The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)1/22

A Communicative Framework for Introductory Japanese LanguageCurricula in Washington State High Schools

Chris BrockettDepartment of Asian Languages and LiteratureUniversity of Washington

ver the past several years, the movement tocodify the content of foreign languagecurricula has gained significant momentum

across the United States. Some projects have beennational-level efforts, for example, the NationalStandards in Foreign Language Education, currentlybeing developed by the American Council onTeaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL), and theproject by the National Foreign Language Center(NFLC) at Johns Hopkins University, that led to thepublication of A Framework for JntroductorvJapanese Language Curricula in American HighSchools and Colleges in 1993. The field of Japanesepedagogy, in particular, has been characterized by anationwide surge of grass-roots efforts by state andregional groups of school teachers, impelled by arecognition of the need for standards and a consensuson the content and goals of instruction.

In one such project, high school and collegeinstructors in Washington State have beencollaborating since 1991 to develop curricularguidelines for Japanese language instruction in highschools. The resultant document, A CommunicativeFramework for Introductory Japanese LanguageCurricula in Washington State High Schools, waspublished by the Washington State Office ofSuperintendent of Public Instruction in Septemberthis year. The objectives of this document, which isnow being distributed to schools and colleges acrossWashington State, are:

• To establish standards for communication-orientedJapanese language instruction in Washington Statehigh schools, by defining a set of principled,reasonable achievable outcomes.• To assist teachers by providing a framework forcourse design, textbook and materials selection, and

lesson planning.• To assist administrators in planning, implementing,and supporting Japanese language instruction, andcounselors in advising students on courses of study.• To establish a conceptual framework on which tobase professional training and enhancement ofclassroom teachers.• To established a conceptual framework for researchand debate about Japanese language instruction at thehigh school level.• To establish a basis for articulation between highschool and college programs.

A Communicative Framework seeks to achieve thefollowing broad instructional outcomes. At the end ofthree years of instruction under reasonably favorableconditions, students should:

• Be able to communicate accurately in spokenJapanese in face-to-face situations involving Japanesenative speakers in Japan or in the United States, inconversations that fall within a specified range oftopic areas, communicative skills, and concepts.• Possess a basic understanding of the culture ofcommunication in Japan, and other relevant Japanesesocial behavior, so that they can make informedchoices about how they will interact with Japanesepeople.• Read and write the Japanese written language at anelementary level, consistent with the communicativegoals of the guidelines.• Have acquired a solid foundation in the Japaneselanguage that will enable them to continue to learnthe language successfully at other educationalinstitutions in the United States, or while living,working or studying in Japan.

The committee responsible for A Communicative

O

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)2/22

Framework believes that Japanese should be taught,not as an abstract classroom exercise, but on theassumption that students will in fact use theirJapanese. We have presumed therefore that 1)students will have opportunities, if not while at highschool, then shortly thereafter, to communicate inJapanese with Japanese speakers, and 2) they arelikely to use their Japanese language skills not only inJapan, but in the United States.

The committee has not sought to codify an existingmediocrity. Rather than attempt to define an arbitraryset of grammatical patterns to be taught in theclassroom, A Communicative Framework seeks toidentify a core set of likely communicative needs ofstudents in Japan and the United States, and to let thegrammatical content of instruction fall out of thoseneeds. In designing A Communicative Framework,therefore, we have adopted and modified for Japanese,the work of van Ek for the Council of Europe in themid-1970s, which has been widely used indeveloping communicative curricula for Europeanlanguages in some states.

This communicative thrust has two importantcorollaries. First, the emphasis is on acquisition ofspoken language skills for use in realistic situations inJapan or the United States. Particular emphasis isgiven to the development of natural discourse skillsappropriate to young people. Second, instruction isbased not on "language and culture," but "language inculture," that is, Japanese is to be taught in thecontext of the culture of communication and socialinteraction, so that students can interact in aninformed manner with Japanese speakers.

Written language is also addressed. The documentspecifies skills in reading and writing of hiraganaand katakana, and recognition of up to 120 kanji, tobe selected from a suggested list of 150 "PracticalKanji." The ability to write of large numbers of kanjifrom memory is not required. Rather than focusexcessively on mechanics of the writing system, ACommunicative Framework targets the developmentof global reading skills, specifying as objectives theability to skim and scan texts, as well as to readintensively when texts consist primarily of familiargrammatical and lexical material. A crucial dis-tinction is drawn between the use of written languageas a medium for language acquisition (a decodingoperation), and the instructional objective of enablingstudents to read simple authentic materials forcomprehension and the extraction of information.

A Communicative Framework is structured in twoparts. Part I discusses general principles and

instructional issues, and defines sets of topic areas,communicative skills and concepts, together withpertinent skill levels in spoken and written languageto be achieved after three years. Part II containsinventories of topic areas, communicative skills, andconcepts, together with associated grammaticalpatterns, phrases and vocabulary items that should beacquired by the end of three years. A "Practical KanjiList" of 150 characters is appended for reference.

The inventories in Part II do not present year-by-yearsyllabuses. Aside from tending to make theguidelines too textbook-specific, such specificationsare apt to neglect local conditions: a school districtthat has an active exchange program with Japaneseschools, for example, may reasonably want to seek todevelop its curriculum around that exchange program.Development of year-by-year specifications is left toindividual programs or consortia of programs.

A Communicative Framework aims to facilitatearticulation between high school and collegeJapanese language programs by promoting higherstandards of teaching and learning in the high schools.It does not attempt to ram high school instruction intothe Procrustean bed of high education curricula, butseeks to be self-standing. By providing colleges anduniversities with information about the goals andcontent of high school instruction, in the long run, itis hoped that they will be able to develop entry-levelprograms that recognize and build upon the languageskills of the growing numbers of students whocommence their Japanese studies in Washington Statehigh schools.

Implementation of A Communicative Framework isvoluntary in Washington State high schools, and willbe accompanied by workshops and seminars forteachers over the next three years funded by privateand federal grants, including $58,000 under thefederal Chapter II Grant Program. The JapanFoundation is also assisting with the costs ofworkshops. The document, which as released is stillvery much in the nature of a draft, will be revisedafter feedback from teachers and reissued in a newedition at a later date.

Committee members who helped develop thedocument include, in addition to the present writer,Leslie Okada Birkland* of Lake Washington HighSchool; Masashi Kato* of Technical JapaneseProgram, University of Washington (formerly ofBellevue High School); Sandra Mizuno of theTechnical Japanese Program, University ofWashington (formerly of Bothell High School);Mayumi Nishiyama Smith*, Director, Nippon

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)3/22

Business Institute Japanese Language Program,Everett Community College; and Michio Tsutsui,Director, Technical Japanese Program at theUniversity of Washington. Yumi Toma, JapaneseLanguage Consultant, Office of Superintendent ofPublic Instruction and Yasuko Wada of CharlesWright Academy, Tacoma and member of the NFLCFramework Committee, served as advisory members.The committee was assisted by a reaction panel oftwelve high school teachers drawn from across thestate who provided much crucial input in this unusualcollaboration among high school and college faculty.

