,
APPENDIX
Creativity, & Overall Effort
E.
N
N
N
N
N
N
Basic Kanji Book Vol. 1
N
APPENDIX
C&D.
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
APPENDIX F
N
N
N
77
N
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
P
N
78
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
WH Questions
N
N
79
N
N
N
N
Quote
N
N
N
N
N
80
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Student A:
It was very good, though some characters aren’t given names until a while after they’re
introduced, which was a little confusing.
81
Student B:
The illustrations in this story were beautiful! I can tell that this team put a lot of effort
into making their story interesting and accurate (grammatically).
Student C:
The story is easily followed and understandable. The vocabulary used is applicable and
sentences work well together.
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
82
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
83
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
84
N
N
N
Journal of College and
University Libraries, Volume 96. pp.1-9.
Bell, T. (1998) Extensive Reading: Why? And How?. The Internet TESL
Journal Vol. IV. No. 12.
Day, R.R. (2003) Teaching Reading: An Extensive Reading Approach. CAPE
Alumni Internet Connection English Teacher Talk 20.
85
APPENDIX A. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
86
APPENDIX B. PROJECT STEPS
87
APPENDIX C. PROJECT GUIDELINE I
88
APPENDIX D. PROJECT GUIDELINE II
89
APPENDIX E. PROJECT EVALUATION
90
91
92
APPENDIX F. TADOKU CARD
93
COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY JAPANESE LANGUAGE
SCHOOL AND THE UNIVERSITY CLASS
Keiko Ono
Princeton University
Princeton Community Japanese Language School
TomokoShibata
PrincetonUniversity
I.
(Wenger 2000)
2011,pp.iii-vii
2013
2011
2014
II.
ACTFL
94
80
2013
2013
,2014
2011,p.viii
1
Can-dostatement
•
•
•
a.
b.
(Can-dostatements)
95
2014
2
Can-do
statement
2014
JASL
1
JASL
2
Can-do
(1)
Community-BasedLearningInitiative(http://www.princeton.edu/cbli/)
1
(1)
2
(2)
JapaneseasaSecondLanguage(JASL)
JASL
(3)
96
(http://www.pcjls.org/)
JASL
3
1
PPT
(2)
CC
3
97
(1)
JASL
PPT
(2)
98
XX
(3)
Can-do
4
III.
(1)
4
99
community
JASL
35
(2)
JASL
5
JASL
JASL
JASL
1
1
JASL1 JASL2 JASL3 JASL4 JASL5
4
20
4
8
5
6
1-4
5-8
1 3-5
2 4-8
5
6
7
7
45
100
JASL
JASL
JASL
JASL
(1)
8
(2)
(3)
8
101
JASL
100
(4)
(5)
JASL
Q&A
4.
(1)
102
20
(2)
IV.
103
2013
JASL
104
2011
2014
18
Wenger E. (2000) Communities of practice and social learning systems
Organization Vol. 7(2) 225-246.
105
IMPLEMENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF CONVERSATION PRACTICE
BRINGING LEARNERS FROM BEGINNER TO INTERMEDIATE LEVEL
Yoko Sakurai
The Japan Foundation, New York
2004
2013
J−GAP
JF
2014
JF
106
CEFR/JF
A2
ACTFL Proficiency Guideline
RP
CEFR
10
RP
CEFR/JF
Can-do
Statements
RP
JF
CEFR/JF Can-do Statements
A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2
de Saint Leger
2009
RP
JF
Can-do Statement
4
RP
RP
2
A2/B1
JF Can-do
/
107
2014
1
90
1
9
11
10
10
15
15
90
20
1
Japan Foundation, NY JF
2014
9
11
CEFR A2
(
(1.5 h x 10 lessons=15 hrs. total)
ACTFL Intermediate-Low)
2014
1
5
15
9
5
OPI
2
1
F
30
IL
2
F
20
IL
3
F
20
IL
4
M
40
IL
5
M
40
IL
6 F
30
NH
7 M
20
IM
8 M
40
IL
9 M
20
NH
108
1
RP
1
2
3
T:
S:
T:
S:
CEFR Can-do
B1
B1
A2-2
A2
Can-do
A2-1
A2
B1
3
CEFR
A2, A2-1 vs A2-2,B1
Can give a simple description or
presentation of people, living or working
conditions, daily routines, likes/dislikes, etc.
as a short series of simple phrases and
sentences linked into a list.
(CEFR A2)
Can reasonably fluently sustain a
straightforward description of one of a
variety of subjects within his/her field of
interest, presenting it as a linear sequence of
points.
(CEFR B1)
Can communicate in simple and routine
tasks requiring a simple and direct exchange
of information on familiar and routine
matters to do with work and free time. Can
handle very short social exchanges but is
rarely able to understand enough to keep
conversation going of his/her own accord.
Can interact with reasonable ease in
structured situations and short conversations,
provided the other person helps if necessary.
Can manage simple, routine exchanges
without undue effort; can ask and answer
questions and exchange ideas and
information on familiar topics in
predictable everyday situations.
(CEFR A2-1)
(CEFR A2-2)
A2
B1
A2-1
A2-2
A2-1
A2-2
109
B1
B1
Can-do
A2
3
1.
2.
3.
1
Can-do Statements
5
A2-2
B1
5
4
Can-do Statements
Can express comprehensibly the main point you want to make.
Can use the most frequently occurring connectors to link simple
sentences in order to tell a story or describe something.
Have sufficient vocabulary to express yourself with some
circumlocutions on most topics relevant to your everyday life such as
family, hobbies and interests, work, travel, and current events.
Can initiate, maintain and close simple, face-to-face conversation on
topics that are familiar or of personal interest.
2
3
W10
Can manage simple, routine exchanges without excessive effort; can
ask and answer questions and exchange ideas and information on
familiar topics in predictable everyday situations.
1
W1
4
5
1= I can’t do it.
2= I think I have some ideas, but am not completely sure.
3 =I think I can do it but not at a satisfactory level.
4 = I think I can do it somewhat satisfactorily. 5 = I think I can do it satisfactorily.
110
1
Plain form
[
[
B
A
4
A
Appendix A
B
B
A
B
4
[
2
A: B
B:
A:
B:
A:
B:
A:
NY
111
B
NY
NY
1
[
A
B
B
NY
[
A:
B:
A:
B:
A:
B:
A:
B
NY
[
A
B
A
B
NY
NY
NY
A
NY
B
A
B
A: B
B:
A:
B: A
A:
B: NY
NY
112
2
4 6
9
3
RP
B1
4
Can-do Statement
Can-do Statement
5
Appendix B
]
5
10
RP
Can-do
5
RP
3
113
Misa
Misa:
Anna:
Misa:
Misa:
Anna:
Misa:
V-
5
1
2
Kaori
Kaori:
Joan:
Kaori:
Joan
114
Kaori:
Joan:
Kaori:
Joan:
[
Kaori:
Joe:
Kaori:
Joe:
Kaori:
1
2
Kaori:
Joe:
Kaori:
115
NY
3
2
3
5.
4
1
5
1
3
Missing some key vocabulary in order to make it flow.
I’m able to do many of the reactions but still have a
lot of work to do on the conjugations!
2
3
Need to be able to use verbs and connectors better!
3
4
1
3.2
Still searching for vocabulary but getting better at
using connectors.
2.5
I still feel I lack a natural use of connectors and some
basic vocabulary.
4
”reactions”
116
3
4
Can-do Statements
[
.
5
Can-do
Statements
Appendix C
1
5
1
5
0.5
5
4
1
3
1
2
4
5
3
4
3
3
117
5
2
3
4
3
[
[
[
5
6.
N=5
1
2
3
4
1
1=Not helpful
1
2=Not very helpful
3=Neutral
4
5
5
118
1
4=Helpful
7
3
1
5
2
1
4
5
1
4
1
4
1
4
3
2
2
5=Very helpful
[
RP
[
2
RP
[
119
(2013)
Proceedings of the 20th Princeton Japanese Pedagogy
Forum, 16-31
[
(2014)
10
115-129
(2009) JF
(2010)
Can-do
(2012)
https://jfstandard.jp/cando/top/ja/render.do
187-204
(2015)
AATJ Spring Conference, 2015
(2012)
Paper presentation at
167-185
(2004)
(2013)
(2008)
46
OPI
14
JF
, 75-91
, 70-73
CEFR
(2008)
18-37
(2010)
15
21-29
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (2012) ACTFL Proficiency
Guidelines 2012-Speaking. American Council of the Teaching of Foreign Languages
website. Retrieved January 2013 from
http://www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/ACTFLProficiencyGuidelines2012Speaking.pdf
De Saint Léger, Diane (2009) Self-assessment of speaking skills and participation in a
Foreign language class. Foreign Language Annals, 42 (1), 158-178.
120
Appendix A:
A
A
B
B
A
A: B
B:
A:
B:
A:
B:
A:
(Conversation continues…)
B
A:
B:
B
A:
B:
A:
B:
A:
B:
A:
(Conversation continues…)
121
Appendix B:
Can-do Statements
Can-do Statements
2
Cantalkaboutyourhobbyincludinghowandwhyyouenjoy
it,andmakesimplecommentsaboutwhatyourclassmate
says.
4
Cannarrateaboutplacesyouvisitedandeventsthat
occurredduringatrip,andmakesimplecommentsabout
whatyourclassmatesays.
6
Caninteractaboutclubactivitiesorlessonsyouparticipated
asachild,howandwhyyouenjoyedit,anddreamsyouhad
thosedays.
9
Cantalkaboutyourwork,ask/answerquestionswitha
certaindegreeofdetailandcontinuetheconversation.
1= I can’t do it.
2= I think I have some ideas, but am not completely sure.
3 =I think I can do it but not at a satisfactory level.
4 = I think I can do it somewhat satisfactorily. 5 = I think I can do it satisfactorily.
122
Self-check
1 5
Appendix C:
Can-do
Can-do Statements
Week
1
Can manage simple, routine exchanges without
excessive effort; can ask and answer questions and
exchange ideas and information on familiar topics
in predictable everyday situations.
2
10
Can express comprehensibly the main point you
want to make.
10
3
Can use the most frequently occurring connectors to
link simple sentences in order to tell a story or
describe something.
4
Have sufficient vocabulary to express yourself with
some circumlocutions on most topics relevant to
your everyday life such as family, hobbies and
interests, work, travel, and current events.
5
Can initiate, maintain and close simple, face-to-face
conversation on topics that are familiar or of
personal interest.
10
10
10
1
Students
2
3
4
Joan
Anna
Mary
Joe
2
3
2
3
2
3
(+1)
4
(+1)
3
(+1)
4
(+1)
3
(+1)
1
3
1
2.5
3
2
(+1)
5
(+2)
3
(+2)
3
(+0.5)
3
3
4
1
3
2
3
5
(+1)
3
(+2)
4
(+1)
4
(+2)
2
4
3
3
4
3
(+1)
4
3
3.5
(+0.5)
3
(-1)
2
4
2
3
2
3
(+1)
4
4
(+2)
3.5
(+0.5)
3
(+1)
1= I can’t do it.
2= I think I have some ideas, but am not completely sure.
3 =I think I can do it but not at a satisfactory level.
4 = I think I can do it somewhat satisfactorily. 5 = I think I can do it satisfactorily.
123
5
Tommy
2
DEVELOPMENT OF ORAL SKILLS AND LEARNERS’ PERCEPTION IN AN
ONLINE JAPANESE LANGUAGE COURSE
Shinji Shimoura
Purdue University
.
.
.
2
Thorne, 2006
2
.
.
.
.
.
Everywhere
Speak
.
.
2
.
Goertler and Winke, 2008; Blake, 2013
2
.
124
. (Hampel, 2003; Hrunpel & Hauck, 2004; Lamy, 2004)
.
.
.
Blake (2013)
.
2
.
.
.
.
.
Elementary French Online
Chenoweth, Jones, and Tucker (2006)
Elementary
French Online
Elementary French Online
.
Houston, 2005
.
Harlow & Muyskens, 1994;
Elementary French Online
.
Elementary French Online
1
2
Elementary French Online
1
.
2
1
3.
Hatasa,
Hatasa, and Makino, 2015
.
I.
II.
III.
125
2
Speak Everywhere
2
Speak Everywhere
Speak Everywhere
.
2
2
.
1
.
.
.
.
2015
4.
.
.
.
.
.
.
126
.
.
4.1
. 20.75
. 22.06
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
.
2
General Education requirements
Language requirement
.
.
.
4.2
2
Elicited Imitation Test (EIT)
.
.
EIT
4.3
.
127
4.3.1 Q&A
Q&A
.
.
. 53.57
13.21
AS-Units
.
1.5
.
.
2
.
.
Mean run length
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
.
2
*=p<0.05
Total
response
time
53.57*
Speech
time
Number
of ASUnits
4.80*
Speech
rate
Articulation
rate
21.39*
Total
number of
moras
94.00
100.43*
224.34
Mean
run
length
4.96*
13.21*
6.57*
32.80
2.20*
149.15*
246.91
7.39*
28.10
10.63
44.80
2.20
93.93
212.16
5.56
15.41
7.58
32.20
2.20
135.57
218.03
6.91
67.90*
29.48
131.20
5.20
111.39
235.55
5.68
32.23*
18.02
76.60
5.00
143.09
209.38
6.16
128
0.25
.
. silent pause
. filled pause
.
.
.
.
3
.
.
AS-Unit
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*=p<0.05
3.52*
silent
pause
count
within
AS
16.40*
silent
pause
time
within
AS
18.52*
filled
pause
count
within
AS
2.20*
filled
pause
time
within
AS
1.11
2.80*
1.14*
2.60*
1.15*
0.80*
0.33
3.80
2.40
8.00
10.00
1.80
0.62
6.31
3.00
1.53
4.00
3.10
1.00
0.45
29.60
34.74*
7.20
3.67
22.20
24.52
4.00
1.88
13.80
10.67*
6.40
3.53
7.80
5.17
3.20
1.80
silent
pause
count
silent
pause
time
filled
pause
count
filled
pause
time
23.00*
28.73*
6.20*
6.40*
5.51*
11.20
14.79
7.00
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
129
.
Error-free
AS Unit
AS Unit
Ratio
43
62
65.79%
27
47
57.45%
4.3.2 Elicited Imitation Test
Elicited Imitation Test
Elicited Imitation Test
Elicited
Wu and Ortega (2013)
Imitation Test
2
psychomotor
2
2
.
.
.
Appendix
.
Median
73.73
.
Median
61.81
.
Z=0.289, p=0.772
.
EIT
.
Elicited Imitation Test
N
7
61.81
8
73.73
130
4.4
4.4.1
1
.
1. Online course is more demanding than content delivered in traditional face-toface courses.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Q1. Online course is more demanding than content delivered in traditional
face-to-face courses. (n=18)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
2. Technology used for assignments is easy to use and understand.
.
.
.
131
.
Q2. Technology used for assignments is easy to use and understand.
(n=18)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
3. The amount of communication and interaction between students and an
instructor in the online course was sufficient for effective learning.
.
.
.
Q3. The amount of communication and interaction between students and
an instructor in the online course was sufficient for effective learning. (n=18)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
4. Technology-based communication (e.g. Speak Everywhere and WebEx) is
more effective than face-to-face communication for practicing Japanese.
.
.
.
.
132
Q4. Technology-based communication (e.g. Speak Everywhere and
WebEx) is more effective than face-to-face communication for practicing
Japanese. (n=18)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
5. I believe using an online course design is just as effective as traditional
teaching methods.
.
Q5. I believe using an online course design is just as effective as
traditional teaching methods. (n=18)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
6. I prefer online courses to traditional face-to-face courses.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
p<0.05
.
133
Q6. I prefer online courses to traditional face-to-face courses. (n=18)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
7. I prefer online courses only for specific subjects and/or specific levels of
instruction.
p<0.05 .
.
.
.
.
.
Q7. I prefer online courses only for specific subjects and/or specific
levels of instruction. (n=18)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
8. Students can learn the same amount in an online course as in a traditional
course.
.
.
.
.
.
134
.
Q8. Students can learn the same amount in an online course as in a
traditional course. (n=18)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
9. The online format allowed me to control the overall pace of my learning.
.
.
.
Q9. The online format allowed me to control the overall pace of my
learning. (n=18)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
10. I was able to motivate myself to complete the out-of-class assignments.
.
.
.
.
.
.
135
Q10. I was able to motivate myself to complete the out-of-class
assignments. (n=18)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
11. Your learning goals in this course are met.
.
.
.
5
.
.
2
Q11. Your learning goals in this course are met. (n=18)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
12. My preferences, needs, social life, technology choices, etc. were better served
by online learning.
.
.
.
.
.
136
Q12. My preferences, needs, social life, technology choices, etc. were
better served by online learning. (n=18)
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1
2
3
4
5
Q9,Q10,Q11,Q12
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Speak Everywhere
. Speak Everywhere
.
.
2
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
137
.
.
2
.
2
.
.
Speak Everywhere
.
.
.
.
Fukada, 2015
.
.
Fukuda, 2014
.
.
.
.
2
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
.
.
.
138
.
2
(2016) Design,Development,andOperationofa
Speaking-FocusedOnlineJapaneseCourse.InProceedingsofThe22nd
PrincetonJapanesePedagogyForum(pp.191-205).
Blake, R. J. (2013). Brave new digital classroom: Technology and foreign language
learning. Georgetown University Press.
Chenoweth, N. A., Jones, C. M., & Tucker, G. R. (2006). Language online: Principles of
design and methods of assessment. Changing language education through CALL,
146-167.
Fukada, A. (2015, March). Comparison between the oral proficiency of online Japanese
curse participants and that of face-to-face course participants. Presented at the
American Association of Teachers of Japanese Annual Conference, Chicago, IL.
Fukuda, M. (2014). Dynamic Processes of Speech Development by Seven Adult Learners
of Japanese in a Domestic Immersion Context. Foreign Language Annals, 47(4),
729-745.
Goertler, S., & Winke, P. M. (Eds.). (2008). Opening Doors Through Distance Language
Education: Principles, Perspectives and Practices. Computer Assisted Language
Instruction Consortium.
