YTK Project YTK team’s intereststkoyama/ytk/Download/PPT/2011_JALT...2011/11/20 3 By starting younger take advantages of bothof these learner characteristics 13 2.4. MEXT’s stress

2011/11/20

1

JALT2011:37th Annual International Conference on Language Teaching

National Olympics Memorial Center, Tokyo2011/11/19-21

1

Emiko Yukawa, Ph.D. Ritsumeikan University＜[email protected]＞

‘Uniqueness’ of the Japanese situation

*‘unique’ and hesitant (Enever, 2010)

*Asia TEFL in 2007 (Seinan University, Fukuoka)

“Elementary school EFL education in Japan: Teachers' conceptions of instructional goals and assessment of their attainment”

(Yukawa, Takanashi, & Koyama, 2007)

2

YTK Project

3

YTK team’s interests

1. Assessing pupils’ communication abilities and attitude

2. Considering the significance of their achievement and how to realize continuity from elementary to secondary schools

4

Overview1) Introduction -the Japanese situation and

framework

2) Basic understanding of YL and our stance

3) A quick glance at elementary school English ) q g y gteaching

4) Listening abilities

5) Conversational abilities

6) Transition from elementary schools to junior high schools

5

1)

1) Introduction -the Japanese situation and framework

2) Basic understanding of YL and our stance2) Basic understanding of YL and our stance

3) A quick glance at elementary school English teaching



6) Transition from elementary schools to junior high schools 6

2011/11/20

2

Framework of English education in Japan

In 2002-2010 optional “activities” within Period for Integrated Studies

Grades 3~6

From 2011 obligatory only for 5th and 6th graders From 2011 obligatory only for 5 and 6 graders

once a week (40-45 minutes per time)

Goals: “to form the foundation of pupils’ communication abilities through foreign languages”

7

• No specific linguistic goals• Emphasis on : engaging in communicative

activities, nurturing positive attitudes toward nurturing positive attitudes toward

communication as well as language and cultural awareness

(MEXT, 2008 http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education/micro_detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2009/06/16/1234931_012.pdf) 8

2)1) Introduction -the Japanese situation and framework





6) Transition from elementary school to junior high school

9

2.1. Younger is not necessarily quicker.

Larsen-Freeman & Long (1991, p.155)

Hyltenstam & Abrahamsson (2003, p.546)

Muñoz (2009) –Barcelona Project

#older Ss quicker after 416 hrs

#After that younger learners slowing caught up

Nikolov (2009) many variables

10

2.2. Early starters are not necessarily automatically better.

Reasons for mixed results on effects of early language learning (Butler,2004-5):

1) Lack of curriculum continuity1) Lack of curriculum continuity

2) Doubtful validity of the test used

3) Sampling problem of the participants

11

2.3. Instruction at the elementary school level is desirable all the same.

• use more background knowledge• literacy,

analytical skills andolder

l

older

l

Johnstone (2002) and Nikolov (2009):

12

• analytical skills and• better learning skills.

learnerslearners

• relative ease of acquiring the sound system and unanalyzed wholes,

• higher motivation and lower anxiety.

young learners

young learners

2011/11/20

3

By starting younger

take advantages of bothboth of these learner characteristics

13

2.4. MEXT’s stress on oral English and nurturing positive attitudes toward English- sensible

2 5 N t i ti ti d l i2.5. Nurturing motivation, developing minimum language skills-inseparable

(Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2009; Yashima,2002; 2009a; 2009b)14

3)1) Introduction -the Japanese situation and framework






15

3.1 Themes and commonly taught words/expressions

16

3.2 Activities

17

4)1) Introduction -the Japanese situation and

framework


3) A quick glance at elementary school English3) A quick glance at elementary school English teaching

4) Listening abilities5) Conversational abilities

6) Transition from elementary school to junior high school 18

2011/11/20

4

19

YTK Listening Test

37 questionsI. words and sentences 48points /80

II. teacher’s commands (classroom English) 10/80

III. letter‐sound correspondence 14/80

IV. story comprehension 8 /80

total: 80 points20

YTK Listening TestThemes and word categories

days of the week

months

time

foods

animals

classroom English

weather

number

countries

colors

Sports

school subjects

directions

shapes

ordering at a shop

occupations

21

湯川笑子・高梨庸雄・小山哲春(2007).

「中学校進学前の生徒の英語リスニング力」小学校英語教育学会紀要第８号 29-36頁

湯川笑子・高梨庸雄・小山哲春・川中尚(2008). 湯川笑子高梨庸雄小山哲春川中尚(2008).