Information about A Communicative Framework maybe obtained from:

Washington State Japanese Language CurriculumGuidelines Committeec/o The Japan America Society of Washington State1800 9th Avenue, Suite 1550Seattle, WA 98101

Contents

Part I. Framework

1. Introduction2. Assumptions and Principles3. Linguistic Specifications4. Written Language5. Classroom Implementation

Part II. Inventories

Topic Areas1. Personal Information

2. Family and Home3. Education and Career4. Japanese and Other Languages5. Leisure and Recreation6. Travel and Transportation7. Health and Welfare8. Shopping9. Food and Drink10. Services11. Weather and Climate12. Geography

Communicative Skills1. Socializing2. Getting Things Done3. Communicating Factual Information4. Communicating Opinions and IntellectualAttitudes5. Communicating Emotional Attitudes6. Modulating Interpersonal Relations7. Managing Discourse

Concepts1. Existential Concepts2. Spatial Concepts3. Temporal Concepts4. Quantitative Concepts5. Physical Concepts6. Evaluative Concepts7. Referential Concepts8. Event-Related Concepts9. Logical Relations

Practical Kanji ListUseful AddressesReferencesIndex of Grammatical Patterns

College Board Test and Curricular Framework

Mari NodaThe Ohio State University

Introduction

he College Board Achievement Test inJapanese with Listening (re-named the SAT IISubject Test in Japanese with Listening,

hereafter the Japanese Test) was developed

simultaneously with A Framework for IntroductoryJapanese Language Curricula in American HighSchools and Colleges (1993, Unger et. al, hereafterreferred to as The Framework). While it wasimportant for The Framework to be established inorder to develop a meaningful achievement test, it

T

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)4/22

was also felt that the Japanese Test could also beinstrumental in moving the field in the directionrecommended in The Framework. The results of thefirst two administrations of the Japanese Test in 1993indicate that the Japanese Test is useful in measuringthe achievement of current secondary school learnersof Japanese, as well as in directing the Japaneselanguage curricula in secondary schools.

The Japanese Test

SAT II Subject Test in Japanese with Listeningconsists of 80 to 85 multiple-choice questions in threeparts:Listening, Usage, and Reading.' In order to answerthe questions in the Listening section, test takers needto identify the general content of the conversation orthe monologue as well as sociolinguistic informationsuch as the relationship between the speakers. TheUsage section tests the learner's ability to completeJapanese sentences in a way that is appropriate interms of structure, vocabulary, and social context.The items in this section are given in three-columnformat, providing the same information in threedifferent types of orthography that beginning learnersof Japanese are likely to know. The Reading sectionquestions are based on texts such as notes, menus,advertisements, letters, and excerpts from newspaperarticles and essays. A short explanation is given foreach text. The questions and options in this sectionare printed in English.

At the end of the test, participants are asked toanswer a set of questions about their background instudies of Japanese. Answers to these questions areused to perform statistical analyses of the test results.

Who took the Japanese Test?

Figure 1 summarizes the participants of the JapaneseTest administered in April and November of 1993.2A total of 2,800 people participated, and a little overhalf of them came from the target group called the"academic group"-those students whose knowledgeof Japanese came primarily from two or more yearsof high school instruction (College Board publication#207132,1993). In other foreign language tests, morethan 80% of the participants belonged to theacademic group in the respective languages. TheJapanese academic group had the mean score of 521in April and 505 in November. The differencebetween the mean scores of the academic group fromthe two administrations was not statistically signifi-cant.

There was a noticeable difference in the distributionof sub-groups between the Japanese academic groupand the academic groups of the other foreignlanguages with listening, as illustrated in Figure 2.

Less than 1% of the test takers in French, German,Spanish tests reported less than two years of study ofthat language in high school. The largest sub-group inthese languages had studied the language for fouryears or longer. In contrast, 13% of the Japanese testtakers had less than two years of high schoolJapanese, only 11% had four years.

How did the candidates do in the Japanese Test?

In the April administration, 61.1% of the academicgroup completed the test, 80% reached the 77th itemout of 80 items in the test, and 99.9% completed 75%of the test. These results indicate that the test was ofreasonable length for the time allotted to theparticipants.The number of years of Japanese studied in highschool positively correlated to the mean test scores.This is shown in Figure 3. For example, in April,participants with less than two years of study had themean score of 463 while those with four years of highschool Japanese had the mean score of 566. Themean score for those whose knowledge of Japanese

came primarily from Nihongo Gakko3 was 665 and

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)5/22

native speakers had the mean score of 754. TheNovember results showed a very similar curve.

The difficulty level of the different sections of thetest is measured not with their mean scores, but witha special statistical device called 'observed delta". Incomparison with the average observed delta for allforeign language tests, the most difficult section inthe Japanese test was the Usage section, and the leastdifficult was the Reading section. The Listeningsection was only slightly more difficult than theaverage.

Curricular Considerations: Where do we go fromhere?

From the results of the 1993 administrations of theJapanese Test, several observations and conjecturescan be made about the current state of Japaneseprograms in secondary schools. First, the longerstudents study Japanese in high schools, the betterthey tend to do on the

Japanese Test. This is encouraging for it means thatthe effect of the instruction is reflected in testperformance. It should be noted, however, that thebiggest difference in mean scores is seen betweentwo and three years of study. The first two yearsseem to make only a small difference.Second, the majority of the Japanese programs seemto offer only one or two years of instruction. Thesmall number of students who have had three or fouryears of study seem to do well. It may be the casethat students at schools that offer three or four yearsof instruction do much better than those whoseschools offer only one or two years of Japanese.While no data is available yet to substantiate such ahypothesis, schools with four-year curriculum aremore likely to have a full-time teacher of Japanesededicated to building the program at the school. Itmay be worth comparing the performance of studentswith two years of study in a fuller program with that

of students studying in programs that only go up tosecond-year Japanese.Third, the products of Japanese programs insecondary schools tend to be weak on accuracy instructure, vocabulary use, and social context. Usagequestions come closest to testing production skillssince test takers are required to synthesize a sentence.Low level of performance in Usage section may beindicative of the misplaced goals in some curricula. Itmay for example, be that much greater emphasis isplaced on receptive skills over productive skills, orthat too much focus on communication is causingaccuracy and appropriate use of the language tosuffer.There are some things that the early results cannottell us. For example, we don't know anything aboutthe correlation between the Japanese Test scores andplacement into college-level Japanese. We will haveto wait until College Board releases an old test formfor use by college programs, and a sufficient numberof learners in college programs have taken such a

test.4 It will be important for college teachers to findout if any of their students with previous backgroundin Japanese have had the College Board JapaneseTest and see if the score differences are meaningful indetermining the students' placement.

Footnotes1. For more detail and sample questions, see Takingthe SAT II Subject Tests, published by the CollegeBoard each year and distributed to high schoolcounselors. For information about the SAT IPJapanese Test with Listening, contact Brian O'Reilly,director of SAT Program Operations andDevelopment. The College Board, 45 ColumbusAvenue, New York, NY10023-6992.

2. The Japanese Test will be given only once a yearstarting November, 1994.

3. In most Nihongo Gakko, curriculum is designedprimarily for Japanese children who are in the U.S.temporarily.

4. I have tried to gather some data on this point, butdata is still insufficient for making any conclusiveremarks.

References

College Board. 1994. Taking the SAT II Subject Tests1994-95 (#200701).

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)6/22

____________ 1994. Revised Interpreting Scores onthe French, German, Japanese, and SpanishAchievement Tests with Listening: November 1 993(#207132)

____________ 1994. SAT II Japanese Subject Test:Use theResults to make Important Placement or Admission

Decision for Your Students.

Unger, J. Marshall et al. 1993. A Framework forIntroductoryJapanese Language Curricula in American HighSchools and Colleges. Washington, D.C.: TheNational Foreign Language Center.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)7/22

Report from the 1994 JF'LC Summer Workshop for Teachers of Japanese

Noriko Yokoyama, Chief Language Specialist, JFLCKimiko Kabutomori, Lecturer, JFLCHiroko Furuyama, Lecturer, JFLC

he Japan Foundation Language Centeroffered three sessions of 5-day summer work-shop for in-service secondary school teachers

of Japanese (June 20-24, June 27-July J and July 11-16). We had a total of 20 participants, all of whomsuccessfully completed the course. This articlereports on the goal, content and evaluation of theworkshop.

