Sisal journal 6(4) Special Issue on self-access and young learners

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 322-331.

Volume 6, Number 4, December 2015 Special Issue on Self-Access and Young Learners Edited by Annamaria Pinter, Robert J. Werner and Jo Mynard Articles •

•

• • •

•

Self-Access and Young Learners: Introduction to the Special Issue by Jo Mynard, Annamaria Pinter, and Robert J. Werner (322-331) ‘After Mom Gets Some Books, Then I’ll Make a Selection’: A 5-Year-Old ELL’s Decision-Making in the Book-Related Home Play by Heeyang Park (332-351) About a Boy: A Gamer and L2 English Speaker Coming into Being by Use of Self-Access by Pia Sundqvist (352-364) L2 Motivation and Young Self-Instructed Learners’ Persistence in Learning English: A Causal Analysis by Chika Takahashi (365-381) An Example of Classroom Practice Using Flashcards for Young Learners: Preliminary Indications for Promoting Autonomy by Feng Teng and Fang He (382-398) Self-Access and Metacognitive Awareness in Young Learners: How Japanese Sixth Graders Learn How to Learn English by Robert J. Werner and Yu Kobayashi (399-412)

Work in Progress • Sea Change in Library Use by Ian Adkins and Devin Unwin (413-422)

Book Reviews edited by Hisako Yamashita • ‘Teaching Young Learners To Think' by Herbert Puchta and Marion Williams. Reviewed by Duncan Jamieson (423-425) • ‘Stories and Storyline’ by Sharon Ahlquist and Réka Lugossy Reviewed by Nena Nikolic-Hosonaka (426-430) Language Learning Spaces Part 3: Developing Effective Student Staff Training Programmes edited by Katherine Thornton • Introduction: Supporting Student Staff Through Effective Training by Katherine Thornton (431-432) • Peer-led Discussion Groups in Foreign Languages: Training International Students to Become Peer-Facilitators by Catherine Jeanneau and Stéphanie O'Riordan (433-443) • Effective Training for SALC Student Staff: Principles Borne from Experience by Ashley R. Moore and Misato Tachibana (444-460) • Training Student Workers in a Social Learning Space by Naomi Fujishima Announcements • Upcoming Special Issue: Second call for papers Special Issue on Virtual and other learning spaces, June, 2016 (Volume 7, Issue 2) edited by Curtis Edlin and Jo Mynard. DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSIONS: January 15th, 2016.

322

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 322-331.

Self-Access and Young Learners: Introduction to the Special Issue Jo Mynard, Kanda University of International Studies, Japan Annamaria Pinter, University of Warwick, UK Robert J. Werner, Kanda University of International Studies, Japan

The theme of this special issue is self-access and young learners as the editors felt that bringing these two active areas of research and practice together was long overdue. In recent years the theme of ‘learning beyond the classroom’ has received an increasing amount of attention (e.g. Benson & Reinders, 2011; Council for Learning Outside the Classroom, 2015), and the editors take this as a starting point for exploring what support might be appropriate for young learners beyond the classroom. Institutions investing in self-access support for language learners tend to be at the tertiary level, yet there could be benefits for learners if such support were available in schools, public spaces, and community centres. Surely, if we are to equip our learners with skills for autonomous learning beyond the classroom, then the earlier we start, the better? In order to be able to make suggestions on directions for the most appropriate kind of support, it is necessary to explore how young language learners are already learning languages beyond the classroom and how educators are promoting autonomy and metacognition in formal classroom settings.

Articles Learning outside the classroom Three contributions to the special issue focus specifically on learning beyond the classroom. In the first article, Heeyang Park, from the University of Warwick in the UK, explores the role of young English language learners’ (ELLs) play, particularly when making choices that affect their own language learning. The author shares an exploratory case study of a 5-year-old Korean English learner in order to illustrate how a very young learner makes decisions about her learning and takes an active role as a research participant. The author describes how storybooks are being used as self-access resources in spontaneous play at home.

323

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 322-331.

In another contribution investigating young learners’ study outside the classroom, Chika Takahashi from the University of Ehime in Japan examines the structural relationships among factors affecting self-instructed learners’ persistence in learning by using self-instructional radio (SIR). The study takes place in a Japanese high school with ELLs. The author investigated selfinstructed learners’ motivational bases and their relationships to persistence by administering a questionnaire and testing two models using structural equation modeling. The results suggest that the levels of motivation and the quality of learning from using these materials were related to persistence in learning. The author also notes, however, that simply persisting in learning through use of the materials does not mean that learners are confident in L2 communication, so further practice is necessary.

The potential for gaming to play a role in language development outside the classroom is already beginning to receive attention in the literature (e.g. Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2014a; 2014b).

In this special issue, Pia Sundqvist from the University of Karlstad in Sweden reports on an interview study of Eldin, an exceptional 14-year-old Bosnian boy living in Sweden. The study investigates how Eldin became a gamer and how he engages in self-access gaming in English and is strongly motivated to learn English. Drawing on language learning motivation theories (Dörnyei, 2007; 2009) and Dweck’s (2006) concept of mindsets, the author shares the analysis of an in-depth interview in order to understand Eldin’s experiences of successfully learning English - largely through gaming.

Metacognitive development in the classroom Although only a few writers (e.g. Gardner & Miller, 1999; Vettorel, 2015) have focussed specifically on self-access language learning aimed at young learners, we can draw upon work on developing autonomous learning skills in the classroom (e.g. Ellis, 2011; Ellis & Ibrahim, 2015; Pinter, 2006) as a way to introduce students to self-access learning. In addition, work on promoting critical thinking in young learners (e.g. Ellis & Ibrahim, 2015; Puchta & Williams, 2012) can also inform our practice.

Two contributions to this special issue explore how learners might initially be prepared for self-access within the classroom. In exploring metacognitive development and autonomy in the language classroom, Robert J. Werner and Yu Kobayashi look at how sixth grade Japanese learners describe their understanding of learning processes and the strategies they employ. While

324

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 322-331.

the Japanese educational system allocates a very small number of hours per year to elementary English instruction, the article reports on types of strategies (see Ellis & Ibrahim, 2015) and ways learners might use them to improve their language skills both in the classroom and beyond.

In their article, Feng Teng and Fang He introduce the idea of working with flashcards in a Chinese primary classroom and claim that this approach can motivate young learners to practise and learn new vocabulary. In this study the children were introduced to a range of different techniques to make flashcards, and then they were invited to make flashcards about new words in each lesson. They were free to put as much or as little information on the cards as they wanted.

The results indicated that some children filled in the cards with useful information that helped them to remember words, and they also enjoyed working on these cards outside the class. The authors argue for the use of flashcards to encourage practice outside lessons and learning which can lead to more autonomous behaviour.

Work in Progress Ian Adkins and Devin Unwin from the British Council, Madrid share an overview of a project which aims to redefine their current library space for young language learners, making it into a self-access centre with a counselling service. After describing the context, the authors outline proposed support systems which emphasise the importance of training for learners and teachers in order to foster autonomous learning. Support will initially be somewhat structured and will normally be a result of teacher referrals, but the nature of the support is likely to change over time and be sensitive to learners’ developing awareness. We watch this innovative project with interest and hope that the authors write another progress report in the future, which could be very helpful for other centres considering implementing a self-access and/or advising service for young learners.

Book Reviews We are fortunate to be able to feature in this special issue reviews of two books on young learners, which have been coordinated by our reviews editor Hisako Yamashita. A recent book

by Herbert Puchta and Marion Williams (Puchta & Williams, 2012) can be a useful resource for preparing young learners to take responsibility for their language development both inside and outside the classroom. The title of the book is Teaching Young Learners to Think and has been

325

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 322-331.

reviewed by Duncan Jamieson who is based at the Oxford Intensive School of English in the UK. Jamieson summarises the theoretical models underpinning the book and also its practical nature and adaptability. Teachers can use the activities in ways that best support their learners and courses, focusing on appropriate lexis or grammar in addition to thinking skills.

Nena Nikolic-Hosonaka reviews Stories and Storyline by Sharon Ahlquist and RĂŠka Lugossy (Ahlquist & Lugossy, 2015) in her contribution to this special issue. Nikolic-Hosonaka gives an overview of each chapter of the book and provides an intuitive interpretation of how the authors understand the nature and needs of modern young language learners and how they present ways in which stories can be used to address those needs.

Language Learning Spaces Series The third instalment of the Language Learning Spaces series edited by Katherine Thornton includes a focus on different models of self-access staff training for students. In addition to an introduction by Thornton, the series features contributions by Catherine Jeanneau and StÊphanie O’Riordan from the University of Limerick, Ireland; Ashley R. Moore and Misato Tachibana from Osaka Institute of Technology, Japan; and Naomi Fujishima from Okayama University, Japan.

Implications for Self-Access and Young Learners What is clear from the various contributions is that it is beneficial for learners to receive support and opportunities for developing autonomous language learning outside the classroom to pave the way for self-access learning. In the following paragraphs, we provide suggestions for the development of the field of self-access for young learners.

1. Focus on the development of learner autonomy in the classroom Helping learners to begin to take charge of their own language learning once they begin formal education usually involves a shift in thinking and the realisation that, although the teacher can greatly help the process, it is the student who ultimately needs to take charge. Teachers working with young learners have a role to play in establishing a sense of learner autonomy as early as possible. Practical ways for implementation in the classroom are through involving young learners in making decisions - even small ones - as much as possible, and also involving

326

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 322-331.

them in critical thinking, (Puchta & Williams, 2012; Jamieson, this volume), self-assessment, goal setting, strategy awareness (see Teng & He, this volume), and resource selection (see Werner & Kobayashi, this volume).

2. Provide opportunities for young learners to choose motivating language learning activities and resources Young learners are likely to have limited class time dedicated to language learning, so teachers and caregivers have a responsibility to help learners pursue language learning in meaningful ways outside the classroom. This can be done by selecting suitable resources that not only promote language learning and/or use, but are also motivating for young people. For example, by using the target language when playing games (see Sundqvist, this volume) or engaging in story-related play (see Park, this volume). However, it is not just the activity/resource that is important for learning; there should also be opportunities for communication and further language practice (see Takahashi, this volume).

3. Draw upon stories and story-related activities Story books could be considered to be particularly powerful self-access resources for young learners. Stories engage the imagination, help with social and literacy development, and provide a shared and engaging context for language learning. Stories are one of the ways in which the language classroom can be extended to include other areas of a young learner’s life. In practical terms, stories can be integrated into the young learner’s language classroom (see Ahlquist & Lugossy, 2015; Nikolic-Hosonaka, this volume), provided in a self-access centre - or even a shelf in a classroom - at school, or at home (see Park, this volume).

4. Involve young learners in research into self-access There is a large body of literature in general education and sociology that is focussed on young learners acting as researchers and co-researchers alongside adults. In English language teaching, such a focus has not been prominent except for a few studies (e.g. Pinter, 2014; Pinter & Zandian, 2014; 2015). The shift of emphasis from treating children as unreliable and vulnerable objects of research to capable and resourceful subjects and partners in research brings a new opportunity where children learn about research processes and share some control over

327

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 322-331.

important decisions with adults. In this process, children are empowered and motivated to learn more and more about research. This has direct links with autonomy, choice and enjoyment. As the field of self-access and young learners is relatively new, further research is needed, and it is recommended to involve young learners themselves (see Park, this issue for an example).

5. Provide a social language learning environment beyond the classroom As Thornton (this volume and 2015) reminds us, self-access is not just a physical resource centre; humans learn languages most effectively from interacting with each other in a social environment. Optional clubs, activities and events taking place outside class that give young learners the opportunity to enjoy using the target language in a natural and nonthreatening environment should be encouraged.

6. Provide advising/counselling to support outside class learning for young learners Although advising is normally limited to older language learners, the goal is to engage the learners in a reflective dialogue and thought process so that they can gradually develop the knowledge and skills to take charge of their own language learning. There has been limited work in this area for young learners, but it is likely to be a fruitful area for the future, especially as so many resources are available to learners outside the classroom. In practical terms, advising could begin inside the classroom by engaging young learners in dialogue about their dreams, interests, and goals, and promoting metacognitive awareness (see Adkins & Unwin, and Werner & Kobayashi, this volume). This could ideally transcend the classroom if advising were available outside class.

7. Involve learners in running self-access systems Involving learners in self-access systems could include: (1) having learners create a language resource ‘centre’ either inside a classroom or outside of one. This might involve identifying a shelf, cupboard, corner or trolley and sourcing or creating materials for the community of learners to use; (2) empowering learners to run events using the target language.

These events might include contests, parties, karaoke, plays or games; (3) involving learners in peer mentoring (e.g. Everhard, 2015) or working in a self-access centre (see Moore & Tachibana, and Jeanneau & O’Riordan, this volume)

328

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 322-331.

Although we benefited from insights from various contexts when editing this special issue, we were unable to feature articles related to actual self-access centres or systems for young learners. We would welcome contributions to future general issues of the journal to help us understand how self-access support is being given to young learners so that we might further expand our knowledge of the field.

Acknowledgements The editors would like to thank the authors, reviewers and editorial team members for their invaluable contributions to this special issue.

Notes on the editors Jo Mynard is an associate professor and the director of the Self-Access Learning Centre at Kanda University of International Studies in Japan. She holds a doctorate in TEFL from the University of Exeter (UK) and an M.Phil. in Applied Linguistics from Trinity College Dublin (Ireland).

Annamaria Pinter is an associate professor at Warwick Applied Linguistics, University of Warwick, UK, and her research interest centres on all aspects of teaching language to children and working with children as co-researchers.

Robert Werner is a lecturer in the English Language Institute at Kanda University of International Studies in Japan. He holds an MA in TESOL from Teachers College Columbia University in New York. He has taught elementary school ESL/EFL in both the United States and Japan.

References Ahlquist, S., & Lugossy, R. (2015). Stories and storyline. Hong Kong: Candlin & Mynard ePublishing.

Benson, P., & Reinders, H. (Eds.). (2011). Learning beyond the classroom. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Council for Learning Outside the Classroom. (2015). Learning outside the classroom changes lives. Retrieved from http://www.lotc.org.uk/

329

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 322-331.

Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9-42). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House.

Ellis, G. (2011). Learner training and young learners. In C. J. Everhard and J. Mynard with R. Smith (Eds.), Autonomy in language learning: Opening a can of worms (pp. 99-102).

Canterbury, UK: IATEFL. Ellis, G., & Ibrahim, N. (2015). Teaching children how to learn. Peaslake, UK: Delta.

Everhard, C. J. (2015). Implementing a student peer-mentoring programme for self-access language learning. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 6(3), 300-312. Retrieved from http://sisaljournal.org/archives/sep15/everhard Gardner, D., & Miller, L. (1999). Establishing self-access: From theory to practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Pinter, A. (2006). Teaching young learners. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Pinter, A. (2014). Child participant roles in applied linguistics research. Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 168-183. doi:10.1093/applin/amt008 Pinter, A., & Zandian, S. (2014). ‘I don’t ever want to leave this room’: Benefits of researching ‘with’ children. ELT Journal, 68(1), 64-74. doi:10.1093/elt/cct057 Pinter, A., & Zandian, S. (2015). ‘I thought it would be tiny little one phrase that we said, in a huge big pile of papers’: Children’s reflections on their involvement in participatory research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 235-250. doi:10.1177/1468794112465637 Puchta, H., & Williams, M. (2012). Teaching young learners to think: ELT activities for young learners aged 6–12. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Sundqvist, P., & Sylvén, L. K. (2014a, Sept 2). How Swedish children learn English through gaming. The Conversation. Retrieved from theconversation.com/how-swedish-childrenlearn-english-through-gaming-31073 Sundqvist, P., & Sylvén, L. K. (2014b). Language-related computer use: Focus on young L2 English learners in Sweden. ReCALL, 26(1), 3-20. doi:10.1017/S0958344013000232.

330

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 322-331.

Thornton, K. (2015). The crucial role of peer-learning in language learning spaces. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 6(3), 286-287. Retrieved from http://sisaljournal.org/archives/sep15/thornton/ Vettorel, P. (2015). Teaching technologies: Setting up self-access centres. Onestopenglish.

Retrieved from: http://www.onestopenglish.com/support/methodology/teachingtechnologies/teaching-technologies-setting-up-self-access-centres/146524.article

331

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351

‘After Mom Gets Some Books, Then I’ll Make a Selection’: A 5Year-old ELL’s Decision-making in Book-related Home Play Research Heeyang Park, University of Warwick, UK Abstract The main theme of this article is examining the active role that young English language learners (ELLs) play in making important choices that affect their own language learning and research participation. I will consider the growing emphasis in child Second Language Acquisition (SLA) on the importance of exploring children’s perspectives about their participation in research and English language development as a second language. The first part of this article discusses the new paradigm in child SLA, which takes note of the voices of young children in research rather than overlooks their agency in favor of an adult perspective, while the second part describes an exploratory case study of a 5-year-old KoreanEnglish learner and illustrates how a very young ELL makes decisions as an active research participant in engaging English storybooks as self-access resources in the child’s spontaneous play at home.

Keywords: Learner autonomy, decision-making, self-access learning, child SLA, book-related play, ELL, research with children

From the early 1980s onward, contemporary research on language learning has shifted the focus of research, theory and practices from the traditional teacher-oriented teaching environment to the learner-centered learning environment that promotes autonomy. According to Holec (1981), learner autonomy is characterized by “the ability to take charge of one’s own learning” (p.

3). An autonomous learner is an “active participant in the social processes of learning” (Bergen, 1990, p. 102), in which both the contents and the learning processes should be negotiated, determined, monitored and evaluated by the learners themselves out of mutual interaction with the facilitative teacher (Rogers, Lyon, & Tausch, 2014).

While Holec (1981) originally derived his notion of autonomy in language learning from formal institutional settings in the adult education, Little (1991) has maintained that the autonomy can expand into much broader areas of life and ages. !

332!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 Given the digital and technological nature of 21st-century life in particular, language learning is no longer confined to the classroom context as the internet, the media and the social network along with the increasingly advanced digital devices have made various self-access learning resources and tools more readily available beyond the classroom (Alhinty, 2015; Castellano, Mynard, & Rubesch, 2011; Jeon, 2014; Kuure, 2011; Nunan & Richards, 2015; Richards, 2015). As regards the ages, a growing number of studies suggest that even young children can be ready for accepting responsibility for some aspects of their own learning with careful guidance (Dam, 1995; Kirsch, 2012; Kristmanson, Lafargue, & Culligan, 2013; Little, 1991).

This shift in focus from teachers to learners in increasingly wider contexts and age ranges has also applied to undertaking research on children’s English language learning in Second Language Acquisition (SLA) (Copland & Garton, 2014). Not only do researchers in child SAL encourage participating children to exercise autonomy in various aspects of language learning but to make informed decisions in the research processes including whether to participate in or withdraw from research. If the research is to be undertaken with very young children aged 5 and under (Ellis, 2014) with limited linguistic and cognitive capacity for expression, it will require even more careful research design to make sure that their ideas and views are taken into serious consideration.

The main theme of this article is thus to examine the active role that young English language learners (ELLs) play in making important choices that affect their own language learning and research participation. I will consider the growing emphasis in child SLA on the importance of exploring children’s perspectives about their participation in research and English language development as a second language (L2). The first part of this article discusses the new paradigm in child SLA, which takes note of the voices of young children in research rather than overlooks their agency in favor of an adult perspective (Pinter, 2014), while the second part describes a case study of a 5-year-old KoreanEnglish learner and illustrates how a very young ELL makes decisions as an active research participant in engaging with English storybooks as self-access resources in the child’s spontaneous play at home.

!

333!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 Considering the definition of self-access learning, which features students’ selection of materials and work on tasks on their own (Sheerin, 1991), children’s story reading/listening in the home environment can provide rich and powerful self-access learning opportunities for young ELLs. While substantial research attention has been drawn to the resultant benefits of home reading on children’s L2 development (Cameron, 2001; Chow, McBride-Chang, & Cheung, 2010; Kim & Hall, 2002; Uchikoshi, 2006), few studies have highlighted how young ELLs actively take the initiatives in these valuable learning processes such as deciding which books to read and which book-based tasks they engage in. In many studies, books are normally selected by adults (Jones & Buttrey, 1970; Kim & Hall, 2002) and young children’s spontaneous book-related play in L2 is inherently limited because child-initiated play tends to occur in their first language (Mourão, 2014).

It is, therefore, worthwhile to explore how a 5-year-old ELL develops the knowledge and skills she needs to be able to take control of her own learning as well as her participation in research in response to the decision-making opportunities offered by an adult researcher.

Paradigm Shift in Child SLA Contemporary research on childhood has recently witnessed the elevation of children’s status in research from passive objects to more active participants (Kellet, 2010). This new paradigm has shifted its focus from research ‘on’ or ‘about’ children to research ‘with’ children (Kellet, 2010), with children taking on more active roles in deciding research agendas by speaking in their own rights and reporting valid views and experiences (McTavish, Streelasky, & Coles, 2012).

The value of listening to children’s voices, therefore, enables a fuller understanding of childhood in child-focused research.

Despite increasing weight being given to ‘listening to children’s voices’ in recent sociological, anthropological and educational child studies, however, Pinter (2014) has claimed that this perspective shift has largely been neglected in child SLA, which is still “overwhelmingly adult initiated and adult focused” (p. 169).

In many studies, research findings are expressed in numerical terms and children’s acquisition of a new language is interpreted in terms of “normality and deviation” (Pinter, 2014, p. 170). The enduring issue of single one-off !

334!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 measurement of children’s language learning achievement is still prevalent, as Pinter (2014) shows in her review of literature on age factors in child SLA. In addition, there seems to be little improvement with regard to unfamiliar task types (Vandergrift, 2005), incomprehensible language use in research design (Macaro & Erlier, 2008) and lack of linguistic means available to children to articulate their thoughts and concerns (Gu, Hu, & Zhang, 2005).

While still a fledgling phenomenon as it remains, however, a new set of research tools have begun to emerge for undertaking research on children’s English language learning (Copland & Garton, 2014). In this line, one of the mainstream applied linguistics publications, ELT Journal, published a Special Issue focusing on pre-/primary-school learners in 2014 and introduced a number of innovative research methods (Besser & Chik, 2014; López-Gopar, 2014). This perspective shift from a paternalistic approach has recently been promoted by child-centered SLA researchers such as Kuchah, Pinter and Zandian, who suggest using various participatory activities and engaging children’s participation in developing research instruments such as questionnaires, interview questions or activities.

Kuchah and Pinter (2012) encouraged 10-11 year old children in Cameroon to engage in a co-constructed dialogue with the adult researcher, where all the interview concepts and processes were mutually agreed and negotiated.

Children were able to challenge adult conceptions and make unexpected, spontaneous comments and suggestions about ‘good teaching’ and ‘good teacher’, which showed a profound difference to the views of teachers who had also been interviewed. The resultant amendment to the intended research processes in this case signifies that the whole research plan should be revisited and reconstructed in accordance with the adoption of child participants’ voices about the project.

Moving beyond the interactive methods ‘during’ the data collection stage, Pinter and Zandian (2015) have explored children’s retrospective reflection of their participation in research. Revisiting the earlier project in a follow-up session with the demonstration of the physical results of the research such as the MA dissertation in this case proved to be conducive to both stakeholders. One the one hand, the participating children understood more fully what the research had really been about and how they were represented in the project by asking questions about pseudonyms and transcribing. On the other hand, the researchers !

335!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 were able to reinterpret the original research findings with a deeper understanding of how the work with children should be. As Pinter and Zandian (2015) have suggested, better understanding of children’s conception about research will lead to more effective research design in subsequent studies.

Voices of Very Young Children The growing emphasis in child SLA on the importance of exploring children’s perspectives about their L2 development is a welcome development, though examination of current research has demonstrated that there have been few observations or experiments that take note of the voices of very young learners aged 5 and under. Part of the reason for this gap in research may be attributed to the view that at this earlier age, children are neither able to articulate their thoughts or concerns nor report their experiences and views in a logical fashion even in their first language (Bongartz & Schneider, 2003; Gu et al., 2005; Philp, Mackey, & Oliver, 2008).

This feature of very young children then leads to the concern on their freedom of choice with regard to participation in and withdrawal from research (Alderson & Morrow, 2011; Christensen & James, 2000; Coady, 2010). Young children who are not yet linguistically and cognitively competent lack the capacity to express their views and must rely on their parents or guardians to give consent on their behalf. Further, wishing in general to please their significant adults or being influenced by adults with authority, pre-primary children tend to decide to remain in research even if they feel uncomfortable and anxious (Cameron, 2001; Langston, Abbot, Lewis, & Kellet, 2004).

This does not mean, however, that there is no way for researchers to recognize their verbal or non-verbal messages regarding participation and refusal.

Even children aged 3 and upwards can understand and talk about what a project is about and what we would like them to do. In an attempt to gain children’s consent for participation, O’Reilly, Ronzoni and Dogra (2013) advise that we should familiarize ourselves with children’s vocabulary, the types of tasks they enjoy or dislike and the way they generally interact with adults. Considering their age, cognitive ability and preferred ways of communication, we need to think about what we are asking children to do and how we deliver it. !

336!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 Verbally incompetent as they may be, children of the pre-primary stage can signal their likes or dislikes in a number of different ways. As Langston et al.

(2004) have admitted, even very young babies can indicate their dislike of a research procedure by crying, looking uneasy and anxious, or simply not responding to the researcher. It is, therefore, important for us to remember that the children’s best interests are always paramount and to carefully monitor their facial expressions and body language throughout the course of the research in order to identify messages of dissension.

The Case of Jihu In the following, I consider the points mentioned above with reference to the findings of an exploratory case study of my own daughter Jihu, 5 years old at the time of data collection, in England for three months from March to May 2014.

The aim of this study was to explore what kind of book-related play that an English learning child spontaneously engages in at home after shared reading. The research findings are connected with an ELL’s language learning, but the research processes also illustrate how a very young child can make important choices as an active research participant in response to the decision-making opportunities offered by her mother researcher.

Background In early September 2013, I moved from South Korea (Korea hereafter) to England to take the one-year Master program in English Language Teaching.

Before coming to England, Jihu had not studied English except for very limited instruction at her Korean kindergarten for one year. During the 8-month period from late September 2013 through May 2014, she attended a reception year class in a British public elementary school and gradually learned how to speak, read and write in English. At home, Jihu took great pleasure in watching children’s English animations and reading children’s English books and enjoyed performing story-based role-plays with me as playmate.

My role as mother and intimate playmate as well as researcher presented me with both advantages and disadvantages in conducting child research. As family member, I could capitalize on the “complete membership role” (Adler & Adler, 1987), which allowed me to fully enter into my daughter’s life world !

337!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 without restrictions and closely examine the lived experiences of childhood at home. As a result, not only could I gain in-depth knowledge of my child but I could also have wide access to multiple sources of language data, both spontaneous and planned. However, if the parental role becomes stronger than the research role and parent researcher tips the balance in such hybrid roles toward membership, it is possible to imagine the researcher’s right to know taking precedence over the participant child’s right to privacy and need for autonomy. In order to preserve the balance between both sides regarding my status as mother researcher, I tried to maintain as much as possible my sensitivity to the autonomy and confidentiality of the child both as an empowered research participant and a capable language learner.

Deciding to participate When the idea of conducting research with my daughter began to emerge, I explained to her about the research objectives and overall process in words she could understand and obtained her approval for participation. She was very excited that I would make a ‘big book’ on her, where she could see her name ‘!""! {a hundred times}’. For this reason, she disliked the use of pseudonym for the sake of privacy protection. Rather she strongly demanded that her real name, Jihu, should be used. After making careful references to other family-based research (Bongartz & Schneider, 2003; Lee, 2005; Rowe, 1998), I agreed to her request.

Deciding what books to read Stories and books for very young children are normally selected by adults (Jones & Buttrey, 1970). It is mainly the adults’ judgment or assumptions that will determine the criteria of book choice for children, in the belief that such books will be interesting and valuable to the children or will meet their academic needs (Kim & Hall, 2002). In choosing the right materials, Little (1991) admits that even adult learners are likely to need assistance because they do not have proper knowledge or experience to find them. The responsibility for the selection of learning materials, therefore, can be a “compromise” (Little, 1991, p. 49)

!