「小学校英語活動における評価ツールの活用」小学校英語教育学会紀要第9号 55-70頁

Available from <http://www.notredame.ac.jp/~tkoyama/ytk/>

22

湯川笑子・高梨庸雄・小山哲春(2009).

「小学校英語で身につくコミュニ

ケーション能力」三省堂

[Yukawa, E., Takanashi, T. & Koyama, T. (2009). (Communicative competence expected to be ( p plearned in elementary English Education)]. Tokyo: Sanseido.

¥2500

YTK Project papers available from <http://www.notredame.ac.jp/~tkoyama/ytk/>

23

YTK Listening Test(AY2006 ~ 2011)

YTK Listening Original

N M (%) SD (average)

Max Min

Elementary

Total (17)

1528 63.09 (78.86) 11.50 80 21

Junior TotalJuniorHigh

Total (5)

795 67.26 (84.08) 8.43 80 28

Total22 schools

2323 64.52 (80.64) 9.96 80 21

YTK Listening 2 N M (%) SD (average)

Max Min

J.H. All (6) 738 80.42 80.42 12.56 100 19

2011/11/20

5

342

520496

AY2006-AY2011：Elementary Schools17 schools (4private / 13 public)

N: 1528 (5th & 6th)Average: 63.09 (78.86%)SD: 8.87 (average)Max: 80Min: 21

0‐ 10‐ 20‐ 30‐ 40‐ 50‐ 60‐ 70‐80

0 0 531

134

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

0 0 0 4 17

86

175

239

AY2006-AY2011：Elementary Schools

N: 521M: 67.12 (83.90%)SD: 7.98 (average)Max/Min: 80/36

4 private Schools

0‐ 10‐ 20‐ 30‐ 40‐ 50‐ 60‐ 70‐80

0 0 5 27

117

256

345

257

0‐ 10‐ 20‐ 30‐ 40‐ 50‐ 60‐ 70‐80

N: 1007M: 61.00 (76.25%)SD: 9.31 (average)Max/Min: 80/21

13 public Schools

0 0 0 011 12

43

28

0 0 0 1 3

14 14

31

2007-2008 (2nd phase): 4 schools

N: 63 M: 65.32 (81.65%)

I (public)N: 94 M: 63.24 (79.06%)

K (public)

0 0 0 0 0 3 4

32

0 0 0 0 29

24

38N: 73 M: 68.55 (85.68%)

L (private)

N: 39 M: 73.97 (92.47%)

M (public)

279

375

AY2006-AY2011：Junior High Schools5 schools (4 private / 1 public)

N: 795 (1st)Average: 67.26 (84.08%)SD: 8.43 (average)Max: 80Min: 28

0‐ 10‐ 20‐ 30‐ 40‐ 50‐ 60‐ 70‐80

0 0 1 719

114

82

142

129

4 schools (private): 2009

N: 454 (1st)Average: 79.66 (%)SD: 14.34Max: 100Min: 20

YTK Listening 2 (Max = 100)

0‐ 10‐ 20‐ 30‐ 40‐ 50‐ 60‐ 70‐ 80‐ 90‐100

0 0 2 49

34

52

74

80

90

2 schools (private): 2010

N: 284 (1st)Average: 81.64 (%)SD: 11.66Max: 100Min: 19

YTK Listening 2 (Max = 100)

0‐ 10‐ 20‐ 30‐ 40‐ 50‐ 60‐ 70‐ 80‐ 90‐100

0 1 1 03

10

25

2011/11/20

6

Findings and Limitation of YTK Listening Test

1. Overall performance high2. Distribution pattern uniform

across schools3 This sample- schools that taught3. This sample schools that taught

English more than 20 hours per year from the 3rd grade: 28% of all the schools(calculated from the survey result conducted in 2007* by MEXT http://www.pref.tottori.lg.jp/secure/296303/tyousa-syou.pdf)

31


framework




5) Conversational abilities6) Transition from elementary school to junior high

school32

5.1 YTK Speaking Test (i.e., “Let’s Talk”)

1. A 3-5 minute conversation with an adult English speaking stranger

2. Testing alone - too threatening Luoma g g(2004: pp.33-39) → testing in pairs

3. Test with scaffolding-(Cameron, L. (2001: p.217), citing Vygotsky,1962; Wertsch,1998)

33

Components of Communicative Competence

Canale (1983)

Grammatical competence

Sociolinguistic competence

Discourse competence

Strategic competence

Language Ability

Language knowledge

Organizational knowledge

G ti l T t l

Pragmatic knowledge

Ill ti l S i li i ti

Bachman and Palmer(1996)

Grammatical knowledge

Textual knowledge

Illocutionalknowledge

Sociolinguistic knowledge

35

Strategic competence

Goal setting assessment Planning

Bachman and Palmer(1996)

Interpersonal Communication Competence

Conversational

AdaptabilityConversational

InvolvementConversational

Management

Canale, Cody, & Manusov (2000) etc.

