|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
JimDunlop2
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Posts: 2286
Location: Japan
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:26 am Post subject: Grammar Translation Method - Necessary evil in J-classrooms? |
 |
|
I've been thinking a lot about the teaching I do here in Japan. (For those of you who don't know me, I teach in the public school system at two junior high schools on a privately negotiated BoE contract). But that's besides the point.
It seems to me, that 90% of all the teaching we do here is the grammar translation method. At first, I thought that maybe, akin to Japan's Draconian justice system, their pedagogy may be equally antediluvian. However, I wonder if it isn't out of mere necessity more than anything that drives this.
How can you do speaking/listening activities when the class lacks basic language formation skills. When they don't know a verb from a noun, and don't realize that you MUST have a verb in order for a sentence to have meaning, any other instructional method is moot, isn't it? It doesn't help matters any when I only see each class for an hour a week (make that 50 minutes) and the rest of the time they're being taught grammar -- but not just any grammar; only what they need to know for their next exam. Then, if I want to have my kids practice ANY speaking and listening whatsoever, about 1/2 my class is spent learning and practicing the skills necessary to complete the forthcoming activity or game. This means translating everything into Japanese and drawing English-Japanese equivalents.
It all boils down to a vicious cycle of ineptitude and not understanding.
1. Students are taught grammatical patterns by the Japanese teacher.
2. The native-speaker attempts to distill and summarize what they have learned and turn it into practical, communicative English.
3. Students are incapable of drawing a connection between the textbook and real-life, so it must be explained to them in Japanese -- using -- you guessed it, words and grammatical patterns in Japanese by the Japanese teacher.
My question to other teachers today is, have you had any success in breaking out of such a cycle? If so, how? If not, have you resigned yourself to using Japan's traditional grammar-translation method?
As for me, I've come to accept a bit of a balance. I've had some limited success in distilling textbook grammar into useful language... But at the same time, I understand that there is very little I can do at the level I teach to dramatically improve or significantly change the overall English level. The most I can hope for is that I will instill into them a sufficient interest and passion for learning English, that they will pursue it after high-school, or be motivated to learn it outside the classroom. As such, I take whatever grammar the students learn in their textbooks, attempt to distill it into something useful, and with very limited time, teach them how to apply it to everyday conversation, speaking and listening. I try to encourage as much interaction as possible in my classes. The students are usually doing group work, pair work, or exercises that force them to speak and listen to English whenever they can... Having said that however, there is also a huge chunk of English - Japanese translation going on and making equivalents. Eg. house wa ie desu. Nezumi is a mouse. Where is your house? Anata no ie ha doko desu ka. And so on... At the very least, I try to encourage the kids, that if they must do this, they should at least be using phrases like: "How do you say....? How do you spell....?"
If anyone has had any success applying some of the more "enlightened" methods you get taught in teaching school, specifically in a low-level public school setting, I'd be curious to hear about it. Until then I think I have to just make the most of what I see as a necessary thing... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
spidey
Joined: 29 Jun 2004
Posts: 382
Location: Web-slinging over Japan...
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 5:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
JimDunlop2
Is "antediluvian" some kind of Star Trek lingo? 
But seriously...
May I ask how much time you spend in each respective school? By this I mean that do you spend the whole day there? Also, how many times a week do you visit each school?
I also teach at a JHS and I have experienced the same situation as you, but not necessarily the same problems.
In my experience, the classroom is not the place where the students will really learn how to use English. By instilling a sense of confidence to your students when it comes to speaking English, they will naturally try to use it whenever they see you. I have actually seen them trying to use English when talking amongst themselves.
I focus on developing a strong and sincere relationship with my students. When we are together in or outside the classroom they know that I will not judge them on there use of English. But instead we will have fun trying to communicate. They also know that I am studying Japanese, so they know I understand how they feel. When I speak to them in Japanese, they help me with the mistakes that I make. But they also see me not getting embarassed when I make them. We all have a good laugh.
You're right when you say that there is very little time for you to teach them listening and speaking, and that most of their class time is spent learning grammar.
I would suggest to you that you do not focus so much on the content of the lessons but more on developing an atmosphere of trust and friendship between you and your students.
...you can be the one that helps the students break out of their "fear of making a mistake and looking foolish" shell.
I hope this gives you some things to think about.
S |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sheep-Goats
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
Posts: 527
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 5:19 am Post subject: Re: Grammar Translation Method - Necessary evil in J-classro |
|
|
| JimDunlop2 wrote: |
It seems to me, that 90% of all the teaching we do here is the grammar translation method.... I wonder if it isn't out of mere necessity more than anything that drives this. |
Lexically based textbooks (or portions of textbooks) are becoming much more popular these days, largely due to the new avialabilty and useability of computer based corpora. It's fairly easy to do a lexical take on any given part of a grammar-constructed course or text. Basically, you look at what different meanings are derived from a word or phrase instead of looking at what different meanings are derived from a grammatical point. This includes looking at what are essentially grammatical words, like "would" or "the."
At any rate, if you do some looking around you'll probably find a good many articles, here's a shotgun I got from a quick googlel for "lexical EFL methods":
(A summary of Grammar Trans and some options)
http://www.onestopenglish.com/News/Magazine/Archive/whatgrammar.htm
(Some stuff about influences of lexical idiology, particulary reguarding teaching vocab)
http://iteslj.org/Articles/Amer-Vocabulary/
(dictionary entry on lexical approach)
http://bogglesworld.com/glossary/lexicalapproach.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sheep-Goats
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
Posts: 527
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 5:30 am Post subject: Re: Grammar Translation Method - Necessary evil in J-classro |
|
|
| JimDunlop2 wrote: |
| Having said that however, there is also a huge chunk of English - Japanese translation going on and making equivalents. Eg. house wa ie desu. Nezumi is a mouse. Where is your house? Anata no ie ha doko desu ka. And so on... |
But are nezumi and mouse really the same thing? The objects they represent are the same, but the collocations of the terms themselves are bound to differ in their respective languages. If a Japanese person is living in America and they buy a pet mouse, do they really buy a pet mouse or do they buy a nezumi? Why do people buy a mouse? Surely some of these resons are related to what the word "mouse" calls up in our minds, and some of them are based on what that little thing in the cage actually is instead of what it's called. This means that it's quite possible someone who's native tongue is Japanese, who is otherwise identical to you, probably would have a few different reaons to buy a mouse than you would. This may indicate that, in fact, mouse and nezumi are not interchangeable.
Surely you've encountered this yourself -- sometimes here in Thailand I find mysel calling the really Thai looking taxi cabs a "TAXIII" like the Thais say it, in my mind, while the more standard looking affiars are just called taxi, in English.
Anyway, my point is that constant translation of this kind can be a real bar to fluency in some ways. You don't need to retranslate the words in your native tongue to some other idea beore they're understood unless you're talking about a difficult topic -- and it is possible to use a foreign language without translating it in your brain first at least some of the time, but it takes practice... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Glenski
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Posts: 12844
Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 6:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| My question to other teachers today is, have you had any success in breaking out of such a cycle? If so, how? If not, have you resigned yourself to using Japan's traditional grammar-translation method? |
The simple answer is...not much breaking out. As you put it, students in Japan study English not to learn how to communicate orally, but to pass college entrance exams, which have ancient, rarely used, and arcane English patterns in them.
Just do your best to instill some interest in those JHS kids. It's probably the first time they have ever seen a foreigner in the flesh, and it's probably their first exposure to English. At my school, the JHS kids get lots of choral repetition to instill some sense of confidence in their speaking abilities. Sigh.
