The Language Teacher
04 - 2001
When Do Native English Speaking
Teachers and Japanese College Students Disagree about the Use of Japanese in the English Conversation Classroom?
Peter Burden
Okayama Shoka University
Why Do Mismatches or Disagreements Occur in the Language Classroom?
Native speakers of English and their Japanese students have
different opinions when and indeed if the students' L1 (Japanese)
should be used in a conversation class. This paper attempts to
examine those differences or mismatches in opinion. A questionnaire
survey was given to both Native Speakers of English and Japanese
students (see Appendix) to explore the use of the students' L1;
the term MT used in it and in this paper refers to Mother Tongue.
Mismatches often occur in the transition between high school and
tertiary education as high school students may see one of the
specific roles of the teacher as imparting knowledge. The communicative
English conversation classroom, where feedback and correction
play less of a role, may be a jump in cultural terms and may thus
be disconcerting for students having their first experience of
studying oral English with a Native Speaker of English. Many students
have long been accustomed to English courses delivered by instructors
in Japanese, with Murphey and Sasaki (1998, p.22) reporting on
the anomaly of English use decreasing as students progress
through junior to senior high school. This is due to pressures
of the entrance exam syndrome, meaning that Japanese teachers
use English less the closer they get to the exams as they believe
that cramming information into students' heads can be done faster
in Japanese. This leads to the widespread belief that the students
themselves feel they have not grasped a concept in English unless
there is an accompanying one in Japanese, therefore using only
the target language is a violation of the known classroom culture.
Nunan (1989) writes that the effectiveness of a program relates
to the expectations of learners, and if students' subjective needs
and perceptions related to the learning process are not recognized
by teachers, there can be a mismatch of ideas. This is echoed
by Kumaravadivelu (1991, p.98) who notes that the "narrower
the gap between teacher intention and learner interpretation .
. . the greater the chances of achieving desired learning outcomes."
There is the possibility of conflict arising, and teacher beliefs
that contrast sharply with those of students can drive oral language
learning and teaching into dysfunctional exercises or unhappy
experiences for both parties.
Changes to class content and teaching approach should rely
not only on self-monitoring and self-evaluation by teachers, but
also on information garnered from learners. As Critchley (1999,
p.10) has noted, most studies about L1 use have approached the
issue from a needs perspective. This explains how bilingual support
might objectively help students, yet a wants perspective is also
essential to gauge what students want from their teachers in terms
of language support. Students' own beliefs of when they want the
teacher to use Japanese can be usefully contrasted with teachers'
own beliefs to examine the degree of mismatch.
Questionnaire Rationale
As Cole (1998, p.13) has noted, some language teachers try
to conceal knowledge of Japanese while others persist in an acknowledged
pretense of inability. While this shows that the teacher is
demonstrating that English can be an effective tool for communication
and not just language practice, there are undoubtedly occasions
when both native English speaker teachers and learners feel the
lesson cries out for Japanese language input.
The aim of the questionnaire is to explore the issue of when
teachers and students feel the use of their L1 is acceptable in
class. It may be that students want the teacher to use Japanese
for classroom management of learning processes such as explaining
class rules, task or test rationale and methodology, or what Lin
(1988) refers to as pedagogical interactions. However,
students may prefer the para-pedagogical use of Japanese, where
the teacher role is one of a "sympathetic friend or adviser."
(Lin, 1988, p.83) Thus, the survey attempts to answer the following
questions: How do teachers see their classroom role? How much
language support do teachers feel they need to use, and do these
views match the opinions of the students in our classes? Do teachers
see their role as language providers in the same way as their
students, or is there a mismatch in expectations? When do teachers
and learners feel Japanese should be used, and subsequently how
should the teacher and learner together reduce the potential for
a mismatch of views?
Administering the Questionnaire
Five native English speaking teachers, two British and one
each from the United States, Canada, and Australia administered
the questionnaire to 290 students at five universities, one national
and four private, within Okayama City. The questionnaire was handed
out in the first class of the first semester. Questionnaires including
a stamped, addressed envelope, and three additional copies of
the questionnaire were also mailed out at random nationwide to
tertiary-level teachers who belonged to a teaching organization.
