The accent argot Language Teacher - JALT Publications

84 Pages·2010·5.08 MB·English

accent
The
argot
articulation
brogue
cant
Language
communication
conversation
dialect
diction
dictionary
Teacher
discourse
doublespeak
expression
gibberish
idiom
<tlt.jalt-publications.org> interchange
jargon
lexicon
lingua franca
palaver
Feature Articles . . .
January / February 2011
parlance
Volume 35, Number 1 3 Peter Burden looks at the mechanization of teaching at
patois
the tertiary level in Japan
ISSN 0289-7938 11 Toshie Agawa, et al., explore demoptivhatrinag fsacetoros inl ogy
¥950
English learning prose
signal
The Japan Association Readers’ Forum . . .
for Language Teaching slang
17 Naomi Hashimoto and Steve Fukuda help students build
sound
more democratic classrooms
speech
23 David Penner examines linguistic and contextual factors
style
T全HE　 JAP国AN　 ASS語OC　IAT学ION　 FO教R LA　NG育UA　GE T学EA　CHI会NG affecting Japanese EFL readers
29 Mayumi Asaba and J. Paul Marlowe discuss the use otf alk
peer assessment terminology
35 Daniel Dunkley interviews John Read on meatsourinng gue
JALT2011 – Teaching
student vocabulary
Learning Growing utterance
November 18-21, 2011 verbalization
My Share . . .
National Olympics Memorial vernacular
Center, Yoyogi, Tokyo 38 Activities from Azzedine Bencherab, Darby McGrath,
vocabulary
Matthew Porter, and Yukie Saito
<jalt.org/conference> vocalization
Book Reviews . . .
voice
44 John Bankier reviews Reading Explorer 1, 2, 3, & 4w, anod rd
Julian Pigott evaluates English Firsthand 2 (4th ed.)
wording
JALT Publications
JALT Publications Board Chair } OuTrEACh Yoko}Nakano}– Kwansei Gakuin University
david McMurray Jonathan}Picken}– Tsuda College
Ted O’Neill [email protected] Martha}Robertson – Aichi University
Stephen}Ryan}– Eichi – Sapientia University
[email protected]
Lorraine}Sorrell}– Macquarie University
regular Column Editors
Toshiyuki}Takagaki – Onomichi University
TLT Editorial Staff Dax}Thomas – Meiji Gakuin University
} sig NEWs Deryn}Verity}– Osaka Jogakuin College
}}TLT}CO-EdiTOrs James Essex York}Weatherford – Kyoto Sangyo
damian rivers [email protected] University
Jennifer Yphantides } ChAPTEr EvENTs Fukiko}Yoshida}– Rikkyo University
Asako}Yoshitomi – Tokyo University of
[email protected] Michi saki
Foreign Studies
}}TLT}AssOCiATE EdiTOr [email protected]
Pending } ChAPTEr rEPOrTs
} AddiTiONAL rEAdErs
[email protected] Tara Mcilroy Eric}Bray,}Dale}Brown,}John}Eidswick,}
}}TLT}AssisTANT EdiTOr [email protected] Naomi}Fujishima,}Fujirou}Fukushima,}
Brian McMillan } JOB iNFOrMATiON CENTEr James}Hobbs,}Yoko}Ichiyama,}Masataka}
Kizuka,}Chieko}Miyanaga,}Greg}Rouault,}
}}TLT}JAPANEsE-LANguAgE EdiTOr James McCrostie Tim}Stewart,}Alan}Stoke,}Bernie}Susser,}
阿部恵美佳 (Emika Abe) [email protected] Dax}Thomas
[email protected] } CONFErENCE CALENdAr
}}TLT}JAPANEsE-LANguAgE AssOC. david stephan JALT Journal
EdiTOr [email protected]
迫和子 (Kazuko sako) } OLd grAMMAriANs }}JALT}JoURNAL EdiTOr
[email protected] scott gardner darren Lingley
[email protected]
}}TLT WEB EdiTOr [email protected]
Theron Muller }}JALT}JoURNAL AssOCiATE EdiTOr
[email protected] Production Pending
[email protected]
}}TLT WEB AdMiN
Malcolm swanson (acting) } PrOOFrEAdiNg TEAM LEAdEr }}JALT}JoURNAL JAPANEsE EdiTOr
[email protected] Jerry Talandis Jr. Ken urano
} PrOOFrEAdErs [email protected]
Karen Cosgrove-smith, James Essex,