1. GoalEducation in the United States is characterized by itsdiversity and variety because of its decentralizededucational system and spirit of freedom. This factled us to target participants to explore and develop"better teaching" for their own teaching contexts withpractice-oriented minds, rather than only tofamiliarize participants with techniques and skillsbased on theory-oriented methodologies.Thus the goal of the workshop was set to fosterparticipants' critical self-awareness and self-evalua-tion of their own teaching because of the followingreasons. (1) in pursuing learner-centered principlesfor language teaching, "better teaching" cannot beprescribed by any supervisor who does not directlyknow the learners, but can be developed only by theteachers themselves. (2) Opportunities for self-eval-uation should help the teachers explore and develop"better teaching" for their own teaching contexts.

2. Content Pre-Workshop AssignmentPre-Workshop Assignment had been sent a fewweeks before the first workshop. The participantswere asked to send a one-class hour audio- or video-recording of their teaching a class with a teachingplan and self-evaluation. The purpose of　theassignment was for participants to have theopportunity to self-evaluate their teaching, and for usto determine the needs of the participants.

IntroductionThe participants were familiarized with the purposeand content of the workshop.

PrinciplesThe participants were familiarized with the principlesof proficiency-oriented language instruction. First, asa warm-up, the principles that each participant hadalready been familiar with were discussed using a

questionnaire that we had prepared. Then, afterreading "Hypotheses/Corollaries" (Omaggio 1993:77-88), the participants discussed which"Hypotheses/Corollaries" they would like toaccomplish in their teaching during this workshop.

ApplicationHow to apply the principles of proficiency-orientedinstruction to lesson plans and classroom activitieswere covered through demonstrations and discussion.

A. Structure of the lessonThe following is the basic four stages that we pursuedin this workshop.*1) Presentation (Introduction)• Provide contextualization for learning• Make students focus on the learning item(Form/meaning/usage)• Let students know the objective or learningoutcome of the lesson2) Practice for Accuracy (Practice of LinguisticForms)• Make students use the words and structures in acontrolled way3) Practice for Fluency (Practice of Usage inDiscourse)• Make students use the language in lesscontrolled/more realistic/authentic way• Let students create their own language4) Evaluation & Feedback• Check whether students have understood/becomeable to use the language freely• Give appropriate feedback according to yourobservation and evaluation.*A single class hour may not include all these stages.The stages are in no fixed order.

B. Designing classroom activitiesThe first three stages were closely examined throughthe demonstration and criteria. The following is thecheckpoints of each stage.Presentation• Showing meaning through a situation/context• Showing meaning visually• Giving several examples• Using students' ability to guessPractice for Accuracy• Mechanical -- Meaningful

T

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)8/22

• Get students to talk about real life (themselves, theirfriends, and things in the world)• Give situations which imply the structure, but leavethe students to decide exactly what to say• Active interaction among studentsPractice for Fluency• Use language in a context likely to be encountered• Discourse (beginning -- end)• Real life situation• Natural conversation• Express students' own meaning• Active communicative interaction among students• Practice carrying out functions

After demonstrations and explanations of checkpoints,the participants were asked to design and demonstrateactivities of the given task in each stage in a smallgroup. The example of the task is in the following:Please make a "Practice for Fluency" to perform thejunction ' to express and inquire about likes anddislikes.'

Text Selection and Supplementary MaterialsParticipants evaluated the textbook currently used intheir high schools and another from our library interms of lesson objectives, relevance to students'needs, vocabulary, grammatical explanation, andexercises. The purpose of this session was to reassureand/or select a textbook to better match the students'needs and interests after identifying strengths andweaknesses of the textbooks.After learning in what each textbook was deficient,participants explored the supplementary materials,such as picture cards, video, and activity books,available in our library in order to find materials tomake up for the deficiencies of the textbooks.

Making A Teaching PlanSince the goal of this workshop was to foster theparticipants' critical self-awareness and self-evalua-tion, they planned, demonstrated, and self-evaluatedtheir own teaching on the basis of the goals whichthey had set for themselves. Adapting the idea of"Action Research Project" introduced in Nunan(1989), the procedure for developing a plan of actionto improve one's own teaching were: 1) declare whataspects of teaching one would like to improve afterlistening or viewing one's own pre-workshopassignment, 2) plan, implement, and demonstratesimulated teaching, 3) reflect on one's own teachingafter viewing his/her video in relation with the focalaspects declared, and 4) discuss self-evaluationtogether in a group and think about what subsequentactions one would like to take after going back tohis/her school.

Each participant chose and analyzed a lesson fromthe textbook selected for the simulated teaching.He/she analyzed a whole lesson in relation to lessonobjectives, topics, vocabulary, communicativefunctions, grammatical items, types of exercises, andaccompanying materials. In addition, he/she addedand/or omitted some of the items considering his/herstudents' needs and readiness.

In making a teaching plan, each participant chose theamount of items which could be covered in 40minutes and planned a lesson. There were tworequirements for a teaching plan. One of them was tocover the three stages discussed in the earlier"Designing classroom activities" session; i.e.,Presentation, Practice for Accuracy, and Practice forFluency. The other was to set a lesson objectivebased on communicative functions.

Simulated TeachingEach participant demonstrated his/her 40-minuteteaching while others acted as students. Before eachdemonstration, the participant who acted as a teacherinformed others of his/her actual class, such as whathis/her students had learned prior to the lesson. Eachdemonstration was video-recorded and given to theparticipant as a resource for self-evaluation. In the15-minute discussion after the demonstration, theteacher made comments based on what he/shedeclared to focus in simulated teaching. Then, othersgave comments and suggestions based on theirexperience as students.

Self-EvaluationEach participant viewed his/her own simulatedteaching video and evaluated him/herself based onthe following questions: 1) how were goals ofteaching set in Action Research Project achieved andwhy, and 2) what part of simulated teaching shouldbe implemented when applying for actual classroomteaching? After individually viewing and filling out aself-evaluation sheet, all the participants discussedand exchanged opinions regarding their simulatedteaching and self-evaluations.Guest SpeakerWe invited a teacher who was experienced inteaching Japanese at the pre-collegiate level as aguest speaker. The guest speaker led a session onhis/her expertise. A sample of topics covered in thesession are listed below: 1) how to motivate studentsand maintain their interests in learning Japanese, 2)how to manage to teach the large number of studentsin class, and 3) how to develop a curriculum.

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)9/22

3. EvaluationIn evaluating the workshop, we compared two "self-evaluations" carried out by the participants firstly inthe pre-workshop assignment and secondly after thesimulated teaching. It was observed that, for most ofthe participants, the second self-evaluation was morecritical and analytical compared to the first self-evaluation. This could be attributed to the fact thatthe participants had plenty of opportunities to reflecton their teaching while planning and implementingsimulated teaching, critically reviewing the activities

using the framework of "Structure of the lesson", andself-evaluating their own teaching. The results of theworkshop-evaluation questionnaire from theparticipants also showed that "Structure of the lesson"and simulated teaching are effective.

ReferencesNunan, D. 1989. Designing Tasks for theCommunicative Classroom. New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.Omaggio, A. 1993. Teaching Language in Context.Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Making of Textbooks (2)

A Textbook for Young StudentsHisako YoshikiJapanese Language ConsultantState of Wisconsin, Dept. of Public Instruction

he purpose of this article is not to talk about aparticular textbook which I had been engagedin producing in 1988 and 1990, or to promote

it, but it is rather by discussing the process oftextbook production, to raise questions as to whetherit is really necessary to write a textbook for the younglearners of Japanese; or if it is, then what type oftextbooks would be needed for the current dynamicand diverse learners. Therefore this article can beconsidered as a kind of record of before and after thetextbook production, and how the authors' concept ofthe role of a textbook has changed during the past tenyears before and after the production.

