• 検索結果がありません。

DSpace at My University: Strategies for Progress in the SELHi Project : Project Leader’s Role

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

シェア "DSpace at My University: Strategies for Progress in the SELHi Project : Project Leader’s Role"

Copied!
14
0
0

読み込み中.... (全文を見る)

全文

(1)

Project Leader’s Role

Hirokazu Nakai

セルハイ・プロジェクト進展方略:プロジェクト・リーダーの役割

Abstract

The Super English Language High School (SELHi) program is one of the measures the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT) formulated in 2003 to promote innovative English education in senior high schools. The results of this project in model SELHi schools are reported in MEXT Forums and others. However, few presentations and papers have summarized and critically evaluated the project leader’s role in the SELHi projects. This paper seeks to fill this gap, reviewing strategies for progress in the SELHi project and pointing out the important roles of the leader.

Key words : ELHi leader’s role P-D-C-A management conceptualization

(Received September25, 2006)

スーパー・イングリッシュ・ランゲージ・ハイスクール(SELHi セルハイ)は、高等学 校の英語教育の改善を図るため文部科学省によって平成14年から始められた施策の一つで ある。セルハイ指定校のプロジェクト成果は、毎年、文科省のフォーラムなどで報告され ているが、セルハイ・プロジェクトの成否を担うリーダーの役割については発表や論考は あまりなされていない。本論文では、そこに視点を置き、セルハイ研究進展の方略やリー ダーの役割について論じる。 キーワード:セルハイ リーダーの役割 PDCA マネジメント 概念化 (2006年9月25日 受理) ― 49 ―

(2)

1 . Introduction

Rapid globalization in various fields of the economy and society has caused English to play a central role as an international language. The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT) recognized Japanese people have an inadequacy in English-speaking ability to communicate and exchange their ideas with foreigners. Therefore in 2002, it initiated the Action Plan to cultivate “Japanese with English abilities” (MEXT 2002), and formulated various measures to promote English ability of Japanese people.

One of the measures is the Super English Language High School (SELHi) program. The MEXT designated model senior high schools to carry out a research project to promote innovative English education in their schools. This is the 5th year since this project started.

What is essential in advancing the research projects is that model schools organize study groups and carry out a management cycle of Plan ― Do ― Check ― Action (P-D-C-A) for their projects. Some projects have been a success, and the success is reported in the MEXT Forums and others, mainly referring to the results of their projects, “Check” in the management cycle. However, few presentations and papers have summarized the “Plan and Do”, how leaders of the project organized and managed the research projects. The project leaders’ roles in SELHi projects influence the results of the project and how they fulfill the purpose and objectives.

This paper describes the leader’s roles and discusses strategies for progress in the SELHi project that the leader should take.

2 . The SELHi Project

SELHi is a three-year project. The MEXT has designated 34 senior high schools (public 25, private 9) in 2006. The total number of SELHi schools is now 100 since the first pilot SELHi schools (14 schools) were designated in 2002. The MEXT is trying to designate 110 model schools by 2007. The budget for 2004 was about 510 million yen (about 4 million US dollars).

Main project research themes studied in SELHi schools up to 2006 are reading-based themes in 18 schools, listening-based themes in 10 schools, writing-based themes in 20 schools, speaking-based themes in 15 schools, integrated themes ; reading & writing in 14 schools, listening & speaking in 13 schools, writing & speaking in 13 schools, others in 94 schools, and indefinite or “fuzzy” themes in 54 schools. (Benesse 2006) Most schools are working on overall themes rather than one specific theme. This shows the projects have been carried out with rather ambiguous goals or objectives.

(3)

3 . Review: Research on SELHi project

The designated SELHi schools report annually to the MEXT on what they have achieved in the year and what problems they have faced. Most SELHi schools have opened their own School Homepages and they present the report of their SELHi project, too. Their results are also introduced on the Internet sites of some publishing companies. So, the teachers in other schools can get information on what the model SELHi schools did in their projects, and this has a good appeal not only for the school advertisement but also for the improvement of high school English education in Japan. However, in most cases they mainly report what they have done, which puts stress on the results.