Just don't expect them to KNOW things like parts of speech even when they get into high school. They just aren't taught these mechanics.[/list] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taikibansei
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Posts: 811
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Glenski wrote: |
As you put it, students in Japan study English not to learn how to communicate orally, but to pass college entrance exams, which have ancient, rarely used, and arcane English patterns in them. |
It's actually a bit of a myth that the university entrance exams--especially the national "Center" exam--are directly to blame. Most of these exams have an oral component and no longer use "ancient, rarely used, and arcane English patterns"--the problem is that the Japanese teachers of English at the high school level often lack the language ability and training to adjust to the new exam contents. Here's an article I found on the topic (Mulvey, 2001) which appeared in The Language Teacher (note that the links are a bit old and may no longer work):
The Role and Influence of Japan�s University Entrance Exams: A Reassessment
This article looks at recent changes to Japan's university admissions process, especially at how demographic trends have combined with Monbukagakusho-instituted reforms to impact the role and influence of the infamous entrance examinations. The term infamous is used here advisedly: few subjects in EFL have ignited such controversy over such an extended number of years. This paper focuses on three items at issue: the supposed difficulty of gaining university admission, the primacy of the exam's role in making admissions decisions, and the causal exam-pedagogy relationship that is the ostensible result of this so-called "monopoly" (Brown & Yamashita, 1995b, p. 98; Gates, 1995, p. 102).
As the discussion below will make clear, received arguments with regards to these three issues appear to be based on an incomplete understanding of exam role and content; worse, they fail to take into account the effects of reforms (sparked in turn by economic and demographic concerns) which have, over the last fifteen years, completely revamped the admissions process. Hopefully, the research and statistical evidence provided below will inspire a more informed critical review of both the substance of the reforms and the possible impact of the economic and demographic forces which have prompted them.
Background
The university entrance examinations (i.e., the national "Center" exam and the various independently generated and separately administered individual college or faculty exams) have been heavily criticized for both perpetuating archaic pedagogical practices and impeding efforts at curriculum reform (see for example Brown, 1993; Brown and Yamashita 1995a & b; Cutts, 1997; Frost, 1991; Hards, 1998; Leonard, 1998; Sturman, 1989; Tsukada, 1991; and Vanderford, 1997). A key term in this criticism is washback effect, used to refer to the supposedly cause-and-effect nature of the entrance examinations influence on senior high school teaching methodology and textbook content. The difficulty of gaining university admission, not to mention the critical (as widely believed) importance of the exams in gaining said admission, have ostensibly created a situation where exam content dictates to a great extent how and what students will be taught up until they graduate from high school (see Brown & Yamashita, 1995b, pp. 97-8; Leonard, 1998, p. 26; Sturman, 1989, p. 76; Vanderford, 1997, p.23); hence, without equivalent changes to the exams themselves, achieving systematic curriculum reform is held to be impossible.
It would be difficult to exaggerate the nature and scope of the ongoing -- and almost completely uncritical -- acceptance of the above arguments. This November, The Language Teacher will publish a special issue devoted to this problem, marking the third time since 1993 that a JALT publication has been so dedicated. Numerous non-JALT publications (most recently, The Daily Yomiuri -- see "Academics," 2001) have done so as well. Indeed, despite the fact that the basic presupposition -- i.e., that exam contents accurately mirror high school curriculum contents -- upon which they are based has (until recently) never been systematically examined, these received arguments have come to suffuse all discussion about English educational reform in this country, with entrance exam influence a popular scapegoat for a host of perceived curriculum-related flaws.
Current Research and Statistics
In asserting these positions, the above researchers appear to have focused exclusively on the experiences of that subset of students in academic (as opposed to industrial, agricultural, or business) high schools who are both attending college prep classes and struggling to enter Japan's most exclusive universities (to his credit, Cutts, 1997, acknowledges this -- see pp. 158-160). It is this student population who worry about hensachi (standard deviation) tests and face �examination hell� (Frost, 1991), a reference to the months and years they must spend "working industriously in school, at home, and in jukus" in order to pass the various exams and get into the elite university of their choice (Brown & Yamashita, 1995b, p.86).
As studies in this area almost invariably fail to include verifiable citations, the exact size of this student population is difficult to ascertain. Unsubstantiated claims of up to 80% attendance at jukus, for instance, exist (see Smith, 1998, p. 93); however, one of the few studies actually to include a survey of student families found that the percentage of students regularly attending jukus was only 33% (Nihon Kodomo o Mamoru Kai, 1984, p. 228). Support for this lower figure can be found in the fact that the percentage of students who do take the entrance examinations and apply to enter university only topped the 50% mark in the last decade (Monbukagakusho, 1999a, 2000a). As the majority of even this latter group of students do not apply to elite universities (Akira, 1998, pp. 949-1024), and as school expulsion for poor grades (literally impossible at the elementary/junior high level and almost unheard of at the high school level -- Mulvey, 2001) is not a prime concern, the financial burden of attending a juku would appear for many to be superfluous; at the very least, one must question the applicability of terms such as exam hell and language testing hysteria to the experiences of the majority of the student population.
Indeed, analysis of current admission trends suggests that, especially for low- and mid-tier universities, successful admission is no longer a difficult prospect requiring hysterical (Brown, 1993) expenditures of time and family resources. 25 years ago, the large number of applicants vis-a-vis the limited number of spaces available gave Japan's universities a well-earned reputation for exclusivity; now, nearly 80% of test-takers pass the examinations and successfully enter university (Monbukagakusho, 1998a, 1999b, 1999c), with the overall matriculation rate into post secondary schools currently higher in Japan than in the supposedly lax United States.
Matriculation Rates:
Country Male Female Combined Average
Japan 48.9 48.2 49.6
United States42.4 51.7 46.9
Source: Nihon Kokusei Zue (Abe, 2000, p. 461)
While it is true that admission rates remain extremely low (10-15%) for Japan's fifteen most exclusive universities (Akira, 1998, pp. 949-1024), the same can be said for the top western schools as well (e.g., Princeton 10.4%, Harvard 10.7%). In fact, many colleges and universities in Japan now admit more than 50% of applicants, with a large number of 2-year colleges -- not to mention some 4-year regional universities -- accepting close to 100% of those applying (Akira, 1998, pp. 949-1024; Mulvey & Jannuzi, 2000).
Furthermore, though almost unmentioned in articles written in English, there has been a well-documented decrease in average test scores over the last 10 years. Studies sponsored by Asahi Shinbun ("Daigaku," 2001), the Chuuo Kyouiku Shingikai ("Misu-machi," 1999), and Monbukagakusho (2000c), for example, all indicate a sharp decline in median academic ability vis-a-vis test-related skill areas among even successful university entrants, with many of the freshman evaluated lacking minimal skills in not only English, but also math, the sciences, and the Japanese language. Indeed, a study conducted by the Daigaku Shingikai (2000, pp. 1-4) found that a number of universities have begun accepting students even with extremely low examination results, a trend which threatens to make success on, and academic preparation for, the exams even less important in the near future (see also "Misu-machi," 1999; "Cram," 1998; "Creative," 2000).
To cite just one specific example of this phenomenon, out of the 365 students who took the entrance examination to enter one section of a prominent university in Fukui Prefecture last year, only two scored over 45% on the English section -- i.e., far too small a number of successful applicants to ensure the economic viability of such a large university. The university's response? All final scores for the English section were multiplied by 1.65, thereby increasing the pool of successful applicants dramatically. How widespread a practice this is, is unknown; however, as the economic and demographic forces which have created this situation are expected to worsen over the next decade (Daigaku Shingikai, 2000, pp. 1-4; Monbukagakusho, 1998a, p. 1), it seems safe to argue that a number of other universities are either acting similarly or considering it. Beyond the obvious economic advantage, this kind of mathematical acrobatics has an additional pragmatic advantage as well: all universities must report the average test scores of accepted applicants (to newspapers, guidebooks like that put out by Gakken, etc.); a high reported average suggests high selectivity, thereby adding to the prestige of the university.
