)1 19 9 , 9 A1 ( 21 919 0 19 0 0 9 0

�������

�������� �������

��������� � ����������

���� ����� �����

1. Policy1) English is the only foreign language option in mostschools and the only subject tested in all universityentrance exams (Galloway and Rose, 2015). Entranceexaminations focus on four skills (MEXT, 2013).

2) Undergraduates in Japanese university study Englishfor at least two years, regardless of their subjects(Galloway and Rose, 2015).

3) G30: The Global 30 Project (2009-2014) : 13universities; developing degree programs conducted inEnglish (MEXT, 2009).

4) Top global university project (2014-2023): 37universities: 13 as “top global universities” and 24“global traction universities” ; more universities areinvolved; increase the number of courses in English(EMI) etc. (MEXT, 2014).

5) teacher training and education (MEXT, 2013)

2. Universities1) Millions of Japanese studies English aboutgrammar and vocabulary in order to pass theentrance of examinations but little use of English(just like learn to piano, explain, show, never use it)(Baskin and Zhao, 1996)2) National universities have been autonomouscorporations since 2004 (Kitagawa and Oba, 2010).3) Universities can decides on English curricula andEnglish-medium instruction (Ishikawa, 2017).

3. MaterialsUseful sources: NHK, daily radio, and televisionprograms for beginning, intermediate, advancedstudents to study eikaiwa (one hour, 60/70$). Theprice of textbook is reasonable. Bilingual televisionbroadcasts of America, British are available (Baskinand Zhao, 1996).4. Society1) Many companies see English as the officialworking language (Galloway and Rose, 2013).2) Japanese corporations regard English tests suchas TOEIC as “a convenient tool to measure the levelof effort” (Kubota, 2011. p.258).

5. Teachers1) Teachers in school mainly focus on grammarand vocabulary, while teachers in trainingcourses after teach speaking skills (Baskin andZhao, 1996).2) Teachers think university students may stillfollow the standard English stereotypes becauseJapan advocate the NES traditionally (Gallowayand Rose, 2013).6. Students1) Students in university prefer native English,especially American English (Galloway, 2013).2) A native English accent is the same as beingproficient in English, giving them confidence(Galloway, 2013)3) Students have an awareness of Global English,some feel more comfortable when speakingEnglish with NNSs and being aware of NNEnglish, but attitudes were largely negative to NNEnglish (Galloway, 2013).

1. Teacher recruitment: NNS(non-native speaker) Assistant TeachersIt is not necessary for assistant language teachers to be native speakers of English. We will have more multinational and multicultural communications in the future. There will be more opportunities to communicate with non-native speakers (Takahashi, 2011).2. Materials: Developing ELF-oriented English language teaching materials Textbooks and other teaching materials for teaching EIL(English as an international language)...must have a broader representation in terms of both language and culture (Matsuda 2006: 9). 3. Classroom activities: Creating ELF-oriented classroom activities and developing tasks to raise learners� accommodation skillsJenkins (2006a: 174) claims that the priority for ELF learners is �to be able to adjust their speech in order to be intelligible to interlocutors from a wide range of L1 backgrounds�. 4. For university students: Assessment method for English learning (Takahashi, 2011)

Study N size Methodology Results

Ishikawa (2017)

509 Japanese undergraduates

• Pilot questionnaire• 95 open-ended email

questionnaires;• 18 face-to-face

conversational interviews

• Participants overall negative attitude to Japanese communication ability;• Textbooks, study guides and CD, school English and English tests influenced

students attitudes;• In accordance with English entrance exams and school tests

McKenzie (2007)

558 Japanese university students

• Quantitative study;• The Verbal-Guise

Instrument (VGT);• Dialect Recognition Item;• Perceptual Dialectology;• Background Information

• Participants can differentiate between speech varieties • They hold different and complex attitudes to standard/non-standard and

native/non-native varieties of English speech• Japanese learners draw on the varieties of their English speech to identify

and evaluate speech varieties • Participants’ gender, level of self-perceived competence and level of

exposure to English affect their perceptions of varieties of English speech Morita (2004)

56 students for questionnaires;2 teachers for interview;6 college students for interview

• Questionnaire;• In-depth interviews • A case study

• NESTs prefer for phonological and oral skills;• NNESTs prefer for grammar instruction and literacy skills;

Cargile et al. (2006)

113 Japanese undergraduates

• A verbal-guise study;• A follow-up language

awareness;• questionnaire

• Informants reported the mainstream US English (MUSE) more positively than African-American vernacular English (AAVE);

• However, no obvious difference in MUSE and AAVE in terms of effectiveness;

• Japanese participants’ evaluations on the two varieties is similar to US informants

Galloway and Rose (2017)

108 students • Presentation tasks in a EAP course;

• Participants have a strong preference for outer circle Englishes;• Students selection of a variety was connected to their prior experience;• Students reflections depended on what they have learnt and listened to

others;• Activity itself influences students’ attitudes

Teacher chosen:One pedagogical benefit of NES teacher selection, as nativespeakers of the particular variety, local teachers are highlyproficient. (Bokhorst-Heng, 2008)

Material:Native English Speaker (NES) norms dominate in universitymaterialAdd Global English in textbooks and university English learningmaterial (Takahashi, 2010).

Classroom Activities:advocated ‘Lingua Franca Core’ (LFC) as a pronunciation targetfor English language learners, as part of ELF research in anattempt to improve mutual intelligibility in interactions and allowlearners to ‘preserve their L1 identity’ (Jenkins, 2000).

For university students:1)In a lingua franca model, classroom activities are more likely tobe focused firmly on the achievement of successful interculturalcommunication between non-native speakers of English fromdifferent linguistic and cultural backgrounds (Yasukata, 2011).2)Students have more choice in English language learning andwithout pressure from dominant NS community (Jenkins, 2006).

Gaps:1)focus on lexical, grammar instead of proficiency2)Raise university students’ awareness of global English

(Galloway & Rose, 2013).