Job Discussion Forums

[PAULH]

(This was recently posted on the ELTnews website)

In Defense of EIKAIWA


by Tony DePrato (written in March 2004)
September 2004

What is Eikaiwa?
In Japan, Eikaiwa is the Japanese name given to the English Conversation Schools which exist through out the entire country. These schools are privately owned for-profit-organizations.

What are some examples of Eikaiwa companies?
As of 2004, the largest and most popular Eikaiwa schools are Nova, ECC, GEOS, and. AEON. However, there are numerous other smaller schools which exist in almost every average sized community in Japan.

What are the main criticisms of the Eikaiwa industry?
There are many ways to approach this topic. Alls schools are slightly different, but there are some similarities. Looking at the topic of criticism from an educational perspective is the path I have chosen for this essay.

Eikaiwa schools have no formal way to certify or accredit themselves. They also do not keep or make public records regarding student performance. In fact many students simply study as a hobby and do not care about their overall education. Therefore the schools are usually considered to be 59% Entertainment and 41% Education.

To reflect this fact, most schools will hire anyone meeting the very basic requirements set forth by the Japanese Government. These requirements are:
A Passport from a native English speaking country
English must be the individuals first language
A BA of any type from an accredited college


This hardly qualifies someone to be a competent teacher or even mentor to students of English.

Finally, most of the people managing Eikaiwa schools and developing curriculums do not have a background in education. Many of them are Japanese nationals or former Eikaiwa teachers. Their resumes usually include ESL training in the form of certifications earned within Japan. These certifications are not transferable to the United States (I do not know about other countries), and they cannot be used to apply for US teaching certificates.

As an educational professional, how can you defend this type of industry?
Eikaiwa itself cannot be defended, but teachers within the system need a positive voice. They should not be stereotyped and pigeonholed in a negative context for working at an Eikaiwa school. As a matter of fact, Eikaiwa teachers probably can manage classes and develop materials better than most "professional teachers", if those said teachers have been working in a good Eikaiwa environment. Not to mention the fact that their (Eikaiwa teachers) communication skills and ability to work cross-culturally far exceed that of most people- regardless of industry or profession. To push forward this point, focused needs to be shifted to those who are criticizing the Eikaiwa system: The Institutions of the United States Educational System at home and abroad.

How different are they?
There are numerous books, essays, documentaries, etc, which document the incredible faults of the United States Education system. Some of the books which I have personally studied include:
"Savage Inequalities", by Jonathan Kozol
"The Book of Learning and Forgetting", by Frank Smith
"Experience and Education", by John Dewey
"The Children�s Machine", by Seymour Papert
"Growing Up Digital", by Don Tapscott


These books all address similar problems: teachers who have degrees and certification, but seemingly cannot teach or hate teaching; poor administration with little or no training in educational administration; improperly managed projects and budgets due to a lack of proper professional training; and finally curriculums which are not designed for the students, but often dictated by text books and text book companies.

When put side-by-side the US Public Education System and the Japanese Eikaiwa School System are very similar.

It is true that to get a job in the US a schoolteacher must possess a degree that demonstrates a completion of specific course work and a teaching certificate in one or more areas of expertise. However, this clearly does not mean the teacher is prepared to teach. Why? Because the teacher was probably educated in the same poor education system which they are now working in.

So does this mean that all public school teachers in the United States or US accredited international schools are bad teachers? Of course not! The same is true about Eikaiwa teachers.

The point of this essay is not to truly defend Eikaiwa. It is to help organizations outside of the Eikaiwa system to understand how to tell the difference between a teacher who is a professional working in Eikaiwa and one who is simply working in Japan.

So how can an organization know the difference between these two types of Eikaiwa teachers?
There are many skilled people working in Eikaiwa who have the proper teaching credentials and education to move in "mainstream education", but many US accredited schools will not count Eikaiwa teaching as experience. Therefore, good teachers often get passed over for others who have been working in traditional environments. If you are an organization who has in the past not accepted Eikaiwa teaching experience, please carefully read the list of candidate questions you should have asked or should be asking in the future.