Researchers have published reports or papers on the contents, the results or the effects of SELHi projects. Yoshida (2005) wrote, “A Comparison of the English Proficiencies of Japanese. (SELHi vs. Non-SELHi), Korean, and Chinese High School Students.” He also reported to the MEXT a study on the standard ability of English proficiency desired in junior and senior high school, and gives presentations on “Can-do effects” in SELHi Forums (2004) and others. Matthew Walsh (2005) wrote, “Experimental Syllabus Design Developed as Part of the SELHi Project : Writing for 11th Graders,” and explains effective teaching methods in writing using “Criterion” software. Porcaro (2005) wrote, “SELHi Classroom Perspectives” and presents his observation of SELHi classes. View 21 Special issue (2005) features the SELHi project. A round-table talk article in the issue describes that the most important concern for senior high school teachers is how they carry out their daily lessons not total-span lessons. Actually, the teachers are busy with daily matters and have little time to view their teaching from the long term perspective. As a result, teachers are at a loss regarding what to plan and do as a research project, so they tend to simply list as many themes as possible without having a clear image as to how they should proceed with their project.

The English Teachers’ Magazine TAISHUKAN features what English lessons are carried out in SELHi. Matsumoto (2006) mentions “Seeking for better SELHi projects” in the preface of the magazine, referring to the teamwork of the projects among the teachers of English. Koike is researching the effects of the SELHi project through a questionnaire to SELHi schools. His group’s interim report (2006) introduced in the magazine tells that teachers are tired of the overload of project work and that with teachers’ inadequacy in understanding the project, ‘demotivation’ to be engaged in the project becomes larger as the project years go on. Some reasons can be pointed out. First, the number of designated model SELHi schools have increased year by year as the program has proceeded. Second, senior high school teachers cannot fulfill their desired goals and they are dissatisfied with the results. Third, their plans are too broad and vague so that they are not sure what they

(4)

Table 1 Changes in S School Teachers through the 3-year Projects (Unit : %, N = 13)

You think. . . strongly

yes Rather yes rather no strongly no

Teachers’ recognition of the project themes has changed. 33.3 50.0 16.7 0

You understood each student’s academic level better than ever. 41.7 41.7 0 8.3

Teachers’ collaboration has improved. 25.0 66.7 8.3 0

Teachers have improved their teaching methods. 33.3 50.0 8.3 8.3

You have satisfaction as a project member more than ever. 0 25.0 41.7 33.3

Your confidence to improve your teaching has increased. 0 75.0 16.7 8.3

Your desire to participate in research or seminars has become stronger. 0 75.0 16.7 8.3

You can express critical opinions to the seminar reports. 8.3 41.7 33.3 16.7

SELHi 3, (2005) need to do. There might be some other reasons as well.

Therefore, it is desirable to examine what the problems are and what is needed for senior high school teachers to carry out SELHi projects. One of the important problems is who the leaders of the projects are and what they should do.

4 . Research : Roles of Leaders

The writer was once a principal at a pilot SELHi School (S School) in Osaka and worked together with the teachers of English to carry out the SELHi project, and then became a SELHi advisor for another Senior High School (OJ School) in their last project year and coached their SELHi project. Now, the writer is an advisor to another SELHi school. These experiences in observing and advising on how planning should be done, lessons should be carried out, the project should be evaluated, and how plans should be revised are sources for this paper’s research evidence, which examines from the inside how the management of a SELHi project matters.

4. 1 Importance of the Leader

SELHi 3 (2005), the report of S School SELHi summarizes some points considered when the project was carried out.

S high school English teachers commented that they understood what they were requested to do in the project and that the collaboration to work together improved. They increased their confidence in their teaching. Furthermore, they want to keep reforming their teaching. However, the teachers did not get much satisfaction from being engaged in the project. They felt rather tired. They enjoyed less sense of achievement.

Generally, the teacher’s first concern is to make innovative lessons. Therefore, they are always thinking how they should manage lessons and prepare for their lessons. The SELHi project asks them to collect data and analyze the data. Unfortunately, they do not have much time to complete all these things. Though their interest in the project increased, they

(5)

felt more dilemmas from not getting enough time to proceed in their research study. The OJ School SELHi Report (2006) reports the teachers’ engagement in the SELHi project ; as follows.