resources Editors }}JALT}JoURNAL rEviEWs EdiTOr
Myles grogan, Jonathan Fisher, harry Bill Perry
} MY shArE harris, Martin hawkes, Tom Mahler, [email protected]
dax Thomas david Marsh, Jason Peppard, Te Mana
[email protected] Potaka-dewes, Patrick rates, Paul Conference Proceedings
spijkerbosch, Jerry Talandis, Jennifer
} BOOK rEviEWs
robert Taferner Yphantides, Chris Wharton } PrOCEEdiNgs EdiTOr
[email protected] } 和文要旨作成協力者 (JAPANEsE Alison stewart
} PuBLishErs’ rEviEW COPiEs ABsTrACTs) [email protected]
LiAisON 宮尾真理子 (Mariko Miyao) } vETTiNg COOrdiNATOr
greg rouault 稲森美穂子 (Mihoko inamori) Theron Muller
[email protected] 納富淳子 (Junko Noudomi) [email protected]
Konan}University,}Nishinomiya}Campus, } dEsigN & LAYOuT
8-33}Takamatsu-cho,}Nishinomiya, Pukeko graphics, Kitakyushu Peer Support Group
Hyogo}663-8204
} PriNTiNg
} Psg COOrdiNATOr
}}TLT WirEd Koshinsha Co., Ltd., Osaka
Wilma Luth
Ted O'Neill
[email protected]
[email protected]
}}TLT EdiTOriAL AdvisOrY BOArd
} Psg MEMBErs
Eric}Bray}–}Yokkaichi University}
JALT Focus Editors Steve}Cornwell}– Osaka Jogakuin College Paul}Beaufait,}Loran}Edwards,}Wilma}Luth,}
Steve}McGuire,}Theron}Muller
Frank}Daulton}– Ryukoku University
} JALT FOCus EdiTOr Michael}Furmanovsky}– Ryukoku University
Marcos Benevides Scott}Gardner – Okayama University JALT Central Office
Chiaki}Iwai}– Hiroshima City University
[email protected] Masaki}Kobayashi}– Kanda University of Urban}Edge}Bldg.}5F,}1-37-9}Taito,}
} MEMBEr's PrOFiLE & shOWCAsE International Studies Taito-ku,}Tokyo}110-0016}
Jason Peppard Shirley}Leane – Chugoku Junior College t:}03-3837-1630;}f:}03-3837-1631
[email protected] Todd}Jay}Leonard}– Fukuoka University of [email protected]
Education
} grAssrOOTs
Robert}Long}– Kyushu Institute of Technology
Joyce Cunningham & Mariko Miyao
Bern}Mulvey}– Iwate University
[email protected] Tim}Murphey}– Kanda University of
t:}029-228-8455;}f:}029-228-8199 International Studies
| 1
January / February 2011 • Vol. 35, no. 1
in this month’s issue . . .
COnTEnTS
Feature Articles
A
s 2011 is upon us, the staff at TLT
} The mechanization of teaching: Teachers’
would like to take this opportunity
metaphors and evaluation in Japanese
tertiary education ...................3 to wish you a prosperous New
} Preliminary study of demotivating factors Year. We hope 2011 will bring you
in Japanese university english learning ....11 much success and profession-
al fulfillment. To help start
Readers’ Forum
you off this year, we have put
together an issue packed with
} reaching for their own goals: a more
informative articles, lesson
democratic classroom ................17
shares, interviews and book
} linguistic and contextual factors that affect
reviews.
Japanese readers of eFl .............23
} using peer assessment in the language There are two Feature
classroom .......................29 articles in this edition. The
} an interview with John read ..........35 first, by Peter Burden, addresses
issues of the mechanization of
Resources
teaching and evaluating at Japanese universities.
The second, by Toshie Agawa et al., is a good
} My Share ........................38
complement to Burden’s as it examines the various
} book reviews ....................44
factors which contribute to demotivation amongst
} recently received .................47
Japanese students at the tertiary level.