Received arguments with regards to exam washback effect on English language high school teaching methodology and textbook content appear similarly to be counter-indicated by recent scholarship. Brown (1995), Guest (2000), Law (1994), Kimura & Visgatis (1996), and Pai (1996) have demonstrated clearly that entrance examinations no longer emphasize translation or grammar-focused "discrete-item" exercises; on the contrary, they now uniformly feature advanced, adult level reading passages (Brown, p. 96-7; Guest, pp. 25-7; Law p. 96; Kimura & Visgatis, pp. 86-92; Pai, p. 153), along with contextualized, task-based analysis problems requiring examinees to have the ability to summarize and/or explain difficult areas in the reading passages (see Brown, pp. 94-95; Guest, pp. 25-7; Law, p. 96; Kimura & Visgatis, pp. 86-92; Pai, p. 153).
However, this new emphasis has not produced the corresponding curriculum changes that one would expect in the presence of a washback effect. Indeed, studies have demonstrated that high school textbook contents do not reflect the present reading/analytical orientation of the entrance examinations (Kimura & Visgatis, 1996; Mulvey 1998, 1999; Pai, 1996); further, it has been shown exhaustively that, for the overwhelming majority of Japanese students, high school English classes do not offer instruction in reading skills sufficient to prepare them for the reading/analytical sections which currently make up the main part of the examinations (see Gorsuch, 1998; Guest, 2000; Jannuzi, 1994; Kitao, K. & Kitao, S. K. 1995; Kitao, K., Yoshida, S., & Yoshida, H., 1986; Kitao, S. K., Kitao, K., Nozawa, K., & Yamamoto, M., 1985; Kitao and Yoshida, 1985; Law, 1994, 1995; Mulvey, 1998, 1999; Nishijima, 1995; Saeki, 1992; Yoshida, H., 1985; Yoshida, S., 1985; and Yoshida & Kitao, 1986). When coupled with the fact that the addition of a writing skills section to many individual university examinations (Kawasaki, 2000; Monbukagakusho, 2000b) has similarly failed to translate into a corresponding increase in writing skills instruction even at local academic high schools (Kawasaki, 2000; Mulvey, 1997; Okada, 1995; Yamada, 1993), it would appear that the nature and extent of exam washback effect has been exaggerated; at the very least, it seems possible to argue that strong motivational forces and situational requirements outside of mere "test preparation" are in operation, ones that have not been fully studied but which may be significant nonetheless.
Recent Reforms and the Demographic and Economic Forces that Inspired Them
As delineated above, current government statistics and recent research published in Japanese-language publications seem to indicate that traditional conceptions regarding university admission exclusivity, the primary role of exam scores in making admissions decisions, and the causal exam-pedagogy relationship that this so-called monopoly supposedly engender may no longer accurately represent the actual situation. This section discusses the demographic, political, and economic forces that appear to have played a role in the creation of this apparent discrepancy.
Chief among these forces is the ongoing and profound impact the declining birthrate has had on Japan's admissions process. In 1990, the number of students entering high schools in Japan officially peaked at 1, 871,333 students (Monbukagakusho, 1999e). By 1999, this number had dropped to 1,436,423 -- i.e., a drop of almost 25% in just nine years. Combined with the overcapacity created by the ill-advised college building frenzy of the late-80's bubble years (when the number of 2- and 4-year universities increased by 31% -- see, Mulvey & Jannuzi, 2000), this sudden decline has placed severe economic strains on Japan's mid- and low-tier universities.
The fact is, Japan's traditional university feeder programs are rapidly reaching the point where they can no longer graduate a number of students sufficient to maintain the economic vitality of the majority of Japan's universities. In 1999, for example, 756,149 high school students applied for entrance into university, with 602,078 accepted (Monbukagakusho, 1999b, 1999c). This works out to a success rate of 80% -- an all-time high, and one which is expected to climb even higher over the next few years. Japanese sources (Daigaku Shingikai, 2000, p. 2; Keizai Doyukai, 1999, p. 216; Monbukagakusho, 1998a, p.1), for instance, estimate that the "applicant-to-university space" ratio (shigansha ni taisuru shuuyouryoku) will reach exactly 1:1 by the year 2009--sooner if a predicted sharp increase in the percentage of 18-year olds who do take the exams and apply to university does not materialize.
As the number of applicants comes to equal the number of places available, it stands to reason that post-secondary programs will be forced into a continued relaxation of admissions standards in order to maintain enrollment levels sufficient to ensure their economic viability. Indeed, the effects of this trend have already begun to manifest themselves. As described in the proceeding section, universities have already begun to admit students with non-passing scores on the entrance examinations. Furthermore, declining applicant numbers, along with the resultant lowering in academic expectations by universities, have combined to threaten the whole test preparation industry itself, forcing many jukus and yobikos to the brink of bankruptcy ("Cram," 1998, "Creative," 2000).
Another possible side-effect of this process may be the seeming weakening (if not elimination) of washback-type influence on high school methodology and textbook content alluded to above. As most did not conduct comparison studies, it is difficult to ascertain how accurate many washback effect proponents were in their initial claims. However, even assuming this influence, it should be clear how current trends toward looser admissions standards might be affecting its nature and extent. As even students with extremely poor exam results can now successfully gain admittance into many universities, the pressing need for high school educators to make curriculum adjustments with every change in exam content would seem to be removed. This in turn would make high school curriculums less open to exam influence, as many students would still pass regardless of any preparation deficiency in their high school English classes. In other words, perhaps the lack of exam influence described earlier is the result of the examinations evolving where high school curriculums have not?
Indeed, it cannot be questioned that the admissions process in general, and the role and contents of the exams in particular, have changed drastically over the last 15 years. Since the late 1980's, political pressure (spurred in part by economic pressure brought on by the demographic changes delineated above) has caused Monbukagakusho to institute a series of reforms to increase both the quality, and the accessibility, of the exams (Monbukagakusho, 1999d, 2000b). As noted earlier, entrance examinations no longer focus solely on translation or grammar exercises; on the contrary, reading skills are emphasized in almost all cases, with listening and writing skills sections now included on a large number of individual university exams as well. Moreover, several recent policy changes have allowed students even from non-traditional backgrounds (e.g., so-called returnees, students from non-academic high schools, students over 16 but without high school diplomas, etc.) to take the exams and attempt to enter university (Monbukagakusho, 2000d). Finally, there has been a marked increase (to approximately 85%) in the number of universities who accept a percentage of their students under the suisen nyuugaku or entrance by recommendation system (Akira, 1998, pp. 949-1024; Monbukagakusho, 2000b). As the name suggests, these fortunate students are evaluated separately from their test-taking peers, with admission decisions based mainly on recommendations from high school advisors/coaches, often (but not always) supplemented by test scores, a submitted essay, and or an interview with the applicant.
Furthermore, Monbukagakusho has worked hard to make public universities (the majority of private universities having instituted similar reforms voluntarily) less dependent on a single entrance examination result for admissions decisions (Monbukagakusho, 1999d, 2000b). The results have been striking. Currently, only 4% of public universities rely on a single examination score as the sole criteria for their admission decisions. The overwhelming majority includes Center exam scores, individual university examinations, essays, and or interviews in the decision-making process.
Percentage Breakdown of Public Universities Including Supplemental Criteria in Admissions Decisions:
Year Interview Essay Physical Education Exam
1980 35.0 33.3 45
1999 93.6 94.2 44.9
Source: Kyouiku Kaikaku Q & A (Monbusho, 2000b)
Percentage of Public Universities Requiring Students to Take Individual University Exams (Plus Number of Exam Sections Required Where Applicable) :
Not Required 1 Exam 2 Exams 3 Exams 4 Exams
36.2 15.1 25.0 19.2 4.5
Source: Kyouiku Hakusho (Monbusho, 1999d)
Typically, applicants receive points in each category required by the university in question. The points are then totaled, and the final combined score is compared to those of other applicants in the same year. At Fukui National University, for instance, the Center exam, the individual university exam (usually three subject-sections), and the required essay are each assigned a value of up to 200 points, with the additional interview worth up to 100 points. Even at the same university, however, certain departments are less stringent than others; would-be engineering and science majors at Fukui University, for instance, have the English section scores waived, while some other departments make the interview/essay optional.