Class Planning

Did you prepare your own lessons? If so, how much time were you given per week to develop materials etc?
Was your curriculum strictly dictated or was it flexible?
Were you allowed to help plan the curriculum based on the needs of students?
As a teacher what resources did you have available for planning classes and making materials?


Class Structure

Did you teach the same classes every week with the same students?
How long was each class and how many times a month did most students come?
Were you allowed to assign homework or special work for students with unique problems?
How many students were in each class and how were those students selected for those classes?
How long did the average student study at your school: one year, two years etc?
Did your school have special classes for grammar, pronunciation, business communication, etc?
How were your lessons structured? For example: A different topic each week; a reinforcement-based system which spanned a week, month etc; open structure with very little preparation; topics were student driven; or the textbook(s) determined the order.


Training and Development

Did your school cover the cost of and provide time for you to attend seminars or certification courses?
Did you have regular staff meetings with the entire school, including management and Japanese staff?
Did your school encourage and support your studying of the Japanese Language?
Did you have fairly regular conversations with students or the guardians of students concerning their education?


School Reform and Change

Was it possible to for you to create and or change an existing school policy by going through the proper channels? If so how long would you say a fairly simple change would take to be implemented?
Did you have regular access to all school administrators and personnel?
Were you given time to work on school projects, such as curriculum development, during working hours?
Were students who misbehaved in anyway scolded by the school or even removed from the school?


If an individual has been working at an Eikaiwa school that was focused on education, then most of the questions will be answered "Yes + details". In my experience, the entertainment-based schools do not allow teachers very much freedom. And those schools do not in anyway support training and development outside of their own proprietary environments. Therefore, teachers from entertainment based schools will answer "No +details" to most of these questions or "Yes + very sparse or shallow details".

As someone who is at least well educated in and well read in the realm of education and theory, I beckon to all organizations to consider these questions as a test of a former Eikaiwa teacher�s experience. Please do not assume that all people and schools are the same. Consider the uniqueness of what an individual may have done with their lives.

And then consider that the most important thing is that a new member of any group be walking the same path as the entire organization. It should not matter if they are wearing different shoes.

[Glenski]

[Eric]

I was previously an Elementary School teacher for three years and now I am an Ekiwa sensei. I believe one major difference between Elementary school teaching and teachers and Ekiwa schools is the issue of accreditation of both schools and teachers.

When I taught elementary school I was trained by a mentor teacher for 6 months which is average along with my coursework and had to indepentently teach the class and plan lessons under supervision to recieve my accreditation. While teaching it is a given that all co-workers have gone through the same process and understand the same methodology when it comes to teaching what you teach. Instructors were required to keep accurate records and if student progress was not achieved or documented the teacher would possibly lose accreditation. All children were to achieve standards that were set by the state and while there are definately problems with the American school system for a variety of reasons these problems are carefully looked at and schools and principals may lose accreditation do to undesired teaching.

As an ekiwa sensei I was trained for a week and was not required to show any teaching ability or credentials what so ever. The teaching is wonderful for a public school teacher in an ekiwa school because of incredibly small class sizes and motivated children. My public school kids were required by law to be there while my students now have parents who are usually concerned about what their children are learning because of the amount of money they pay.

My hope as an English teacher is that eventually there will be a system of accreditation for the ekiwa schools and teachers. I believe if this was too happen the standard of teaching in Japan would go up.

[AsiaTraveller]

[PAULH]

[GambateBingBangBOOM]

[AsiaTraveller]

Thanks, Paul.

[guest of Japan]

I'm in agreement with Glenski. I've taught in public schools, an eikaiwa, and in two Japanese High Schools. None of the three compare.