The background of the textbookNihongo Kantan: Speak Japanese, a textbook foryoung students was written when the authors, Sakaand myself were teaching at the international schoolsin Japan at the pre-collegiate level. There was next tonothing for the high school levels nor for themiddle/Jr. high levels. Thus all the teachers then werecurriculum writers, teachers, and textbook writers atthe same time. They both suffered from the fact ofhaving no textbooks to follow and, at the same time,enjoyed the freedom of not having to become a slaveto the textbook.

Description of the target groupOur students were the students in the middle schooland early stage of Sr. high school at the internationalschools which usually adopt American styleeducation and use English as the language of

communication. They are in Japan because of theparents' decision and not on their own. The length ofthe stay is usually between 6 months to 5 years.

For the students at the latter part of the secondaryschools, college level textbooks could be adopted,even though the topics dealt with in those textbooksneeded to be altered to suit their age level, but for theyounger students there were none, not even acurriculum guideline. That was the reason why theauthors felt that it was necessary to do somethingabout it; something to share what they had learnedfrom their experiences with the novice teachers sothat this textbook would free them from at leastpreparing the basic teaching materials of day to dayteaching obligations and they would be able to spendtheir time and energy on teaching itself and to bringin more interesting cultural activities into theclassrooms.

The goals of the textbookWhat we had in our mind then was something like asimple framework type book which enabled teachersto adapt to their own teaching situations but it shouldnot fail to include everything necessary for studentsto communicate in Japanese. This is what we learnedfrom our experiences that would benefit the students.First, the materials should be suitable to the learner'sage, should promote the meaningful and purposefullanguage use, and should be full of activities whichencourage learners to communicate in Japanese.Students should be able to enjoy studying Japanese.

T

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)10/22

Second, students will build up a concept to be aglobal citizen through studying another languagedifferent from their own, which in this case wasJapanese. While students learn the Japanese language,they, at the same time, learn about the people whouse the language and how they live, which ultimatelymay help them grow to be more broadminded worldcitizens. This was our biggest goal. Then studentswill be able to learn how to learn cooperatively withtheir classmates, since an international school oftenhas more than 60 different nationalities and they needto learn to be cooperative and kind to each other,rather than competing with each other.

Needs analysisBefore starting writing and also while writing, thestudents were often asked in which situations theywished to be able to speak Japanese in order to maketheir life in Japan easier.

QuestionnaireName Grade______

JFL (A, B, C, D, 0) JNL (A, B, C, D, E, F)

1. How long have you been living in Japan? _____years _____ months

2.What language do you speak at home?

3.Which language can you speak besides English?

4.Have you studied Japanese before? EL Yes EL NoIf Yes, please state where and for how long you havestudied.

5. Why do you want to study Japanese?

6. By the end of the course, what would you like tobe able to do with Japanese?

From these questionnaires, we found out that at thevery beginning level the students needed to havesurvival skills in the communities where English wasnot spoken. A cultural component was based on theculture embedded in the language use and not so

much on traditional culture, for at most internationalschools located in Japan, cultural components aredealt with in the classes such as social studies, Asianstudies, or more specifically in Japan studies.Students have usually abundant opportunity toexplore Japanese culture on their own.

At the same time, main textbooks of the beginningstage available for college level, which includesIntroduction to Modern Japanese were closelyexamined in the area of grammatical structures andother grammatical elements and as the result, it wasconcluded that at a very beginning level where thelearners are still seeking survival skills, there was notso much difference in the functions andcorresponding grammar even for the young learners.The difference might lie in the socio-cultural areas asto whether the complicated structure of Keigo shouldbe taught or not. Saka and I decided that if our targetstudents can handle the "desu" and "masu" stylecorrectly, they would be able to get things done forthem without offending the grown-up persons theywould encounter, so most of the Keigo was taken out.Then the functions were matched to the situations andtopics where these expressions are used. Thevocabulary was then decided on the basis of thesituations and topics.

Articulation to the senior high school programAnother important element to consider was thearticulation to their courses taught at the high schoollevels. Even though the students enjoy learningJapanese, unless they can continue their study ofJapanese, we cannot say that we are serving theirneeds. Even though the middle school level shouldnot be looked upon as a mere preparation stage forhigh school Japanese, if they had to restart their studyfrom the very beginning we are not doing service tothe students either. Therefore the sequencing of thegrammatical continuation was seriously taken intoconsideration. At each different stage before a newgrammatical item is introduced the previously learnedones are reviewed, even though the main emphasis ison helping students develop their owncommunication skills.

Topic/situation and vocabularyTopics and situations were chosen to suit the needs ofthe young learners who were living in Japanaccompanied by their parents, and studying Japaneseas a foreign language at the international schools.Therefore the topics like going to the bank to open anaccount or going to a housing agency to getassistance to rent a room was not included. Instead,topics on their favorite sports, food, hobbies, schoollife, or going around in the communities on their own,

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)11/22

something more related to their realistic daily liveswere chosen. Then the vocabulary was decided inrelation to the topics.

How our concept changed; do we still need toproduce more "textbooks"?When we started to think about writing this series in1984, there was a definite need, for there was noteven a curriculum guide available. After ten years,things have drastically changed and we can easilyname ten different textbooks for pre-collegiate level.The national curriculum for K-12 Japanese has beencompleted in Australia to be shared with everybodyin the world, more (at least 2) are coming up here inthe US for the same level. So, if you have time andenergy to produce "textbooks" I would adopt andadapt them into your own teaching situations. Weneed more opportunities to learn about how to useauthentic materials. In order to do that we need a lotmore opportunity to get to know what is availableand to consider to use such materials. Teachersworkshops could accomplish both goals.

Creative teachersTeachers might wish to have a textbook which haseverything in it and all they have to do is to follow itfrom page to page. It would be so nice to have atextbook which has all kinds of exercises,grammatical explanations, cultural notes and eventests to assess the student's progress. A perfect text-book, if there is any, may be very useful but at thesame time, it may have the danger of making theteachers and students its slaves. What students reallyneed is not a perfect textbook but teachers who arefree and creative, and above all, who care about thekids.

Whatever textbook teachers may use in teachingJapanese, they have to decide their goals and objec-tives in order to meet students' needs. Then teachersmust organize the course and prepare resources. Thismeans that a textbook should be considered as one ofthe resources and not as the curriculum. This is thebasic and the biggest change in our thinking, fordifferent resources are being needed at every stage oflanguage learning and teaching.

Technology Yes, But Student Centered

Kazuo TsudaUnited Nations International School(This is an extract from the paper presented at the 2nd Princeton Japanese Pedagogy workshop,May 1994.)

1. Introductions you know already, one of the new practicesis computer assisted instruction (CAl). Ourchallenge is to discover how to use CAl,

which includes multi media, with the new computergeneration we have today, in the secondary school.This paper describes a CAl program-theMultipurpose Language Program. This program canbe used to help transform traditional teacher-centeredinstruction to student-centered learning.

2. Post-TextbookI want to discuss first the "post-textbook" aspect ofthe program. In the post-textbook situation thestudents are confronted with an alterable page withwhich they can interact (interface with the text.) Theycan initiate behavior that turns study into play. Thestudents have the possibility of altering the text; theycan add their own text to the printed image, thus

creating their own text and simulating unpredictablelanguage activity. In simulating interactive languageactivity, we escape the teacher-and-textbookdominated class situation in which the studentpassively absorbs instructional material. Under post-textbook conditions the students become the center oftheir own language learning activity. In this way thepassive learner becomes an active learner-participantin meaningful language activity.

Interacting with this post-textbook, students arestimulated to move as rapidly as they can. Thus theprogram produces optimal self-pacing. This is a clearadvantage of this program over the traditionalteacher-centered classroom. The MultipurposeLanguage Program can be used more creatively.

The self-sorting index feature of the program permitsthe teacher or the student to creatively respond to

A

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)12/22

particular needs. Student or teacher can arrange orrearrange the text by choosing a modular element, i.e.,a situation, a function, a grammatical structure, acommunication strategy. A definite advantage of theprogram over the traditional text is that both studentand teacher can tailor material (text) to theirindividual needs. In the traditional textbook all pagesare bound. Page one can never become page fifteenor page fifty.