Hampel, R. (2003). Theoretical perspectives and new practices in audio-graphic
conferencing for language learning. ReCALL, 15(01), 21-36.
Hampel, R., & Hauck, M. (2004). Towards an effective use of audio conferencing in
distance language courses. Language Learning & Technology, 8(1), 66-82.
Harlow, L. L., & Muyskens, J. A. (1994). Priorities for Intermediate
Instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 78(2), 141-154.
139
Level Language
Hatasa,Y.A.,Hatasa,K.,&Makino,S.(2014).Nakama1:JapaneseCommunication
CultureContext.CengageLearning.
Houston, T. (2005). Outcomes assessment for beginning and intermediate Spanish: One
program's process and results. Foreign Language Annals, 38(3), 366-376.
Lamy, M. N. (2004). Oral conversations online: Redefining oral competence in
synchronous environments. ReCALL, 16(02), 520-538.
Thorne, S. L. (2006). Pedagogical and praxiological lessons from internet-mediated
intercultural foreign language education research. Internet-mediated intercultural
foreign language education, 2-30.
Wu, S. L., & Ortega, L. (2013). Measuring global oral proficiency in SLA research: A
new elicited imitation test of L2 Chinese. Foreign Language Annals, 46(4), 680704.
140
Appendix:
Elicited Imitation Test
0
6
7
4
2
8
4
3
78
3
3
(
3
)
2
5
6
3
6
7
7
9
7
8
3
2
2
2
72
6
72
6
9
6
3
7
3
96
(
6
)
6
3
3
4
1
366
3
3
5
2
33
7
141
3
3
LISTENING COMPREHENSION ISSUES
WHEN INTERMEDIATE JAPANESE LANGUAGE LEARNERS
PARTICIPATE IN CASUAL CONVERSATION
Hisashi Noda, National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics
Ayako Sakaue, Osaka University
Eiji Nakayama, Osaka Sangyo University
2
2
7
1
7
8
7
1
7
1
2
2
6
1
8
8
6
1
8
1
6
7
6
6
1
o
8
9
8
1
142
o
7
8
6
1
o
71
7
6
7
8
7
6
71
6o
1
6
1
7
7
1
6
6
1
7
81
8
7
o
6
7
1
1
7
7
8
8
7
7
o
1
(
1
81
1
7
8
81
(
8
6
9
81
2
3
9
o
6
1
7
6
7
7
6
6
7
(
6
1
143
1
9
o
1
7
8
6
1
71
8
6
1
o
o
7
1
o
(
6
1
o
7 1
(
o
7
1
-.
6
1-.
8
o
7
6
1
8
7
3
2
1
1
8
o
7
9
7
7
7
8
7
6
1
8
)
7
1
)
)
2
7
1
7
1
8
8
o
144
6
6
1
8
o
1
o
6
1
2
78
6
2
7
83
83
2
2
3
1
7
o
1
6
6
78
7
8
2
73
2
2
3
6o 2
83
o
1
6
3
2
2
8
67
83
o
1
3
p81
3
o
6
3
2
2
3
3
6
12
2
1
o
8
D7
7
2
1
2
3
2
o
8
6
7
1
3
2
3
3
7
p81
1
8
8
7
8
3
3
o
8
6
6
6 1
1
9
8
1
145
2
8
1
2
7
8
D
6
6
3
6
7
6
1
1
7
2
D
7
7
D
6
7
3 78
1
7
6
o
7
8
p81
2
6
1
2
3
2
3
2
7
6
1
o
7
6
1
6
7
6
6
6
6
9
1
7
8
81
o
81
8
p81
6
178
7
8
7
8
7
6 1
8
7
1
146
3
3
7
7
1
178
7
6
6
o
7
7
o
2
2
3
1
7
6
1
3
1
6
8
8
6
D
6
p
7
1
1
8
78
6
2
73
7
7
2
2
3
6
1
7
o
8
7
83
3
o
2
1
6
6
p8
7
7
7
7
7
7
78
6
1
8
6
8
2
3
1
(
(
2
7
7
83 2
3
147
8
1
78
78
6
1
178
7
6
6
)
7
7
6
1
o
7
2
3
o 2
)
7
3
6
6
7
7
7
8
7
6
7
7
6
78
7
78
78
7
7 1
7
6
2
1
3
1
2
3
6
2
3
7
p
6
1
2
7
9
1
8
1
6
1 o
6
6
3
2
8
73
1
o
1 o
7
2
8
o
3
8
o
2
73
1
6
8
6
716
1
6
6
6
67
6
8
8
1
1
o
8
1
28
148
3
6
o
67
2
3
7
7
78
1
7
7 2
o
6
o
73
78
78
1
.
9
2
o
6
1
o
7
71
o
8
7
8
9
7
1
7
o
7
1
9
8
7
1
2
7
8
3
1
797916
6
7
p7
7
1
p71
1
6
8
19
9
2
3
61
p71
6
6
7
6
1
8
1
2
78
6
3
6
7
8
2
o
1
78
7
149
3
7
6
2
3
78
1
2
3
7
7
8
7
8
9
6 1
9
8
1
7
2
7
8
3
1
8
7
7
7
7 7
8
7
7
1
1
6
1
8
77
1
o
7
1
1
9
8
6
8
8
7
7
1 6
6
8
2
3
7
1
2
8
9
1
3
7
o
78
6
8
7 26
8
8
2
7
7
D7
o
7
8
32
7
1
8
3
9
9
6
6
1
1
7
1
8
9
8
1
150
1
6
9
o
7
71
8
o
8
8
7
6 1
o
71
7
7
8
p
p
o
6
7
8
7
8
6
71
p
8
1
8
8
78
9
4
7
8
5
o
71
2
8
1
6
9
2
7
2
3
8
3
3
2
2
78
7
1
3
D
6
8
1
7
8
6
2
3
2
2
3
7
3
9
3
2
3
1
7
8
9
7
3
7
8
2
1
8
2
7
2
9
3
2
151
6
9
3
1
9
8
7
1
6
7
6
7
7
1
7
8
9
6
1
8
7
1
8
6
(
)
(
1
8
9
7
o
1
p
8
6
)
7
8
9
8
6
o
1
8
o
7
1
8
6
7
78
8
8
78
1
7
6
(2
(
1
0
034
5 (
(
2
o
34
5 ((
4
Do Hoang Ngan
0
1
5
(
p
2
03
4
5 )
(
)
http://ir.lib.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/files/public/29799/
20141016172847509593/JIDC_16-1_35.pdf
152
hv
OPI
cp
8 9 -.1 60 81
-
CMH H E
672
E
L
2
IA
H
F
15 -9 97
F EFC
E
E
.1 9
4
LAE
3 F
3 F
H
H
J
I E
JC
Tomoko Koh (ChihTzu, Kao)
Columbia University, MA course
1.
i
1895
1945
50
50
S
hpT
w
S
S
hv
70
T
w Oral Proficiency Test1
hp
w
TOPI
hSe
hv
hv
Snhv
cp
sp w
l
(OPI)
sv
hS
hv
w
S
hv
hp
e
S tv
w
T
S
pr
v
a
a
w
w S
hv
cp
pr
w
S
S
hpT
S
JSL/JFL
pr
w
e
S
spT
.
OPI
pr
Foreign Languages)
h
t
OPI
p
S
h
ipTn
pTnewS
S
pr
OPI
h
v
1
sv
wa
p
p
ACTFL(American Council on the Teaching of
w
TOPI S
w
hp
ACTFLS2012Sp.1
153
S
S
t
T
t
p
:
w
(
T
, 2013, p.2
)
hv
n
w
hv
o
(
(
(
y
(
hp
n
T
(
p
T
S
sh
hp
n
T
vap
S
e
t
hv
S
w
T
t S1684
hpT
hp
S2009Sp.18 T
S17
hvap
Snhvn
e
hS
sp
e
wa T
w S
hp T
v
hp
hv r
p awS
h
p
S
SF T
.
2
3
v
T(
c
w
T
S2002S p.4)
4
w
S
17
w
h
T
154
S
w
T
S
T
w
sp
hv
(
c
T
S
c
(
hv
hp
w
p
S
)
w
hv h
sp
vSe
S
F ) T
S
F ) T
w
p
w
Se
p w
S
F (
S
p
S
d
e
hS
s
c
T
sv
(
)
S
pr
prw
S
S
SF
T
SF
)
S
pr
S
w
S
SF
S
S
S
)
w
5
w
S
w
T
e
v
SF
e
cp
pS
sp
S
)
hS
hp
S
F ) T
svavS
h
S
lvapT
w
n
S
(2013)
hp
9
S1925
h
F
cS
S
pT
T
p
p
Y
14
6
S1917
13.1 S25.1
w
S
sv
hv
S
1.3%w
9.604
hS
)
e
e
c
y
p
155
w
6
S29.5
e
S1920
w
T
T
wS
c
S2013Sp.17 T
S
pT1942
w
e
hv
w
S
cp
c
t v
vap S
hvS
F
S
S
w
T
S
w
hp
w
S
iS
w
w
cp
hv
ur
hv
P
S
w
w
Sn
O
S
sp
p
S
T
w
S p
v
sp
v
T
S
S
S
S
t v sv
S
sv
Th hS
pr S
v
hv
ipTe
p
S
hv
hpT672
hp
S672
hv
p
pr
hp
l
S
e
wa S
Sn
wa
e
wa S
e
wa T pS672
e
wa (ACTFLS2012S
pr
S
c
e
p
SF
sv
S
672
w
w
d
S
p
y
p
2)Te
8
v
9
w
sv
S
2001 S
hp
7
2002
2007
a
2006 S
S
a
d
2008
h
y
hp
SOPI
156
w
T
pr
S
s
S
a
w
p.1-
h
l
T
wa
T
w
rhuthmos
e
S2008S p.6)T
(2009)
t v
hv
S
w
hp T
2007
(
sv
S
e
2006
p
v
S
h
dv
sv
hv
T
hv
T
w
hp
h
t
hvS
d
y
S
h
T
.
2014
SOPI
8
cv
10
hpT
v
spT
.
w
Koh
w 9
T1945
Lin
spT
pr
w
Ryo
S
S
w
14
cv
TTenrunSLi,SShuho
cv
SKohSLinSTeiSHorinSHei
cv
T
11
12
w sv
S
w
hv p T
OPI
pr
3:
(
1945
OPI w SACTFL
checks)S a d(probes)S
T p
T ACTFLS2012Sp.2
T ACTFLS2012Sp.5
10
warm-up S
wind-down
sp
w
(level
w
sv
S
w
hv
157
)
sv
S
S
t
11
12
/
pr
pT
Ryo
90
1924
21
-
6/
5/
2
Tenrun
84
1930
15
-
6/
3/
-
3
Li
85
1929
16
-
6/
3/
-
4
Shuho
83
1931
14
-
6/
2/
-
5
Koh
81
1933
12
6
Lin
79
1935
10
R
14
R
Tei
78
1936
9
-
-
2/
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
)15
3/
-
8
Horin
85
1929
16
-
8/
9
Hei
82
1932
13
-
6/
pr
hv
hp
S y
hv
S
Ryo
16
1945
TRyo
w
S
w
hv
hpTRyoSTenrunSLiSShuhoSKoheSTei
hvap SLinSHorinSHei 1945
hve
spTh hSLin
2010
w
hv
T
S
pr
4:
1
(
6/
(
7
3/
)13
1
p
4
-
T
cv
p
T
w
2
13
Tenrun
Ryo
14
Lin
p S
16
S6
T.
hv
1945
w
hv
hpT
R
w spe
hS
w
3
15
T
w
2
hpT
cp
2
wa
hpT
158
hpTHorin
c
T
w 1945
T
w
i
w
3
Li
T
y
T
T
1945
-
w
S
hv 21
cv
T
T
w
w
Shuo
hv
w
4
Shuho
hv
S
-
T
w
w
Li
hv
w
Lin
R17
w
T
t
T
hv
T
w
tT
R
w
S
3
T
S
h
S
1945
hv
S2010
sv
1
T
S
Tei
y
T
sp
hS
7
T
hv
1945
6
S
T
1945
Koh
T
w
pr
5
T
hS
p
y
c
s
pT
w
S
w
cv
8
17
Horin
R
T
v
w
T
cp
w
spp
hv
c
v
w
T
1945
pr
cp
spe
S
w
T
159
T
1945
9
Hei
70
h
spT
cp
S
6
w
y
c
spT
w
pr
hv
1945
.
3
S
pT
h
70
spT
OPI
pr
5
v
w
OPI
pr
T
hS
w
G1
OPI
G4
s
w
hpT
pr
G1
OPI
G2
Ryo
Tenrun
G3
Li
Shuho
Ko
G4
Lin
Tei
Horin
Hei
h
S
/
S
y
hv
y
h
cw
hv
h
S
v
y
cw
S
S
S
S
h
v
T
cw
S
c
c
hv
v
S
c
T
w
wa
T
pS
T
p
T
w
e
wa
w
w
w
w
l
e
e
l
l
T
e
160
T
l
w
l
S
e
T
y
y
S
S
sp
sp
T
y
S
sp
T
S
T
h
h
T
v
h
T
T
wa
h
T
h
w
T
S pt
w
TG2
G3
S
S
OPI
w
S p
w spT
pr
t
hp S
OPI
v
vSG1
SG2 G3
SG4
w
T
S
OPI
w S
S
sp
y
e
waS
hp S
l e
h T pS
hv
v
sv
h
w
(ACTFL, 2012, p.14)Th hS
G4
S
p
w
S
w
h
f
v c
y
hp
e
wapT p OPI
w S
y
l
y
a
SG1 cw
SG2SG3
hpTe
S
pr
a
sv
S
pr
hp
OPI
G2
G3
hv
Se
161
i
pT
Tenrun
S
(1) Tenrun:
cT
(2) Li: hs
S
Tenrun
SLi
hs
yS
l
2007
t
w
S
T
Sn
S
h
S
S
l
S
h
v
h
hp
h
h
Li
S
hv
w
wh
Th
hS
Sn
cpS
e
c
sp
w
Th
w
wh
h
hS
T
pr
v
S
T
w
hp
hpT
T
TENRUN: wSne
RYO:
w
T
p
hv
wT
S
S2007Sp.469 : i
sp
hT
w
hpT
RYO : 3 w
T3 whp
KOH: s h
T s h
S
S2007S
TENRUN:
KOH:
r
.466
w
T
w
162
S
pr
S
w
s
sv
e
sv
cS
wh
hvS
h
h
T
T
S2007Sp.466
T
w sv
wh
T
RYO
S
T
2007
i
w
t
ywt
p
T
SHUHO:
S
hp T
SHUHO: se
Sh s
LI :
v
l S S
whpT
h
wS
psvS
S2007Sp.302
S
TENRUN:
TENRUN :
w
h
sv
h
p
KOH:
TENRUN:
TENRUN:
l
S
T
hv
R
a
Sh
s
svT
w
T
cy T
S2007Sp.117
hT
dv
hr sp
T
T
spS
pr
hp
T
svS h
2007
h
S
T
sp
h
hp
S
cy S
S2007Sp.381
v
S
v
Tv Sp S
hp
w
hv
sp
w
T
hv
h
G1
G2
G3
G4
Ryo
Tenrun
Li
Shuho
Koh
Lin
Tei
Horin
Hei
1
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
2
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
3
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
4
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
5
163
R
R
6
%
18
R
R
R
R
R
R
38
48
49
42
43
40
S v
w
w
G3
h
hv
h
hv
e
4
34
e
w
hv
R
R
26
16
S
G1SG2S
T p6t
h
S
e
spT
hv
hp
e
9
OPI
6
h
v
spTe e
S
v
h
sv
Sn
h
hv
T
S
w
h
hv
G1S
G2SG3
h
hv
S30
OPI
sv
S a
a
i lp w
T
S70
y
hve
sp G4
h
TG4
OPI
a
S
w
w
hv
T
G4
S5
h
hv
spT
S i
w
hw
T
n
hv
S
h
h
e
p
S i
pt
T
sp
hv
w
Te
hv
hv
hp T
hv
(langue)
(parole)
w
18
19
wa
[
h
langue
T
parole
w
19
hv
hS
wS
p
hp
S
2013
Sn
]/[ OPI
w
Se
hv/ a
T
S2006Sp.2
164
]w
w
hpT
h
e
S
Sn
v
p.2 T
2013
t v
v
S
hv
w
Tt
S
hS
v
h
e
svS
wa
w
Tn
hv
h
wa
w
T
h
S
h
p
n w
e
lSnhv
h
e
u l Tn
wS
w
hp t
h
y
h
n
S
T
n
t
pr
pr
w
l
lS
h
hS
h
S2013S
ie
h
w
hv
hS
t
hv
hv
t
Se
T
wa
pr
S
wa
e
T
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.2012. “Oral Proficiency Interview
Tester training manual 2012”. American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages
2013
c
hv
Y ti
2011
sp
hv
Y
2004
v
w
e Y
2013
2013 6
22
2009
Y 38 Sp.18-25
2009
Y
2007
Y
2008
Y
165
EFFECTIVENESS OF GENRE-BASED PEDAGOGY
Shinji Kawamitsu
University of Massachusetts Amherst
1.
(social practice)
(critical literacy)
2.
3
2)
1)
3
3)
2.1.
(Haneda, 2007;
Thomson, 2013)
, 1996; Kumagai & Fukai, 2009; Ramzan &
166
(
,
2008)
2.2.
2
4
(Thompson & Armour, 2013)
(decontextualization)
(Yasuda, 2011)
2.3.
(
(
)
(
) )
)
( (
) 2.4.
12
(Doerr & Kumagai, 2014; Iwasaki & Kumagai, 2008;
Kumagai, 2007,
, 2008;
&
, 2009)
167
, 2008;
2.5.
2
3.
3.1.
SFL
(Systemic Functional Linguistics)
(SFL)
MAK Halliday
SFL
(language in social-semiotic perspective) (Halliday & Hasan, 1989)
SFL
3.2.
