PDA

View Full Version : English Teachers are changing...for better or worse?



Mekugi
19th July 2003, 03:09
I've heard both sides of these issues discussed in one way or the other for the past 6 years, an Oregonian friend of mine left their position at college because their approach to English was sterile and unrealistic. Then again, basics are a foundation for further education...and learning the basics is an essential. I think a happy medium can be reached, eventually.

Universities turn to new ways to teach English

The Asahi Shimbun



Universities, trying to reverse dwindling students numbers due to plunging birth rates, are now hiring instructors from English conversation schools to teach practical language skills.

Institutions such as Keio University and the Tokyo University of Agriculture are outsourcing instructors from English conversation schools, including Osaka-based ECC Foreign Language Institute and Tokyo-based Berlitz Japan.

Officials of the Tokyo Institute of Technology decided to offer more classes in English after an in-house survey found graduates thought their accomplishments in the language had not fulfilled the expectations they had when they were freshmen. The graduates ranked their achievements in English bottom out of 11 areas they had hoped to improve when they entered the institute.

But when officials began scouting instructors to teach the new classes, they struggled to find staff capable of teaching scientific and technical terms as well as English.

To solve the problem, they hired 24 instructors from English conversation schools.

The institute has since settled a contract with Berlitz Japan and will offer a new practical English class for third-year students majoring in engineering from October.

Officials hope the classes will enable all students to achieve at least 650 points in the TOEIC test by the time they graduate.

``Tutors used to teaching literature such as Shakespeare might protest the decision, but we have to consider the needs of the students. This type of reform is needed to train engineers who can do their job in English,'' said Osamu Kusakabe, a professor of geotechnical engineering who is in charge of the reform drive.

The Tokyo University of Agriculture also hires instructors from English conversation schools. Ten instructors from ECC teach 54 courses, such as English conversation, composition and a preparation class for the TOEIC test, to first- and second-year students.

``We decided to rethink English lessons because they had become impractical. Students approve of the classes, too,'' said a university administrator.

But some departments oppose the reform, arguing it abandons the commitment to education, and are sticking to conventional English classes.

At Keio University's Faculty of Environmental Information and Faculty of Policy Management, two instructors from Berlitz Japan language school have been teaching four classes since April.

The classes are open to students learning English as their chosen foreign language-a compulsory subject-but who fail to achieve 400 points in the TOEFL test.

University officials said they hit on the idea of outsourcing instructors to teach students basic language skills, because their own English teachers are too busy lecturing to students who already have mastered the basics.

The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology has approved lessons by instructors from language schools as formal courses, prompting more universities to accredit classes taught by outsourced instructors.

Berlitz Japan sends instructors to about 60 universities. At one time, none of the classes these outsourced instructors taught were accredited, but now nine universities accredit such classes.

It's a similar story at ECC. About 10 of the 50 universities that use instructors from ECC now accredit such classes.

``With deregulation, more and more universities are expected to outsource English lessons,'' said an official with ECC's corporation operation division.

``State-run universities will have more autonomy when they become independent corporate entities in April next year. Hopefully, this will provide us with a new market,'' said an official of Berlitz Japan.(IHT/Asahi: July 19,2003)

(07/19)

P Goldsbury
19th July 2003, 05:02
Hello Russ,

Of course, there is much that the article does not say and, as you know, you also have to read between the lines of what is actually written.

TOEIC has become the new fashion fad in the long-running, but ultimately useless, attempts to improve the level of English-language ability and teaching at tertiary level. Our own president decided that all students (our intake is about 4,000 students per year) would take TOEIC twice each year, as they go through the system. The millions of yen required to finance this operation comes from some fund at the president's disposal. The next step is to build a fully-fledged language centre, with a staff of 60, but even the president has admitted that this is a 'dream'. Like Pharoah in the OT, he has these dreams regularly, as did his predecessor. The previous president liked opera, so, guess what! We must be the only university in Japan with a opera house (shaped, apparently, like a grand piano) on the campus.