The teacher can even add authentic material: theteacher can purchase CD-ROM disks from Japan anduse them as text support. The students can add theirown authentic material or their own creative ideas orthey can add to their video portfolio.

So this post-textbook program induces self pacedinteractive participation. It can be used with any tra-ditional textbook-perhaps we can now call thempaleo" textbooks, or the program can be used on itsown.

(Figure 1)

3.1 Student CenteredThe new computer technology supports the shift fromteacher-centered classes to student-centered classes.This shift lays the foundation for developing newstudent competencies. We can measure themovement in a particular classroom from teacher-centered instruction to student-centered learning. Iwill be describing the stages of the shift, based on theperformance-based foreign language instruction andoutcome-based foreign language instruction.

3.1.1 Guided ObservationIn the first stage of the shift, the computer displaysand introduces authentic materials. Students listen tothe audio component while viewing images of, forexample, Japan.

3.1.2 Guided AnalysisIn the second step of the shift, the computer is an

assistant to the teacher in a teacher-centered class.The computer displays and explains the structure ofthe language and the strategy of communication. Thestudents rearrange the text by choosing a modularelement, e.g., a situation, a function, a grammaticalstructure, and a communication strategy.

3.1.3 Guided PracticeIn the third stage, the computer is still an assistantwith the teacher in a teacher-centered class. Thecomputer supports students in self-paced learningthrough drills and practice and writing in order tohelp them to memorize. Even though students usetechnology in the traditional classroom, this stepmoves the students in the direction of moreautonomous learning.

3.1.4 Simulated Interactive PerformanceIn the fourth stage, the computer technology providesgreater motivation for students to work with theirpeers. In this stage, teachers and students are givennew direction. Now, the teacher may introduce aformat but the students supply the content to createthe simulations. Teachers see their students' skill andknowledge from a different point of view. Thecharacteristic roles of teacher and student changedrastically at this stage.

3.1.5 Interactive PerformanceIn the fifth stage, the greater student advances occurin classes where teachers begin to achieve a balancebetween the appropriate use of direct instructionstrategies and collaborative, inquiry-drivenknowledge-construction strategies. Students start tocollect information using multiple devices andformats. They can organize this information, linkingboth visual and audio elements (e.g. responding inspeech to a written cue displayed on the computerscreen). They can create their own performance-outcomes and see them on their screen or hear them,correcting or modifying them as they see fit. Theycan use the same technology to communicate theirideas to others, to discuss and evaluate theirperformances-outcomes.

3.2 Roles3.2.1 Teacher RoleTechnology changes the characteristic role of theteacher. In the traditional classroom teachers domi-nate, presenting their knowledge and skill as a modelfor pupils. In the student-centered class, the teachercannot do this. In the fourth and fifth stage the role ofteachers change from the role of lecturer and expertto sometimes learner and sometimes collaborator.

3.2.2. Student Role

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)13/22

Although computers and other technologies areincreasingly important for our generation, they arevitally important for the next generation, they arevitally important for the next generation. Thisgeneration was born into the electronic environment.This process makes it easy for our students to changethe role from listener to collaborator or expert. This iswhat happens in the fourth and fifth stages.

4. Advantage of Student-Centered Class4.1 Learning Styles/Variety of LearningStyles in the Student-Centered ClassroomAlthough in the traditional classroom the teacherinstructs the students, the knowledge and skills can-not be transferred directly from the teacher to thestudents. Students have many different learning styles.Students are most often compelled to learn a subjectusing the teacher's learning style. For this reasonstudents who have different learning styles will oftenhave difficulty with a subject. In student-centerededucation we see many different types of learningstyles. All types mingle in student-centerededucation.

4.2. Advantage of Student-Centered ClassMy Multipurpose Language Program allows studentsto use the learning style they are most comfortablewith, but by encouraging collaborative work, itenables students to develop and expand their learningabilities. This may be perhaps the greatest advantageof the Multipurpose Language Program.

(Figure 2)

ReferencesDwyer, D. 1994. "Apple Classroom of Tomorrow:

What We've Learned," Educational LeadershipVol.51, 7,4-10

Means, B. 1994. "The Link Between Technology andAuthentic Learning" Educational LeadershipVol.51,7 15-18

McCarthy, Bernice. 1980. The 4 MAT System,Teaching to Learning Styles with Right/Left ModeTechniques, Excel

McCarthy, Bernice. 1990. "Using the 4 MAT Systemto Bring Learning Styles to Schools" EducationalLeadership Vol.51,7 31-37

Miyata, Kazuo. 1994. "Secondary School JapaneseLanguage Education in America" Sankei Shinbun,Feb 22

Peck, K. 1994. "Why Use Technology?" EducationalLeadership Vol.51, 7 11-14

Tsuda, Kazuo. 1994. "Letter from President"NEASTJ Newsletter, 2-4

Valette, R.M. 1994. "Teaching, Testing, andAssessment: Conceptualizing the Relationship",Teaching, Testing, and Assessment, NortheastConference Reports: 1-42

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)14/22

Yookoso: A Textbook as a Tool to Create an Enriched Learning Environment

Yasu-Hiko TohsakuUniversity of California, San Diego

ne of language instructors' roles is to createan "enriched" learning environment whichfosters and facilitates students' language

acquisition inside and outside the classroom.Yookoso: An Invitation to Contemporary Japanese,beginning-level Japanese textbook published fromMcGraw-Hill, Inc.*, is intended to be an instructionaltool that helps instructors create the optimalenvironment for Ianguage learning as well asmaximize students' learning efficiency.

I would like to briefly discuss the designing anddevelopment principles of this textbook which willhelp the users design and deliver their instructionefficiently.

Effective Activities for Language Acquisition

Yookoso is written for a class whose learning goal isto acquire functional, communicative abilities ofJapanese in four skills. It is based on a systematicsyllabus of topics, functions, situations, and notionsthat students must be able to handle in order toeffectively function in Japanese. The first step toacquire a foreign language is to be exposed to lan-guage input. Yookoso provides authentic, naturallanguage input through modeling and demonstration.It also includes a variety of activities through whichstudents are exposed to a large volume of input.Second language acquisition research indicates thatLearners' active involvement (experiential learning),interactive, cooperative learning, meaningfulness(relevancy to learner's needs and interests) andcontext-richness of activities, use of higher-order ofcognitive skills, pleasant learning conditions, andlearners' strong motivation are contributing factors toeffective language learning. Activities in Yookoso aredesigned and developed with these factors in mind.

Flexible Organization Accommodating a WideRange of Learners' NeedsCurriculum goals and instructional design must beshaped by learners' needs (including learning goals,learning style, previous learning experience, andlanguage aptitude level) and instructional conditions(class time, class size, etc.). In designing anddeveloping Yookoso, every effort was made so thatinstructors can flexibly and freely select and ordermaterials, and adjust the amount of materials used

inside and outside the classroom depending oncurriculum goals and learners' needs. Yookoso'sflexible organization of various types of activitieshelps instructors provide learners with an enrichedlearning environment in a coherent, consistent fash-ion. For instance, Yookoso makes it possible forinstructors to sequence activities in the followingways.• input (comprehension) activities4 output (production) activities• skill-getting activities4 skill-using activities• teacher-led activities4 pair/group activities• controlled activities4 creative, open-ended activities

In addition to the main text, Lab Manual/Workbookincludes diversified activities that can be used eitherinside or outside the classroom. Teacher's Manualprovides suggestions for additional activities.

