Benefits of Active Learning in English Classes for Japanese Students
日本人学生向けの英語授業におけるアクティブラーニングの効用
Brian SOUTHWICK
N o b u e I N O U E
ブライアン サウスウィック
井 上 信 恵
Abstract
The Japanese government has placed increasing emphasis in recent years on an active model of learning, as distinct from the conventional passive paradigm, at the primary, secondary, and tertiary level. In classrooms informed by active design, teachers are facilitators rather than dispensers of knowledge, while students are discoverers or creators of meaning as opposed to empty vessels. This paper describes active learning projects undertaken in English language classes that incorporate debates, presentations, and role-plays, and discusses the feedback we have received from Japanese students. Based on the survey results, we conclude that active learning is an effective educational method that would help students improve their English. Keywords: active learning, active learning for English learners in Japan, debates, presentations, role-plays 昨今、日本政府は初等・中等・高等教育において、従来の受身型授業に変わる、アクティブラーニ ング式の学びを重視するようになってきている。アクティブラーニングでは、教員は知識を単に伝 えるのではなくファシリテーターとなり、学生は単に受身の存在としてではなく、学びの意味を発 見したり考案したりすることが求められる。本論文は、ディベートやプレゼンテーション、ロール プレイを活用したアクティブラーニング型の英語授業に関する、日本人学生から得られたフィードバッ クについて論じるものであり、調査の結果、アクティブラーニング型の授業は学生の英語力向上に 効果的な教育的手法であることが結論付けられた。 キーワード：アクティブラーニング、日本における英語学習者を対象としたアクティブラーニング、 ディベート、プレゼンテーション、ロールプレイ
As reported by Fiske (1983), Japanese education is orientated around factual knowledge, such as the dates of battles in history and formulas in science. While a curriculum that requires students at all levels to master a great deal of factual material assures a high level of general competence (Fiske 1983), Japanese people have a reputation of being less creative and individualistic due to an educational system that emphasizes memorization and rote learning (Ishikida, 2005). Therefore, the Japanese education system has been often criticized for focusing on cramming knowledge, at the expense of critical thinking (Osumi, 2016).
Consequently, Japanese education today encourages an active learning approach at primary, secondary, and tertiary levels in order to improve teaching methods. For example, the education ministry’s outline of the new courses for primary and secondary education defines the concept of active learning as autonomous and cooperation-based learning aimed at identifying and solving problems (“Much potential,” 2015); and it is recommended that universities should shift their educational paradigm by incorporating active learning methods that would allow students to learn proactively in order to further expand and improve the strengths that were cultivated through high school (Central Council for Education [CCE], 2014).
The term active learning, however, has been used in Japan only recently (Ito, 2017). Kan Suzuki, who holds professorships at The University of Tokyo and Keio University, argues that Japanese traditional teaching methods are focused on rote memorization and thus, the mindset of teachers should be changed and relevant supports should be provided to them in order to encourage active learning in Japan’s education system (Hilton, 2016). In particular, although the pedagogic term active learning frequently appears in university syllabi and textbooks (McMurray, 2018), there appears to be lack of research into the effectiveness of active learning approaches in terms of English teaching for Japanese students.
For these reasons, we have decided to identify whether active learning actually helps Japanese students develop their English language skills. We believe that exploring the potential benefits of active learning in the classroom will help English teachers create an optimum language learning environment for students struggling with learning English due to Japanese traditional teaching methods.
Literature Review
Benefits of Active Learning
While active learning has received considerable attention over the past years, attracting strong advocates among those who regard it as an alternative to traditional teaching methods, skeptical faculty considers active learning as just another in a long line of educational fads (Prince, 2004); and the term has never been precisely defined in educational literature (Bonwell & Eison, 1991).
Nevertheless, it is generally agreed that active learning places greater emphasis on developing students’ skills and exploring their own attitudes and values, rather than transmitting information (Bonwell & Eison, 1991); and teachers act as facilitators who check that learning has taken place, rather than being instigators (British Council, n.d.; Cambridge Assessment International Education [CAIE], 2017). In other words, active learning is the opposite of passive learning where learners receive and recall information without applying or practicing what they have learnt (British Council, n.d.; Shuchi, 2017).
