The Language Teacher
06 - 2000
Improvement in English Education from a Learning Perspective:
The Teacher's View versus The Student's View
Anthony Rausch
Hirosaki University
The past few decades have seen a gradual shift in the focus of education related research, from that based solely on a teaching perspective to that which incorporates a learning perspective as well. The former prioritizes content, curriculum, and teacher role in the instruction process, while the latter considers the importance of the learner and their role in the learning process. This new orientation has generated new insights into the practice of foreign language education, bringing about a shift in teaching from that which is totally grammar-based and teacher-centered to that which is increasingly needs-based and learner-centered. As Weaver and Cohen (1998) point out, inherent in this shift is a change in the responsibilities of both teachers and students. No longer does the teacher control every aspect of the education process, rather the learners share the responsibility for successful language learning. As Usuki (1999) pointed out, students themselves "think that the students' role should be that of an active learner and the teachers' role that of facilitator or advisor" (p. 7).
The purpose of this study is to consider various elements of language education from a learning perspective, including both the teacher's viewpoint and the learner's viewpoint. The research considers teaching practices, educational philosophy, and teacher and student roles, as well as ideas regarding how to improve learning. While not directly comparing the responses of these two groups, the results do highlight the similarities and discrepancies between them, identifying the areas on which we should focus in our attempts to improve English education in Japan from a learning-centered perspective.
Two Surveys
The findings reported herein are based on two written surveys of similar organization and content, one of Aomori prefectural high school teachers (N = 116; 72% return rate by high school) and the other of first and second year Hirosaki University students enrolled in English language classes (N = 68). The surveys were provided in Japanese, co-written by a Japanese high school English teacher and myself, and subjected to pre-testing by six graduate students at Hirosaki University, of which four are high school English teachers.
In reporting on surveys which cross the gap existing between high school and university education, these results represent the potentially very different perspectives characterizing education in Japan. In that sense, the results are not comparative, but rather contrastive. The high school English teacher survey can be considered representative of the traditional educator's perspective, in Japan that characterized by Gorsuch (1998) as dominated by a yakudoku methodology, which she characterizes as classroom instruction based on intensive reading of linguistically difficult textbooks with unfamiliar content, and translation of English into Japanese, having Japanese as the language of instruction in teacher-centered classes with no expectations and few opportunities for students to produce English, and conformity in translations and responses and frequent test-based assessment of students. On the other hand, the university student survey can be considered representative of the learner's perspective, hopefully addressing some of the stereotypes Susser (1998) pointed out researchers have come to take for granted. University students were chosen to represent the student response on the basis that their answers can be considered as reflecting the breadth of the educational experience in Japan. Although representative of different educational levels and institutions, the findings from such contrastive surveys can provide insight into the relative learning-centeredness of each group and identify their respective ideas concerning improving English language education in Japan.
The surveys consisted of statements concerning course management (curriculum design factors, class materials, and student evaluation), educational philosophy (teaching-centeredness versus learning-centeredness and the respective roles of the teacher and learner), and English language learning improvement (various means for improving learners' overall learning skills and foreign language learning skills). In order to identify the subtle balance between specific survey items and still yield rankings of items, responses are based on a five-point Likert scale with five indicating the positive response (important, frequent, agree), three indicating a neutral response, and one indicating the negative response (not important, not frequent, disagree). The figures reported indicate mean responses.
Survey Findings
The age representation of high school teachers was relatively uniform across age groupings, with 24 percent of the respondents in their 20s, 26 percent in their 30s, 30 percent in their 40s, and 17 percent in their 50s. Eighty percent of the high school teachers reported holding a Bachelor's degree, with 17 percent holding a Master's degree. Ten percent reported membership in some sort of academic association, with 88 percent indicating non-membership (figures do not equal 100 percent due to "no-answer" responses).