First, the whole school engagement in the SELHi project was not adequate enough. We organized a SELHi project committee, which cannot be recognized to have functioned well. Secondly, the executive committee consisting of representative English teachers was unable to initiate the plan of the project well, so we had ambiguous objectives regarding the whole project. The vague image of the project, without having a clear sense of vision, its purposes and methods resulted in us being lost as to what to do and what kind of data to collect. This is the strongest argument for why we achieved less in the SELHi project than we had expected.

These teacher’s comments suggest that leaders who can organize and advise the project are necessary for the SELHi project.

4. 2 Evaluating the Roles of Leaders through Organization

Figure 1 and Figure 2 (p. 6) show how the two schools above organized the research body. These two schools had a slightly different organization style.

Figure 1 is the SELHi organization of S School. The principal was once a teacher of English, and a teacher’s consultant at the Education Center in Osaka and had knowledge about English Education. Therefore, the principal took the role of the general research management and introduced the comprehensive vision of the project so the teachers could

Figure 1 SELHi Research Organization (S High School)

(6)

understand what they should do. The department chief took the role of a go-between, activating plans and leading the project teachers to the goals. S School had four different themes in the project and had four different section chiefs for the themes. A faculty meeting to share the ideas of the project was held every week with the coordination of the department chief. The department chief informed the staff of the principal’s vision. Sometimes she suggested this is what principal thought best. She sometimes used a somewhat hierarchical management style, a Top-down method.

In contrast, OJ’s SELHi organization was at first not set up well. Years later, they rearranged their organization, which is shown in Figure 2. In this system, the executive chief of the SELHi project was the department chief. The SELHi Executive Committee did not work well. It left all the jobs to the SELHi Project Board Committee. Here, this committee depended on the executive chief. The chief had to think about all the research. Consequently, for about two years, the project teachers were less aware of what they should do and collect as data. The writer became one of the advisers in the last year of the research project, and presented a vision for OJ’s SELHi research and coached the

Figure 2 SELHi Research Organization (OJ)

(7)

executive chief as a special advisor. It was not effective that they had no leader to conceptualize their project.

5 . Results : Points to consider Leader’s Role in SELHi project

5. 1 Designing project

One of the biggest problems in SELHi research projects is that senior high school teachers are not well trained in how to plan the research objectives, design the research approaches and evaluate the research statistics for analysis. “Plan” & “Do”, the first and second steps of the management cycle are the keys to starting the research. In most cases the teachers can propose the purposes of the research. However, those are not broken down into clearly understandable or measurable objectives and the teachers lack the ways to fulfill them. The MEXT’s SELHi Plan Data (2006) has a list of the themes and objectives of all the SELHi schools. Some of the themes are so broad that the schools may not be able to focus on what they really need to do, as mentioned “2. the SELHi project” in this paper (p. 2).

If a research objective is at point A in Figure 3, everybody knows what to do and it cannot be recommended as a SELHi research target, because there is no need for the research. SELHi research is required to seek Point X. It is a challenge. The position of Point X varies for each SELHi. What must be researched is how to get to Point X. Therefore, the leaders in research organizations need to have the ability to conceptualize their strategic insights so that the insights become understood by the teachers and open to both challenge and further improvement. Otherwise, the project teachers get lost and lose interest in the research, and no collaboration can be expected.

Planning does not arise automatically. When planning, researchers should have a vision of the whole research project. Without a vision, effective development cannot happen. The vision is the statement of the direction. An image of the desired state or goal

Figure 3 Seeking Goals

(8)

has to be articulated.

In S School’s case, the original plan was not clear enough. The principal, leader of the SELHi project had to conceptualize the image of the research and present the vision to the teachers. It is not easy to establish a perfect vision immediately. The research work needs to be reflected on, and modifications to the vision are essential.