As reported by Gholami, Moghaddam, and Attaran (2014), research findings have advocated that a suitable learning environment is not passive but active; and numerous researchers have claimed that active learning is necessary in the classroom (Bonwell & Eison, 1991). First, active learning develops learners’ autonomy and gives them greater involvement in the process and control over their learning (British Council, n.d.; CAIE, 2017; Morris, 2016). Second, because active learning creates personal connections to the material for students (“Active learning,” n.d.), students would be more motivated to learn by actively engaging in learning activities than being passive in the classroom (Agbatogun, 2014).
For these reasons, active learning fosters students’ understanding rather than rote learning of facts (CAIE, 2017), clarifies unclear points to enhance their understanding of the lessons (Gholami et al., 2014), and helps learners retain information and knowledge more effectively and make links to existing knowledge (British Council, n.d.).
In the context of the college classroom, Bonwell and Eison (1991) defined active learning as anything that “involves students in doing things and thinking about the things they are doing” (p. 2). More specifically, active learning is a participative classroom approach that involves learners in the learning process of finding out, solving problems, discussing, and analyzing by building knowledge and understanding in response to learning opportunities provided by their teachers, rather than simply watching, listening, and taking notes (Agbatogun, 2014; British Council, n.d.; CAIE, 2017); and students are engaged in activities, such as reading, discussing, and writing, and involved in higher-order thinking including analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, instead of listening passively (Bonwell & Eison, 1991).
In other words, active learning is associated with student-centered or learner-centered learning that requires students to play an active role, while the teacher’s role is less dominant and he/she helps students meet their goals by guiding, facilitating, assisting, and evaluating as an activator of learning, not an instructor (CAIE, 2017; Griffith & Lim, 2010; Harizaj, 2015; Shuchi, 2017). It is therefore generally contrasted with the teacher-centered approach, which is seen as authoritarian and hierarchical and encourages rote learning and memorization without any real understanding (Clifford, 2015).
lead to measurable improvements in students’ academic performance, attitudes towards learning, and persistence in programs (Froyd & Simpson, 2008). In particular, Griffith and Lim (2010) suggested that student-centered classrooms significantly motivate and engage students and provide them with an opportunity to expand their knowledge beyond the original context and the classroom, and thus students communicate in English with others and become more independent and interdependent in their learning. For these reasons, active learning is believed to be an effective teaching method for English language learners.
Active Learning and Course Design
Bonwell (n.d.) pointed out that a faculty using active learning strategies might face several obstacles because he/she may not feel self-confident and in control of the class and possess needed skills, or others may not view them as teaching in an established manner. In addition, students might resist non-lecturing approaches, which are unfamiliar to them, and thus might not participate actively, learn course content sufficiently, use higher order thinking skills, or enjoy the experience (Bonwell, n.d.).
Nevertheless, Bonwell (n.d.) suggested that active learning strategies can be successfully adopted by gradually incorporating teaching strategies that increase student activity level. More specifically, active learning can be successfully adopted in classrooms by group work, carefully planned learner-focused questioning, and instruction involving whole-class interactions, instead of the teacher just lecturing students (CAIE, 2017).
Furthermore, even though active learning can take place with both individual and group work, it is often most effective when learners work together (i.e., pair or group work) to undertake a task (British Council, n.d.). Paulson and Faust (n.d.) explained that grouping students in pairs provides them with an opportunity to state their own views, to hear from others, and to hone their argumentative skills and makes each student accountable and engaged. As for group work, Paulson and Faust (n.d.) explained that students working in groups will help each other to learn thanks to cooperative learning, which refers to the subset of active learning activities performed in groups of three or more, rather than alone or in pairs.１ Consequently, active learning allows
students to practice important skills, such as collaboration through pair and group work, and builds their self-esteem through conversations with other students (“Active learning,” n.d.). Another thing to consider is that active learning is beneficial in that it is stimulating and intellectually exciting and helps learners keep engaged and enthusiastic (Morris, 2016). The relevant literature gives several examples of learning exercises promoting such active learning approaches, including debates, role-plays, and presentations (see Bonwell & Eison, 1991; Paulson & Faust, n.d.). First, debates have several benefits for students regardless of the format (Bonwell & Eison, 1991), which include motivating students and developing students’
oral communication skills (Schroeder & Ebert, 1983).２ Second, as for role-plays, students get a
better idea of the concepts and theories being discussed by acting out a part (Paulson & Faust, n.d.).３ Last, presentations can form a natural part of task-based learning and are a practical
way to revise and extend book and pair and group work by focusing on a particular language point (Hayton, n.d.); and doing presentations helps students practice all language systems areas (vocabulary, grammar, discourse, and phonology) and language skills (speaking, reading, writing, and listening) and build confidence (Hayton, n.d.).