Table 1. Educational philosophy: Teacher versus Learner-Centeredness
| . | |||
| 1 a | Testing is the best measure of students' learning progree. | 4,06* | 3.26 |
| 1 b | Observation is the best measure of students' learning progress. | 3.56 | 3.60 |
| 2 a | it is immportant to follow the set curriculum and the appoved textbook. | 3.05 | 2.66 |
| 2 b | It is important to be flexible and respond to students' needs. | 4.05 | 4.35* |
| 3 a | Teacher-based instruction is important for effective learning. | 3.31 | 3.22 |
| 3 b | Student-centered independent study is important for effective learning. | 3.98* | 3.96* |
| 4 a | Instuction & explaination by the teacher is required for successful learning. | 3.91 | 4.19 |
| 4 b | Self-discovery by learners is required for successful learning. | 4.08** | 4.12** |
| 5 a | Even with good materials, students do not know how to learn on their own. | 3.82 | 3.15 |
| 5 b | Given proper mterials, students can learn on their own. | 3.68** | 3.22** |
| 6 a | The knowledge of the teacher determines students' success. | 3.38 | 2.79 |
| 6 b | The effort learners put in determines their own sucess. | 4.25* | 4.28* |
| 7 a | The teacher is the final suthority on the best way to learn english. | 3.05 | 3.18 |
| 7 b | The are many individual wys to sucess in learning English. | 4.04* | 3.915* |
| 8 a | Class-time should be used for teacher-led instruction and explanation. | 2.75 | 2.68 |
| 8 b | Class-time should be used for learner interaction and practice. | 4.19* | 4.130* |
| 9 a | The most important thing to teacher is the fundamentals of the language. | 3.93* | 3.69 |
| 9 b | The most important thing to teach is how to study and learn the language. | 3.37 | 3.51** |
Student survey respondents were comprised of first and second-year university students, with first-year students accounting for 54 percent and second-year students 46 percent. The majority of respondents were from the Faculty of Education (72%), with 18 percent from the Faculty of Humanities, seven percent from the Faculty of Science and Technology, and the remainder from the Faculties of Agriculture and Medicine.
1. Course Management/ Learning Management
The most important items cited by the high school teachers in their curriculum design were "school-based curriculum" (3.81), "self-designed curriculum" (3.79), and "assessment of student needs" (3.68). The top elements cited by the university students in managing their learning were "professorial guidance" (4.57), followed by "self-designed study planning" (4.03) and "department-based curriculum" (4.03).
The most important items cited by the high school teachers in conducting classes were "the Ministry of Education-approved textbook" (3.73), "realia" (3.62), "educational materials" (3.56), and "supplementary texts or materials" (3.44). The items of most importance for the university students in their classes were "realia" (4.19), "educational materials" (4.06), and "professor-supplied textbook" (4.07), followed by "self-supplied texts or materials" (3.50).
The most important means of evaluating students cited by teachers were 'one final examination' (4.62), followed by "class participation by students" (4.24) and "multiple quizzes" (4.05), ahead of "teacher-developed homework" (3.91), "textbook-based homework" (3.62), "communicative language use" (3.56) and "subjective evaluation of progress" (2.91). The most important aspects of being graded from the university student perspective were "class participation" (4.57), followed by "evaluation of communicative language use" (4.31), "multiple quizzes" (3.94), "evaluation of student-produced study materials" (3.87), "one final examination on textbook material" (3.90), "evaluation of textbook-based homework" (3.68) and "subjective appraisal of progress' (2.91).
No longer does the teacher control every aspect of the education process.
In terms of management of teaching and learning, the results show that the teachers, for the most part, conduct classes using a traditional, teaching-centered approach based on a uniform curriculum, text, and evaluation formula, initially confirming Gorsuch's (1998) portrayal of Japanese high school English education as based on a yakudoku methodology. However, there also appears to be a latent learning-centered mentality, as seen in the responses alluding to use of a self-designed curriculum and assessment of student need, use of realia and educational materials, and evaluation based on participation. Learners, on the other hand, appear to expect teacher guidance in directing their learning on the one hand, but conversely look to the use of realia as learning material (ahead of texts, either teacher provided or self-supplied) and class participation and language use as the preferred means of evaluation on the other. It is interesting to note that while neither teacher nor student advocate purely subjective evaluation of progress, both saw class participation as important and the student respondents further saw evaluation of communicative language use as important in student evaluation, both of which have subjective qualities to them.