JALT Focus In the Readers’ Forum section, Steve Fukuda and
Naomi Hashimoto discuss how they promoted
} JalT notices .....................48 the development of a more democratic classroom
} Member’s Profile ..................50 by giving students the opportunity to take more
} Grassroots .......................52 control of their learning. David Penner takes an
} outreach ........................57
Continued over
Columns
JALT PubLiCATiOnS OnLinE
} SIG news .......................60
<jalt-publications.org>
} Chapter events ....................64
January/February 2011 online access
} Chapter reports ...................67
} Job Information ...................74 Material from all our publications produced in the last 12
months requires a password for access. These pass-
} Conference Calendar ...............75
words change with each issue of TLT and are valid for a
} old Grammarians ..................77
3-month period. To access our archives:
} Membership Information .............80
[ login: jan2011 / password: 2qo8D32s ]
} online access Info ..................1
} Submissions Guidelines ...............2
TLT Coeditors: Damian rivers & Jennifer yphantides
TLT Japanese-Language Editor: Mihoko Inamori
1
THE LANGUAGE TEACHER: 35.1 • January / February 2011
The Language Teacher » Foreword & Information
in-depth look at the numerous linguistic and We hope you enjoy what we have for you
contextual factors that make reading in English in this issue and that it will contribute to your
problematic for Japanese students. Mayumi professional development in meaningful ways!
Asaba and J. Paul Marlowe offer tips on using All the best for the New Year.
peer assessment in the language classroom and Jennifer Yphantides, TLT Coeditor
Daniel Dunkley reports on an interview he
conducted with John Read about measuring 2011年の年頭にあたり、本年が皆様にとって素晴ら
student vocabulary. しい年になり、皆様の成功と専門的成就の年となり
ますようにTLTスタッフ一同お祈りします。新年のス
The My Share column includes a piece by Azze-
タートにふさわしく、情報たっぷりの記事、授業のアイディ
dine Bencherab on pre-reading strategies. In addi-
ア、インタビュー、書評などを満載しています。
tion, Darby McGrath provides advice on helping
今月号には2つの Feature が掲載されています。ま
students with citations and references. Matthew ず、Peter Burden が日本の大学における指導と評価の
Porter spices things up with his conversation 機械化の問題点について論じています。次に、Toshie
lesson on hotel English, and Yukie Saito discusses Agawa et.al.が日本人大学生の学習意欲減退の様々な要
因を調査しています。
using TOEIC Part 2 to help students with indirect
speech acts. In Book Reviews, John Bankier looks Readers’ Forum では、Steve Fukuda とNaomi Hashimoto
が、学生に学習をコントロールする機会を多く与えること
at Reading Explorer 1, 2, 3 & 4 and Julian Pigott
で、より民主的な教室をいかに作り上げていったかついて
reviews English Firsthand 2, 4th edition. 論じます。David Penner が、日本人学生にとって英語読解
の問題点となる数多くの言語学的、状況的要因を詳しく
調べます。Mayumi Asaba と J. Paul Marlowe が、語学授業
submitting material to で学生による相互評価を用いる際のアドバイスをしていま
す。Daniel Dunkley が、学生の語彙力測定についてJohn
The}Language}Teacher Read に行ったインタビューを報告しています。
My Share では、Azzedine Bencherab が、プレリーディ
ング・ストラテジーについて述べています。さらに、Darby
Guidelines
McGrath は、学生の引用文献と参考文献に関する助言を
The editors welcome submissions of materials しています。Matthew Porter は、ホテル英語に関する会
話の授業にスパイスを加えています。Yukie Saito は、学生
concerned with all aspects of language educa-
の間接的発話行為の理解促進のためにTOEIC Part 2を使
tion, particularly with relevance to Japan. As
うことを論じています。Book Reviews には、John Bankier
well as for feature articles, readers’ forum が Reading Explorer 1, 2, 3, 4 の書評を、Julian Pigott が
articles, interviews, and conference reports, English Firsthand 2 (4th edition) の書評を寄稿しています。
we also need material for our many columns. 今月号の内容が皆様にとって楽しく、かつ専門性の発
展に役立つものであることを祈ります。新年が最高の年に
Submitting online
なりますように。
To submit articles online, please visit: Jennifer Yphantides, TLT Coeditor
<jalt-publications.org/access>
From there, you can register an account,
then submit your articles through our produc- Advertiser index
tion site. After creating your account, please
Cambridge university Press ..............28
be sure to check the About page for further
EFL Press ............................34
submission guidelines.
general union .........................51
Information about submitting to our regular
columns is available through the Section Neuro-Logical .........................79
Policies and Online Submissions links, as well Lexxica ..................inside back cover
as within the columns in this issue of TLT.