Conclusions and Final Comments
In suggesting the need for a reassessment of entrance exam role and influence, this author wishes to make clear that he is neither overlooking nor discounting the numerous problems documented in both the admissions process in general, and in the entrance examinations in particular. Questions remain about exam reliability and validity (Brown & Yamashita, 1995b), with the lack of emphasis on listening skills (Hards, 1998; Vanderford, 1997) another obvious flaw. There is also the undeniable reality that many exams test for a level of comprehension clearly far beyond the overwhelming majority of test takers, so much so that one must perforce doubt the value of their results. Finally, ethical questions can conceivably be raised with regards to several aspects of the exam process, especially the advisability of having a separate suisen nyuugaku system where a percentage of fortunate students can gain admission on the strength of recommendations alone.
The above flaws are both undeniably real and unarguably serious; unfortunately, the same cannot be said for many other commonly held assumptions regarding the admissions process. As delineated above, most scholarship in this area has attempted to present Japanese secondary level education -- especially student experiences in EFL education -- as monolithic in nature. Documented problems are almost invariably ascribed to negative exam influence, the result in turn of the supposed monopoly the examinations have in determining university admission. However, while the possibility of washback effect-type influence cannot be discounted entirely, it should be clear from the above discussion that received arguments of this kind may have exaggerated its nature and extent. Worse, the uncritical acceptance of these arguments has resulted in a narrowing of the debate, an oversimplification of the complex economic, political, and demographic obstacles facing educational reformers in this country.
Demographic changes will continue to put more and more economic pressure on universities to compete for a dwindling pool of applicants. What will these changes mean for English teachers? Possible consequences, as predicted by the Japanese government, include faculty layoffs, school closures, hiring freezes, and severe budget reductions (Jannuzi & Mulvey, 2000; Mori, 1999; Mulvey, 2000; "Shushou," 2000).
On the other hand, changes in admission standards will allow a new generation of students to attend university, ones whose needs, levels of ability, and areas of interest may differ dramatically from what long-term English language professionals in Japan are perhaps accustomed to seeing in the classroom. Far from being catastrophic, however, this latter development -- if sufficiently anticipated -- could become an opportunity for instituting needed reform. Hopefully, the research presented above will encourage a broader discussion of these issues, inviting a deeper examination of the motivational forces and situational requirements in action in Japanese society today.
Thanks go to Dr. Tachi Kiyotaka, Dr. Terao Takeo, and Prof. Joe Tomei for their kind assistance.
Notes
1. Effective this year, Japan�s Department of Education (Monbusho) has changed its name to Monbukagakusho.
2. Matriculation rates are based on Japanese criteria for details, see Abe (2000, p. 461).
3. Texts like the one cited here do not require schools to differentiate between applicants who complete the application and take a particular university's entrance exam and inquiring students who only begin the process (i.e., request an application but do not actually sit for the exam), nor is allowance made for individuals who send in applications to several schools. As it is in the best interest of schools (for prestige purposes) to over-report applicant numbers, it is therefore quite possible that the statistics quoted actually under-report the real success rate. Indeed, as the number of applicants reported by all listed universities, if totaled together, would be well in excess of the total number of graduating senior high school students (and almost 3 times the total number of those who actually attempted to enter college), it should be clear that a significant amount of overstating may be occurring. The 80% overall success rate for applicants -- taken from Monbukagakusho's own database -- further implies this.
4. These figures do not include the small number of nontraditional applicants -- returnees, etc. -- who also apply each year.
References
Abe, Kiyohide. (Ed.). (2000). Nihon kokusei zue [Figures on the state of Japan].
Tokyo: Kokuseisha.
Academics ponder the future roles of universities. (2001, January 4). The Daily
Yomiuri, pp. 1, 8.
Akira, H., (Ed.). (1998). Juukenkou wo kimeru! [Decide on which schools to apply
for!]. Tokyo: Gakushu Kenkyuusha.
Brown, J.D. (1993). Language testing hysteria in Japan? The Language Teacher, 17 (12), 41-43.
Brown, J., & Yamashita, S. (1995a). English language tests at Japanese universities:
What do know about them? JALT Journal, 17 (1), 7-30.
Brown, J., & Yamashita, S. (1995b). English language entrance examinations at
Japanese universities: 1993 and 1994. In Brown & Yamashita (Eds.), Language
Teaching in Japan (pp. 86-100). JALT.
Cram schools no longer drawing crowds.(1998, September 21). Nikkei Weekly, p. 6.
Creative curriculum hit for drop in skills. (2000, November 1 . Nikkei Weekly, p. 6.
Cutts, Robert L. (1997). An empire of schools: Japan's universities and the molding
of a national power elite. London: M.E. Sharpe.
Daigaku Shingikai. (2000). Daigaku nyuushi no kaizen ni tsuite [About reforming the
entrance exams]. Available: http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/houdou/12/11/0011a13.htm
Daigaku yurugasu "2006nen mondai" [The university-shaking "year 2006 problem"].
(2001, January 11). Asahi Shinbun, p.19.
Frost, P. (1991). Examination hell. In E.R. Beauchamp (Ed.), Windows on Japanese
education (pp. 291-305). New York: Greenwood Press.
Gates, Shaun. (1995). Exploiting washback from standardized tests. In Brown &
Yamashita (Eds.), Language Teaching in Japan (pp. 86-100). JALT.
Gorsuch, Greta J. (1998). Yakudoku EFL instruction in two Japanese high school
classrooms: An exploratory study. JALT Journal, 20 (1), 6-32.
Guest, Michael. (2000). But I have to teach grammar! An analysis on the role
"grammar" plays in Japanese university English examinations. The Language
Teacher, 24 (11), 23-29.
Hards, Scott T. (1998). Erase English requirement. The Japan Times Shukan ST, 48
(35), 28.
Jannuzi, Charles. (1994). Team teaching the reading class. In M. Wada & T.
Cominos (Eds.), Studies in team teaching (pp. 119-131). Tokyo: Kenkyusha.
Jannuzi, C. & Mulvey, B. (2000). Junior college numbers drop. EL Gazette, 246, 4.
Jannuzi, C. & Mulvey, B. (2000, July 2. A rock lands in still waters: The threat of
cuts and even institution closures is stirring the sleepy, safe world of Japanese academia.
London Times Higher Education Supplement, p. 11.
Kawasaki, Asaka. (2000). Academic writing instruction: A study of rhetorical
differences and their pedagogical implications. Unpublished graduation thesis:
Fukui University.
Keizai Doyukai: Jidai Kangaerukai. (1998). Nihon no kyoiku wa doko ni mondai ga
aru no ka? [Where are the problems in the Japanese education system?]. In Otake,
M., et. al., (Eds.), Nippon no Yume to Muda [Japan's Dreams and Impossibilities]
(202-221). Tokyo: Media Factory.
Kimura, Shinji & Brad Visgatis. (1996). High school English textbooks and college
entrance examinations: A comparison of reading passage difficulty. JALT Journal,
18 (1), 81-95.
Kitao, K., & Kitao, S. K. (1995). English teaching: Theory, research, practice.
Tokyo: Eichosha.
Kitao, K., Kitao, S.K., & Yoshida, H. (1985). Daigakusai no eigo dokkai sokudo
no kenkyu" [A study of college students' reading speed]. Chubu Chiku Eigo
Kyoiku Gakkai Kiyo, 14, 168-174.
Kitao, K., & Yoshida, S. (1985). Daigakusei no eigo dokkairyoku to sono speed
no kenkyu" [A study of college students' English reading comprehension and speed].
Chubu Chiku Eigo Kyoiku Gakkai Kiyo, 14.28-34.
