The Language Teacher as Seen by Japanese Female and Male
University Students
Veronica Makarova
The University of Edinburgh, UK
Stephen Ryan
Eichi University, Japan |
Many teachers have observed that female and male students often behave
differently in class (Flood, 1995, p. 305). In many cultures, males and
females have their own systems of values, symbols, and communication norms
that vary from nation to nation (Sunderland, 1994, p. 2). They employ different
communication strategies, and their attitudes toward certain behaviour can
be different (Suzuki, 1997). Some researchers even adopt a "gender
as culture" approach (Maltz & Borker, 1982; Mulac & Bradac,
1995; Tannen, 1990), in which males and females within one nation are studied
as carriers of distinctive cultures.
In the classroom, there are interactions between the gender-specific
cultures of the students, between gender and other social and personality
factors among the students, and between the gender-specific cultures and
personalities of the students and their teacher. Gender becomes a particularly
important factor in a foreign language class (Graham & Rees, 1995; Sunderland,
1994) when the focus is on verbal communication, an area where gender differences
are particularly striking (Azuma & Ogura, 1984; Flood, 1995; Sunderland,
1994; Wareing, 1994).
The present study investigates to what extent Japanese students' perception
of a language teacher is determined by gender. Teachers' understanding of
gender-specific behaviour and expectations of the students can contribute
to the establishment of student confidence, interest, and motivation in
class, and help the teacher make adjustments to fit learners' needs (Strevens,
1977).
Rationales for the Study
Our study focuses on Japanese university students' perception of the
language teacher. The following three considerations have prompted this
choice: (a) both the teacher and the student are of utmost importance in
learning; (b) knowledge of students' opinions can help the teacher achieve
better interaction between the teacher and the students; and (c) data that
would reveal gender-specific features of students' perception of their teacher
have been so far insufficient.
Although the teacher has been shown to play an "obvious and central
role in creating effective environments for language teaching and learning"
(Flood, 1995, p. 549), modern teaching methods also require a shift towards
the learner (Nunan, 1988). The teacher is seen as a facilitator of learning,
who establishes an interpersonal relationship with the learner. Recently,
more and more research has appeared which focuses on the student and considers
the role and qualities of the teacher from the student's viewpoint.
The available studies of Japanese students' expectations of their teachers,
however, typically include male and female subjects in the sample but do
not account for gender differences in the analysis (Durham & Ryan, 1992;
Hadley & Yoshioka Hadley, 1996; Makarova & Ryan, 1997; Shimizu,
1995). This study uses a questionnaire to trace the differences between
female and male university English majors' expectations about teachers of
English. We targeted language majors because we hypothesized that these
students would have more to say about university English teachers and language
teaching/learning problems than students from other disciplines.
Materials and Methods
Questionnaires
The present survey is part of a larger cross-cultural study of students'
expectations of language teachers held by Russian and Japanese students
(for the full study, see Makarova & Ryan, 1997). The data was obtained
in the course of a two-stage survey conducted through two successive questionnaires.
The original open-ended questionnaire contained questions about the essential
qualities of a good foreign language teacher at a university, student descriptions
of appropriate and inappropriate actions of a foreign language teacher in
class, and their preferences regarding teacher attitudes towards students.
The questionnaire was originally constructed in English, then translated
into Russian and Japanese using the Werner & Campbell back-tanslation
method (1970). Japanese and Russian university students answered the questions
in their native languages. The questions at the first stage were open-ended
to allow students to freely express themselves, allowing us to collect a
pool of items used by university students in the two countries to talk about
their expectations of language teachers.
The results of a content analysis of the responses were used to construct
the second forced-choice 93-item questionnaire, which included the most
frequent responses from both countries in the original study grouped under
seven major headings: (a) the teacherŐs attitude to students, (b) the teacher's
personality, (c) the teacher's skills, (d) the teacher's knowledge, (e)
what the teacher should teach, (f) the teacher's actions in class, and (g)
the teacher's experience. Respondents indicated on a 5-point Likert scale
how important they thought each of the factors were in a good university
foreign language teacher. The aim of this research design was to create
an instrument which would be valid in both Japanese and Russian settings.
From the original study, we present here only the analysis of the Japanese
English majors' responses, since their sample was balanced according to
gender.
Subjects
The sample discussed in this paper was taken from a mid-ranking medium-sized
university in the Kanto area. We included only the responses of second,
third and fourth-year students (since we believed that their opinions of
a university English teacher would be better informed than those of first-year
students), between the ages of 19 and 23 (typical university age). Responses
of students who had studied abroad for longer than two months were excluded
to avoid the influence of foreign attitudes. The total number of respondents
was 259: 121 males (46.7%) and 138 females (53.3%).