338!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 between learners and teachers since the teacher’s professional expertise cannot simply be handed over to the learners.

For this study, I had originally selected 10 English storybooks that have the qualities of content, illustrations, organization and language use (Cameron, 2001; Leicester, 2009; Linse, 2005). Prior to the full-scale data collection procedure, Jihu had demanded that she should make a final decision as to which books to read and in which sequence to read them. Excerpt 1 below shows Jihu’s wish to exercise her rights in the book selection process.

Excerpt 1 (Audio recorded on 26 Feb 2014) Jihu (J):

Well (...) after Mom gets some books !! "###$! "#$! %! &'(! "##$! (..) and tells me about this and that )! *+,! -.! %-! /*! book (..) then I will make a selection.

0.! %-! /*! -12! 34(! "##$! 5$! 672#!

Table 1 illustrates the list of storybooks Jihu chose for the study, which confirms Cameron’s (2001) suggestions about a good quality story. The characters, settings and events in these books are relevant and engaging to the child in one way or another. For example, the famous character Lola from the Charlie and Lola series written by Samantha Hill is a genuine reflection of a girl in Jihu’s age. The bunnies from the Peter Rabbit series contain lots of details in terms of a mischievous boy Peter and his good-natured little sisters, one of whom, Mopsy, Jihu felt great attachment to. Even though the big furry tiger from The Tiger Who Came to Tea initially had not been well accepted to Jihu but the settings and events, in which the tiger is invited to tea with a similar-aged girl Sophie and her mother at home, bore enough resemblance and familiarity to Jihu’s real world to enable her to empathize with the character. Apart from the features described thus far, author factor cannot be overlooked because Jihu becomes strongly motivated to read books of her favorite storybook authors such as Eric Carle, Julia Donaldson, Jill Murphy and Oliver Jeffers.

Table 1. Selected Storybook List ! English Storybook *

!

Author 339!

Publishe d Date

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 1 The Tiger Who Came to Tea 2 The Tale of Peter Rabbit and Benjamin Bunny 3 The Very Hungry Caterpillar 4 My Wobbly Tooth Must Not Ever Never Fall Out 5 Snow is My Favorite and My Best 6 Lost and Found 7 Room on the Broom 8 Peace at Last

Judith Kerr Frederick Warne Eric Carle Samantha Hill Samantha Hill Oliver Jeffers Julia Donaldson Jill Murphy

2006 1997 2002 2012 2012 2006 2002 2007

Note: * Storybooks are listed up in the chronological order of Jihu’s play.

While learners may not be able to find the right learning materials such as storybooks in this case only with their own resources (Little, 1991), it is essential that the adult stakeholders should offer opportunities to the learners for negotiation and review about the content of learning and support the initiatives the learners take (Dam, 1995). Given the early age of the learner in this case, sufficient adult support may be inevitable but it is important to remember that learning can be enormously effective and meaningful when we give her the right to choose (Schouten-van Parreren, 1989). After all, it is the learners who can judge which materials are genuinely appropriate for them.

Deciding whether to record Once the storybooks were arranged in order as requested by Jihu, we used a strategy of repeated reading for the purposes of pleasure and effective reading (Cameron, 2001). One story was read multiple times during shared reading, mostly in bed at bedtime while I was reading and Jihu was either looking at the pictures or simply listening. In this way, we covered one story repetitively until Jihu began to create activities based on the story. Over the course of three months from March to May 2014, I collected 15 video recordings (3.21 hours) and 9 audio recording (1.22 hours), with accompanying pictures of Jihu’s artifacts and a detailed journal kept by me. From these data, I selected 9 video clips (34.36 minutes) and 2 audio recordings (3.15 minutes) for transcription. !

340!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 The use of audio and video recordings for this project had clearly been explained to Jihu at the initial stage of the research and was accepted. From the 2nd week of March, however, she began to demonstrate her discomfort with my role as researcher rather than playmate. During a filming session on 13 March 2014, she articulated her dissatisfaction with my videotaping by complaining in Korean, ‘!"!" #$%" &'" ()" *+" ,-.# {Mom, turn off the camera and just join in my play.}’ Since then, Jihu’s initial positive attitude to filming gradually changed into resistance. After consultation with Jihu and reflection over child-centered research, I determined to stop taping sessions from 20 March and pay more attention to recovering the naturalness of my relationship and play with Jihu.

It was not long before Jihu became willing and excited again to take part in the research from the 4th week of March. While her performances always emanated spontaneously, we sometimes set a certain day for recording if she felt ready. There were even a couple of times when Jihu finished preparation for play on her own and called out, ‘!"!" *" /0" 123.#" *" 456" 738.! {Mom, I’m ready now. Film me, please.}’ In the same way, I became more flexible and negotiable with my role. Whenever Jihu wanted more of me as mother and play partner, I gladly listened to her and fully immersed myself in our play. At these times, recording was done, not with audio or video equipment but through diary keeping as soon as possible after the event while my memory remained fresh.

My data collection procedures demonstrated the researcher’s general tendency to consider children’s initial attitudes as a “simple formality” (O’Reilly et al., 2013, p. 151). Furthermore, the episode above confirms Little’s (1991) and Dam’s (1995) suggestion that when applied to child research, participant children should actively be encouraged to monitor and evaluate their involvement, while adult researchers should be willing to reflect the learner’s ideas and suggestions and amend the original plan at any stage of the research.

Deciding what types of play to do Unlike adult-led guided play, in which adults generally take the lead in terms of play type choice, preparation and in-play interactions (Massey, 2013), this project highlighted the self-initiated spontaneous play of a preschooler as a !

341!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 way of representing the books she had read. As might be expected from the childinitiated play, various types of unstructured play ideas emerged by the child’s own efforts and enacted with the resources available in her immediate environment. The resultant book-related play that Jihu created was categorized into role-playing, miming, book-reading events, story retelling and book art (Table 2). For the purpose of this article, I define ‘book-reading event’ as a preliteracy activity where prereaders pretend to read largely by guessing and memory without applying phonological and orthographical strategies for text decoding (Chall, 1983), and ‘book art’ as a collaborative work which involves children’s planning, designing and producing their own books in letters and art work (Johnson, 1998).

Table 2. Types of Book-related Play !

English Storybook

Play Type

1 The Tiger Who Came to Tea 2 The Tale of Peter Rabbit Benjamin Bunny 3 The Very Hungry Caterpillar

and

4 My Wobbly Tooth Must Not Ever Never Fall Out 5 Snow is My Favorite and My Best 6 Lost and Found 7 Room on the Broom 8 Peace at Last

book-reading retelling role-playing

event,

story

miming, role-playing, book art book-reading event book-reading event book art role-playing, story-retelling book art

As evident in Table 2, it is not uncommon that one story sometimes produced different types of play. For example, The Very Hungry Caterpillar was enacted in three different patterns: miming, role-playing and book art. More surprisingly, the agreed roles and rules even within a single play activity did not always remain intact throughout the whole event but was subject to amendment and adaptation in response to the child’s instantaneous ideas, interest and needs.

Excerpt 2 illustrates the natural transition of Jihu’s role from a responsive mime performer more towards an initiative script developer.

!

342!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 Excerpt 2 (Video recorded on 8 April 2014) J: M: J: M:

J: M: J: M: J: M: J: M: J: M: J:

(Still lying on the bed) No- no, uh pretend it’s (.) not the same, mom.

Ah, not the same story?

Yeah.

Okay, so on Fri- on Saturday, she ate this one, she ate that one, she ate candy, she ate corn, she ate (.) uh a slice of watermelon:::n. AND THEN? She FELL ASLEEP. (Asking Jihu) Is that what you mean?

No. Ah, it’s (.) alright. (Sitting up on the bed) Apple, one apple, two pears, three plums, four strawberries, five oranges (..) is RIGHT. Yes? But, I DON’T LIKE TO HAVE (..) the (.) xxx On Fri- Saturday, she ate through one slice of cup cake, (..) that (.) I don’t want to have that. I just need to Ah, okay. So on Friday, on Friday night, (..) the hungry caterpillar (.) fell asleep.

(Jihu pretends to sleep on bed.)

And then. Oh Jihu, is the (.) is the caterpillar still hungry, or is- is she full now?

(Opening her eyes) I’m a FULL now.

Ah, she’s full now! She’s NOT hungry ANY MORE. And then she fast fell asleep.

(Closing her eyes for a couple of seconds and then opening them and sitting up) Now I eat through one lea- one nice leaf. Owp, owp, owp!

And the next morning, she woke up and she ate through one big nice leaf. And then, she fell asleep too.

No, I just rest.

At the initial stage, Jihu only mimed the caterpillar to my narration. This concept of play was suggested by Jihu; she assigned our roles, made a set of rules and managed the play session from the beginning. This pattern, however, changed from the middle of the session, when Jihu gradually took the lead with more verbalization. Jihu demanded story re-creation by clearly verbalizing that she did not want to follow the same storyline. From that point, she became more responsible for script adaptation and I responded naturally.

As regards the book art activity, which Jihu was able to do alone without the limitation of places and number of playmates, the self-made book on Lost and Found was created independently during her free time in school. It was when Jihu engaged in more self-initiated book making in school, including the binding of the pieces of paper with glue and sticky tape as well as emergent writing inside. Her title (Lost end fawd) shows that Jihu used the letter-sound correspondence from phonics in order to spell words (Figure 1).

!

343!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351

Figure 1. Jihu’s Self-made Book on Lost and Found Taking the best use of freedom afforded to her in re-enacting and representing storybooks in any ways she preferred, not only did Jihu take more control of both the contents and processes of her language play but she also demonstrated significant linguistic development in her English learning as an L2.

Fluency in her oral language improved considerably with the repetitive use of key phrases and expressions from a story through various activities such as roleplaying, story-reading events and story retell. In addition, her early literacy development was fostered when Jihu engaged in the literacy-related behavior of making a book based on the story he had read or heard (Johnson, 1998; Pellegrini, 1980).

!

344!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 Deciding to record herself with an app Within the context of informal out-of-class language learning, the educational benefits of mobile learning for ELLs have been confirmed in a number of studies over the past ten years in terms of motivation, agency and autonomy (Jones & Issroff, 2007; Richards, 2015; Traxler, 2013). While considerable research has been conducted on young ELLs’ collaborative learning with peers and other language groups such as in online gaming and chat rooms (Alhinty, 2015; Jeon, 2014), however, little research attention has been paid to a single young learner’s use of mobile devices in his/her spontaneous language play.

Excerpt 3 below describes a child’s ability and enjoyment in incorporating mobile technology into her free language play. Wishing to record her story retell of Room on the Broom with my Smart Phone, Jihu found a filming App on her own and started self-recording. Then she changed her mind and searched for a voice-recording App. Immediately after the recording, Jihu listened to her story retell very intensively several times before repeating the same procedure until she was eventually content with her performances. Encouraged by her successful first attempt, Jihu undertook the second round of self-recording four days later based on Peace at Last. This time, there was no need for her to check the procedure with me because she already knew how to do it.

Excerpt 3 (Video recorded on 12 May 2014) J: J: M: J: M: J: M: J: M: J: M: J:

!

(Jihu turns off the filming App and is searching for another App.) (Pointing to a voice recording App) !", !"! {This one, This one!} Ah! Just voice, voice mail? But I think videotaping is better, but- (..) but do you like audio taping?

(Jihu keeps looking at the phone.)

If you WANT, if you want the audio recording BETTER, you can go with it.

Which way do you want to do?

(Jihu shows the audio recording App to mother.)

Ah, AUDIO RECORDING? Great!

Th- (Then Jihu stops her speech and shows the audio recording App to mother again.)

(Checking if the App is turned on) >Okay<, [let me see.

[Is it working?

Yes, it’s WORKING! OH! You’re very good at the machine.

(Brining the phone closer to her mouth) The witch had a cat (.) and the long ginger hair when- (.) no (.) and the tall hat (..) when you (..) and the lo::ng ginger hair when you wore in the plant. (Chewing gum) Bu- how the- (.) how the cat purred

345!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 Given the fact that the rising generation are increasingly adept at and thus motivated towards working with mobile technologies in all aspects of their lives (Jones & Issroff, 2007), it is not surprising that even a 5-year-old child can utilize mobile devices fairly easily and skillfully despite their apparently complicated layout and functionality. Jihu’s capacity to act independently and purposefully using the “tools and resources available in the surrounding environment” (Kalaja, Alanen, Palviainen, & Dufya, 2011, p. 47) can be referred to agency and autonomy, while repeated listening and speaking practices to perfect her story retell can contribute to the ELL’s oral language skills and fluency development.

Based on the observations and field notes in this study, I suggest that a child’s ability to incorporate mobile technology into his/her free language play should be further examined.

Conclusion In this study, a 5-year-old ELL demonstrated considerable capability and willingness in taking charge of her participation in research and book-related language play as self-access learning at home. Not only did the child explicitly approve her participation in research but she determined which storybooks to focus on, negotiated on whether to record, and made spontaneous decisions on what type of play to do and which resources to use including the state-of-the-art mobile device. While more care is to be taken to ensure autonomy for very young children, it is important that parents, teachers and researchers understand the power of learner-centeredness in child SLA. By offering decision-making opportunities to young learners as empowered research participants and capable language learners, we adults can be ready for any wonders they will bring back. !

Notes on the contributor!

Heeyang Park has worked as an English teacher, materials developer and teacher/parent trainer for young learners for ten years in South Korea. She completed her MA in English Language Teaching (ELT) at the University of Warwick in England in 2014 and is currently pursuing a PhD with a major in Applied Linguistics and ELT at the same institution. Her research interests

!

346!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 include early literacy development, research with children and teacher/parent education.

References Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1987). Membership roles in field research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Alderson, P., & Morrow, V. (2011). The ethics of research with children and young people: A practical handbook. London, UK: Sage.

Alhinty, M. (2015). Young language learnersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; collaborative learning and social interaction as a motivational aspect of the iPad. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 10(2), 24-29. doi:10.3991/ijet.v10i2.4313 Bergen. (1990). Developing autonomous learning in the foreign language classroom. Bergen, Norway: Universitetet I Bergen, Institutt for Praktisk pedagogikk.

Besser, S., & Chik, A. (2014). Narratives of second language identity amongst young English learners in Hong Kong. ELT Journal, 68(3), 299-309. doi:10.1093/elt/ccu026 Bongartz, C., & Schneider, M. (2003). Linguistic development in social contexts: A study of two brothers learning German. The Modern Language Journal, 87(1), 13-37. doi:10.1111/1540-4781.00176 Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Castellano, J., Mynard, J., & Rubesch. T. (2011). Student technology use in a selfaccess center. Language Learning & Technology, 15(3), 12-27. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/issues/october2011/actionresearch.pdf Chall, J. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Chow, B. W., McBride-Chang, C., & Cheung, H. (2010). Parent-child reading in English as a second language: Effects on language and literacy development of Chinese kindergarteners. Journal of Research in Reading, 33(3). 284-301. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2009.01414.x Coady, M. (2010). Ethics in early childhood research. In G. M. Naughton, S. A. Rolfe, & I. Siraj-Blatchford (Eds.), Doing early childhood research: International perspectives on theory and practice (2nd ed.) (pp. 73-84).

Buckingham, UK: Open University Press

!

347!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 Copland, F., & Garton, S. (2014). Key themes and future directions in teaching English to young learners: Introduction to the special issue. ELT Journal, 68(3), 223-230. doi:10.1093/elt/ccu030 Christensen, P., & James. A. (Eds.). (2000). Research with children: Perspectives and practices. London, UK: Falmer Press.

Dam, L. (1995). Learner autonomy 3: From theory to classroom practice. Dublin, Ireland: Authentik.

Ellis, G. (2014). ‘Young learners’: Clarifying our terms. ELT Journal, 68(1), 7578. doi:10.1093/elt/cct062 Gu, P. Y., Hu, G., & Zhang, L. J. (2005). Investigating language learners’ strategies among lower primary school pupils in Singapore. Language and Education, 19(4), 281-303. doi:10.1080/09500780508668682 Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.

Jeon, S. A. (2014). The impact of playing commercial online games on young Korean EFL learners’ L2 identity. In S. Rich (Ed.), International perspectives on teaching English to young learners (pp. 87-103). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Johnson, P. (1998). A book of one's own: Developing literacy through making books (2nd ed.). London, UK: Hodder & Stoughton Educational.

Jones, A., & Buttrey, J. (1970). Children and stories. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.

Jones, A., & Issroff, K. (2007). Motivation and mobile devices: Exploring the role of appropriation and coping strategies. Research in Learning Technology, 15(3), 247-258. doi:10.3402/rlt.v15i3.10934 Kalaja, P., Alanen, R., Palviainen, A., & Dufva, H. (2011). From milk cartons to English roommates: Context and agency in L2 learning beyond the classroom. In P. Benson & H. Reinders (Eds.), Beyond the language classroom (pp. 47-58). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kellet, M. (2010). Rethinking children and research: Attitudes in contemporary society. London, UK: Continuum.

Kim, D. J., & Hall, J. K. (2002). The role of an interactive book reading program in the development of second language pragmatic competence. The Modern Language Journal, 86(3), 332-348. doi:10.1111/1540-4781.00153 Kirsch, C. (2012). Developing children’s language learner strategies at primary school. Education 3-13: International Journal of Primary, Elementary and !

348!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 Early Years Education, 40(4), 379–399. doi:10.1080/03004279.2012.691372 Kristmanson, P., Lafargue, C., & Culligan, K. (2013). Experience with autonomy: Learners’ voices on language learning. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 69(4), 462-486. doi:10.3138/cmlr.1723.462 Kuchah, K., & Pinter, A. (2012). ‘Was this an interview?’ Breaking the power barrier in adult-child interviews in an African context. Issues in Educational Research, 22(3), 283-297. Retrieved from http://www.iier.org.au/iier22/kuchah.html Kuure, L. (2011). Places for learning: Technology-mediated language learning practices beyond the classroom. In P. Benson & H. Reinders (Eds.), Beyond the language classroom (pp. 35-46). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Langston, A., Abbot, L., Lewis, V., & Kellet, M. (2004). Early childhood. In S. Fraser, V. Lewis, S. Ding, M. Kellet, & C. Robinson (Eds.), Doing research with children and young people (pp. 147-160). London, UK: Sage.

Lee, C. N. (2005). Supporting English learning in the family: An ethnographic case study of a young Korean-English learner (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Southampton.

Leicester, M. (2009). Early years stories for the foundation stage: Ideas and inspiration for active learning. Oxford, UK: Routledge.

Linse, C. (2005). Practical English language teaching: Young learners. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Little, D. (1991). Learner autonomy 1: Definitions, issues and problems. Dublin, Ireland: Authentik.

López-Gopar, M. E. (2014). Teaching English critically to Mexican children. ELT Journal, 68(3), 310-320. doi:10.1093/elt/ccu017 Macaro, E., & Erler, L. (2008). Raising the achievement of young beginner readers of French through strategy instruction. Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 90-119. doi:10.1093/applin/amm023 Massey, S. L. (2013). From the reading rug to the play center: Enhancing vocabulary and comprehensive language skills by connecting storybook reading and guided play. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(2), 125131. doi:10.1007/s10643-012-0524-y McTavish, M., Streelasky, J., & Coles, L. (2012). Listening to children’s voices: Children as participants in research. International Journal of Early Childhood, 44(3), 249-267. doi:10.1007/s13158-012-0068-8 !

349!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 Mourão, S. (2014). Taking play seriously in the pre-primary English classroom.

ELT Journal, 68(3), 254-264. doi:10.1093/elt/ccu018 Nunan, D., & Richards, J. (Eds.). (2015). Language learning beyond the classroom. New York, NY: Routledge.

O’Reilly, M., Ronzoni, P., & Dogra, N. (2013). Research with children: Theory and practice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Pellegrini, A. D. (1980). The relationship between kindergarteners’ play and achievement in prereading, language and writing. Psychology in the Schools, 17(4), 530-535. doi:10.1002/1520-6807(198010)17:4<530::AIDPITS2310170419>3.0.CO;2-A Philp, J., Mackey, A., & Oliver, R. (2008). Child’s play? In J. Philp, R. Oliver, & A. Mackey (Eds.), Second language acquisition and the younger learner: Child's play? (pp. 3-23). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.

Pinter, A. (2014). Child participant roles in applied linguistics research. Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 168-183. doi:10.1093/applin/amt008 Pinter, A., & Zandian, S. (2015). ‘I thought it would be tiny little one phrase that we said, in a huge big pile of papers’: Children’s reflections on their involvement in participatory research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 235250. doi:10.1177/1468794112465637 Richards, J. (2015). The changing face of language learning: Learning beyond the classroom. RELC Journal, 46(1), 5-22. doi:10.1177/0033688214561621 Rogers, C., Lyon, H., & Tausch, R. (2014). On becoming an effective teacher.

London, UK: Routledge.

Rowe, D. W. (1998). The literature potentials of book-related dramatic play.

Reading Research Quarterly, 33(1), 10-35.

Schouten-van Parreren, C. (1989). Vocabulary learning through reading: Which conditions should be met when presenting words in texts? AILA Review 6, 75-85.

Sheerin, S. (1991). Self-access. Language Teaching, 24(3), 143-157. doi:10.1017/s0261444800006315 Traxler, J. (2013). Mobile learning: Shaping the frontiers of learning technology in global context. In R. Huang, Kinshuk, & J.M. Spector (Eds.), Reshaping learning: Frontiers of learning technology in a global context (pp. 237-251). London, UK: Springer.

!

350!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 332-351 Uchikoshi, Y. (2006). English vocabulary development in bilingual kindergarteners: What are the best predictors? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9(1), 33-49. doi:10.1017/s1366728905002361 Vandergrift, L. (2005). Relationships among motivation orientations, metacognitive awareness and proficiency in L2 listening. Applied Linguistics, 26(1), 70-89. doi:10.1093/applin/amh039

!

351!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364.

About a Boy: A Gamer and L2 English Speaker Coming into Being by Use of Self-Access Pia Sundqvist, Karlstad University, Sweden Abstract This is an interview study of Eldin, a 14-year-old Bosnian boy living in Sweden since the age of six. The aim is to investigate how Eldin became a gamer and how he, strongly motivated, learned foreign/second (L2) English mainly through selfaccess gameplay. Using language learning motivation theories, Dörnyei’s (2005, 2009) L2 Motivational Self System and Dweck’s (2006) concept of mindsets, the questions are: (i) By whom and at what age was the learner introduced to video games?, (ii) What was it about the games that kept the learner motivated for two years before he started to play ‘for real’?, and (iii) How does the learner himself describe his process of language learning? Data consist of an in-depth interview and three university-level vocabulary/multiple-choice tests measuring English proficiency. Guided by the questions, interview data were analyzed qualitatively.

Eldin’s mindset seems to favor naturalistic language learning, matching his interest in gaming. Experiences of having fun and daring to use ‘trial-and-error’ in gaming have contributed to his English proficiency, which is equivalent to a passing grade at second-semester university level. Elements of gaming (in particular, competition, stories, and escapism) appeal to Eldin, thereby indirectly contributing to his successful learning of English.

Keywords: CALL, gaming, self-access, young learners, Ideal L2 self, motivation

There are several ways to learn a second or foreign (L2) language, and language learning motivation varies with each individual learner. Whereas some strongly believe that it is best to learn an L2 in natural settings, others may prefer to do so in school. Zlatan Ibrahimovi!, a current top international football player from Sweden, describes in his autobiography how he grew up under harsh and poor conditions in a suburb to Malmö. His parents, who divorced when Ibrahimovi! was little, had met in Sweden after having emigrated from former Yugoslavia (Lagercrantz & Ibrahimovi!, 2011). Ibrahimovi! did not care a whole lot about school, but he certainly loved football. He became a professional footballer around the age of 20 and has since then played for teams in Holland, Italy, Spain, and France and is now a mega star. As an international player, it is important to be able to speak the native language of the country in which you are currently playing. In the book, while describing the joy of having been transferred 352

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364. from Ajax in Holland to Juventus in Italy, Ibrahimovi! reveals that Juventus decided to put him to school to learn Italian. Twice a week he was supposed to be tutored by a teacher. Such a set-up did not suit Ibrahimovi! at all, because he did not believe in learning languages in that way. Thus, instead of taking lessons, he encouraged the teacher to officially tell the club that she was teaching him (and make sure she got paid for it), while Ibrahimovi! himself went on a mission to pick up Italian in natural settings: in the locker room, at hotels, and in interviews with the media. From the perspective of second language acquisition in general and self-access language learning in particular, his mission is highly relevant. For instance, he set his mind to begin all interviews in Italian rather than English.

Thus, Ibrahimovi! dared speaking even though he knew he made lots of grammatical mistakes, at least in the beginning. However, this did not bother him much, because he was confident his Italian would improve over time with enough practice. Ibrahimovi! says that he was strongly motivated to learn – and he noticed that fans and others appreciated his linguistic effort. In the autobiography he also gives vivid descriptions of how he was totally absorbed by playing video games – and this he did in English.

Ibrahimovi!’s approach to learning languages accords well with the present study: an interview study about an exceptionally motivated 14-year-old boy who learned English by self-accessing Halo and World of Warcraft.

Gaming and Young Language Learners Although the number of empirical studies targeting gaming and young language learners is still rather small, research has revealed a positive relationship between digital gameplay and various aspects of learners’ L2 proficiency. For example, in a study from Canada, focus was on learning vocabulary with the help of games. The participating children were Francophone L2 English learners (aged 12–13) who were instructed to play Word Coach, an educational vocabulary training mini-game (Cobb & Horst, 2011). Based on data from one pre-test and two post-tests, the results showed, among other things, that two months of gaming coincided with one to two years’ growth in the recognition of L2 vocabulary. In addition, instances of code-switching were lowered. In out-of-school/extramural contexts, there are some interesting European studies that involve young learners.

353

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364.

For example, in a Finnish study, Piirainen-Marsh and Tainio (2009) examined two boys in their lower teens who played a game called Final Fantasy X. Again, the findings were very positive with regard to English skills. For instance, it was possible to link the repetitive practice inherent in the game to language learning. In another study, which employed data from the same boys, a relation was found between involvement in gaming and the development of interactional competence in L2 English (Piirainen-Marsh, 2011). In two studies among young L2 English learners in Sweden, the findings are equally positive.

The first study, carried out among 12-year-olds, showed significant links between extramural gaming and three aspects of English proficiency: vocabulary, listening comprehension, and reading comprehension (Sylvén & Sundqvist, 2012). The second study found that when 10-year-old non-gamers, moderate gamers, and frequent gamers were compared, all the frequent gamers were strongly motivated to learn English (Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2014).

In sum, the findings reported on above are very promising from the perspective of L2 learning. The studies that target extramural gaming, where gaming can be viewed as an example of self-access learning practice, are particularly relevant with regard to the present study. With this as a backdrop, it is reassuring to see that the results from a large European project involving 10- and 11-year-olds from seven countries, Early Language Learning in Europe (ELLiE) (Muñoz & Lindgren, 2011), confirm many of the findings in the studies above, which are all much smaller in terms of the number of participants.

Self-access In recent years, the theme of language learning beyond the classroom has caught an increasing amount of attention. In a ground-breaking volume edited by Benson and Reinders (2011), the common factor among all included chapters is that they deal with research carried out outside of classrooms. As pointed out by the editors, such studies are valuable, because they provide alternative perspectives on cognitive and social processes involved in L2 learning. In one of the chapters, Sundqvist (2011) proposes the use of an umbrella term, extramural English, to describe the current worldwide phenomenon of young learners picking up English outside of class through English-mediated activities such as gaming, listening to music, and watching TV series or films. She argues that “no degree of 354

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364. deliberate attention to acquire English is necessary on the part of the learner, even though deliberate intention is by no means excluded from the concept” (Sundqvist, 2011, p. 107). Thus, being engaged in extramural English activities can certainly be categorized as self-access language learning, even though self-access language learning has traditionally been more linked to the idea that learners access collections of rich L2 materials at specific learning centers (at schools or higher education institutions) which, in turn, offer great opportunities for self-directed learning (cf. Benson, 2011). In the present study, gaming is viewed as an opportunity for L2 English learning.