Kitao, K., Yoshida, S., & Yoshida, H. (1986). Daigakusei no eigo dokkairyoku
no mondaiten -- gotou no ruikei to genin [Causes of Japanese College Students'
Problems in Reading English]. Chubu Chiku Eigo Kyoiku Gakkai Kiyo, 15, 8-13.
Kitao, S. K., Kitao, K., Nozawa, K., & Yamamoto, M. (1985). Teaching English
in Japan. In: K. Kitao, K. Nozawa, Y. Oda, T. Robb, M. Sugimori, & M.
Yamamoto (Eds.), TEFL in Japan: JALT 10 Shunen Kinen Ronbunshu [JALT
10th Anniversary Collected Papers], 127-138.
Law, G. (1994). College entrance exams and team teaching in high school English
classrooms. In M. Wada & T. Cominos (Eds.), Studies in team teaching (pp.
90-102). Tokyo: Kenkyusha.
Law, G. (1995). Ideologies of English language education in Japan. JALT
Journal, 17 (2), 213-224.
Leonard, Todd Jay. (1998). Japanese university entrance examinations: An interview
with Dr. J. D. Brown. The Language Teacher, 22 (3), 25-27.
Misu machi nyuugaku: Kaisho gimon -- daigaku to koukou Chuukyoushin ga chuukan
houkoku. [Mis-matched university admissions: Doubts about a solution -- an interim
report from the Central Committee on Education] . (1999, November 2). Yomiuri
Shinbun, p. 3.
Monbusho. (1998a). Daigaku/Tanki daigaku no zentai kibo no shisan [Preliminary
calculations with regards to the complete structure of 2-, 4-year universities]. Available:
http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chuuou/toushin/pdf/7.pdf
Monbusho. (1999a). Wagakuni no bunkyou shisaku (heisei 11 nendo): Dai ichi setsu --
21 seiki no daigaku zou to kongo no kaikaku houkou. [Our country's educational
policy (1999): Section 1 -- portrait of the universities of the 21st century as well
as reform trends]. Available: http://wwwwp.mext.go.jp/jyy1999/index-39.html
Monbusho. (1999b). Nyuugaku shiganshasuu. [The number of university applicants].
Available: http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/toukei/r316/yoran/hyo12041.pdf
Monbusho. (1999c). Daigakutou shingakushasuu. [The number of successful entrants
to 2-, 4-year universities]. Available:
http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/toukei/r316/yoran/hyo12042.pdf
Monbusho. (1999d). Dai 2 setsu: Daigaku nyuugakusha senbatsu no kaizen [Section
2: The reform of university admission evaluation]. In Kyouiku Hakusho: Heisei 11
nendo waga kuni no bunkyou shisaku [The education white paper: Our country's
policies for 1999].
Monbusho. (1999e). Nyuugakushasuu (nenji retsu) [The number of students
entering school (by year)]. Available:
http://wwwwp.mext.go.jp/jyy1999/index-106.html
Monbusho. (2000a). Heisei 12 nen do gakkou kihon chousa sokuhou (chousa
kekka no yoshi) [The year 2000 school fundamentals study announcement (results
summary)]. Available: http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/houdou/12/08/000805.htm
Monbusho. (2000b). Kinnen, daigaku nyuushi ni oite mo jukensei no nouryoku/tekisei
wo teinei ni miru tame no torikumi ga okonawareteiru to kikimasu ga, kakudaigaku
no torikumi ha dono you ni natte iru no deshou ka? [Over the past few years, I've
heard universities are working on ways to make admissions procedures more open
to the careful evaluation of applicant abilities and aptitudes, but exactly what steps
have been taken so far?] . In Kyouiku Kaikaku Q & A [Questions and Answers
Regarding the Education Reforms], pp. 170-1.
Monbusho. (2000c). Gakuryoku teika ha hontou ni okiteiru no? [Is there really an
ongoing decrease in student academic abilities?]. In Kyouiku Kaikaku Q & A
[Questions and Answers Regarding the Education Reforms], pp. 150-1.
Monbusho. (2000d). Koukou de ha iro iro na jijou ga ari chuutai shite shimatta no
desu ga, chiisai koro kara kyoumi no atta rekishi ni tsuite daigaku de benkyou shitai
to kangaete imasu. Koukou wo sotsugyou shite inakute mo daigaku wo ukeru
houhou ha aru no deshou ka? [I had to drop out of high school because of various
things, but from the time I was little I've wanted to study history in college. Is there
now a way even for high school drop-outs like myself to gain university admission?].
In Kyouiku Kaikaku Q & A [Questions and Answers Regarding the Education
Reforms], pp. 164-65.
Mori, Touru. (1999). Dokuritsu gyousei houjinka ni hantai suru (Opposing the dokuritsu
gyousei houjinka). Joukoukai Nyu-su, 4, 1-2.
Mulvey, B. (1998). Entrance exams -- the reading example. ONCUE, 6 (3), 5-12.
Mulvey, B. (1999). A myth of influence: Japanese university entrance exams and
their effect on junior and senior high school reading pedagogy. JALT Journal, 21
(1), 125-142.
Mulvey, B. (2000). The dokuritsu gyousei houjinka reforms: Ramifications and
opportunites. PALE, 6 (1), 2-8.
Mulvey, B. (2001). Order collapses in the classrooms. EL Gazette, 252, 3.
Nihon Kodomo wo Mamoru Kai. (1984). White paper on children. Tokyo: Sodo
Bunka.
Nishijima, Hisao. (1995). Nihonjin eigo no jakuten wa nani ka? [What are the
weak areas in Japanese learners of English?]. Eigo Kyoiku, 44: 28-30.
Pai, Ashlynn. (1996). Overcoming the barriers. JET Journal, summer, 151-157.
Okada, T., et al. (1995). Daigaku ni okeru eisakubun no arikata: eisakubun
jittaichichousa no houkoku (English composition teaching in Japanese universities:
Report on the current situation). Kyoto: JACET Kansai Chapter.
Saeki, Tomoyoshi. (1992). Kagakutekina gaikokugo gakushuuhou [Scientific methods for
studying a foreign language]. Tokyo: Koudansha.
Shusou hatsugen ni Fukudai hanpatsu [Fukui University reacts strongly against
Prime Minister's statements]. (2000, October 12). Fukui Shinbun, p. 26.
Smith, Patrick. (1997). Japan: A reinterpretation. New York: Pantheon Books.
Sturman, P. (1989). Team teaching in Japan: the Koto-ku project. JALT
Journal, 11 (1), 68-77.
Tanaka, Chie. (1985). A Study of the Effectiveness of Reading Instruction at
the College Level in Japan Based on Phycholinguistic Theory. Unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation, University of Kansas, DAI 8608453.
Tsukada, M. (1991). Student perspectives on juku, yobiko, and the examination
system. In B. Finkelstein, A.E. Imamura, & J.J. Tobin (Eds.), Transcending
stereotypes: Discovering Japanese culture and education (pp. 178-182).
Yarmouth, Maine: Intercultural Press.
Vanderford, S. (1997). Oral English in college entrance exams. ONCUE, 5 (3),
19-24.
Yamada, K. (1993). Visions: An academic writing text. JALT Journal, 15 (1),
115-118.
Yoshida, H. (1985). CAI sokudoku kunren (Speed reading: Training by
computer]. In K. Kitao, K. Nozawa, Y. Oda, T. Robb, M. Sugimori, & M.
Yamamoto (Eds.), TEFL in Japan: JALT 10 Shunen Kinen Ronbunshu
[JALT 10th Anniversary Collected Papers] (pp. 45-53). JALT.
Yoshida, S. (1985). Daigakusei no eigo dokkairyoku: Kodoku no shiryo
toshite [Japanese college students' reading ability: Data from college English
courses]. In K. Kitao, K. Nozawa, Y. Oda, T. Robb, M. Sugimori, & M.
Yamamoto (Eds.), TEFL in Japan: JALT 10 Shunen Kinen Ronbunshu
[JALT 10th Anniversary Collected Papers] (pp. 117-125). JALT.