Oxford university Press ....outside back cover
To contact the editors, please use the contact
For more information on advertising in The Language
form on our website, or through the email
Teacher, please contact JalT Central office <am@
addresses listed in this issue of TLT.
jalt.org>, or see the advertising guidelines on our
<jalt-publications.org/contacts>
website <jalt-publications.org>
2
THE LANGUAGE TEACHER online » <jalt-publications.org/tlt>
| 3
The Language Teacher » FeaTure arTICle
The mechanization of
teaching: Teachers’
metaphors and evaluation
in Japanese tertiary
education
Keywords
student evaluation, metaphors, teach-
er improvement, effective teaching Peter Burden
Twelve elT university teachers
reflected, through using metaphors, in okayama Shoka university
interviews about the use of Stu-
dent evaluation of Teaching surveys
(SeTs) in their respective universities.
The introduction of student evaluation of teaching
Studying teachers’ metaphor reveals
their first-hand experience of how
The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Tech-
they were affected in their teaching by
SeTs. Metaphors suggest that SeTs do nology (MEXT) in Japan has made the implementation of self-
not match teachers’ conceptions of evaluation in tertiary education compulsory since 1999 (MEXT,
teaching as an art. Such evaluation has
2004). Reflecting the popularization of higher education,
caused relations between teachers,
administrators, and students to fracture end-of-semester student evaluation of teaching surveys (SETs)
due to competitive ranking. While par- have been encouraged in the belief that popular teachers and
ticipants accept formative evaluation as
courses offer student satisfaction, will attract potential students
a necessary process to give insights to
teachers, they wish for a more open, and, for private institutions dependent on fees for income, will
improvement-focused, coopera- make them more able to retain students once they have entered.
tive, specific evaluation. They want
more teacher involvement and more In this study, twelve ELT university teachers reflected,
dialogue between teachers to discuss through using metaphors, in interviews about the use of SETs
the results of SeTs to aid the reflective
in their respective universities. The paper will first outline how
process for change.
SETs are administered in tertiary education and then briefly
各大学での学生による授業評価（SETs） focuses on contentious areas that have led the author to ques-
について、12名のELT担当の大学教師への
インタビュー調査を実施し、回答に用いら tion the use of SETs from an ELT perspective. After outlining
れたメタファー（比喩）を分析した。その結
果、SETsで各教師の実際の教え方にどのよ the research methodology in which details are given about the
うな影響があったかが明らかになり、SETs interview style and the participants, the importance of meta-
と教師側の「教える」という概念とは一致し
ないことが示唆された。このような評価は、 phorical expressions which teachers employ when talking about
競争的な順位付けをすることで教師側・大
学当局側・学生側の関係を壊している。被 their professional beliefs about evaluation is discussed. Teach-
験者の大学教師達は、教師の自己洞察のた
ers’ spontaneous use of metaphors during interviews revealed
めに必要な過程として形成的評価を受け入
れる一方で、よりオープンで改善を目的とし participants’ perceptions of their roles in tertiary education, and
た、連携的で具体的な評価を望んでいる。さ
らに、SETsの結果に教師がもっと関わり、 the following discussion offers some implications for improving
教師間で意見交換することで授業改善を進
めることを希望している。 the use of evaluation. These include a greater need for clarity
of the evaluation purpose, more ‘horizontal’ dialogue between
THE LANGUAGE TEACHER: 35.1 • January / February 2011
TLT » Feature article
the parties involved in evaluation, and the use of Recognizing that effective teaching is contextu-
multiple data sources so that evaluation becomes al, if definitions of the constituents of effectiveness
more personally meaningful for teachers. are not in place, teachers and administrators may
have conflicting expectations (Stronge & Tucker,
The administration of SET surveys 1999). This researcher started to hear concerns
among English language teaching colleagues
SETs in tertiary education in Japan usually utilize
when SET surveys began to be administered at
paper and pencil questionnaires containing
the end of a single semester of English education.