These findings indicate that a faculty would be able to adopt active learning approaches effectively into the English language classroom through pair or group work for debates, role-plays, and presentations.
Methodology
This study was conducted in two English courses (English Conversation and English for Tourism) for freshmen during the Academic Year 2016/17 and a special orientation program called Schooling held in March, 2017 for high school seniors admitted to our university for the academic year beginning April 1, 2017.４ All participants were classified according to the
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) as either A1 to A2 level or below A1 level.
The methodology for each course/program is summarized in Table 1, whose detailed explanation is given in the following sub-sections.
Course/
Program Academic year (term)a
Activity
(Topic) Format n Data collection methods Data analysis methods English for
Tourism 2016/17 (1st term) Role-plays (travelling abroad)
Group
work 19 Questionnaire Microsoft Excel 2016/17
(2nd term) Presentations (inbound tourism)
Group work 18 2016/17
(2nd term) Role-plays (inbound tourism)
Group work 17 English
Conversation 2016/17 (1st term) Debates (Olympics) Group work 9 Free responses Content analysis Schooling 2016/2017
(2nd term) Presentations Pair work 11 Questionnaire 7 Free responses Microsoft Excel Content analysis Table 1
Summary of Methodology for Each Course/Program
Note. N = 39. Nineteen students completed the questionnaire for role-plays and/or presentations in English for Tourism; nine students wrote their feedback on debates in English Conversation; and 11 students who participated in Schooling completed the questionnaire for presentations, seven of whom wrote their feedback on the activity.
English for Tourism (Role-plays and Presentations)
‘English for Tourism -Basic-’ (ISBN: 978-4-384-33437-1) edited and written by the Center for Tourism English Proficiency Test has been selected as a textbook for the English for Tourism course.５ The first 11 units, whose focus was on travelling abroad (outbound), were covered
during the first semester (Spring 2016). Students (n = 19) worked in pairs or groups outside of class and created their own script regarding travelling on the basis of the textbook’s units, and then acted out role-plays in class as part of their assessment in July 2016.
The remaining 12 units taught during the second semester (Fall 2016/17) dealt with foreigners’ travelling in Japan (inbound). Some of the units included a dialogue or a passage about traditional Japanese facilities, such as ryokan (Japanese-style hotels) and onsen (Japanese hot springs). Students (n = 18) worked in pairs or groups outside class hours and prepared a presentation about Japanese culture intended for foreign travelers, and delivered a group presentation in class in December 2016, as part of their assessment for the second semester (Fall 2016/17).６ In addition, students (n = 17) did role-plays regarding foreign travelers in Tokyo on
the basis of the script they created in pairs or groups outside class hours, in front of the class in December 2016 as another part of their assessment;７ this was based on the last unit related to
sightseeing in Tokyo and conducted in the same way as the previous semester.
At the end of the academic year (February, 2017), a questionnaire as shown in Appendix A was distributed to all freshmen (n = 19) and analyzed by using Microsoft Excel software.
English Conversation (Debates)
Since the Japan Olympic Committee learned of its successful bid to host the 2020 Tokyo Summer Olympic Games, the Games have figured prominently in domestic media, popular culture, and the country’s collective consciousness. ‘Hosting the Olympics Is a Good Idea’ was therefore chosen as the debate topic for its topicality and the likelihood that students had informed opinions on the matter.
