A_Study_of_the_Process_of_Teaching_Speaking_in_Japan

  A study of the process of teaching speaking in Japan                                                                       A Comparative study British and Thai undergraduates in Torrance Test of Creative Thinking. Fisik Sean Buakanok, Paisan Suwannoi, Amanda Jefferies, Neil Davey, Wanida Kanarkard & Wiroj Taweepworadej (pp. 18-25) The Asian Conference on Language Learning Official Conference Proceedings 2011 ISSN: 2186-4691 Proceedings URL: http://iafor.org/acll_proceedings.html iafor The International Academic Forum www.iafor.org The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan USING ACTION RESEARCH IN THE ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CLASSROOM By Marc Waterfield MATESOL Kumamoto University Oral Communications Buntoku SHS 860-0082 Kumamoto-Ken, Kumamoto City Ikeda Machi 4-22-2 (096) 354-6416 (230) mizuno_marc@hotmail.com ACLL: Language Education 26 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan Using Action Research in the Oral Communications Classroom Marc Waterfield MATESOL Kumamoto University Oral Communications Buntoku SHS Abstract Action research helped the author identify his students' confidence problem to use English as being related to their unrealistic study goals and performance expectations. Furthermore, it assisted the author greatly in designing a course syllabus that met the curriculum specifications outlined by the Ministry of Education. In this framework, providing specific information and helping to set more realistic study goals increased students’ appreciation of English communicative skills. Action research is presented here as an appropriate framework for teacher-researchers to conduct classroom-based research in the aim of effecting positive change. The process by which the outcomes were reached is described in detail. In this case, the gap between the standards set at the national level and the teacher's classroom reality was reduced and positive change did occur. Students' appreciation for English communication skills was achieved through attaining the ability to set more realistic study goals, resulting in more realistic performance expectations regarding English study. Professional competence designing and teaching an oral communications syllabus was also achieved by the author. Introduction Over the past three decades, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) has made a definite shift in its policies toward language teaching approach, nationwide, advocating more communicative based curriculums in its public schools (Butler & Iino, 2005). This shift has also been mirrored by private schools. One of the major pedagogical results of this shift was the creation of oral communications (OC) courses in secondary schools (MEXT, 1999). My Situation In 2008, I began teaching OC in a private senior high school (SHS) in Kumamoto City. I had some experience as an Assistant Language Teacher (ALT) on the Japan Exchange and Teaching (JET) Program. This gave me limited classroom experience in the public school system and some knowledge of the demands placed on language teachers in the elementary (ES) and junior high schools (JHS) where I taught. However, my duties were limited to that of a support position. Independently designing a course syllabus was something that I had not experienced. Moreover, my teaching experience was limited to ES and JHS students; a specific demographic with specific needs. I assumed that the needs of SHS students would be very different from that of students in ES and JHS. 27 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan I had little experience but needed to create a syllabus that complied with the Curriculum Guidelines (MEXT, 2009) and the needs of the students. In order to achieve this, I needed to find an explicit and disciplined approach to the problem and thus chose Action Research (AR) as a framework. Furthermore, I wanted to use AR to sharpen my insight into pedagogical matters with the aim of assessing the effectiveness of my syllabus. This paper reports how AR helped me bridge the gap between the standards set by MEXT at the national level and the reality I confronted at the local level. Adapting to classroom challenges in a rational and accountable way through its systematic approach and working from the bottom up, AR helps teachers address the immediate concerns in their classroom in a reasonable time frame and lends itself easily to assisting the ‘teacher-researcher’ in the process (Wallace, 1991). AR has gained popularity among educators because it empowers teachers to become teacher-researchers which helps them address and correct the problems they face in the classroom (Altrichter et al., 1993, p. 204). This, Nunan (1992) argues, leads to professional development. Outline of Action Research The term ‘Action Research’ was first used by Lewin (1946) to describe the process of researching and acting on the findings of that research. Carr and Kemmis (1986, p. 162) describe AR as a form of ‘self-reflection’ conducted in order to improve one’s practices, understanding of these practices, and the situations in which these practices are carried out. A distinguishing feature of AR is that it is ‘participatory’ in nature (Dadich & Fitzgerald 2007, p. 12; Melrose 2001; Zuber-Skerritt 1996). Stringer (1999) argues that AR can be used to formulate effective solutions to problems faced in public and professional lives. Maintaining positive standards and or promoting a continuity of values are also essential components of AR according to Dadich and Fitzgerald (2007, p. 12). In a school setting, AR may be undertaken by teachers looking for ways to improve instruction and enhance student achievement (Ferrance, 2000, p. 1), and typically refers to disciplined inquiry done by a teacher with the intent that the research will inform and change his or her practice in the future (Ferrance 2000, p. 2). The study reported here conforms to the typifying features of AR listed above. The study was participatory in nature, involved disciplined inquiry and reflection on my part to overcome the challenge I confronted and to improve my own teaching practices. Purpose of this Study I began this study out of necessity; I needed to design a workable syllabus for the OC course conforming to MEXT’s curriculum (MEXT, 2009) in a short time frame and with no guidance or opportunity for collaboration. Given the definition of AR, I felt that it would provide me with an ideal model by which to address problems that may arise while designing and developing an OC syllabus. 