(Register)
(Halliday & Hasan, 1989)
Halliday
(field)
(tenor)
3
(mode)
2)
1)
3)
(
168
)
( 1)
1
(Martin & Rose, 2008)
3.2.1.
(field)
(
)
(
(
)
)
(
)
)
(
(
)
3.2.2.
(tenor)
169
3.2.3.
(mode)
1
1
1
(Halliday, 2001)
3.3.
(Genre Theory)
James Martin (1992)
process through register”
“staged, goal-oriented social
(social process)
(goal-oriented)
(staged)
(Martin & Rose, 2007)
(Genre-based Pedagogy)
4.
(Rothery, 1996; Rothery & Stenglin, 1997)
4.1.
2014
1
2
10
15
2
& Martin, 2012)
(Deconstruction),
(Independent Construction)
1
3
(Roes
(Joint Negotiation),
1
(Rose & Martin, 2012)
3
170
4.2.
4.2.1.
(Deconstruction)
(Kawamitsu, 2015)
(
A)
3
2
(Orientation)
(Evaluation)
(Resolution)
C)
3
3
(
(Complication)
2
(Coda)
(
(
(
B)
A)
B)
4.2.2.
(Joint Negotiation)
1
1
1
3
1
2
2
2
2
171
1
4.2.3.
(Independent Construction)
(List of Events)
(Orientation)
(Seeking Solution)
(Title)
(Thoughts)
3
5.
2)
1)
5.1.
3
(
)
(tenor)
3
(
)
172
4
(field)
key conjunctions
key nouns
(mode)
key verbs
(
)
(recount)
(
(anecdote)
)
1
(exemplum)
3
1
3
(
)
2
5
3
3
3
potential” (Halliday, 1978)
4
5
173
“meaning
3
5.2.
1
1
174
6.
2
1
2
7.
Christie, F. & Derewianka, B. (2008). School discourse. London: Continuum.
Doerr, N., & Kumagai, Y. (2014). Power of language ideologies: Challenging the notion
of foreign loanwords in Japanese-as-a-foreign-language classroom, Writing
Systems Research, 6(2), 1-18.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of
language and meaning. Baltimore: University Park Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. (2001). Literacy and linguistics: Relationships between spoken and
written language. In Burns, A. & Coffin, C. (Eds.). Analysing English in a
global context: A reader. The Open University, London: Routledge.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1989). Language, context, and text: Aspects of
language in a social-semiotic perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Haneda, M. (2007). Modes of engagement in foreign language writing: An activity
theoretical perspective. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 64(2),
301-331.
Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and second language writing. Ann Arbor, MI: The University
of Michigan Press.
Iwasaki, N. & Kumagai, Y. (2008). Promoting critical reading in an advanced-level
Japanese course: Theory and practice through reflection and dialogues.
Japanese Language and Literature, 42(1), 123-156.
Kawamitsu, S. (2015). Introducing genre into Japanese-as-a-foreign-language: Toward a
genre-specific approach to elementary/intermediate writing. L2 Journal, 7(4),
63-90.
Kumagai, Y. (2007). Tension in a Japanese language classroom: An opportunity for
critical literacy? Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 4(2-3), 85-116.
Martin, J. R. (1992). English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause.
London: Continuum.
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2008). Genre relations: Mapping culture. Sheffield, UK:
Equinox.
Ramzan, Y., & Thomson, A., E. (2013). Modelling writing: Using the genre approach in
the Japanese as a foreign language classroom. In Thomson, E. A., & Armour,
W. S. (Eds.). Systemic functional perspectives of Japanese: Descriptions and
applications. Sheffield, UK: Equinox.
Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge
and pedagogy in the Sydney School. Sheffield, UK: Equinox.
Rothery, J. (1996). Making changes: Developing and educational linguistics. In R. Hasan
& G. Williams (Eds.), Literacy in society. Harlow, England: Longman.
175
Rothery, J., & Stenglin, M. (1997). Entertaining and instructing: Exploring experience
through story. In Christie, F., & Martin, J. R. (Eds.). Genre and institutions:
Social processes in the workplace and school. New York: Cassell.
Thomson, E. A., & Armour, W. S. (2013). Systemic functional perspectives of Japanese:
Descriptions and applications. Sheffield, UK: Equinox.
(1996)
6, 35-48
(2008)
( )
:
/
(pp. 14-30)
(2008)
( )
:
/
(pp. 130-150)
(2009)
:
19, 177-197
176
8.
A
Orientation
(
(
)
)
Complication
Evaluation
Resolution
Coda
Genetic Structures of Narrative Genres (adapted from Christie & Derewianka, 2008;
Hyland 2004; Rothery & Stenglin, 1997)
177
B
Power Point slides for register analysis
A
•  What&kind&of&“verbs”&or&“ 4adjec7ves”&are&
used?&
–  Ex.&
etc&
•  Any&“7me”&or&“place”&related&words?&
–  Ex.&
etc&
•  “Who”&is&introduced&in&this&leBer?&
– 
B
•  Is$the$language$here$$
–  Typical$“wri5en”$language?$Or$
–  Typical$“spoken”$language?$Or$
•  What$is$the$medium$of$the$language?$
–  Email,$Blog,$twi5er,$le5er,$paper,$etc.$
C
•  Ques&on?*Statement?**
•  Tense?*
–  Present*tense*or*past*tense?*
–  Do*you*see*a*“shi8”*tense?*(from*past*to*present)*
•  Emo&on?*
–  Is*the*author*happy?**
–  Is*the*author*evalua&ng*someone/something?*
•  Polite?*
178
MAKING CONNECTIONS: INCORPORATING COMMUNITY-BASED
LEARNING INTO ADVANCED LEVEL JAPANESE COURSE
Naoko Kurokawa
Duke University
C
Communities
Communication, Cultures, Connections, Comparisons,
Community-Based Learning
Coufal, 2009
Lally, 2001; Goldberg &
Caldwelll, 2007
2009
Lally, 2001; Caldwell, 2007; Goldberg & Coufal, 2009
179
Lally, 2001
Overfield
1997
2014
”Communities”
FL
Overfield (1997)
180
JFL
SNS
FL
181
IT
JPN407S: Issues in
Japanese Language and Society)
2014
182
N1
N2
N1
Advanced-Low
NGO
JET
C
”Communities”
”Connections”
, 1999
183
184
(WordPress
)
A
-
B
NGO
- JET
- JET
C
-
D
-
A
185
B
JET
C
NPO
D
186
•
I really enjoyed working on this project. I’m glad I was able to pick a company
that engaged my interest and that I was able to integrate my career interest into
the research project.
•
•
•
A
187
188
2015
5
2014
189
(1999).
(1999).
(2009).
19
Caldwell, W. (2007). Taking Spanish Outside the Box: A model for Integrating Service Learning
Into Foreign Language Study. Foreign Language Annuals, Vol.40, No.3
Coufal, K. & Goldberg, L.R. (2009). Reflections On Service-Learning, Critical Thinking, And
Cultural Competence. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, Vol.6, No.6
Grim, F. (2008). Service-learning: Teaching a foreign language from Kindergarten through
College. CLAC 2008
Lally, C.G. (2001). Service/community learning and foreign language teaching methods. Active
learning in higher education. Vol. 2 (1)
National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project (1999). Standards for Foreign
Language in the 21st Century. Allen Press
Overfield, D.M. (1997). From the Margins to the Mainstream: Foreign Language Education and
Community-Based Learning. Foreign Language Annuals, Vol. 30, No.4
190
DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT, AND OPERATION
OF A SPEAKING-FOCUSED ONLINE JAPANESE COURSE
Hiroko Mishima, Mayu Miyamoto, Shohko Yanagisawa
Purdue University
.
)
)
.
.
)
)
)
)
)
(
)
)
(
)
.
) (Harlow and Muyskens, 1994; Tse, 2000;
Rivera and Matsuzawa, 2007; Houston, 2005)
.
(
.
) .
(
)
.
.
(
)
191
Synchronous
Asynchronous
(
.(
)
.
.
.
)
)
.
)
)
.
.
(
.
)
)
)
.
)
).
Nakama (Hatasa, Hatasa & Makino 2014)
.
(
.
)
(
)
)
.
)
192
)
.
.
)
Speak Everywhere
SE
Enhanced Language Learning
)
(
SE
.
)
.
SE
Fukada 2013
SE
)
Center for Technology-
Web
)
.
.
.
.
193
.
.
)
(
.
)
.
(
)
PDF
194
195
(
Learn&Say
Flashcards
.
Say&Check
Q&A
.
)
.(
)
Make up sentences
)
Monologue
Reading aloud
.
Interaction
.
.
Interview
Role-Play
Learn&Say
Flashcards
Learn&Say
Q&A
)
Say&Check
)
)
)
)
(
.
(
)
.
.
.
196
.
(
(
(
)
)
.
)
197
Nakama
(
)
Q&A
Monologue )
)
)
)
)
)
.
.
)
)
)
198
)
)
.
.
.
Monologue
(
Role-play
.
)
(
)
)
)
)
)
.
.
.
.
)
199
Role-play
)
)
)
.
.
)
.
(
.
.
.
)
.(
)
)
)
200
.
SE
)
)
.
.
)
WebEX
.
.
)
(
.(
.
.
.
(
.
.
.
(
(
)
.
)
WebEX
(
)
.
)
)
)
)
201
(
1
)
.
(
Role-play
SE
Performance-Based Test
Timed Dictation
SE
(
Read&Answer
SE
)
)
Monologue
Reading aloud
Role-play
Guided conversation
Q&A
)
)
.
)
.
)
(
.
202
Monologue
(
Reading aloud
.
)
.
.
)
)
)
Read&Answer
)
(
.
.
.
Q&A
)
)
)
.
Role-play
.
Guided conversation
)
)
(
)
)
.
.
)
)
)
)
)
.(
)
.
).
203
.
)
)
.(
.
.
.
Uchida 2015
(
)
)
.
(
.
)
.
)
.
.
)
)
.
.
)
(
)
)
.
.(
(
))
Fukada 2015
)
.(
.
)
)
.
)
.
.
.
)
.
.
.
)
)
)
)
204
)
.
)
(
Fukada, A. (2013). An Online Oral Practice/ Assessment Platform: Speak Everywhere,
The IALLT Jornal, 43:1, PP. 64-77.
Fukada, A. (2015, March). Comparison between the oral proficiency of online Japanese
curse participants and that of face-to-face course participants. Presented at the
American Association of Teachers of Japanese Annual Convention, Chicago, IL.
Harlow, L.L., Muyskens, J. A. (1994). Priorities for intermediate-Level Language
Instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 78(2), 141-154.
Houston, T. (2005). Outcomes assessment for beginning and intermediate Spanish: One
program’s process and results. Foreign Language Annals, 38(3), 366-374.
Rivera, G. M.,
Matsuzawa, C. (2007). Multiple-language program assessment:
learner’s perspectives on first-and second-year college foreign language programs
and their implications for program improvement. Foreign Language Annals, 40(4),
569-583.
Tse, L. (2000). Student perceptions of foreign language study: A qualitative analysis of
foreign language autobiographies. The Modern Language Journal, 84 (1), 69-84.
Uchida, N. (2015, March). From traditional to performance-based assessment:
Comparison at the beginning level and wash back effects on learning. Presented
at the American Association of Teachers of Japanese Annual Convention,
Chicago, IL.
205
"OLYMPICS JAPANESE CONVERSATION” TEXT DESIGN
Shimizu Yasuo
Doshisha University
206
207
208
209
210
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
211
•
•
212
213
Do the Geminate Consonants have same Characteristics?
Acoustic Observations and Learners’ Acquisition
Nobuko WANG
Senshu University
F
F
F
M
J
M
F
A
C
F
C
J
P
A
c
i
[p][t][k][s]
J
C
F
ɕ
J
M
A
F
F
J
A
C
1990
i
M
J
1994
214
F
M
1993
J
ɕ
2013
i
i
2015
A
J
C
2014
J
J
i
d
F
J
F
F
M
J
F
i
c
i
C
M
M
M
J
c
F
F
F
F
i
J
F
M
A
F
215
F
J
PC
J
F
M
A
aJ
A
M
M
J
Ac
J
i
J
[ɾ i p
[ɾ i p
1
1
P
p a]
]
[
i
]
J
J
M
1
1
M
[besso:]
[bes]
i
i
[pa]
J
[pa]
i
c
[p]
[p]
A
A
M
A
N
J
i
216
i
J
d
J
N
M
J
F
J
PC
J
d
A
i
r
r
i
4-1
[p]
[t]
J
J
CF
t
CM
217
JF
CF
t
JF
t
CM
218
t
CF
CM
JF
0.1183 sec
0.0630 sec
0.2793 sec
t
CF
CM
JF
0.2179 sec
0.2516 sec
0.2482 sec
2
t
J
[ ]
i
C
P
t
i
F
J
4-2.
i
J
t
i
CF
CM
219
JF
[na]
CF 0.3315 sec
CM 0.1378 sec
JF 0.1728 sec
J
M
i
J
CF
A
i
i
4-3.
J
CF
i
CM
r
220
r
CF
r
r
M
[s]
[t]
r
J
P
[s]
M
i
CM
F
i
M
2014
J
F
i
F
J
C
J
P J
i
P
C
A
PC
J
ɕ
A
A
C
F
y
i
A
A
y
J
M
F
i
A
J
J
P
i
F
221
A
i
F
P
i
r
c
F
C
M
J
u
N
ɕ
F
A
i
d
M
i
t
c
M
c
J
c
i
J
i
J
1993
C
41
1994
C
41 pp.87-102
3 pp.36-42
.
C
1990
2015
33 pp.191-201
J
1996
2014
24
(2013)
t
r
J
pp.69-80
C
222
33
pp.45-58
223
Dual Enrollment and Its Impact on Japanese Education
Guohe Zheng, Ball State University
Introduction
Dual enrollment in both high school and college has been proliferating since 1980s.
Its results, however, remain controversial. Proponents claim that earning tuition-free
college credits in high school saves students time and money and gives them the
confidence and momentum to continue on with higher education. Critics, on the other
hand, insist that acceleration with younger students compromises rigor and, ultimately,
doesn’t do them any good. Meanwhile, unaware of the controversy, parents of students
consider dual enrollment a vital factor in course selection in high school. This preference
in course selection according to the availability of dual enrollment puts foreign language
programs, particularly those of less-commonly taught languages such as Japanese, in
disadvantage, even in danger of elimination. This paper discusses dual enrollment and its
impact on Japanese education.
1. A Brief History of Dual Enrollment and Its Current Models
A good place to start is a brief look at the history of dual enrollment and the
different models it operates in today. Information from such an investigation can help us
understand how dual enrollment originated, how it evolved into what it is today, and the
role it plays in our educational system.
The history of dual enrollment, commonly known as “dual credit," can be traced
back to as early as 1950s when individual courses were created in New York State to keep
high school students from slacking off. In the 1970s, Syracuse University pitched these
courses to local schools as a cure for “senioritis.” A decade later, in the 1980s, the first
state-wide dual enrollment programs rolled out in New York State. Soon, it spread to
Florida, Texas, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Washington and eventually to all 50
states.
As it is practiced today, an official agreement must be signed by participating high
schools and their college or university partners in order to create a dual enrollment
program. In the case of more than one levels of the same subject are to be offered as dual
enrollment courses, these levels must obey what is known as “the rule of sequencing.” For
example, when a dual credit Japanese program is created, the high school will be approved
224
to teach only Japanese 101 for the first semester. In the second semester, both Japanese
101 and 102 can be approved but no Japanese 201 or 202, which have to wait until
students of 102 complete and pass their class, and so on. The point, of course, is to ensure
that all dual credit students are trained within dual credit program from the beginning in
order to maintain the consistent rigor comparable to that of the same course in college.
With few exceptions, only high school juniors and seniors are allowed to take dual credit
courses. Moreover, these students must have a GPA of A or B to be enrolled in such
courses.
In most high schools, one of two models is adopted in terms of dual credit course
offerings. The courses are offered either a la carte, or less commonly, prix fixe. There are
also variations within each model. In terms of material delivery, the instruction is carried
out in most cases at the high school by teachers the credit-granting college approves.
Elsewhere, online technology links college professors with high school classrooms. Less
commonly, high school students commute to the college campus to take the course taught
by a college professor. When the instructor is a college professor, there is no problem in
terms of instructor credentials for college credit courses. When high school teachers are at
the helm, colleges typically insist on the same qualifications as that for adjunct instructors
hired to teach at the college, often a master’s degree in the subject being taught.
These various models are reflected in the definitions of dual credit by the department of
education in most states. For example, the Indiana Department of Education defines “dual
credit” as follows:
Dual credit is the term given to courses in which high school students have the
opportunity to earn both high school and college credits simultaneously. Dual
credit courses are taught by high school faculty, adjunct college faculty or college
faculty either at the high school, at the college or university, or sometimes
through online courses or distance education. Dual credit is offered by both state
and independent (private, regionally accredited) colleges and universities.1
The most important factor contributing to the proliferation of dual credit programs
is definitely the financial benefits such programs can give to students. Students enrolled in
a dual credit course will pay only a fraction of the cost for college credits that they would
pay for the same course as a traditional college student. A program sponsored by the
University of Missouri-St. Louis, for example, costs just $60 per credit hour
while enrolled in high school, compared with the $258 per credit hour rate charged to
college students.2 At Mooresville High School in Indiana, a course taught by an Indiana
University-certified high school teacher costs students $248. A night class taught Ivy Tech
Community College faculty costs $300.3 At Ball State University in Indiana where I teach,
“high priority courses” such as German, French or Spanish cost as little as $25 per credit
hour while non-high priority courses such as Chinese, Japanese, or Latin cost $250 per
1“DualCredit,”lastmodifiedJuly15,201,5http://www.doe.in.gov/ccr/dual-credit.
2St. Louis Post Dispatch, May 19, 2013.
3Blackie, John A. “Dual Enrollment in Spanish: Building a Successful Program,”
Hispania March 1997. Vol. 80. No. 1, pp. 136-139.