Eikaiwas are the most dissimilar of the three. Almost anyone with a good and energetic personality and the ability to communicate well can quickly become an effective conversation school teacher. It takes years to become an effective teacher in the public schools.

Conversation teachers teach to small groups of motivated students. There is absolutely zero longitudinal planning, no serious student evaluations. Public education has a slew of important issues to be considered every day. A conversation teacher just whips together a lesson based on overly prescibed perameters and presents it again and again.

I'm not saying that eidaiwa teaching isn't hard work. I also think it is a valuable teaching experience. However it does not compare to actual public school teaching in any way. It's better than having no experience, and certainly adds an international element to a cantidates background, but that first year teaching in a public school is still going to be a first year experience.

[Eric]

I see the point about not having enough teachers as well as the logistical problems of hiring only certified teachers for eikaiwa not ekiwa schools. I wonder though, if it would be possible to one day beef up the quality of the eikaiwa schools by having certification programs and changing the schools so they are a little more standards and performanced based.

I also completely agree with Guest in Japan:s point about language school teaching being a completely different ball game then high school or elementary school teaching.

[PAULH]

[Eric]

Good points Paul. I appreciate your feedback.

As you pointed out it will probably never happen, however the way that accreditation might work is through an accrediting body that schools could belong to that would self govern. In my graduate work I belonged to the America Speech and Hearing Association which had a set of guidelines known as the professional code of conduct for therapists to follow and suggestions to how therapy could work.

It might be possible however unlikely for schools to belong to an organization like ASHA that would ensure that schools and their teachers were up to a certain level of performance. This way if the student studies for a week and then quits or six months he/she knows that the teacher understands what they are doing and is carefully planning goals for student improvement. The Japaneese government would have nothing to do with the accrediting body of teachers, but this body could be recognized. The advantage is that teachers would know what to expect as professionals and students would come to schools with an understanding that they can trust their teachers.

All the points that were brought up about the difficulties with logistics make sense to me and I know my accrediting idea is a little crazy.

[PAULH]

Eric,

this is of course assuming you have people teaching English in Japan actually having to pass a test or show they are competent and professional language teachers before they are let loose on students. therapists have to be certified. Lawyers have to pass the bar exam. Electricians and plumbers have to be certified before they get their trade ticket. All you need in Japan is a valid work visa. Many teachers here have no degree but no more than a high school education and a spouse visa. This is not to say they are bad teachers, but there are no guidelines for what constitutes acceptable teaching and decide who should be able to get a teaching job and who should. Virtually any Tom, Joe and Harry can get a job here at the moment.

When you say that teachers are professional you also assume that eikaiwa teachers treat their jobs in that way. I do know that in Australia TESOL teachers need to have CELTA or Trinity qualifications, have experience and to my knowledge be registered with some TESOL organisation that accredits teachers (I have seen the acronym when applying for teaching jobs in Australia)



Many are just here to savor the culture, pay for their OE in Asia, or maybe they have just arrived here a spouse to support. I have even seen some who are non-native speakers or have skills in IT andf say it they cant find a job they will 'teach English'. Its like the job of last resort for many.

Some are not particularly enamored of teaching TESOL, working for NOVA and GEOS but it pays the bills and pays off the student loans. There are 'professional' and serious teachers teaching in eikaiwas, but they tend to make up the minority, unfortunately. At las count about less than 10% of JET applicants have formal ESL qualifications or formal teaching experience. 'Professional' doesnt necessarily mean simply being eager and earnest teachers as well- like the other professions one needs proper training in ones degree or professional field, professional development, a sense of ethics, perhaps belong to a professional association and have concern for the continued growth of the industry. In the AMA for example a doctor can be disbarred for malpractice and a lawyer can have his licence taken away. Not so in English language teaching. The trouble is so few actually have any teaching skills or training when they arrive and kind of 'pick it up' when they get here, including me. Its what you do after you get here that is also important too.