Likert-type 1-5 scales anchored from “Very poor
Is it possible for ‘communicative’ language teach-
(1)” to “Very good (5).” These questions are
ers who encourage functional language profi-
coupled usually, but not always, with a final glo-
ciency involving the expression, interpretation,
bal characteristic of ‘overall satisfaction’ of the
and negotiation of meaning to be evaluated after
course and ‘effectiveness’ of the teacher. Many
just a single fifteen-week semester by first-year
schools require the students to anonymously fill
undergraduates who may not previously have
in closed-item questions which are subsequently
experienced such a teaching approach during
used for data analysis by the school administra-
six years of junior high and high school English
tion and are the basis for summative scores.
education? Teaching is too important an activity
Many writers, for example Feldman (1988,
to be conducted without critical inquiry and as
p.291), note that if faculty and students do not
there have been insufficient explorations of teach-
agree as to what constitutes effective teaching,
ers’ perceptions into the introduction of SETs,
then faculty members may well be “leery” of
research focusing on faculty perceptions and how
students’ overall ratings of them. Often, there is
evaluation affects teaching is clearly warranted.
not any explicit statement of purpose delivered
To understand teachers’ personal understandings
either to schools or to teachers, or any indication
of the introduction of teaching evaluation, and
of a remedial path for teachers who receive poor
whether the use of SETs matches their conceptions
evaluations. While many may see the introduc-
of teaching, data from teachers’ spontaneous use
tion of SETs ultimately as a benign attempt to
of metaphors during interviews were collected.
encourage teachers to somehow improve or in-
If evaluation through one tool, SETs, is to
novate their teaching, for many teachers the lack
encourage improvement, the key element of
of any remedial path, the delay in feedback, and
receptivity to this form of evaluation from teach-
the actual timing of the administration suggest a
ers cannot be ignored, as feeding back useful,
summative decision-making perspective.
diagnostic information creates energy, which can
then be directed through reflection into an action
Rationale for the study
plan which leads to development.
Gorsuch (2000) argues that knowledge in Japan
is traditionally seen in terms of immutable truths SETs and the use of metaphor
so, there is a danger of dissonance through
Reform in Japanese education has been described
oversimplifying the conditions required for
as top-down (Gorsuch, 2000), but made opaque
language learning to a set of discrete points
through the “extraordinary reluctance to clarify,
instead of recognizing that the “whole is more
define, and articulate policy” by MEXT (Miyoshi,
than the sum of the parts” (Crabbe, 2003, p.27).
2000, p.681). While evaluation should be seen
While Darling-Hammond and Snyder (2000,
as “an agent of supportive program enlighten-
p.523) suggest that “teaching is becoming more
ment and change” (Norris, 2006, p.578), it can
complex in response to increasingly challenging
be argued that if evaluation is left to the end of
curriculum expectations and growing diversity
a course, it loses any opportunity to inform and
among students,” the emphasis seems to be one
influence teaching. The longevity of SETs use in
of controlling behavior and learning in such a
America may suggest presumptive ‘evidence’
way that they will conform to pre-determined
for the benefits, but studies considering the
ends or an “identical path to understanding”
institutional effects on teachers are “scarce or
(Darling-Hammond & Snyder, 2000, p.523).
non-existent.” (Kulik, 2001, p.15).
4
THE LANGUAGE TEACHER online » <jalt-publications.org/tlt>
Burden: The mechanization of teaching: Teachers’ metaphors and evaluation in Japanese tertiary education
It is fruitful to consider what sorts of meta- The interviews took place approximately two
phors teachers use to refer to evaluation, how the months after teachers had administered evalua-
metaphors are used, and to discuss what impli- tion during the final weeks of the second semes-
cations can be drawn from teachers’ metaphor. ter ending in early February. It was assumed that
They serve as “pattern making devices” (Miles & the university administration had had sufficient
Huberman, 1994, p.225), placing the metaphors time to analyze and send the data back to teach-
into the larger context of evaluation and the ers in anticipation of the new school year starting
teachers’ position within the current evaluation in mid-April. However, none of the teachers had
method. Metaphor also “captures the thinking of received feedback despite the two-month gap.
teachers in their own language, rather than in the
language of the researcher” (Munby, 1986, p.198), Findings
while De Guerrero and Villamil (2000) suggest
Findings suggest that teachers feel threatened
that teachers employ metaphorical expressions
by the introduction of SETs and are concerned
when talking about their professional beliefs,
about the purpose and consequences of this form
which reflect how teachers understand their
of evaluation. Participants’ metaphors reveal
world.
their lack of involvement, voice, and feelings
As metaphors reveal “tensions, surprises,
of distance from power holders, which often
confusion, challenges and dilemmas” (Louie,
encourages an absence of trust in accepting
Drevdahl, Purdy, & Stackman, 2003, p.143), an
organizational change.
examination of metaphor use can encourage
reflection on the relationships teachers have
Metaphors to describe those who devised
with other stakeholders—students, colleagues,
SETs items
parents, and administrators.