Motivation in L2 Learning The renowned L2 motivation scholar Dörnyei (2009) has developed a model of L2 motivation called the L2 Motivational Self System. In Dörnyei’s model, there are three dimensions of motivation: an Ideal L2 Self, an Ought-to L2 Self, and the L2 Learning Experience. The Ideal L2 Self represents the L2specific component of the individual’s overall “ideal self”. To give an example, in a situation where the type of person a learner would like to become speaks an L2, the learner’s Ideal L2 Self functions as a powerful motivator; there might be a desire to reduce the discrepancy between actual and ideal selves. Further, the Ought-to L2 Self is linked to the attributes a learner believes he or she should possess in order to meet social expectations and avoid potentially negative outcomes, such as wishing to do well on language tests. The third dimension, the L2 Learning Experience, deals with situated executive motives that are related to the immediate learning environment (generally the classroom).

There is some agreement among scholars as regards learners’ L2 motivation. For example, most researchers would probably agree that intrinsic motivation leads to qualitatively improved learning outcomes. In general, learners who are intrinsically motivated find learning fun and personally meaningful and, as a consequence, their possible learning gains tend to be more durable.

In recent motivation research, Ryan and Mercer (2011) apply Dweck’s (2006) theory of so-called mindsets. They propose that one particular feature of mindsets can relate to beliefs about the relative ‘naturalness’ of the L2 learning process. In light of the fact that many countries offer almost ideal settings for involvement in extramural English activities – not least many European and 355

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364.

Southeast Asian countries where Internet access is high and English has a very high status in society – English encountered outside the walls of the classroom is likely to constitute a constant background presence. In such countries, a ‘naturalness’ mindset is likely to evolve. In short, many learners may feel they learn English more easily outside of school in naturalistic settings and, therefore, they are likely to find this way of learning qualitatively more effective than learning in school. There is also research that deals with rather extreme experiences of feelings of motivation, such as the theory of flow.

Flow Twenty-five years ago, Csikszentmihalyi (1990) introduced the theoretical concept of flow. Flow is a state when individuals are completely absorbed with the activity at hand, or they might be totally immersed in what they are doing: nothing else seems to matter, such as food or time. Gaming is one activity that can lead to states of flow, as testified in several accounts from gamers around the globe. The aforementioned footballer, Ibrahimovi!, describes Gears of War and Call of Duty as poison (Lagercrantz & Ibrahimovi!, 2011). Ibrahimovi! has clearly experienced states of flow: he could play up to six or seven hours per day (and often late into the night) and his desire to win in the video game was as strong as on the pitch, and he enjoyed interacting with gamers of different nationalities. In short, flow can be said to be an optimal state of intrinsic motivation.

Research Questions The present interview study involves a young learner who claims to have learned most of his English outside of school through playing video games.

Further, he claims having spent around two-three years as an observer of games before he started to play ‘for real’ (using his own expression). With these claims as a background, the following research questions are asked: (1) By whom and at what age was the learner introduced to video games?

(2) What was it about the games that kept the learner motivated for two years before he started to play ‘for real’?

(3) How does the learner himself describe his process of language learning?

356

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364.

Material and Methods Participant: Eldin The participant is a 14-year-old boy (pseudonym Eldin). His parents are Bosnian and he was born in Bosnia himself. Thus, his first language is Bosnian.

The family, who also includes a 16-year-old sister, moved to Norway when Eldin was four. He went to preschool in Norway for a short while, but does not remember any Norwegian. Two years later, the family moved to Sweden, where they have lived ever since. Both parents are medical doctors and Eldin aims to become a doctor too. The family lives in a semi-detached house in a multicultural part of a medium-sized town. At the age of six, Eldin started first grade in a regular class and began to learn Swedish. English was introduced as a school subject in third grade. In sixth grade, Eldin changed schools and became a student at a school with a content and language integrated learning profile; English is used as the medium of instruction in many (but not all) school subjects.

(According to Swedish law, a maximum of 50 per cent of the time in compulsory school may be mediated in another language than Swedish.) At the time of the interview, Eldin was in the eighth grade.

The author of this paper met with Eldin when he had two weeks of mandatory vocational training at the university, hosted by the English department.

By coincidence, Eldin heard of the author’s previous research about gaming and L2 learning, and this was when he revealed that he had learned most of his English outside of school via gaming and that he had spent two or three years more or less ‘waiting’ before he could actually start playing. Thus, he came across as a potentially interesting learner to interview about motivation for L2 learning, in particular with regard to self-access and extramural English gaming. Eldin agreed to be interviewed and a written form of consent was collected from his parents before the interview took place.

Material and analytic procedure There are various types of interviews, but the typical qualitative interview is one-on-one (interviewer plus interviewee), and it can be described as a “professional conversation” (Kvale, 1996, p. 5). It has the purpose of obtaining “descriptions of the life world of the interviewee with respect to interpreting the

357

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364. meaning of the described phenomena” (Kvale, 1996, pp. 5-6). A semi-structured interview format was adopted, and an interview guide from a previous study focusing on extramural English among young learners was used (for details, see Sundqvist, 2012). Although the semi-structured interview includes a number of pre-set questions and prompts, the format is “open-ended and the interviewee is encouraged to elaborate on the issues raised in an exploratory manner” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 136). Further, the topic at the core of this study – Eldin’s strong determination to do what was needed in order to be able to play games successfully in English – is approached from a constructivist perspective; that is, concepts and theories are constructed by the researcher “out of stories that are constructed by research participants who are trying to explain and make sense out of their experiences and/or lives, both to the researcher and themselves” (Corbin & Strauss, 2008, p. 10).

The present interview lasted 1 hour and 10 minutes (audio-recorded).

Interview data were analyzed qualitatively bearing the specific research questions in mind. More specifically, in a first phase, data were trawled through and instances that responded to the questions were marked up. In a second phase, a selection of quotes was made, mainly to serve the purpose of illustrating key findings. In addition, three university-level vocabulary/multiple-choice (VOC/MCT) tests were administered. As part of his training, Eldin had volunteered to take these tests together with the university students. The purpose of the VOC/MCT test is to measure students’ level of English proficiency and for the purpose of this study, Eldin’s scores are thus indicative of his level of L2 English proficiency.

Each test consists of two parts. The first part (called ‘Vocabulary’) employs a MCT format; there are 120 items (one English word; five options in Swedish; the correct option should be ticked). The second part (‘Text’) also employs a MCT format, testing mainly grammar and idiomaticity. Here, there is a running text in English and in certain places the test-taker is supposed to tick the correct option from a number of suggestions, such as selecting the correct English preposition, phrase, or grammatical form. Each part of the test renders a score which is converted to another score on a 1–10 scale; the two converted scores on the 10-graded scale are then added up, yielding a possible highest total score of 20 for the whole VOC/MCT test. The passing grade is 9 for first semester English 358

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364. university students (distinction: ! 11), 12 for second semester students (distinction: ! 15), and 16 for third semester students (distinction: ! 18).

Results and Discussion The interview began with the researcher asking about what language Eldin would prefer for the interview. He responded “English”, because he had an “easier time with the words” in English than in Swedish. After some warm-up questions about his background, the interview focused on Eldin’s interest in playing video games and his beliefs about his own language learning.

With regard to research question 1, “By whom and at what age was the learner introduced to video games?”, Eldin revealed that it was his parents who first introduced him to video games when he was around seven. They had given him an Xbox with the game Halo, an alien science fiction first-person shooter game (later also available as a real-time strategy game). Eldin claimed that his parents told him that they did not think he would be affected in a bad way by playing video games, adding that they did not think he would become aggressive or start using bad language.

Research question 2, “What was it with the games that kept the learner motivated for two years before he started to play ‘for real’?”, focuses on aspects of gaming that appeal to Eldin. When talking about Halo, Eldin revealed that he did not understand anything at all in the beginning. Everything was in English and he only knew Bosnian and some Swedish at the time. He remembered being unable to finish the first game and also how he got amazed one day when he suddenly realized that there were plenty of more games to play in Halo (besides the game he had already tried). He described that there was a whole world out there, in the game, and he “wanted to know what they were talking about, what was going on”. Despite the fact that he was so young, Eldin convincingly disclosed that he spent about two or three years observing, reading, listening, and trying to connect visuals with audio in order to understand what was going on in the game. He really appreciated that everything was in a context and the game was pure entertainment to him, and in hindsight Eldin describes his experiences as “three years of informally learning English by trial and error”. As for game genres, he said he had been particularly fond of online strategy games and, at first, he usually played as a single player but later he switched and played multiplayer.

359

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364.

In the interview, Eldin frequently touched upon his own process of learning various languages. In addition to Bosnian, Swedish, and English, Eldin started studying Spanish in sixth grade as part of the mandatory language option in the Swedish curriculum. To facilitate learning Spanish, Eldin made sure to game with native speakers of Spanish every now and then, thereby forcing himself to use Spanish naturally. He understands some Croatian and Russian (because they are Slavic languages like Bosnian) and wants to learn German too.

In a potentially threatening future (a third world war), quite extraordinarily, Eldin explained that “if you learn German, you will be a lot safer”. All these languages relate to the third research question (“How does the learner himself describe his process of language learning?”); below, focus is mainly on English.

According to Eldin, he has learned English mainly outside of school.

When English was introduced in school in third grade, Eldin had already spent a great deal of time with Halo and, therefore, learning about colors and animals et cetera came across as too easy and the teacher decided to let Eldin join the fifth graders for English. Eldin praised his teacher for her decision, but unfortunately the fifth-grade solution did not work out: the older children did not appreciate the presence of a much younger learner who knew as much as them (or perhaps even more). Thus, Eldin returned to his regular class but was bored with English there.

According to Eldin, the main thing in life is not to get bored, which at least partly explains the extensive amount of time (cf. flow) he has spent on gaming over the years.

In the interview, Eldin explained what intrigues him about video games: “The story and things that I wouldn’t do in real life”. The quote is important and has pedagogical implications (see below). He also gave a concrete example of language learning while gaming; for some reason, Eldin thought the letter s should be pronounced with an h-sound. Thus, when playing World of Warcraft, Eldin had used “helling” instead of “selling” a number of times until a co-player enlightened Eldin about this specific phonemic confusion, and Eldin immediately corrected his mispronunciation. Other concrete examples of language learning (most likely) thanks to gaming would be his excellent English oral fluency on the one hand (displayed throughout the interview), and his high level of English proficiency on the other (displayed through excellent results on the university VOC/MCT tests, see Table 1). In brief, Eldin scored high on all three 360

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364. examinations. Had he been a university student, Eldin would have been awarded the grade ‘pass with distinction’ as a first-semester student and ‘pass’ as a secondsemester student.

Table 1. Eldin’s VOC/MCT test scores (10-graded scale score in brackets) Test

‘Vocabulary’

‘Text’

Total (max: 20)

1

81 (7)

124 (7)

14

2

80 (7)

114 (6)

13

3

76 (7)

124 (7)

14

Implications for Self-Access Learning and Young Learner Classrooms This interview study may have practical applications to the field of selfaccess in terms of learners’ access to online video games, bearing in mind the caveat that only one (possibly exceptional) learner was included in the study.

Although most young learners’ access to games probably needs to be monitored – perhaps not all guardians dare trusting their children with games the way Eldin’s parents trusted him – there is a great deal to learn from the case of Eldin. By having self-access to games, he was prepared to ‘study’ hard for years in order to be able to play. He was extremely motivated and wanted to become a gamer (cf.

L2 Ideal Self) and in order to succeed, Eldin needed to learn English. This study also has pedagogical implications. More specifically, with regard to self-access centers, it is possible that L2 learners who lack the opportunity to try online gaming from their homes could do so from the center; it might be worthwhile to consider pairing up novice gamers/learners with more experienced gamers (peers/staff). Moreover, teachers may want to consider the inclusion of more stories in young learner classrooms, and more often design language tasks that encourage role-playing/escapism. At least based on the results of this study, such aspects may be highly motivating for young learners. As for further research, more in-depth interview studies are needed, preferably with more participants and multiple sessions of interviews coupled with observations.

361

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364.

Conclusion There are some limitations to the present study. Most importantly, there is only one participant, Eldin, and he was interviewed on one occasion. In other words, it is necessary to view the results of this small-scale study with great caution.

In many ways, Eldin is like any other boy his age: he has friends, likes gaming, and goes to school. However, he is also different. Not just any boy aspires to become a medical doctor and chooses the university for his vocational training. Not just any boy sits relaxed and talks – using L2 English – for more than an hour to a researcher. It is the author’s firm belief that Eldin’s experiences from gaming strongly contributed to his ability to carry out such an interview: he is fearless when using English. Admittedly, there are other potentially influencing factors that may have contributed to his fearless attitude, such as the fact that he was born and raised in a highly educated, international family and the fact that he started attending a school with an English profile in the sixth grade. Having said so, based on the findings in this interview study, key factors for Eldin’s successful learning of L2 English include experiences of having fun and of daring to use ‘trial-and-error’ while gaming. Furthermore, elements of gaming such as competition, stories, and escapism appeal to Eldin and, thereby, indirectly contribute positively to his process of learning. Using terminology from Dweck (2006), Eldin’s mindset clearly seems to favor naturalistic language learning, even though he does not come across as reluctant to learn languages also in school because, using his own words: “I think it’s awesome to learn new things”.

Notes on the contributor Pia Sundqvist holds a PhD in English linguistics from Karlstad University, Sweden, where she is Associate Professor of English. Her research interests are extramural, out-of-class, informal English language learning, CALL (especially gaming), L2 vocabulary acquisition, and assessment of L2 oral proficiency, with a focus on primary and secondary school learners.

References Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and researching autonomy (2nd ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.

362

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364.

Benson, P., & Reinders, H. (Eds.). (2011). Beyond the language classroom: The theory and practice of informal language learning and teaching.

Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Cobb, T., & Horst, M. (2011). Does Word Coach coach words? CALICO Journal, 28(3), 639–661. doi:10.11139/cj.28.3.639-661 Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research (3rd ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper and Row. Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9-42). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House.

Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lagercrantz, D., & Ibrahimovi!, Z. (2011). Jag är Zlatan Ibrahimovi!: Min historia [I am Zlatan Ibrahimovi!]. Stockholm, Sweden: Albert Bonniers Förlag.

Muñoz, C., & Lindgren, E. (2011). Out-of-school factors: The home. In J. Enever (Ed.), ELLiE: Early Language Learning in Europe (pp. 103–124). London, UK: British Council.

Piirainen-Marsh, A. (2011). Enacting interactional competence in gaming activities: Coproducing talk with virtual others. In J. K. Hall, J. Hellerman, & S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.), L2 Interactional Competence and Development (pp. 19–44). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Piirainen-Marsh, A., & Tainio, L. (2009). Other-repetition as a resource for participation in the activity of playing a video game. The Modern Language Journal, 93(2), 153–169. doi:10.1111/j.15404781.2009.00853.x Ryan, S., & Mercer, S. (2011). Natural talent, natural acquisition and abroad: Learner attributions of agency in language learning. In G. Murray, X. Gao, & T. Lamb (Eds.), Identity, motivation and autonomy in language learning (pp. 160-176). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

363

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 352-364.

Sundqvist, P. (2011). A possible path to progress: Out-of-school English language learners in Sweden. In P. Benson & H. Reinders (Eds.), Beyond the language classroom (pp. 106-118). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sundqvist, P. (2012). Informal learning of English among young learners: Report from a one-year project in preschool class, grade 3, and grade 6. In M. Allström & A.-M. Pinter (Eds.), English for Young Learners – Forum.

Proceedings from the Conference in Uppsala, 19 June 2012 (pp. 122-132).

Uppsala, Sweden: Fortbildningsavdelningen för skolans internationalisering [Centre for Professional Development and Internationalisation in Schools].

Sundqvist, P., & Sylvén, L. K. (2014). Language-related computer use: Focus on young L2 English learners in Sweden. ReCALL, 26(1), 3-20. doi:10.1017/S0958344013000232 Sylvén, L. K., & Sundqvist, P. (2012). Gaming as extramural English L2 learning and L2 proficiency among young learners. ReCALL, 24(3), 302–321. doi:10.1017/S095834401200016X

364

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

L2 Motivation and Young Self-Instructed Learners’ Persistence in Learning English: A Causal Analysis Chika Takahashi, Ehime University, Japan Abstract This study examined the structural relationships among factors affecting selfinstructed learners’ persistence in learning with a sample of Japanese high school English learners. L2 self-instruction remains under-researched, in spite of the importance of out-of-class learning emphasized in the literature. One example of L2 self-instruction that is prevalent in Japan is learning using self-instructional radio (SIR) materials, with the country’s public broadcasting company offering radio English-education materials since 1934.

Self-instructed learners find it difficult to persist in this type of learning and the drop-out rates have been reported to be high. In order to investigate selfinstructed learners’ motivational bases and their relationships to persistence, a questionnaire was administered and two models were tested using structural equation modeling. The results indicated that the intensity of motivation and the quality of learning experiences with these materials were related to persistence in learning.

Furthermore, simply persisting in learning using SIR materials did not make learners confident in L2 communication. Practice in L2 communication might be necessary in order for learners to become more confident in L2 communication, which SIR materials did not offer.

Keywords: second-language self-instruction, radio materials, second-language motivation, persistence in learning

Despite being in the era of globalization and English as the primary international language contact with the target language is still limited in many English as a foreign language (EFL) contexts, both inside and outside the classroom.

Under such circumstances second/foreign language (hereafter L2) learners do not have enough opportunity for input, output, or interaction. One way of compensating for such shortcomings and immersing oneself to the target language is L2 selfinstruction, which takes place outside the regular classroom without institutional control. L2 self-instruction, particularly using broadcast materials, has been prevalent in certain contexts such as Japan. It has been perceived by L2 learners to be an 365

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

economical way of learning with relatively easy access and rich input. However, many learners find it difficult to persist in this type of learning possibly because there is no mandatory attendance or assessment of their learning.

One factor that might be closely related to self-instructed learnersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; persistence in learning is L2 motivation. Although much has been investigated in the field of L2 motivation (e.g., Gardner, 1985; Yashima, 2002), L2 motivation among independent learners has not been investigated enough. This study aims to investigate the motivational bases among L2 learners in self-instruction using radio materials and their relationships to persistence in learning. In doing so, two models are tested by using structural equation modeling (SEM).

Literature Review Self-instruction using broadcast materials L2 self-instruction using broadcast materials has been a prevalent way for learners, including young learners such as junior high and high school students, in some contexts. For example, the Japanese public broadcasting company Nippon Hoso Kyokai (NHK) has been broadcasting radio English-education materials since 1934 and TV English-education materials since 1953.

One of the problems L2 learners face in self-instruction is the issue of motivation. L2 learners in self-instruction need to keep motivating themselves without encouragement/pressure from their teachers/peers, and many find it difficult to persist in learning. In spite of such difficulty some learners seem to be able to persist for a long time, for years in some cases. The question arises, then, as to the differences in the motivational bases between persistent and non-persistent learners.

Conceptualization of L2 motivation There have been developments with regard to the conceptualization of L2 motivation after the dominance of the socio-educational model (Gardner, 1985).

Researchers have tried to propose models that may be compatible with English as an international language used by L2 learners without a clear target-language community in their mind. First, in the Japanese EFL context Yashima (2002, 2009) 366

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

proposed the attitudinal construct of international posture (IP). It tries to capture one’s readiness to interact with people around the world in English, and is made up of the following four sub-constructs: (a) intergroup approach-avoidance tendency; (b) interest in international vocation/activities; (c) interest in international news; and (d) having things to communicate to the world (Yashima, 2009).

Second, another development is the application of the self-determination theory (SDT) (Deci & Ryan, 2002). The model postulates that humans have “natural, innate, and constructive tendencies to develop an ever more elaborated and unified sense of self” (p. 5). Social contexts interact with this human nature by either nurturing or impeding the organism’s active nature. When the social factors nurture the nature and satisfy the three basic psychological needs, i.e., for competence, relatedness, and autonomy, human beings are proposed to have intrinsic motivation.

This is based on the inherent satisfactions and enjoyment of the behaviors. The theory distinguishes between intrinsic motivation and a less internalized type of motivation, extrinsic motivation. Unlike intrinsic motivation, when a learner is extrinsically motivated he/she engages in the activity for “contingent outcomes that are separable from the action per se” (p. 10, original emphasis). Depending on the level of internalization, types of extrinsic motivation are categorized from external regulation (less internalized), introjected regulation (one in the middle), and identified regulation (more internalized). For example, when someone has external regulation, he/she might learn an L2 simply to earn credits. Introjected regulation is more internalized than external regulation in that a learner might study an L2 to avoid guilt or shame. Identified regulation is even more internalized and if a learner has high identified regulation he/she learns an L2 because it is personally important to him/her.

In addition to these types of motivation, amotivation represents the lack of intention to act. As such, the theory focuses on the qualities of motivation.

SDT has been applied in various L2 contexts (e.g., Hiromori, 2003, 2005; Pae, 2008). For example, Pae (2008) examined the structural relationships among factors affecting L2 achievement, including L2 motivation (motivational intensity, desire to learn English, and attitudes toward learning English), self-confidence, and five L2 orientations (i.e., integrative, instrumental, introjected, identified, and intrinsic). The 367

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

researcher examined the data from 315 Korean university English learners and tested five models, with each model including one orientation. It was demonstrated that, of the five models, only the one including intrinsic motivation adequately represented the data. In this model, intrinsic motivation led to L2 motivation as well as selfconfidence, which both led to L2 achievement as measured by the scores of the Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC). Self-confidence also directly predicted motivation. These results suggest that intrinsic motivation is â&#x20AC;&#x153;the most powerful orientation variable that is related to L2 achievement in the Korean EFL contextâ&#x20AC;? (p. 20). Even the internalized type of extrinsic motivation (i.e., identified regulation) did not fit the model, and the applicability of extrinsic motivation in explaining the intensity of motivation and achievement needs to be clarified in future studies.

Variables related to L2 motivation In recent years, variables related to L2 motivation have been extensively researched in particular using SEM, for these variables are believed to be related to one another. These variables include L2 willingness to communicate (WTC) and L2 communication confidence. First, WTC is oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tendency to approach the initiation of communication when he/she has free choice. The concept has been particularly important in the era when L2 communication in many contexts is considered to be both a means and an end to L2 teaching/learning.

Second, MacIntyre (1994) proposed that L2 WTC is predicted by a combination of perceived L2 competence and L2 communication anxiety (apprehension), which make up L2 communication confidence. This means that as a learner has greater perceived communicative competence in an L2 and a lower level of communication anxiety he/she will be willing to communicate in the L2.

Past studies have demonstrated the interrelationships among the variables explained above, i.e., L2 motivation, IP, L2 WTC, L2 communication confidence, L2 achievement, and frequency of L2 communication. For example, Yashima, ZenukNishide, and Shimizu (2004) examined the structural relationships among IP, L2 motivation (intensity), L2 communication confidence, L2 WTC, and frequency of L2 368

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

communication with a sample of Japanese high school students learning English. In this study the researchers demonstrated that IP significantly predicted L2 motivation as well as L2 WTC, and that L2 motivation led to L2 communication confidence, which then led to L2 WTC. Frequency of communication was predicted by both L2 WTC and IP. However, L2 motivation did not directly predict L2 WTC, contrary to the hypothesized model.

Research questions Despite the richness in research in L2 motivation, little has been investigated regarding L2 motivation among independent learners. Thus, the present study, as part of a larger mixed-method study, aims to examine the motivational bases among young Japanese English learners using self-instructional radio (SIR) materials in relationship to persistence in their learning. Specifically, the following research questions were posed: 1. What are the relationships between and among the following variables: IP, L2 communication confidence, L2 WTC, L2 motivation, and persistence in self-instruction as measured by the length of study in Japan?

2. Do extrinsic types of motivation significantly contribute to the above SIR model?

Method Participants and procedures The participants in this study were 180 Japanese high school students with experience learning English using SIR materials. All were in their second year of high school. To further illustrate, this school, a coeducational high school in Tokyo, is very academically oriented, every year sending more than 50 students to top universities in Japan. Thus, it was expected that they might be generally motivated to learn English.

The questionnaire, which was in the participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; first language, Japanese, was administered during regular class time. Participants were informed of their anonymity, the volunteer nature of the questionnaire, its non-relationship to their 369

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

grades, and the freedom to drop out of the questionnaire at any time they wished.

Instrument First, a questionnaire was constructed and piloted with 273 students in the same high school who did not participate in the main study. The questionnaire was analyzed with descriptive statistics, factor analyses, inter-correlations, and answers to an open-ended question that asked the participants to freely write how the questionnaire might be improved. The revised questionnaire consisted of the following three parts: (a) 47 items measuring the subtypes of L2 motivation within the SDT, IP, L2 communication confidence, and L2 WTC; (b) 13 items asking about learners' experiences using SIR materials (length of study, total minutes of study per week, frequency of study, names of study materials, whether they willingly learned with SIR materials without being coerced by teachers/parents, possible reasons for dropping out, as well as four 5-point Likert-scale items on the quality of learning experience using SIR materials); and (c) basic background questions. Brief descriptions of each variable follow.

Motivation-quality. Items measuring subtypes of motivation were based on Noels, Pelletier, ClĂŠment, & Vallerand (2000), as well as studies within the framework of SDT conducted in Japan (Hiromori, 2003, 2005; Sakai & Koike, 2008; Tanaka & Hiromori, 2007). Each subcomponent had four 5-point Likert-scale items and asked participants to rate the extent to which the proposed reason for learning English applies to them. Although questions were asked about the five subcomponents, in the present study only the data on intrinsic motivation and identified regulation were included (! = .84 for intrinsic motivation and .90 for identified regulation).

Motivation-effort. This study measured effort in terms of how many minutes per week learners put into learning English with SIR materials. In addition, two 5point Likert-scale questions on the intensity of studying English with SIR materials were asked in order to make the variable as reliable as possible. Specifically, one 370

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

question asked the participants to rate the extent to which they put effort into learning English with SIR materials (5 = a lot of effort, 1 = little effort), and the other asked them to rate how often they skipped listening to these materials (5 = never skipped listening, 1 = often skipped listening).

IP- intergroup approach-avoidance tendency. Based on Yashima (2009), three items measuring the tendency to approach/avoid non-Japanese in Japan.

Participants rated their behavioral tendency, recorded on 5-point scales (! = .74).

IP- interest in international vocation/activities. Based on Yashima (2009), three items serving to measure participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; interest in an international career or living overseas, recorded on 5-point scales (! = .83).

IP- interest in international news. Based on Yashima (2009), three items focusing on measuring participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; interest in international affairs, recorded on 5point scales (! = .76).

IP- having things to communicate to the world. Based on Yashima (2009) three items serving to measure the extent to which participants had things to communicate to the world, recorded on 5-point scales (! = .82).

Perceived L2 communication competence. Based on MacIntyre and Charos (1996), five 5-point Likert-scale items asked participants to indicate how competent they would feel using English. Items regarded various communication contexts (public speaking, discussion in small groups, and talking in dyads) and interlocutors (strangers, acquaintances, and friends), and they were adapted from Ryan (2009) (! = .91).

Communication anxiety in English. Five items asked participants to indicate how nervous they would feel using English. They were recorded on 5-point scales.

The contexts and interlocutors were the same as in perceived L2 communication competence (! = .89).

371

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

L2 WTC. Five items were adapted from Ryan (2009). These items served to measure participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; willingness to communicate in English. Participants were asked to indicate how much they would choose to communicate in English under various contexts. The contexts and interlocutors were the same as in perceived L2 communication competence (! = .90).

Persistence. Persistence was measured in terms of the length of studying English using SIR materials as measured in months. Particular attention was paid to operationalizing this variable. Many students came from junior high schools that are attached to the high school. Some teachers at those junior high schools assigned students to listen to SIR materials. Thus, some participants stated that they only listened to these materials because it was required. In such a case, the total number of months they were in junior high school was subtracted so that the remaining months would represent their true persistence.

Quality of Learning Experience with SIR Materials. Four questions asked the participants to rate the extent to which they considered (a) SIR materials to be useful for learning English, (b) the radio to be useful as a medium for learning English, (c) materials to be interesting, and (d) teacher figures of the materials to be of high quality. These questions were asked because their quality of learning experiences with SIR materials was quite likely related to persistence (! = .83).

Hypothesized models In order to investigate the interrelationships among L2 motivation, IP, L2 communication confidence, L2 WTC, quality of learning experience with SIR materials, and persistence, two hypothesized models were tested using AMOS 18.