I think the reason that TOEIC was chosen is that Japanese companies appear to require it and thus students are potentially that much more employable, which matters quite a lot down in this part of the country.

In national universities at least there is a sharp distinction made between joukin (full-time tenured) and hijoukin (part-time) teachers. Foreign joukin teachers are comparatively rare and it is impossible at present to create many new teaching posts. However, Hiroshima University has been employing suitably-qualified hijoukin teachers from English language schools for a number of years. By 'suitably-qualified', I mean in possession of a master's degree. The good thing about this is that it has reduced the number of Japanese dinosaurs, those hijoukin teachers who wander round the universities teaching (in Japanese) their own unique brand of 19th century English. The bad thing is that having native speakers who attempt to teach up to 65 students for 90 minutes per week in a lecture room does not really attack the cause of the problem. I see some of these dinosaurs on my weekly trip to a local private university, where I teach Latin (yes, Latin) to some English majors.

Have you come across Brian McVeigh's "Japanese Higher Education as Myth" (ISBN 0-7656-0925-8)? In Chapter 7 he has some interesting thoughts on how English teaching in Japan reinforces national stereotypes. I hear on the grapevine that many feathers were ruffled by the publication of this book; so many, in fact, that McVeigh lost his job as a result. I am not sure whether these rumors are correct.

Best regards,

Vapour
20th July 2003, 01:53
Just because one has a bachelor/master/PhD degree does not mean one can teach English. I personally think none of English teachers from English conversation school are qualified to teach English in any useful sence except to entertain Japanese student. I could be wrong but impression I got is that none of them have qualification/training in ESL.

Teaching English as second language shouldn't be done by amature who just happend to have university education. There are quite large number of people who specialise in this profession in most English speaking university. It wiouldn't be difficult to find few of them to come to Japan given the pay offered by Japanese university.

Mekugi
20th July 2003, 09:45
OK this is how my conversations normally go when discussing this topic:

Who taught you how to speak? Was it a school? Did you go to school not knowing how to speak your own native language? In fact, did the school teach you the proper way to speak, the academic way? Exactly what role schooling plays in foreign and native language is the actual question. Furthermore when it boils down to it: how much can a professor teach their students in such a small amount of time. People, on the other hand, develop language skills over -time-. Not in school.

There is a difference between learning the rules to a language and learning how to effectively communicate in it. Writing is an example of both the mesh of rule and communication. However, to learn to speak, one does not have to know how to write- and one does not learn to write before one learns to speak (in general- unless there are extenuating circumstances).

The whole fallacy of the school and foreign language IMHO is an issue that scholars are not clear on- and they are arguing it to this very day. The problem they are finding is how people actually learn to communicate and the limits of a reading writing and verbal class has. To be honest, most language programs are heavily based on theory, not actual learning process of the individual. While I agree that having a proper idea on how the language works is a good idea, that does not in any way mean that the person can communicate effectively. Being immersed in the language and forced to use it on a daily ,repetitive basis, in various situations and circumstances is the only way that humans learn to speak. Cleaning it up comes afterwards.

Just my two cents.

-Russ


Originally posted by Vapour
Just because one has a bachelor/master/PhD degree does not mean one can teach English. I personally think none of English teachers from English conversation school are qualified to teach English in any useful sence except to entertain Japanese student. I could be wrong but impression I got is that none of them have qualification/training in ESL.

Teaching English as second language shouldn't be done by amature who just happend to have university education. There are quite large number of people who specialise in this profession in most English speaking university. It wiouldn't be difficult to find few of them to come to Japan given the pay offered by Japanese university.

Vapour
20th July 2003, 10:06
When I said, "There are quite large number of people who specialise in this profession in most English speaking university." I didn't mean academic who teach linguistic. What I meant was that, in most university, they have ESL school where they teach English to new foreign students. People who works there are trained professional some of whom has has degree/diploma level qualification in ESL with years of experience in teaching English to foreign students who often are undertaking degree course at the same time.