The participants feel threatened by the opaque
Method evaluation purpose and use uninformed specula-
tions while disparaging others they have not
Twelve tertiary English language teaching (ELT)
met. Participants have little confidence in the
faculty were asked to outline their perceptions of
ability of administrators who wrote the ques-
the introduction of SETs in their tertiary institu-
tions. Administrators are seen as “powers that
tion through interviews. The interview questions
be,” “big cheeses,” or “old farts” and “groups
were flexible and encouraged teachers to reflect
of little men” who form “nameless committees”
on their first-hand experience of how they were
and “get together” in “darkened rooms” and
affected in their daily teaching by the introduc-
whose views are not consonant with teachers’
tion of SETs. A range of perspectives from both
educational goals and conceptions of teaching.
male and female ELT teachers was sought to
Questions are seen as “outdated” and “ir-
enhance credibility (Rubin & Rubin, 2005).
relevant,” being written “about a million years
Seven male and five female teachers from five ago” by some “Japanese statistician type” or by
different universities—one national and four “someone in the hard sciences a long time ago.”
private universities—in one city in Western One teacher compared the questionnaires to
Japan participated. Their ages ranged from early dictionaries which build on the original corpus
30s to late 50s, while their teaching experience and only slowly change over passing years.
in the tertiary sector ranged from one year to
Participants’ feelings of unease about the role
close to thirty years. The two Japanese teachers
of the administration reflect findings in Ryan,
of English in this study were full-time tenured
Anderson, and Birchler (1980), which suggested
faculty. Seven of the ten expatriates had lower-
that SETs usage increased the distance between
status, limited term contracts and the remaining
faculty and administration. In the current
three were tenured. As evaluation is inherently
administrative climate, participants fear they are
political, anonymity and confidentiality proce-
evaluated unfairly because consequences of SETs
dures were outlined, and participants under-
are often unknown as stakeholders hold different
stood that the tape-recorded interviews would
purposes for evaluation, and so considerations
be transcribed verbatim.
5
THE LANGUAGE TEACHER: 35.1 • January / February 2011
TLT » Feature article
of what or who the evaluation serves is far from The issue of “popularity” is a fundamental
clear. While the developmental formative nature issue for another participant who says the
of evaluation is often recognized in English degree of preparation, or “hidden labor” is not
language teaching literature (see Hedge, 2000), addressed through evaluation while he hears
without clear description, teacher understanding students complaining of workloads. He says:
is incomplete and so teachers do not understand
You could be a real, quote, “strict” teacher. I
which behaviors to improve, which to retain,
tend to give a lot of homework and the com-
and what the likely consequences of this form of
ments are, “You make us work too hard.” But
evaluation are.
I don’t think that it’s too hard. It depends on
your interpretation. I think they can handle
Metaphor to describe evaluation as a form
it. I think the work they do outside the class-
of consumer satisfaction
room is just as important as in it. They’ve
For participants, another focus of evaluation got to bring English into their daily lives so I
is to directly improve the quality of student have them doing things outside and then I get
satisfaction so “the goal is getting more students complaints.
and keeping them in business” so they become
However, he worries that “if student com-
“cash cows” and should not be “let go for four
plaints are reflected on here [evaluation forms]
years.” Therefore, participants suggest that
then I’m a bad teacher.” Participants suggested
evaluation has become a “popularity contest”
that classes where content is not emphasized
and, while those teachers whose “little numbers
will lead to “dumbing down” because teachers
and charts” look “good” are safe, universities
will need students to have “a good time” so that
can say to “poor” teachers in the face of declin-
“appropriate” education becomes secondary
ing admissions: “You’ve had consistently low
to an education the student “wants,” which is
evaluations and we don’t need your services
problematic when students enter school with lit-
any more.” Evaluation is seen as a “marketing
tle initial academic interest. Participants suggest
tool” to “sell” the school and if teachers are “not
the competition for students means that teachers
jumping up and down in class” the students
need to be a “draw” to attract students through
may not perceive it as enthusiasm and so give a
word of mouth, which may promote speculation
poor overall global evaluation. One participant
and tension among contracted teachers with
suggests that “popular teachers” can get a “good
regards to their future employment.