Figure 1 presents the basic models to be tested, which is based on results of past studies (Pae, 2008; Yashima, 2002; Yashima, Zenuk-Nishide, & Shimizu, 2004). The difference between the two models is whether both intrinsic motivation and identified regulation contribute to the model, or whether only intrinsic motivation significantly contributes to the model.

372

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

Model 1: Intrinsic Motivation and Identified Regulation PC WTC

CA Persistence

CC

QLE

IDR

IM

MQ

ME

ER NSL

IP

IIN

AAT

MIN IVA

HTC

Model 2: Intrinsic Motivation Only PC WTC

CA Persistence

CC

QLE IM

ME

ER NSL

IP

IIN

AAT

MIN IVA

HTC

Note: WTC: Willingness to Communicate in L2; CC: L2 Communication Confidence; PC: Perceived Communication Competence in L2; CA: Communication Anxiety in L2; MQ: Motivation (Quality); IM: Intrinsic Motivation; IDR: Identified Regulation; ME: Motivation (Effort); ER: Effort Reported; NSL: Non-Skipping of Lessons; MIN: Total Minutes of Study Per Week; QLE: Quality of Learning Experience with SIR Materials; IP: International Posture; IIN: Interest in International News; AAT: Intergroup Approach-Avoidance Tendency; IVA: Interest in International Vocation/Activities; HTC: Having Things to Communicate to the World.

Figure 1. Basic L2 SIR Learning Models to Be Tested

373

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

Results and Discussion Preliminary analysis As a preliminary screening, four participants who answered that they used English for communicating with their families were deleted, for this was not typically Japanese. Then the patterns in missing data among the 47 Likert-scale questions (less than .5% of all possible answers) were checked. Since there did not seem to be any noticeable patterns in the missing data and no participant had more than four answers out of the 47 items missing, those missing answers were replaced with the means of the individual responses for each variable.

After replacing the missing answers for the 47 Likert-scale questions with the individual means for those scales, nine participants had missing answers on the remaining variables and there were complete data for 167 participants. This analysis used only complete cases (n = 167).

For all the variables except for the ones stated below, the means of the answers to the questions on each variable represented observed variables in the SEM analysis: persistence, efforts reported, non-skipping of lessons, and total minutes of study per week. This was done in order to reduce the number of variables in the SEM analysis and reduce the size of the models, particularly in light of the relatively small number of participants in the analysis.

The assumptions for the analysis were checked through SPSS. Five cases, either as univariate or multivariate outliers, were deleted from the data set (n = 162).

No non-linearity or multicollinearity was detected.

Structural equation modeling Maximum likelihood was chosen as the estimation method. First, for both of the models, the results showed large !" values, 167.31 with df = 70, p < .01, for Model 1 (with intrinsic motivation and identified regulation, see Figure 1), and 150.51 with df = 59, p < .01, for Model 2 (with only intrinsic motivation, see Figure 1). Although the two models were both statistically significant and showed poor fit to the data, given the known sensitivity of this statistic to sample size (Byrne, 2010, p.

76), other goodness-of-fit indices were examined.

374

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

Table 1 shows the goodness-of-fit indices of the two models. Model 1, which contains both intrinsic motivation and identified regulation as components of L2 motivation-quality, showed a slightly better fit to the data, as evidenced by higher CFI and lower RMSEA . Thus, the data with Model 1 was closely analyzed.

Table 1. Goodness-of-Fit Indices of the Initial Two SEM Models GFI

NFI

CFI

RMSEA

Model 1

.89

.84

.90

.09

Model 2

.89

.84

.89

.10

Figure 2 presents the initial model with its standardized estimates. Because the model fit was still poor ways of improving the model were explored. It was suggested that if a path was drawn from IP to L2 communication confidence, the overall !" value would drop by at least 44.66 with df = 1, which is significant at p < .01. This means that those who have high IP scores are likely to have confidence in L2 communication. This requires further research, but considering that using SIR materials is only one way of learning an L2, and many of those who are high in IP may have other ways of learning an L2 which are not represented in this model, it makes sense that they are likely to be confident in L2 communication confidence.

Thus, this data-driven path from IP to L2 communication confidence was added to the model.

375

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

PC WTC

.89

*

CA

.91*

-85*

CC

IDR

IM .20

*

Persistence

.20*

.76

.75*

.33*

.08

*

MQ .85*

IP .69*

IIN *

.60*

.64*

.28

ME* .41

-.13

.41*

QLE

.75* .47*

ER NSL

MIN .83

AAT

* .25.64 *

*

IVA

.64

*

HTC

p < .05

Note: WTC: Willingness to Communicate in L2; CC: L2 Communication Confidence; PC: Perceived Communication Competence in L2; CA: Communication Anxiety in L2; MQ: Motivation (Quality); IM: Intrinsic Motivation; IDR: Identified Regulation; ME: Motivation (Effort); ER: Effort Reported; NSL: Non-Skipping of Lessons; MIN: Total Minutes of Study Per Week; QLE: Quality of Learning Experience with SIR Materials; IP: International Posture; IIN: Interest in International News; AAT: Intergroup Approach-Avoidance Tendency; IVA: Interest in International Vocation/Activities; HTC: Having Things to Communicate to the World.

Figure 2. Initial SEM Model (Model 1) with Standardized Estimates The final model with the data-driven path from IP to L2 communication confidence added still showed a large !" value of 107.53 with df = 69, p = .002.

However, given the known sensitivity to the sample size, other goodness-of-fit indices were checked. The final model may show an acceptable fit to the data, with GFI = .92, NFI = .90, CFI = .96, and RMSEA = .06. The final model with standardized coefficients is in Figure 3.

376

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

PC

CA -.84*

.92* .86*

WTC

.66

.10

IDR

.74* IM

*

Persistence

.08

CC

.08

.77*

.74*

.33

MQ

.87*

-.18

IP .68*

IIN *

.63

*

AAT

.82

.63*

*

IVA

.25*

QLE

.64*

.33*

ME.41* .41*

.75*

ER

.47*

NSL

MI N

HTC

p < .05

Note: WTC: Willingness to Communicate in L2; CC: L2 Communication Confidence; PC: Perceived Communication Competence in L2; CA: Communication Anxiety in L2; MQ: Motivation (Quality); IM: Intrinsic Motivation; IDR: Identified Regulation; ME: Motivation (Effort); ER: Effort Reported; NSL: Non-Skipping of Lessons; MIN: Total Minutes of Study Per Week; QLE: Quality of Learning Experience with SIR Materials; IP: International Posture; IIN: Interest in International News; AAT: Intergroup Approach-Avoidance Tendency; IVA: Interest in International Vocation/Activities; HTC: Having Things to Communicate to the World.

Figure 3. Final L2 SIR Learning Model Although space does not allow for detailed discussion of the full model, some points should be emphasized. First, in comparing the two models, not only was intrinsic motivation a significant variable in the final model, but an internalized type of extrinsic motivation (identified regulation) was as well. Second, the IP and L2 WTC models were partially replicated in this study. The paths from IP to L2 motivation-quality and from L2 communication confidence to L2 WTC were both significant, but not from IP to L2 motivation-effort or from L2 motivation-quality to L2 motivation-effort. Regarding the relationships among IP, L2 communication confidence, and L2 WTC, IP did not directly predict L2 WTC, but rather predicted 377

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

L2 communication confidence, which in turn predicted L2 WTC. Third and more importantly, persistence in learning with SIR materials was predicted by quality of SIR learning experience and motivation-effort, but not by L2 motivation-quality.

Quality of SIR learning experience also predicted L2 motivation-effort. L2 motivation-quality did not predict persistence or L2 motivation-effort. Finally, persistence did not predict L2 communication confidence.

These results indicate that L2 motivation-effort and quality of SIR learning experience were significant factors for predicting persistence, but not L2 motivationquality. Participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; learning experiences with SIR materials might be a particularly important factor in predicting persistence because it also predicted L2 motivationeffort. Furthermore, even if learners study English for a long time with SIR materials, they might not be confident in L2 communication. This might be because learning with these materials does not offer opportunities for interaction. Persistent learners may or may not have other ways of practicing L2 communication; without these opportunities, they may not be confident in L2 communication, even after persisting in this type of learning for a long time.

Conclusions As demonstrated in the final model, those who were likely to persist in learning with SIR materials were those who put forth much effort and had positive experiences. The next step in future research might be to examine the actual L2 learning in self-instruction among those who do persist. Also related to the issue of actual learning, in future research it will be fruitful to examine the effect of the lack of interaction in self-instruction. Contrary to the general agreement in the L2 literature that interaction is essential for L2 learning (e.g., Long, 1996), L2 selfinstruction, especially using radio materials, does not allow such interaction. Thus, future studies should examine what kind of role self-instruction plays in L2 learning.

Pedagogically speaking in order to help L2 learners persist in self-instruction materials designers need to explain what it is like to study with SIR materials at the beginning of each new series. Teachers and parents could also play a role in helping young learners study with radio, a medium that young people might not be used to.

378

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

Quality of SIR learning experience is an important factor in persistence, and even if learners are motivated to learn English, if their experience learning with SIR materials is negative they are not likely to persist in learning. Furthermore, persistence in learning with SIR materials did not make L2 learners confident in L2 communication. This might mean that L2 learners using SIR materials need to consider ways of compensating for the lack of interaction in this type of learning so that they can be confident and comfortable with L2 communication after learning with SIR materials. Considering the advantages of SIR materials, self-instruction using radio materials can be a valuable way of L2 learning. Learning to make the most of these materials and finding ways of compensating for the lack of interaction for themselves might help these learners become more self-directed.

Notes on the contributor Chika Takahashi is an assistant professor in the Faculty of Law and Letters at Ehime University. Her research interests include L2 motivation, L2 self-instruction, and research methods.

Acknowledgement This study was partially supported by the Language Learning doctoral dissertation grant.

References Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of self-determination research.

Rochester, NY: University of Rochester.

Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London, UK: Edward Arnold.

Hiromori, T. (2003). 学習者の動機づけは何によって高まるのか ‐自己決定理 論による高校生英語学習者の動機づけの検討 [What enhances language learners’ motivation?: High school English learners’ motivation from the perspective of self-determination theory]. JALT Journal, 25(2), 173-186.

Retrieved from http://jalt-publications.org/files/pdf-article/jj-25.2-art3.pdf 379

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

Hiromori, T. (2005). 外国語学習者の動機づけを高める３つの要因：全体傾向 と個人差の観点から [Three factors that motivate L2 learners: From the perspectives of general tendency and individual differences]. JACET Bulletin, 41, 37-50. Retrieved from http://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110006318213/en Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 487-535). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

MacIntyre, P. D. (1994). Variables underlying willingness to communicate: A causal analysis. Communication Research Reports, 11(2), 135-142. doi:10.1080/08824099409359951 MacIntyre, P. D. & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15(1), 3-26. doi:10.1177/0261927x960151001 Noels, K. A., Pelletier, L. G., Clément, R., & Vallerand, R. J. (2000). Why are you learning a second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language Learning, 50(1), 57-85. doi:10.1111/0023-8333.00111 Pae, T. (2008). Second language orientation and self-determination theory: A structural analysis of the factors affecting second language achievement.

Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27(1), 5-27. doi:10.1177/0261927X07309509 Ryan, S. (2009). Self and identity in L2 motivation in Japan: The ideal L2 self and Japanese learners of English. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 120-143). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Sakai, H., & Koike, H. (2008). 日本語話者大学生の英語学習動機の変化―国際 イベントへのボランティア参加の効果― [Changes in Japanese university students’ motivation to learn English: Effects of volunteering in an international event]. JALT Journal, 30(1), 51-67. Retrieved from http://jaltpublications.org/files/pdf-article/art3_7.pdf Tanaka, H., & Hiromori, T. (2007). 英語学習者の内発的動機づけを高める教育 実践的介入とその効果の検証 [The effects of educational intervention that enhances intrinsic motivation of L2 students]. JALT Journal, 29(1), 59-80.

Retrieved from http://jalt-publications.org/files/pdf-article/art3_10.pdf Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 54-66. doi:10.1111/15404781.00136 380

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 365-381

Yashima, T. (2009). International posture and the ideal L2 self in the Japanese EFL context. In Z. Dรถrnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 144-163). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Yashima, T., Zenuk-Nishide, L., & Shimizu, K. (2004). The influences of attitudes and affect on willingness to communicate and second language communication.

Language Learning, 54(1), 119-152. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00250.x

381

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

An Example of Classroom Practice Using Flashcards for Young Learners: Preliminary Indications for Promoting Autonomy Feng Teng, Nanning University, China Fang He, Nanning University, China

Abstract This article reports preliminary indications that flashcards are helpful for promoting a sense of control over learning. Participants were 25 fifth-year primary school students, who were required to create flashcards to use outside of their classroom after receiving instructions on relevant techniques. At the end of the semester, flashcards were collected in order to explore notes taken by the students. Ten of the students also participated in a follow-up interview. Results indicated that the open-ended nature of the flashcards, combined with scaffolding provided by the teacher, facilitate studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; autonomous engagement, although some techniques were rarely used and some were not maintained consistently throughout the experiment. Pedagogical implications for promoting self-access language learning are discussed.

Keywords: learner autonomy, self-access, young learners

In the last ten years, there has been an extraordinary increase in the number of primary school students learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL) both in state systems and in private language schools. Thus teaching English to young learners is one of the growing areas in foreign language education. However, no matter how much students learn through lessons, there is much more they need to learn beyond the classroom, suggesting that it is essential to help students become more autonomous.

Autonomy is an undisputed educational goal for all learners. However, does this apply to young learners as well? What can teachers do to help young learners become more autonomous? How does the teacherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role change? This paper constitutes a progress report on how the authors have taught English and attempted to develop autonomous learning for young learners. Training young learners to think for themselves is an essential skill. Thus it is never too early to introduce autonomy.

382

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

In this paper, we demonstrate an effective approach of using flashcards to encourage young learners to be more autonomous and develop self-access language learning skills. In our intervention, students were required to create flashcards to use outside of their classroom. At the end of the semester, flashcards were collected in order to explore their notes taken. A follow-up interview was also conducted to further investigate how autonomy can be promoted from this approach. After describing the activities and the findings, we will comment on the signs of autonomous behavior shown in the learners according to our classroom practices.

Literature Review Learner Autonomy (LA) has become a central theme in foreign language education. The most widely cited definition conceives of LA as a learner’s ability to take charge of one’s own learning (Benson, 2006). This capacity is also important in learning a foreign language. As Benson stated, “Learners who achieved proficiency in foreign languages did so, at least partly, as a result of exerting control over their own learning process” (2001, p. 65). This highlights an important role for teachers in enhancing learners’ autonomy. Indeed, promoting learner autonomy seems like a worthy goal in teaching English, both from a practical or a theoretical viewpoint. As Little (2007) claims, students should be responsible for various aspects and stages of their own learning processes. This entails setting goals, determining content, selecting techniques, and evaluating the progress.

Some scholars have suggested that Asian EFL learners do not readily take charge of decision-making in their own learning processes (Littlewood, 2000; Teng, 2015a). Smith (2008) proposed that the following learning processes are normally determined by the teacher, institution, or other factors: •

Objectives

•

Contents (including materials)

•

Stages (‘syllabus’)

•

Methods and techniques

•

Pace, time, and place

•

Evaluation procedures.

383

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

In other words, although autonomy is important, decisions concerning the above points may affect EFL learners’ development of autonomy. Several studies have looked at autonomous learning practices in young learners in various parts of the world. For example, in an attempt to stimulate autonomous practices among tenyear-old EFL learners in Sweden, Sundqvist and Sylvén (2014) observed three groups of research participants: Group one included students who did not play any computer games at all, group two were students who played a little, and group three were students who played video games a lot (four hours or more per week). The results showed that young frequent online role-playing gamers had developed their speaking skills and ability to self-assess in learning English more than the other students.

Goh and Taib (2006) explored the effects of metacognitive instruction on young second language learners’ autonomy in Singapore. Ten primary school pupils participated in eight specially designed listening lessons that contained traditional exercises, individual post-listening reflections on their listening experience, and teacher-facilitated discussions that focused on specific aspects of metacognitive knowledge about listening. After the lessons, all the learners reported a higher level of autonomous learning in understanding of the nature and the demands of listening.

Butler and Lee (2010) examined the effectiveness of self-assessment on facilitating young learners’ autonomy in South Korea. 254 EFL young learners who participated in the study were asked to perform self-assessments on a regular basis for a semester during their English classes. The findings showed that the young learners’ self-efficacy improved significantly. This reveals that applying selfassessment on a formative basis in an EFL setting leads to increased self-efficacy.

Huang (2011) suggested that content-based language instruction had an impact on EFL young learners’ motivated behaviors, for example, eagerness to volunteer, and classroom verbal interaction. Law (2010) proposed that cooperative learning may have a long-term effect on improving Hong Kong fifth-grade students’ autonomy.

Considering the above studies, one thing that we should bear in mind is that young EFL learners can indeed be encouraged to develop autonomy. This raises the 384

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

question of whether there are particular classroom practices and activities that can contribute to the gradual development of autonomy. The classroom practice reported in the present study investigated whether flashcards could be a useful means to promote autonomy.

Flashcards are a set of cards bearing information, such as words, pictures, or numbers, on either or both sides, used in classroom drills or in private study.

Flashcards are a simple, handy, versatile, valuable, yet often an underexploited resource and seemed like a useful tool for promoting autonomous learning. Kohyama and Shimada (2005) designed three activities through using flashcards for improving fourth to sixth graders’ autonomy. They concluded, “Although the levels of autonomy reached by each student differed, flashcards encouraged children to reflect on learning and be responsible for it. By personalizing the learning activities and goals, students became more motivated to learn, and made exerted efforts to the best of their abilities…. The levels of autonomy achieved by students depended on their experience dealing with it, not their age” (p. 120). In other words, when primary school students are provided with sufficient guidance through using flashcards, they will attempt to take responsibility for their own learning.

The present study reports an empirical example of classroom practice through using flashcards. Through using flashcards, teachers can help students improve autonomy in three ways: First, by instructing students how to select words. They can self-select words for study, which is crucial for learners because EFL students tend to encounter more words than they could possibly memorize at short notice.

Second, flashcards can give learners choices of what information to include for a new word. After being instructed as to the different kinds of information, e.g., synonyms, antonyms, collocations, example sentences, pictures, that are available, students may be able to choose for themselves which piece of information is appropriate for their learning.

Third, flashcards can be used to facilitate memorization by way of spaced repetition. The process of creating flashcards may exercise the mental processes of active recall. It may also present different ways for students to monitor and evaluate their learning processes.

385

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

In view of the above-mentioned reasons, creating flashcards seems to be an effective approach to promote a sense of control over learning for EFL students.

Nunan (1997) divided levels of implementing autonomy into five categories: 1. awareness; 2. involvement; 3. intervention; 4. creation; to 5. transcendence. At level one, awareness, students are made aware of the goals and contents of the materials.

They are encouraged to locate effective language learning strategies for their learning.

At level two, involvement, students are encouraged to make choices of activities from a range of alternatives. At level three, intervention, students modify the tasks or goals of the course according to their needs and interests. At the same time, they are required to do more reflective thinking. Level four is creation. Students create their own objectives and tasks. Level five is transcendence. Students become teachers beyond classrooms. They do project work, and teach each other. Creating flashcards can have the potential to familiarize students with the concept of autonomy from the first to the fifth level (Kohyama & Shimada, 2005). In this regard, students may become more motivated to learn and manage their own learning, and make concerted efforts to the best of their abilities. This may build a foundation for the promotion and implementation of self-access language learning, which is learning a language through the use of a self-established learning environment with readily accessible materials (Chung, 2013).

Method Participants The research focused on 25 fifth-year primary school students aged eleven and twelve years. They started learning English from the age of five, thus they had been learning English for at least six years prior to the study. They were of intermediate-level English proficiency according to an internal placement test.

Additionally, according to their teacherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s experience, they could be defined as nonautonomous learners because they were heavily dependent on their teacherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s instruction in learning English. Students were not informed that autonomy would be the focus of this study

386

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

Research setting The research was conducted during a semester-long course, with two 50minute lessons per week. An EFL story book (Wang & Xu, 2014) was used in the students’ regular class with an aim to improve their reading skills. This is a story book that is specifically designed for fifth-year primary school students and commonly used in primary schools in China. There is a vocabulary list following each story, which contains some new words. Each word was accompanied by its Chinese meaning.

Students were instructed to read the stories and the vocabulary list, guided in preparing the vocabulary test administered by the ELT Department, selecting important words and learning different techniques (see the instruction section).

Students were required to create flashcards outside the classroom. At the end of the semester, the flashcards were collected and any notes that were added were analyzed.

The second author, who was familiar with the research procedures, was responsible for teaching the students.

Instructions For the first 10 minutes, the teacher taught the difficult words and students read the story. After this, the teacher spent approximately 10 minutes of class time instructing the techniques of the keyword method, semantic mapping, finding collocations, finding antonyms and synonyms, and producing sentences.

The keyword method is a visual-mnemonic technique beneficial for learning new words. Students think of a L1 word that sounds similar to the new L2 word.

They then imagine and draw a picture that connects the two words. For example, Chinese students may find the pronunciation for the English word ‘tea’ similar to the word ti, which means ‘carry.’ Therefore, the students may draw a picture of someone who is carrying a cup of tea. This visual aid is beneficial for the learners because it can remind students of the meaning of the word ‘tea’ and its pronunciation.

Semantic mapping is a technique for vocabulary expansion and extension of vocabulary knowledge. Students relate already known words to a new word by drawing a semantic map showing the relationship between the words. The steps were: 387

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

choose and write a word on the card, then let students have a think of as many words as they can for the key word, and put the words into categories.

Collocations are partly or fully fixed expressions that become established in a context (Bejoint, 2010). Put simply, words often occur together with other words in chunks or phrases. Lessard-Clouston (2013) suggested that learning collocations, or lexical chunks, be incorporated into vocabulary teaching.

Finding antonyms and synonyms for target words is a useful technique for vocabulary learning (Teng, 2014). Thus, students were encouraged to use their previous knowledge or their books to locate any possible antonym and synonym for the target words. A synonym is a word or phrase that means exactly or nearly the same with the target word. An antonym of a particular word is one that has the opposite meaning.

Sufficient research findings also supported the effects of producing sentences in vocabulary learning (Teng, 2015b). This was due to the fact that producing sentences is related to a higher involvement load in learning.

Following the instructions for the techniques, students were required to spend 15 minutes in learning the words to prepare for vocabulary tests administered every month. These internal tests measure knowledge of written word form, and the formmeaning link. The tests use a stem plus a four choice multiple-choice format. The stem item mainly consists of previously learned words followed by a single nondefining context, and four options. One option has the closest meaning with the stem word, other options are distracters.

Following this, the teacher spent 15 minutes instructing the learners about how to select some important words for learning. This step was of paramount importance because key components of autonomy include learnersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; ability to make decisions for themselves, as well as the critical reflection involved in this process (IllĂŠs, 2012). In this case, Barkerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2007) cost/benefits questions were adapted. This was to facilitate a learner in deciding whether a word is worth particular attention.

This method was also successfully applied in a previous study in Japan (Baierschmidt, 2011), which was to assist learners selecting words for a vocabulary journal. Adapted questions were as follows: 388

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

1. Does this word often appear in your books?

2. Would I use the translation of the word in my language?

3. Do I have a special reason for using this word?

4. Do I want to use this word in my learning?

5. Does your classmate often point out this word to you?

After this, participants were then told to choose important words from the book and create flashcards outside their class (See an example of flashcards in Appendix A). The word, and the Chinese definition were provided in the book. The students were encouraged to include more information for their flashcards through using the above-mentioned techniques. Throughout the semester, the teacher checked the flashcards which the students created. At the end of the semester, the flashcards were collected for analysis. After the study, ten students were invited for an interview (see the interview section).

Prior to the study, the teacher and her students discussed the best way to create flashcards. Students were shown several sample flashcards, such as flashcards both with a word and its definition on the front, flashcards with a word on the front, and its definition on the back, flashcards with a word, part of speech on the front, and its definition on the front. Following a discussion between the teacher and the students, it was decided that a preferred flashcard is to have a word and its part of speech on the front, and its Chinese definition on the back.

It may seem contradictory to require students to choose required words when one of the purposes of using flashcards was to enhance studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; capacity in selfselecting words. This was done for the following reasons: First, because the tests for measuring studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; learning performances consisted of the words from the book, learning these words was in line with the requirement of the teaching syllabus.

Second, only eight students expressed they were confident in self-selecting words.

Third, it seemed unrealistic and unfair to expect primary school students to have fully active roles in autonomous learning (Pinter, 2014). Thus an approach that provided words for them to choose seemed acceptable.

Students were encouraged to use the techniques in their flashcards if they felt 389

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

it was useful. Throughout the semester, the teacher collected and checked their flashcards. At the end of the semester, the flashcards were once again collected. This was for analyzing the notes taken, defined as any additional information that the students had added in the flashcards. After the analysis, a follow-up interview was also conducted in order to gain further insight into the results.

Interview After the end of the course, ten students were randomly chosen and invited to participate in a one-on-one interview. Taking participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; English proficiency level into account, the interview was conducted in Chinese. The interview was to encourage participants to reflect on their experiences of creating flashcards, and to express opinions on how the experiences affected their autonomous learning. The second author was responsible for the entire process and took notes. Interview time for each participant was about two minutes. The total time was about 20 minutes.

Questions for interview were as follows: 1. What did you think of creating flashcards? Why? 2. Among the nine categories of information (Self-example written sentences, copied example sentences, pronunciation, collocations, synonyms, antonyms, semantic mappings, translation of example sentences, drawings), which one did you tend to provide for the flashcards you created? Why? 3. Did you maintain your interest in flashcards till the end of semester?

Why? Data analysis As noted above, the students were expected to add more information in the flashcards through using the techniques. As part of speech, and definition were already provided in the book, the flashcards were collected to check other additional information. Analysis showed that students provided nine kinds of notes which can be said to provide evidence of autonomous learning behavior. These were: Self-example written sentences â&#x20AC;˘

Copied example sentences 390

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

•

Pronunciation

•

Collocations

•

Synonyms

•

Antonyms

•

Semantic mappings

•

Translation of Example Sentences

•

Drawings

“Self-example written sentences” are the sentences produced by the students through using the new words. “Copied example sentences” are the sentences that the students copied directly from their textbooks. “Pronunciation” referred to the attempts at applying phonetic symbols to memorize the pronunciation of a word.

“Collocations” meant the students provided words or phrases that often co-occur with the target words. For example, for the new word ‘naughty,’ a student included a word like ‘monkey.’ “Synonyms” meant the students provided a word with a similar meaning of the target words. For example, a student provided ‘bad’ for the new word ‘naughty.’ “Antonyms” meant the student recorded words that are opposite in meaning with the new word. For example, ‘good, well-mannered’ for ‘naughty.’

“Semantic mappings” referred to the attempt that the students drew a web of connections demonstrating the relationships between the target words and their already known words. “Translation of example sentences” meant the students translated the English example sentences into Chinese. “Drawings” referred to the pictures that the students self-drew to help them remember the meaning of the new word.

Results Figure 1 shows the types of notes taken and the number of students who took the notes.

391

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

Figure 1. Summary of the Notes Made on Flashcards Figure 1 shows that among the categories, “self-written example sentences” were used the most (18 students), followed closely by “copied sentences” (16 students) and “pronunciation” (16 students), “collocations” (10 students), “synonym”(8 students), “antonym” (6 students), “semantic mapping” (5 students), “translation of example sentences” (4 students), and “drawings,” which was used least (3 students).

Analysis of interview The above findings were investigated further in the interviews. Data from the interviews revealed that eight learners out of the ten interviewed expressed satisfaction with creating flashcards. The following comments were encouraging as they indicated that boring rote-learning of words could be transformed into an enjoyable experience through flashcards (comments were translated into English by the second author).

“I enjoyed it because it was like an interesting assignment to finish.”

“I enjoyed it because it was very helpful. It encourages me to find more related words, or phrases, example sentences to complete this assignment by myself.”

“I enjoyed it because it is interesting to finish this assignment at home.”