225
course.
It is mentioned above that dual enrollment originated as a way to keep high school
students from slacking off. The same scenario still stands behind the motivations of many
states to promote dual enrollment programs. It Texas, for example, it has bee pointed out
that “many of the schools that have been converted to the early-college model [namely
dual enrollment] have a pattern of low test scores and high dropout rates. The state is
changing them over on the theory that academic rigor and the chance to save time and
money will motivate students.”4 As dual enrollment evolved, however, it also became a
way to accommodate bright students for whom high school classes are full of busy work
and lack challenges, as June Kronholz’s investigation reveals.5
It should be noted that there is no contradiction between the two.
Both are supported by experiences of different schools. That, perhaps, is why legislators
believe that dual enrollment offers something for everyone: "academic enrichment for kids
who have maxed out the honors and accelerated classes their schools offer; a glimpse of
college rigor for high school laggards; and a leg up on a career for those who enroll in
trade programs."6
2. Controversies about Dual Enrollment
However, dual enrollment remains a matter of controversy. Many dual credit
courses taught at high schools rely on memorization, contends Harrison Keller, vice
provost for higher-education policy and research at the University of Texas at
Austin. “They're really high school courses on steroids,” he says. “If you simply credential
a teacher with a master’s degree and say, ‘Here’s your syllabus, and sixth period is
now college,’ it doesn’t translate into an authentic college-level learning experience.”7
Similarly, Ken W. Smith, a professor of mathematics and statistics at Sam
Houston State University, wrote with Diana Nixon in a recent column in The Chronicle of
Higher Education about an 18-year-old student who landed in his precalculus class as a
junior, with 65 credits she’d earned in high school. She struggled with his tests, she told
him, because her learning style was suited to multiple-choice questions.8 Another example
is the dual credit “British Literature” offered at Lyndon B. Johnson High School in Austin,
4Mangan, Katherine. “Is Faster Always Better? The Case Against Getting ahead,” The
Chronicle of Higher Education. February 21, 2014. A18-22.
5Kronholz, June. “High Schoolers in College: Dual Enrollment Programs Offer
Something for Everyone,” Education Next. Summer 2011. Vol. 11, No. 3.
6Kronholz, June. “High Schoolers in College: Dual Enrollment Programs Offer
Something for Everyone.” Education Next. Summer 2011. Vol. 11, No. 3.
7Mangan, Katherine. “Is Faster Always Better? The Case Against Getting ahead,” The
Chronicle of Higher Education. February 21, 2014. A21.
8Mangan, Katherine. “Is Faster Always Better? The Case Against Getting ahead,” The
Chronicle of Higher Education. February 21, 2014. A22.
226
Texas taught by Richard Price, an instructor at Austin Community College. The ambitious
course is a blend of Chaucer, Milton, and Shakespeare. The class starts with a recap of
works from Chaucer and Milton. Then, one day, the students break into groups of our or
five, dragging their chairs together to act out scenes from Chaucer’s poem Troilus and
Criseyde with roles signed by Mr. Price. Amid much conversation, two students excitedly
plan their costumes as Eve and the serpent. But the problem is that they are picturing a
scene from Milton’s Paradise Lost when they are supposed to be in Chaucer’s Troy.
Realizing the confusion, Mr. Price had to remind the students sympathetically: “You’re in
the wrong garden example...We’re moving quickly.”9
The above assessment of the gap between high school and college is supported by
the experience of some parents of students who have taken dual credit classes. One parent,
who happened to be a veteran insider to higher education, frankly calls the theory “a
fiction” which asserts that dual enrollment is a good way to prepare high school students
for college. He lumps together Advanced Placement courses and dual enrollment courses
in his criticism.
Can we dispense with the fiction that Advanced Placement courses in any
way resemble college courses? Because that’s what it is—a fiction, carefully
crafted by the College Board to promote its AP franchise to the detriment of other,
better options. Specifically, I’m talking about dual enrollment… I speak as
someone who has had a great deal of experience with both AP and DE. As a
college administrator and professor, I’ve dealt with hundreds of students who had,
or were seeking, AP credit. I’v also taught hundreds (probably well over
1,000) dual enrollment students. Moreover, as a parent, I have four children who
have all taken at least one AP course...and I am now on my third daulenrollment student. My two older kids each earned a full year of college
credit while dually enrolled, which served them well, as my daughter went on to
graduate from a private liberal arts college in three years and my son…appears
poised to do the same.10
Admitting that AP and DE classes are better as high school courses because they
usually have the best teachers and best students, he nevertheless emphasizes that “they’re
high-school classes, not college classes.” One reason he gives for this is
the relative paucity of graded assignments of college courses: 45-50 grades a student gets
in high school versus only a few tests plus a term paper in many college courses. But he
also points out a far more significant difference between high school and college
illustrating the point with a story about his daughter, a high school senior. She was taking
a dual credit political science class and became frustrated one day with a paper. Here
are the exchanges between the daughter and her concerned father, as told by the father.
9Mangan, Katherine. “Is Faster Always Better? The Case Against Getting ahead,” The
Chronicle of Higher Education. February 21, 2014. A22.
10RobJenkins,‘AdvancedPlacementvs.DualEnrollment,”TheChronicleofHigher
Education,January14,2013.
227
“I’m supposed to write an essay for political science about which has more power,
the House or the Senate,” she told me.
“OK,” I said, “so what’s the problem? You’re a good writer.”
Whereupon she exploded, “But I don’t know which has more power!”
I was able to explain to her, calmly, that she wasn’t supposed to know; she
was supposed to think. “Go back over your notes,” I told her. “Reread the chapter in
the book. Decide which one you think has more power, then tell why, giving your
reasons. That’s what your professor is looking for.”
“Oh,” she said, clearly taken aback. “Nobody’s ever asked me what I
thought before.”
This was a young woman who had already taken several AP courses and
made A’s in all of them. And yet that experience had not prepared her for the rigor
of college work—a true rigor based on intellectual engagement, not simply on time
spent slogging away at “projects.”11
When high school students with similar early-college experiences go to college,
they will find themselves ill-prepared. Such is the case with James
Hinkson. Hickson graduated in 2011 from Orem High School outside Provo, Utah, with
two years of college under his belt. His senior year was a blur of 13 college courses, most
of them beamed onto a TV screen in a multimedia room at the high school. Two weeks
after his high-school graduation with an associate degree from Utah Valley University in
hand, he moved into a dorm at Brigham Young University. He was already a junior. Three
days later, he found himself immersed in upper-level courses with juniors. He kept his
stride at Brigham Young until he decided he’d earned the right to slack off a bit. Before
he knew it, his grades began to suffer, and he got discouraged. Within three months, he
had put college on hold and moved back home, an experience he called humbling. “It shot
all the confidence I’d built based on having done so much more than everyone else,” he
says. “I realized I wasn’t so great.” In retrospect, he wishes he hadn’t been in such a hurry.
After trying his hands for two years at several dead-end jobs, he returned to Brigham
Young full time in Fall 2013 a much more mature student. A 21, he was right where he
might have been if he hadn’t started college in high school. Citing James Hinkson as one
piece of evidence, Katherine Mangan tries to make a case against dual enrollment. She
reminds us that “[a]s more high schools offer ways to earn college credit, some educators
worry that students are being set up to fail.”12
On the other hand, proponents claim that earning tuition-free college credits in
high school saves students time and money and gives them the confidence and momentum
to continue on with higher education. There are success stories that support this claim
about dual enrollment. The above-mentioned Lyndon B. Johnson High School in Austin
also offers an example of how dual credit programs can help low-performance students
11RobJenkins,‘AdvancedPlacementvs.DualEnrollment,”TheChronicleofHigher
Education,January14,2013.
12Mangan, Katherine. “Is Faster Always Better? The Case Against Getting ahead,” The
Chronicle of Higher Education. February 21, 2014. A18-22.
228
succeed. Deemed “academically unacceptable” by the state of Texas in 2010-2011, JBJ,
which serves predominantly minority students whose parents did not go to college, teamed
up with Austin Community-College to offer a dual credit curriculum. Students have to
pass a test to prove that they are ready to take college courses. About 130 of 831 students
are enrolled in at least one such course. As a result, these students have become more
confident about themselves, with bigger dreams about the future. For example, one student
is enrolled in five dual credit courses in 2014. Another student plans to get into Texas
A&M University to study petroleum engineering. Reflecting her experience with dual
credit classes, she says that before taking dual credit course, she didn’t think she’d be able
to get the work done, but college-level courses have boosted her confidence. Still another
student, who admits that he was “never a fan of hard work,” was enrolled in a dual credit
engineering class only after an auto-mechanics class he’d signed up for was canceled.
After a brief period of procrastinating and “freaking out” when the workload piled up, he
did pretty well in the new course. When the time came, he applied to Texas’ two flagship
universities, planning, not to repair cars—his old dream—but to design them.13
Another success story is that of the dual credit program launched as early as in
1984 by Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI). Evolved into the
Special Programs for Academic Nurturing, SPAN now opens all of its undergraduate
schools to the most able youngsters and claims to be the only Indiana university that does
it. According to Dr. Johnny Russell, SPAN’s executive director, SPAN was designed to
accommodate talented students unfit with current public education system which “shoots
for the middle,” and its resources are increasingly spent getting struggling students just to
average. These bright students, once enrolled in SPAN, see “glimpse of hope,” and
show “excitement and zeal.” One high school student from SPAN graduated with a 4.3
GPA and 45 IUPUI credits and was admitted to both Brown and Stanford.14
Despite the controversies, demand for dual enrollment is booming. The number of
dual-enrollment courses taken increased by 67 percent from 2002-3 to 2010-11, according
to federal data. At schools with higher shares of minority students, the expansion has been
explosive. In that eight-year span, the number of dual-credit courses taken at
predominantly minority schools rose by 145 percent. About 1.4 million high-school
students nationally were enrolled in dual-credit courses in 2010-11, the most recent year
for which data are available. More than 8 in 10 high schools offered the courses. As is
pointed out, early-college credits including that from dual enrollment, has become a new
norm for colleges and universities. Because of the money that can be saved, dual
enrollment extends opportunities to low-income and minority students, perhaps one of the
13Mangan, Katherine. “Is Faster Always Better? The Case Against Getting ahead,” The
Chronicle of Higher Education. February 21, 2014. A22.
14Kronholz, June. “High Schoolers in College: Dual Enrollment Programs Offer
Something for Everyone.” Education Next. Summer 2011. Vol. 11, No. 3.
229
most significant impact of dual enrollment. That is why education supporters such as the
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has been so active in promoting dual enrollment.15
3. Policy Makers and Dual Enrollment
The growth of dual enrollment is, ultimately, the result of the response to
the globalization of the knowledge economy, a process that started picking up speed
since the 1980s even though it can be traced back to earlier. The process has been further
accelerated by the development of IT technology and internet. Drawing on the findings
from a recent commissioned research, Carol Geary Schneider has noted that “success in
today’s workplace requires achievement in at least six new areas of knowledge and skill
development, which have been added to the already ambitious learning portfolio required
in earlier eras.” Employers ask for not only such traditional skills as “communications,
analytic reasons, quantitative literacy, broad knowledge of science and society, and fieldspecific knowledge and skills,” they also ask for high levels of “global knowledge and
competence, intercultural knowledge and skills, creativity and innovation, teamwork
and problem-solving skills in diverse settings, information literacy and fluency,
and ethical reasoning and decision making."16
The general public understands the trend of the times and is flocking to colleges
and universities in order to increase their chances of success in a rapidly changing
economy. Too few of them, however, are completing college. On the other hand, college
access and completion have been strikingly stratified by income and by community of
origin for many years. At least three of four students who make it to campus are
underprepared to succeed there (ACTFL 2011), and many need serious remediation to
bring their skills up to college levels. A significant number of these students are
working, often carrying the kind of workload that studies show is correlated with high
levels of failure to complete. Because of this, the United States is currently projected to be
at least three million college-educated workers short to meet the projected demand by
2018 (Carnevale, Smith, Stroll, 2010). As a result, the pressure on higher education to
increase the number of college graduates has been building for decades. President Obama
tried to address this issue in his first State of the Union address in 2009: “By 2020,
America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world…in
a global economy where the most valuable skill you can sell is your knowledge, a good
education is no longer just a pathway to opportunity—it is a prerequisite…every
American will need to get more than a high school diploma.” Governors, the Department
of Education, many leading foundations and many policy organizations have taken up
President Obama’s call. In 2010, the National Governors Association (NGA) launched the
Complete to Compete Initiative. The Initiative urges states to implement new performance
15Mangan, Katherine. “Is Faster Always Better? The Case Against Getting ahead,” The
Chronicle of Higher Education. February 21, 2014. A21.
16QuotedinDebraHumphreys, “What's Wrong with the Completion Agenda—And
What We Can Do About It,” Liberal Education. Winter 2012, Vol. 98, No. 1.
230
funding systems that tie state funding to public universities with completion rates ratter
than with initial enrollment figures alone, as was practiced previously for decades.
In this context, instead of exploring ways to train students to meet the expectations
of the new economy, public colleges and universities are facing strong pressure from the
State to move in the opposite direction. As a result, rather than reforming their general
education programs to make them more integrated and inclusive of the real-world,
institutions of higher learning are seeking to increase graduation rates by lowering the bar,
as is the case with the English Department of Anne Arundel Community College in
Maryland, which was talking about eliminating the requirement of research paper to allow
more students to graduate. Or they seek to increase graduation rates by “outsourcing”
general education to high schools “to get general education out of the way."17
It is here that dual enrollment comes into the bigger picture of the National College
Completion Agenda. To policy makers, particularly at state level, dual enrollment is a
very appealing way to implement the “national college completion
agenda.” It “offers something for everyone,” as mentioned above. It is not surprising that
many states started making it mandatory for high schools to offer dual credit
courses. For example, Indiana has a law that requires that all Indiana high schools offer
dual credit courses. The following is from the official website of Indiana Department of
Education.
2. Are Indiana high schools required to offer dual credit courses?
Yes. Indiana law currently requires each Indiana high school to offer a minimum of
two dual credit courses. The intent is to expand opportunities for students to take
college-level coursework while in high school. It also provides an opportunity to
fulfill the Core 40 with Academic Honors (AHD) and Core 40 with Technical
Honors (THD) diploma requirements using the dual credit options, and will help
more students prepare for college and careers.18
Moreover, to implement the national college completion agenda, many institutions
of higher learning launched an initiative called Degree Maps, designed to
create “a semester-by-semester list of courses a student must take to graduate on-time,”
namely within four years. Since the four-year graduation rate is now tied by law with state
funding to public universities, all public institutions of higher learning scrambled to find
ways to ensure their freshmen will graduate in four years after their being admitted.
Indiana Commission for Higher Education, for example, published a “Degree Map
Guidance for Indiana’s Public Colleges and Universities” in October 2013, which
mandates that all public colleges and universities in Indiana implementing the 4-year
degree map starting from their class of 2014. The Guidance is available online
17DebraHumphreys, “What's Wrong with the Completion Agenda—And What We Can
Do About It,” Liberal Education. Winter 2012, Vol. 98, No. 1.
18“IndianaDualCredit:FrequentlyaskedQuestions,”lastrevisedJanuary2015,
http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/ccr/dual-credit-final-3.6.15.pdf.
231
at http://www.in.gov/che/files/Degree_Map_Guidance_for_Indiana_Public_Colleges_and
_Universities.pdf.
4. Discrepancies in Dual Enrollment Policies
The above sections discussed the demand for college-educated workforce as the
result of the globalized economy, and how a national college completion agenda was
created in recent years to press institutions of higher learning to produce more graduates
with fewer resources. Policies and regulations have been created to implement the relevant
laws concerning dual credit courses in high schools. Discrepancies, however, exist in the
policies and regulations, which were meant to implement the National Completion
Agenda, or more relevant to this paper, the law that requires high schools to offer dual
enrollment courses. The following example is from policies published in Indiana, but
similar discrepancies are presumably exist in other states as well. The most crucial
discrepancy concerns the required credentials of high school teachers to teach a dual credit
class.
According to a document published by Indiana Department of Education, one of
the ways in which colleges and universities ensure that the dual credit coursework in high
schools is college level is that
Approved instructors of dual credit courses shall have credentials consistent with
the credentials required for on-campus faculty or a development plan approved
by the postsecondary institution to satisfy this requirement.
Such high school teachers would fall into the category of adjunct faculty in a
university. Since adjunct faculty at my university must have a minimum of a masters
degree to teach an on-campus class, high school teachers who wish to teach dual credit
classes must also have a masters degree to meet the minimum credential requirements.
However, community colleges in Indiana have a different policy. The following is
the entire text of the policy regarding the credentials of a teacher for a dual credit class at
Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana.
511 IAC 16-2-6 Dual credit teacher
Sec. 6 (a) A teacher holding any license that makes them eligible to teach in a
secondary school may teach a course for which dual credit may be awarded by
an institution of higher learning if all of the following conditions are met:
(1) Complete a major of at least 36 hours in the subject in the subject or a
related subject which they will teach the dual credit course;
(2) At least three prior years of teaching expense; and
232
(3) On or after September 1, 2017, received a rating of effective or high in
three (3) of the last (5) years based on an evaluation that meets the guidelines
outlined in IC 20-28-11.5.19
Comparing the two policies, one will notice obvious discrepancies between
credentials required at public universities and at Ivy Tech Community College in Indiana:
the latter is much more lenient.
5. The Impact of Dual Enrollment on Japanese Education
Such policy discrepancies have enormous impact on less commonly taught
languages such as Japanese. There are many high school Japanese teachers with years of
proven records of excellent teaching who do not have a masters degree. The abovementioned policy discrepancies put these teachers in great disadvantage: Teachers of
commonly taught languages in Indiana can apply to teach dual credit classes with Ivy
Tech Community College of Indiana if they do not have a masters degree since a masters
degree is not required there. But that option is not available to teachers of Japanese
because of the simple fact that there is no Japanese program at Ivy Tech Community
College of Indiana.