SocialComposure

Articulation Responsive‐ness

Attentive‐ness

Turn‐takingTurn‐yielding

Back‐channeling

Spitzberg (1995) etc. (Conversational Skill Rating Scale)

Altercentrism Composure Expressiveness Interaction Management

2011/11/20

7

Five different criteria with four levels each

1. PhonologyWhether they can speak in natural English pronunciation that is easy to understand.

2. Syntax + Vocabulary

Whether they know the necessary vocabulary words and can use grammatically correct English.

3. AttentivenessWhether they can concentrate, listen and

d d d i h i

4 :the highest level ～ 1：the lowest level

3. Attentivenessunderstand during the conversation.

4. ExpressivenessWhether they can actively communicate what they want to convey using verbal and non‐verbal means.

5. Management

Whether they recognize their role in the conversation as either the speaker or the listener and contribute to the conversation so it progresses smoothly.

four different levels for each criterion(1:lowest, 4:highest score)

４

Actively expresses what s/he wants to convey making use of verbal (English words), and non-verbal (gestures or facial expressions) means of communication all the time.

Expressiveness

p )

３

Expresses what s/he wants to convey most of the time, although at times s/he could not make use of either one or both of verbal and non-verbal expressions.

２Can actively express what s/he wants to convey making use of both means of communication half of the time.

１Does not actively express what s/he wants to convey using either verbal or nonverbal means of communication.

38

5.3 Participants in YTK Speaking Test (Academic Years of 2006 to 2010)

Academic Year Type of SchoolNumber of participants

20063 private and

1 public schools236

39

2007 1 public school 53

2008 2 public schools 89



Total 734

• Yukawa, E., Koyama, T. & Takanashi, T. (2009‐2010). What does ‘Let’s Talk’ tell us?: elementary school students’ speaking performance variability and its relation to instructional content. JASTEC Journal 29, 1‐15.

Available from <http://www.notredame.ac.jp/~tkoyama/ytk/>

• Koyama, T. & Yukawa, E.(2011). Validity of the YTK speaking test: construct validity of a performance‐based English y p gspeaking test for elementary school students in Japan. (to appear in Bulletin of Kyoto Notre Dame University, March ,2012).

• 小山哲春 (2009)「小学校外国語活動で可能な「評価」：YTKスピーキングテスト(Let’s Talk)の試み」『英語教育』第58巻第4号, pp.30‐31.

40

5.4 Study 1: Findings from the initial trial (AY2006)

1. Able to manage the conversation

2. Very good pedagogical tool, especially for th il h h d t h d hthe pupils who had not had such an opportunity before

3. Scores vary depending on the pedagogical policy of each school

41

Let’s Talk(full mark= 4

points, Total=20 points)

YTK Listening Test(full mark=80 points)

Total Mean S.D.

Table 5.4.1 Results of Let’s Talk in 2008

42

A School 15.97 62.89 9.84

B School 15.44 64.42 11.13

C School 14.17 68.85 7.88

D School 15.68 71.78 5.94

j School 12.38 62.42 8.75

2011/11/20

8

5.5 Study 2: Instructional intervention to improve conversation performance

Research question 1:

Does an instruction specifically designed for communication gmanagement skills improve the performances in Let’s Talk?

(Yukawa, Koyama & Takanashi, 2009-2010)

43

Instructional intervention:

InterventionＡＹ 2007Let’s Talk

ＡＹ 2008Let’s Talk

(1) To be able to ASK questions rather than simply wait for being talked to and

(2)To give back‐channeling (“Me, too.” “Nice.” “I see.“ “Interesting.” “Oh, no.”)

44

total phonologyvocabulary

and syntax

attentiveness expressiveness conversational

management

fullmark （20）（4）（4）（4）（4）（4）

RQ1 The performances of Let’s Talk in AY2007 and AY 2008

45

fullmark （20）（4）（4）（4）（4）（4）

AY2007mean 12.38 2.77 2.27 2.75 2.33 2.27

s.d 2.39 .58 .56 .68 .65 .69

AY2008mean 13.63 2.73 2.44 3.08 2.69 2.69

s.d 2.41 .49 .58 .45 .75 .78

t(98) 2.58* .37 1.45 2.85** a 2.58* 2.85**

N = 52(2007 March), N = 48 (2008 March); * p <.05, ** p <.01

Research question 2:

What qualitative differences of communication performances can be seen between students who scored 4’s (full score) and students who scored lower?