392

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

Close analysis of the interview data also revealed a number of interesting observations. First, eight of students interviewed included example sentences when creating flashcards because they believed that including example sentences would be helpful for their learning. Secondly, learners’ responses seemed to warn us against total dependence on flashcards. Nine of the students mentioned that they would not provide a semantic mapping, or drawing. The following comments explained the reasons for this.

“It is very difficult for me to provide a semantic mapping for the new word that I included in the flashcards. Although I tried to, I gave up at last.”

“I write sentences, or copy sentences directly from the book. However, I do not want to provide a semantic mapping for the words in the flashcards. It takes too much time.”

“I want to draw a picture in the flashcards. However, it is too difficult.”

Thirdly, four learners said that they did not maintain interest for using flashcards consistently throughout the semester. For example, three students commented, “I am quite interested in flashcards at the first beginning, but I lost interest towards the end of the semester.”

“Some of the techniques are difficult to follow to the end. For example, finding a synonym or antonym.”

“Establishing a semantic map needs time, and teacher does not ask us to do this. Although I did it at the start, I decided not to continue.”

Discussion and Conclusion The interview data and notes on the flashcards could be presented as preliminary indications that flashcards are helpful for promoting a sense of control over learning. Even though the students were not required to and did not receive any external rewards for using any techniques, about two-thirds of the students provided example sentences, copied sentences, as well as phonetic symbols to memorize the 393

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

pronunciation. Additionally, about one-third of the students provided collocations, and synonyms for the words recorded in the flashcards. A few students provided drawings, semantic mapping, and translations.

However, there are a few caveats to be made of the findings. For example, some of the techniques were rarely used. Only five students presented semantic mapping, a technique for graphically representing concepts. Results seemed to suggest that semantic mapping is not a technique that can be autonomously used by students. In addition, an autonomous student could choose not to use the technique because it is not effective for him/her. Although a previous study has shown that semantic mapping helps students, especially struggling students, to identify, understand, and recall the word meaning (Zorfass & Gray, 2014), to make this technique beneficial for the students, a step-by-step set of direct instructions and repeated practice might be needed.

Second, only three students autonomously applied drawings for the included words in the flashcards. They may think drawing is time-consuming. As a previous study has shown that the drawing strategy was an effective word problem solving strategy for students (Dennis, Knight, & Jerman, 2015), direct instruction and repeated practice for this one also seems to be necessary.

Third, some techniques were not maintained consistently throughout the whole semester. Follow-up interviews showed that some students did not continue use some of the techniques, e.g., semantic mapping, and finding a synonym or antonym. Possible explanations for this were studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; lack of time, interest, and the difficulties of the technique itself. Baierschmidt (2011) used a vocabulary journal for his students to promote autonomous learning. However, some techniques were also not maintained long term. This seemed to raise questions as to whether we can have only one tool to maintain learnersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; interest and, or how we can go about doing it?

Fourth, the usefulness of applying flashcards might have been affected by variables, e.g., classroom setting, context, learner background, etc. Future studies with in-depth analyses are warranted.

This example of classroom practice also sheds lights on promoting self-access language learning. By creating flashcards, students began to set their own learning 394

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

goals. Students are offered a learning environment in which they are active participants rather than passive recipients of information. First, they clarify their objectives. Then they select words relevant to those objectives, choosing not only the information best suited to the flashcards, but also the level appropriate to their ability.

Second, they exercise their responsibility for their own learning by developing their own flashcards. Students learn how to set priorities, decide when and where to study, and determine how to pace their learning. Finally, they evaluate their learning and, if necessary, change their plan of action through sharing flashcards in the class.

Unfortunately, some learners may not have the knowledge and skills that allow them to take part in this kind of classroom practice. Teachers must therefore need to help their learners develop this knowledge and skills. A teacherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role is to move learners along a continuum from dependence on the teacher to autonomy. This can be done by a collaborative effort between teachers and learners. In other words, this calls for a pedagogical partnership between teachers and learners.

Notes on the Contributors Feng Teng is a language teacher educator at the department of English, Nanning University, China. His main research interests include teaching and learning vocabulary, extensive reading and listening.

Fang He is a lecturer at the department of English, Nanning University, China. She also works as an English instructor in a self-access center for primary school students.

Her research mainly includes young learners, and bilingual education.

References Baierschmidt, J. R. (2011). Promoting autonomy through vocabulary journals. In A. Stewart (Ed.), JALT 2010 Conference Proceedings. Tokyo, Japan: JALT. Bejoint, H. (2010). The lexicography of English. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

395

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning.

London, UK: Pearson Education.

Benson, P. (2006). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 40(1), 21-40. doi:10.1017/s0261444806003958 Butler, Y. G., & Lee, J. (2010). The effects of self-assessment among young leaners of English. Language Testing, 27(1), 5-31. doi:10.1177/0265532209346370 Chung, I. F. (2013). Are learners becoming more autonomous? The role of selfaccess center in EFL college students’ English learning in Taiwan. The AsiaPacific Education Researcher, 22(4), 701-708. doi:10.1007/s40299-0130076-y Dennis, M. S., Knight, J., & Jerman, O. (2015). Teaching high school students with learning disabilities to use model drawing strategy to solve fraction and percentage word problems. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 60(1), 10-21. doi:10.1080/1045988x.2014.954514 Goh, C., & Taib, Y. (2006). Metacognitive instruction in listening for young learners.

ELT Journal, 60(3), 222-232. doi:10.1093/elt/ccl002 Huang, K. M. (2011). Motivating lessons: A classroom-oriented investigation of the effects of content-based instruction on EFL young learners’ motivated behaviors and classroom verbal interaction. System, 39(2), 186-201. doi:10.1016/j.system.2011.02.002 Illés, E. (2012). Learner autonomy revisited. ELT Journal, 66(4), 505-513. doi:10.1093/elt/ccs044 Kohyama, M., & Shimada, M. (2005). Curriculum: Entering the courtyard of freedom: Facilitating autonomy for young learners. In K. Bradford-Watts, C. Ikeguchi, & M. Swanson (Eds.). JALT2004 Conference Proceedings. Tokyo, Japan: JALT. Retrieved from http://jaltpublications.org/archive/proceedings/2004/E75.pdf Law, Y. K. (2010). The effects of cooperative learning on enhancing Hong Kong fifth graders’ achievement goals, autonomous motivation and reading proficiency. Journal of Research in Reading, 34(4), 402-425. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01445.x Lessard-Clouston, M. (2013). Teaching vocabulary. Alexandria, VA: TESOL International Association.

Little, D. (2007). Language learner autonomy: Some fundamental considerations revisited. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 14-29.

396

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

doi:10.2167/illt040.0 Littlewood, W. (2000). Do Asian students really want to listen and obey? ELT Journal, 54(1), 31â&#x20AC;&#x201C;35. doi:10.1093/elt/54.1.31 Nunan, D. (1997). Designing and adapting materials to encourage learner autonomy.

In P. Benson & P. Voller (Eds.), Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 192-203). New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.

Pinter, A. (2014). Child participant roles in applied linguistics research. Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 168-183. doi:10.1093/applin/amt008 Smith, R. C. (2008). Learner autonomy (Key concepts in ELT). ELT Journal, 62(4), 395-397. doi:10.1093/elt/ccn038 Sundqvist, P., & SylvĂŠn, L. K. (2014). How Swedish children learn English through gaming. The Conversation. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/howswedish-children-learn-english-through-gaming-31073 Teng, F. (2014). Research into practice: Strategies for teaching and learning vocabulary. Beyond Words, 2(2), 41-57. Retrieved from http://journal.wima.ac.id/index.php/BW/article/view/592/0 Teng, F. (2015a). Assessing learner autonomy and EFL vocabulary acquisition: A case study. Beyond Words, 3(1), 78-99. Retrieved from http://journal.wima.ac.id/index.php/BW/article/view/678 Teng, F. (2015b). Involvement load in translation tasks and EFL vocabulary learning.

The New English Teacher, 9(1), 83-101. Retrieved from http://www.assumptionjournal.au.edu/index.php/newEnglishTeache r/article/view/508/712 Wang, L. L, & Xu, L. P. (2014). Story collections for primary school students.

Shanghai, China: East China University of Science and Technology Press.

Zorfass, J., & Gray, T. (2014). Connecting word meanings through semantic mapping. Retrieved from http://www.readingrockets.org/article/connectingword-meanings-through-semantic-mapping

397

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 382-398

Appendix A An example of a student participantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s flashcard

(Front)

(Back)

398

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. !

Self-Access and Metacognitive Awareness in Young Learners: How Japanese Sixth Graders Learn How to Learn English Robert J. Werner, Kanda University of International Studies, Japan Yu Kobayashi, Koyamadai Elementary School, Japan

Abstract This paper discusses theory and practice related to self-access and metacognitive awareness in young learners. While still an emerging field, the paper presents several studies that describe young learners’ self-access through playing online multi-player digital games, watching TV/films, and reading various types of texts. The teaching of metacognitive awareness, or ‘learning how to learn’, is also discussed, and examples illustrate how this knowledge is applied to learning both in class and beyond. The latter part of this paper describes elementary English instruction in Japan and includes practical applications of learning how to learn through examples from a Japanese sixth grade English class. The students discuss motivating factors beyond the classroom, how they access metacognitive knowledge, and strategies they apply to better learn English.

Keywords: self-access, metacognitive awareness, Japan, elementary school, gaming

Self-access and autonomy with young learners is an emerging field. Holec (1981) defines autonomy as “the ability to take charge of one's own learning” (p. 3), and Benson (2011) takes it a step further in describing autonomy in language learning.

He discusses the capacity, or ability, to take control, although the way in which this occurs will vary depending on the situation.

While there has not been a lot of research in the area of self-access and autonomy with young learners, interest has been increasing in recent years, and some studies have shown promising results. In addition to reading, watching TV/films, and using social media in English outside of school, young learners have also been learning and practicing English through playing online multi-player video games.

Studies described below will demonstrate how young learners access English beyond the classroom and use the knowledge acquired to demonstrate improvement in school.

In addition, there are now resources designed to help educators in teaching children how to learn, so that they can apply strategies both in the classroom and beyond.

!

399!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. !

This article will be divided into two parts. First, it will discuss language learning and self-access outside the classroom with regard to young learners, and also examine theory and practice related to metacognitive awareness, including instruction on ‘learning how to learn’. In this paper, young learners are defined as those in elementary and junior high school. Because educational systems and the ages of students vary in different countries, it is difficult to draw the line at a particular grade level. For example, in the United States, students finish elementary school in grade five and junior high (middle school) in grade eight, but each level is completed one year later in Japan. With the varying ages of junior high school students (11-15 years old, depending on the country), some learners are still developing metacognitive skills and discovering their personal learning styles at this level. Therefore, the term young learners will not be restricted solely to those in elementary school.

After discussing theory, the paper will describe practical examples where Japanese sixth grade learners of English talk about how they learn, and how various strategies have helped them to become better learners. One of the authors teaches English at an elementary school in Japan. The examples come from her master’s thesis research (Kobayashi, 2015), conducted when she was an observer/researcher in a sixth grade class. For the purpose of this article, the terms young learners and children will be used synonymously.

Language Learning Beyond the Classroom Most studies have traditionally focused on in-class learning. However, in recent years, there has been an increasing amount of interest in learning beyond the classroom. Any discussion of this topic should begin with Benson and Reinders’ (2011) groundbreaking volume, which is dedicated solely to the variety of ways in which learning occurs outside of a school or classroom setting. Two chapters that are most relevant are discussed here. While some learners are in or approaching high school and therefore might not traditionally be considered young learners, these studies are relevant as examples of self-access and learning beyond the language class.

First, Kalaja, Alanen, Palviainen, and Dufva (2011) consider the relationship between agency and context in learning beyond the classroom. The Finnish participants of their study discuss activities they engaged in while learning English during their grade school years (grades 3-12). Findings show that they primarily learned grammar in school. On the other hand, learners not only used social situations !

400!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. ! to improve their English communication and expand their vocabulary through various contexts (TV, the internet, magazines, newspapers, books, radio, and listening to music), but also demonstrated a willingness to search out opportunities to use the language outside of school.

Sundqvist (2011) examines learning beyond the classroom, or extramural English, as she terms it, in ninth grade Swedish learners (ages 15-16). Like other studies discussed in this paper, Sundqvist found that students’ oral proficiency and vocabulary improved through reading various print and electronic media (including the internet) and playing video games. These results are supported by a Swedish National Agency of Education report (as cited in Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2014), which states that the majority of Swedish upper elementary school students learn the same amount or more English beyond the classroom.

Self-access through gaming and other media Recently, there have been several studies on self-access in which young learners (ranging in age from ten to fourteen years old) demonstrated academic improvement in English from having played online multi-player video games outside of school (Jeon, 2014; Piirainen-Marsh & Tainio, 2009; Sundqvist, 2015; Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2014). Sundqvist and Sylvén (2014) found that Swedish learners of English demonstrated improvement in speaking and vocabulary through out-of-school gaming.

In Jeon’s (2014) study, young Korean EFL learners had positive learning experiences and became more confident using English in school as a result of having played video games on their own. Finally, Piirainen-Marsh and Tainio’s (2009) Finnish participants improved their speaking abilities through repetition of various phrases that were necessary to play the game.

In Iceland, eight year-old children who had not yet begun formal English instruction had nevertheless acquired basic speaking and listening skills through activities done at home, such as playing computer games and watching TV programs, movies, and YouTube videos (Lefever, 2010). In fact, students were already capable of producing sentence-level spoken English when formal instruction began in the third grade.

As part of the Early Language Learning in Europe (ELLiE) Project, a largescale study spanning seven European countries, Muñoz and Lindgren (2011) examine language exposure and improvement in ten to eleven year-old children, based on out!

401!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. ! of-school activities. Results tend to support those of the smaller studies discussed above in that learners’ language improved through various activities, mainly computer games, subtitled TV/films, the internet, music, and radio (Sundqvist, 2015).

Metacognitive Awareness It is generally accepted that when an adult learns a language, he/she can think about how the learning occurs and consciously apply strategies (O’Malley & Chamot, 1995). Flavell (1979) states that children are not able to talk about their learning in the same fashion as adults. On the other hand, it has been argued that if children have the chance and the teacher presents it in the right way, they can indeed understand and discuss how they are learning (Ellis, 1999, 2001, 2011; Ellis & Ibrahim, 2015). In fact, learning how to learn is a key factor to any discussion of metacognitive awareness, as children need to acquire the necessary skills to understand how they are learning a language, and then apply this knowledge to their learning both in and beyond the classroom. Likewise, Phillips (1997) states that children need to learn how to learn and that it is the teacher’s role to assist them in gaining the necessary skills to be able to do so.

There are two texts on teaching young learners how to learn, and each includes numerous classroom activities (Ellis & Ibrahim, 2015; Puchta & Williams, 2011). Ellis and Ibrahim’s (2015) book is comprehensive in its description of metacognitive theory, including a detailed description of exactly how teachers can assist children in developing metacognitive awareness and becoming more autonomous language learners. In addition to metacognitive strategies, cognitive, socioaffective, and communication strategies are also important for a student’s growth as a learner (Ellis & Ibrahim, 2015). The authors go on to list numerous practical examples of the first three types (which all relate to communication in one way or another), so that teachers can be conscious of the learning process when strategies are utilized in the classroom. Examples discussed later in this paper illustrate some of these strategies in action, such as reflecting on and communicating personal preferences about language learning (metacognitive), differentiating between sounds and trying different language and learning strategies (cognitive), and collaborating and chanting together in English (socioaffective).

A notable characteristic of learning how to learn, especially with young learners, is with regard to use of the mother tongue (L1) in the classroom. Ellis and !

402!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. !

Ibrahim (2015) state that there is no harm in using the learners’ mother tongue to either talk about learning or review something that was already taught. Similarly, Puchta and Williams’ (2011) view is that “the students’ mother tongue should be used as little as possible, but as often as necessary, as long as it facilitates learning” (pp.

15-16). These opinions are applicable to the Japanese context that will be discussed below because, while young Japanese learners do not have the linguistic ability to discuss their learning in English, it will be clear that they are definitely able to do so in their mother tongue.

Several studies discuss metacognitive awareness in young learners. With extremely young learners (ages three to five), Whitebread and Pasternak (2005) found, through video and personal observations, that children are capable of demonstrating metacognitive knowledge. Pinter (2014) asserts that child research participants are not only able to talk about their learning, but can also influence the direction research takes based on their beliefs and interests. Pinter and Zandian (2014, 2015) found this to be the case, as ten year-old learners demonstrated their metacognitive understanding by asking about aspects of the research process that interested them, thereby taking control of it.

O’Malley, Chamot, Stewner-Manzanares, Kupper, and Russo (1985) established that American high school ESL students1 use cognitive and metacognitive strategies both within and beyond the classroom in their language learning. Clarke (2014) found 14-15 year-old Japanese learners of English in Belgium to acquire autonomy and metacognitive skills through weekly journal entries. In a related study, Hazari (2013) discusses how ten to twelve year-old Iranian learners of English demonstrated metacognitive awareness through collaborative writing.

Boström (2012) looks at Swedish ten year-old students’ perceptions of their own language learning. She found that the children were able to explain how they learned various English content, as well as discuss their learning styles. This data supports Ellis and Ibrahim’s (2015) assertion that children are capable of metacognitive awareness. Similarly, Kobayashi (2015) examines Japanese sixth grade English learners’ awareness of how they learn. Based on a very limited amount of English instruction by European standards, her findings nevertheless indicate that students were able to discuss their learning. They also showed signs of taking control !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1

This study does not report on the age of the participants. However, American high school students are generally 14-18 years old.

!

403!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. ! of their learning, thus becoming more autonomous in the process. Several practical examples from Kobayashi’s study are described in the next section.

English Instruction in a Japanese Elementary Context According to the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) (2008), while English is a compulsory subject in Japanese elementary schools beginning in the fifth grade, the focus is not so much on learning to communicate as in fostering pupils’ positive attitudes toward the language. A second aim is to increase their desire to communicate with foreigners. One possible reason why actual English learning goals are not mentioned in the government policy might be related to the lack of teachers with both elementary teaching qualifications and high-level English language skills (Japan Business Federation, 2000; MEXT, 2013). Between the government ideology and the actual amount of instruction time allocated to English education (35 hours per academic year, which comes to a little less than one class per week), teaching English at this level has been challenging.

According to Kobayashi (2015), Japanese elementary English educational policies have downplayed the students’ academic achievements. While the goal in other subject areas is to learn the content, in English, on the other hand, the top priority is having fun. In other words, English has been treated more as a game than an area of study.

This is not to say, however, that students are unsuccessful in learning the language. One of the authors of this paper conducted a year-long qualitative study in a Japanese sixth grade classroom (Kobayashi, 2015), where she was solely an observer.

However, her interviews ended up having an unforeseen, but positive effect on the children in helping them to better reflect on their learning. Thanks to a progressivethinking principal and an innovative curriculum, the English teachers were able to concentrate on teaching not only language skills, but also how to effectively learn. In addition, they emphasized the fact that English is an academic subject, and while learning can be fun, it is also a serious part of the day. Through observations and interviews (conducted in Japanese), students gave voice to how they were learning.

Qualitative analysis was conducted based on the grounded theory approach. Data collected via observation notes and interview transcripts throughout the year were categorized and coded according to an emergent framework. !

!

404!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. !

Kobayashi (2015) explored how young EFL learners develop autonomy at a public elementary school in Japan. The research took place in a sixth grade class of 34 students (ages 11-12). Data included in-class observation notes and transcriptions of two types of interviews: ‘post-class’ and ‘follow-up’, both of which were semistructured in nature. There were 64 post-class interviews, which focused on any of 21 students soon after each English class finished. The post-class interviews occurred any time something appeared to have changed with the individual and his/her learning (based on observations). Follow-up interviews were dedicated to understanding students’ learning in more detail. Three of these students each participated in a twenty-minute follow-up interview because observations and post-class interview data suggested that they were developing autonomy and metacognitive awareness.

Two of the students showed the most drastic improvement in autonomy and language proficiency throughout the year, while the third was very competent at explaining how she was learning.

Seven examples of learner autonomy (selected from 33 cases identified in the study) are described in this paper. While the first two have to do with self-access and learning beyond the classroom, they do not relate specifically to English, but rather to motivating factors. The next three show how students apply strategies to their English learning, and the final two examples relate to how the children demonstrate their understanding of metacognitive knowledge.

Example 1: Motivation beyond the classroom One day, Pupil T looked very excited in English class. In an interview, he told the researcher about a conversation he had had with friends who graduated from the same school a year earlier. His friends told him that the sixth grade English class is helpful in preparing for junior high school. In this case, what happened outside of class strongly affected his motivation to study English. Ellis and Ibrahim’s (2015) metacognitive strategy, “sharing ideas about language learning” (p. 12), is related to this example because the older students told him about the importance of studying English.

He also mentioned how a returnee (a student who had returned to Japan from living in an English-speaking country) had influenced him. His new goal was to emulate that student’s pronunciation. As he listens to her and repeats, he is applying one of Ellis and Ibrahim’s (2015) cognitive strategies. !

405!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. !

Example 2: Motivation through content According to observation notes, in the beginning of the school year Pupil E did not look like a girl who enjoyed English. Until the middle of the second semester, she appeared overwhelmed and frustrated in class. However, her attitude and methods of studying English gradually improved. One day, she began to take notes in class and also started to raise her hand to answer questions. The researcher began to pay closer attention to Pupil E and her interests in order to understand why this change had occurred.

In English class, the children had been singing the song Somewhere Over the Rainbow for several months. One day, the Japanese Teacher of English (JTE) asked students to write their dream on a handout. The JTE wanted students to focus on “the dream that you dare to” dream, which is a line in the song. During this activity, Pupil E wrote that she wished for world peace, and the JTE later introduced this idea to the class. In the post-class interview, the author and Pupil E had the following conversation: Author: When your idea was introduced by Mrs. (JTE’s name), what did you think?

Pupil E: I wanted to sing that song more wholeheartedly. I have been interested in veterinarian as a job in the future, but started to think I want to be an adult who can promote world peace.

She went on to say that she became interested in this field through learning about Malala Yousafzai and Sadako Ogata (former United Nations High Commissioner of Refugees) both in and outside of school.

Author: What do you think about learning English?

Pupil E: In order to build a peaceful world, English is necessary. I’m not good at English now, but I believe I can make an effort to be good at it.

According to observation notes, Pupil E researched Ogata for a class project (in Japanese) and gave a speech about her. This activity led Pupil E to begin thinking about her own future. Therefore, content learned separately and in two languages combined to increase motivation and also gave her a reason to work harder in English class.

!

406!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. !

Example 3: Applying three types of strategies simultaneously The sixth grade English curriculum is based on joint storytelling (a methodology developed by the JTE), where students learn language forms, such as vocabulary and structure, in order to knowingly produce language (Allen-Tamai, 2013). The JTE selected one Japanese folk story and made a manuscript with rhythm, songs, and gestures based on American Sign Language. The term joint storytelling originated from the fact that “students learn to jointly retell a story together or with a teacher, and their first language (Japanese) is used jointly with their second language (English)” (Allen-Tamai, 2013, p. 122).

The students learned to tell the entire story little by little throughout the school year, and in the process applied all three types of learner strategies outlined by Ellis and Ibrahim (2015). Students listened to and repeated after the teacher, in addition to practicing pronunciation through reciting the story (cognitive), and they chanted together with peers (socioaffective). Several metacognitive strategies were applied as well. When they learned to chant the story, they became aware of word stress. As students practiced what they had already learned, they activated prior knowledge, and finally reviewed what they had already learned. In short, students learned about the process of language learning through experiencing it.

Example 4: Gestures as a learning strategy Pupil F described how a song helped her to learn English. As mentioned in Example two, the class had sung Somewhere Over the Rainbow using gestures based on American Sign Language. According to the student, “In the beginning of the song activity, the teacher sang the song so naturally that it was hard to catch what she said.

However, using the gestures was helpful.” She went on to say that it is too difficult to sing without the gestures. Since she would not have been able to read all the lyrics, that method would also have been hard. The student felt that this learning strategy was effective because “we remembered the song briefly by using gestures, then focused on understanding the meaning later”.

Example 5: Note-taking strategy Students do not usually take notes in English class because spelling is not explicitly taught. However, some students in the class regularly copied words from the blackboard. One day, Pupil E suddenly began to take notes. In an interview, she !

407!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. ! said that she copied the spelling and meaning of words because she was imitating another student, Pupil H. She found that Pupil H was able to read the words aloud from having copied them, so she decided to do the same thing. As a result, she was able to learn how to read several new words. By doing this, Pupil E selected criteria for success and therefore applied a metacognitive strategy (Ellis & Ibrahim, 2015).

Example 6: Understanding metacognitive knowledge through peer teaching Ten students in the target class participated in a program in which they taught joint storytelling to first graders. (They had been learning this way since second grade, and now had a unique opportunity to teach the younger students how to learn the content.) In doing this, they applied some of Ellis and Ibrahim’s (2015) metacognitive and socioaffective strategies. First, they reflected on their language learning (metacognitive) in order to access what was needed to pass the knowledge on to the younger children. After that, they were collaborating, cooperating, discussing and listening to each other, and finally helping one another to effectively teach the story (socioaffective). Pupil F discussed how teaching the first graders forced her to think carefully about how to learn. She said, “I think I improved myself by teaching them, because it made me think hard about how to tell the younger students new things.”

Before this experience, Pupil F thought that if she could successfully tell the story, it would be easy to teach it. Afterwards, however, she realized, “We need to have a deep understanding to teach someone.”

Example 7: Understanding how to learn In a lesson designed to develop phonological awareness, students were learning about the relationships between letters and sounds. Pupil O understood what was happening and explained why she was learning the phonemes. She said, “Understanding and acquiring each phoneme is allowing me to read such long words.”

She also explained about the literacy learning goal of each grade: acquiring consonant phonemes in the fifth grade, and acquiring short and long vowel sounds in the sixth grade. Even though she might not have been managing her own learning yet, she was able to vocalize how she was learning, thus accessing metacognitive knowledge.

!

408!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. !

Conclusion The examples discussed above provide a glimpse into the metacognitive awareness and choices made by Japanese sixth grade learners of English. Through use of various strategies, the students took charge of their own learning and made decisions that helped them to be better learners. In doing so, they applied several of Ellis and Ibrahimâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2015) metacognitive, cognitive, and socioaffective strategies to their language learning. Since interviews did not contain questions about learning English at home or outside the classroom, the examples focus solely on in-school learning. While it would have been helpful to know if self-access had played a role in their motivation or decision-making, it is nevertheless evident that the children understood how they were learning and were able to explain about aspects of their metacognitive and cognitive awareness.

The interviews might have served the purpose of giving students an opportunity to actively reflect on their learning, thus assisting them in recalling their thought processes while completing various tasks. In this way, Kobayashiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2015) data collection might actually have motivated the children by challenging them to recall and think about how they learned different areas of language. Active reflection is a key aspect of learning how to learn (Ellis & Ibrahim, 2015), and the interviews likely helped the students to do just that. If a young learner understands how to learn, he/she will be more successful not only in school, but also in learning beyond the classroom. This is especially pertinent in the Japanese system with 35 hours of English instruction per academic year. In this context, a successful learner will likely acquire most language skills outside of the classroom through self-access, utilizing strategies that have worked in school.

While there have not been many studies on self-access with regard to young learners, those described above show promising results. As technology continues to improve, and more children use the internet or play digital games, so too have new ways of language learning emerged. The studies that have been conducted illustrate the need for more research on young language learnersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; self-access and ways they apply metacognitive strategies beyond the classroom.

Notes on the Contributors Robert Werner completed his MA in TESOL at Teachers College Columbia University, and has been teaching ESL/EFL for over ten years at the elementary, !

409!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. ! secondary, and tertiary levels in the United States and Japan. He is currently a Lecturer at Kanda University of International Studies in Japan, and his research interests include autonomy, motivation, metacognitive awareness, and CALL. Yu Kobayashi completed her MA in English Education at Aoyama Gakuin University, and has been teaching English at three Tokyo elementary schools since 2014. Prior to that, she spent five years observing elementary school English classes that followed an innovative curriculum. Her research interests include autonomy, relatedness, and self-determination.