Subsequently, the author distributed the questionnaire to tertiary
education teachers attending the JALT 2000 conference, and overall
73 completed surveys were received. Fifteen teachers had taught
in tertiary education for less than 2 years, 12 teachers had taught
between 2 and 5 years, 30 teachers for over 5 years and 16 had
taught for more than 10 years.
The Results of the Questionnaire
The findings were converted to a percentage, and looking at
question 2, 73% of students, or 211 out of the 290 sampled stated
that the teacher should use Japanese in class, while 86% of teachers
(63 teachers out of 73) likewise stated that Japanese should sometimes
be used.
As can be seen in table 2 below, when it came to specifics,
there was less agreement among students. Both students and teachers
overwhelmingly thought that Japanese should not be used (in question
12) about testing (82% and 76% respectively), and (in question
7) when the teacher is talking about a foreign culture (75% and
65%). Japanese should be used when explaining the differences
between L1 and English grammar (question 11, 53% and 63%), and
for relaxing the students (question 14, 61% and 78%).
Table 1. A Comparison of the Opinions of Teachers and
Learners
|
All students |
All teachers |
| 1. Should the teacher know the Students' MT? |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2. Should the teacher use the students' MT in
class? |
|
|
| 3. Should the students use their MT in class? |
|
|
|
|
|
Note: Students, N=290, teachers, N=73. All responses are expressed
in percentages.
Table 2. Comparison of teachers' opinions concerning
how Japanese should be used in class
|
Student Responses |
Teacher Responses |
|
|
|
| 4. Explaining new words |
|
|
| 5. Explaining grammar |
|
|
| 6. Giving instructions |
|
|
| 7. Talking about culture |
|
|
| 8. Talking about tests |
|
|
| 9. Explaining class rules |
|
|
| 10. Explaining the reason for doing an activity |
|
|
| 11. Expaining the differences between MT and
English grammar |
|
|
| 12. Testing the students |
|
|
| 13. Checking for understanding |
|
|
| 14. Relaxing the students |
|
|
| 15. Creating human contact |
|
|
Note: Students, N=211, teachers, N=63. All responses are expressed
in percentages.
However, as table 3 shows there areas where students and teachers
clearly do not share opinions.
Table 3. Differences in perceptions between teacher
and students:
|
Teacher Reponses |
Student Responses |
|
|
|
| 5. Explaining grammar |
|
|
| 6. Giving instruction |
|
|
| 9. Explaining class rules |
|
|
| 10. Explaining the reason for doing an activity |
|
|
| 13. Checking for understanding |
|
|
| 15. Creating human contact |
|
|
Note: Students, N=211, teachers, N=63. All responses are expressed
in percentages.
Disagreements over Grammar Explanations (Question 5)
University freshman-level listening and speaking comprehension
is seen to be low as students "have been trained to read
and analyze sentences grammatically, but have had no practice
in developing speaking or listening skills" (Nozaki, 1993,
p. 28). For students, grammar explanations may have unpleasant
associations with high school lessons geared towards grammar,
vocabulary, and translation. Once in university, the students
see the native speaker of English as providing real English
and thus want the chance to express themselves. For many language
learners, the receptive understanding of grammar is higher than
productive use partly due to teaching to the entrance exam, so
teachers often misinterpret student's stumbling as a lack
of requisite grammar knowledge and insist on starting from the
basics again. Helgesen (1993, p.38) puts it succinctly, noting
that students know a lot of English "but have difficulty
giving anything other than the most basic information about themselves
. . . yet to ignore what they have learned is to waste the previous
six or more years, and besides, to start at the beginning again
would bore and belittle them." We as teachers need to look
more closely at the inductive and deductive uses of grammar explanations.
An adoption of an eclectic approach could create a balance between
accuracy and fluency and to present a variety, including holistic
and analytical approaches.
Disagreement over Explanations, Class Rules and Why the Students
are Doing Something (Questions 6, 9 and 10)
Teachers often claim it is expedient to use L1 in explaining
or talking about the task as opposed to using TL in the task,
but students often do not differentiate between teacher input.