2. Educational Philosophy and Teacher-Student Roles
Using an attitude scale format based on 12 contrasting statements, the teacher survey identified (see Table 1 for full survey responses and mean responses):
(1) two indicators which pointed toward a teaching-centered philosophy (statements 1a/b: "testing" over "observation" as "the best measure of learning progress" and statements 9a/b: "fundamentals of language" over "how to study and learning" as "the most important thing to teach");
(2) two indicators which pointed toward ambivalence regarding educational centeredness, where no significant difference was found between responses to contrasting statements (statements 4a/b: "teacher instruction and explanation" and "self-discovery" as "required for successful learning," and statements 5a/b: "even with the proper materials, students do not know how to learn" and "given the proper materials, students know how to learn");
(3) five indicators which pointed toward a learning-centered philosophy (statements 6a/b: "student effort" over "teacher effort" in "determining student success," statements 8a/b: "learner interaction" over "teacher instruction" as "preferable class activities," statements 2a/b: "flexibility and response to student needs are important' over "following the set curriculum is important," statements 7a/b: "there are many ways to learn" over "there is one way to learn," and statements 3a/b: "independent study" over "teacher instruction" as "important for effective learning"); and
(4) a 'teaching-centered educational philosophy' attitudinal mean score of 32.85 (s.d. 4.87) (out of maximum score of 50) countered by a 'learning-centered educational philosophy' attitudinal mean score of 39.13 (s.d. 4.52) on the part of the teachers.
Using the same attitude scale approach, the student survey identified:
(1) six indicators which pointed toward a learning-centered philosophy (statements 2a/b: "flexibility and response to student needs are important" over "following the set curriculum is important," statements 6a/b: "student effort" over "teacher effort" in "determining student success," statements 8a/b: "learner interaction" over "teacher instruction" as "preferable class activities," statements 3a/b: "independent study" over "teacher instruction" as "important for effective learning," statements 7a/b: "there are many ways to learn" over "there is one way to learn," and statements 1a/b: "observation" over "testing" as "the best measure of learning progress");
(2) three indicators showing ambivalence regarding educational centeredness, where, as above, no significant difference was found between responses to opposing statements (statements 4a/b: "teacher instruction and explanation" and "self-discovery" as "required for successful learning," statements 9a/b: "fundamentals of language" and "how to study and learn" as "the most important thing to teach," and statements 5a/b: "even with the proper materials, students do not know how to learn" and "given the proper materials, students know how to learn"); and
(3) a "teaching-centered educational philosophy" attitudinal mean score of 30.81 (s.d. 4.57) (out of maximum score of 50) countered by a "learning-centered educational philosophy" attitudinal mean score of 38.69 (s.d. 4.38) on the part of the students.
Table 2. Teacher and Student Roles
| Statement | Mean Te | Mean St |
| The teacher's most important task is to . . . | ||
explain the content of the course and textbook. |
3.16 | 3.30 |
assign homework and develop tests. |
2.58 | 2.17 |
correct student's mistakes. |
2.49 | 3.27 |
identify and address students difficulties. |
4.22 | 4.42 |
develop appropriate learning strategies & materials. |
4.11 | 3.95 |
organize and coordinate student learning activities. |
4.04 | 3.52 |
| The student's most important task is to . . . | ||
listen and take notes in class. |
3.51 | 3.32 |
complete the homework and pass the tests. |
3.13 | 3.05 |
correct mistakes and seek perfection. |
2.94 | 3.48 |
seek feedback and help from the teacher. |
3.53 | 3.76 |
develop effective learning behaviors. |
4.34 | 4.39 |
learn to study on his or her own. |
4.59 | 4.44 |
(N = 68); all responses based on 5-pt Likert scale
(5 = positive response, 3 = neutral, 1 = negative)
The teacher survey revealed that the principal teacher roles in the minds of teachers were "identifying and addressing student difficulties" (4.22), "developing appropriate learning strategies and materials" (4.11), and "organizing and coordinating student learning activities" (4.04), with the principal learner roles as "learning to study on his or her own" (4.59) and "developing effective learning behaviors" (4.34), as shown in Table 2. The student survey identified the principal teacher roles in the minds of the students as "identifying and addressing student difficulties" (4.42), "developing appropriate learning strategies and materials" (3.95), and "organizing and coordinating student learning activities" (3.52), with the principal learner roles as being "developing effective learning behaviors" (4.44) and "learning to study on his or her own" (4.39).