References Allen-Tamai, M. (2013). Story trees. Tokyo, Japan: Shogakukan-Shueisha.

Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and researching autonomy (2nd ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson.

Benson, P., & Reinders, H. (Eds.). (2011). Beyond the language classroom.

Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

BostrĂśm, L. (2012). Do ten-year-old children in Sweden know how they learn? A study of how young students believe they learn compared to their learning styles preferences. International Education Studies, 5(6), 11-23. doi:10.5539/ies.v5n6p11 Clarke, D. (2014). Using learning journals to chart the development of learner autonomy. In J. Mynard & C. Ludwig (Eds.), Autonomy in language learning: Tools, tasks and environments [ebook]. Faversham, UK: IATEFL. Ellis, G. (1999). Developing childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s metacognitive awareness. In C. Kennedy (Ed.), Innovation and best practice (pp. 108-120). Harlow, UK: Longman.

Ellis, G. (2001). Is it worth it? Convincing teachers of the value of developing metacognitive awareness in children. In B. Sinclair, I. McGrath, & T. Lamb (Eds.), Learner autonomy, teacher autonomy: Future directions (pp. 75-88).

Harlow, UK: Pearson.

Ellis, G. (2011). Learning training and young learners. In C. J. Everhard & J. Mynard, with R. Smith (Eds.). Autonomy in language learning: Opening a can of worms (pp. 99-102). Canterbury, UK: IATEFL. Ellis, G., & Ibrahim, N. (2015). Teaching children how to learn. Peaslake, UK: Delta.

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 !

410!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. !

Hazari, S. (2013). Equipping young learners with learning to learn strategies by developing their meta-cognitive skills through reflection (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Warwick, UK. Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.

Japan Business Federation. (2000). Gurobaru ka jidai no jinzai ikusei ni tsuite [On human resource development in globalization]. Retrieved from https://www.keidanren.or.jp/japanese/policy/2000/013/honbun.html! !

Jeon, S. A. S. (2014). The impact of playing commercial online games on young Korean EFL learners’ L2 identity. In S. Rich (Ed.), International perspectives on teaching English to young learners (pp. 87-103). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9781137023230.0012 Kalaja, P., Alanen, A., Palviainen, A., & Dufva, H. (2011). From milk cartons to English roommates: Context and agency in L2 learning beyond the classroom.

In P. Benson & H. Reinders (Eds.), Beyond the language classroom (pp. 4758). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kobayashi, Y. (2015). Development of autonomy among young EFL learners in their social contexts: How did sixth graders learn English at a public elementary school? (Unpublished master’s thesis). Aoyama Gakuin University, Japan.

Lefever, S. (2010, October). English skills of young learners in Iceland. Paper presented at Menntakvika Conference, Reykjavik, Iceland. Retrieved from http://netla.hi.is/menntakvika2010/021.pdf MEXT. (2008). Courses of study: Foreign language activities. Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2011/03/17/13 03755_011.pdf MEXT. (2013). Gurobaru ka ni taioshita eigo kyoiku kaikaku jisshi keikaku [English education reform implementation plan: Responding to globalization].

Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/houdou/25/12/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2013/12/17 /1342458_01_1.pdf Muñoz, C., & Lindgren, E. (2011). Out-of-school factors: The home. In J. Enever (Ed.), ELLiE: Early language learning in Europe (pp. 103-124). British Council. Retrieved from https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/B309 ELLiE Book 2011 FINAL.pdf O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1995). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

!

411!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 399-412. !

O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Manzanares, G., Kupper, L., & Russo, R. P. (1985). Learning strategies used by beginning and intermediate ESL students.

Language Learning, 35(1), 21-46. doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1985.tb01013.x Phillips, S. (1997). Young learners. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Piirainen-Marsh, A., & Tainio, L. (2009). Other-repetition as a resource for participation in the activity of playing a video game. The Modern Language Journal, 93(2), 153-169. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00853.x Pinter, A. (2014). Child participant roles in applied linguistics research. Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 168-183. doi:10.1093/applin/amt008 Pinter, A., & Zandian, S. (2014). ‘I don’t ever want to leave this room’: Benefits of researching ‘with’ children. ELT Journal, 68(1), 64-74. doi:10.1093/elt/cct057 Pinter, A., & Zandian, S. (2015). ‘I thought it would be tiny little one phrase that we said, in a huge big pile of papers’: Children’s reflections on their involvement in participatory research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 235-250. doi:10.1177/1468794112465637 Puchta, H., & Williams, M. (2011). Teaching young learners to think: ELT-activities for young learners aged 6-12. London, UK: Helbling Languages.

Sundqvist, P. (2011). A possible path to progress: Out-of-school English language learners in Sweden. In P. Benson & H. Reinders (Eds.), Beyond the language classroom (pp. 106-118). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sundqvist, P. (2015). About a boy: A gamer and L2 English speaker coming into being by use of self-access. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 6(4), 352-364. Retrieved from http://sisaljournal.org/archives/dec15/sundqvist Sundqvist, P., & Sylvén, L. K. (2014). Language-related computer use: Focus on young L2 English learners in Sweden. ReCALL, 26(1), 3-20. doi:10.1017/S0958344013000232 Whitebread, D., & Pasternak, P. (2005, August). Metacognition in young children: Evidence from a naturalistic study of 3-5 year olds. Paper presented at the 11th Biennial European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI) Conference, Nicosia, Cyprus. Retrieved from http://www.educ.cam.ac.uk/research/projects/cindle/Cyprus paper 2.doc

!

412!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 413-422.

Sea Change in Library Use Ian Adkins, British Council, Madrid Young Learners Devin Unwin, British Council, Madrid Young Learners

This article gives an overview of a project we are currently working on. We are extending our current support system and library (Resource Centre) to include a selfaccess and counselling service. Support, as traditionally understood in the centre, has catered to borderline students who needed specific help with one more areas in order to pass on to the next level. This project will also include learner training (Ellis & Sinclair, 1989) being incorporated into the syllabus for all levels as well as further learner training within the counselling sessions. The learning training is intended to foster more autonomous learning and allow the learners to take full advantage for the resources (both digital and paper) which the centre has in abundance. We draw upon the work of David Little who writes: â&#x20AC;&#x153;It is fundamental to autonomous learning that the learner should develop a capacity to reflect critically on the learning process, evaluate his progress, and if necessary make adjustments to his learning strategiesâ&#x20AC;? (Little, 1991, p.

52).

The Centre and our Learners The centre is a dedicated young learners centre, teaching English as an extracurricular activity, in central Madrid. The centre was established in 1940, and became a dedicated young learner centre from the late 90s. Over a hundred thousand students have passed through its doors in its seventy-five year history. All teachers at the centre are first language English speakers and have at least two years' post-CELTA or equivalent experience. Most have a background in English language teaching with a few coming to the centre from mainstream education. The majority of the teachers are from the British Isles with other nationalities represented. Most teachers are settled in the city and at the centre, meaning that the annual staff turnover is relatively low. The centre offers continual professional development, in which all teachers are encouraged to participate, through the TYLEC - Trinity Young Learners Extension Certificate (Trinity College London, 2015a), the Trinity DipTESOL - Diploma in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (Trinity College London, 2015b) and an extensive INSET programme. !

413

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 413-422.

The students range in age from four to eighteen with maximum class sizes of fifteen. Seniors within the school are age fourteen and above and these classes include specific levels orientated towards the Cambridge English language exams particularly the Cambridge English: First (FCE) and the Cambridge English: Advanced (CAE) although last year almost thirty students from the centre passed the Cambridge English: Proficiency (CPE). The centre has 28 modern classrooms fitted with interactive whiteboards and has its own library with multimedia facilities including computers with Internet access. Over recent years we have seen an increase in off-site classes. These are classes given within public, grant-maintained and private curricular schools in our area, either during the lunch period or once the school day has finished. The types of learners and the methodology used are the same as in the main teaching centre; the off-site classes are popular as the learners do not have to travel to central Madrid. A disadvantage for the learners in these off-site classes is they do not have access to our Resource Centre. There is also a plethora of digital resources available only at the centre including class sets of laptops, tablets and Play Station Portables. Also, due to their location, it is difficult for learners from the majority of the off-site schools to attend support classes.

Currently we offer support classes for small groups of learners who are considered to be struggling with their current course during the academic year as well as during the month long summer intensive courses. Students are referred to the support classes by teachers who feel that they will not meet the standardised criteria for progressing to the next level. Teachers will usually request support for a learner for one or more specific problems e.g. â&#x20AC;&#x153;student struggles with auxiliary verbs and syntax while forming spoken questionsâ&#x20AC;?. At the moment support teachers have a fairly sizeable bank of activities and materials to draw on which minimises the preparation for these classes.

Quite often these support classes are successful and enable the learner to complete their course. Unfortunately these classes are only available at certain times during the academic year or intensive course, as the same teachers provide exam preparation workshops around the time of Cambridge English exams. Support hours form part of substitution time at the centre. At any given time between three and six teachers will be on paid substitution time meaning they are expected to be in the centre should another teacherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s class require substituting due to illness or unpaid leave. The centre limits the number of support hours given that teachers timetabled to teach support classes cannot also be put on the substitution roster. The support classes are normally timetabled !

414

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 413-422.

around our busiest periods and this allows the majority of learners to attend support classes just before or after their normal classes. Due to changes in demand for classes at these times, both on-site and off-site, we will not have the staff available to continue with our current model of support classes. The project described in this paper proposes a change to the current system which will provide a more dynamic form of support throughout the course, running alongside the current support classes, but these will be more limited in their scope.

The Broader Educational Context Over the past ten years bilingual education has been gradually introduced into Spanish state schools. The classes given in English are limited to Science, Arts and Crafts, Music, Physical Education and English (as a Foreign Language). This has led to a general improvement in the English level of learners coming through this system but has created a need for some learners to reinforce their vocabulary for these subjects. To help these learners we also aim to include some Task Based Learning and Content and Language Integrated Learning activities that can either be used on-line or in our Resource Centre to cover these areas as these are not explicitly covered in our syllabi.

This new direction for the Resource Centre can thus be seen as a dynamic response to a change happening with in our local curricular school system.

The Project: Application and Structure This project starts with a structured self-access support system. Structured refers to the levels of guidance a learner will receive (Gardner & Miller, 1999), as the centre deals with young learners, high levels of guidance will probably be needed until the learners are used to this style of learning. At first this would be by teacher referrals to the current support system which will provide the learners with two or three contact classes. The learners will then be provided with self-access support including counselling sessions and access to study materials. To enable all of our learners to access these study materials they will be housed on the centreâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s portal. Access to the portal is restricted to our learners and is individually password protected. A needs analysis will have been carried out by the teacher, during the referral process, therefore the initial purpose of the counselling will be to make learners aware of the resources available to them. The counselling session will ultimately focus on helping learners learn rather than filling in gaps in their target language. Dam (2000) defines a learner !

415

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 413-422.

centred learning environment as one where learners are: given the possibility of being consciously involved in their own learning; expected to be actively engaged in their own learning and thus made aware of the different elements involved in the learning process - an awareness to be made use of in other contexts.

The change in the nature of support and the role of the resources centre must recognise the student and their needs as central to the process. One of the overriding factors behind introducing the self-access system is to improve learner awareness of being autonomous in language learning. This is an area that is not encouraged in the Spanish education system in any subject. Feedback will be sought on the effectiveness of learner training and recorded to help focus future training. A fair amount of counselling time will also thus have to be dedicated to making learners aware of their learning preferences as well as which learning strategiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; work best for them. This is no easy task and depends on the commitment of the learner as well as the skills set of the counsellor. As Wenden so rightly observed As noted in Holec (1981), learners need methodological and psychological preparation to be autonomous, i.e. facility in the use of strategies, including the skills of self-directed learning and the self-confidence and willingness necessary to take on the challenges of autonomous learning (Wenden, 1995, p.192).

The counsellor thus becomes a guide to the learner allowing them to take more and more control of and responsibility for the learning process.

To keep track of their progress, the learners will be expected to keep a learner diary. This will be accessed via the central portal, along with relevant materials, allowing easy access for both learners and counsellors over the Internet. Learners will be expected to complete an agreed study plan with a counsellor and this will be entered in their learner diary along with a record of the work they have done towards the study plan. The diaries will be loosely based on the European Language portfolio with an emphasis on the learner identifying areas they are struggling with and devising a plan of action with the help of the counsellors. The diary will also give the learner a space to reflect on which learning strategies worked best for them and how they could transfer these effective study skills into other academic areas. Although as Little (1991) has noted learner autonomy in one area of study does not necessarily translate into other academic areas it is hoped that at least some of the skills and techniques acquired and generated by learners will be applicable in other scholastic endeavours.

!

416

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 413-422.

The structure of the process of the new self-access style support system can be seen in the flowchart (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Self-Access Flowchart As can be seen from the flowchart, the system will be opened up in the future to allow for teacher referral and self-referral for those learners interested in working beyond the classroom.

The system would need to be introduced in a phased manner. The majority of the material we will need to use is already available in the resource centre but it will need to be indexed for these specific purposes and made available on-line.

As the material will be available on the portal it will allow learners from off-site classes to have access to the system, permitting learners to work from home and avoiding the need to attend the centre. This will also reduce the demands on space within the resource centre.

The vast majority of the materials needed can be produced and indexed by teachers on substitution time, so this should not involve any great expenditure for the centre. The same would go for the counselling service as this would be provided during the same substitution slots.

Materials for the video grammar classes will be sourced from British Council websites like LearnEnglishKids, LearnEnglishTeens and LearnEnglish. When the

!

417

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 413-422.

required material is not available, short videos will be sourced from other sites or produced in-house. The video classes will be based on a short instructional video of the area in question followed by short tasks to check understanding.

Training will have to be provided for teachers on counselling services. The majority of this training could be included on the induction days for the summer course and the academic year. All of our off-site schools have a co-ordinator who will be trained to provide counselling services to learners who are unable to attend the teaching centre. Training should include special educational needs (SEN) awareness as this has been an area of concern recently as we have seen an increase in SEN learners recently and need to improve our service to these learners. Counselling services will be provided by the existing support teachers at first for two reasons. Firstly they are used to helping students with their motivation and setting goals through their experience in support classes and secondly to allow time to fully train other volunteer teachers to take on the role of counsellors. The counselling services we intend to provide will be language based with some elements promoting learner autonomy. Essentially we need to train teachers in how to set up a new framework of communication with learners including the skills that set counselling apart from teaching like questioning, confronting, empathising etc. (Mozzon-McPherson, 2011).

The resource centre staff will have to be trained to provide cover for the counselling service as a precautionary measure to ensure a continuous service is provided. As the resource centre staff are not expected to be able to give full counselling sessions their duties would be to orientate learners on the use of the self-access system.

Learner training will need to be included in the syllabus for each level, for the reasons previously stated in this article. The levels within the centre (particularly the senior levels) are based on the CEFR and its communicative â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;can doâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; statements. As such the task and activities used should also be based on this scale. Beyond this, learners will be given the space to begin to use the self-knowledge about their own learning they have acquired in order to begin to help themselves. It has been found that learners in our centre do not habitually receive learner training, apart from some strategies for memorising vocabulary. It is envisaged to have one dedicated learner training class per term and that further learner training will be given via the counselling service. Hopefully as learner training becomes more integrated in the syllabus dedicated classes will not be necessary and will be included in general skills and language learning classes. One of the keys to success in these learner training classes will be to !

418

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 413-422.

make the content relevant and that it is perceived as time well spent by the learners. Put another way the benefits and progress made by the student will be dependent on their belief in and commitment to the process.

The self-access system will be completed for our Junior and Senior levels first, learners from 11 to 18 years old. Once this system is up and running we will evaluate the possibility of extending this to our Primary levels 6 to 10 years old. Due to the age of these Primary learners parental help will necessarily be involved.

As there has not been a centre-wide initiative to integrate learner training into our courses before now, the self-access system will need to be introduced slowly into the syllabus for each level. The self-access system will be closely linked to our existing courses but not integrated into them at first. It is not planned to make the self-access system obligatory outside of the classroom but we hope that its partial introduction into the syllabus will encourage learners to use it as part of their studies (Cooker, 2010). If it is proved to be successful we will incorporate Project Based Learning activities which will start to integrate the self-access system into the classes.

Overcoming the Hurdles This is a complex and potentially challenging project and measures need to be put into place to ensure its success. We have identified three possible problems and their solutions.

The first area we need to address is teacher motivation to include the self-access system and learner training in their classes. Due to the increase in off-site classes there has been a change in teacher timetabling at the centre. The result of this is that many teachers do not coincide with each other at the centre and this leads to an increasing feeling of detachment between teachers. We plan to run a series of workshops to include all teachers in the production and maintenance of the tasks hosted on the portal. These workshops will also include the preparation of learner training tasks to be included in the syllabi. We hope that the preparation of material in this way will motivate teachers to include and expand on the learner training tasks as they will be teacher driven and not an external mandate.

Secondly, we need to be aware of our learnersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; ability to develop learner autonomy. We need to bear in mind that full learner autonomy is not always possible even for adult learners and that if we only see a partial gain in autonomy in the learners participating in the self-access system, this has to be seen as a positive step forward. !

419

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 413-422.

Self-access systems have been successfully implemented with young learners (Gardner & Miller, 1999) and learner autonomy has also been successfully introduced to young learners (Dam, 1995). Parental help will be sought to encourage learners to complete tasks outside the classroom, especially for those learners referred through the support system.

Finally we must ensure that future counsellors receive adequate training.

Teachers cannot be expected to suddenly acquire the skills to be a counsellor (MozzonMcPherson, 2001).!This would avoid the obvious problem of teachers treating counselling session as a one to one lesson; which would mean maintaining the current support classes without changing the pedagogical approach underpinning it. To encourage a more reflective, dialogical approach to counselling, workshops will be organised to help create a more open and collaborative atmosphere; which will in turn enable learners to truly engage with the self-access system.

Conclusion This project offers an exciting opportunity to meet the changing demands both with in the centre and in the broader educational context in which it is situated. As the content for the self-access system will be prepared by the teachers themselves and it is a teacher led initiative, we hope that the resulting self-access system will be organic, reacting to teachersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and learnersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; needs, and its integration into our courses will become a natural process. The project was conceived by the authors and it has been given the green light by the centre management. The managementâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s enthusiasm for the project is understandable since not only will it be cost effective in terms of support hours but will also offer the centre a unique selling point to distinguish it from the ever increasing competition within the city. Furthermore as has been already noted the project is a response to changing demands on language teaching services as determined by the curricular system. Another clear upside to the project is that it will allow the centre, and its staff, to uses the digital resources available to their maximum potential. It is hoped that the success of this project will allow this model of self-access to be used by other centres, which have similar resources.

!

420

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 413-422.

Notes on the Contributors Devin Unwin and Ian Adkins are both teachers at the British Council, Madrid Young Learners and are currently studying towards a Master’s degree in TESOL at the University of Nottingham, UK. References Cooker, L. (2010). Some self-access principles. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 1(1), 5-9. Retrieved from http://sisaljournal.org/archives/jun10/cooker/ Dam, L. (1995). Learner Autonomy 3 - From theory to classroom practice. Dublin, Ireland: Authentik Dam, L. (2000). Why focus on learning rather than teaching? From theory to practice.

In D. G. Little, L. Dam, and J. Timmer (Eds.), Focus on learning rather than teaching: Why and how?: Papers from the IATEFL Conference on Learner Independence, Kraków, 14-16 May 1998 (pp. 18-37). Dublin, Ireland: CLCS, Trinity College Dublin. Retrived from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED441341.pdf Ellis, G., & Sinclair, B. (1989). Learning to learn English: A course in learner training - Teacher’s book. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Gardner, D. & Miller, L. (1999). Establishing self-access: From theory to practice.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.

Little, D. (1991). Learner Autonomy 1 - Definitions, issues and problems. Dublin, Ireland: Authentik.

Mozzon-McPherson, M. (2001). Language advising: Towards a new discursive world.

In M. Mozzon McPherson & R. Vismans (Eds), Beyond language teaching towards language advising, (pp. 7-22). London, UK: CILT. Mozzon-McPherson, M. (2011). Counselling/advising for language learning: Setting the context, in search of identity. In C. J. Everhard & J. Mynard, with R. Smith, (Eds.), Autonomy in language learning: Opening a can of worms (pp. 51-56).

Canterbury, UK: IATEFL. Trinity College London. (2015a). British Council / Trinity Teaching Young Learners Extension Certificate (TYLEC). British Council/Trinity Teaching Young Learners Extension Certificate (TYLEC). Retrieved from http://www.trinitycollege.com/site/?id=3206 Trinity College London. (2015b). DipTESOL. DipTESOL. Retrieved from http://www.trinitycollege.com/site/?id=202

!

421

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 413-422.

Wenden, A. L. (1995). Learner training in context: A knowledge-based approach.

System, 23(2), 183-194. doi:10.1016/0346-251X(95)00007-7 !

!

422

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 423-425

Book Review: Teaching Young Learners To Think. By Herbert Puchta and Marion Williams Duncan Jamieson, Oxford Intensive School of English Young Learners, UK

Picking up any education journal, reading online blogs or attending education conferences one cannot fail to notice that teaching thinking skills in classrooms is very much in vogue. In terms of learner autonomy, what could be more beneficial than equipping students with the tools to develop and improve their own thinking processes? Puchta and Williams’ Teaching Young Learners To Think is both a timely and hugely practical resource aimed at primary or lower secondary school children learning English as a foreign language.

It contains activities, which are designed not only to provide meaningful language practice, but also to help students develop their thinking skills.

The book has easy-to-follow activities for classroom use that require little preparation.

It is arranged into thirteen sections, each with a helpful introduction. The sections are based on Feuerstein's Instrumental Enrichment programme and have been influenced by the Somerset Thinking Skills Course developed by Blagg, Ballinger and Gardner (1993).

Feuerstein was a clinical, developmental, and cognitive psychologist, known for his theory of intelligence. Feuerstein, Klein and Tannenbaum (1991) stated that intelligence was not ‘fixed’, but rather modifiable. Feuerstein’s curriculum involved teaching ‘metacognition’, that is, teaching learners to think about their own thinking, and to act accordingly. The Somerset Thinking Skills Course followed on from an Instrumental Enrichment programme which systematically teaches thinking skills, including problem-solving, analysing and synthesising, predicting and deciding, etc. The foundations mentioned in the course are adapted in Teaching Young Learners To Think and cover the thinking skills in order of cognitive difficulty ranging from lower order thinking skills, such as 'comparison' and 'categorisation', to higher order thinking sections, such as 'solving problems' and 'creative thinking'. The book, however, acknowledges that students may need more than one thinking strategy at a time when learning.

Each activity comes with procedure notes, including level of language proficiency, age, language focus, and thinking skills required. Each also comes with a photocopiable worksheet. The book is not supposed to be used sequentially, but rather activities are chosen as they arise in class, either by topic, language, or cognitive challenge. It comes with a handy 423

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 423-425 reference section at the back of the book designed to help a teacher find an appropriate activity to suit their specific need.

Although the activities can be used immediately, I would recommend reading the informative introduction first, which gives a clear outline of the theoretical aspects of the activities in the book. The authors suggest setting up an environment conducive to developing thinking, an environment that allows for students to be creative without criticism, where mistakes are seen as an opportunity to learn. Also, they stress the importance of giving the learners sufficient time to really think, process and decide on what they believe are the best (notice 'best' rather than 'right') answers. This approach counters much of the 'first past the post' mentality often seen in classrooms, where young learners scramble to finish an activity first. Encouraging them to take their time to think contributes in fostering a good habit of thinking.

Teachers using the book with mixed nationality young learners aged seven to thirteen years old on an Oxford Intensive School of English (OISE) summer school course in the UK this year were encouraged to use Teaching Young Learners To Think, incorporating it into their existing course programme when appropriate. The feedback from the teachers who used this resource was positive with comments such as there was “a good variety of activities and task types”, and “students enjoyed the creativity needed to complete tasks”. Interestingly, this resource was seen by some teachers as a tool where, “students were able to work independently to complete many of the activities”, and that it could be used, “with elementary and pre-intermediate students for homework exercises”. Whilst it is true that many of the activities can be done individually, this rather skews the authors' vision of where students will interact in line with Feuerstein's (1980) 'mediation theory', which suggests that students can help each other to progress through their social interactions. The material is much better exploited either in class time with a teacher to coach, mediate and scaffold the thinking, or used as homework in situations where students can work collaboratively with one another (which is possible on a residential summer course).

One great aspect of the book is that the activities can be adapted with a little imagination by the teacher to encompass other language, so that if a task has been successful, it can often be repeated using other lexis, etc. For example, a simple categorisation activity where animals are sorted into those that can fly, move on land, swim or a combination of these can be repeated with a different set of animals, specific to a particular lesson or syllabus. The teacher need not be confined to animals either. They could use food, for example, changing the categories to boil, roast or grill. This kind of extension and adaptation 424

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 423-425 can be done with many of the activities in the book. Thus, it has the potential to be used as a developmental tool for teachers wanting to create their own lesson materials. Using the activities in the book as a template, teachers can produce materials that go beyond mere language content.

Perhaps a missed opportunity is not having these activities digitalised for the interactive whiteboard, student tablet or self-access centre, so this would be a welcome development in a future edition of the book. A great asset to any EFL young learner staffroom, Teaching Young Learners To Think is ideal for classroom use, as it helps develop a 'thinking habit' that is an essential life skill, making students better, more autonomous learners inside and outside of the classroom.

Publication Information Title: Teaching Young Learners To Think Authors: Herbert Puchta and Marion Williams Publisher: Helbling Languages ISBN: 978-1107638525 Date of Publication: March 2012 Price: $31.41-$54.75 Format: spiral bound Available from: Amazon.com and other Amazon stores worldwide Notes on the contributor Duncan Jamieson is an Academic Manager at Oxford Intensive School of English (OISE) in Oxford, UK. He has been involved in EFL for over twenty years as a teacher, teacher trainer and manager at the primary, secondary and post-secondary levels. His research areas of interest include learner motivation, thinking skills and educational psychology.

References Blagg N., Ballinger M., & Gardner R. (2003). Somerset thinking skills handbook (Revised ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Feuerstein, R., Klein, P. S., & Tannenbaum, A. J. (1991). Mediated learning experience (MLE): Theoretical, psychosocial and learning implications. London, UK: Freund.

425

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 426-430 !

Book Review: Stories and Storyline by Sharon Ahlquist and Réka Lugossy Reviewed by Nena Nikolic-Hosonaka, Kanda University of International Studies, Japan

Stories and Storyline, written by Sharon Ahlquist and Réka Lugossy is an ebook published by Candlin & Mynard ePublishing. It stands out as a book which, devoid of unnecessary generalities, leads the readers in developing their own judgment based on their own teaching practices. The authors have done their research in Sweden and Hungary respectively, under different educational circumstances. In this book, they present their rich experiences, accompanied by sound theories as well as the experiences of fellow teacher-researchers. In a word, this book is an excellent example of dynamic autonomy meaningful to both teachers and students alike in teaching/learning as well as the research.

In the setting of foreign language learning and teaching to young learners (616 years of age), the authors of Stories and Storyline investigate the positive changes caused by this innovative approach. Although used in the mother tongue context in many educational fields, it also, they believe, shows a strong potential in the foreign language education.

The book is divided into two sections. The topic of the first section is the theory and practice of using stories and children’s literature in the classroom and of the second, the storyline approach in theory and practice. The first section is further divided into seven chapters.

In chapter one, the authors familiarize us with the characteristics of the young learners, indicating that stories as instructional materials are most congruent with the principles of how children learn i.e. that their intrinsic motivation increases in the contexts where they can apply their cognition, emotions and creativity. They focus on developing both content area (knowledge) and the language skills in the story context, with a deep regard for the feelings and attitudes of the learners.

In chapter two, in order to raise the teachers’ awareness of their pedagogical beliefs, authors introduce a number of theories that validate their classroom practices and thus empower them. Although the stories have been met with resistance from

!

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 426-430 ! analytical lines of thought, the authors see the benefit of narrative pattern in organizing teaching material across the curriculum, its positive effect on relationship within social groups, literacy development, and providing a meaningful context for language acquisition.

In chapter three, the authors share common concerns in the classroom setting: the usage of authentic stories, boys’ and girls’ interests, understanding every word, ability of following the story line, teaching grammar, relationship between mother tongue and a foreign language in meaning making, dealing with older students, among the others.

