The study-abroad program here at Yokkaichi University is a for-credit course that includes a trip to the US, Britain, or China, depending on the year and student motivation. There was a gathering of students today for an explanation by a representative from our sister school, Long Beach State University in Long Beach, California.

Of the students attending nearly half of them were non-traditional students, those students who have been in out of the academic world for some time who chose to return to study at university. Their ratio here at this school is very small when compared to students who enroll at 18 or there abouts. The ratio of enthusiasm is in converse proportion, though. The older students have the hunger and the energy of teenagers. They are excited to participate and explore possibilities. They are full of life and fun to be around.

Non-traditional students have participated in small numbers in the study-abroad program here, and in not-for-credit study abroad courses in much higher numbers.

Yup, 'peaters... Had them again today. I have changed the class into a self-paced affair, where students who come (today of the 22 registered, 8 appeared) learn what they need from the course, and the others study to retake quizzes that they have failed. My feeling is that instead of a lock-step class, where everyone does the same thing and the students who need real help get left behind, this would boost attendance, scores, and student egos. For example, one student came to class today who had not taken the last quiz. I let him take it in class. Abysmal. He studied again for the quiz, took the same one again, and did very well. He smiled a big ole smile and then went on with what the students who have taken and passed the quiz were doing.

There are problems with the system. One surprising obstacle came up today; upper classpersons do not want to work with lower classpersons. I think it is a pride thing.

Some precautions to take here would be to explain again what the objectives of the class will be and what the requirements for a passing grade AS WELL AS explaining what it would take to achieve excellence.

Yesterday was the class for students repeating First-year English Communication. It is a mixed class of second and third-year students. The roll suggests that there are 14 people in each of two classes. I have seen a few more than half of their faces, and there were 4 students in each class yesterday to take a unit test. Possibly half of those students passed the short test.

Over the weekend we had another gathering of participants of the Yokkaichi Teachers' Initiative. This week's theme was Learning Strategies for Teachers and Learners. The workshop was my job this time, so I organized it with the help of materials, especially the book, "The Learning Strategies Handbook," by Anna Uhl Chamot, Sarah Barnhardt, Pamela Beard El-Dinary, and Jill Robbins, published by Pearson Education. A fine book to own for any teacher.

I was struck by the gap that my class yesterday illuminated for me between the strategies outlined in the "Handbook" and the strategies my students employ. Rather than starting with strategies for planning and monitoring, these students are in need of some tools that will help them make some more fundamental decisions. Do they want to be at university? Do they want to graduate with an English language tool in their bag of goodies? Are they ready to make the effort required to meet standards? If asked, they would probably exhibit a variety of mixed responses between students and even with individuals. My guess is that they would acknowledge the need for a second language, but would be hesitant in committing themselves to the amount of effort required to achieve standards.

An article from the Asahi Weekly
site says:

"Just 6 percent of teachers at elementary and junior high schools have confidence in their ability to counsel students in social skills and other nonacademic matters, according to a recent survey.

The figure was markedly lower than in Britain and China, where 47 percent and 73 percent, respectively, of teachers were confident of their ability to shepherd students toward becoming more well-rounded individuals."

In the Yokkaichi Teachers' Development Initiative that I coordinate with Andy Mellor, and in the TOPLINE program that I coordinated with Paul Beaufait in Kumamoto, we asked teachers about their confidence levels in English language use and in teaching. Paul and/or I reported the data from the TOPLINE program at some point on those issues. We did not have another population of teachers with which to compare them, but the numbers were not nearly as bleak as the figures above.

What I do see, though is a general trend of low self confidence among teachers in Japan. The reason I say this is the data from the report above, and from another report out of the International Study Center at Boston College. In a report from the 1999 TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and science Study) it shows that while Japan is relatively strong (5th in their data behind Singapore, Korea, Taipei, and Hong Kong) in math achievement scores, Japanese teachers have very low confidence levels IN THEIR PREPARATION to teach mathematics. Their data shows that the confidence highs of 85% for Macedonia, the US, the Slovac Republic and Cyprus, are contrasted with the lowest score of 8% in Japan. Data on science teachers reflects the same kind of differences with high confidence levels in Macedonia and Japan with the lowest confidence levels.

If this data is reliable, teachers are far less than confident in their preparation for these two teaching careers. Can this data be extrapolated to cover English teachers? I am not sure that the levels would be as low as those for math and science, but they would be lower than 85%. I am making that judgment based on the data collected from the seminars with English teachers, and the teachers that attend those seminars are special in a number of ways, if not only their motivation to improve themselves professionally.

There may be factors that account for some of the data collected, like a generally low level of self esteem that passes for modesty here, a result of the general tendency by those in power to bully and focus on their subordinates' faults rather than to build on strengths. This behavior is perpetuated by the "sempai/kohai" social structure.

In any case, teachers in Japan, of whatever grade or subject, are hardworking, honest, dedicated people who desperately need ways to build confidence in their ability to contribute to their students and their professions.

As my research career here seems to be going to pot, I have decided to assume a new policy of reading and writing for one hour each, every day. This is experimental, but if it is something I continue, it should have great long-term rewards.

One quote from today's reading, Peter Jarvis' "The Practitioner-Researcher: Developing Theory from Practice" :
"Learning is the process of creating and transforming experiences into knowledge, skills, attitudes, values, emotions, beliefs, and the senses..."

Jarvis' definition suggests that learning comes directly from experience. One question is then, is the classroom an appropriate venue for learning? What experiences can learners have in the classroom? In my own field, I can help learners experience using language in the classroom. For example, I can do a unit on ordering from a menu at a fast food restaruant. (Making that experience authentic is difficult in a classroom.) Another question is that if the classroom is a place for experiences, then are the learners obliged to create and transform those experiences into their useable product. That is, if I construct the classroom one day to be a place for the learners to experience ordering from a menu at a fast food restaruant, then their task would be to transfer that into a skill that they could then use for their own purposes. That would end my role as teacher, facilitator.

Then my role as an evaluator would be to assess whether that learner has actually transformed the experience into a skill. The next problem is to build an instrument that actually measures the learner's transformed experience by evaluating his or her ability to use the new tool.

Have you ever been experienced?