The nine first-year students took part in a debate in July, 2016. The debate format was informal, with emphasis placed on group discussion and presentation rather than on the linguistic structures and seating configurations required by the formal style. The lesson plan for the English Conversation course is shown in Appendix B.
After completing the activity, the students were asked to reflect on their experience freely in Japanese. The written responses were translated into English and analyzed by content analysis according to the procedures suggested by Erlingsson and Brysiewicz (2017).
Schooling (Presentations)
As it was the first time for the 11 participants to meet each other, the students introduced themselves briefly in English. They were then placed in three groups at random and played a version of the game Pictionary to encourage thinking about the topic: travel and tourism in Japan. Next, vocabulary slips related to tourism in the participants’ local area were placed on a desk and they selected and took one of the slips based on their interest. Then, the participants prepared short presentations in English on tourism with the help of upper-class student facilitators.８ Students rehearsed their presentations for the teachers and made their
presentations in turn in class.
After the activities, students were asked to complete the questionnaire (see Appendix A) with an additional section encouraging students to reflect freely in Japanese on the active-learning activity; seven of them wrote their feedback on the activity. The questionnaire results were analyzed along with the English for Tourism course by using Microsoft Excel software; and the free responses were translated into English and analyzed by content analysis according to the procedures suggested by Erlingsson and Brysiewicz (2017) in the same way as for the English Conversation course.
Results
Questionnaires (Role-plays and Presentations)
As shown in Table 2, all participants (n = 30) who took part in role-plays and/or presentations for the English for Tourism Course and presentations for the Schooling program checked ‘I felt the activities were better than a typical one at helping me acquire English skills; and no one picked ‘I did not feel the activities were better than a typical one at helping me acquire English skills.’ Furthermore, while four (13.33%) chose ‘I did not feel the activities were more rewarding than a typical one,’ 26 (86.67%) ticked ‘I felt the activities were more rewarding than a typical one.’ As for the difficulty, while 14 (46.67%) students selected ‘I felt the activities were easier than a typical one,’ another 14 (46.67%) chose ‘I felt the activities were more difficult than a typical one.’
Free Responses (Debates and Presentations)
Firstly, one theme was identified for debates conducted in the English Conversation course as shown in Table 3. The theme suggests that although engaging in debates might have been difficult for the participants (n = 9), the activity would be effective for their English learning because they found it enjoyable, beneficial, and motivating.
More specifically, three (Student A, B, C) responded that they were unfamiliar with the activity. For example, Student A wrote, “there are words we don’t ordinarily use in a debate.” In addition, seven students (Student A, B, D, E, F, G, H) felt that the activity was difficult:
“It was difficult to put thoughts into words at the drop of a hat” (Student A).
“Coming up with ideas and then putting them into English was hard work” (Student G). “I felt it was really difficult to express myself in English. There are two sides, pro and con, to a single topic, and expressing an opinion in English requires not only mastering vocabulary but also forming words into sentences” (Student H).
Two of the students (Student A, G) also showed their concerns about the activity. For instance, Student A wrote, “I felt my knowledge of the context was insufficient.”
Nevertheless, three (Student B, C, D) indicated that the activity helped them improve their
Survey items na %
I felt the activities were more rewarding than a typical one. 26 86.67% I did not feel the activities were more rewarding than a typical one. 4 13.33% I felt the activities were easier than a typical one. 14 46.67% I felt the activities were more difficult than a typical one. 14 46.67% I felt the activities were better than a typical one at helping me acquire English skills. 30 100% I did not feel the activities were better than a typical one at helping me acquire
English skills. 0 0%
Codes Categories Themes
Unfamiliarity Participants’ characteristics Difficult yet enjoyable, beneficial, and motivating, thus effective for learning English
Improved speaking skills,
Improved vocabulary Benefits Beneficial, Concerns, Difficulty,
Motivation, Pleasure Perceptions Table 2
Results of the Questionnaire for Role-plays and Presentations
Table 3
Themes with Codes and Categories for Debates
Note. n = 30.