Larson-Freeman (1986, p.128) notes that English should be used
not only during communicative tasks, but also in task explanation,
and when assigning homework. The students learn from these management
exchanges and get to recognize that English can be a vehicle for
communication. Students also did not want the teacher to talk
about tests in L1, with results of questions 9 (75%) and 10 (76%),
showing that many students do not want the teacher to use L1 when
explaining class rules or why the students are performing a certain
task. These results may seem surprising, considering their unfamiliarity
with communicative teaching, but it may also be an indication
of students' overall indifference to a certain approach and that
it is the teacher's job to select appropriate materials. As Nunan
(1989, p.182) has illustrated, learners often are not focusing
on the point of the lesson in hand and that while teachers are
trying to develop communicative activities with an emphasis on
conveying meaning, the learners are often more interested in the
more formal aspects of language. Shimizu (1995, p.7) argues that
many students may not seriously participate in class activities
they perceive as trivial, instead waiting for an activity that
fulfills their expectations. Willing (1985) noted that more traditional
activities including pronunciation practice, conversation practice
(presumably individually with the teacher), error correction,
and vocabulary development were all seen to be more popular than
communicative activities.
Disagreements over Checking for Understanding (Question 13)
The apparent difference (57% of students thought it was undesirable,
whereas 56% of teachers thought it was) may be is due to learners
viewing the native teacher's role as primarily conversation practice
partner. Shimizu's (1995, p.7) study showed that a mere 4% of
Japanese students thought intelligence was important for foreigner
teachers. Knowledge of the subject area, and ability to explain
things clearly were qualities that were seen as being far more
desirable in Japanese teachers. Medgyes (1994, p.65) argues that
native speakers often only have a vague picture of their students'
backgrounds and aspirations while the local teacher possesses
"gut feelings based on (her) comprehensive familiarity with
the students' linguistic, cultural and personal backgrounds."
Japanese teachers have succeeded in learning English as a foreign
language and thus have experience and direct insight into the
learning process.
Disagreements over Creating Contact (Question 15)
The teachers suggested that they should use Japanese to relax
the students, and that when deemed necessary, the student has
recourse to the language they are most comfortable with, thus
serving their basic psychological needs. For the students, relaxing
may mean no more than the use of the occasional phrase to encourage
them, or the odd joke or interesting story. This facilitates a
supportive and open environment without relegating the Japanese.
Interestingly, students rejected the use of their L1 to create
human contact, (question 15, 62%), while teachers endorsed it
(73%), possibly indicating that real communication with a native
speaker means talking in the target language.
Conclusions: Should Teachers Change their Approach?
In my classes I noticed that if students are frustrated due
to mismatches in lesson expectations and teaching approach, progress
can be hampered. While the results are not overly conclusive,
and there is a need for more teacher feedback, findings do illustrate
a tendency for student dissatisfaction over Japanese use for instructions
and explanations. The results suggest that there should be an
emphasis on language learning through communication, echoing
language use outside the classroom. Yet, we as teachers have to
recognize that students place value on tasks through their understanding
of the task rationale, so we also have to ensure that this understanding
is clear. If, as teachers, we are unsure of whether the students
have grasped the task rationale, we should compromise, giving
instructions in English and then asking for a repetition in the
learners' tongue. If learners initially do not understand, they
get to know less and less, and motivation decreases. Gardner (1997)
argues that a number of variables including aptitude, language
strategies, anxiety, motivation, and attitudes are linked to language
learning success. The results in table 2 of question 14 showed
that both teachers and learners recognized the value of occasional
Japanese use to relax the students, to serve their basic psychological
need of not having their language rejected.
Many teachers find it difficult to consider students as equal
partners because of the general tendency to underestimate students'
ability, intelligence, and capacity for responsibility. In table
3, 63% of teachers, yet only 37% of students perceived grammar
explanations in the learners' mother tongue (MT) as useful. While
students need to know how to construct grammatical sentences,
they also want to use their knowledge gained from many years of
studying in high school. Students want to express themselves and
to see how sentences are used for communicative effect with corrective
feedback from teachers in TL that the learner can then adapt into
their own language.
A range of contexts in materials and presentation is necessary
to consolidate learning, to provide for structured practice, and
freer use. Arguably, learners do not develop grammatical fluency
through studying rules, but through forming hypotheses that he
or she subsequently tests through language use. These hypotheses
also relate to the differences expressed over explanations of
class rules, giving instructions, and checking for understanding.