28 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan Here I will focus on one major problem that emerged; the problem of being unable to set realistic study goals resulting in a lack of confidence among the students to use English to communicate during classroom activities. I will show how AR helped me quickly identify this problem and address it effectively, even with my limited experience. Pedagogical Context This study was conducted during my OC classes at a SHS in Kumamoto, Japan. The participants included all of my 1st year OC students which included 391 male and female JHS graduates from in and around Kumamoto Prefecture. Grouped into nine classes, the average class size was 43 students. We met once a week for 50 minutes. One semester consisted of 14 to 16 hours. The total number of hours therefore, ranged from 28 hours to 32 hours for the entire school year. Methodological Approach AR frameworks may vary in the number of phases/cycles of research and intervention, but, each AR framework is grounded in the qualitative research paradigm (though it may not exclusively rely on this paradigm) and works to make the sometimes implicit problems of the classroom explicit with the purpose of affecting positive change. Implementation I used a six phase format adapted from Nunan’s (1993) framework to conduct my study. I chose this model because it provided an observation phase after the initial problem was identified (see below table, Phase 2 Preliminary Investigation). This allowed me to construct a critically informed plan of action early in the study while the key points of the syllabus were still being formed. Table 1 presents an outline of each of these phases along with a brief description of what each phase entailed. Later sections of the paper elaborate on the phases summarized in the table. Table 1. Six-phased Action Research Study Outline (adapted from Nunan, 1993) Phase 1 Identify a problem Lack of ability among the students to set realistic study goals which directly affected motivation levels Observation & Needs Analysis Providing students with information that will help them set more realistic study goals will also increase their confidence to use English to communicate Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Preliminary investigation Forming a plan based on observations of problematic areas for students to the aim of forming realistic study goals Take action The implementation of the Plan developed in Phase 3 29 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan Phase 5 Reflection (data analysis) Phase 6 Report findings Review outcomes and collect further data to support or reject the appropriateness of the actions taken based on the planned intervention Provide copies of findings to co-workers and administration Phase 1 Identify a Problem During the initial observation phase I noticed that there was an overall lack of motivation to communicate in English during classroom activities. I recorded these observations in Classroom Improvement Assessment (CIA) field notes. The following CIA notes indicate the students’ perceived apathy and decline in motivation. CIA field note 1 May, 11th (1st Grade SHS class – Italics indicate my observations) Today each student that I observed performed the task well but with little to no deviation from the example pattern. After the ‘free talk’ the students were required to speak in front of the class. It was at this time that their motivation levels dropped dramatically. Some students refused to participate. CIA field note 2 May 18th (Same SHS first grade class) 1. The students looked detached when giving them the structure sentence for the interview activity. I had the students stand up and taught them “Rock, Paper, Scissors” as a way to determine who would initiate the question and answer process. The students seemed excited but this quickly faded and the same blank looks returned. 2. The students were very loud when performing the interview activity but not focused. The students will perform their first individual speech presentations next week. Due to the observed lack of focus and motivation, I suspect that some of the students will not be prepared. I also expect the main weaknesses in the presentations to be low voice volume, and lack of eye contact with the audience. CIA field note 3 May, 25th (same class) Today’s greeting was not at all energetic. As suspected, the major weak areas of the speech presentations were low voice volume and lack of eye contact. Some students also deliberately held their papers in front of their faces between themselves and the audience. The actions of the students today and in previous classes seem to indicate a lack of confidence. The lack of eye contact and low voice was a common occurrence among all of the students. Regarding speeches and presentations, the content was acceptable but the voice volume at times was almost inaudible and a common, consistent lack of eye contact lead me to believe that a 30 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan general lack of confidence was the major problem that needed to be addressed. The data gathered in the initial observation phase was further supported in following phases. It showed that the students’ lack of Willingness to Communicate (WTC) (MacIntyer, 1994) stemmed from a deeper lack of confidence in personal language abilities. I made an initial inference that this lack of confidence was mainly a byproduct of unrealistic study goals that the students had set for themselves. Therefore, I commenced in collecting information that would empower the students by helping them set more realistic study goals. Phase 2 Preliminary Investigation Needs Analysis and Observation This is a very important phase of the AR cycle because it is in this phase that information necessary to take ‘critically informed’ action (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988) is gathered. In order to determine that the implicit problem noted was not just my misunderstanding of the situation, I triangulated my research approach by developing questionnaires, conducting interviews and observing students reactions to communicative tasks/activities in the classroom. I commenced gathering information which would allow me to address my students’ needs and form a plan of action. I also conducted research addressing various teaching approaches and continued to collect teaching materials. Preliminary Research I searched the internet, ESL textbooks and consulted with professionals to gain a better understanding of what designing and teaching an OC syllabus should entail. The information gathered during this phase was crucial in helping my students begin to set more realistic study goals and helped me organize materials for classroom activities. Furthermore, the information gathered here helped me to better understand how, and in what order, the materials should be delivered to students at various stages of the process of language learning. Presentation of the Data Found in the Needs Analysis I needed to assess my students’ needs quickly. I had each student give an introductory speech to gage their productive abilities. I conducted interviews to assess their receptive and productive abilities in conditions that