This disadvantage on the part of teachers of Japanese will soon be translated into
something more serious: the availability of dual credit classes for the commonly taught
languages—such as French, German, and Spanish—but the lack of it for Japanese. Since
parents of 8th grade students tend to select high school courses according to the
availability of dual credit classes rather than the wishes or the passion of their children,
lack of Japanese dual credit option will lead to reduced enrollment of Japanese programs.
Low enrollment is a problem at any time for any school. But when there is a budgetary
concern, as was the case since the start of the recession in 2008, programs with low
enrollment, such as Japanese, become more vulnerable. They would be the first programs
to be considered for phase-out or even elimination. Unfortunately that was what happened
to some high school Japanese programs in Indiana, such as that of Crown Point High
School.20
There are several teachers of Japanese in Indiana who indicated their interest in
offering dual credit Japanese in their schools, but their applications were not approved by
my university because they don’t have a masers degree. They cannot partner with Ivy
Tech Community College of Indiana either because Japanese, as a less commonly taught
language, is not offered there. That is the new reality of Japanese education today. The
19“FacultyCredentialStandards,”compiledFebruary202013,
https://www.ivytech.edu/files/credentialing_standards.pdf.
20NorikoWachowski,“StrugglingtoSavetheJapaneseProgramatMyHighSchool,”
inEmbracingtheNewPhaseinJapaneseEducationintheUnitedStates:Proceedingsof
the23rdAnnualConfereneceoftheCentralAssociationofTeachersofJapanese”edited
byKazumiMatsumoto,SadatoshiTomizawaandGuoheZheng.163-166.
233
least that I can do is to highlight the impact of dual enrollment on Japanese education in
the United States, pinpoint the reason for it, and hope that teachers of Japanese, by
working together, can find some solution. I have appealed to several offices including
Indiana State Department of Education and National Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment
Partnerships (NACEP), and the office of Distance Education at Ball State University, but
to no avail so far. Currently, Ball State University is working with five Indiana high
schools in offering dual enrollment Japanese. All these teachers had a masters degree in
hand.
Bibliography
Ann, Brian P. “The Influence of Dual Enrollment on Academic Performance and College
Readiness: Differences by Socioeconomic Status.” Res High Edu (2013) 54: 407-432.
Ann, Brian P. “The Impact of Dual Enrollment on College Degree Attainment: Do LowSES Students Benefit?” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. March 2013. Vol. 35.
No. 1. 57-75.
Blackie, John A. “Dual Enrollment in Spanish: Building a Successful Program.” Hispania
March 1997. Vol. 80. No. 1. 136-139.
Humphreys, Debra. “What's Wrong with the Completion Agenda—And What We Can Do
About It.” Liberal Education. Winter 2012, Vol. 98, No. 1.
Jenkins, Rob. “Advanced Placement vs. Dual Enrollment.” The Chronicle of Higher
Education. January 14, 2013.
Kronholz, June. “High Schoolers in College: Dual Enrollment Programs Offer Something
for Everyone.” Education Next. Summer 2011. Vol. 11, No. 3.
Mangan, Katherine. “Is Faster Always Better? The Case Against Getting ahead.” The
Chronicle of Higher Education. February 21, 2014. 18-22.
St. Louis Post-Dispatch. "AP courses vs. dual credit: what's best for high school students?”
by Jessica Bock. May 19, 2013.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/ap-courses-vs-dual-credit-what-s-best-forhigh/article_32de45f2-37e8-572c-a01a-aa7726797e62.html
Wachowski,Noriko.“StrugglingtoSavetheJapaneseProgramatMyHighSchool,”in
EmbracingtheNewPhaseinJapaneseEducationintheUnitedStates:Proceedingsof
the23rdAnnualConferenceoftheCentralAssociationofTeachersofJapanese”edited
byKazumiMatsumoto,SadatoshiTomizawaandGuoheZheng.163-166.
234
―
―
A COLLABORATIVE PROJECT VIA THE INTERNET FOR THE PLURALISTIC
APPROACHES OF LANGUAGES AND CULTURES:
AN ATTEMPT TO MEASURE THE ABILITY OF INTERCULTURAL
COMMUNICATION
Ryoko Hayashi, Kobe University
Chiyo Kunimura, Université Rennes 1
Jumpei Kaneda, National Museum of Ethnology
facebook
twitter
CEFR
can-do statement
2013
, 2013a, 2013b
CARAP: un cadre du référence pour le approches plurielles1
FREPA: a framework of reference for pluralistic approaces
CARAP
Compétences et ressources
descriptor
CARAP
http://carap.ecml.at/Accueil/tabid/3577/language/fr-FR/Default.aspx
http://carap.ecml.at/
2015
5
1
1
234
3
2013a
7
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
4)
ICT
3)
7
8
5)
235
4
0
2
3
I
3
10
2
3
2
―
II 2012
4
7
I 2011
4
7
2013a
1)
2
3
SNS
skype
1
1
2
1
10
3
3
2)
2
1
1
3
11
236
6
4
3)
4) 5)
―
6)
3
7)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
2
10
2
4
237
4
9
2
4
3
88
9
66
20
6
Q1:
4.2
3.9
3.9
2.9
2.4
2.4
3.9
4.1
3.6
3.1
3.6
3.7
Q7:
4.3
3.8
Q8:
3.8
3.1
Q2:
Q3:
Q4:
Q5:
Q6:
238
Q9:
Q10:
3.6
3.3
4.6
3.9
3.4
1.9
4.0
4.2
Q11:
facebook skype, prezi
Q12:
9
14
5
5
1
9
2
2
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
80
90
70
95
90
83
85
100
95
88%
40, 5
70
80
75
70
75
80, 85
70
70
66%
9
5
6
3
2
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
12
4
3.
CARAP
239
descriptor
CARAP
Skill
Attitude
Knowledge
500
3
4
5
13
CARAP
K
K 1 Knows some of the principles of how languages work
K 1.1 Knows that °language is / languages° are composed of signs which form
a (semiological) system
K 1.2 Knows that the relationship °between words and their *referent*, <the
reality which they designate> / between the *signifier* <the word, the
structure, the intonation …> and the meaning° is a priori an arbitrary one
K 1.2.1 Knows that even cases of onomatopoeia, where a link does exist
between word and referent, retain a degree of arbitrariness and vary from
one language to another
K 1.2.2 Knows that two words which may °have the same form / look alike°
in different languages do not automatically mean the same thing
K 1.2.3 Knows that grammatical categories are not “the” replica of reality
but one way of organising this in language
K 1.2.3.1 Knows that grammatical gender and sexual gender are
not the same thing
4.1.
42015
5
http://carap.ecml.at/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=NwlQZ9n1Kko%3d&tabid=3194&language=
en-GB 2015
5
1
5 http://web.cla.kobe-u.ac.jp/staff/rh/2015/05/post.html
2015
5
1
240
CARAP
5
K1
K1.2 K1.2.1
K1.2.3.1.
1
K08
A03
A06
A13
A14
A17
S04
S06
S07
3.63
3.79
3.77
3.87
3.75
3.73
4.10
3.83
3.91
1
K01
K04
K07
3.22
2.95
3.34
241
A09
A10
S05
K 1.6
K 3.4
4.08
4.50
K 5.6.1
K 6.5.2
4.25
4.00
K 6.6.2
4.08
K 8.3
K 8.4
4.08
4.00
K 8.7.2
K 9.4.1
K10.5.1.1
4.17
4.17
4.00
K 10.4.1
4.08
K 10.4.3
K 12.1
K 12.3.1
A 2.1
A 2.2
A 4.3
4.00
4.00
4.17
4.17
4.50
4.00
A 4.3.3
4.00
3.10
3.15
3.03
/
2
…
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
...
...
A 6.5.1
A 7.1
A 8.8
A 13.1
4.08
4.00
4.42
4.00
/
/
/
/
/
/
A 13.2
4.17
242
A 14.2
4.08
A 14.3
A 17.3
A 19.1
4.00
4.25
4.00
S 2.11
S 3.7
S 4.1
4.00
4.00
4.25
S 4.2
S 4.3
S 4.4
4.08
4.00
4.42
S 6.1.1
4.17
S 6.2
4.25
S 6.2.1
S 6.2.2
4.33
4.42
S 6.3.1
S 7.3
S 7.3.2
S 7.6
S 7.6.1
S 7.6.1.2
4.08
4.08
4.00
4.33
4.00
4.42
S 7.7
S 7.7.1
S 7.7.3
4.00
4.17
4.08
S 7.7.4.2
S7.7.4.1
4.08
4.25
K 1.1
2.33
K 1.2
2.58
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
...
/
/
/
/
/
/
…
243
/
K 1.2.3
2.50
K 1.2.3.1
K 1.3
2.58
2.67
K 3.1.1
K 3.5.2
2.08
2.58
K 4.1.1
2.67
K 4.2.2
K 4.3
2.58
2.67
A 9.2.1
2.67
A 16.3.1
3.00
S 1.1.1
S 1.2
2.67
2.75
S 1.5
2.75
“
”
/
/
/
/...
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
S 5.2.1
2.58
S 5.3.1
2.83
''
''
/
4.2.
CARAP
5
2
p<.05
4.1.
244
p<.001
1
K05
K12
A03
A06
A08
A13
A18
3.61
3.6
3.65
3.61
3.74
3.72
3.71
1
K04
A09
A14
S01
S02
S05
2.54
2.96
2.85
2.64
2.68
2.31
/
/
/
''
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
3.44
3.54
3.54
3.41
3.35
2.90
6
245
CM
Facebook
CARAP
2014
15K12910
(2013a)
41
―
, pp.31-43.
―
2013b
― ,
―
―
2013
246
18,
17
(2013/9/5-7) 263-265
17
p.10
1
1.1
1999
1
2014
/
2007
α
1.2
α
2011
α
1
26
http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/files/000049149.pdf
247
(
2015
5
1
16
00)
2.2
α
α
2
2.1
α
α
2013
α
α
α
α
2014
30
40
1990
2000
20
α
α
α
2.2
Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages: Learning, teaching, and assessment,
CEFR
248
(plurilingualism)
α
(
CEFR
multilingualism
2004)
social agent
α
2014
CEFR
social agent
α
2013
α
3.1
4
2014
2
3
19
3
26
1
2014
7
26
8
22
10
1
2
10
α
3
α
K
3.2
2000
LS
α
1
LS
2011
2009
2010
LS
2013
249
2010
LS
2002
LS
20
α
1
2002
LS
3.3
K
40
K
K
K
1
3
250
3.4
K
K
K
K
K
2
K
K
K
K
K
α
K
α
K
K
K
4.1
K
2
α
7
2004
5
(http://www.education.ie)
2005
251
K
K
α
K
K2
K3
K
4.2
K
K4
W1
K5
252
K6
1
/
/
K
K
α
K
K
α
4.3
K
K
W2
K7
3
α
3
Crèche baby
Crèche
253
90
W3
α
K8
2
α
W4
α
K9
K10
K
K
K
α
K
K
254
3
K
K
α
K
α
K
α
α
K
K
K
K
K
K
α
K
α
α
K
α
K
K
α
α
α
α
255
2010
9
pp.17
41
2014
EUIJ Waseda
2010
Working Paper No.2013-2
2011
2013
2011
2002
2014
39 pp.1-14
2007
104
2013
S.
M.J.
Castles,S.,&Miller,M.J.(2009).The age of migration :International population
movements in the modern world. Fourth Edition. London: Palgrave Macmillan .
2014
14 pp 1 10
2004
256
ADOPTION AND CHANGE IN A SELF-INSTRUCTION COURSE:
A CASE STUDY OF A JLPT ONLINE COURSE
Yuko Kojima
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
1.
1-1.
90
2007
2004
2006
2007
1-2.
2015
1
65
2010
N1
257
N5
15
(American Association of Teachers of Japanese)
12
2.
2-1.
2-2.
200
12
258
300
2-3.
N2
N3
10
N2
N1 N4
N3
N2
N3
11
Quiz
1
100%
1
1
Desire2Learn
(D2L)
Quiz
259
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
8-9
10-11
12-14
15-16
2
2-4.
N2
N3
N2
N1
2-5.
2014
2
2
Skype
260
N4
N3
15
N1
N2
N3
11
3
40%
1-3
4-7
8-11
12-15
—
—
3
2-6.
3
3~4
261
3.
Final Reflection Paper (5%)
Write a paper in English in order to reflect your learning methods and to utilize what you have learned
in this semester for future learning. Double-spaced, 12 point font, times new roman, two pages by
midnight on [Date].
Your paper will be evaluated by how much thought you put into the reflection questions below.
- Comments or thoughts about JLPT
- Some advices to students who are going to take this course next year
- What you achieved this semester
- What you could not achieve/ What you should have done
- Future challenges and plans (Will you take JLPT next year? How should you prepare for it?)
1
4.
4-1.
1993
262
2
4-2.
3
263
4
4-3.
100
100
100
264
5
6
5
4-4.
265
6
4-5.
7
266
5.
6.
267
(2007)
(2007)
(2000)
http://www.jlpt.jp/index.html (2015
(2004)
―
5
8
)
―
2004
pp.143-148
−
(2006)
,
,
(1993)
(2006)
268
i
Wd
――
TEACHING WRITING IN A BEGINNING JAPANESE CLASS:
FOCUSING ON COEHSION
iK
Itsuko Nishikawa
University of Washington
i
i
i
h
t
t
h
AT
h
ihad
---T
A
e
T
hT
Wd
T
ad
a
e
Wd
d
h
T
[d
W
i
h
i
T
i
dWt
At
d
Wi
h
i
W
Wd
Tt
ihadWt
g
i
h
h
h
h
h
d
W
i
t
eh
e
ta
t t
ta
Ag
i
[ T
n
a
ad
T
h
ih
T
t
W
e
A
T i
h
A
t tad
h
e
h
hg
(Lee 2002)A
e
T
T
[
h
T
e
i
i
T
e
W
A
i
(semantic unit) W
i
Wd
A
i
A Wd
Wd reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, lexical cohesion
W
ALexical cohesion i
general noun e
Halliday & Hasan (1976)
d
h
ad
synonym superordinate hg
S
d
AReference i
e
(endophoric reference)
e
(exophoric reference)
A
e
h reference
personal reference
e
d endophoric reference e
e
T endophora
e
Wd
A
-, t tad h
i
e
i
i
Sd
A Wd Halliday & Hasan (1976)
h
a
h
it t
Wd
A
(
-, i
hg
W A
W
i
e
i
d
i
e a A
--(
[
Wd
hg
i
W A
h
e
A
i
i W
e
h
i
e
d
h a A
Wd
A
hg
Wd
hW
th
A
i
hW
a T
d
A
repetition
i
dK
A
n
()
e
)
i
1.
d
n
W
A
A
s
1.
ad
270
ge
A
Wd
1.
T
d
T
iK
e
Te
d
W
h
Tt
d
A
i
h
nh
i
e
TTe
e
h
i
h
dWt A
h
i
e
a
A
i
i
A
W
S
W A
ih A
e
At
T
i
h
Wd
W
e
e
T
ih
e
T
W
h
A
i
,
ad
e
W
i
i
i
AT
T
i
t
s
sg
T
iW
A
i
h
i
t
i
A
e
a
a
A
(
K
e
a
A
i
tei
T
n
W
W
AT
i
[
A
i
g
i
adt
i
T
a
i
i
AT
W A
t
i
hT
e
[
At
h
e
A
e
i
d
W
hg
ad
W
g
i
T i
W
i
Wd
e
271
A
e
i
h
d
e
ad
i
i
[
[
[
A
h
d
[
At
i
i
d
A Wd
e
h
i
h
h
T
i
had
A
Where the school is
e
htc
i
c
h
a
e
tW
A c
A
c i
i
tW
tW
A
ad
c tW
T
eW
A
i
c
i
A
h
h
eW
T
A
iK
a
h
d
A
ad
i
d
ad
At
i
A
h
d
h
T
A
e
e
K
W
i
a
g
iK
e a
i
e
[
tW
i
e
W
i
i
e
i
sge
i
g
A
e
e
h
A
hg
A
Wd
i K
i
AK
t
i
tc i
d
tW
h
n
d
e
T
Ae
i
h
[
hT
d
t
A
ad
e
eW
d
c
W
TTe
i
i
A
T
c
t[
c
iWd
h
tW
W
[
272
A
A
Wd
i g
hgi
i
d
)
W
(
TTe
d
g
ATTi
S
ad
h
d
d
AhK
i
A
a
d
W
A
h
t
S
t[
e
W
e
ihad
eW
A
eW
t[ eW
eW
ad tW A
eW A
A
WtW
ad
e
A
(
A
WtW
hW a
e
A
A
e
WtW
A
i
A
h
t
Wd
t
tW
Ae
d
h
iha
A
h
i
W
A
ihad
e
i
e
Tg
t[ eW
Ae s
i
W
d
i
e
tW
ad
A
ad
W
ad
A
W
i
e
(
i
273
i
Te
tW A
T eW A
tW AgTi
t[ A
tW
e
A
i
ih
h e
e tW
i
i
e
i
tW Ae
i
T WtW A
i
eW A
aW i
eW
e
tW A
i
e
W
T eW A
tW Ae
t[ eW A
tW
T
ad
Wd
T
tW A
Te
i
e
t[ eW
t
i
e
i
i
h
i
e
Wh
e
a
i
nh
T
i
W
i
s
A
T
i
W
(
iha
e
A
h
TTe
a
e
tW
W
A
A 7
i
e
i
A
o
d
d
e
W
A
7
25 9
8
i
t
ad tW
A
t[
e
e
t
eW
A
tW
A
e
t
A
W
A
[
e
e
eW
W e
A
e
A 7
W A
[
A
eW
e
g
[
W
S
tW
[
d
t[
W e
Wi
o
i
e
a
eW
e A
tW
i
A
eW
7
A
25 9
g
d
274
i
7
[
W
8
dAe
tW Ae
tW
e
nh
hW a
A
A
e
e
t[
i
]
i
e
t
]
it t
ih
tW
T
e
d
e
i
h
( (
tW
AT
A
i
i
7
e
d
a A
tW
e
A
W
T
i
i
eW
e
ad
tW
[
eW
eW
i
a
A
eK
a
eW
tW A
tW At i
t
a
A
e
h
A
Wt[
t[ eW
eW
T
T
T
e
eW
t[
hW
e
T
T
tW
ad
eW
i
Ah
eW
eW
A
A
tW
tW
4
tW
i
a
ihad
ihadK
tW
Wt[
g
A
A
A
eK
eW
g
A
eW
e
4
d
a
g
A
A
3
ad
A
A
eW
A
a
Wt[
d t[
ad
a
A
A
3
ad
056A
i
T
eW
A
ee
W
a
tW
e
A
i
i
th
At
i
275
ha
A
( )
e
e
i
tW A
h e A
e
3
eW
K
W
t
A
4
t
i
e
e
Ae
eW
3
i
tW
ad
A
i
Wt
A
e
A
tW A
h aT
4
e
i
A
K
eW
W
a
e
A
tW
A
A
e
A
e
i
T
T
e
i
ihadK
a
A
W
d
t
h
e
A
T
e
e
t
t
iha
)
)
i
•
•
•
T
a
i
e
A
What kind of information did you find?