reputation” and can “make the school money”
in “fun” classes. Schools’ survival is addressed
Metaphors to describe fracturing
through evaluation - “because the kids basically
relationships
walked in doesn’t mean that they’re going to
stay” as students may drop out due to a lack Similarly, participants are “wary” of ranking
of immediate “satisfaction.” This caused one teachers in “league tables” which emphasize
teacher to ponder: “winning and losing” as they can can lead to “a
competitive win-lose situation” (Braskamp &
I know I shouldn’t feel scared or uncomfort-
Ory, 1994, p.7) where faculty learn little about
able by doing this because teachers should be
“how to improve, only that they should” (p.6).
evaluated. I think students have to be satisfied
This decline in collaboration and dialogue
but at the same time they don’t know how to
has led to harboring bitter feelings expressed
study, they don’t know what the good edu-
through metaphor towards colleagues, especially
cation is so we have to make them do things
teachers of “conversation.” These classes are
they don’t want to do. Even though they
seen as “fun,” “non-challenging classes” with
hate it, it doesn’t mean that the teacher is a
colleagues who “play games,” “jump around”
bad teacher. This is the difficulty. One teacher
and “act like a jack-in-the-box.” This resentment
said, “Of course I get the bad scores because
may well stem from a belief that the evaluation
they don’t want to study.” So he knows that
“playing field” is not even, with evaluation being
he isn’t popular.
unfair as it is only used to judge part-timers. One
6
THE LANGUAGE TEACHER online » <jalt-publications.org/tlt>
Burden: The mechanization of teaching: Teachers’ metaphors and evaluation in Japanese tertiary education
participant has heard of tenured faculty with specific faculty teaching behaviors, and “may
“poor” evaluations being retained at the expense constrict teaching styles rather than encouraging
of part-timers with better scores. Participants a diversity of classroom strategies” (Braskamp
are suspicious of others’ teaching methods, the & Ory, 1994, p.182). Another participant com-
ability of students to appreciate and evaluate mented:
“academic” classes, and whether teachers ma-
The questions are predetermined by admin-
nipulate evaluation data to inflate their scores.
istrators who know little about teaching, and
As the parameters are unclear, teachers question,
who actually determine what techniques
“When is ‘good’ good enough?”
should be used. In the same sense that a text-
Perhaps paradoxically, while many teachers
book assumes a certain method or approach,
seem to oppose the use of SETs for summative
evaluations show techniques a teacher is
purposes, they lament the teaching performance
required to use. Evaluation is not responding
of those around them. Most participants imple-
to the humanity of the teachers or students.
ment their own evaluation to aid reflection on
Knowledge for me is something that they can
their own practice, but point to a lack of profes-
discover for themselves, but as it is a foreign
sionalism of those around them. Participants talk
language it’s not something inside them; to
of “dead wood,” suggest that tenured, full-time
discover from examples by themselves is a
university teachers “go through the motions” or
good way but just to sit and tell them this is
“fall into ruts” or “comfortable routines,” and
what we do here- I don’t think that’s an effec-
“devalue teaching because it gets repetitive.”
tive way - getting them to reach answers for
Comments above may reflect different levels of
themselves is the best way.
evaluative scrutiny for tenured or non-tenured
faculty, similar to Nasser and Fresko’s (2002) For a third participant, rather than behaviors
findings where few tenured faculty reported or “techniques,” teaching is a “creative proc-
changing their teaching as a result of course ess” which requires constant reflection leading
evaluations. to “refinement” and “development.” While
teaching can be “learned” like mathematics so
that “there are practices you can follow so that
Metaphor as an expression of conceptions
anyone can carry out a teaching job,” unreflec-
of teaching
tive teachers are “unempathetic,” while “good
Participants saw their teaching through meta- teachers” can “know when [they’ve] caught the
phors of “art,” which suggests “a unique set audience and can lead them to tears or laughter.”
of personal skills” (Freeman & Richards, 1993, Other participants suggest similar metaphors,
p.206). As one participant says: seeing their roles as a “magician” or “a creator”
who “creates the sequence or order to best fit
I can feel when the kids are tired or preoc-
the students in different classes,” or, again, as an
cupied. But I’m sure there are teachers who
artist being creative in order to hold onto, and
wouldn’t feel anything. Teaching is not a craft
encourage, interpersonal relations and positive
or a skill you can learn, or a set of techniques.
attitudes.