English. For example, Student D wrote, “I was able to remember new words, like going into the red.” Furthermore, four students (Student B, D, F, G) felt the activity was enjoyable, and six students (Student A, B, C, D, G, H) found it beneficial:
“It was beneficial to learn how to express my opinion” (Student A). “I thought it was important to say my opinion” (Student D). “It was a lot of fun, and interesting” (Student G).
“I found that it’s good to speak in a way that the listener finds easy to understand” (Student H). Moreover, two (Student B, E) were motivated to continue the activity:
“I’d like to do this again” (Student B).
“Next time I’d like to be able to express my opinion smoothly” (Student E).
Secondly, one theme was identified for the presentation activity conducted in the Schooling Program as shown in Table 4. The theme suggests that although doing presentations in English might have been difficult for the participants (n = 7), they found the activity beneficial and motivating.
After the activity, one of the seven participants (Student I) felt that “English was very difficult” and another student (Student O) showed concerns about English: “I'm not good at English.”
Nevertheless, two students (Student M, N) felt that the activity was beneficial: “It was beneficial to understand Japanese culture through English” (Student M).
“I felt it was beneficial to make an English presentation even in the short time available” (Student N).
Furthermore, one student (Student K) felt that “it was very rewarding” and two students (Student J, O) showed motivation:
Codes Categories Themes Beneficial, Concerns, Difficulty,
Motivation, Satisfaction Perceptions Difficult yet beneficial and motivating Table 4
“I want to be able to communicate in English” (Student J). “In the future, I want to improve my English skills” (Student O).
Discussion
Overall, the findings are in line with the arguments made by the relevant literature (Agbatogun, 2014; Griffith & Lim, 2010; Morris, 2016). The results show that the participants’ perceptions of active learning activities including debates, role-plays, and presentations were generally positive. The results of both questionnaires and free responses imply that active learning would be effective and beneficial for students learning English. In particular, the identified two themes indicate that students’ motivation increases as a result of the enjoyment they experience through active learning activities. Considering that motivation is a key success factor of foreign language learning (Dörnyei, 1998; Richards & Schmidt, 2010), active learning is believed to help students improve their English. It is also worth mentioning that one of the reasons why the participants’ feedback was positive might be that they worked in pairs/groups and had opportunities to help each other as suggested by “Active learning,” (n.d.), British Council (n.d.), and Paulson and Faust (n.d.).
Nevertheless, the results also suggest that active learning activities might be difficult for some students. Considering that the participants were classified as either A1 to A2 level or below A1 level, while there is merit to the active learning approach, students who are poor at English might be unable to understand the lesson. In this regard, active learning can be enjoyable and beneficial for students in general, yet it can also be challenging for some students, depending on their English proficiency.
Conclusion
Japan’s relatively low English proficiency has been discussed for decades and it seems that how the English language education curriculum should be developed to improve English proficiency remains one of the country’s unresolved mysteries. As a result, incorporating active learning into the classroom seems to have become an educational trend in Japan in order to nurture students who can express themselves well in English.
In order to identify the potential benefits of active learning in the English language classroom, this study explored three types of learning activities (debates, role-plays, and presentations), which are believed to be effective for English language education. It was found that even though active learning activities might be difficult for beginner-level students, they would be beneficial for students from language perspectives because they would motivate students to learn English.
Therefore, instead of relying solely on traditional rote learning methods, it could be suggested that teachers incorporate active learning into their classroom as one of the beneficial teaching methods in English education.
Although this study was an attempt to investigate the potential benefits of active learning in the English language classroom, it has two main limitations that should be addressed. Firstly, this study involved a small sample size of participants with a limited number of instruments (questionnaires and free responses). In particular, the qualitative data for debates and presentations might not have been sufficient. Therefore, future studies should include a wider number of participants and adopt such tools as interviews to explore the participants’ perceptions in depth. Secondly, the methodology for each course/program was not consistent and somewhat problematic. While the English for Tourism course used a questionnaire (role-plays and presentations), the English Conversation course (debates) adopted free responses; and the Schooling program (presentations) adopted both the questionnaire and free responses. In addition, the questionnaire for English for Tourism did not ask whether the participants referred to role-plays or presentations. Future studies therefore should refine the methodology to assess each activity’s effectiveness more accurately.