How are pieces of information connected to each other?
Is there something that seems random or out of place?
eh
i
A
Is there any part of the essay you have questions about or do not fully understand?
If so, what was confusing?
276
A
T
e
h
a
e
t
A
i
i
i
ad
e
e
[d
h
[
h
i
g
T
d
iK
h
i
e
T
d
e
h
g
i
h
a
h
h
e
[
ha
eh
d
d
i
te
i
e
A
ad
e
i
AT
T
i
h
h
h
i
i
T
h
h
h
h
A
i
h
A
)
T
e
W
i
W
)
A
T
h
S
a
T
A
i
d
d
Wd
)
e
S T
W
sg
T
Wd
h
T
T
a A
S T
W
A
h
e
b
A
T
e
a
S
51
25
15
25
27
28
6
31
39
i
Aa
)
S
A
W
t
a
T
A
,(
h
Wd
i
S
T
i
Wd
W
h
a. Yes, it helped me figure out how to structure my essay and how to ward some of
the sentences for better topic flow between paragraphs.
277
b. Yes, you provided an example for the last writing project that affected the
structure of my paper. While writing, I compared my paper quite often to the
example to make sure it had a nice flow and stayed on topic like the example did.
S
d
i
T
W
e
h
h
Wd
T
A
c. While writing, I compared my paper quite often to the example to make sure it
had a nice flow and stayed on topic like the example did.
d. It definitely did. It really helped give me ideas what to write about, linking
sentences, and making sure I was using grammar points properly.
e. It gave me a good idea as how to introduce the topics in my paper, as well as
make them flow.
f. It’s pretty helpful. The example teaches me how to write the composition in a
good sentence and how to connect sentence well.
T
e
i
h
Wd
e
AT
it
a
d
h
t
A
K
t
i
[
e
T
A
i
a
e
a
A
i
Wd
e
i
W
A
“Nothing”
i
A
i
W
[ i
At
[h A
i
h
ei
e
[
e
W
a
i
ta
T
e
i
Wd
sge
T
i
T
i
h
A
h
W
Wh
ihad
AT
i Wd
h T
W
d h T
278
a
i
h
a
a
A
d
i
i
W
e
h
T
d
T
W
d
e
AT
a
a
A
h
e
T
Wd
e
Wd
g
i
hWi
T
At
e
n
eh
t
ite
A
e
T
i
h
K
h
,
W
W
i
i
i
Wd
g
h
e
h
A
t
a
T
A
iK
2007
1983
I
―
iK
102
1999
i
1994
―
2012
―
W
d―
―
iK
i―
42
421-437
2005
31
―
10
2009
dd―
Halliday, M. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London and New York:
Longman.
Lee, I. (2002). Teaching coherence to ESL students: a classroom inquiry. Journal of
Second Language Writing, 11, 135-159.
279
i
1. What do you like about your partner’s composition?
2a. What kind of information did you find?
2b. How are pieces of information connected to each other?
2c. Is there something that seems random or out of place?
3. Is there any part of the essay you have questions about or do not fully understand? If
so, what was confusing?
4. Tell the author what you want to know more about.
5. Tell the author if there are any parts s/he can de-emphasize and why.
About your writing experience
1. Did the example affect your writing product? How so or how not so?
2. What did you pay attention the most and the least? Please write “1” in the
parentheses for the item you paid attention the most and “3” for what you paid
least attention.
( ) Using the grammar items
( ) Not making mistakes
( ) Linking sentences/paragraphs
3. What would help you to write a better essay?
280
o
KWANTLEN POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY
i
v
u
b
v
u
m
o
cu
u
o
[
v
u
w
w
j
wy
v
u
y
u
w
y
o
y
v
w u
m
uu
[b
y
b
[
vmdv
y
u
j
b
y
bv y
w
v
S
u
v
u
m
dw m
w
w
b
y
u
[
v
um
u
v
dw
v
v
dw
gj
y p
v
m
v
v
w u
u
dw
v
w u
u
p
v
u
y
o
v
u
w
j
w
y
o
v
w
m
j
oSv
dw
j
u
v
v
v
y
u
o
o
md
w
u
o
v
b
m
v
u
w
u
v
v
mdv
u
u
o
dw
v
v
y
o
u
w
y
7 JF
u
u
v
u
u
o
j
281
m
j
m
v
v
y
w
u
u
w
wy
d
o
w
u
w
w
w
v
y
2014
v
v
v
u
j
u
j
S
j
v
o
v
u
y
ddv
[b
w JICA
w
S
v
d
u
2014
o
u
2011
w
y
w
v
d
u
2011,p.3 v
v
y
y
u
v
S
w
[
y
u
w
j
o
Sw
v
u
u
y
wm
u
m
wj
2011
y
m
u
n
y
[
BLK
w
y
k
y
v
v
y
j
y
dw
v
v
u
v
o
w
o
y
w
y
m
o
Sw
y
w
g y
y
ddv
o
w
u
u
u
o
v
j
y
S
w
u
y
w JICA
[ u
w
u u
u
w
u
2014)
w u
u
u
o ESD
o
y
w
o
v
b
o
o
v
wm
m
u
d
u
m
u
y
dw
j
dw
wy
v
b
w u
282
o
u[
v
u
u
u
u
[
y
cu
u
d
w
u
y
o
v
w
y
k
y
v
dw
u
y
v
y
DeSeCo (OECD)
ESD
Global Education
y
u
y
y
v
y
(2014,
p.48,49
JICA
w
u
u
u
d
m
o
j
n
v
y
S
w
y
u
wd
j
u
w
j
w
w
u
dwp
v
wy
w
m
w
y
)/
p
y
/
kd
o
v
w
m
ww
u
u
u
v
)
md
k
283
k
u
dw
m
u
[
u
v
gj
u
S
b
b
o
ojw
o
v
o
y
S F
w
u
b
w
dwv
j
d
bu
o u
w
y
o
w
dw
y
m
v
o
m
u
/ y
u
u
j . / v
u
w
y
bu
u
w
w
m
y
v
dw
u
w
v
v
v
y
by
d
v
w
v
v
Socialization m
w
p
y
d
w
v
v
Duff
Ochs and Schieffelin
Language
m
It is “the lifelong process by which individuals-typically novices-are induced into
special domains of knowledge, beliefs, affect, roles, identities, and social
representations, which they access and construct through language practices and social
interaction.” (Ochs and Schieffelin, 1995).
It is the “acquisition of linguistic, pragmatic, and other cultural knowledge through
social experience,” and often equated with the development of cultural and
communicative competence” (Duff, 2010).
y
S
j
pb
y
pbvy
y
u
dwv
S F - d
u
[b
m
j dw
g u
m
Sw
u
Bhabha (1990), Kramsch(1993)
m
Third SpaceSw
w
u
w
284
w
y
y
oy
yov
o
w
d
o
u
u
u
(
j
d
o
u
o
u
o
y
u
dw
w u
dw
dw
v
wy
dw
u
dw
u
d
v
S
j
y
v[
u
b
dw [
dw v
u dw
o
u
S
w
)
u 7 JF
o
v
/
u
jv
m n
v
v
v
y
dw
(
o
o
v
u
y
w
m n
odw
u
c
w
m
y
4:D
v
j dwv
(
k
j
u
w
w
u
o
v
u
k
d
y
u
o
odw
w
w
dw
v
o
/
u
v
w
w
u
j
[
u
dwv
jdw v
o
odw
v
•
•
•
m
m
w
u
7 JF
y
v
y
v
v
y
o
u
285
u
dw
v
v
(
)
m
vy
( v
u
)
u
w
(
w
wj
v
u
u-
v
o
w
o
v
u
w
u
u
Sw
v
(
u
o dw
o d
dw
w
u
b
u
ydw
w
j
u
m
o
dw
v
dw
iow
y
3
7 JF
v
u
[
odw
w
w
j
w
w
o
w
w
[
w
j
v
j
u
w
pdw
j
o
u
odw
286
w
u
7 JF
d
ydw
•
o
u
m
d
u
u
u
o
•
v
o
v
pdw
o
o m
ydw
v
pdw
[
[
o
w
o
u
u
•
o
u
m
y
vd
w v o
v o
y
p
w
o
y
y
v
m
y
w
o
w
w
v
y
u
d
dw
y
o
o
wy
o
u
o
u
o
dw
u
dw
v
i
y
•
bu
v
o
o
u
dw
v
o
y
•
w
iu
o
m
o
pw
•
•
o
v
e
y
u
o
[
u
dw
ow
y
u
j
287
j
v
•
e
y
u
o
u o
dw
•
u
u
v
u
w
o
o
u
m
u
u
u
v
y
o
p
dw
y
v
vmd
u b
v y
o
u
dwy
b
wd
y
w
j
v
dw
ywd
m
v
w
w
7 JF
v
y
uu
7 JF y
4:
8 C
v
v
y
w
u
od
v
v
v
w
y u
v
dw
o
od
o
v y p
w
u
y
j
u
dwv
y
w
dw
m
u
u
w
v
o
j
u
y
um
dw
j
v
j
bwy
w
y
u
dw
o
bo
oy
wy
y
k
w
y
d
dw
o
v
u
o
[
v
v
y
m
odw
[
u
iu
y
u
w
m
u
y
m
dw
v
d
j
w u
o dw
u
io
u
v
m
v
d
y
o
odw
4: ;EE
o
u
v
v
j dw
d
v
288
dwv
o
dw
[
y
dw
p
bu
o
y
u
j
cu
v
u
v
bu
m
u
wy
u
y
m
y
n
v
u
u
y
i
v
v(
y
o
wy
u
v)
m
u
u
v
b
m
o
o
y
u
b
j
m
dw
v
y
u
v
v
p
w
w
u
m
Sw
o
odw
o
y
o
y
dw v
u
w
u
o
u
w
u
y
ow
dw
dw
uy
k
p
w
o
o
y
Sw
u
y
o
d
d
y
y
u
o
m
o
m
[
o
o
u
m
y
u
[
v
pb
o
o
w
ip
v
o
v k u
v
w
k
o
n
v
o
o
o
dw
o
o
v
j
v
j
p
u
o
m
m
w
m
u
y
v
v
u
y
v
b
y
u
289
u
o
w
u
(
S
bu
FF
9
j
S
S
7 JF
o
)
FF
S
w
u
w
S
518
)
FF
T
m
)
j
i
T
III
518
g u S
AF : :I:
S
o
FF
bo
D
42
[b
FF
-
j
S
FF
6510
(
6510
S FF
(
w
(
u o
SJCJLE 2014
ya Skype
T
gj
S
w
Duff, A. (2010) Language Socialization. In Hornberger and Mckay (Ed.), Sociolinguistics
and Language Education. Toronto: NP on L&E.
290
A Case Study of Team-Based Learning in a Content-Based Japanese Course
Reiko Sono
University of Massachusetts Amherst
1.
(Team-BasedLearning
TBL
5 1
)
TBL
8
100
TBL
TBL
1
TBL
1
TBL
1)
2)
3)
4)
(Fink 19)
3)
4)
1)
(TBL
1
2)
TBL
)
1
TBL
1
1
291
TBL
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TBL
TBL
TBL
1
TBL
1
TBL
1
1
TBL
1
1
1
TBL
Mackey
1
1
1
TBL
1
1
TBL
TBL
292
TBL
1
2. TBL
TBL
Larry K. Michaelsen
(Michaelsen “Preface” vii)
40 1 120
1
1970
1
Team-Based Learning
TBL
Michael Sweet
Michaelsen
“Critical Thinking and Engagement”
TBL
l (
l
l
S
l
)
TBL
1)
2)
3)
(Sweet and Michaelsen 19)
1
1
1
1
1
Honors
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1—
1
1
1—
293
1
(Wright)
1
1
1
3
5
5
7
1
(Sweet and Michaelsen 19)
Wheelan
(Wheelan 13)
(Sweet and Michaelsen 20)
1
Ryan &
Deci
1
(64)
1
1
TBL
294
1
1
1
1
1
TBL
TBL
(Sweet and Michaelsen 21
(1)
(2)
)
( 4)
(3)
1
1
1)
5
20
2)
3)
4)
(Michaelsen “Getting Started” 33)
1
1Michaelsen
1
(“GettingStarted”36)
295
1
1
—
Michaelsen
1)
S
(Sweet and Michaelsen 25)
(Significant Problem)
1
1
2)
1
(Specific Choice)
3)
(Same Problem)
1
4)
1
(Simultaneous Reporting)
1
4 S
1
296
1
1
1
1
(Sweet and Michaelsen 26 27)
Michaelsen
1)
1
1
2)
1
3)
1
TBL
1
1
1
1
1
4)
5)
6)
1
1
TBL
1
TBL
1
1
297
1
TBL
1
1
Sweet and Michaelsen
1
TBL
1
TBL
1
TBL
3.
3
75
9
7
1
1
3.1
2010
(Integrative Experience)
(“Integrative Experience”)
1
3
4
1
1
1
13
2
N2
1
4
298
(“I. E. Criteria”)
1)
2)
3)
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
JET
1
1
1
(
)
1
299
(
79)
TBL
3.2
1
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
1
1
4
5
8
1
1
9
13
3.3 TBL
TBL
9
5
2
300
4
1
PowerPoint
5
1
(LMS)
Moodle
Moodle
Google Drive
5
TBL
1
1
(same)
(significant)
(simultaneous)
1
(specific)
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
301
iPeer
1
1
TBL
1
4
TBL
1
1
TBL
1
1
1
3.4
1
1
TBL
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
21
302
TBL
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TBL
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
303
TBL
11
TBL
4S
1
1
1
4S
1
4.
TBL
1
TBL
1
TBL
304
—
132
2007 79 88
Fink, L. Dee. “Beyond Small Groups: Harnessing the Extraordinary Power of Learning
Teams.” Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small Groups in
College Teaching. Ed. Larry K. Michaelsen, Arletta Bauman Knight and L. Dee
Fink. Sterling, VA.: Stylus Publishing, 2004. 3-26. Print.
“I. E. Criteria.” UMass Amherst: General Education. University of Massachusetts
Amherst, 2009. Web. 4 May 2015.
“Integrative Experience.” UMass Amherst: General Education—Integrative Experience.
University of Massachusetts Amherst, 2009. Web. 4 May 2015.
Mackey, Alison. Input, Interaction and Corrective Feedback in L2 Learning. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2012. Print.
Michaelsen, Larry K. Preface. Team-Based Learning: A Transformative Use of Small
Groups in College Teaching. Ed. Larry K. Michaelsen, Arletta Bauman Knight
and L. Dee Fink. Sterling, VA.: Stylus Publishing, 2004. vii-xi. Print.
. “Getting Started with Team-Based Learning.” Team-Based Learning: A
Transformative Use of Small Groups in College Teaching. Ed. Larry K.
Michaelsen, Arletta Bauman Knight and L. Dee Fink. Sterling, VA.: Stylus
Publishing, 2004. 27-50. Print.
Ryan, R. M. and Deci, E. L. “Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and
New Directions.” Contemporary Educational Psychology 25.1 (2000): 54-67.
Web. 3 May 2015.
Sweet, Michael and Larry K. Michaelsen. “Critical Thinking and Engagement: Creating
Cognitive Apprenticeships With Team-Based Learning.” Team-Based Learning in
the Social Sciences and the Humanities: Group Work That Works to Generate
Critical Thinking and Engagement. Ed. Michael Sweet and Larry K. Michaelsen.
Sterling, VA.: Stylus Publishing, 2012. Print.
Wheelan, L.S. Group Processes: A Developmental Perspective (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn &
Bacon, 2004. Print.
Wright, Robin. “Active Learning Institute with Robin Wright.” University of
Massachusetts Amherst. Integrative Learning Center N111. 25-26 August 2014.
Workshop.
305
NHK 1
2
USING TV DOCUMENTARY PROGRAMS FOR ADVANCED COURSE
PROJECTS
Yasuko Matsumoto
Harvard University
2013
2014
4
5
2
5
0
2
1
72
NHK
1
6
5
5
Japanese
Advanced Modern
53
15
5
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
306
=
%
1
2
1
72
4
3
=
7
7
6
4
5
5
4
5
8
5
6
4
4
4
7
56
4
5
6
5
6
=
5
4
=
5
5
2012-
2013
5
5
6
5
5
5
5
56
7
1)
2)
4
6
7
5
5
5
7
4
4
5
=
4
4
2001
5
4
0
6
4
5
5
7
307
=50
6
6
5=
5
5
4
56
4
5
5
6
4
4
4
.
6
4
56
4
6
56
6
=
.
5
88
5
5
4
4
1998
.
85
5
6
=
4
5
5
2005
7
5
(2009)
=
5
4
6
8
5
5
6
5
=
5
5
4
6
7
4
5
85
4
5
7
5
=
56
5
5
5
5
=
6
8
5=
6
6
6
5
6
=
56
1
5
4
2006
5=
1
5
2
5
7
2
5
.