Yoshida S & Kitao, S. K. (1986). Itsutsu no dokkai test wo riyoshita
daigakusei no Eigo dokkai sokudo oyobi rikaido no kenkyu [Japanese
College Students' English Reading comprehension ability and speed --
A study based on five tests]. Chubu Chiku Eigo Kyoiku Gakkai Kiyo,
15, 183-188. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Glenski
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Posts: 12844
Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nice (long) article. However, aside from a few minor details, it does not run completely counter to what some of us say about the college entrance exams.
| Quote: |
| Most of these exams have an oral component |
True, but that component is new and very small. Otherwise, how would you test thousands of potential students? I forget the format for such an oral component, but it's certainly not one that equates to a one-on-one conversation style interview test that I give my HS kids.
Snipped from the article:
| Quote: |
| these received arguments have come to suffuse all discussion about English educational reform in this country, with entrance exam influence a popular scapegoat for a host of perceived curriculum-related flaws. |
Scapegoat, my eye. I've seen the sample exams! I teach high school English. I've seen the practice exams and the accompanying teachers' manuals. Nothing "perceived" about it. Oh, sure, the fact that Japanese teachers teach English in Japanese might have something to do with it, but how do you explain all of those Ministry-approved textbooks with the arcane and outmoded English, and the fact that many Japanese teachers come to us native speakers with questions about the grammar?
| Quote: |
| the above researchers appear to have focused exclusively on the experiences of that subset of students in academic (as opposed to industrial, agricultural, or business) high schools who are both attending college prep classes and struggling to enter Japan's most exclusive universities |
Not in my case. My kids either go to many kinds of universities, not just the elite ones.
| Quote: |
| It is this student population who worry about hensachi (standard deviation) tests and face �examination hell� |
So wrong! Unless the high school is in an escalator system where there is no entrance exam to take you to the sister university, all students worry about exam hell. Not just the ones who go to elite schools.
| Quote: |
| nearly 80% of test-takers pass the examinations and successfully enter university (Monbukagakusho, 1998a, 1999b, 1999c), |
I find this figure extremely hard to believe, especially since it comes from the government. I'm not saying this is completely false: just that it would be interesting to see how Monbukagakusho juggles the numbers to come up with this. And, are those 80% taking the test for the first time or second, third, fourth, etc.?
| Quote: |
| Brown (1995), Guest (2000), Law (1994), Kimura & Visgatis (1996), and Pai (1996) have demonstrated clearly that entrance examinations no longer emphasize translation or grammar-focused "discrete-item" exercises; |
This is about the only specific mention made to run counter to what has been said by people like me. I'd like to see what these people wrote. Like I said, I've seen the practice exams, and they do contain such exercises. Emphasize them? What does that mean? Use as more than half of the test material/time? Not sure, but this is a key point in the argument that goes unexplained in this article. I guess I will just have to find a way to read those supporting articles.
From the sample tests my HS students take, they have to be ready to organize jumbled sentences (or parts of them) to make sense, do direct translation, determine words in groups that have different accent stress or pronunciation, respond to listening sections of several minutes' length by answering multiple choice questions, etc. Those are the discrete item exercises that I know.
| Quote: |
| on the contrary, they now uniformly feature advanced, adult level reading passages (Brown, p. 96-7; Guest, pp. 25-7; Law p. 96; Kimura & Visgatis, pp. 86-92; Pai, p. 153), along with contextualized, task-based analysis problems requiring examinees to have the ability to summarize and/or explain difficult areas in the reading passages |
Oh, yes, absolutely true! However, many (if not most) of those adult level passages are so high level that native speakers find it hard to understand them as well, and the grammar in them is still full of that arcane English. Regarding the previous snippet, the length of time it takes students to read these long, convoluted passages with their detailed accompanying graphs sucks up a lot of test time. (One of my students just came to me for help with such a passage, and about 1/4 of it required her to use a dictionary to explain before she could even begin understanding it, let alone answering questions about it.) Perhaps that is what is "emphasized" -- in terms of time, not amount of material. I don't know. "Featuring" such material... does that mean emphasizing it, too?
So, maybe my school helps to perpetuate the "myth". I don't know. I really want to see those references above, but for now, all I can say is this. I see the sample tests kids are meant to take, and whenever students come back to visit (which is quite often) after they to go universities, they never complain that we gave them inappropriate material for the entrance exams. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taikibansei
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Posts: 811
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
A very interesting and informed response. Let's see if I can respond to some of your comments myself.
| Glenski wrote: |
| True, but that component is new and very small. Otherwise, how would you test thousands of potential students? I forget the format for such an oral component, but it's certainly not one that equates to a one-on-one conversation style interview test that I give my HS kids. |
There are different formats for each university, though usually they are dumbed-down versions of questions from the TOEIC. And yes, it's not perfect, but considering the numbers involved, what system would be?
| Glenski wrote: |
| Scapegoat, my eye. I've seen the sample exams! I teach high school English. I've seen the practice exams and the accompanying teachers' manuals. Nothing "perceived" about it. |
But the point of the article is that they often don't learn the grammar. Ever. Heck, as a former university teacher in Japan, I can tell you that things would have been much easier if my students had English abilities even to the levels seemingly demanded on the exams. They didn't. Too often, these students lacked even the most basic grammar/vocabulary/reading/writing skills, let alone those necessary to handle adult-level reading and analytical passages on the entrance exams. And frankly, as the article mentions (with citations), the students often do very poorly on the entrance exams--I remember years where nobody passed (in the Western sense--i.e, 70% or above) our university exams, though they contained only materials (no arcane English at all) that Monbukagakusho had specifically OKd!
Are the exams perfect? Certainly not. However, are students even learning the materials necessary to pass them? No. Do you blame the exams for this?
| Glenski wrote: |
| So wrong! Unless the high school is in an escalator system where there is no entrance exam to take you to the sister university, all students worry about exam hell. Not just the ones who go to elite schools.. |
As stated (with citations) in the article, until very recently, the majority of Japanese high school graduates didn't attempt to go to university. Period. Why would they care about hensachi? Why would a student attempting to enter, say, a tandai (with 100% admission rates) worry about their hensachi? Doesn't make sense.
| Quote: |
| I find this figure extremely hard to believe, especially since it comes from the government. I'm not saying this is completely false: just that it would be interesting to see how Monbukagakusho juggles the numbers to come up with this. And, are those 80% taking the test for the first time or second, third, fourth, etc.? |
First time students. The percentage is higher now, by the way--nearly 88%. By 2010, it is expected to be at 100% (things should get very interesting then). Now, you need to remember that most students submit applications to at least three universities...the 88% pass rate refers only to the fact that they managed to pass into at least one of those universities.....
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Brown (1995), Guest (2000), Law (1994), Kimura & Visgatis (1996), and Pai (1996) have demonstrated clearly that entrance examinations no longer emphasize translation or grammar-focused "discrete-item" exercises; |
This is about the only specific mention made to run counter to what has been said by people like me. I'd like to see what these people wrote. Like I said, I've seen the practice exams, and they do contain such exercises. Emphasize them? What does that mean? Use as more than half of the test material/time? Not sure, but this is a key point in the argument that goes unexplained in this article. I guess I will just have to find a way to read those supporting articles. |
Read the supporting articles. Also, how recent are those practice exams?
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| on the contrary, they now uniformly feature advanced, adult level reading passages (Brown, p. 96-7; Guest, pp. 25-7; Law p. 96; Kimura & Visgatis, pp. 86-92; Pai, p. 153), along with contextualized, task-based analysis problems requiring examinees to have the ability to summarize and/or explain difficult areas in the reading passages |
Oh, yes, absolutely true! However, many (if not most) of those adult level passages are so high level that native speakers find it hard to understand them as well, and the grammar in them is still full of that arcane English. |
So, it seems you are in agreement with the article writer. The reading passages are very (impossibly?) difficult for the student skill levels. Why is that? Strange that 88% still can pass, huh? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taikibansei
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Posts: 811
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 1:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Glenski (and anyone else even remotely interested),
In going through some old computer files, I came upon a 1999 article (again, very long) which quotes extensively from many of the sources used in the one provided above. PM me if you're interested in receiving it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Glenski
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Posts: 12844
Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
taikibansei,
I think we are not really talking about the same thing in some of our messages. One fault of trying to have a conversation through a text forum, I guess. Let's see if I can help to straighten some out.