References
Active learning. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://teaching.cornell.edu/teaching-resources/engaging-students/active-learning Agbatogun, A. O. (2014). Developing learners’ second language communicative competence through active learning: clickers
or communicative approach? Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(2), 257–269. Retrieved from http://www. jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.17.2.257
Bonwell, C. C. (n.d.). Active learning: creating excitement in the classroom. Retrieved from http://www.ydae.purdue.edu/lct/ HBCU/documents/Active_Learning_Creating_Excitement_in_the_Classroom.pdf
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active Learning: creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED336049
British Council (n.d.). ESOL Nexus professional development: energising your ESOL lessons. Retrieved from https://esol. britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/attachments/informational-page/CPD%20Energising%20your%20ESOL%20 Lessons.pdf
Cambridge Assessment International Education. (2017). Active learning. Retrieved from http://www.cambridgeinternational. org/images/271174-active-learning.pdf
Central Council for Education. (2014). On integrated reforms in high school and university education and university entrance examination aimed at realizing a high school and university articulation system appropriate for a new era (Highlights of Report). Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2015/03/31/1353908_1.pdf Clifford, I. (2015, October 7). Do learner-centred approaches work in every culture? Retrieved from https://www.britishcouncil.
org/voices-magazine/do-learner-centred-approaches-work-every-culture
Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 31(3), 117–135. https://doi. org/10.1017/S026144480001315X
7(3), 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afjem.2017.08.001
Fiske, E. B. (1983, July 10). Japan’s schools: intent about the basics. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www. nytimes.com/1983/07/10/world/japan-s-schools-intent-about-the-basics.html?pagewanted=all
Froyd, J., & Simpson, N. (2008, August). Student-centered learning addressing faculty questions about student centered learning. In Course, Curriculum, Labor, and Improvement Conference, Washington DC, 30 (11). Retrieved from http:// citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.526.348
Gholami, V., Moghaddam, M. M., & Attaran, A. (2014). Towards an interactive EFL class: using active learning strategies. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 4(2), 124. Retrieved from http://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/RHSS/ article/view/15780
Griffith, W. I., & Lim, H. Y. (2010). Making student-centered teaching work. MEXTESOL Journal, 34(1), 75–83. Retrieved from http://mextesol.net/journal/index.php?page=journal&id_article=37
Harizaj, M. (2015). Discussion as an active learning in EFL. European Scientific Journal, 11(16). Retrieved from http:// eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/view/5866
Hayton, T. (n.d.). Student presentations. Retrieved from https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/student-presentations Hilton, A. (2016, December 16). Why Japan must ‘change the minds of a million teachers’. Asia Society. Retrieved from
https://asiasociety.org/blog/asia/why-japan-must-change-minds-million-teachers
Ishikida, M. Y. (2005). Japanese education in the 21st century. Retrieved from http://www.usjp.org/jpeducation_en/ jpEdContents_en.html
Ito, H. (2017). Rethinking active learning in the context of Japanese higher education. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1298187. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1298187
Keyser, M. W. (2000). Active learning and cooperative learning: understanding the difference and using both styles effectively. Research strategies, 17(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0734-3310(00)00022-7
McMurray, D. (2018). MEXT’s new course of study guidelines to rely on active learning. The Language Teacher, 42(3). Retrieved from https://jalt-publications.org/articles/24329-mext%E2%80%99s-new-course-study-guidelines-rely-active-learning
Morris, J. (2016, September 15). What is active learning? Retrieved from https://blog.cambridgeinternational.org/what-is-active-learning/
Much potential in new courses. (2015, August 22). The Japan Times. Retrieved from https://www.japantimes.co.jp/ opinion/2015/08/22/editorials/much-potential-new-courses/#.WT5C82h97IU
Osumi, M. (2016, April 14). Global education experts urge Japan to look beyond rote learning. The Japan Times. Retrieved from https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/04/14/national/global-education-experts-urge-japan-look-beyond-rote-learning/#.Wo0gQ6jXbIX
Paulson, D. R., & Faust, J. L. (n.d.). Active and Cooperative Learning. Retrieved from http://www.calstatela.edu/dept/chem/ chem2/Active/index.htm
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. W. (2010). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge.