How many eikaiwa teachers say that they can say they are truly 'professional' (like a doctor, architect or tradesman) seeing as many dont stick around long enough to call them selves proper teachers? As long as language schools (not to mention high schools and universities) just see them as no more than warm bodies who can speak English things are not going to change. I work at a university, have accreditation and qualifications and consider myself professional experience up the gazoo but my university just sees me as non-permanent hired help to be spat out after three years. Its hard to develop a feeling professionalism or of being taken seriously when you are looking over your shoulder all the time waiting for the axe to fall.

[Mark]

It would be relatively easy for eikawas to set up a self-regulating association, but would any of them pay any attention to it? The government could set one up, but the same problem arises.

I used to teach ESL in Canada and there were a variety of systems in place to regulate schools, but they certainly didn't weed out all the bad ones. And that was an environment in which a lot of private were actually striving for quality. I don't think that's the case in Japan.

In order for a school to pursue quality, it has to believe that pursuing quality will result in the school making more money. I'm not sure that a quality school would actually succeed in the Japanese market.

Most eikawa lessons are once a week or so, and they seem to focus mainly on direct method approaches. Lots of chorusing, reading dialogues, doing substitutions, and so forth. Students perform these mechanical drills relatively well and believe that they're progressing towards fluency. Of course, they're not.

It's not all bad, of course. But schools here seem to go out of their way to ensure that lessons are set up in such a way so that students are unlikely to make mistakes or be unable to do something. In a more modern approach, you'd give the students a task to complete that would require language they don't have. Once they realize they need that language, you help them acquire it and then they can use it. You can't entirely predict what language they're going to be deficient in, so you have to be able to improvise and deal with whatever problems arise.

In Japan, students practice everything to death and then try to use it in an extremely controlled environment. Personally, I don't really see how a NOVA lesson is any more useful than simply talking to somebody for the same length of time in a social setting. Japanese students don't seem to respond well to being challenged.

At the Eikawa where I "teach" (not NOVA), the lessons seem to be designed to ensure students are not put in the position where they can't do something. Even when standard books are used, the lesson approach takes pains to make sure that students are very overprepared for any kind of task they may have to perform. This doesn't apply to every kind of class, just most of them.

There's also the fact that a lot of students here have no confidence whatsoever in their ability to learn English. They don't know what a reasonable language-learning timetable might be, and they really have no way of juding the effectiveness of a school until they've been in it for a while.

Anyway, I don't want to get carried away and rant on and on (any more than I've already done, anyway), but things won't change until a school becomes successful through actually helping its students achieve some reasonable degree of fluency. And this won't happen until a school adopts more modern teaching methods. And that, it seems, just isn't going to happen.

[PAULH]

Just curious, how many language school teachers in Japan would stack up against all or most of the following criteria?

A professional learns every aspect of the job. An amateur skips the learning process whenever possible.


A professional carefully discovers what is needed and wanted. An amateur assumes what others need and want.


A professional looks, speaks and dresses like a professional. An amateur is sloppy in appearance and speech.


A professional keeps his or her work area clean and orderly. An amateur has a messy, confused or dirty work area.


A professional is focused and clear-headed. An amateur is confused and distracted.


A professional does not let mistakes slide by. An amateur ignores or hides mistakes.


A professional jumps into difficult assignments. An amateur tries to get out of difficult work.


A professional completes projects as soon as possible. An amateur is surrounded by unfinished work piled on unfinished work.


A professional remains level-headed and optimistic. An amateur gets upset and assumes the worst.


A professional handles money and accounts very carefully. An amateur is sloppy with money or accounts.


A professional faces up to other people�s upsets and problems. An amateur avoids others� problems.


A professional uses higher emotional tones: Enthusiasm, cheerfulness, interest, contentment. An amateur uses lower emotional tones: anger, hostility, resentment, fear, victim.


A professional persists until the objective is achieved. An amateur gives up at the first opportunity.


A professional produces more than expected. An amateur produces just enough to get by.