NHK
5
260
8
7
308
5
6
6
0
56
5
7
56
5
6
4
5
4
4
5=
5
5
7
5
4
5
6
70
51
6
5
=
5
=
6
2010
103
8
0
5
10
15
5
5
7
4
4
4
5
6
6
5
260
=
=
56
5
7
=
4
=4
=
4
5
56
4
=
5
8
5
5
7
5
2013
6
2014
15
12
8
4
6
4
5
4
5
1
309
2014
9
4
6
4
2
56
2012
7
4
5
3
6
4
1)
2)
1
1
72
1
2
5
5
5
5
4
5
3
8=
6
5
4
5
5
5
=
5
5
2
6
5
7
1000
6
2
5
8= 6
85
=4
2014
5
6
310
5
0
6
56
5
7
7
4
4=
6
0
4
4
5
4
5
4)
4
4)
5
5)
5
56
2013
5
=
5
56
5
=
6
6
2013
56
7
7
=
800
5
5
4
5
4
5)
2014
1000
=
5
6
6
638
2
4
5
7
3
5
5
0
=
4
15
4
6
.
5
=
5
2013
15
6
2014
12
2
4
7
5
6
=5
6
5
=
4
56
5
6
4
6
7
4
5
311
5
5
56
4
5
0
職業
ピアニスト
DJ
花火職人
落語家
杜氏
スキーヤー
バーテンダー
洋樽職人
56
名前
室井摩耶子
安藤延夫
小口昭三
桂米朝
継枝巴一
高橋巌夫
山崎達郎
斎藤光雄
職業
漫画家
建築家
デザイナー
染織家
パン職人
アートディレクター
英語講師
名前
やなせたかし
手塚貴晴
佐藤オオキ
志村ふくみ
成瀬正
佐藤可士和
竹岡広信
=
56
=
=
0
56
4
4
6
7
56
=
5
4
5
5
4
4
=
6
=
4
6
5
5
56
5
5
5
5=
5
5
6
7
8
5
6
6
=
=
6
56
5
5
=
5
312
6
0
4
7
5
5
=
5
5
5
5
=
=
7
5
5
.
5
7
6
5
5
=
5
6
6
5
5
0
6
1
=
2
5
55
5
6
=
5
7
5
6
4
=
=
7
5
6
55
6
64
0
6
5
=
056
=4
4
=
56
=
7
4
5
=
5
0
5
5
5
4
=
56
4
4
0
7
5
0
7
.
6
=
5
0
6
5
0
5
4
313
5
0
5
7
5
6
7
10
1)
2)
5
4
5
4
80%
90%
5
3)
=0
4
=0
4
55
4)
50
55
56
5
7
5
5
5
5
56
6
5)
5
=
.
6
=
0
=
=
56
6
5
=
0
56
=
4
6
314
5
4
5
5
5
0
4
6
5
=
5
4
6
4
6)
5
5
6
4
6
56
5
5
5
6
4
5
10
5
5
5
5
=
10
5
5
9
4
0
0
4
0
56
4
4
7
5
5
1)
4
6
56
5 5
=
5
5
5
5
5
56
56
2)
56
=
5
1)
7
0
0
7
=5
4
6
5
7
6
6
7
5
4
5
4
56
4
5
.
315
56
6
=
4
6
6
7
7
6
2
NHK1
4
=
.
5
=
4
5
5
5
6
4
6
4
=
5
4
5
7
6
4
7
6
50
5
56
5
6
4
7
7
7
4
6
4
4
7
5
56
5
01
1998
—
6
2
,23
8
2005
0WEB
—
1
2No.12,
, 59-77
(2009)
0WEB
1
2
http://www.nkg.or.jp/kenkyu/Forumhoukoku/2009forum/poster2009/P-06sanjiki.pdf
2010 1
72
2001
1
2
0
1
2vol.9, 1-12
316
2014
1
72
3
1
2
7
7
5
5
=
6
1
3
5
2
5
4
0
7
0
%
6
56
7
%
3
0
45
317
6
☆ ミニプロジェクトについて
１．面白かったですか。
１
・
（全然）
２
・
３
・
（普通）
４
・
５
（非常に面白かった）
４
・
５
（非常に役立った）
2．日本語の上達のために役立ちましたか。
１
・
（全然）
２
・
３
・
（普通）
3．具体的にどのスキルが上達したと思いますか。
4．日本の文化や社会を理解するために役に立ちましたか。
１
・
（全然）
２
・
３
・
（普通）
４
・
５
（非常に役立った）
5．具体的にどのようなことが理解出来ましたか。
6．プロジェクトの後、仕事をすることに対して何か気持ちの変化がありましたか。
7．ミニプロジェクトの代わりに読み物を一つ多く読んだ方が良いと思いますか。
また、その理由は何ですか。
8．来年の４年生のコースでもプロジェクトをした方が良いと思いますか。
9．このプロジェクトを良くするために、どのような点を変えたら良いと思いますか。
318
2013
2014
2014
“
”
(
319
2014 p.305)
(
p.325)
2013
2013 2011
(
2011)
320
2
UNSW
(Lave & Wenger
1991)
(Thomson & Mori 2014)
Lave
Wenger
(Situated Learning, Lave &
Wenger 1991)
2004 321
Wenger (1998)
Wenger
UNSW
UNSW
UNSW
322
2015
UNSW
323
NICHIGO Press
Wenger
100
324
UNSW
2015
p.19
Lave, J. & E. Wenger (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge
University Press.
Thomson, C.K. & T. Mori (2014) “Japanese Communities of Practice: Creating
opportunities for out-of-class learning.” Chapter 27, pp.272-281 in D. Nunan & J.C.
Richards (Eds.) Language Learning Beyond the Classroom. Routledge.
2004
2015
325
pp.3-25.
2014
21st Princeton Japanese Pedagogy Forum
Proceedings. pp. 302-331.
2011
−
2013
20th Princeton
−
Japanese Pedagogy Forum Proceedings. pp. 251-254.
326
6
0.
6
E
6
6
5
E
E
5
6
5
6
.
6
6
x
5
[
5
5
x
x
[
5
6
~
5
x
x
6x[
~
[
6
5
[
E
6
5
~
5
5
5
6
~
5
x
(Creativity)
5
(Imagination)E
6
E5
E5
5
x5
6
E
5
5
x
E
x
E
6
~
5
5
[
5
5
E5
6
327
6
~
~
E
[
5
E5
x
5
5
5
6
5
E
6
2.
5
E
(
5
5
)
[
6
5
5
x
6
~
E
5
~
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
—
~
5
x
x
5
5
6
5
5
5
~
x
x
5
5
E
x
SF
[
--6
6
5
6
3.
6
~
E5
~
E
~5
6
5
5
x
x
~
E
5
6
x
x
6
3-1
~
6
E
x5
5
5
5
E
{
5
x
6
328
5
E
/
5
}
{
/
}
[
E
6
6
(2014)
4
6)
{
:
5
/
}
E
6
6
x
5
E[
x
6
5
“construal”
5
&
~
x
6
3-2
~5
x
x
6
5
x
E
5
5
6
5
~5
[
x
5
6
~
E
6
E
E5
5
6
E
6
~
5
5
6
[
6
(langue)
E
5
5
x
(parole)
E
6
E
5
[
329
5
6
x
(2003,2006,2009,2011)
6
4
6
3-2
~5
x
x
6
x5
5
5
E
5
{
5
x
}
6
6
/
5
}
{
E
[
E
5
/
6
4
5
{
(2014)
:
/
}
)
6
E
6
3-3
6
5
5
E
6
x
(
x
5
E
6
5
4
:
E
))
3-4
6
(2003))
:
E
5
~
E5
”history”
[
“(h)istoria”(ἱστορία)
E
~
6
6
330
6
5
5history
5
E
:
(712)
E
E
(1953-67)
:
(1966)
6
6
5
5
5
E5
5
x:
:
E5CharlesDickens
TaleofTwoCities(1859) :
E
)
A
5
6
3-5
E
5
3-5-1
6
E
PierreGuillaud) :
(Stylistique1954:109)
6
[
(
6
~
)6
(2007:365-66)
:
~
~
~
5
[
~
5
6
5
5etc. 6
E
~
6
6
E
5
5
5
vs.
5
vs.
5
vs.
6
331
~
5
E
~
E
6
3-5-2
E
~
6
x
]
S5
S
6
5
6
5
5
6
5
~
E
E
6(4
:
(1984)
:
(1980))
3-5-3
[
:
~
5
6
E
⇒
5
6
E
6
NorwegianWood(1987)
5
:
6
AlfredBirnbaum
6
(Ex.1)
a.
6
⇒
6
E
6[
]
E
6
Andhe’dgetdressed,gotothebathroomandwashedhisface.Ittookhiman
awfullylongtimetowashhisface.
(He’dgetdressed,gotothebathroomandwashedhisface---forever.)
b.
6
6
⇒
6[
]
6
332
Deathisn’ttheoppositeoflife.Deathalreadyexistswithinme.
(Deathwasnottheoppositeoflife.Itwasalreadyhere,withinmybeing.)
c.
[
[ 6
6
⇒
[
[ 6[
]
6
AlmosthalfayearhadgonebysinceIhadlastseenher.Inthathalfa
yearshehadlostso
muchweightthatshelookedlikeadifferentperson.
(AlmostayearhadgonebysinceIhadlastseenNaoko,andinthattime
shehadlostso
muchweightastolooklikeadifferentperson. d.
6
~
⇒
~
[
6
6[
]
[ 6
Ire-readherletterhundredsoftimes.AndeachtimeIre-readitIfelt
unbearablysad.
(IreadNaoko’sletteragainandagain,andeachtimeIwouldbefilledwith
thatunbearable
sadness….)
5
6
E
5
5
E
5
~
5
6
5
x
x5
5
5
5
E
[
x
5
6
6
5
5
6
5
E
6
6
6
333
5
5
5
5
E
x:
Ex.2
6
~ 5
E
x
6
[
E
~
5
[
5
~
6
x
E
x
[
5
x
x
6
E5
~
x
E[
[
5
6
6
[
~
[
[
6
5
E5
6
5
[
6
5
~
5
E5
6 x5
(2006:94))
x
5
6
E
:
[
5
E
x
~
6
E5
5
x
x
6
E
x
5
6
5
5
~
5
6
6
5
5
x
334
E
x
6
5
x
E5
:
E
6
5
6
.
6
~
~
ACTFL
6
OralProficiencyInterview(=OPI)
]
6
5
E
E
E5ACTFL
5
~5
[
5
E
6
5
5
6
5
5
6
(AmericanCouncilforTeachersofForeignLanguagesInc.)
(2012
~
6
)(ProficiencyGuidelinesforReadingSkillsofAmericanCouncilfor
TeachersofForeignLanguagesInc.(2012Version)[ACTFL Proficiency
Guidelines 2012_FINAL(1)pdf] (DISTINGUISHED)
5
5
E
6
6
5
5
5
~
5
5
5
5
x
5
E
5
6
x
E
E
6
5
x
6
E
5
E
5
x
5
6
5
x
5
6
~
x
6
x
5
x
5
5
E5
~
6
~
5
6
6
5
335
SUPERIOR
[
6
[
~S5
5
~
E
~
6
6
E
5
[
6
E
5
5
E
{
6
x
/
6
E
x
}
E
5
5
6
E
E5
E
x
6
ADVANED
5
[
5
(authentic)
5
5
/
E
~
x
x
E
E
[
5
6
5
[
6
~
5
E
E
E
[
6
6
5
6
E
E
~
5
6
[
6
x
E
5
x
E
6
5.
6----
[
----
5-0
5
6
5
6
E
E
E
336
6
E
6
6
6
5-1.
5
6
(Sound)
(1)
5
E5
]
5
6
(2)
5
x
(2014)
6(4
5-2.
5
)
(Vocabulary)
(1)
E
5
5
6
(2)
5
6
(3)
E
5-3
(1)
6
5
5
6
5
5
6
5
E
6
~E
~
E~
(Ex.3)
6
[
E
[
[
x
]
]
[
x
337
[
x
ASleepingTraveler)
[
(
E
)
(MasakiIkei(2009):
]
E
[
[
x
[
x
x [
(2009):
E
)
[
E5
x
[
6
S
[
E
6
Ex.4 /
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
(5-4)
1931
6
6
E
[
5
6
(Ex.5)
5
x
5
(1960):
6
(
338
)
6
“AtthisGoeringgrinned,buthisanswerwasprofound.‘Wearealwaysatonewith
thepeopleandpartofthepeople.’” TranslatedbyDonaldKeene:AftertheBanquet
(1963))
(Ex.6
~
[
6(Alltherubyexamplesare
takenfromHideoLevy’snovels.)
a.Japanese
(
English
vijiteeshonraito(visitationright))
dipendentovijita(dependent
visitor))
buranchi(brunch))
chaakooruguree(charcoalgray))
napaamu(napalm(bomb))
howaitosupuremashii(white
supremacy))
(b)Japanese Chinese
(
ruuben(Japan))
renminjefangu(people’sliberation))
gemingu(revolution))
tongujii(comrade))
shaoje(girl))
minguchao(tomorrowmorning))
(
(5-5)
(Syntax)
5
−
E
~S
x
5
[
6
−
[]
---
~
6
[
5
E
5
E
E
E
~
~
6
6
−
[
−
(1989))
339
5
6
6(4
:
(1948:6)
:
[
x
]
E5
6
xE
5/x/
6
(Ex.7)
/
/
/
/
/
//
[ /
/
/
/
~/
/
/
x/
[ /6
6
E
E
6
3E
6
(1)5(4)5(5)5(7)
6
3(1)
(2)
6(NounType)
6(AdjectiveType)
[ ]5
x[ x
[
]5
[
E
]
[
~
] (3)
6 VerbType)
[
]5
E E [
] 3(4)
6 ParticleType)
[ ]5 E
[ ]( ~
)
3(5)
6(ConjunctionType)
E [ [ ~]5 [
[
] 3(6)
6(NominalizerType)
[
]5
[ ](
)
(7)
6 ModalityType)
5
[
] (Ex.7)
E Ex.8)
6(
[[]]
E
6
5
E
5
[]
6)
Ex.8=Ex.7)
[
[
] ~ x
[
]
[ ]
[[
]]
[ 6)
AfriendofminewhomImetoneyearagoinFrancesentme[[anemail]]askingme
ifhecouldattendwithhiswifeat[anacademicconference]whichwillbeheldin
WashingtonD.C.
340
]]
5[[
E
[
[[
]]
]]
~[[
6
−
6
~
6
6
E
E5
−
5
6
Ex.9 [
[
5
]E5
x
[[
[
[
E
]]
S
E
6(
:
p.119)
Butthenhewitnessedsomethingextraordinary:[aman]withacrewcutandnearly
twiceBen’sheightwasstandinginfrontoftheIwoJimaMemorial---itsflagathalfmast---andwipingtearsfromhiseyeswithhislarge,clumsyhands.)(C.Scott (2011:69))
x
~
x
E
E5
5
5
5
5
6
E
(1992) :
E
6
[[
E
6
]]
6
(Ex.9-1)
[
5
~
~
5
[
~
E[
[ ]
5
[
[ [ ]E
[
[[ ]]E
6(
:
(1992) )
(Thesweetstiflingfragranceofsummermallowshadsuddenlycreptinfrom
thebackdoorwiththefirstwispsofdawn,andOryu,thinkingtheblossoms’
smellwouldchokeher,openedhereyesand,seeingthephotographofher
husbandReijolookingfaintlywhiteinthedarknessfromwhereithadbeen
placedonastandnexttothefamilyaltar,hadafeelingthathermarriageto
Reijo,amanlikeanobleBuddha,musthavebeenanimpossibleillusion.)
(
(2001)
)
[
[
E
]E
341
5
(1936- ) E
(2005:110-120)
:
---
---
~
6
6
−
5
−
[]
−
−
6
6
[
x5
E5
E
[
E
6
5
E
Ex.9-2
a.
5
[[ ]]
5
5
E
5
E[
6
5
[
b.
5
6
E5
5
5
5
[
[[
]]
5
c.
5
E
5
[
E
[[
~5
~
5
x
5
]] 5
5
6
5-6.
(5-6-1)
5
5
5
6
E
6
E
6
5
6
(5-6-2)
5
5
5
6
5
5
x
5
E
6
[ ]
342
5
5
/
5
]
Ex.10
[1]
5
E
6
E
[3]
6[2]
5 E
S
[
5
[
E
6[4]
5
5
E
6
6
(
:
1992
5
10
p.22)
([1]Atourhouse,Momwouldmakemanju(steamedbuns)andkashiwamochi(rice
cakeswrappedinoakleaves),andthevillagewouldcometogethertomakemiso
andsoysauce.[2]Whenavisitorcame,Fatherwouldmakesobanoodles.[3]Andon
thosedays,achickenwassuretodie.[4]ItwasFather’swayofofferingafeast,you
see.)(UchitoSotonoGengo-bunka-gaku:
Kevin
Steinbach )
Ex.11 [1]
5
5
[
6[2]
E
[
6[3]
5
x x
5 x S 6[4]
5
E
x
6(p.31)
([1]Imadeasmalldishwithapictureofmyyoungestdaughteronit,whichIcall
“AngelDish”,forwhichI’vereceivedaguestfordinnerandI’mwonderingwhat
platetoputoutdeserton.[2]Whenyou’rehavingamealandyou’reservedwitha
lovelyplate,youfeelalittlerushofhappness.[3]You’reeatinginanother
dimensionseparatefromdailylife,andtherethefoodisdeliciousandtalkcomes
easily.[4]Asenseofthesethingsisimportantwhenyou’remakingadish.)(Kevin
Steinbach )
5
E
5
5
5
6
5
6
~
6
[2]:
E
343
5
S
E
[
x
5
6
6
(1978) 5
(1979)
x
6
E
6
E
5
5
6
~
~
[
/
E5
/
6x
5
E
6
118)) E
E
[
6
]
/
5
5 [
[2
1996 (109-
x
E 90
]
x
]
~ [2
/
]
5
]
~[
6
E
5
5
/
x
~
[
5
/
6
]
E
5
E
E
x
E5
[2
6
E
S5
~ [2
E5
]
]
x
5
5
5[2
]
x
6
]
5
E
5
6
/
5[+
/
6
(1899-1972)
E
[
(1954)
:
5
344
E
~
6
E
[
6
] [2
]
6
6
[14]
5
E
5
[14]
6
(Ex.12)
[1]
E5 E
6[2]
~
~
x
6[3]
5
E
6[4]
6
[4]
E5
[
5
6[5]
5
6[6]
x
6[7]
5 E
x
~5
[ E5
[ 6[8]
E5
x
E [ 6[9]
x
5
[ 5
[
6[10]
6[11] E
5
6[12]
~
E
6[13]
5
5
x
[ E5
[
6[14]
5
6
:
1954))[
E5
[11] [12]
E
6]
[1]ThoughAugusthadonlybegunautumninsectswerealreadysinging.[2]He
thoughthecoulddetectadrippingofdewfromleaftoleaf.[3]Thenheheardthe
soundofthemountain.Itwasawindlessnight.[4]Themoonwasnearfull,butin
themoist,sultryairthefringeoftreesthatoutlinedthemountainwasblurred.[5]
Theyweremotionless,however.[6]Notaleafonthefernbytheverandawas
stirring.[7]InthesemountainrecessesofKamakuratheseacouldsometimesbe
heardatnight.Shingowonderedifhemighthaveheardthesoundofthesea.Butno
---itwasthemountain.[8]Itwaslikewind,faraway,butwithadepthlikea
rumblingoftheearth.[9]Thinkingthatitmightbeinhimself,aringinginhisears,
Shingoshookhishead.[10]Thesoundstopped,and[11]hewassuddenlyafraid.