Integrated Approach to Language Learning andTeachingTime is a precious resource for instruction. We haveusually more content to cover than class time. Onesolution to this problem is to assign self-learnablematerials (i.e., what students can study on their own)as homework, concentrating in class on what we cando only inside the classroom (e.g., activities requiringinteractions with classmates and the instructor).Recent second language acquisition researchdemonstrates that explicit grammar instruction has arelatively small, though not totally negligible, impacton language acquisition. In Yookoso, thus, grammarexplanations are clear and simplified so that studentscan learn grammar independently outside theclassroom. Students also learn grammar integrallythrough classroom interactive activities. Theseparation of grammar explanations from oral andother activities in Yookoso makes it possible forstudents to study grammar inductively or deductivelydepending upon their learning style or grammaritems.Other means used in Yookoso to make efficient use oflimited class time is to promote transfer andintegration of four skills in a coordinated, systematicmanner. Students are given opportunities to applyitems acquired in, for example, reading activities to

O

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)15/22

oral activities or writing activities, etc.

Textbook for a "Learner-Centered" ClassroomTraditional language textbooks, as an authoritative,complete document for language teaching, limitcurriculum goals and instructional design to thosewhich the authors considered appropriate. Such a"textbook-centered" approach, ignoring learner'sneeds in particular circumstances, does notnecessarily create the optimal learning condition. Inthis approach, most likely, learners are passive par-ticipants who simply receive and repeat the infor-mation presented in the text ("chew-and-spew" use oftextbooks). An active process of language devel-opment does not take place.

I strongly believe that language textbooks must be a

resource tool that helps learners build theirknowledge and improve their skills while actively Cinvolving in, taking an initiative in, and taking con-trol over their learning process. Yookoso's diversifiedcontent and flexible organization, combined withneeds analysis, adequate goal setting, and effectiveinstructional design and delivery, allow instructors tocreate an input-rich, context-rich, acquisition-richenvironment where learners, as active participants intheir learning process, can maximize languageacquisition.

*Lab Manual/Workbook, audiotapes, and Teacher'sManual are also available. The second volume,Yookoso: Continuing with Contemporary Japanese,accompanying video and computer program will beavailable later this year.

Making of 中・上級教科書

Yoshiko HigurashiSan Diego State University

am honored to share with you some points Inoted when I was developing the manuscripts ofCurrent Japanese: Intercultural Communication

(Tokyo: Bonjinsha, 1987, henceforth CJ) for inter-mediate or advanced college students of Japanese andAdvanced Japanese: Social and Economic Issues inJapan and the U.S. (Tokyo: Harcourt BraceJovanovich Japan, 1990, henceforth AJ) for advancedcollege students.

Problems and Needs of StudentsWhen I began writing CJ in 1983, the first step was toanalyze the most common problems among mystudents. They were frustrated with outdated materialin their textbooks, they had misconceptions aboutJapan, and they were unable to discuss current issueseffectively in Japanese. There were few students withstrong language skills who were interested andknowledgeable about the influence of culturalheritage on the people and society of modern Japan.

Thus, I saw a need to promote intercultural com-munication along with practical language skills. Itwas evident that my students needed a text whichwould (1) help students develop their language skillsfor the purpose of communication, (2) give a sense ofcurrentness, (3) present an accurate picture of modernJapan, and (4) introduce up-to-date cultural topics.

Create Your Own GuidelinesOnce the problems and needs of students areidentified, the next step is to create our own guide-lines for the text, by asking ourselves general yetfundamental questions. These questions may includethe following:1. 　 What level is to be targeted: elementary,intermediate, or advanced?2.　Is the audience at the collegiate level or secondarylevel?My decision to write CJ for those who had completedan elementary level Japanese text for college studentsdetermined the level. My audience would haveapproximately 180 hours to 240 hours of instructionand could be at the intermediate or advanced leveldepending upon the curriculum at their institution.3.　What materials do we presume to have beencovered in the previous text?4.　What are the goals of the text? What do we expectour students to have achieved by the time they finishthe text?5.　What kinds of specific tasks/functions (e.g. how tostart/end conversations, how to explain uneasysituations, how to apologize, and how tosupport/oppose opinions), con texts (e.g. formal-informal, superior-inferior, male-female), content,and text types must we provide in order to attain the

I

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)16/22

goals of the text?The ultimate outcomes I sought for students who useCJ were (a) a remarkable improvement of com-munication skills, (b) wider perspectives on the world,and (c) the development of a warmer attitude towardpeople with different cultural backgrounds.I wanted my students to feel comfortable com-municating in more than simple paragraphs. Eachstudent, whether speaking or writing, should be ableto express complex opinions on a wide variety oftopics using the logic and style appropriate to theJapanese cultural context.6.　Why do we have to write our own text? Isn't thereany text available to accommodate our needs? If not,what kind of contribution can we make to the field bywriting our own?7.　Do we create original stories/conversations, or dowe compile authentic materials? What are the prosand cons of controlled vs. authentic materials?8.　How many class hours does it take to finish eachlesson and the whole text? What lesson plans arepossible for each lesson?9.　How should each lesson be organized?10.　What kinds of drills, exercises, and activities willbest support each lesson?

My Own GuidelinesIn the process of developing CJ, I kept the followingpoints in mind:1.　Create a text which makes it possible to requirestudents to use only Japanese as a means ofcommunication.2.　Write the author's original stories in Japanese.Introduce language and culture in a systematic andgraded manner.3.　Create main characters who are American students(one male student and one female student, allowingthe introduction of both male and female styles ofJapanese) who have just moved to Japan after takingelementary Japanese in college.4.　Create ten life-like situations based upon theproblems they encounter in Japan, and assign them to

ten lessons.5.　Devote each lesson to one major topic. Coveressential topics discussed in the theory ofintercultural communication.6.　Keep the organization of the main story consistent:the situation is explained, the issue is raised, and theproblem is solved. Both a written style and a series ofconversations must be used in each story.7.　Set up a goal for Kanji learning. (Mastery ofKvoiku Kanji was set.)8.　Select a guideline for expressions. (Asahi Shinbunno Yogo no Tebiki was used.)9.　Produce supplementary materials (at least, audiotapes for the Language Laboratory use and KanjiPractice Sheets)10.　Present updated information about Japanesesociety.11.　Use the same structure for each lesson: Main,Story, List of Vocabulary with English Translation,New Kanji, Exercises, Word Definition and Usage,Idiomatic Expressions/Grammar Patterns, RelatedMatters and Questions for Discussion, and Radicalsand Kanji Characters.

This is how I developed the manuscript of CJ. Ithought the CJ was the first and the last textbook Iwould ever write. However, to my great surprise,those professors who used CJ encouraged me to writeanother textbook to follow CJ, by (a) focusing ontopics for business-minded students and (b)incorporating 949 kanji characters introduced injunior high school in Japan.

Thus, I wrote a manuscript of AJ. The lessonstructure and teaching method used in AJ are almostthe same as those of CJ. I am grateful to numerousprofessors for supporting my textbooks. Both of themare currently in their 6th printings.

I will be delighted if my experience in developing CJand AJ will be of any assistance to those who plan towrite their own text.

The Making of an Intermediate-Level Textbook

Akira Miura University of Wisconsin

deally, you should write your own textbook toteach with. You are familiar with your students'proficiency level, objectives, interests, and

capabilities. The problem with writing a textbook,

however, is that it takes an inordinate amount of time,and who has all that time while teaching full time? Sowhat you usually do is choose a textbook you canbest relate to, and use it while supplementing it with

I

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)17/22

handouts of your own creation. You do this for a fewyears, but sooner or later you become weary of thebook; you switch to another textbook and startwriting a whole new set of handouts. During all this,you keep saying to yourself or your colleagues, "I'mnot really satisfied with this book," but you continuerepeating this whole process year after year anyway.Does this sound familiar to you? It should. After all,isn't this what most teachers of Japanese do?At least this was what my colleague Naomi HanaokaMcGloin and I used to do regarding our second-yearJapanese course at the University of Wisconsin untilthere came a time when we said to ourselves, "Let'swrite our own book!" Actually it wasn't that simple. Iwas allowed half of my teaching load off by theUniversity for one year; besides, we were given agrant by the Japan Forum to sup-port us for twosummers. With enough time thus guaranteed, wewere able to launch our textbook-writing project!