A professional produces a high-quality product or service. An amateur produces medium-to-low quality product or service.


A professional earns high pay. An amateur earns low pay and feels it�s unfair.


A professional has a promising future. An amateur has an uncertain future.


The first step to making yourself a professional is to decide you ARE a professional.


Are you a professional?

�

[PAULH]

First of all, I would like to mention "Japanese
traditional grammar translation method." Last year, in
Japan the Ministry of Education decided to change some
parts of "Course of Study." One of the reasons is that
recently Japanese citizens have criticized Japanese
traditional style of teaching English in junior high and
high school. For a long time in Japan, Japanese teachers
have taught English focusing on grammar usage. As a
result, a lot of Japanese adults cry "School English
education was useless! Because I have studied English for
more than 6 years, but I still cannot understand English!"
Actually in Japan the rate of teenagers who attend school
is very high. And most of them are forced to study English
in junior high and high school for 6 years. Nevertheless,
the score of TOEFL was worst in Asia in 1999.
During The last days of the Tokugawa period, Western
cultures flowed into Japan. Before then, government
applied National Isolation and permitted only studying
Dutch. However at that time, government has decided to
start English learning to absorb Western knowledge. At the
first, the purpose was to understand Western knowledge, so
main part of study English was reading. People needed to
know only meaning, not pronunciation. So, Japanese
substituted Japanese system of syllabic writing "Kana" for
English pronunciations.



Like these Japanese invented original English
Interpretation method. And this method has spread among
scholars. This English Interpretation method is one of the
translation methods. We can divide translation methods
into four groups; English Interpretation method,
Grammar-Translation method, Practice method, and mastery
method. Characteristics of English Interpretation method
is that it was invented by Japanese for Japanese. By using
this method, learners will not understand total meaning of
the sentences but translate English words into their
mother languages word by word. Grammar-Translation method
was systematized by a German scholar named Plotz. This
method is also mainly using translation into learners'
mother languages to understand English sentences. Its weak
point is teachers so concentrate on reading and writing
that they tend to neglect listening and speaking sections.
Then, Practice method and Mastery method are similar. Both
of them make learners memorize English sentences. Through
oral practice learners can master native English
pronunciations. On the other hands, it has no creativity
because of learners' repetition.


Secondly I would like to mention more communicative
teaching method. In my junior high and high school, there
were native English teachers. They came to our English
class once a week and taught us English. However I might
not be able to say "teach", because we only enjoyed easy
English conversation with them. At least I can say that it
was an enjoyable way to communicate with foreigners. To
us, foreigners were rare and curious. Recently such kind
of system has rooted in Japanese junior and high school.
Tuchiya said that most of native teachers have no license
to teach English in Japan, so in many cases, they have to
share their classes.They are ordinarily called ALT
(Assistant Language Teacher). This Team teaching started
in 1987. There are mainly 3 purpose of ALT adoption. The
first one is offering real English. And the second one is
embodiment of Western cultures. The final one is offering
students opportunities to communicate with native people
in English. Japanese teachers cannot avoid intentionality
to talk with students in English. And students will feel
somewhat strange to talk with Japanese in English.
However, it is quite natural to talk with native speakers.
What is more, students can experience achievement of
communicate with native teachers in their elementary
English. This experience will give students great
confidence, and it will be motivation to learning English
later.



Now, I would like to introduce another example of
communicative method cooperating with native teachers.
Here is example of a famous private English conversation
school. In 1878, Berlitz, an American who was born in
Germany, invented the Natural method. He found that
translation method which was popular in those days was not
useful. And he established language schools in the US and
taught English through the natural method. Natural method
is designed for learners to learn English naturally as
mother tongue. His theory of teaching was based on
Rousseau's naturalism. And he insists "Learners should to
learn English kids' order. Because kids acquire language
ability naturally in listening, speaking, reading, and
writing order." His teaching method mainly concentrates on
conversation. And learners can acquire vocabulary in the
context. They do not teach translation. And they never use
help of mother tongue. Such kind of method called direct
method has a big weak point. It is that teachers have
difficulty to recognize whether or not students understand
what native teachers speak. Of course students' mother
tongue is not English, so it is hard for them to
understand English words perfectly. And it is possible
that teachers do not notice students misunderstand English
words. Compared with teaching method using mother tongue,
there is uncertainty.