I agree with Chaudron's (1988, p.124) "functional allocation
of language" through which too much emphasis on either the
target language or the students' MT signals that one or the other
is inferior, and also limits the students' useful language input.
The results of table 3 show that teachers want to use the learners'
MT when checking and explaining, yet these are communicative situations
where there is a real need to get communication across. MT explanations
belittle the students; the teacher must have more confidence in
the learners' ability to understand, as students really do learn
from these negotiated classroom management and communication exchanges.
References
Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language Classrooms: Research
on teaching and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Cole, S. (1998). The use of L1 in communicative English classrooms.
The Language Teacher 22 (12), 11-13.
Critchley, M.P. (1999). Bilingual support in English classes
in Japan. The Language Teacher 23 (9), 10-13.
Gardner, R.C. (1997). Individual differences and second language
learning. In G. R. Tucker & D. Corson (Eds.). Encyclopaedia
of language and education. Volume 4: Second language education
(pp.33-47). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Helgesen, M. (1993). Dismantling a wall of silence. In P. Wadden
(Ed.). A handbook for teaching English at Japanese colleges
and universities (pp.37-50). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (1991). Language-learning tasks: Teacher
intention and learner interpretation. ELT Journal 45 (2),
98-107.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and principles in
language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lin, A. (1988). Pedagogical and para-pedagogical levels of
interaction in the classroom: A social interactional approach
to the analysis of the code-switching behaviour of bilingual teachers
in an English Language lesson. Working Papers in linguistics
and Language Teaching, 11. Language Centre: University of
Hong Kong.
Medgyes, P. (1994). The non-native teacher. Hong Kong:
Macmillan.
Murphey, T. & Sasaki, T. (1998). Japanese English teachers'
increasing use of English. The Language Teacher 22 (10),
21-27.
Nozaki, K. (1993). The Japanese student and the foreign teacher.
In Wadden, P.(Ed.). A handbook for teaching English at Japanese
colleges and universities (pp. .27-35). Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Nunan, D. (1989). Hidden Agendas. The role of the learner in
programme implementation. In R.K. Johnson (Ed.). The second
language curriculum (pp. 176-188). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Shimizu, K. (1995). Japanese college student attitudes towards
English teachers: A survey. The Language Teacher 19 (10),
5-8.
Wlling, K. (1988). Learning styles in adult migrant education.
Adelaide: NCRC.
Appendix A: The survey given to 73 teachers
Using the Mother Tongue in the Language Classroom
Please circle ( 0 ) the best answer for you in the questionnaire.
Please note: In this case, MT = Mother Tongue = Japanese
How long have you been teaching in a Japanese University?
a) less than 2 years, b) between 2-5 years, c) over 5 years, d)
over 10 years
1. Should the teacher know the students' MT? Yes No
2. Should the teacher use the students' MT in class?
3. Should the students use their MT in class?
If you said 'Never' in answer to question 2, why not?
______________________________________
If you said 'Never' in answer to question 3, why not?
______________________________________
If you said 'Sometimes' in answer to question 2, please
complete the following:
Should the teacher use the students' MT when:
| 4. Explaining new words? |
Yes |
No |
| 5. Explaining grammar? |
Yes |
No |
| 6. Giving instructions? |
Yes |
No |
| 7. Talking about the culture of their home country? |
Yes |
No |
| 8. Talking about class tests? |
Yes |
No |
| 9. Explaining class rules? |
Yes |
No |
| 10. Explaining WHY the students are doing a task? |
Yes |
No |
| 11. Explaining the differences between MT and
English grammar? |
Yes |
No |
| 12. Testing the students? |
Yes |
No |
| 13. Checking for understanding? |
Yes |
No |
| 14. Relaxing the students? |
Yes |
No |
| 15. Creating human contact? |
Yes |
No |
| 16. Other? (please state) |
|
|
Peter Burden is an Associate Professor in Okayama, where
he has lived for ten years. He has written the textbook: Let's
have a Natter -- Small talk in the Classroom and has published
widely on student attitudes and perceptions. He is President and
Program Chair of Okayama JALT, and can be contacted at <burden-p@osu.ac.jp>
All materials on this site are copyright © by JALT and their respective authors.
For more information on JALT, visit the JALT National Website