The first thing we had to do was to decide what kindof syllabus our book should follow. We opted infavor of combining a topic syllabus with a functionalsyllabus. Since the University of Wisconsin has asemester system, each semester lasting roughlyfifteen weeks, we thought it would be a good idea towrite a book of fifteen lessons, each lesson takingtwo weeks to study. That meant choosing fifteentopics that would interest our students. At ouruniversity, most students majoring in Japanese go toJapan for a year's study during their junior year. Sothe most logical thing, we felt, would be to select thekinds of topics relevant to their year in Japan. Thuswe chose topics such as doing a home-stay, going torestaurants, taking trips, getting ill, etc., in Japan. Wealso decided to include some current topics that areimportant in today's Japan, such as issues involvingwomen, internationalization, and cultural friction.Next we chose the kinds of functions thatintermediate students would need most:meeting people, asking favors, receiving or extendinginvitations, making reservations, offering apologies,etc. Sequencing these topics and functions was not aneasy thing to do. The most basic criterion here waswhat situations our students would most likelyencounter. But, before settling on the final sequence,we had to actually use the lessons in manuscript formfor a few semesters.

The next thing we did was to discuss the structure ofeach lesson, i.e., what sections each lesson shouldconsist of as well as in what sequence they shouldappear. Since we wanted to include as many elementsas possible within reason, this was also a difficulttask, but somehow we decided on the items as well asthe sequence: "Culture Notes," "Dialogues,"

"Intensive Reading Selection," "Glossary," "KanjiList," "Grammar Notes," "Grammar Exercises,""Communicative Exercises," "Listening Exercises,"and "Speed Reading 'Pas sage." In addition, we choseto enliven the book with little bits oflinguistic/cultural information such as kanji radicals,proverbs, and haiku.

Next came the assignment of work, i.e., who shouldwrite which sections. This job was fortunately notvery difficult, because our strengths and interestsdiffered, or, to put it more positively, theycomplemented each other. One of us thus agreed towrite some sections, while the other volunteered totake care of the rest. Needless to say, however, weconstantly showed each other what we wrote. Thiswas done regularly, i.e., once a week, which pro-duced a constructive exchange of opinions, which inturn led to repeated rewrites and revisions. Using thematerials in class was also extremely helpful becausewe discovered by trial and error what worked andwhat did not. Moreover, comments from our studentsand teaching assistants helped a great deal.

Finally, I would like to list some things we aimed atwhile writing our textbook. (1) We wished to helpdevelop all four language skills, i.e., listening,speaking, reading, and writing. (2) In addition to theabove four skills, we concentrated on culture. Wewanted our students not only to develop their lan-guage skills but also to deepen their understanding ofJapan, the Japanese mind, and Japanese society. (3)We tried to make the dialogues sound as natural aspossible. To that end, we mixed different styles, i.e.,male/female, informal/formal, and keigo/nonkeigo.One problem here was that, in all textbooks ofJapanese, foreign speakers always speak perfectJapanese. This is, of course, highly unnatural. It is, onthe other hand, pedagogically unsound to useincorrect sentences in a textbook. We, therefore,made a compromise by including lines where foreignspeakers did not understand some words uttered bynative speakers. That kind of situation arises quitefrequently in real life, and we wanted to make surethat our students would learn how to ask questions ina case like that. (4) We used some authentic materials,i.e., reading selections directly taken from Japanesebooks and newspapers. This was due to our beliefthat even intermediate-level students should and canlearn to handle materials written for native speakers,and that they enjoy doing it. (5) As far as the kanjiuse goes, we avoided the idea of introducing all"kyooiku-kanji," as is done in some intermediate-level textbooks. Instead, we felt that words that arenormally written in kanji should appear in kanji, butthat the students should not be expected to learn to

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)18/22

write all the kanji introduced in the book. Wetherefore divided the kanji in each lesson into twocategories: those the student should learn to both readand write and those the student should learn to onlyread. (6) In the glossary, in addition to literaltranslations, we added explanations, e.g., deeto "date(in the sense of 'social engagement' only)". (7) in"Grammar Exercises," we avoided mechanical drill-like problems as much as possible; instead weincluded, wherever we could, short conversation-typeexercises. (8) In "Un 'yoo Renshuu (CommunicativeExercises)," we included pair work as well as small-group work in order to increase the opportunity forthe student to use the language communicatively. (9)We provided a speed reading passage ("S okudoku")

at the end of each lesson. Its objective was to give thestudent some culture-oriented reading material whichwas informative yet easy enough for him/her to readthrough quickly, so that he/she could proceed to thenext lesson with renewed confidence. (10) We triedhard to make our book fun to use by mixing inhumor.It was thus that our newly published An IntegratedApproach to Intermediate Japanese came into being.But like any other textbook, ours too starts going outof date almost as soon as it is published. Language isfluid: pronunciation, vocabulary, and grammar allchange. Besides, topics that are up-to-date today areno longer current tomorrow. That is, however, thefate of a textbook!

The Australian Language Levels (ALL) Guidelines

he Australian Language Levels (ALL)Guidelines is an organizational framework andcurriculum guidelines for language teaching

learning from primary to secondary levels inAustralia. The ALL Guidelines advocates a learner-centered approach. Learner characteristics aredescribed, and language syllabuses and programs areorganized by means of a proposed Framework ofprogressive, age-related stages. The following dia-gram depicts the Framework of Stages and indicatesinitial entry points for beginning learners.

ALL Syllabus Development andProgramming Book 2, 1998 p.6

Stages A and B are for learners who have no priorbackground in the target language. Stages C and Dare for those who have some home background in thetarget language.

The syllabuses or each stage contain the five areas ofgoals (communication, sociocultural, learning-how-tolearn, language and cultural awareness, generalknowledge) and specific contents (context, topic,functions, notions, grammar, modes ofcommunication, text-types).

The ALL Guidelines is comprised of a four book setentitled:1. Language Learning in Australia2. Syllabus Development and Programming3. Method, Resources and Assessment4. Evaluation, Curriculum Renewal, and TeacherDevelopment

T

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)19/22

Yoroshiku: National Curriculum Guidelines for Japanese, K-12

he Yoroshiku series was developed inAustralia based on the Australian LanguageLevels (ALL) Guidelines. It is divided into

three sets for different: 1) Niko Niko:Stages A & B, 2) Moshi Moshi: Stages 1 & 2, and 3)Pera Pera: Stages 3 & 4. (They might be equivalentto American elementary school level, beginning levelat the junior and senior high, and intermediate levelJapanese at the high school level respectively.) Eachset comes with four types of materials: Students'Book, Teachers' Handbook, Teachers' Resources, andAudioCassette. The Students' Book contains keyexpressions for every function introduced in each unit,full of activities through the book, and 'simulatedauthentic' materials. The Teachers' Handbook listssuggested learning items including languagefunctions, notions, grammatical items and kanji foreach stage as well as suggested classroom activitiesin each unit. The Teachers' Resources provideactivity worksheets, games, songs, and storiesincluding transcripts for an accompanyingaudiocassette tape.