Offer them decent Japanese wage for full time (i.e. 8 hours a day) work. Given that university post qualify them to rent a flat in japanese civil servants houseing which often cost less than 15000 per month, they will be loaded when they finish their contract.

Mekugi
20th July 2003, 11:28
OK I can see what you are saying.

There is a big difference between ESL and the "standard" college course.

However, maybe they should put the same intensity into the "fly-by-night" college courses as they do in the ESL, which would make them worth a damn, really. I took 3 years of Spanish and I learned more in one week staying with my Cuban friend and his family than I did the entire college course.

:P

-Russ



Originally posted by Vapour
When I said, "There are quite large number of people who specialise in this profession in most English speaking university." I didn't mean academic who teach linguistic. What I meant was that, in most university, they have ESL school where they teach English to new foreign students. People who works there are trained professional some of whom has has degree/diploma level qualification in ESL with years of experience in teaching English to foreign students who often are undertaking degree course at the same time.

Offer them decent Japanese wage for full time (i.e. 8 hours a day) work. Given that university post qualify them to rent a flat in japanese civil servants houseing which often cost less than 15000 per month, they will be loaded when they finish their contract.

hyaku
20th July 2003, 12:21
I can see various problems that go well against the grain of anyone having any other language abilty in Japan.

Firstly the methods leave a lot to be desired. Japanese School textbooks (all subjects) have all been changed this year in Monbusho's attempts to improve the system. The books are better but the students abilties do not match up to the contents.

Also Monbusho still only enforces one hour compulsory oral communication lesson in a week. Hours will increase next year as more high school students will have to take listening test as part of centre tests for university. But if there was a substantial increase in hours educators of other subjects would soon complain as the whole lot already fits together like a complicated jigsaw puzzle.

Secondy its really nothing to do with speaking. They cant hear! Only hours of hearing breaks the barrier. Most dont speak because they simply cant understand the original question or topic of conversation.

Lastly as mentioned its the time. They don't have any. Three years of good training at junior high and they are all speaking. Then it all goes out the window when they go to High school.

I see students studying from 9:00 to 5:00 and Saturday mornings just to try and pass entrance exams for college or uni. Then they become? English teachers. I know one girl who speaks well and wants to go overseas but she cant study as student union duties has her getting home at eleven in the evening. Gotta give to some of them they study like crazy.

Bottom end others simply pay the fees at sit and sleep for three years. As long as you attend you graduate!

In any case doesnt anyone think that language abilty is a talent?
I see Westerners living in Japan for years that can never seem to get the hang of Japanese regardless of qualifications.

As the newspapers say , 151 native speaker dropouts last year.
Cant say I blame them either working like bored circus animals.
Glad I dont do that sort of soul destroying stuff.

Five thousand seven hundred came here last year because they graduated with a college or uni degree, Not because they are English teachers. If they only knew what was in store most would not come.

Hyakutake Colin

doaho
21st July 2003, 18:23
[i]doesnt anyone think that language abilty is a talent?
[/B]

Is it a 'talent' if everyone can do it?

hyaku
22nd July 2003, 00:20
Originally posted by doaho


Is it a 'talent' if everyone can do it?

Sorry. I should have said talent to command a second language or more.

Hyakutake Colin

doaho
22nd July 2003, 02:02
Originally posted by hyaku


Sorry. I should have said talent to command a second language or more.

Hyakutake Colin


What I mean is: is commanding a second language or more really a 'talent', or is it a matter of priorities, persistence, and patience?


I'm really wondering.

I dunno....:confused:

Vapour
23rd July 2003, 14:59
I once got 6 out of 100 in my English exam in my high school year. Got 6 gengotu (fist punch into forehead) for that. I usually hovered arouc 40-60. Now, I'm doing English History PhD in one of British university.