46

10

12

14

16

パフォーマンス比較

investigation of difference between ‘3’s and ‘4’s

Comparison of utterance types

47

0

2

4

6

8

4a 4b 4c 4d 4e 4f 4g 4h 4i 3a 3b 3c 3d 3e 3f 2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 2f

4 3 2

自発的発言相づち等Self‐initiated utterances backchanneling

Findings

Conversation practice and teaching strategies(backchanneling, initiating a conversation) –useful to some extent

However knowledge of basic words andHowever, knowledge of basic words and expressions is indispensable

Unless we see pupils’ performance we cannot detect their feat or agenda for further improvement

48

2011/11/20

9

Putting all the assessment results altogether

What can 6th gradersWhat can 6th graders achieve through

elementary school English?

49

1. Pupils learn most words/expressions at the receptive level- helpful training wheels for secondary school English

2. The most valuable learning- the experience of having used English for communication and knowing that they are capable to do it

50


framework






51

6.1 Do JHS 1st year students’ motivation decline?

JHS students’ motivation for learning English declines in the middle of their first yearthe middle of their first year

(Koizumi & Matsuo,1993; Yamamori, 2004; Benesse, 2009)

52

Koizumi and Matsuo (1993)

Decline by June or October, and then stabilize

Yamamori (2004)“Motivated students” 96% 61% over a yearyear

Benesse (2009, p.54) The most motivated period- beginning of the 1st

year

Started to feel English is difficult- latter half of the 1st year

53

Do JHS 1st year students’ motivation decline?

Mixed results:

K School - decline

F School - keep or go up

S School - slight decline?

H School - keep

54

2011/11/20

10

4

4.5

Practicality of English

Desire for acquiring practical English skills

International posture

Confidence in English

1st year September

1st year March

K School(Public)

55

2

2.5

3

3.5

2010. Sep. 2011. Mar.

g

Desire for doing well in English

Satisfaction with English lessons

Smooth transition of positive image

Study behavior

4

4.5 Practicality of English




F School (Private)

1st year July

1st year December

1st year March

56

2

2.5

3

3.5

2010 Jul. 2010 Dec. 2010 Mar.

g




Study behavior

Self assessment of achievement

4.0

4.5

5.0

Practicality of English



1st year April

1st year July

1st year September

1st year December

S School(Private)

(Yoshida, 2011)

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

2010 Apr. 2010 Jul. 2010 Sep. 2010 Dec.





4.0

4.5

5.0

Goal of learning English (n=106)

1st year April

1st year July 1st year

December

1st year March

H School(Private)

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

2009 Apr 2009 Jul. 2009 Dec. 2009 Mar.

Desire for doing well in English (n=96)

Smooth transition of positive image (n=61)

58(Yukawa, Koyama & Sugimoto, 2010)

ConclusionI discussed today only the following:

1. Assessing pupils’ communication abilities and attitude

2. Considering the significance of their achievement and how to realize the continuity from elementary to secondary schools

59

Conclusion: Summary 1Assessing pupils’ communication abilities and

attitude

Pupils are developing formal Pupils are developing formal knowledge to the extent that we should not ignore;

Pupils can converse in English if scaffolding is provided

60

2011/11/20

11

Conclusion: Summary 2Considering the significance of their achievement

and how to realize a good transition from elementary to secondary schools

Pupils’ experience of language use and their feeling of accomplishment is valuable

Good transition is possible, but we need more work and research

61

Only a few pieces of a big puzzleBut

Hope they were helpful

62

Thank you!

Contact: [email protected]

YTK Project papers & plenary slides available at

<http://www.notredame.ac.jp/~tkoyama/ytk/>

ReferencesBachman, L.F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Canale. M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. C.

Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds), Language and communication. (pp.2-27). Essex, UK: Longman.Canale, M., Cody, M., & Manusov, V. (2000). Interpersonal communication: A goals-based approach

(2nd ed.). New York: St. Martin’s Press.Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (Eds.). (2009). Motivation, language identity, and the L2 self. Bristol, UK:

Multilingual Matters. Enever, J. (2010). “A global revolution? Teaching English at primary school” A British Council

seminar delivered on November 5th, 2010. Retrieved November 11. 2011 from http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/seminars/a-global-revolution-teaching-english-primary-school

Hyltenstam, K. & Abrahamsson, N. (2003). Maturational constraints in SLA. In: C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp.539-588). Oxford: Blackwell.