You started by trying to show an article which says that entrance exams are not full of useless and old English, but you wrote:
| Quote: |
| But the point of the article is that they often don't learn the grammar. |
That's not what I got out of it. Which grammare are you talking about, by the way? Grammar useful for having a conversation, or for passing the entrance exams? The fact that most students stumble enormously after a simple "Hi, how are you?" shows their conversational abilities are abyssmal. The fact (posed by the article) that 80% of applicants pass the entrance exams would suggest that they have learned what is necessary there. However, a little ways down in the article, it says:
| Quote: |
| many colleges and universities in Japan now admit more than 50% of applicants, with a large number of 2-year colleges -- not to mention some 4-year regional universities -- accepting close to 100% of those applying (Akira, 1998, pp. 949-1024; Mulvey & Jannuzi, 2000). |
Ok, fellas, who is closer to the truth? I'm not in the university system, so I hope those that are can settle this one. Perhaps the difference is in the use of the words most vs. many, but if that was the case, I'd like to slap the people who refereed the article for letting someone use the word "many" as brazenly as he did to make some sort of point.
For what it's worth, taikibansei, I agree with you in stating that HS kids have terrible basic grammar abilities, whether for spoken or oral English. In my opinion, they cram hard enough to pass what they face in the entrance exams, and then open the valve on their skulls to let it all drain out. Rote memorization has that sort of flaw sometimes.
As for this statement...
| Quote: |
| As stated (with citations) in the article, until very recently, the majority of Japanese high school graduates didn't attempt to go to university. |
Help me find it... I have tried to no avail. I can't respond without reading it. I guess it's not really important, however, because you were confused on semantics of what I wrote:
| Quote: |
| all students worry about exam hell. Not just the ones who go to elite schools.. |
When I wrote "all", I was referring to those that choose to go to university, not every single student in Japan, and not those who go to places with no entrance exams or with 100% acceptance.
| Quote: |
| Read the supporting articles. |
Well, I would be very happy to, except that I do not have any access to them whatsoever. My HS does not do inter-library loans, and I don't have access to any library that has such journals. This is a major pet peeve of mine. If you (or anyone else) would care to send them to me, I would be eternally grateful. Meanwhile, can you sumarize them to answer my question?
| Quote: |
| how recent are those practice exams? |
Very. Within the past 2-3 years.
| Quote: |
| So, it seems you are in agreement with the article writer. The reading passages are very (impossibly?) difficult for the student skill levels. Why is that? Strange that 88% still can pass, huh? |
Well, look at the article itself. At the end, the author writes:
| Quote: |
| There is also the undeniable reality that many exams test for a level of comprehension clearly far beyond the overwhelming majority of test takers, so much so that one must perforce doubt the value of their results. |
To answer your question, if, indeed, they do pass honestly, yes, it is strange. The article itself (with citations) mentions how test scores can be altered by the university itself to get the almighty yen (students) into the doors. I've already posted a message on the Teachers' Forum attesting to a similar instance at the high school level.
But, we know that university grades are pretty immaterial for many jobs in Japan because employers look at the school reputation (however THAT is determined, based on the alteration of grades we see, and the cheating on tests when questions are leaked by the writers), not on the grades. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taikibansei
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Posts: 811
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| You started by trying to show an article which says that entrance exams are not full of useless and old English. |
Nope, I was responding to this statement:
| Glenski wrote: |
As you put it, students in Japan study English not to learn how to communicate orally, but to pass college entrance exams |
English study in Japan--at most levels and for many students--seems more about ritual than actual learning, whether for the entrance exams or for any other task. I mean, you seem to be suggesting that the majority of these students enter university with sufficient--or even minimal--reading and writing skills, when in fact numerous Japanese studies since the 1980s have shown that this is not the case.
| Quote: |
| That's not what I got out of it. Which grammare are you talking about, by the way? Grammar useful for having a conversation, or for passing the entrance exams? |
Now you're playing with semantics. I helped write some of these exams at two universities, and I'm sure I've seen almost as many as you. The reading passages we used were from modern (last 25 years) texts, while the writing prompts (for the short English essay students had to write) were taken from contemporary issues--give me some examples of a "grammar" relevant to reading such texts and writing for such prompts which would never be relevant to oral conversation?
Furthermore, the reading skills sections of a number of other university entrance exams have been analyzed by Brown (1995), Law (1994), Kimura & Visgatis (1996), and Pai (1996), among others, with the following conclusions:
1) The reading passages used therein are almost without exception adult level, well-written, grammatically and stylistically correct (see Brown, pg 96-7, Law p. 96, Kimura & Visgatis, pgs. 86-92; Pai, p. 153; etc.)
2) Contextualized, task-based questions -- i.e., not just translation or narrow "discrete-item" questions -- make up a large portion of these exams, requiring examinees to have the ability to summarize and/or explain difficult areas in the reading passages (see Brown, p. 94-95; Law, p. 96; Kimura & Visgatis, pgs. 86-92; Pai, p. 153; etc.).
These same studies--not to mention others by Guest, (2000); Kitao, K. & Kitao, S. K. (1989, 1995); Kitao, S. K., Kitao, K., Nozawa, K., & Yamamoto, M., (1985); Kitao and Yoshida, (1985); Nishijima, (1995); Pai, (1996); Saeki, (1992); Takefuta, (1982); Tanaka, (1985); H. Yoshida, (1985); S. Yoshida, (1985); and Yoshida & Kitao, (1986), etc.--argue that the overwhelming majority of college-bound Japanese high school students make it through high school without sufficient preparation to read such texts and/or handle such questions. For example, the Kimura & Visgatis study shows conclusively that those high school "readers" and "study guides" you keep referring to have, on average, a 3 grade-level difference in reading difficulty when compared to actual exam content--have to love the quality of that "test preparation"....
| Quote: |
| The fact that most students stumble enormously after a simple "Hi, how are you?" shows their conversational abilities are abyssmal. The fact (posed by the article) that 80% of applicants pass the entrance exams would suggest that they have learned what is necessary there. |
Students "pass" the exams because, as explained in the Mulvey article (and as you allude to below), universities have no choice but to take a certain percentage of the applicants available in order to have enough students to keep running. Still, I don't get your point--are you now seriously arguing that students who cannot respond to "Hi, how are you?" are actually somehow grammar (even exam grammar) masters and/or closet readers of the great books? Are you seriously buying into the "We can read and write English, but cannot speak it" myth? Tell me, in what universe does someone who cannot answer that basic question--after six years and almost a thousand hours of language instruction--excel in other areas of English? Studies by Kitao, K. & Kitao, S. K. (1995); Kitao, S. K., Kitao, K., Nozawa, K., & Yamamoto, M. (1985); Yoshida, S. (1985) and Yoshida & Kitao (1986) found that even successfully matriculated students lack the vocabulary (about 1000 words) and reading speeds--let alone top-down processing strategies--necessary to handle native texts. Heck, one of these studies noted that a number of Japanese students successfully enter university without even basic dictionary skills--do you really think that mere unfamiliarity with oral communication is the only problem with speaking here?!! 
| Quote: |
As for this statement...
| Quote: |
| As stated (with citations) in the article, until very recently, the majority of Japanese high school graduates didn't attempt to go to university. |
Help me find it... I have tried to no avail. I can't respond without reading it. |
From the Mulvey article:
"Support for this lower figure can be found in the fact that the percentage of students who do take the entrance examinations and apply to enter university only topped the 50% mark in the last decade (Monbukagakusho, 1999a, 2000a)."
| Quote: |
| When I wrote "all", I was referring to those that choose to go to university, not every single student in Japan, and not those who go to places with no entrance exams or with 100% acceptance. |
This now makes sense, then.
| Quote: |
| To answer your question, if, indeed, they do pass honestly, yes, it is strange. The article itself (with citations) mentions how test scores can be altered by the university itself to get the almighty yen (students) into the doors. I've already posted a message on the Teachers' Forum attesting to a similar instance at the high school level. |
I agree with this 100%--indeed, your observations here support both what I was saying and what the other article said.