Book Title Price Call No.tKana Frieze* A$45.OO 810.7NANiko Niko: Stages A &B-Early Childhood to Upper Primary Students' Hook A$19.95 810.7 NA A,B

Teachers' Handbook A$34.95 810.7 NA A,B Teachers' Resources A$24.95 810.7 NA A,B Audio Cassette A$19.95 810.7 NA A,BMoshi Moshi: Stages 1 &2- Lower to Middle Secondary Students' Book A$24.95 810.7 NA 1,2 Teachers' Handbook A$34.95 810.7 NA 1,2 Teachers' Resources A$24.95 810.7 NA 1,2 Audio Cassette A$19.95 810.7 NA 1,2Pera Pera: Stages 3&4- Senior Secondary Students' Book A$34.95 810.7 NA 3,4 Teachers' Handbook A$34.95 810.7 NA 3,4 Teachers' Resources A$24.95 810.7 NA 3,4 Audio Cassette A$19.95 810.7 NA 3,4

+This is the Call No. used in The Japan FoundationLanguage Center Library.*It is suggested to use this with Niko Niko and MoshiMoshi.

For further information on the ALL Guidelines andYoroshiku:,Curriculum CorporationACN 007 342 421, St. Nicholas Place141 Rathdowne Street, Canton Victona 3053AustraliaTel:, 03-639-0699Fax:, 03-639-1616

Recipients of The Japan Foundation Language Center Grant ProgramsJanuary-March 1995

Workshops and Conferences Grant Program1. The Ohio State University Dept. of East AsianLanguages & Literatures Columbus, OH"7th Annual Meeting of Lake Erie Teachers ofJapanese"February 3&4, 1995$2,000.00

2. The Arizona Association of Teachers of Japanese(AATJ)"A Workshop on How to Test Oral Proficiency in theCommunicative Classroom"March 1995$1,000.00

Association Grant Program

1. Northeast Association of Secondary Teachers ofJapanese (NEASTJ)$1,500.00The Japan FoundationLanguage Related Programs

2. National Council of Secondary Teachers ofJapanese (NCSTJ)"1995 ACTFL Meeting" November 18-21, 1995Atlanta, GA $1,222.50$1,222.50

T

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)20/22

From Our Readers

n Ritsu ShimizuShaler Area High/Middle School

Attending the Institute of the National K-12 Foreign Language Resource Center at IowaState University

his summer I had the honor of attending theInteractive Multimedia Authoring Institute,one of four institutes established by the

National K-12 Foreign Language Resource Center, atIowa State University. The National K-12 ForeignLanguage Resource Center (Director, Prof. MarciaRosenbusch) was funded by a $400,000 grant fromthe U.S. Department of Education. The grant madepossible the formation of four Institutes to achievevarious goals. They were designed to fulfill theestablished three major initiatives: teaching strategiesand curriculum improvement; new technology; andperformance assessment.

The participants of The Interactive MultimediaAuthoring Institute were selected competitively andnumbered twenty teachers, who represented six lan-guages (French, Spanish, German, Russian, Japaneseand Chinese); all levels and programs (elementaryimmersion; middle and high school language courses,and Distance Education); and 11 regions from Alaskato Mississippi, California to Connecticut. Among thetwenty, there were two Japanese teachers, includingmyself from Pennsylvania and Tim Cook sensei fromLincoln, Nebraska.

During the intensive 5-day institute, all participantsexplored the benefits of using multimedia, examinedexemplary multimedia hardware and software,authored a HyperStudio stack and produced lessonslinking a stack to segments on a CD-ROM and or avideo disc that integrated into the stack a segment ofa motion video. All participants also received trainingin the use of electronic mail since one of the goals ofthe Institute was to establish long-term professionalsupport for participants through their use ofelectronic mail.

Despite the unavailability of all the multimedia tech-nological facilities in our current average foreign lan-guage classrooms, at least the use of HyperStudiomay come close to reality. HyperStudio andHypercard come with alphabet fonts. At this writing,

I am contacting Prof. Hatasa, at Purdue University,for his new tool software called Development Toolsfor Japanese (DTJ), which enables the use of kana inthe HyperCard environment. Once we can use kanain the HyperCard environment, there are variouslearning enhancing projects available for ourJapanese language students.

Many teachers teach some type of written languageas part of Japanese language teaching (in my school,hiragana first). Without sacrificing the developmentof the cardinal skills of language teaching, that is,aural and oral skills, the students master kanaremarkably well after going through a set ofdevelopmental, perceptual processing over manymonths. If the teacher does not have students use theacquired knowledge in a productive fashion, suchknowledge may become sterile. As a pilot program, Iam planning to have my students create HyperStudiostacks using kana fonts and they will also record theirshort messages in their stack. This will be conductedas an extra curricular activity as part of the JapanClub activities.

We all know that technology does not replace theteacher, and the student's interactive learning modeswith their teacher. Technology serves students as anadditional motivational, learning enhancement andreinforcement tool, which we Japanese languageteachers in category four language need more thanever. (For those who learn Japanese in DistanceLearning, it is an essential means of learning.) Whyshouldn't we give them an additional learning tool?How can we as classroom teachers secure such afacility is another issue?

Perhaps someday, among Japanese language teacherswe can exchange the stacks students created, or wecan form a specific interest group for electronic mailcorrespondence for our professional growth as wellas nurturing the students' interest in learningJapanese.

T

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)21/22

n Michelle MiyazakiUrbandale High School7111 Aurora AvenueUrbandale, Iowa 50322

y name is Michelle Miyazaki, and I am theJapanese teacher at Urbandale High Schoolin Urbandale, Iowa. I have enjoyed reading

your publication for the past year, as it has proved tobe both interesting and educational to me as a firstyear teacher. I am writing to share a uniqueexperience that might interest your readers.

Urbandale High School has enjoyed a sister schoolrelationship with Minami Senior High School ofOsaka, Japan, for the past four years, and we areexcited to announce the visit of their entire juniorclass. Next month approximately 160 Japanesestudents and 10 teachers, including the principal, willbe traveling to Urbandale, where they will stay withover 80 host families October 27-30. Urbandalecurrently has almost 100 Japanese language studentsin four different levels, including two classes taughtvia fiber optics. Japanese was offered for the first

time five years ago, and the sister school relationshipbegan shortly thereafter. Since then, we havewelcomed a group of 17 students and teachers fromMinami High School, and last year 15 Urbandale stu-dents and teachers traveled to Osaka, Japan. Inaddition, we have been fortunate to host two long-term Japanese exchange students every year, andhave also sent several Urbandale High Schoolstudents for an extended student exchange.

The October visit of Minami High School studentswill mark the high point of our relationship with theschool. The 80 host families, Japanese language stu-dents, and the entire Urbandale community areanxiously awaiting the arrival of our Japanese friends.It is our hope that this visit will not only strengthenour ties with the Japanese school, but increasecultural understanding between the U.S. and Japan.Thank you for your time and support.

New Information On Washington Endorsement

Yumi Toma, Japanese Language ConsultantWashington State Office for Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI)

eachers wishing to have an endorsement inJapanese on their Washington teachingcertificate may now obtain this endorsement

by passing New York University's LanguageProficiency Examination in Japanese with a score of16. The individual who scores 16 points on the 16-point examination need not take any college coursework in order to obtain the endorsement.

The exam is offered in more than 40 languages andused by both native English language speakers andnative speakers of other languages. The candidatemust be examined for 16 points. The results are validfor five years. The results will normally be sent toOSPI within one month of the examination."Proficiency Testing in Foreign Languages" (a copyof the brochure/registration form and a description ofthe exam) is available by calling (212) 998-7030 orwriting to:,

New York City UniversitySchool of Continuing EducationForeign Language Department48 Cooper Square, Room 107New York, NY 10003

A report letter from NYU may be sent to thefollowing address:,

Professional Education and Certification Office,OSPIOld Capitol Bldg., P.O. Box 47200Olympia, WA 98504-7200

State rules and regulations concerning teachercertification are subject to change.

For basic information, please refer to my article on

M

T

The Breeze, No. 9 (December 1994)22/22

"Endorsements in Teaching Certificates:, K-12Japanese in

Washington Language Endorsements" (The Breeze,Number Six, April, 1999