For the conceptualization or visualization of the project, the leader’s jobs require relevant knowledge, understanding, skills and abilities to carry out the work. Therefore, leaders in SELHi projects need to have background knowledge in the project themes areas.

5. 2 Facilitating Collaboration

SELHi projects cannot be done by one teacher, but rather must be done in a team. Therefore, team-work skills, and the ability to coordinate research tasks are necessary. It is very important to organize a project group with an effective communication network. There are two types of communication networks.

Type A organization in Figure 4 has the advantages of quick communication, rapid decision-making, and rapid solutions. However, its week points are that followers can be passive, take less initiative, and be less forward. On the contrary, the good points of Type B organization are high working ethics, shared information, and anyone can be a leader, but this type needs enough time for incubation.

As shown in Figure 1, the SELHi project organization of S School had these two types in its organization. The principal took a Type A leader’s role and the department teacher took a rather Type B leader’s role. This worked well to develop their research in the STLHi project.

In contrast, in OJ’s case, a Type B system was only taken, and it needed a long time to develop a clear vision of their project. The leader type system of OJ’s SELHi project was weaker in proceeding in the research.

As a result, Type A and B leaders relationship and the way the leaders are interacting are necessary to help the project teachers develop their teaching through the creation of

Figure 4 Organization Type

(9)

work place conditions.

6 . Discussion: Different Leadership ―― Skills and Knowledge

Whatever projects we are engaged in, it is necessary for someone to play a role of leader as long as the project is a group work. Leadership involves establishing a direction, a vision of the future and strategies for producing any changes needed to achieve the vision, and communicating the intended direction in words.

In SELHi projects, a principal is usually the head of the SELHi project. The head of the department takes the role of the local leader. Sometimes the principal’s position is only in name, and substantially the department chief looks after all the jobs of the project. As mentioned in OJ’s review report, in the beginning the project teachers failed to have a clear image of the research objectives and how they would work towards the objectives. Two types of leaders are necessary : Type A leader and Type B leader. A Type A leader is a vision maker and also a decision maker, and a Type B leader is an informant of the actual methods of the research activities and also a coordinator. These leaders need to discuss the objectives of the project in detail and also the atmosphere of the project teachers. Both speedy decisions and detailed discussion are required.

In an organization, the working atmosphere and relationships among leaders and colleagues will have a great influence on the quality and the character of the research project. The comparison of the organization of S School and the OJ organization in terms of developing the research showed a difference of whether a Type A leader and a Type B leader work together or not.

The characteristic skills of a Type A leader and a Type B leader must be understood when promoting the staff collaboration. Katz (1974) defined those required skills as follows ; Conceptual skill involves the formulation of ideas. Managers understand abstract relationships, develop ideas, and solve problems creatively. Human skill involves the ability to interact effectively with people. Technical skill involves knowledge of and proficiency in processes or techniques. (Figure 5)

Figure 5 Skill Distributions at Various Management Levels (Robert Katz 1974)

(10)

A Type A leader, who might be in an administrative position, needs to have conceptual skills to oversee the whole project and explain things well. It can be difficult for a Type A leader to maintain a positive view of self with the pressures, conflicts and demands placed on himself. Type A leaders need a strong self-concept to persuade the project teachers to develop the research. This does not mean a Type A leader mandates the project teachers with his or her administrative authority. A top management person should have human skills, too. Lesley Kydd, Lesley Anderson & Wendy Newton (2003) describe that the key to leadership is that it is value-driven and, therefore, in taking a leadership approach to managing people and teams, the leader needs to be clear about his or her own values and how these are demonstrated through the culture and the management practices of the organization.

A Type B leader, who might be a department chief or a project chief teacher, also shares the same quality but this leader needs to have more chances to look after the project teachers. The effective Type B leader will demonstrate good practices by leading with examples which show technical knowledge.

Those two types of leaders working together for the staff development enables the SELHi project to succeed.

7 . Conclusion: Roles Desired for SELHi Leaders

In conclusion, the progress and success of a SELHi project considerably depends on whether the SELHi can organize an effective research group. To establish an effective research organization needs effective leaders to develop the research work. Furthermore, it is desirable that the organization has two types of leaders : Type A and Type B leaders. Through sharing a vision and set of values rather than through rules and procedure, a Type A and Type B leader can play a key role in creating the conditions that enable professional teaching communities to function effectively.