Finally, I would like to mention more practical method
based on ESL method in USA. We might be able to say
gradually English has become a world language. A lot of
people are using English. English can be divided into
three types; English as a mother Tongue, English as a
second language, and English as a foreign language. Former
two is American, British, or Canadian's point of view. And
latter is mainly European or Asian's point of view.
In USA, 11.5% of population is people who were born in
other countries. And another research showed that 18% of
population over age 5 is people who do not use English in
their house. In the country of immigration USA, people
cannot survive without English. And nowadays ESL courses
have become a valuable tool for helping these people to
quickly learn useful English. Now I will introduce one ESL
class example. Typically, as in one ESL class in
Montgomery Country, Maryland, the students are tested,
placed in appropriate classes, and trained in
communication skills involving English. From studying and
applying various styles of writing to doing mock court,
political speeches the instructions are alive and
functional often incorporating significant current events,
such as the aftermath of a hurricane.The characteristic of
this type of teaching is that both teachers and learners'
purpose is quite clear.


Also, the strength of ESL is that
it breaks down cultural barriers. By using languages which
are linked to its culture, ESL encourages students to
experience the cultural patterns which language bring. For
example, learners can learn tempo of fighting or how to
make a joke! Japanese schools are spending more hours
teaching English, but one wonder is how it is being
taught. In USA, some public schools introduce a foreign
language to young children by teaching arithmetic and
music in that language. While the Japanese tend to focus
on mastering the language before moving on to other
skills, this method, on the contrary, focus the students
on using the language immediately before acquisition.ESL
is like a boat in the ocean. Learners can dive into ocean,
because ESL will help them. They take risk, but certainly
they acquire techniques go along with people.



In conclusion, I think communicative method cooperating
with native teachers is the best way to teach English to
teenagers. From my research, I found a lot of teaching
methods, and analyzed these advantage points and
disadvantage ones. Before writing this essay, I estimated
that ESL method was the most effective way to teach
English. In fact, I would like to try ESL method to learn
English because it seems to be more practical than any
other methods. However, when I was searching various
materials, I came to pay attention at the purpose to learn
English. The first one, Japanese traditional grammar
translation method, is better way to teach English to
teenagers. Especially to students who have never studied
English, it is effective way. Through this method,
students can understand English words by translating to
their mother tongue, so it is easy to understand to
beginners. And in Japan, this method has been used for a
long years. It has already rooted and had actual result.
It might be the easiest way to start to study English to
Japanese. On the other hands, it has weak point. As most
of Japanese have already realized, through this method
they cannot acquire English communication skill. That is
why I cannot say this is the best way, however I can say
it is better way to beginners. And third one, ESL method,
is better way to people who need to acquire more practical
or immediate English skill. As I showed before, in USA a
lot of businessmen or immigrants are learning through this
method. Replacing with teenagers, if they are enough
interested in Western culture or English learning, it is
hard to motivate them because of Japanese original
disadvantage in acquisition of English. The first
disadvantage is that Japan has never dominated as a colony
by Western countries. The second one is that in Japanese
society the rule or necessity has not defined yet. Then
the third one is that in linguistics, English and Japanese
belong to different groups, so they have different forms
in various situations such like word order, or
pronunciation.

The way to teach English should be
flexible. It should be up to students' purpose of learning
and motivation, so I chose communicative method. Thorough
this method, teachers can develop students' curiosity and
interest to English learning, Western cultures, and
Western people. This method can use the both advantages
Japanese and native teachers have.