Learning language is like martial arts. Sure you may not become Poet Lauret or Morihei Ueshiba but if you practice consistently, you are guranteed to become a competent speaker/writer. Having said it, I still cannot be bothered with plural though. :D

Joseph Svinth
24th July 2003, 03:32
Richard Francis Burton spoke and read about 25 languages, and had near native ability in at least a dozen of them. This is hardly a record talent -- Cardinal Giuseppe Mezzofanti spoke at least 40 languages well, and could get by in about 75. The current record is apparently held by Ziad Fazah, who gets by in more than 50 languages besides his native Arabic, and is fluent in at least 40 of them.

The key? Start learning multiple languages before you're 14.

MarkF
25th July 2003, 09:24
Excuse me, someone all ready said what I intended to say.


Mark

hyaku
25th July 2003, 10:10
Sounds amazing. Twenty five languages, forty languages.

But I was just trying to base things on the average people I had met over the years. Some of them have problems with one language let alone two. If people were so good at this the world would indeed be a wonderful place. I was just trying to say that I dont think we can blame it all on the teachers and the system.

Most of the ones I meet that are still in education are far from stupid. Just too damn lazy to do anything.

If everybody wanted to study so hard it would certainly make the teaching easier.

Hyakutake Colin

Joseph Svinth
26th July 2003, 02:01
On the languages, age matters. You can teach virtually anybody aged 6 and under to speak any language in the world, but by the time they're 20, it's gotten really hard.

doaho
28th July 2003, 17:06
Originally posted by Joseph Svinth
On the languages, age matters. You can teach virtually anybody aged 6 and under to speak any language in the world, but by the time they're 20, it's gotten really hard.


a little misleading

Mekugi
28th July 2003, 22:01
It's a skill. There are different levels of skill everywhere.

Language skill.

-Russ


Originally posted by hyaku


Sorry. I should have said talent to command a second language or more.

Hyakutake Colin

doaho
28th July 2003, 22:34
is walking a skill?

Mekugi
28th July 2003, 22:51
Yes!
Now, are we talking about walking to the mailbox, to the supermarket....
or.....from Missouri to Oregon (Oregon Trail anyone???)




Originally posted by doaho
is walking a skill?

hyaku
29th July 2003, 01:30
Was the word talent the wrong?

I thought the word Talent was defined as: A special aptitude or faculty, or mental abilty. I did not mean Japanese "Talento"

A skill is usually defined as: Expertness or facility in action dexterity or tact.

The man(oops nearly said guy) that rents surfboards on a Bali beach speaks far better Japanese than most foreigners I know and probably a lot better English than some Westerners too. Even although he didnt even go to school he has this special aptitude.

For those that prefer the word skill, sadly there are few of us that can be the David Beckams of English. Its a skill that does not seem to have any boundries when it come to high levels of inteligence.

Asking an English teacher to turn everyone into skilled people is a bit of a tall order. We can only guide those that have this faculty and special aptitude (talent) in the right direction.


Hyakutake Colin

Mekugi
29th July 2003, 05:57
You can develop a skill. Talent is something you are born with and comes naturally.

At least in the way I speak the language.

It's like the difference between a translator and interpretor.

-Russ


Originally posted by hyaku
Was the word talent the wrong?

I thought the word Talent was defined as: A special aptitude or faculty, or mental abilty. I did not mean Japanese "Talento"

A skill is usually defined as: Expertness or facility in action dexterity or tact.

The man(oops nearly said guy) that rents surfboards on a Bali beach speaks far better Japanese than most foreigners I know and probably a lot better English than some Westerners too. Even although he didnt even go to school he has this special aptitude.

For those that prefer the word skill, sadly there are few of us that can be the David Beckams of English. Its a skill that does not seem to have any boundries when it come to high levels of inteligence.

Asking an English teacher to turn everyone into skilled people is a bit of a tall order. We can only guide those that have this faculty and special aptitude (talent) in the right direction.


Hyakutake Colin