Summarizing these results, not only do both teachers and learners profess a learning-centered orientation and see the teacher's role as identifying and addressing student difficulty, developing learning materials, and coordinating student activities, with the learner's role being learning to study autonomously and developing effective learning behaviors, they do so to a strikingly similar degree. The only significant areas of differences between the two groups concern "testing" versus "observation" as "the best means of evaluation" and teacher focus on teaching the "fundamentals of the language" rather than "how to study and learn the language." In addition, it is significant to note that students were ambivalent in responses concerning both "instruction and explanation" versus "self-discovery" as "required for successful learning" and their "ability to learn on their own," calling into question students' confidence in activating their attitudes.
3. English Language Learning Improvement
Responses regarding the most important means by which both learning skills in general and English language learning can be improved were virtually identical. The surveys showed that the most important means by which learning skills can be improved were seen in "improving student attitudes toward learning" (teachers: 4.31, students: 4.41), "improving the understanding of the fundamental processes of learning" (teachers: 4.31, students: 4.32), and "improving the planning and management of the learning process" (teachers: 4.25, students: 3.98), as shown in Table 3.
The elements cited as important in improving English language learning were similar as well, seen as improving "student attitudes toward learning" (teachers: 4.58, students: 4.70) and "class curriculum and management" (teachers: 4.48, students: 4.47), followed by improving "the design and quality of textbooks" (teachers: 3.88, students: 3.70) and "teacher training" (teachers: 3.90 students: 3.70).
From these results, it is apparent that both teachers and students focus on student "attitudes" over both teacher and student "know-how." In responses to both how to improve learning in general as well as English language learning, "attitude improvement" was the most cited response, followed by improvements in either teacher know-how ("class curriculum and management") or student know-how ("processes of learning and learning management").
Implications
There are several broad implications that can be taken from the surveys with regard to improving learning from a learning perspective. First, it is clear that achieving a learning-centered approach to English education is possible. From the results of the two surveys, it is clear that both teachers and students in Japan do possess a learning-centered consciousness. That consciousness can be seen in the overall learning-centeredness attitude scores as compared to the teaching-centered scores, as well as in responses supporting the notions that the effort on behalf of students determine their own success, that class time should be for learning-directed interaction and practice on the part of the student, that there are many both individual and independent ways of learning, and that flexibility and response to student needs on the part of the teacher are important in learning. The roles ascribed both teachers and students in both surveys reflect this learning-centered orientation, with teachers seen as learning facilitators rather than simply content providers, homework providers, and test givers, and students seen as active and independent learners, instead of note-takers, homework doers, and assistance seekers.
Table 3. English Language Learning Improvement
| Statement | Mean Te | Mean St |
| Improving general learning skills: | ||
Improve attitudes toward learning |
4.31 | 4.41 |
Understanding fundamental processes of learning |
4.31 | 4.32 |
Planning and management of learning |
4.25 | 3.98 |
Improving memorization of content to be learned |
3.97 | 3.85 |
| Improving English language learning: | ||
Improving student attitudes toward learning |
4.58 | 4.70 |
Class curriculum and management |
4.48 | 4.47 |
Improving teacher training |
3.90 | 3.70 |
Design and quality of textbooks |
3.88 | 3.70 |
(N = 68); all responses based on 5-pt Likert scale
(5 = positive response, 3 = neutral, 1 = negative)
However, it is also clear that dependence on the traditional model of teacher-centered education, that based on a teaching perspective (and that outlined by Gorsuch, 1998), persists for both teachers and students. Teachers (understandably) admitted a philosophical preference for teaching the fundamentals of the language and a practical belief that testing was the best measure of progress. Neither teachers nor, more importantly, students indicated believing that learner self-discovery was preferable to teacher instruction and explanation, or that learners were capable of learning on their own. These results point to an orientation based on what can be characterized as hierarchical educational dependence, with the teachers looking toward the school-based curriculum, the Ministry of Education textbook, and purely-objective testing regimens to organize their teaching, and the students looking toward the teacher to organize their learning.