As shown in Figure 6, planning with a vision, goals and ways to reach the goals is the primary task for SELHi Type A leaders. You cannot know how to plan if you do not know what to plan. Therefore, leaders need to have distinct knowledge of the themes as well as

Figure 6 SELHi Type A Leader’s Stategic Planning Tree

(11)

management intelligence and skills. The competence of SELHi leaders (Type A and B) will be required in the following areas ;

1. Sharing ideas : using reports, newsletters, bulletins, notice boards and meetings. 2. Working with the project teachers : developing team-work, coordinating,

encouraging high levels of performance

3. Decision Making : leading to a conclusion, taking action to generate new ideas, appropriate judgment

Reference

Alexander W. Astin (1993), Assessment for Excellence―the philosophy and practice of Assessment and

evaluation in higher education - - , American Council on Education OPYX Press, 46

Beaty, Liz (1995), Unit 10 Working Across the Hierarchy, in Angela Brew (Ed.) Directions in Staff

Development, SPHE and the Open University Press, Bristol, 149

Benesse Edeucational Develpoment Center (2006). SELHi Database View 21 Special issue, from http://benesse.jp/berd/center/open/kou/view21/2006/sp/selhi_database/ index.html Campbell, J. Kyriakides, L., Muijis D., & Robinson, W. (2004), Assessing Teacher Effectiveness―

Developing a differentiated model, Routleedge Falmer New York

Combs, W. A, Miser, A. B, Whitaker, K. S (1999), On Becoming a School Leader―A Person-centered

Challenge-, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria USA, 164, 196

Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 33―85

DuFour, R. & Eaker, R (1998), Professional Learning Communities at Work―Best Practices for Enhancing

Student Achievement, National Educational Service, Indiana

Everard, B. and Morris, G. (1990) Effective School Management, Paul Chapman Publishing, London. Fullan, M. (1993) Change Forces Probing the Depths of Educational Reform, The Falmer Press,

Philadelphia

Goddard, D. & Leask, M. (1992), The Search for Quality ; Planning for improvement and managing

change, Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd. London

Katz (1974). Skills of an effective administrator, Harvard Business Review, September-October 1974, 90― 101.

Koike, Shiina, Midorikawa, Murano, Wakabayashi (2006). SELHi projects interim report, The English

Teachers’ Magazine TAISHUKAN, 64―67

Kotter, J. (1990). Leading Change. Boston : Harvard Business School Press. in DuFour, R. & Eaker, R (1998), Professional Learning Communities at Work―Best Practices for Enhancing Student

Achievement, National Educational Service, Indiana, 81

Kydd, L., Anderson, L. & Newton W. (2003). Leading People and Teams in Education, The Open University,

Matthew Walsh (2005) Experimental Syllabus Design Developed as Part of the SELHi Project : Writing for 11th Graders,

from http://www.walshsensei.org/Selhi2004.pdf#search=%22Matthew%20Walsh%20(2005)%20wrote %2C%20“Experimental%20Syllabus%20Design%20Developed%20as%20Part%20of%20the%20SELHi% 20Project%3A%20Writing%20for%2011th%20Graders%2C”%22

Matsumoto (2006). What English lessons are carried out in SELHi, The English Teachers’ Magazine

(12)

TAISHUKAN, 4―5

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports. Science and Technology [MEXT] (2002). Developing a strategic plan to cultivate “Japanese with English abilities”.

from http://www.mext.go.jp/English/news/2002/07/020901.htm

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports. Science and Technology [MEXT] (2006). Super English

Language High School Plan Data 2006.