In chapter four, the authors share a plethora of practical ideas easily applied to any classroom, with the students of different ages and different proficiency levels.

Structurally, they attend to pre-reading, reading, reading again, follow-up tasks, discussion, open-ended questions and retelling from a different perspective. They all focus on a meaningful experience that stimulates the imagination and involves the whole person.

In chapter five the authors suggest ways of identifying issues for classroom research. They present four small-scale studies dealing with specific issues in specific settings. The researchers include the teachers themselves, children and external observers who all cooperate in order to notice the small changes and enhance language learning for the benefit of the class.

In chapter six, Réka Lugossy introduces the concept of a Storyline approach in which she focuses on different topics for different age groups. Young learners, by becoming the characters in a story actually create it by focusing on different key questions starting with “Who are you?” The questions and the tasks, situated within the framework of the story, move the story forward. They are linked to the curriculum, and, in order to participate in a conversation, learners share knowledge, and, in the end, review and evaluate the learning outcomes.

An example of a detailed planning of a storyline through a number of key questions is introduced in chapter seven. The syllabus includes the topics, the subskills of speaking, listening, reading and writing, grammar and vocabulary. Young learners are seen as active participants in classroom explorations as they fill out the questionnaires, respond to interview questions or write in learner journals, the process that makes them feel as experts on their own learning

!

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 426-430 !

Chapter eight looks at topics for different age groups and claims that learners benefit from bringing the outside world into the language classroom. The tasks deal with real-life situations as seen in the key questions and the accompanying supplements. Learners help each other and the occasional use of their mother tongue is believed to keep everyone involved and on the track.

Chapter nine reviews the existing limited research on Storyline and introduces a study done with a class of Swedish 11-13 year olds over a period of five weeks. It is worth noting that the learners’ reflective journals showed that the Storyline approach was not only real for them and therefore worth the effort, but that it was also fun.

In the final chapter, the authors summarize the previous chapters making once again the case for the long-term benefits of regular exposure to stories and their role in creating ultimate environment for successful language and literacy development.

One can say that the authors address not only the needs and wants of the growing children, but also the needs and wants of the modern society. In the process of growing, learners try to make sense of themselves, of the culture they are in, and of the society in general. Sense-making refers to the ability of the child to react to changes within his or her environment and feel comfortable about this reaction, leading to self-presentation. Through the approach presented in this book, a child learns about him/herself through the actions and the thoughts of the story characters and peers. By having an organizing aspect, stories also help the learners develop knowledge in the content area. The modern society we live in also puts a strong emphasis on autonomy of individuals who take responsibility for their own actions, and who show mutual respect and solidarity.

The greatest strength of this book is that the authors are tuned into the needs of modern times as well as the needs and nature of the young learners, thus making a significant contribution to the field of foreign language learning and teaching. By being both teachers and researchers, the authors posed very pertinent and realistic questions with which teachers anywhere in the world can feel familiar with. For example, “Are authentic stories better than those designed for language teaching?”, “How do I teach grammar with stories?”, “Do learners have to understand each and every word?” among the many others. Moreover, the sections on research are not overloaded with unnecessary academic language and reflect ordinary classroom !

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 426-430 ! situations, common problems, providing us with solutions any teacher can feel comfortable with. Last but not least, throughout the book, the authors keep emphasizing the autonomy of the teachers themselves, giving them freedom and respect for managing their own classrooms and for making their own choices. One cannot but emphasize once again the importance of having one’s own teaching philosophy. The same goes for the autonomy of young learners and the choices they make, at the same time developing the group solidarity and cooperation.

There is one thing that needs clarification. The authors insist that the young learners build on their background knowledge, that they understand the story from the clues given either verbally or visually, or through the teacher’s gestures or intonation.

If they rely on their natural curiosity to follow the story line, I wonder why the authors suggest the young learners start with the stories they already know in their L1.

How long should that stage, if theoretically acceptable, last?

One more concern relates to the materials (supplements). While it is my belief that they can successfully prepare young learners for the challenges of the world we live in (through topics like neighborhood, or a hotel, for example), and while it is clearly stated that the ideas reflect the authors’ respective environments, I have a feeling that many things need to be changed in order to adjust to the environments other than European. In countries like Japan, it might take time and effort to change the educational scene from teacher-centered to learner-centered, and the things it pertains. For this kind of cultural milieu, it might have been necessary to explain into more detail, for the sake of beginners, how to actually define one’s own teaching philosophy and how to make the first steps.

In the view of the authors’ remark that the readers of this book have the autonomy to adjust the contents according to their own teaching scene, I take the liberty to suggest that, for the sake of cultural learning and teaching a foreign language at the same time, it might help to include the characterization process in describing the characters. According to Culpeper (2001), that is done by paying attention to the textual clues like the way the character presents him or herself, by inferring character information from his or her linguistic behavior, or by character information coming directly from the author. This way, learners would be able to guess from the context and later on to create their own characters through the similar process, and possibly notice the cultural differences.

!

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 426-430 !

All in all, Stories and Storyline is not only a welcome addition to the area of foreign language teaching and learning, it is a must in any school serious enough to prepare young learners for the world we live in.

Publication Information Title: Stories and Storyline Authors: Sharon Ahlquist and RĂŠka Lugossy Publisher: Candlin & Mynard ePublishing ISBN: 9781311935861 Date of Publication: March 9, 2015 Price: $20.32 (Kindle edition) Format: mobi (for Kindle), ePub (for iPad, Kobo and other e-readers) or PDF for reading on a PC. Available from: http://www.candlinandmynard.com/new-titles.html https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/491557 Amazon Kindle and other online stores Notes on the contributor Dr. Nena Nikolic-Hosonaka works as a lecturer at Kanda University of International Studies, Japan. She holds an MA in teaching English as a foreign language, an MA in teaching Japanese as a foreign language, and a PhD in language sciences. Her main area of interest is cultural learning and teaching to young learners.

Reference Culpeper, J. (2001). Language and characterization: People in plays and other texts.

London, UK: Longman.

!

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 430-432 !

Supporting Student Staff Through Effective Training Katherine Thornton, Otemon Gakuin University, Japan

Gone are the days when a self-access centre consisted of bookshelves and a cabinet of VHS tapes that students checked out from a manager or administrator.

Language Learning Spaces in the twenty-first century are social learning spaces, where people learn with and from others as much as, if not more than, from physical or Internet-based resources. As was highlighted in the previous instalment of this collection, successful learning spaces create a sense of community among users, and student staff are often key members of these communities.

Training these students so that they have the appropriate mindset and skills to maximize users’ learning potential is by no means an easy matter. High turnover of staff and limited time to be devoted to training by managers and academic directors can all hinder the process of developing staff members’ skills. While one of the aims of employing student staff is to facilitate the creation of a learning community, the staff themselves often work in isolated shifts and may not know one another well.

As educational institutions, universities have a duty of care to their student workers, and providing appropriate training is an important part of helping students reach their potential and preparing them for the world beyond university. The reflective accounts featured in this issue highlight different models of staff training and the affordances they may offer for managers looking to improve the skills of their student staff.

In the first paper, Catherine Jeanneau and Stéphanie O’Riordan describe an award-winning programme at the University of Limerick, Ireland, which trains international students to run peer-conversation sessions in the Language Learning Hub. Through a combination of lectures, session observations and reflection, overseas students studying in Limerick get the chance to earn credit and learn the skills necessary to successfully facilitate target language practice over the course of a semester. This programme offers an alternative model for centres who may be unwilling or unable to employ paid student staff.

!

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 430-432 !

Ashley R. Moore and Misato Tachibana give an account of how their training programme for Reception Assistants has evolved over the four years since their Language Learning Center was opened at Osaka Institute of Technology, Japan. A key element of their programme has been the gradual increase in personalized training, facilitated by regular individual meetings with each staff member, who reflect on their job performance and set personal goals for improvement. The authors note the importance of focusing on each student workerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strengths and the individual skills that they can bring to the centre and highlight several principles which they believe can result in effective training programmes Finally, Naomi Fujishima from Okayama University, Japan, uses training session observations and interviews with student workers in the social learning space to investigate how both home and international students are trained to perform a variety of roles in the centre, from receptionist to language lesson teacher. She highlights the challenges in making sure students are equipped with the skills necessary to help themselves and other users negotiate the dynamic interactions of a social learning space where the emphasis is on students learning from each other.

The next instalment in the Language Learning Spaces series will examine several different programmes which aim to foster learner autonomy among facility users.

Notes on the editor of the series Katherine Thornton has an MA in TESOL from the University of Leeds and is the founder and Program Director of English CafĂŠ at Otemon, a self-access centre at Otemon Gakuin University, Osaka, Japan, where she works as a learning advisor.

Prior to her current position, she worked as a learning advisor at Kanda University of International Studies, Chiba, Japan. She is president of the Japan Association of SelfAccess Learning (JASAL), and a regular column editor of Studies in Self-Access Learning (SiSAL) Journal. Her research interests include self-access centre management, advising for language learning, and self-directed learning%!

!

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 432-443

Peer-led Discussion Groups in Foreign Languages: Training International Students to Become Peer-Facilitators Catherine Jeanneau, University of Limerick, Ireland Stéphanie O’Riordan, University of Limerick, Ireland Abstract While practice is paramount to achieve fluency and accuracy in a foreign language, Higher Education is understandably limited in the amount of language practice it can offer to its students.

The initiative discussed here aims to address this issue by providing peer-led discussion groups in languages in a systematic manner. For the past three years, a team of language practitioners at the University of Limerick, Ireland have developed a programme whereby groups of native speakers receive training before facilitating discussion groups and/or one-to-one sessions.

In this study, we will first present an overview of the initiative. We will then focus on the training offered to the peer-facilitators. The main principles of the training package will be explained: it seeks to prepare the facilitators to select relevant topics, to focus on language fluency and to provide constructive feedback to participating students. Finally, we will draw some conclusions from our experience, provide some recommendations and discuss the value of peer-supported activities to integrate International students in their host university.

Keywords: Peer-learning; facilitation training; intercultural education; internationalisation

Context for the Peer-Learning Training Programme The training programme discussed in this paper takes place as part of an initiative, which aims to provide peer-facilitated discussion groups and one-to-one sessions in languages in a systematic manner. It is deployed at the University of Limerick, Ireland, which has a strong ethos of student support and prides itself on its “vital learning resources and learner support services” (University of Limerick Strategic Plan, 2011, p. 30).

The centre that fulfils this role for language learners is the Language Learning Hub (LLH). It was created over thirty years ago and was formerly known as the Language Resource Area (LRA). At its onset, the LRA solely provided access to varied language resources but over time, it became clear that the centre should also foster language learners’ autonomy. The LRA instigated activities to support language learning and enhance student engagement, e.g.: tandem language exchanges (Batardière & Jeanneau, 2015). As a result of these changes, the LRA was renamed Language Learning Hub. 433

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 432-443 It is within this support-rich environment that the peer-facilitated discussion groups and one-to-one sessions were created in 2012, addressing language students’ needs as well as the university goals “to provide an outstanding and distinctive experience for every […] student” (University of Limerick Strategic Plan 2011-2015, 2001, p.6) and “to provide students with experiences that instil the spirit of European and global citizenship” (p. 8).

Description of the Peer-Learning Initiative The peer-facilitated discussion groups and one-to-one sessions are oral practice sessions offered to students in all the languages taught in the School of Modern Languages and Applied Linguistics (namely French, German, Japanese and Spanish). Attendance of the sessions is voluntary. The peer-facilitators are exclusively native speakers who are recruited amongst Erasmus (European Union student exchange programme) and international students on campus. This recruitment criterion ensures that the facilitators bring both linguistic and also cultural input to the exchanges.

Each discussion group session lasts one hour and students can join freely at any time during the semester. Each one-to-one session includes two individual slots of thirty minutes.

These sessions have to be booked in advance by participants to avoid overcrowding. To accommodate as many participants as possible, several discussion groups and one-to-one sessions are offered in each language every week during the semester (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Sample of Timetable of Activities - Spring 2015 (Names have been changed)

434

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 432-443 Since its inception, this initiative has been popular amongst language learners (see Table 1) and the overall feedback, gathered through end-of-semester surveys, is positive.

Users report that the main reason for attending the sessions is to improve their language skills; they particularly enjoy the authenticity of the exchanges and learning new vocabulary in context.

Table 1: Number of Participants (Users), 2012-15

Becoming Peer-Facilitators: A Training Programme As the notion of peer-facilitation is central to the project, a clear definition of the term is necessary. In this specific context, the facilitator is a peer (i.e. a fellow student) who volunteers to guide and support a ‘flowing’ discussion amongst learners of their native language. Although the facilitator needs to apply some attributes associated to teaching (patience, positive attitude, inclusiveness), his/her role contrasts greatly with that of a teacher or lecturer. As the discussion sessions take place “outside class-time” and are informal in nature, a new learning environment is created for learners. The focus of the sessions is on promoting participation and fluency as opposed to gearing discussions towards specific content and form. For this to happen, the facilitator has to apply some core principles, hence the requirement for volunteers to participate in training sessions before becoming facilitators.

Structure of the training programme When the project was first piloted (Academic Years 2012-13 and 2013-14), a fourhour training programme was developed. This initial training aimed at preparing the facilitators before their first sessions.

It was later decided to transform this short training sessions into a 12-hour contacttime module bearing three ECTS (European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System) credits. The first two years of the project had shown a deep engagement from the volunteers in their role as facilitators and it was felt that their engagement needed to be further recognised. Following the advice of the pilot project team (LLH coordinator, facilitator trainer 435

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 432-443 and lecturers representative of each language), a number of volunteers had prepared portfolios reporting on their activities as facilitators in order to qualify for an award under the UL volunteering award scheme which formally recognises strong engagement in the community.

As this exercise allowed the participating facilitators to reflect on their experience, it was subsequently decided to generalise this practice in the new module through the production of a portfolio. This had obvious implications for training needs and institutional support. For instance, support in the area of reflective practice was required. All this led the team to create a fully accredited module integrating six hours of in-depth class discussions on all topics developed in the original training (see description of the training content in the following section) with an added six hours of classroom discussion on reflective practice. The structure of the module can be found in Table 2.

Table 2. Module Breakdown

436

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 432-443 As the change into a credit-bearing module could impact negatively on the attractiveness of becoming a discussion facilitator (some students preferring the â&#x20AC;&#x153;lighterâ&#x20AC;? volunteer option), two options are offered to international students: becoming a discussion group facilitator (1) as a student volunteer after compulsory attendance of six hours of lecture-tutorials as initial training; (2) as a student enrolled in a peer-tutoring for languages module requiring attendance of all lecture-tutorials with the compulsory submission of a portfolio as part of a pass/fail assessment procedure. From September 2014 to December 2015, a total of 54 peer-facilitators were trained (see Table 3) with 22 of them opting to register for the module.

Table 3: Number of Participants (Facilitators), 2012-16

Content of the training programme The content of the training was devised in consultation with members of the Regional Peer-Supported Learning Centre at UL and was partially inspired by literature on language advising (Esch, 2001; Voller, 2004). It is delivered by language teaching academics in the format of highly interactive lectures/training sessions based on the principle of coconstruction of knowledge. Attendance is limited to 20 participants in order to enhance interactivity. The following section aims to detail the six training sessions outlined in Table 2.

Exploring the role of a discussion group facilitator (Lecture 1). The overall aim of the training is to ensure that the peer volunteers understand the distinctions between facilitation and actual teaching in the context of discussion groups. To this end, the training programme starts by clearly defining what a discussion group is. The following working definition was adopted: A group of people meeting informally outside class-time to practise a

437

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 432-443 language they have learnt / are learning in order to become more fluent in that language or to maintain the level they have acquired.

Keeping a discussion flowing with participants who are mostly strangers is a difficult task. Facilitators need to ensure that all participants feel welcome and valued as members of the group regardless of their language level as any negative feeling could cause a participant to never return to a discussion group. Therefore, facilitators must be supportive at all times and suppress any attitude that could be perceived as negative or judgemental. Active listening (Voller, 2004) is an interesting model to draw from. Indeed, its core technique of paraphrasing enables the facilitator to support not only his/her own comprehension but also, and most importantly, that of participants in the group. As soon as a friendly atmosphere is in place, facilitators have to regulate participants’ speaking time. During the training sessions, issues such as turn taking and silences are discussed. Facilitators are reminded that “wait time” is important to allow participants to formulate their thoughts for instance (Turnbull, 2006). It is imperative that every effort be made to avoid interrupting participants except, in specific cases, for example, when it is obvious that one participant is continuously speaking without including others in the discussion.

Preparing the first discussion session through intercultural competence (Lecture 2). The second training session focuses on intercultural competence and it provides opportunities for facilitators to familiarise themselves with “intercultural attitudes such as curiosity and openness, readiness to suspend disbelief about other cultures and belief about one’s own” (Byram, Nichols, & Stevens, 2001, p. 5). Trainee facilitators brainstorm and then discuss the pros and cons of selecting various discussion topics. The general consensus is that student life (shared reality) and personal interests are likely to be successful discussion starters, while it is generally agreed that topics which can be controversial or hurt sensibilities (e.g. religion, race, sexuality and body image) are to be avoided or handled with care if brought up by participants. It is important to stress that facilitators are advised to use their common sense regarding discussion topic selection. These guiding principles are never prescriptive in nature but act as a compass for facilitators who may need it.

Giving linguistic feedback and understanding students’ background (Lecture 3).

Being a native speaker does not necessarily mean that a facilitator is a language specialist.

Facilitators are engineering, IT, maths or business students and their linguistic awareness may be minimal. Therefore, it is important to reassure them that they do not have to be experts on 438

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 432-443 the intricate workings of their own language. They are first and foremost ambassadors of their language and culture. However, when facilitating their sessions, they will notice recurring errors and can expect questions from participants about correct formulations. Consequently, facilitators need to be trained to deliver feedback in a way that will enhance language learning while maintaining the discussion flow. Trainee facilitators are given a list of common mistakes made by non-native speakers in each of the languages offered. This provides the opportunity to think of strategies to use during their sessions to help students correct their mistakes without simply giving them the solutions. Scaffolding techniques such as recasts, reformulations, clarification requests, prompting, and provision of examples are essential skills to develop (Lyster, Saito, & Sato, 2013). “What do you think of wind turbines?” is a question used to trigger a group discussion illustrating the need for such strategies to aid comprehension. This lecture concludes the set of compulsory lectures, which must be attended by volunteers who did not enrol in the module.

E-portfolio writing: Self reflection and peer-observation (Lectures 4 and 5).

Facilitators enrolled in the credit-bearing module are assessed through the writing of a reflective e-portfolio, which documents their experience of being facilitators. Two lectures are dedicated to the set of skills required to perform this task. In the first lecture, the theoretical underpinnings of self-reflection are discussed (Dewey, 1938) followed by a practical session to create and structure an e-portfolio using Google as a platform. In the second lecture, students discuss higher order thinking using Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill, & Krathwohl, 1956) in order to promote depth of analysis within the reflective process.

Peer-observation –i.e. observing and being observed by fellow-facilitators- brings a wider range of insights into students’ e-portfolios (see Table 2). To this end, students use a peerobservation form devised by the UL Centre for Teaching and Learning, which helps them select observation foci and structure the comments given to their peers. Feedback on reflections is delivered individually to students throughout the semester by the main module teacher through the “comment” function of the e-portfolio.

Reflecting as a community of practice (Lecture 6). The last lecture of the programme takes place at a later stage of the semester (See Table 2) and volunteer facilitators are encouraged to join. It focuses on the notion of community of practice (Wenger, 1999) and aims to help facilitators develop – with their fellow-facilitators - a deeper sense of purpose within the university context. Students can avail of this opportunity to discuss their facilitating 439

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 432-443 experience as a group and share ideas on effective discussion topics or activities. With three discussion sessions left, students are asked to write a plan of action for the rest of the semester as well as to look â&#x20AC;&#x201C; beyond the university setting â&#x20AC;&#x201C; at the impact this experience will have in their development as future professionals. The notion of transferable skills features prominently in this lecture to help students articulate the specific skill set that each student has developed as a facilitator. This provides an ideal locus to recap the key concepts evoked within the module classes throughout the semester.

Practical Implementation and Logistical Issues As the peer-facilitated programme relies on international students who are spending a short period on campus (six months to a year) and who have to give priorities to their own studies and classes, the implementation of the programme requires a good logistical organisation in order to draw up a new calendar of activities each semester. Some practical points, which are the key features of these logistical considerations, will be further discussed in this section.

Recruitment & training of peer-facilitators The facilitators are the key actors of the discussion group and one-to-one session programme, so the first phase of the programme thus involves the recruitment of the team of facilitators. Collaboration with the University of Limerick International Education Division is essential to advertise the programme to incoming international students. A promotional email is sent to all international students attending the university and posters are displayed in various points on campus, both briefly detailing the initiative and advertising an information meeting at the end of the first week of the semester. During this session, students receive information on their potential involvement and how they can take part. The main aspects of the training are also highlighted, as well as the benefits of the programme for them (meeting Irish students, gaining self-confidence, being an ambassador of their native language and culture to name but a few). This initial meeting allows for the project coordinator to establish the number of volunteers interested, to collect their contact details and to ensure that a good linguistic diversity has been reached. The training starts the following week. Up to now, all the students showing an interest in the initiative have been accepted to take part in this training. However, they have to complete the first three sessions to be allocated a group. Any imbalance in the numbers of speakers of any of the languages is addressed in the scheduling of the groups. Several facilitators are allocated for one group if we have an over440

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 432-443 representation, and fewer groups are scheduled if we have an under-representation in a specific language.

Implementation of the activities By the second week of their training, international students provide information about their availability and preferred mode of facilitation (discussion group or one-to-one session).

This allows the coordinator to establish the schedule of activities for the four languages and the two modes of delivery (see Figure 1). This timetable is then widely advertised amongst language learners (posters, emails, social media announcements). Lecturers and tutors, who are very supportive of these activities, recommend them to their students. Activities start in week 4 of the semester.

In order to monitor attendance, the facilitators keep a log of participants every week.

This allows the coordinator to ensure that all the groups are attended and to modify the timetable if need be.

Due to the nature of their stay at the university, the facilitators are continually changing (their maximum participation time is one academic year). Even though new facilitators need to be trained each semester, this iterative process brings a dynamic nature to the programme that allows it to evolve slightly every semester.

Recommendations and Conclusion The study abroad experience is generally regarded as a key moment in a student’s life as it is a journey of discovery as much on an academic level as on a personal level. The project presented in this article aims to integrate the international students into the academic sphere of indigenous students by transforming their status, from that of ‘foreign visiting students’ into active linguistic and cultural ambassadors within their host institution.

For this initiative to be successful, some elements are crucial: i) the programme has to be flexible to attract international students and adapt to their varied circumstances (in our case for example, two possible training paths for the facilitators); ii) collaboration with staff members from other units and departments within the institution (i.e., the International Office, language teachers) is paramount for information about the programme to be disseminated; iii) the training programme has to be carefully devised to suit the international students’ needs and the institutional specificities; and iv) attention to the logistical aspects of the programme is essential to ensure the activities run smoothly (i.e., recruitment of the facilitators, training, scheduling and delivery of the sessions).

441

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 432-443 The innovative aspect of this initiative was acknowledged by the European Language Label award in 2015 for its contribution to promoting motivation and engagement in language education. As the project enters its fourth year, users and facilitators’ feedback will continue to contribute to the ever evolving contents, scheduling and delivery modes of this initiative, which aims to reach as many students as possible.

Notes on the contributors Catherine Jeanneau is the Coordinator of the Language Learning Hub at the University of Limerick. This unit aims at implementing a learner support strategy and providing language learning services outside of formal classroom time. Her research interests include second language acquisition, technology and language learning, particularly social media and online communication as well as learner autonomy.

Stéphanie O’Riordan is a member of the Centre for Applied Language Studies (CALS) at the University of Limerick. She has been trainer/lecturer and resource developer on the above project since its inception. Her research interests include second language acquisition, classroom discourse and applied corpus linguistics.

References Batardière, M-T., & Jeanneau, C. (2015). Facilitating a face-to-face tandem language exchange on a university campus. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 6(3), 288299. Retrieved from http://sisaljournal.org/archives/sep15/batardiere_jeanneau/ Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956).

Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals.

Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay. Byram, M., Nichols, A., & Stevens, D. (2001). Introduction. In M. Byram, A. Nichols, & D. Stevens (Eds.), Developing intercultural competence in practice (pp. 1-8). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Macmillan.

Esch, E. (2001). Disseminating the practice of advising: Towards a new evaluation framework. In M. Mozzon-McPherson & R. Vismans (Eds.), Beyond language teaching, towards language advising (pp. 25-39). London, UK: CILT. Lyster, R. Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching. 46(1), 1-40. doi:10.1017/s0261444812000365

442

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 432-443 Turnbull, M. (2006). Employons le français en français de base! [Let’s use French in core French classes]. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 62(4), 611-628. doi:10.3138/cmlr.62.4.611 University of Limerick Strategic Plan 2011-2015. (2011). Pioneering & connected.

Voller, P. (2004). One-to-one consultations: A web guide to language advising. Hong Kong: The English Centre, The University of Hong Kong.

Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

443

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

Effective Training for SALC Student Staff: Principles from Experience Ashley R. Moore, Language Learning Center, Osaka Institute of Technology, Japan Misato Tachibana, Language Learning Center, Osaka Institute of Technology, Japan

Abstract Student staff can play a vital role in any Self-Access Learning Center (SALC) (Gardner & Miller, 1999; Cooker, 2010) and providing training for them is one of the key skills required of people managing SALCs (Gardner & Miller, 2013). This article charts the evolution over four years of a training program for student staff at the self-access language learning center at Osaka Institute of Technology in Japan. After detailing the institutional context of the center, we (the director and assistant manager of the center) discuss how, through a reflective process, the training program developed over this time period, moving from a group-based approach to a more individually-focused program. In the concluding section we draw on these experiences to put forward five principles that we believe will help others who are seeking to establish effective student staff training programs.

Keywords: self-access management, student staff, training, individualization of training

Context Osaka Institute of Technology (OIT) is a university located in Osaka, Japan. It consists of three faculties: Engineering, Intellectual Property and Information Technology.

The university has about 7000 undergraduate students and 500 graduate students. The Language Learning Center (LLC) was established in 2012 through a bilateral agreement between OIT and Kanda University of International Studies (also located in Japan). The LLC is a Self-Access Learning Center (SALC) but also provides various taught courses.

The working mission of the center is to: â&#x20AC;&#x153; â&#x20AC;Ś create a self-access learning community in which OIT students, faculty members, and administrative staff of all proficiency levels can further their language learning. The LLC team wish to aid users in becoming autonomous,

!

444!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

critically reflective, life-long language learners, and hope to support OIT in achieving its vision of developing globally fluent graduates who can thrive in the globalized workplace. Through collaboration with OIT professors and administrative staff, we hope to establish the LLC as a gateway to the international world.â&#x20AC;?

Institutionally, the LLC falls under the purview of the Academic Affairs office. The center is staffed by four full-time lecturers (one of whom, Ashley R. Moore, is the LLC director and co-author of this paper), one assistant manager (Misato Tachibana, co-author), and 16 student staff (see next section for more details).

The LLC offers many different kinds of services such as Consultation Room (15minute conversation sessions with one of the lecturers), Free Conversation (a lunchtime English conversation session run by a lecturer and a student English Conversation Assistant), a structured Speaking Program (run through the Consultation Room), an Independent Learning Program (an advising program facilitated by the lecturers who have been trained in language advising), and an advising program for the Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC). In addition, the lecturers provide non-credit elective courses such as a study abroad preparation course. Besides these services, students also have access to various English learning materials such as comics, grammar textbooks, etc. (see Language Learning Center, n.d., for further information).

LLC student staff The student staff each work a two-hour shift once a week. They are currently divided into two roles: English Conversation Assistants (ECAs) and Reception Assistants (RAs). ECAs work with lecturers during Free Conversation to help users to participate in the interaction. The RAsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; (the main focus of this paper) primary duties are to help users in the LLC, staff the counter, and carry out administrative tasks when required. In the next section we chronicle the evolution of the training program for the RAs over the four years since the establishment of the LLC.