Analysis procedure
The responses of the subjects were tabulated and analyzed using SPSS
software. To mitigate the possibility of a response set, we converted each
respondentŐs answers to z scores (mean = 0; SD = 1). The mean and standard
deviation were calculated for each item for male and female respondents
separately. The means were compared using t-tests. Only items that show
a significant difference (p< 0.05) between the male and female respondents
are discussed in this paper.
Limitations of the study
- The sample is limited in number of subjects surveyed (259) and is restricted
to only one university.
- The statistical procedure employed enables us to draw reliable conclusions
about the differences in the opinions of both groups of subjects, but does
not allow us to discuss similarities in their opinions with any certainty.
- The questionnaire includes items introduced by Russian students, which
may have influenced the Japanese respondents in ways that we have not accounted
for.
Results
Attributes of a good teacher
There is, on the whole, agreement between male and female subjects about
the qualities that are relatively important or unimportant in a good language
teacher. The most important qualities for all subjects (in descending order
of importance) are that teachers: (a) teach useful English, (b) explain
understandably, (c) teach real/living English, (d) be good at explaining
things, (e) be easy to understand, (f) make the lessons interesting, (g)
be good at interesting students in the subject, (h) know how to teach, (i)
not be difficult to understand, (j) be knowledgeable, (k) teach daily conversation,
(l) have good pronunciation, and (m) be interested in the subject.
The qualities that are least important for both groups of subjects (beginning
with the least important) are teachers who: (a) are not familiar with students,
(b) do not teach grammar, (c) do not speak L1, (d) do not teach grammar,
(e) do not talk about personal life, (f) are a foreign teacher, (g) do not
get side-tracked, (h) are strict, (i) use L2 only, (j) are demanding, (k)
read foreign literature, (l) teach literature, (m) do not scold students,
(n) do not force students to study, and (o) have universal knowledge.
Differences in student perceptions
We did not find any cases where a quality considered highly important
by males was considered unimportant by females, or vice versa. There is,
however, statistically significant variation (at p<0.05) in the relative
importance of some items. Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations
for items that were significantly different. The probability level (p <
0.05) is the same for all the given values and the order of qualities in
the table is the same as the order in the questionnaire.
Table 1: Qualities of an English Language Teacher With Significantly
Different Ranking Between Female and Male Japanese University English Majors
|
|
Males (n=121) |
|
Females (n =138) |
. |
Item no. |
.Quality |
Mean |
SD |
Mean |
SD |
. |
1. The teacher's attitude to students |
|
|
|
|
1. |
be polite |
-0.08 |
0.9 |
-0.36 |
0.84 |
2 |
be respectful |
-0.16 |
0.87 |
-0.45 |
0.76 |
3 |
be strict |
-0.87 |
0.97 |
-1.1 |
0.77 |
4 |
be tactful |
0.26 |
0.8 |
-0.1 |
0.84 |
5 |
create a stress free environment |
0.47 |
0.77 |
0.24 |
0.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. The teacher's personality |
|
|
|
|
6 |
be kind |
0.25 |
0.74 |
0.03 |
0.7 |
7 |
be understanding |
0.27 |
0.76 |
0.06 |
0.73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. The teacher's skills |
|
|
|
|
8 |
be easy to understand |
0.74 |
0.5 |
0.87 |
0.5 |
9 |
be good at explaining things |
0.72 |
0.53 |
0.94 |
0.41 |
10 |
have good pronunciation |
0.5 |
0.67 |
0.7 |
0.63 |
11 |
make the lessons interesting |
0.69 |
0.68 |
0.86 |
0.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. The teacher's knowledge |
|
|
|
|
|
NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. What the teacher should teach |
|
|
|
|
12 |
teach daily conversation |
0.58 |
0.61 |
0.73 |
0.59 |
13 |
teach pronunciation |
0.35 |
0.66 |
0.55 |
0.69 |
14 |
teach real/living English |
0.79 |
0.56 |
0.95 |
0.45 |
15 |
teach useful English |
0.87 |
0.55 |
1.01 |
0.44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. The teacher's actions in class |
|
|
|
|
16 |
pay attention to grammar |
-0.36 |
0.86 |
-0.76 |
0.65 |
17 |
use records/tapes |
-0.53 |
0.93 |
-0.3 |
0.89 |
18 |
not give much homework |
-0.18 |
0.92 |
-0.54 |
0.85 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7. The teacher's experiences |
|
|
|
|
19 |
be interested in the subject |
0.52 |
0.67 |
0.69 |
0.59 |
Japanese male and female students regard qualities 8-12, 14, 15, and
19 as relatively important, and qualities 3, 16, 17, and 18 as relatively
unimportant for an English language teacher (see Table 1). There is significant
difference (at p<0.05), however, in the relative importance of each of
these items between female and male subjects.
Discussion
The above data suggest three tendencies.