Osaka Jogakuin Senior High School (2006). Final Report of SELHi Project, 46―47, 61 Porcaro (2005). “SELHi Classroom Perspectives”, JALT Teacher Education SIG Newsletter,

from http://www.jalt.org/teach/Newsletter_files/PDF_files/Spring2006.pdf#search=%22SELHi%20 Classroom%20Perspectives%22

Robbins, P & Alvy, H. (2004) The New Principal’s Fieldbook―strategies for success-, Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria USA, 34

Roberts, C. (1996), The New Self Help Book for Teachers, WP Press New Zealand Senri Senior High School (2005). SELHi 3, 45, 55, 127―132

Whitaker, P. (1993). Managing Change in Schools, Open University, Philadelphia, 37―38, 112

Yoshida (2005). A Comparison of the English Proficiencies of Japanese (SELHi vs. Non-SELHi), Korean, and Chinese High School Students, Association of Sophian Teachers of English Newsletter 53rd

issue. from http://pweb.cc.sophia.ac.jp/∼yosida-k/%91%E6%82T%82R%8D%86.pdf

(13)

千 里 高 校 の 英 語 授 業 千里高校SELHi研究開発「 国 際人に求められるハイレベルなコミュニケーション能力を有する生徒の育成」 =平成14・15年度の研究開発を元にした平成16年度研究開発の構想図= 研究課題 ハイレベルなコミュニケーション能力を育成する指導と評価のあり方を研究考察する。 (1)リスニング能力の向上と評価 (2) スピーキング能力の向上と評価  (3) 国際交流活動を活用した英語コミュニケーション能力の育成  (4)E-learning の活用による英語コミュニケーション能力育成の教育実践 平成16年度の重点研究課題 ①コミュニケーション能力を育成する評価の工夫  ②生徒の学習意欲を高める評価・フィードバック  ③教材と指導を評価する方法の工夫 ◆学習意欲の分析 ◆成績の分析と今後  の展望 ◆千里診断テストの  改善 研究の整理・総括 指導法・授業方略 ◆平成14年度研究の  まとめ ・年間シラバスまとめ ・千里診断テスト作成 ◆平成15年度研究の  まとめ ・コミュニケーション  能力を高める指導法  と評価のポイント ・平成15年度の各課  題別実践概要報告と  評価等 ◆平成16年度研究の  まとめ ・指導と評価のあり方 ・評価によるフィードバック  のあり方 ◆平成16年度研究の  まとめ ・全体計画の総括 ・改善点の検討 ■到達目標の設定 ■3年間の指導計画の確認 ■年間の指導シラバスの設定 ■英語で進める授業構成 ■スピード感 ・ メリハリのある授業  進行構成 ■コミュニケーション活動がある  授業進行構成 ■コミュニケーション能力育成の指導 ・基本例文音読練習 ・パターン ・ プラクティス ・単文での自己表現 ・並べ替え英作文練習 ・文法 ・ 語 法 ・ 構文説明 ・和文英訳 ・テーマ別ペアワーク ・テーマ別ショートエッセイ書き ・グループトーク ・口頭発表 (個人、グループ代表) ■問いかけのある授業 ■生徒の発話時間を確保する ・オーラル・イントロダクション ・英語による指示 ・語彙練習(発音練習含) ・テープリスニング+設問に解答 ・英語内容把握第2段階問題 (審議+QA) ・コーラス、オーバーラッピング ・シャドウイング+録音 ・精読 (区切り、 文構造、 日本語訳) ・文法 ・ 語 法 ・ 構文説明 ・速読 ・多読 (リーディングマラソン) ・内容に対する短いコメント書き ・場面別ダイアローグ練習 ■年間シラバスの進捗状況点検 ■指導方法の効果点検 ■様々な評価活動の効果の点検 ■意欲を引き出す評価 ■engagementの評価 ■授業観察による関心・意欲・態度  の評価 ・ボーナスポイント制度 ■小テスト・定期テスト・実力テスト  等における到達度評価 ■音声テストによる評価 ■インタビューテスト ■到達目標の再検討 ■指導法 ・ 評価方法の検討 ■授業の状況報告 ・ 総括 ■評価のあり方の検討 ■次年度計画への改善案検討 授 業 実 践 学習環境 (教材と授業形態) ■教材の設定と到達度の評価設定 ■授業のスピード  ・一回の授業で進む量の検討 ■重点的に行うコミュニケーショ  ン活動の設定 ■自宅学習の内容・量・評価方法  の設定 (自学習の促進) ■少人数展開授業の設定 ■ティーム・ティーチング授業  の設定と役割分担検討 ■グループ学習・個別学習導入  の計画 ■LL教室等使用教室の計画 ■E-learning授業の設計 ■ビデオ教材の活用 ■インターネット素材の活用 ■海外TVニュースの活用 ■英字新聞の活用 ■複数の教材の一時間内展開 ■大学教授による模擬授業 ■少人数指導 ■グループ活動 ■ペア活動の促進 ■E-learning ■ALTとのティーム・ティーチ  ング ■教材・到達目標に応じた小テス  ト等の作成 ■到達目標の達成度を見る評価 ■授業観察における生徒への  言葉かけ ■評価活動の課題・回数・時期 ■単独評価・グループ評価 ■ALTとの共同評価 ■担当学年授業者の共同評価 ■生徒の自己評価 ■教材の難易度・生徒の興味関  心のチェック ■授業の進度の検証 ■新教材導入の検討 ■自主教材作成の点検と検討 ■ティーム・ティーチングの効  果分析 ■E-learningの授業の検証 ■音声・映像機器使用の点検 検証 ・ 評価 ◆千里診断テストの  作成 ◆外部模試導入の検  討 ◆アンケート調査事  前実施 ◆千里リスニング診  断テスト ◆千里スピーキング  診断テスト ◆TOEICIP実施 ◆公開授業と協議 ◆運営委員の授業参  観 ◆生徒の学習意欲の  調査 ◆生徒の成績の整理 ◆大学の専門家の意  見聴取 ◆運営委員からの提  言 ◆成果の分析・検証 ゴール:「読む・書く・聞く・話す」の4領域における英語運用能力を高め、説得力・交渉力のあるコミュニケーンを行うことができる