[12]Achillpassedoverhim,asifhehadbeennotifiedthatdeathwasapproaching.
[13]Hewantedtoquestionhimselfcalmlyanddeliberatelytoaskwhetherithad
beenthesoundofthewind,thesoundofthesea,orasoundinhisears.[14]Buthe
hadheardnosuchsound,hewassure.Hehadheardthemountain.(Translatedby
EdwardSeidensticker(1970)TheSoundoftheMountain)
5
5
x
6
E
E
6
E5[3]
6x
~5
5
345
E
[
([3] [8]-[15]
)
~
[8]-[10]
[
E
~
E
[
[
5
6
6[12]x
5
E5
~
x
[2
[
]
5[
]
6
~5
5
5
6
E
6[14]
[
[2
5
]
]
~[
6
x
E5
E
E
5
[
5
6
6
(1925-1970)
5
E
E
5
~
5
[
[
~5
5
5 [
~5
E5
S
x
6
6
Ex.13 [1] ]
x
5
(1960:55)
:
6[2]
x
6[3]x
6[4]
[
~
x
5
[
~
5
~
6[5]
x
~
x5
6[6]…….
E
5
E
5
x xx
[
5
E
x5 ]
E
6
(1960:55)):
[[1]Kazu’seyeswerestillonthestonestaircaserisingintothedarknessasher
thoughtsturnedtodeath.[2]Thepastpiecebypiececrumbledawayunderherfeet,
andshewasleftwithnothingtosupporther.[3]Ifshewentoninthisway,there
wouldprobablynotbeasinglepersontomournherwhenshedied.[4]Reflections
ondeathconvincedherthatshemustfindsomeoneshecoulddependon,havea
family,leadanormallife.Buttheonlywaytodothiswastogothroughwiththe
formalitiesoflove.[4]Shecouldnothelptrembleatthethoughtofstillfurthersins.
[5]Onlyveryrecently—lastautumn,itwas---shehadinthecourseofher
promenadeeachmorningattheSetsugoanlookedattheworldandatpeoplewith
346
thesameclarityasshesurveyedthegarden.[5]Shewasabsolutelyconvincedthat
nothingcoulddisturbheranymore.[5]Butnowshewonderedifthattransparency
itselfwerenotaportentofhell…[6]Thepriestwiththemhadexplainedthatthe
Omizutoriceremonywasfrombeginningtoendadisciplinaryriteofpenitenceand
atonement.Kazufeltapersonalawarenessofwhatthismeant.(DonaldKeene
(1963:71-72)AftertheBanquet)
[
E[4] [5]E
E
5
~
][Note:Thereasonfortherepeated[4]
and[5]isthatthetranslatordividedasinglesentenceto2or3sentences.] 5
]E
6
[
[
6
E
~5
6
~
6
6
]
]
5
x
5
~
x
6
E5
6
~
5
[
6
E
[
5
6
6
(
6
E
6
:
E
E5
~
Q
~
6
[
x
E
5
6
E
[
E5
5
E~5
6
.
)
5
6
347
5
[
6[3]
6[4]
6[5]
5
6[6]
6[7]
x
E
S
~
[
E
[
6[8]
E
6(
:1Q84 (2009:321)Vol.2)
([1]Itsuddenlyoccurredtohertosearchinherpantspocket,whereshefoundtwo
sticksofchewinggum.[2]Herhandstrembledslightlyasshetoreoffthewrappers.
Sheputthesticksinhermouthandbeganchewingslowly.[3]Spearmint.[4&5]
Thepleasantlyfamiliararomahelpedtoquiethernerves.[6]Asshemovedherjaw,
thebadsmellinhermouthbegantodissipate.[7]It’snotasifIactuallyhave
somethingrottinginsideme.[8]Fearisdoingfunnythingstome,that’sall.)(1Q84
JayRubin&PhilipGabriel(2011:489))
[1]
[
6[2]
x
5
6[3]
5
5
[
[
5
E
x
5
6[4]
5
6
[
E
-
E
[
E
5
6[5]
E
[4] [5]E
nerves.“
~
[
5”Thepleasantlyfamiliararomahelpedtoquiether
[5]
6
E
[6]
6
E
E
~
~
5
]
6[5] [6] [7] [8]
~
[4]/[5]x[6]
E5
[
6
Asshemovedherjaw,thebadsmellinhermouth
begantodissipate”x
[
…
6
6
5
[7] [8]E
x
x
[
6
5
x5
6
[4]:
348
6
5
x
5
S
~
S
~
~
x
(
(1850-1904))
6
E
(2000:159-163)E
6
E
5
~
“frogs”
S
6
5
~S
x
~
E5
6
S
x5x[
6
(Ex.15)
~
1681
37
6 Autumnevening/Acrowhasperched/Onawitheredbough(
)
E 37
5
B
20
6
~
E
5
~ E
(1993:70-71) ~
6
49)
~
6
(1993Vol.2.,
5
E
5
x
E
~
E
E
E
x5
~5
[
~
[
x5
5
6
E51693
5
5
5
5
[
6
5
[
E5
x
[
E
6
6
37
6
（=Ex.16)
~
349
1681
5
Ex.17)
かれえだに からすのとまりけり
秋のくれ (1693 年、
49 歳の作。)
どうして亡くなる１年前の４９歳のときのバージョンでは俳句では、３７歳の
ときのバージョンの助動詞の「たり」の連体形の「たる」だったのが、４９歳
のときのバージョンでは終止形の「けり」が使われているのだろうか。平たく現
代語で言えば「けり」は「ああ、そうだったんだ」と新しい気づきに驚いている
ことを表現しているのである。１２年若いときには、間投詞の「や」で感情を表
現してはいるが、からすが止まっているな、ぐらいの単純な感覚で秋の暮の情況
を捉えていたのに対して、死を直前にしたときに、12 年前の情況をもう一度振
り返り、新鮮な感慨に浸り、孤独な「からす」の状況を自分の孤独な状況に重ね
て、単数のからすに切り替えたのではないだろうか。もう一つ大変興味深いこと
は３７歳のときは、その俳句を俳画に描き、からすは空枝に止まっているからす
は７羽、空を舞っているからすは２０羽なのである。芭蕉は俳句の弟子であり、
俳画の大家だった森川許六に習っていたのである。ところが、死ぬ１年前には１
羽だけ許六の、からすが一羽止まっている俳画に自分の俳句を讃としてつけたの
である。つまり、芭蕉自身の複数の認知があとで単数の認知にシフトしたのであ
る。
このようなシフトは複数マーカーの「タチ」では同じ文章段落の中で最初は数
が単数か複数か特定できない「無数」だったものが段落の先で「タチ」にシフト
するというケースがある。村上の「１Q８４」からとった次の例を見てみよう。
5[5]
6[6]
5
6
Ex.16
[1]
6[2]
6[3]
6[4]
E
x5
~
6[5]
5
5
[
5
[
350
5
6[6] x
E
5
x
(2009:152)Vol.1:1Q84 )
(2000)
5
5
[
[
5
5
5
5
5
E
E
6[7] [
6(
E
5
~
[
6
5
~
E
5
E5
[
5
E
E
5
5
6
5
[
~
5
6
5
~
6
.[
E
4
]
]
5
(2008))
[
E
5
E5
~E
5
E
E
[
/
5
6
6
x
6
~
E
x
E
x
S
6
7.
)
5
5
5
5
5
6
(384-322))
(
5
:
c.335BC）
351
E
(
−)
6
5
E[
(1797-1856) E
6
(Du bist wie eine Blume)
5
5
6
E
x
5
6
E5
5
5
E
5
(1941-)
E
(1949 - ) E
MetaphorWeLiveBy (1983) (:
(1986))
5
~
5
5
5
5
6
~5
6
6
5
E
5
E
E
5
6
6
E
6
E
x
~
5
~
5
x
5
6
[
x
x
6
5
5
5
[
E
~
[
~
5
E
[
[
5
~
6
E
x
~
~
6
E5
6
[
E
E5
~
5
4L'Imagination
1936))
352
…
Cf.
E
1936))
6L'Imagination
(1995:203)
6
Analogy(simile,metaphor,personification)
5
5
Inclusion(synecdoche)Contiguity(metonymy)
5
)
(
5
5
(
:
6 4
) E
6
[
5
(Ex.17)
a.
6
x
(2004)
:
)
5
6
AfterDark(
6
5
[
6
[
x
:6)
:10 :
004
6
5
6]
Judgingfromherintentexpression,thebookmightcontainchallengingsubject
matter.Farfromskimming,she
seemstobebitingoffandchewingitonelineatatime.(
:5)
b.
[
5
5
E
353
6 :45)
Herfacewearsanopenexpression,buttheskinhasatough,weatheredlook,like
long-used
rainwear.(
:31)
c.
E
5
E
~
6
:126)
Likethelightofthefullmoonpouringdownonanuninhabitedgrassland,the
TV’sbright
screenilluminatestheroom.(
:83-83)
. E
E
6
[
5
6(
:155)
BeforelongthereismovementinEri’sfaceagain---areflexivetwitchingofthe
fleshofone
cheek,asiftochaseawayatinyflythathasjustalightedthere.(
:103)
e.
E5
6(
:262)
Thefinaldarknessofthenightenvelopesthecitylikeathinskin.(
:173)
a
5
6
6
~5
x
E
5
E
E5
6
5
[
E5
5
5
[
E
E
[
5
5
5
6
.
(2011)
6
1
6
~
[
5
5
354
5
x
(4
5
E
)5
5
6
ACTFL
5
5
[
6
5
5
E
5
x
5
5
6
5
ACTFL
6
5
[
6
5
5
E
(2) 5
5
x
5
6
~
6
5
PaulAuster“AuggieWren‘sChristmasStory”
)
5
5
6
(3)
6
6
~
5
6(1Perspectives⇔ Practice⇔Products(StandardsforForeign
LanguageLearning(1996)ACTFL.))
(Ex.18)
(hoistinganationalflag)
x
6
(NationalAnthem)
[
x
6(:
355
x
6x
1983:9) (Ex.19)
E
6(Yourreign)
---6(
E
E[
= ---
5
6
:10)
(Ex.20)
x
~
gymnasticexercise)E
[ x
x5
E
--6 [
~
E
radio
x
6
[ 6
~5
[
S
--6
x
x
:14)
(Ex.21)
(aplacenameinTokyo)
5
(aplacenamein
Tokyo)
5
~
(aplacenameinTokyo)
(aplacenameinTokyo)
E 5
(aplacenameinTokyo)
6
[
6
(aplacenameinTokyo)
x
[
6
:19)
(Ex.22)
6(Hediedthatnightinsidethegarage)N360(a
5
~
6(
:24)
Datsun’sname)
(Ex.23)
[1]
[
(afirefly)
6[2]
6[3]
E[
[
[
[
6[10]
x
E
E~
6[4]
5
x
5
5
5
S
]
E
6[12] E
~
~5
[ 6[5]
[
S
[ 6[6]
x
[ 6[7]
6[8]
x
6[9]
E
[
[13]
S[
5
6[14]
5
356
E
~
x
6[11]
[ 6
5
[
[
6[16] E
6[17]
[
[
6[15]
[
x5
5
[
5
x
E
~5
E
→
5
x
]
6
6
[18]
x
6[19]
x
[
[20]
x
[ 6(
:41-42)
[1]Itwistedopenthelidofthejarandtookoutthefirefly,settingitonthetwo-inch
lipofthewatertank.[2]Itseemednottograspitsnewsurroundings.[3]Ithobbled
aroundtheheadofasteelbolt,catchingitslegsoncurlingscabsofpaint.[4]It
movedtotherightuntilitfounditswayblocked,thencircledbacktotheleft.
[5]Finally,withsomeeffort,itmountedtheheadoftheboltandcrouchedtherefora
while,[6]unmoving,asifithadtakenitslastbreath.[7]Still,leaningagainstthe
handrail,Istudiedthefirefly.[8]NeitherInoritmadeamoveforalongtime.[9]The
windcontinuedsweepingpastthetwoofus[10]whilethenumberlessleavesofthe
zelkovatreerustledinthedarkness.[11]Iwaitedforever.[12]Onlymuchlaterdid
thefireflytaketotheair.[13]Asifsomethoughthadsuddenlyoccurredtoit,the
fireflyspreaditswings,andinamomentithadflownpastthehandrailtofloatinthe
paledarkness.[14]Ittracedaswiftarcbythesideofthewatertankasthoughtrying
tobringsbackalostintervalintime.[15]Andthen,afterhoveringthereforafew
secondsasiftowatchitscurvedlineoflightblendintothewind,itfinallyflewoffto
theeast.[16]Longafterthefireflyhaddisappeared,thetrailofitslightremained
insideme,[17]itspale,faintglowhoveringonandoninthethickdarknessbehind
myeyelidslikealostsoul.[18]MorethanonceItriedstretchingmyhandoutinthe
dark.[19]Myfingerstouchednothing.[20]Thefaintglowremained,justbeyondmy
grasp.
Philip
Gabriel (1988))
~
5
6
6
(Ex.24)
1.
:
1008?
)
E
6
2.
(
1086)
x E
E
]
357
(996?)
:
6
5
~
6
6
x
5
5
~
5
5
E
E
5
x
5
~
x
~
[
6
:
6
5
5
(1978)
[
[
[
[
1967)5
:
E
5
E
~
6
E
6
6
[
E
[
6
x
x
6
x
5
[
~
x
~
5
5
E
x
x
6x
5
5
~
x
E
6
5
S[
E
5
E
E
[
~
E5
~
6
6
[
x
x
E5
6
5
6
[
]
(2000):
6
358
~
5
5C
2008
—
:
6—5
—
:
X
]
—
.6
(2011):
6
(1994):
—
5
6
(1987):
(2005):
NAFLInstitute.
~
6
6
(2014)
,pp.17-33.
1998):
(1960) AldousHuxley
6
(2005):
(1995):
(2003):
5
―
~
5
6
(1990):
(2003)
Vol.118,1-6l.
(2007)
15
:
5
9/10
6
Vol.4,8-12,
:
6
6
:
6
5
2008).
5
5
:
6
:
l
-
(
:
5pp.109-120.)
(
:
6
(2000) :
5
6
(1997)
6
(2008):
6
V.S.:
Tell-TaleBrain—Neuroscientist’s
QuestforWhatMakesUsHuman)
---
]
V.S.Ramachandran(2011)The
(2013)
359
[
]
ACTFLProficiencyGuidelines,Reading(2012),ACTFL.CommonEuropeanFramework
ofReferenceforLanguages:
Learning,Teaching,Assessment.(2001),Cambridge,CambridgeUniversityPress.
Cook,M.(1970)“Experimentsonorientationandproxemics”HumanRelations,23,
21-28.
Grellet,Françoise(1981)DevelopingReadingSkills---APracticalGuideto
ReadingComprehensionExercises.CambridgeUniversityPress.
Guiraud,Pierre(1954) LaStylistique,Paris:Quesait-je?
Hadley,AliceOmaggio,TeachingLanguageinContext:Proficiency-Oriented
Instruction.Boston,MA:Heinle&HeinlePublishers,1986.2nded.1993,3rded.,
2001.
Lakoff,George&Johnson,Mark(1980)MetaphorWeLiveBy,Chicago
UniversityPress.(
(1986):
:
6
Sartre,Jean-Paul(1936)L’imagination,Paris,LibrairieFélixAlcan.
Makino,Seiichi(2011)“Whatwillbelostintranslation?---Acognitive-linguistic
analysis”ActsduColloque,No.7,
EnseignementduJaponaisenFrance,51-108.
Veltkamp,Martijn(2013)“HowDoesFictionReadingInfluenceEmpathy?An
ExperimentalInvestigationontheRole
ofEmotionalTransportation“DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0055341
Williams,Raymond(1983)Keywords–AVocabularyofCultureandSociety,
RevisedVersion,NewYork:Oxford
UniversityPress.
360

ポスター - 一橋大学

翻訳に関する申請者宣誓書 （英文ヒナ型） (Letterhead) (Letterhead

はしがき

Title 平成26年度 卒業論文題目一覧 Author(s) Citation Journal of the

英単語ターゲット1900（第5版） 1001～1500 1 1001

英単語ターゲット1900（第5版） 501～1000 1 501、I cannot (c ) on

翻訳しやすい日本語へ

Year 7 Japanese