Tendency 1: While female respondents are more interested in qualities
referring to teacher's skills such as, be easy to understand,
be good at explaining things, and what the teacher should teach such
as, teach real/living English, and teach useful English, males
are more interested in the teacher's attitude to students and the teacher's
personality such as, be polite, be respectful, be strict, and be
kind.
Other studies have reported that Japanese university students want to
be understood, be listened to, and be treated kindly and politely by their
teachers (Makarova & Ryan, 1997; Shimizu, 1995). We were, however, surprised
to find that in our data, the desire for empathy is stronger for Japanese
males than females, since women have been reported elsewhere to be more
emotional, more right-brain dominant global thinkers than left-brain dominant
analytical thinking males (Sunderland, 1994). Women supposedly express and
expect to receive sympathy more than men (Sunderland,1994). They are believed
to rely more on subjectivity (feelings, cultural sensitivity, and empathy)
than men, who tend to favour objectivity (rules, facts, and logic) and are
associated with "a vision of reason and self-control, not emotional
bursts" (Seidler, 1994, p.29). Our results suggest the opposite.
What factors could account for such results? To answer this question,
we must venture into a delicate and culturally loaded area. The following
are possible explanations.
1. Male students may expect more attention in class. Studies of
teacher attention in classes other than foreign language have found teachers
giving boys more attention than girls (Sunderland,1994), usually due to
boys causing more discipline problems.
2. Social and family role differences require Japanese women to be
emotionally strong while Japanese males rely on emotional support. This
difference is also manifested in the classroom. It has been reported
that Japanese women often pamper their children giving them unlimited gratification,
and thus instill in them formidable dependency needs (Smith, 1983). This
behaviour is sometimes explained as a way of strengthening family ties (Kondo,
1990). For example, the eldest son who is to inherit the property and care
for the parents in their old age may get more attention from his mother
(Hamabata, 1990).
After marriage, Japanese men tend to turn to their wives for emotional
support and are often ŇmotheredÓ by their wives (Hamabata, 1990, p. 16).
Japanese women, for their part, seem to play a very important role in running
the family (Imamura, 1987). The Japanese wife is usually in charge of finances,
maintaining ties with relatives, neighbours and benefactors, and building
up her husbandŐs image (Imamura, 1987). This requires a great deal of emotional
strength and independence and might already be evident at college age.
3. Communicative strategies are less friendly and cooperative for
men than for women; men are therefore disadvantaged at communicative tasks
common in the language class, and may actually need more help and attention
from the teacher. There is a universal distinction between female and
male communicative strategies. In a conversation, men tend to dominate the
talking time, interrupt more often than women, and focus on the content
of interaction and the task in hand, at the expense of attention to their
addressees (Holmes, 1994). Such attitudes may lead to communication failure,
leaving men alone and friendless (Seidler, 1994).
Women, on the other hand, easily build up understanding and connection
with each other (Seidler, 1994); they appear to be cooperative, facilitative
participants in a conversation, and demonstrate in a variety of ways their
concern for their conversation partners (Holmes, 1994). Holmes straightforwardly
advises us to "focus on the inadequacies in male studentsŐ discourse
skills" and Ňteach men how to be good conversationalistsÓ (Holmes,
1994, p. 161). If it is true that men are disadvantaged at communicative
tasks, their bids for attention might be rightful pleas for help.
4. Possible changes in the male image. In the 1980s, there was
a "softening" of the Western image of men and the appropriation
by men of certain qualities traditionally associated with women (Seidler,
1994). Men "began to recognize the injuries done to themselves in the
cultural separation enforced between them and their emotional lives,"
and they became aware of the "necessity of mastering an emotional language
that would allow them to identify and articulate their experience"
(Seidler, 1994, p. 104). Our findings showing emotional attitudes of Japanese
male students might be a sign of a similar tendency in Japan.
Tendency 2: Male students do not want homework; female students
want interesting classes.
It was quite predictable even before the questionnaire distribution that
the "fun" element would be important for Japanese students, since
it is widely known that for them "college is a place for enjoyment,
'a leisure land'" (Nozaki, 1992, p. 28). It is nevertheless interesting
to notice that the "fun/no hard work" element seems to manifest
itself in a slightly different way in male (not give much homework) and
female (make the lessons interesting) responses. It should be also pointed
out that although neither group of subjects wants a strict teacher, for
females this is an even less desirable characteristic than for men.
Tendency 3: Pronunciation is more important for female students.
Many studies have shown that women generally are more concerned with
their pronunciation than men, and tend to be closer in their pronunciation
to the socially prestigious form in a native language. It has been recently
demonstrated that gender differences in pronunciation appear to be connected
with employment patterns and life within the community: the gender that
tends to be mostly unemployed and has looser social structures (women in
the majority of cases) prefers a more prestigious pronunciation form (see
Wareing, 1994, for a full discussion of different interpretations of this
phenomenon). The higher estimation by females than males in our data of
pronunciation teaching and having a teacher with good pronunciation may
be a sign of this tendency.