Johnstone, R. (2002). Addressing “The Age Factor”: Same Implications for languages Policy. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

Koizumi, R., & Matsuo, K. (1993). A longitudinal study of attitudes and motivation in learning English among Japanese seventh-grade students. Japanese Psychological Research, 31, 1, 1-11.

Koyama, T. & Yukawa, E. (2011). Validity of the YTK speaking test: construct validity of a performance-based English speaking test for elementary school students in Japan. (to appear inBulletin of Kyoto Notre Dame University, March, 2012).

63

Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, M. H. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. New York: Longman.

Luoma, S. (2004). Assessing speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Muñoz, M. (2009). Input and long-term effects of early learning in a formal setting. In M. Nikolov

(Ed.), The age factor and early language learning. (pp.141-160). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Nikolov, M. (2009). The age factor in context. In M. Nikolov (Ed.), The age factor and early language

learning. (pp.1-38). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Spitzberg, N. H.(1995). Conversational skills rating scale: An instructional assessment of interpersonal

competence. Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.Vigotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. New York: Wiley.Wertsch, J.V.(1998). Mind as action. New York: Oxford University Press.Yamamori, K. (2004). Durability of the will to learn English: A one-year study of Japanese seventh

graders. Japanese journal of Educational Psychology, 52, 71-82.Y hi T (2002) Willi i i d l Th J M dYashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese context. Modern

Language Journal, 86,55-66.Yashima, T. (2009b). International posture and the ideal L2 self in the Japanese context. In

Dörnyei, Z., and E. Ushioda, E. (Eds.), Motivation, language identity, and the L2 self .(pp.144-163). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Yoshida, H. (2011). Japanese Seventh Graders’ English Language Achievement and Motivation. On Language and Language Education –An anthology of selected research papers submitted in the academic year of 2010 to the graduate school of language education and information science, Ritsumeikan University, 4, 107-141.

Yukawa, E., Koyama, T., & Takanashi, T. (2009-2010). What does 'Let's Talk' tell us?: elementary school students' speaking performance variability and its relation to instructional content. JASTECJournal, 29, 1-15.

Yukawa, E., Koyama, T., & Sugimoto, M. (2010). An exploratory study on junior high school students’ affective state and their perceived success in class. Paper presented at Asia TEFL, Hanoi, Vietnam, August 5-9, 2010.

64

日本語文献

小山哲春 (2009) 小学校外国語活動で可能な「評価」：YTKスピーキングテスト(Let’s Talk)の試み『英語教育』第58巻第4号, pp.30-31

バトラー後藤裕子 (2004-2005) 小学校英語：評価をめぐる課題『日本児童英語教育学会 (JASTEC)研究紀要』第24号, pp.1-18

ベネッセ教育研究開発センター (2009)「第１回中学校英語に関する基本調査報告書【教員調査・生徒調査】」http://benesse.jp/berd/center/open/report/chu_eigo/hon/pdf/data_06.pdf より2011年11月11日ダウンロード

文部科学省 (2007)「平成19年度小学校英語活動実施状況調査のまとめ」http://www.pref.tottori.lg.jp/secure/296303/tyousa-syou.pdfより2011年11月11日ダウンロード

文部科学省 (2008)「小学校学習指導要領解説外国語編」http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education/micro_detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2009/06/16/1234931_012.pdfより2011年11月11日ダウンロード

文部科学省 (2009a)『英語ノート１』文部科学省

文部科学省 (2009b)『英語ノト２』文部科学省文部科学省 (2009b)『英語ノート２』文部科学省

八島智子 (2009a) 動機づけからみた小学校の英語活動湯川笑子・バトラー後藤裕子(編著）『小学校英語活動必修化のためのカリキュラム、教材、教え方』公開研究会報告書 pp.42-54

湯川笑子 (2007) 中学校進学前の生徒の英語リスニング力『小学校英語教育学会紀要』第8号, pp.29-36湯川笑子・高梨庸雄・小山哲春・川中尚 (2008) 小学校英語活動における評価ツールの活用『小学校英語教育学会紀

要』第9号, pp.55-70湯川笑子・高梨庸雄・小山哲春 (2009)『小学校英語で身につくコミュニケーション能力』三省堂

65

Documents

YTK Project YTK team’s intereststkoyama/ytk/Download/PPT/2011_JALT...2011/11/20 3 By starting younger take advantages of bothof these learner characteristics 13 2.4. MEXT’s stress