!

445!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

Evolution of the Reception Assistant Training Program Year one When the LLC first opened, we had a very short window within which to physically set up the center and train students (recommended as students with an interest in English by the English language professors at OIT) as RAs. A training session was somewhat hastily put together by the assistant manager and the director, and consisted of a one-off group meeting (conducted in English) in which we demonstrated their basic duties to the students and covered (through a combination of brainstorming and translation tasks) some potentially useful language that could be used by staff during interactions with users in the LLC. Once it was drafted, we also shared the LLC mission statement (see above) with students. A second group training meeting was also held at the beginning of the second semester in which we reiterated duties that were commonly being missed by the RAs and demonstrated the correct procedures for some administrative tasks, such as processing new materials. During this first year, we also received feedback from the OIT professors that one of the RAs was dissatisfied with the amount of English they could use during their shift as they were often working alone and asked to perform administrative tasks. This highlighted a number of issues; 1) a mismatch between the RAs’ expectations of the job and the occasionally mundane reality of running a SALC, 2) a lack of interaction between the student staff and the rest of the team (exacerbated by the fact that the RAs were mostly covering the reception counter alone), and 3) that we had not given the RAs sufficient ‘sanction’ to express their feelings directly to us if they were unhappy.

Year two A small number of RA positions opened up, necessitating the organization of a recruitment drive and interviews (Appendix A). In addition to fairly standard interview questions, we took it as an opportunity to clearly explain certain aspects of the job (such as the fact that the role did not always involve speaking in English for an entire shift) that, as discussed above, had led to occasional dissatisfaction amongst the first cohort of RAs.

!

446!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

Based on our experiences during the first year, it became apparent that a single group training session at the beginning of each semester was insufficient, as Connell and Mileham (2006) and Neuhaus (2001) have also found. In fact, a number of basic duties were being routinely missed by some RAs and so a follow-up group training meeting touching on these issues was held in the middle of each semester. These training sessions were increasingly conducted in Japanese (the first language for most of our student staff) as we found that the RAs tended to understand our expectations and instructions more clearly.

As set out in our mission statement, one of our goals was to build a ‘self-access learning community’ or Community of Practice (CoP) (Wenger, 1998) through the LLC. However, working conditions for the student staff largely prevented them from developing, following the CoP model, any sense of mutual engagement, joint enterprise or shared repertoire amongst themselves. In an attempt to provide a forum through which the students could communicate, we set up a Facebook group and made it part of the RAs’ basic duties to post in the group and read others’ comments. This proved to be ineffectual however, as although some RAs used Facebook, many did not. The fact that the interaction was prescribed also meant that when it did take place, it was often forced. We came to realize that a successful CoP cannot be cultivated by making membership a duty.

Year three In the third year of the project, there were three major changes in terms of the LLC student staff. Firstly, we expanded our services to include the Free Conversation sessions.

This gave us an opportunity to create the ECA positions (see above). This raised the number of student staff to 16, and created two groups with quite separate training needs.

Secondly, as we spent more time with the students, we came to see them, not as a homogenous group, but as individuals with their own interests and skill sets. In addition to their basic responsibilities, we created individual roles for each RA to match their particular skills:

!

•

Eco-Supervisor (taking care of the plants in the center)

•

Social Networker (promoting the LLC through various social networks)

447!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

•

Translator (translating various documents between English and Japanese)

•

Graphic Designer (creating various graphic products for the LLC, e.g. posters)

•

Display Supervisor (creating and maintaining shelf displays) With this diversification of roles it became clear that there was a need for regular

individual training. This resulted in the third major change: OIT agreed to allocate 90 minutes per week in the director’s schedule for individual student staff training meetings.

Each student participates in three 30 to 45-minute meetings per semester. These meetings are co-facilitated by the director and the assistant manager.

At first, these individual meetings were loosely structured around the following questions: •

Do you have any questions about your work?

•

Do you have any ideas for improvements that could be made to the LLC?

•

What are your professional goals?

•

What do you want to achieve before our next meeting?

When it was needed, we also used these meetings as a chance to offer

supplementary training for those students who were having difficulties. Knowing that our student staff lacked opportunities to interact with each other, the second meeting during the second semester was run as a focus group between three to four students, during which we gave them time alone to introduce themselves, discuss what they enjoyed about their work and, most importantly, how they thought the LLC could be improved. We joined the group towards the end of the meeting and the students (perhaps emboldened by the opportunity to combine their voices) summarized their ideas to us. Many of these ideas (such as changes to the layout of the center) were implemented. These focus groups, along with the fact the student staff had taken it upon themselves to form a group through the LINE social networking app (crucially, this interaction was not ‘enforced’ by us and the platform was one that was already popular among the students), meant that a CoP finally appeared to be forming, driven by the student staff themselves.

!

448!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

Over the first 12 months, these meetings proved to be successful. However, there were a number of issues with the new training system. The open yet repetitive structure of the individual meetings meant that they began to lose some of their initial effectiveness.

Related to this, we identified a need for a wider variety of more focused ‘User Support’ training sessions, crucial given that the RAs usually work alone and thus, as Beile (1997) has noted, ‘their performance can have an inordinate impact upon the center’s reputation’.

Lastly, the hurried notes made during each training meeting were often hard to make sense of several weeks later. Like Connell and Mileham (2006), we found that a more robust system for tracking the individual progress of sixteen student staff was needed.

Year four In our current year of operation the increased individualization of the RA role has begun to reap rewards, and we have watched with pleasure as the students have taken larger ownership over their roles within the center. For example, Shunsuke (pseudonym), one of the Eco-Supervisors, brought in a project that he had been working on at home: a 10-page guide on how to care for the various plants within the LLC, written completely in English.

He explained how he had wanted to make sure the knowledge he had built up was passed on to future Eco-Supervisors once he had graduated. It has become clear that many of our student staff are now ready to take on a mentoring role for others. As trainers, we also need to recognize that student staff need support as they transition into a mentoring role. During Shunsuke’s training meetings, we are providing feedback on his English and encouraging him to think critically about how to improve the text as a training tool for others.

This year we have tried to introduce a phase of more focused ‘User Support’ individual training sessions, and have created sessions in which we discuss the key features of excellent user support and then perform a role-play with the student staff member ‘acting’ as themselves, one of us acting as a user and the other taking observations on the student staff’s performance (Appendices B & C). After the role-play, we discuss our observations, praising the student as much as possible, while also identifying areas where they could improve for next time.

!

449!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

Through the course of these training sessions, we were surprised to find that many students did not recommend services or materials that obviously suited the ‘user’s’ needs.

We discovered a common reason behind the omissions: the student staff lacked key knowledge about some LLC services and materials because they had never personally used all of them. Thus, we have realized that a major phase of training has been missing from our training program: an early focus on ‘Knowledge Building’. To this end, during a student’s first semester of work, we are now asking them to work through a checklist of the most popular LLC materials and services (Appendix D) to ensure they have experienced them.

At the end of the third year we had noted the need for a more robust information management system for the training meetings. This year we have started using a simple database through Google Forms. Data is entered after each training session. As a result, the notes are more detailed and coherent (as they are written after, rather than during, the meeting) and we are better prepared for subsequent meetings. The database notes (see Appendix E) from previous meetings are shared with each student (and are written in a tone that bears this in mind), and we feel that the amount of detail included and ‘permanency’ of them being recorded in the database, send a strong message to the students that the training is important and we are invested in their development.

Five Principles for Effective SALC Student Staff Training Having detailed the development of the RA training program in response to various challenges, in this concluding section we consider future directions for the RA training program, before putting forward overarching principles for effective SALC student staff training.

It is important to note that the RA training program is still very much a work in progress. From April 2016, our main objective is to provide more opportunities for experienced RAs to act as peer mentors in the training of new RAs. For example, we have asked the student featured in Appendix E to provide an example tour to new RAs during the initial group training session. In terms of support, we have been providing extra feedback

!

450!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

and practicing the tour with the student in order to build his confidence as a mentor. A further objective is to consolidate the training program into a series of distinct phases (see Principle 2 below) and produce a training manual that each student will gradually work through, with acknowledgement of their achievements as they progress. We offer the following five principles that, based on our experiences, can guide those wishing to implement or refine similar programs.

1. Recognize each student as an individual and tailor their roles and the form and content of their training accordingly Over the years, we have moved towards an increasingly individualized style of training for our student staff, and have seen a host of!benefits. Observing each student staff’s learning style and adapting one’s approach accordingly can aid understanding. For example, some students only need a simple description of their duties and an explanation of the purpose, while others may have a more visual or kinesthetic learning style. In terms of language we have found that using Japanese in some cases can be more effective and lead to fewer misunderstandings. Managers should also acknowledge that each student will bring a different skill set to the center, and create space within the student’s role in which they can show initiative and utilize these skills. Though we have been extremely fortunate to have been given officially designated time in our schedules to provide individual meetings, those without such affordances should note that we also provide training during the RAs’ shifts. Ensuring that there is sufficient time in each student’s shift when they are working alongside others should provide ample opportunity for individualized training.

2. Identify and prioritize different training phases SALC managers should identify the micro skills and knowledge required of student staff and group them into prioritized phases. The creation of such a system ensures that the training provided is timely and that every student eventually completes all of the training phases. This is especially important if, as we would recommend, the training is individualized as much as possible. Other contexts may find different phases more

!

451!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

appropriate, but the current LLC training program has coalesced into the phases shown in Figure 1.

!

Figure 1: Phases of the RA Training Program

3. Create effective data management systems Any ongoing training program, and in particular those which are individualized, will require a reliable and intuitive data management system. Systems such as Google Forms help trainers to ensure that the support they provide is efficient and effective, while the fact that the data is electronically stored enables trainers to quickly check a particular studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s progress over several years and maintain institutional memory.

4. Facilitate (but not enforce) the development of a Community of Practice amongst student staff A great deal of the training and learning that takes place in any group happens informally between peers. The formation of a successful CoP among student staff will enable this kind of training and resultant relationships are often instrumental factors in !

452!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

terms of keeping team members happy and fulfilled at work. However, trainers should critically assess whether the ways in which students work are conducive to the development of a CoP. Where they are not, efforts should be made to encourage student staff to find a forum for communication that works for them. Furthermore, we have found that these forums tend to work best when managers maintain a mostly ‘hands-off’ approach.

5. Be conscious of power dynamics and whether student staff are afforded the ‘right to speak’ In our experience, many of the best results emerging from the student staff training program have stemmed directly from instances when students have been given the space to give feedback about their roles and the ways in which the center is run. Moreover they must also feel empowered enough to do so. It perhaps goes without saying that these affordances cannot be assumed. Rather, trainers and managers must create them. We suggest finding ways for students to take more individual responsibility and facilitating focus groups and individual training sessions as possible steps towards such empowerment.

While we hope that these principles will be useful to others, we intend to continue developing the LLC student staff training programs and adding to this list in the future.

Notes on the contributors Ashley R. Moore is the director of the Language Learning Center at Osaka Institute of Technology. His research interests are in identity and language learning, self-access management, and English for specific purposes. His work has been published in TESOL Quarterly and as a chapter in The applied linguistic individual: Sociocultural approaches to identity, agency and autonomy (Equinox, 2013).

!

453!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

Misato Tachibana is the assistant manager of the Language Learning Center at Osaka Institute of Technology. Her research interests include self-access management, staff training and using qualitative data from SALC users to inform development of the center.

References Beile, P. M. (1997). Great expectations: Competency-based training for student media center assistants. MC Journal: The Journal of Academic Media Librarianship, 5(2).

Retrieved from http://wings.buffalo.edu/publications/mcjrnl/v5n2/beile.html Connell, R. S., & Mileham, P. J. (2006). Student assistant training in a small academic library. Public Services Quarterly, 2(2/3), 69-84. doi:10.1300/J295v02n02_06 Cooker, L. (2010). Some self-access principles. Studies in Self-Access Learning, 1(1), 5-9.

Retrieved from http://sisaljournal.org/archives/jun10/cooker/ Gardner, D., & Miller, L. (1999). Establishing self-access: From theory to practice.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Gardner, D., & Miller, L. (2013). The management skills of SALL managers. Studies in Self-Access Learning, 4(4), 236-252. Retrieved from http://sisaljournal.org/archives/dec13/gardner_miller/ Language Learning Center. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.oit.ac.jp/japanese/gakusei/llc.html Neuhaus, C. (2001). Flexibility and feedback: A new approach to ongoing training for reference student assistants. Reference Services Review, 29(1), 53-64. doi:10.1108/00907320110366813 Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511803932

!

454!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

Appendix A LLC Student Staff Interview Form

!

455!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

!

456!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

Appendix B Example of Training Material from ‘User Support Training’ Phase

!

457!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

Appendix C Example of Training Material from ‘User Support Training’ Phase

!

458!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

Appendix D Example of Worksheet from ‘Knowledge Building’ Training Phase

!

459!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 444-460

Appendix E Example of Data from Student Staff Training Database

!

460!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 461-469

Training Student Workers in a Social Learning Space Naomi Fujishima, Okayama University, Japan Abstract This paper investigates the issues involved in training student workers in a social learning space (SLS) located at a large national university in Japan. Six years after its inception, the SLS has grown to more than eight times its original size. With the increase in space, there have been more visitors and activities, which has led to the hiring of more student workers.

With the increase of workers, the manager implemented a more organized system to delegate the duties of each student worker. The researcher looked at the different roles of the student workers and what they consist of. A thematic analysis of transcripts taken from one 3-hour training session and three interview transcripts was done to understand these roles and how the students viewed their responsibilities. How to balance the SLS as a delicate ecosocial system (Murray & Fujishima, 2013) while maintaining a solid foundation for training effective student workers is a challenge. Some common themes found in the interview data will be highlighted, as well as implications and recommendations for improvement.

Keywords: social learning space, student workers, manager, training

In the social learning space (SLS) known as the L-café at Okayama University, both Japanese and international students are employed to do a variety of tasks. The hiring of staff and the delegation of tasks are carried out by the manager, with the help of two staff members.

When the present manager took over the position in April 2014, there were no specific guidelines concerning how to train student workers. In the beginning, six years ago, when it was called the English Café, it was relatively easy to hire and train students because the center was so small. In 2013, what used to be a small room housed next to a lunch café was moved to a separate annex more than eight times larger in size and given the name of the L-café.

With this expansion, it became necessary for the manager to employ more student workers to accommodate the increase in visitors.

After the change in managerial staff and growth of the L-café, I was curious to know what adjustments had been made in the training and supervising of the student workers.

Although I have no direct role at the L-café, other than teaching general English classes in the same Language Education Center, I wanted to take a closer look at what the current student worker system was like under the new management. I was also interested in this because it was closely related to a four-year longitudinal study on this social learning space I conducted !

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 461-469 with my colleague, Garold Murray (Murray & Fujishima, 2013; 2015). Data were collected from one three-hour training session and interviews with three student workers. A brief description of the L-café, the roles of the student workers, and how they contribute to the operation of the L-café will be described. Finally, I would like to propose some ideas for the future in terms of training student workers.

Defining a Social Learning Space The definition of the function of a social learning space is not as straightforward as that of a self-access center (SAC). As Murray & Fujishima (2013) state, the L-café is a place where students ‘learn with and from each other in a non-formal setting’ (p. 140). Students do not necessarily go there to use learning materials, although they are available. Morrison (2008) outlines four main ways a SAC supports language learners, by providing a space: to practice their language skills and increase their proficiency, to help them become independent learners, to give guidance in promoting effective learning strategies, and to offer a variety of learning materials and support. A social learning space fulfills all of these functions, but with an emphasis on peer support and learning. There are no trained learning advisors as there would likely be in a SAC, but there are student workers who are all a similar age to the students who visit. The manager chooses students who are more knowledgeable and experienced in order to provide learners with the assistance they need.

Student Worker Roles One of the first things the new manager did was to create categories for the student workers in a more organized way than previously. Under the umbrella of student workers, she made four categories: 1.

Peer teacher: These students teach non-credit bearing English lessons, which include TOEFL or TOEIC preparation, and speaking and discussion classes.

Peer teachers include Japanese and international students.

2.

Receptionist: These students sit near the entrance of the L-café at a reception desk and greet visitors. They help visitors by guiding them into the L-café.

3.

Assistant manager: These students are inside the L-café and assist visitors with whatever they need, such as how to use the graded readers or introducing them to conversation leaders. They are also responsible for opening up and closing the L-café each day.

!

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 461-469 4.

Student officer: This position is reserved solely for the international students who can either be a peer teacher or a conversation leader. If their Japanese is good enough, they can also become a receptionist.

Student Worker Training

In the spring term of 2015, there were 29 student workers employed at the L-café.

Fifteen of them were Japanese and the remainder were international students from a variety of countries. Before the beginning of term, the manager held two training sessions in March.

Students were asked to attend one of these sessions if they were available. Several international students did not arrive in Japan until April, so could not attend a session.

In order to understand the content of the training sessions, a thematic analysis was made using data from the transcripts of one of the three-hour training sessions held in March.

This session was attended by the manager, two staff members, three Japanese and two international student workers, as well as this researcher. During the training session, conducted in Japanese, the main functions of the L-café that were brought up and discussed at length and showed that the L-café is understood to be a place where: 1.

learners seek help to improve their language skills with both human and non-human support (Morrison, 2008),

2.

students seek advice or counseling regarding studying abroad,

3.

students complete their homework assignments from their speaking classes.

Another important function of the L-café is offering the non-credit bearing English

language lessons taught by the peer teachers, but this was not touched upon during the training session. On this particular day, there were no peer teachers present, so perhaps this was the reason it was not mentioned. However, overall the session was quite comprehensive and informative. The student workers also role-played certain scenarios they would encounter on a regular basis at the L-café.

There were three types of manuals given out at the training session. These were compiled from information left behind by the previous manager, former student workers, and what the manager believed to be important for all student workers to know. Two of the manuals, one for the receptionist position and the other for the assistant manager position, were written in Japanese. For the receptionist and assistant manager positions, there were very detailed instructions of what the job content was, such as how to greet visitors, important facts about the L-café, how to borrow graded readers, and basic points of caution. The third manual !

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 461-469 was for student officers and written in English for the international students. This was much shorter than the other two manuals and outlined the job description, what to do with visiting students, what their responsibilities were, and contact information. Two main responsibilities of student officers were as peer teachers and conversation session leaders, but neither was mentioned in the manuals. The manager stated later that this was an area needing rectification.

Student Worker Experiences Data was also analyzed from the transcripts of three student worker interviews (see Table 1 for details). These three students were the only ones who responded to a call for interview participants among L-café student workers. Two of the student workers, as shown in Table 1, had just started working at the L-café, while the third one had been working there for just over one year. Each interview lasted about 20-30 minutes and was conducted in English. I was interested in knowing the answers to these questions: 1. How were the student workers trained? If they couldn’t attend the training sessions, how did they receive guidance?

2. What were the student workers’ responsibilities?

3. What did they like best about their jobs?

Table 1: List of Interviewees

SW1 (student worker) SW 2

Country of origin Assistant manager Japan and receptionist Student officer Serbia

Male/ Length of employment Female F Three months F

One year and three months

SW 3

Student officer

M

One month

Designation

Title

France

Issues regarding the training When asked how they were trained for their positions, all three students interviewed said that they did not attend any training session before they started their positions. The initial training sessions were held during the spring break before the semester started, and none of the three interviewees were in Okayama at that time. Instead, SW1 relied on the office staff for help and guidance. SW2 from Serbia got advice about her role as a lesson teacher from !

"#"!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 461-469 other students. She said that she attended what she referred to as meetings in the beginning to get acquainted with her peers and the L-café staff. She also received information of her duties.

However, she did not refer to these meetings as training sessions and mentioned that she learned what to do mostly from older students or the staff. SW3 from France had no formal training for his position. When he started, he was merely given an explanation of what to do and some administrative documents to fill out.

The three student workers mentioned that the newly hired staff member, Mr. Tanaka (pseudonym) was very helpful in explaining their duties and employment responsibilities.

This staff position was created at the beginning of the 2015 academic year to alleviate some of the work of the manager so she could focus on other administrative duties. Because none of the three student workers I interviewed attended the training sessions, they relied on Mr. Tanaka to give them guidance whenever they needed help. In this way, the office staff held an important function by providing ongoing support.

Creating an inviting atmosphere Each of the interviewees made it clear that they wanted visiting students to feel welcome and relaxed. They were always thinking of ways to help make an inviting atmosphere. This was an issue that the manager discussed during the training session as well.

It is important to create an open and welcoming environment. The manager and staff encouraged the student workers so they felt a sense of involvement, importance, and pride, even when they were at the L-café outside of working hours. When SW2 was asked what the most important part of her job was at the L-café, she said: “Smiling, looking happy and say ‘welcome and please enjoy’ happily. I really hope that from the bottom of my heart so I want student to stay at L-café very comfortable and relaxed and enjoyable.”

Helping others As for the L-café providing a place where learners can seek help to improve their language skills, all three student workers agreed that assisting students in this way was the most important part of their duties. As an assistant manager, SW1 introduced visiting students to the extensive library of graded readers, as well as English language learning materials. In her additional role as receptionist, she greeted visitors from a reception desk near the entrance.

She also introduced them to student officers or teachers who had office hours there to practice their speaking skills. !

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 461-469 SW2 worked as a peer teacher. The non-credit English lessons were scheduled throughout the day, and students had to register to attend. SW2 enjoyed being a peer teacher and found it rewarding when people learned something new from her. She was studying cultural anthropology in graduate school and liked interacting with Japanese students. For her discussion class, she chose topics that were somewhat controversial. These topics are difficult for Japanese students to discuss in English, so SW2 was pleased when the students would return to her lessons. She commented: “…if people come back, so they talk to me once, and they want to come back, I feel that is very inspiring.”

SW3 was a conversation leader in the L-café. There was no preparation needed for these sessions, and students joined if they wanted to practice casual conversation. SW3 said that he enjoyed meeting new students and helping them get used to speaking English, but at times he would have a student who would not say much.

“Sometimes [I’m] doing a monologue—I have someone in front of me—I’m trying my best for like finding new topics or something interesting or something not too much difficult. I try but sometimes they don’t really help me, so I have to find something…I try to be nice, you know, if they are stressed or shy.”

Related to this, some classroom teachers assign their students homework during the semester, which requires them to go to the L-café and talk to an international student in English for 15-20 minutes. Although it seems like a good way to get students, even those who are not interested in studying English, to go to the L-café at least once, it has caused several problems. Firstly, if groups of students go together, sometimes there are not enough international student workers to accommodate them all. Secondly, some students go unprepared and expect the student workers to initiate conversation, which makes it difficult to have a smooth dialog, as SW3 mentioned.

Managerial Issues The fact that the manager received limited guidelines when she was hired is evidence of the struggles she has in her position as middle management in the hierarchy of educational administration. Her superiors did not give her a clear explanation of what her responsibilities should be. As Gardner and Miller (2014) explain:

!

"##!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 461-469 They [middle management] will typically have restricted decision-making authority over staffing and resources but will be expected to take responsibility for ensuring the success of SALL [in this case, the SLS], and should expect to be further managed by more senior managers. (p. 31-32) Thus, in her capacity, she was constrained by restrictions on what she could do to fulfill her duties. In this respect, the decision from above to hire Mr. Tanaka was a positive move in acknowledging that one person, the manager, could not function well without more support.

Another difficulty the manager faced was finding responsible student workers. When she first arrived, most of the senior students had graduated. In April, there were only two students who had prior experience that the manager could rely on for support. It was at this time that she decided to hold an informal meeting with ten students, both Japanese and nonJapanese. This meeting proved to be an effective way to exchange ideas and share experiences. Since then, the manager decided to hold more formal training sessions at the beginning of each semester for incoming student workers. One issue, however, is the timing of these training sessions, as it seems that quite a few students are not available before the semester begins.

Implications and Recommendations As the L-cafĂŠ continues its work and the student worker population changes from year to year, it is important to outline the basic duties and responsibilities for each of the student worker positions. Due to the nature of university life, there will always be a high turnover rate of workers. This is especially true for the international students, whose stay in Japan is usually short. When they leave the country, it becomes more difficult to pass on the knowledge they gained from their experience. How to maintain the institutional memory to make sure knowledge gets passed on between workers was a central issue, which became clear from the data.

One way to overcome this difficulty would be to have a journal or message book, along with a manual, where former workers could write their reflections for future workers to note. Each role would possibly need a different approach, depending on their duties.

Currently, the manager provides students working as receptionists with a manual containing set phrases. While useful for this role, a manual may not be realistic for a student officer as the responsibilities are not as clearly defined. Another idea, outlined by Uchida (2015), would !

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 461-469 be to create a ‘digital habitat’ (Wenger, White, & Smith, 2009), which would work in the same way as a message book, but be a virtual space where information could be accessed easily by anyone. This would take more time, planning and coordination with the university computer center to set up, but in the long run, would be an ideal way in which to keep records, promote collaboration, and provide a means of communication between former and current workers.

Another idea would be to provide staff meetings in which workers could discuss various situations that arose and how they handled them. This would be a good way to help the transition from older to newer workers. In addition, the manager could ask current student workers to keep an eye out for possible candidates to replace them in the future.

There also needs to be support from the teachers’ side to train their students who visit the L-café in order to avoid situations mentioned earlier of students who have trouble maintaining a conversation in their second language. Classroom teachers could have their students prepare a list of questions in advance, and recommend students to attend an L-café orientation (held at the beginning of each semester) before doing their homework task. Not only is it important to train the student workers, but the users also require training in order to make the best use of the L-café.

If the L-café is to remain a learning environment that can adapt over time, depending on the participants, interactions and relationships (Murray & Fujishima, 2013), then rather than workers having to strictly adhere to a manual, giving student workers some general guidelines would seem more pragmatic. The vision held by the university vice-president, to create a space where students can go to practice English in a relaxed, comfortable environment (Tahara, 2015), needs to be explicitly stated. In addition, a clear mission statement, which is lacking at this time, needs to be created. Students, both users and workers, need to be aware that the L-café is a place where students help each other learn and learn from each other in a relaxed atmosphere. Sharing this vision more widely among students would certainly influence the student workers’ training process in a positive way.

Conclusion Careful consideration of the data suggests that the manager needs to carefully supervise the use of a detailed manual, while keeping in mind the organic nature of dealing with people in an environment meant to promote learning through interaction. The L-café is a dynamic place in which both visitors and workers prompt change. The manager could be considered as the only constant unit, in a sense, as she remains in the L-café throughout the !

"#$!

SiSAL Journal Vol. 6, No. 4, December 2015, 461-469 years while the student population changes over time. It is hoped that the university administration recognizes the complexity of this social learning space and listens to the voices of the students and manager. Not only should the administration listen, but they must also take action by providing enough support and better guidelines for the manager to be able to train student workers effectively. Moreover, the manager needs to maintain the essence of the L-café as a delicate ecosocial system (Murray & Fujishima, 2013), enabling it to thrive for many more years to come through the training and support given to both student workers and users.

Notes on the contributor Naomi Fujishima is a professor at Okayama University, Japan, and teaches general English courses in the Language Education Center. Her research interests include learner autonomy, student motivation, and lifelong learning.

References Gardner, D., & Miller, L. (2014). Managing self-access language learning. Hong Kong: City of University Hong Kong Press.

Morrison, B. (2008). The role of the self-access centre in the tertiary language learning process. System, 36(2), 123-140. doi:10.1016/j.system.2007.10.004 Murray, G., & Fujishima, N. (Eds.) (2015). Social spaces for language learning: Stories from the L-café. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Murray, G., & Fujishima, N. (2013). Social language learning spaces: Affordances in a community of learners. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 36(1), 141-157. doi:10.1515/cjal-2013-0009 Tahara, M. (2015). Creating the L-café: An administrator’s standpoint. In G. Murray & N. Fujishima (Eds.). Social spaces for language learning: Stories from the L-café (pp.

14-20). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Uchida, C. (2015). Optimizing affordances: Developing a ‘digital habitat’ for the L-café. In G. Murray & N. Fujishima (Eds.). Social spaces for language learning: Stories from the L-café (pp. 69-78). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Wenger, E., White, N., & Smith, J. D. (2009). Digital habitats: Stewarding technology for communities. Portland, OR: CPsquare.

!

"#$!