Conclusion
The progress of learners is very sensitive to their relationships with
the teacher. For successful teaching we need to establish confidence, trust,
interest and motivation in our students, and we need to continually adjust
our teaching to fit the learner's needs (Strevens, 1977). We cannot accomplish
this goal without a full awareness of studentsŐ expectations of us. It has
so far been unknown whether, or to what extent, these expectations are affected
by gender.
We compared Japanese female and male students' expectations of their
language teachers and found some significant diferences among the responses
of the two subject groups. Our findings fall within the "gender as
culture" approach. They support the idea that gender-specific cultures
affect Japanese studentsŐ expectations of their teachers. We considered
the main three areas these differences seem to be falling into: (a) male
students desire more empathy while females are more interested in practical
skills, (b) females want an interesting class while males want less homework,
and (c) females students show higher interest in pronunciation.
We believe that teachers should consider these differences to better
meet the needs of all their students, both males and females. Our findings
do not suggest that male and female students should be treated differently.
However, information about gender-based differences in expectations should
be helpful to teachers in making decisions about classroom procedures.
References
Azuma, K., & Ogura, C. (1984). Sei-sa no yurai.
Tokyo: Dai Nihon Tosho.
Durham, M., & Ryan, S.M. (1992). What kind of teacher
do students want? A cross- cultural comparison. Speech Communication
Education, 5, 70-99.
Flood, J., Jenses, J. M., Lapp, D., & Squire, J. R.
(1995). Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts.
New York: Macmillan.
Graham, S., & Rees, F. (1995). Gender differences in
language learning: The question of control. Language Teaching Journal,
11, 18-19.
Hadley, G., & Yoshioka Hadley, H. (1996). The culture
of learning and the good teacher in Japan: An analysis of student views.
The Language Teacher, 20 (9), 53-55.
Hamabata, M. M. (1990). Crested kimono: power and love
in the Japanese business family. London: Cornell University Press.
Holmes, J. (1994). Improving the lot of female language
learners. In J. Sunderland, (Ed.), Exploring gender: Questions and implications
for English language education (pp. 156-162). New York: Prentice Hall.
Imamura, A. E. (1987). Urban Japanese housewives: At
home and in the community. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Kondo, D. K. (1990). Crafting selves: Power, gender,
and discourses of identity in a Japanese workplace. Chicago, London:
The University of Chicago Press.
Makarova, V., & Ryan, S. M. (1997). The language teacher
through the studentsŐ looking glass and what you find there. Speech Communication
Education, 10, 127-154.
Maltz, D. J., & Borker, R. A. (1982). A cultural approach
to male-female miscommunication. In J. J. Gumpertz (Ed.), Language and
social identity (pp. 196-216). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mulac, A., & Bradac, J. J. (1995). WomenŐs style in
problem solving interaction: powerless or simply feminine? In P. J. Kaibfleisch
& M. J. Cody (Eds.), Gender, power, and communication in human relationships
(pp. 83-103). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
Nozaki, K. N. (1992). The Japanese student and the foreign
teacher: A handbook for teaching English at Japanese colleges and universities.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 27-33.
Nunan, D. (1988). The learner-centered curriculum: A
study in second language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Seidler, V. J. (1994). Unreasonable men: Masculinity
and social theory. New York: Routledge.
Shimizu, K. (1995). Japanese college student attitudes
towards English teachers: A survey. The Language Teacher, 19(10),
5-11.
Smith, J. R. (1983). Japanese society: Tradition, self
and the social order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Strevens, P. (1977). New orientations in the teaching
of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sunderland, J. (Ed.) (1994). Exploring gender: Questions
and implications for English language education. New York: Prentice
Hall.
Suzuki, S. (1997). "Gender as culture" approach
to cross-cultural communication research: A study of agressive communication
predisposition. Paper presented at the 26th Conference of the Communication
Association of Japan. Tokyo, Japan.
Tannen, D. (1990). You just don't understand: Women
and men in conversation. New York: Morrow.
Wareing, S. (1994). Gender differences in language use.
In J. Sunderland, Exploring gender: Questions and implications for English
language education (pp. 34- 38). New York: Prentice Hall.
Werner, O., & Campbell, D. T. (1970). Translating,
working through interpreters and the problem of decentering. In R. Naroll
& R. Cohen (Eds.), A handbook of method in cultural anthropology
(pp. 398-420). New York: The Natural History Press.
Article
copyright © 1998 by the author.
Document URL: http://www.jalt-publications.org/old_tlt/files/98/jun/makaroba.html
Last modified: July 13, 1998
Site maintained by TLT
Online Editor
|