Plan

Do

Check

Action

Appendix: Conceptulized SELHi Project Plans

(14)

地球的視野で主体的に問題解決できる英語コミュニケーション能力育成のための、ディベートを主軸とする総合カリキュラム・指導法の開発 研究 大阪女学院高校 SELHi 研 究 開 発基本構想 研究主題 学年 ・ 学期ごとの明確な英語運用能 力のゴール設定とレビューシステム 学校生活に密着した英語使用環境 の、 総合的な英語力育成 英語指導効率化のためのマルチメ ディア英語教材等の活用 英語情報に対する主体的な判断能力育成のための 英語ディベートの活用 週12時間以上、 年間650時間のリスニ ング時間とリスニング能力育成 ・3 年間に亘る指導の評価 ・ コミュニケーション技能に対す  る自己評価 検 証 検 証 精選教材の整理分析 ・ ジャンルごとの使用状況 ・ 教材の有効性の分析 メディア教材・機器 ・ マルチメディア教材の効果 ・ メディアの活用状況 ・ 情報処理能力 英語使用環境充実分析 ・ 各イベントの実施に関する生   徒アンケート ・ 各イベントにおける生徒の英   語使用状況 生徒へのアンケート ・ 論理的思考を促す内   容のある教材 ・ 地球的視野を育成す   る異文化理解、国際課   題を扱う教材 ・ 英字新聞 ・ 雑誌の活  用 ・ 外国放送番組の活用 ・ コンピュータ教材 ・ 外国人教員による独   自教材の作成 教材の精選 メディア機器 ・ 英語キャンプ ・