Schroeder, H., & Ebert, D. G. (1983). Debates as a business and society teaching technique. The Journal of Business Education, 58(7), 266–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219444.1983.10534907
Shuchi. (2017). Conventional versus modern: role of information technology in improving teaching pedagogies. International E-Journal of Advances in Social Sciences, 3(8). https://doi.org/10.18769/ijasos.336982
Appendix A
English Translation of a Questionnaire for Role-plays and Presentations９
Please choose all that apply.
□ I felt the activities were more rewarding than a typical one.
□ I did not feel the activities were more rewarding than a typical one. □ I felt the activities were easier than a typical one.
□ I felt the activities were more difficult than a typical one.
□ I felt the activities were better than a typical one at helping me acquire English skills. □ I did not feel activities were better than a typical one at helping me acquire English skills.
Appendix B
Lesson Plan for the English Conversation Course (Procedures of Debates)
Class Session 1
１． Brainstorming about the topic. The class discussed the topic in this warming-up activity. Each student contributed at least one idea, pro or con, writing it in English or Japanese on the whiteboard.
２． The nine students in the class were assigned at random to two groups.
３． A student was selected by others in the group to act as their representative in a game of Rock, Scissors, Paper.
４． The winning group chose which side to argue in the debate, pro or con.
５． Students were given 30 minutes to draw up the following supporting statements, one per member, for their group’s position.
Group A (Pro):
・Statement 1: The Olympics will allow Japan to promote its culture. ・Statement 2: The country will benefit economically.
・Statement 3: People will become interested in sports and healthy lifestyles. ・Statement 4: International cooperation and friendship will improve. Group B (Con):
・ Statement 1: The Olympics will cause inconveniences in the form of noise pollution and increased waste.
・ Statement 2: Hosting the Games is too expensive. ・Statement 3: Terrorism and security will be a concern.
・Statement 4: Economic benefits will be concentrated in Tokyo.
６． Students were allowed to use electronic dictionaries but not the Internet. ７． Using the template provided, the groups rehearsed with the instructor.
８． The members of the “pro” group stood at the front of the class. The student acting as the group’s presenter read the introductory statement. Group members then read their supporting statements.
９． The members of the “con” group took notes (in Japanese or English) while listening, asking (in English) for clarification as required.
10． With the “con” group speaking and “pro” listening, steps 8-9 were repeated. 11． Students compared notes in their groups.
Class Session 2
１．Either group selected two of its opposition’s four supporting statements for rebuttal. ２．Rebuttals were drafted and presented as follows.
Group A (Pro):
・ Rebuttal to Statement 1: More trash cans can be placed around the city to deal with the problem.
・ Rebuttal to Statement 4: Olympic events can be held outside of Tokyo. Group B (Con):
・ Rebuttal to Statement 1: Focusing on culture, not sports, is the best way to promote the former.
・ Rebuttal to Statement 2: There is a high risk of going into the red from hosting the Olympics, as happened in Athens, Greece.
Footnotes
１ According to Keyser (2000), cooperative learning requires every student in a group to have a role or part to play in order to accomplish the task.
２ The format of debates can range from formal presentation of opposing sides with a chance for rebuttal to less formal presentation of arguments for both sides that serve as the basis for discussion in class (Bonwell & Eison, 1991).
３ Role-play exercises can range from simple roleplaying to complex roleplaying that might take the form of a play (Paulson & Faust, n.d.).
４ Schooling was intended to help newly matriculated students experience university-level lectures and lessons before they officially started their program.
５ Each unit has several dialogues related to travelling, such as checking in at the airport, eating out at a restaurant, shopping, and sightseeing.
６ The number fell from 19 to 18 at this stage because one of the 19 students gained the credit for the English for Tourism course by passing a designated test before the presentation assessment.
７ Another student passed the test to earn the credit for the course, and thus, a total of 17 students participated in the role-play assessment.
８ Five freshman students joined Schooling as paid teaching assistants.
９ As the questionnaire was written in Japanese, this paper shows a translated version. In addition, the questions that were beyond the scope of this study were omitted from the questionnaire.