PM me with your email address if you want a full bibliography and/or quotes from some of the articles mentioned above. Bottom line: I am not defending the exams per se, only suggesting that the entrance examinations themselves are not the only source of the problem here. To return to the original point of the thread, grammar translation does exist as a preferred methodology (among other, equally poor, ones), no it is not effective, and I fully sympathize with the OP for having to deal with its products every week. Furthermore, I am quite aware that some Japanese teachers use the exams to justify their methodologies. However, someone (Glenski?) needs to explain to me how a high school curriculum which seems almost intentionally designed to produce students without even minimal skills in reading, writing, or listening is "teaching" for exams which demand reading, writing, and, yes, increasingly listening skills as well. Can't wait to hear this one.
Last edited by taikibansei on Sat Nov 13, 2004 3:58 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guest of Japan
Joined: 28 Feb 2003
Posts: 1601
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've been reading this thread with interest and it seems like there is a lot of spitting hairs over similar opinions.
Whether the entrance exams reflect archaic English or not they (in the interest of weeding people based on test taking skills and memorization techniques) test English skill in terms of quantity and finite details. Yes, a student who is proficient in English will not stumble on these, but the normal student is being asked to assimilate more knowledge than possible and as such can never gain mastery over the basic components.
In putting this kind of pressure on students, high schools have to teach (probably mistakenly) toward the test. A typical grammar or reading class has the teacher and students sound out a passage and then the teachers explains away all the English without the students ever having to try to do so themselves. When it comes time for students to take test they then apply the information the were presented as if it is some sort of physics formula to be memorized and applied.
This sort of testing is not limited to entrance examinations; it's how Japan views testing. It can be seen in the Japanese proficiency examination, the TOEIC and the EIKAN (at least in the first part). It is felt that if you know vocabulary and can utilize a formula then you can comprehend. Rarely, are students asked to create from their own ideas, whether it be oral or written.
English is not taught in Japan. Students are taught about English, and this is reinforced through the university entrance exams. The Discovery Channel teaches about astrophysics, but it doesn't teach astrophysics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike L.
Joined: 28 Feb 2003
Posts: 519
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2004 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| However, someone (Glenski?) needs to explain to me how a high school curriculum which seems almost intentionally designed to produce students without even minimal skills in reading, writing, or listening is "teaching" for exams which demand reading, writing, and, yes, increasingly listening skills as well. Can't wait to hear this one. |
This is a good point. In fact the high school teaching methodology, poorly executed Grammar translation for ther most part, as well as the dummied down tests actually don't prepare students in any for university entrance exams.
To do this, they must go to another "special" juku. Even so if the whole system wasn't rigged so Taro the poohtaroh and his millions of useless cohorts could get in, Japanese universites would be bereft of students.
No wonder Japanese companies invest so much in training!
Really makes me wonder what is the point of Japanese education besides to waste time, opportunites and copious amounts of everyone's money? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
taikibansei
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Posts: 811
Location: Japan
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2004 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mike L. wrote: |
This is a good point. In fact the high school teaching methodology, poorly executed Grammar translation for ther most part, as well as the dummied down tests actually don't prepare students in any for university entrance exams.
To do this, they must go to another "special" juku. Even so if the whole system wasn't rigged so Taro the poohtaroh and his millions of useless cohorts could get in, Japanese universites would be bereft of students.
No wonder Japanese companies invest so much in training!
Really makes me wonder what is the point of Japanese education besides to waste time, opportunites and copious amounts of everyone's money? |
Exactly! Real preparation for the entrance exams happens in the jukus/yobikos...and not in Japan's high schools.
As for what goes on in the high schools themselves, my wife was a juku teacher and I worked in the teacher-training program at a university--between us, we've collected a number of horror stories. One of my wife's favorites regarded a student who, frustrated with always getting marked wrong on her grammar translation homework, asked her mother--a professional translator--for help. Being the 'kyouiku mama' that she was, this mother did her daughter's homework for the next class...and still received a poor grade. One of the things she lost points for: using the word "unhappy" instead of "sad" (the former word wasn't on the teacher's answer sheet, apparently....)
I could write a book about the bizarre 'teaching' I was forced to observe in demonstration classes at the local schools each semester (e.g., "'Computer' is a noncount noun...one computer, two computer, three computer...see?"). And yes, if confronted with their mistakes, the teachers invariably excused themselves by saying, "Yes, but it's that way on the local university entrance exams"--which I knew wasn't true because I helped write the darn things. However, my favorite story involves a high school speech contest. The teacher in charge had bragged to us judges going in how hard he and the other teachers had worked with the students to get their English polished, so our expectations--while not high--were not as low as usual. Then the first student, a very attractive 2nd-year girl, began a speech titled "Why I Like Intercourse"...which ended in the rousing line, "So, I want to have intercourse with many country's people--let's have intercourse with me now!"
She won.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Glenski
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Posts: 12844
Location: Hokkaido, JAPAN
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2004 11:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| are you now seriously arguing that students who cannot respond to "Hi, how are you?" are actually somehow grammar (even exam grammar) masters and/or closet readers of the great books? |
Absolutely not. Don't know how you got that out of my postings.
| Quote: |
| Are you seriously buying into the "We can read and write English, but cannot speak it" myth? |
Who said it was a myth? Are you saying that the kids who enter university cannot speak it but can read and write it well?
All I meant in my comment...
The fact that most students stumble enormously after a simple "Hi, how are you?" shows their conversational abilities are abyssmal. The fact (posed by the article) that 80% of applicants pass the entrance exams would suggest that they have learned what is necessary there.
is that they DON'T leave high school with more than a passable ability to speak English, and their reading and writing skills leave a LOT to be desired, so the simple fact that they can pass a college entrance exam based mostly on writing and reading leads one to wonder why. I have already stated that part of the reason is that they are good memorizers for short term events, and that (as you have already confirmed) many universities juggle the scores anyway just to fill seats. Not much knowledge is really needed to pass the tests, then, is there?
| Quote: |
| do you really think that mere unfamiliarity with oral communication is the only problem with speaking here?!! |
Absolutely not. I agree with you on this one. I teach a reading/literature class and see my co-workers' lessons from writing classes, so I know that the students are pretty poor at reading and writing, even after 6 years of study. Don't get me started on dictionary skills, either (as you mentioned). I have written an article on a related issue/problem, and I am very tired dealing with essays that contain so much "dictionary English" that they are incomprehensible.
| Quote: |
| someone (Glenski?) needs to explain to me how a high school curriculum which seems almost intentionally designed to produce students without even minimal skills in reading, writing, or listening is "teaching" for exams which demand reading, writing, and, yes, increasingly listening skills as well. Can't wait to hear this one. |
Since I'm neither a Japanese teacher, nor a Ministry official, I can't give you the direct answer that you (and I) want. My best guess is that they are all fumbling in the dark and THINK they are providing what the kids need. Blind leading the blind, in my opinion.
FWIW, my own HS has changed curriculum every year for the past 4 years. That really makes it difficult to teach consistently. Not only that, but the native English teachers have to create lesson plans all over again each year. We usually don't even have a textbook, while the Japanese teachers do. Based on the poor test results of this year's students, we'd better change the curriculum again next year, too. Sigh. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