Multi Cultural Day

ディベート試合

Guest Speaker's Lec-

 t ure ・ 英語礼拝 ・ 英語朝終礼 ・ 遠足 ・ 文化祭 ・ インターネット等からの   情報検索 ・ プレゼンテーションソ   フトの活用 ・ DTPソフトの活用 英語使用環境充実 Scanning/Skimming の徹底指導 聞き取り、ディクテ ーションの活用 授業で取り入れる活動 生徒からの問いかけ を促すQタイム 時間制限を設けたア クティビティ 意見対立をともなう グループワーク HP・新聞作成等取 材情報の再生産活動 ディベートで養成する生徒の力 ①問題意識 身近な話題から国の内外の諸問題にまで目を 向け、視野の広がりとともにさまざまな問題 意識を持たせる ②情報処理能力 あらゆるメディアの情報から、 必要不可欠なもの を精選し、 分析する情報処理能力をつける ③論理的思考能力 自分の立場を論理的に思考する力を養う ④Qucik Response 相手の意見に注意深く耳を傾け、 論理矛盾を すばやく見抜くともに、 自分の考えをすぐに述べ られるQuick Responseの能力を鍛える ⑤発表能力 効果的なチャート、 図示の活用から、 声量、 テン ポ、 間の取り方を身につける ⑥討論マナーと自信 他者の意見を尊重しつつ、 議論を戦わせること により自己表現に対する自信を養う 授業で取り入れる活動 スピード感ある連続 した問いかけ 他者の発表に対す る評価意見シート の作成 ピンポン・ディベー トの活用 プレゼンテーション の活用 カリキュラム ・学校設定科目による カリキュラム開発 ・各学年の科目バラン ス 達成目標の設定 ・学年・学期・各科目 で求める英語運用能 力のゴールの設定 シラバスの策定 主体的に問題解決する 力を育成する指導シラ バス ・学年・科目間の連携 シラバス ・ディベートの指導シ ラバス ・ライティングの段階 指導シラバス ・定期考査等における 目標達成を測る出題 シラバス リスニング能力 ・授業でのリスニング 練習時間の確保 ・自宅学習でのリスニ ング時間の確保 ・Listening Hourによる リスニング時間の確 保 成績データ分析 ・ 小テストにおける変化 ・ 発表回数の変化 ・ 定期考査の得点分析 ・ OJTEにおける学習意欲 ・ 英語技   能の診断 ・

TOEIC Bridge GTEC成績分析

成果内容の分析 ・ 発表内容の語彙の変化 ・ 発表における意見の集約と変化 ・ 発表における表現方法の変化 ディベートの効果 ・ ディベートに関する指導時間 ・ ディベートで養成する力育成状況 ・ ディベート指導の波及効果 達成目標・指導の検証 ・ レビューシステム ・ 授業内活動ける指導効果分析 ・ 活動の実践量・実践内容と効果 ・ 多様なものの見方や考え方、 公正な判断  力、 豊かな心情 ・国際理解、 国際社会に生きる人間としての  自覚、 国際協調の精神 ・活動や思考などにおいて、 主体となった  働きかけ ・課題の発見、 分析、 評価 ・課題解決の取り組み 教  員  間  の  授  業 ・ 課  題  の  調  整  シ  ス  テ  ム ― 62 ―

Table 1 Changes in S School Teachers through the 3-year Projects (Unit : %, N = 13)
Figure 1 and Figure 2 (p. 6) show how the two schools above organized the research body
Figure 2 SELHi Research Organization (OJ)
Figure 3 Seeking Goals
+4

参照

関連したドキュメント

In March of 2007, the Ishikawa MC Council initiated the Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) project for telephone-CPR. The project included the following: 1) a standardized manual

[Publications] S.Kanoh,M.Motoi et al.: "Monomer-isomerization, Regioselective Cationic Ring-Opening Polymerization of Oxetane Phthalimide Involving Carbonyl

This product includes software developed by the OpenSSL Project for use in the OpenSSL

Let us consider a switch option, the payoff of which at maturity is set to equal the value at that time of an investment project with possible entry and exit.. The underlying

The Beurling-Bj ¨orck space S w , as defined in 2, consists of C ∞ functions such that the functions and their Fourier transform jointly with all their derivatives decay ultrarapidly

Let us consider a switch option, the payoff of which at maturity is set to equal the value at that time of an investment project with possible entry and exit.. The underlying

2010年小委員会は、第9.4条(旧第9.3条)で適用される秘匿特権の決定に関する 拘束力のない追加ガイダンスを提供した(そして、

The fundamental input of the project is the recognition that Tomita–Takesaki modular theo- ry (the “heart” of equilibrium quantum statistical mechanics) can be reinterpreted as a way