Finally, it was clear that attitude was seen as more important than either teaching or learning. Indeed, the attitude of the learner towards the target language, its speakers, and the learning context undoubtedly plays an important part in learner success. However, as pointed out by Mitchell and Myles (1998), attitude maintenance is the more pressing problem, one they see addressed by motivation. To improve learning, the question of becomes how to increase and maintain motivation, how to inculcate students with the motivation to "want to achieve a particular goal and devote considerable effort to achieving that goal" (Gardner and MacIntyre, 1992, p. 2). As Cohen (1998) pointed out in his book on strategy use in language learning, motivation to use strategies can be generated by pointing out to students that strategy use can make learning easier, and then maintained by giving the learners increasing levels of control over strategy use. Using this reasoning, rather than viewing improved attitude as a necessary precursor to learning, attitude should be thought of as a variable that improves along with the motivation generated by the promise of improved learning in a learning-centered educational environment.
Usuki (1999) stated that she believed that "the most important thing to consider [in language teaching methods] is the responsibility of a teacher as a teacher and a learner as a learner; self-direction of their own roles as teachers and learners" (p. 33). The results of the present survey point to the responsibility teachers and learners can take in fulfilling their respective roles in a learning-oriented educational setting. First, both teachers and students should work to complete the philosophical shift toward a learning-centered consciousness. For both groups, this means recognizing the importance of student self-discovery as an element of their learning success and working to increase student confidence in their own capability to learn. Increasing the number of opportunities for independent or student-directed study, together with affective reinforcements by teachers as students engage in such study, may generate this confidence. Further, teachers should recognize the value of homework and student-produced material as a means of course evaluation. Second, both should seek a balance between objectivity and subjectivity, in terms of both the organization and the evaluation of the learning. In terms of actual practice, teachers should increasingly employ their own, relatively subjective curriculum and develop their own materials on the basis of what they believe to be necessary in their own classrooms. Learners, on the other hand, must accept the reality of subjective elements inherent in learning-centered language learning and work to develop their own, individual approach to language learning. Third, both teachers and learners should consider that a positive attitude on the part of learners toward learning does not necessarily preface learning, nor ensure success in learning. Rather, a positive attitude can be generated by both an understanding of the fundamentals of learning and some degree of learner control of the learning process; both important elements of a learning-centered approach.
This means recognizing the importance of student self-discovery as an element of their learning success.
The writer wishes to thank Noro Tokuji of Aomori Minami High School and the graduate students of Hirosaki University Faculty of Education English Department for their assistance in the preparation of this survey.
References
Cohen, A. D. (Ed.) (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. London: Longman.
Gardner, R. C. & MacIntyre, P. D. (1992). A student's contributions to second language learning. Part II: affective variables. Language Teaching 26, 1-11.
Gorsuch, G. J. (1998). Yakudoku EFL instruction in two Japanese high school classrooms: An exploratory study. JALT Journal, 20 (1), 6-32.
Mitchell, R., & Myles, F. (1998). Second language learning theories. London: Arnold Publishers.
Susser, B. (1998). EFL's othering of Japan. JALT Journal, 20(1), 49-82.
Usuki, M. (1999). Learning from the learners's voice: A consideration of learner development. The Language Teacher 23 (9), 6-9.
Weaver, S. J., & Cohen, A. (1998). Making strategy training a reality in the foreign language curriculum. In A. D. Cohen, Strategies in learning and using a second language (pp. 66-97). London: Longman.
Anthony Rausch has been teaching in Japan for ten years, and is presently in the Faculty of Education of Hirosaki University. He is interested in improving English learning in Japan by virtue of learning strategies. asrausch@cc.hirosaki-u.ac.jp
All materials on this site are copyright © by JALT and their respective authors.
For more information on JALT, visit the JALT National Website