Art is something that is inside that I can de-
velop. Other teachers are more mechanical; Another teacher illustrates the irrelevance of
it’s more like they’ve studied techniques and the evaluation drawing a distinction between
things. I feel I pick it up as I go; I develop it teachers’ concerns with the day-to-day running
and can see it working and feel when some- of classes—“the small details and things like
thing worked or didn’t work. atmosphere”—and the university interest in the
“framework” or the “published, visible side” of
He feels evaluation reinforces a view of teach-
what teachers do inside the classroom. Therefore,
ing as a set of techniques which can be learned
participants have little confidence in the ability
but which do not form a “complete teacher.” He
of power holders whose views are not consonant
suggests teachers need to have the “space” to
with teachers’ educational goals and conceptions
“develop” ideas and to experiment even at the
of teaching.
risk of failure. However, SETs surveys reinforce
7
THE LANGUAGE TEACHER: 35.1 • January / February 2011
TLT » Feature article
Metaphor as an expression of teacher Discussion
programming
Increasingly, the introduction of student evalua-
Teachers see a “robotic” or “cloning” metaphor tion of teaching is seen to “focus on the abilities
implicit in SETs and its representation of teach- of teachers” (MEXT, 2001), but the underlying
ing as “teacher programming.” One teacher conception of what good teaching entails and
observed that: how it can be encouraged has not been made
clear.
It makes clones out of everybody; do this
All of the participants accept that formative
and this and this and you’ll be an accept-
evaluation is necessary as a process to give
able teacher. Yet every teacher has a different
insights to teachers. The participants suggested
personality…you have to watch what other
they often administer self-generated student
teachers do and listen to the students and if
evaluations which offer students opportunities
you want to know whether a teacher is effec-
to provide additional, qualitative comments
tive or not you need to know a lot more than
about the course, the teaching and the teacher,
the answers to a few questions.
as well as to evaluate their own course perform-
“A robot could do that” [the teaching implied ance. However, they all wished for a more open,
by the evaluation], while “it could be pro- improvement-focused, cooperative—but spe-
grammed,” with the questions seen as “limiting” cific—institutional evaluation. They want more
because they emphasize the “little aspects of teacher involvement, more dialogue between
teaching” and so “diminish the trust of teach- teachers to discuss the results to aid the reflec-
ers.” It is suggested that the “Ministry” is trying tive process for change, and the removal of the
to project an image of a “correct institution” pervasive atmosphere of secrecy that surrounds
which “squashes the teaching style.” There is a data results.
lack of a shared sense that SETs reflect important
Openness about the process encourages
aspects of teaching, and the use is not consonant
knowledge of both the purpose and what happens
with teachers’ educational goals and conceptions
to the surveys after they leave the classroom. It
of teaching. An extended quote from one of the
should also be made clear how important each
participants serves as a useful summary:
student’s opinion is, how the opinions impact
on non-tenured teachers and on elective classes.
SETs evaluation is based on the concept of
If the university evaluating body has criteria by
the class as a lecture and somewhere in here
which the evaluations are reviewed these should
maybe the bureaucratic control the belief is
be made known; if there is an overall objective
that there is a good way to teach…these ques-
to which teachers are supposed to be working
tions are a good way to teach. If you can do
it would be useful to know what that is so that
XYZ then you’re a good teacher and breaking
classes might be adjusted. While teachers do not
down teaching into these nice little categories
wish to take a lot of student time, more specific
that are numerically controlled.
questions would push students to think more
Another laments: “I would like to say my job about answers. Also underpinning SETs are judg-
is a profession but it’s just a job.” Giroux’s (1988) ments from an accountability perspective whereby
school-as-factory metaphor comes to mind as there is an assumption that all students pursue an
SETs reduce teaching to basic, predetermined identical path to understanding. This view erodes
skills to quantify and make tangible figures out individual teacher’s artistic and intuitive knowl-
of teaching. Teachers learn to understand and edge. There is a loss of a “sense of involvement of
change their work behavior by continually exam- teachers” (Prabhu, 1990, p.172) as the participants
ining, analyzing, hypothesizing, theorizing and distanced themselves from mechanical SETs. One
reflecting as they work (Schön, 1983). Teachers’ participant sees evaluation as personally irrelevant
valuing evaluation and using feedback depends to his notions of improvement as he sees teaching
on how the teaching act is construed, and there is as a personal, sharing act, from which knowledge
little in evaluation which considers the ‘thought’ grows. He does not see education in terms of
behind teaching. “concrete” improvement.
8
THE LANGUAGE TEACHER online » <jalt-publications.org/tlt>