resembled real-life conversations. I also made use of questionnaires and CIA field notes to record this data. In this section, I present the data accumulated. Key Questionnaire Items The following data was crucial in determining confidence and WTC levels among the students, and in identifying the reasons behind their lack of confidence to use English to communicate. Furthermore, it helped me to realize that the initial problem of low levels of WTC was actually rooted in another problem; a lack of confidence in English abilities which stemmed from an 31 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan inability to set realistic study goals. I asked the following question in order to assess the accuracy of my observations: How often did you know the answer but choose not to speak out in class' Possible Answers: Almost Always, Often, Sometimes, Almost Never. The students’ answers were as follows: 36 students (9.20%) answered “almost always,” 191 students (48.84%) answered “often,” 153 students (39.13%) answered “sometimes” and 11 students (2.81%) answered “almost never.” The majority of the students answered “often” or “sometimes.” This data sparked a further interest to find out why so many students had trouble speaking out in class even when they knew the answer. I asked my students in open class discussions if they felt stressed when they were asked to participate in classroom activities. Most of the students answered in the affirmative. The students’ were obviously under stress when asked to participate in classroom activities. The questions emerging from this addressed where this stress was coming from and why they were feeling pressured to speak English. I needed to determine what variables (stresses) were preventing them from playing a more active role in the OC class. Making the Implicit Explicit I attempted to make this implicit concern explicit by identifying and addressing the stresses hindering students’ involvement in classroom activities. I presented the students with a questionnaire and conducted more discussions, asking the students why they felt they could not speak out in OC class. Table 2. Students’ Eight Most Common Stresses: 1. Worried about what others will say (classroom dynamic) 2. Stress due to lack of confidence (low self esteem) 3. Japanese people are shy (self and cultural image) 4. Don’t want to stand out (low self esteem) 5. Too much pressure (external and internal stress) 6. Must be right / worried about “what if I’m wrong'” (all or nothing approach) 7. Must wait for others to speak first (cultural perhaps) 8. A feeling of apathy “is it really important for me to speak out'” (WTC) By identifying the stresses we made this problem explicit. Through discussing these concerns in an open forum the students appeared to realize that they were not alone in feeling inhibited. This seemed to have a positive effect on the classroom environment. In order to rule out apathy as a cause for low levels of WTC, I also needed to assess whether or not there was real desire among the students to improve their English communicative abilities. 32 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan The following questions were asked to assess the students’ desire to use English to communicate and to assess their study goals: 1. Do you feel there is a need to develop your OC skills in English' 2. State some current areas where you are weak in your communication skills. 3. Tell me one thing that you will do to improve your communicative skills. Their answers to the first question showed a real desire to improve their English communicative skills. Of the 391 students interviewed, 310 students (79.2%) answered yes, they felt there was a need to develop their English communicative skills while only 8 students (2.0%) felt there was no need and 73 students (18.6%) had no answer to this question. Almost 80% of students desired to improve their OC skills but, they were still having trouble participating in classroom activities as noted in the following CIA field notes: CIA Field note 4 May, 21st (1st Grade SHS class) The problem does not seem to be entirely with their English language abilities but rather with their confidence to use it. All of the students had trouble speaking in a loud voice and there was little to no eye contact throughout the speech/presentations and interviews. This led me to believe that the students were suffering from a lack of confidence in their abilities and not a lack of desire to improve their skills. The students’ prepared their answers to questions 2 and 3, listed above and presented them to me in private one-on-one interviews and in writing the following week. The data showed that 56.3% of students interviewed felt that their lack of vocabulary was the number one thing hindering their English conversation abilities while 37.3% of students interviewed stated that they were not able to use English to communicate due to a lack of confidence in their English abilities. It seemed that the students felt that, no matter how hard they studied, their English abilities would always be too poor to communicate effectively. The students identified their confidence problem but, were unaware that it was connected to their unrealistic study goals. These unrealistic study goals and performance expectations trapped them in a downward spiral of disappointment causing them to lose confidence and desire to use English in the classroom. In this phase of the AR, I was able to determine three important things: 1. The students did have a strong desire to improve their OC skills. 2. There was a confidence problem hindering involvement in classroom activities; they felt they lacked sufficient vocabulary skills needed to use English in communicative situations. 3. The students were unable to set realistic goals for themselves because no matter how much 33 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan they advanced they still felt that they were lacking sufficient vocabulary and grammar skills. I wanted to work with them to think of ways that we could fix this problem. When asked what they would do to improve their conversation skills their answer was unanimous, they would study more. I considered this to be further evidence of a general lack of ability to set realistic study goals. This answer may also have been the answer they thought I wanted to hear. Therefore, I focused on strategizing to help the students set more realistic study goals by first determining what they wanted to use English for in the future. Phase 3 Forming a Plan of Action My plan of action centered on the following principle; providing the students with specific information designed to strengthen their strategic competence would help them set more realistic study goals and enhance confidence in their English communicative abilities. Phase 4 Taking Action After collecting more specific information regarding students’ intended use for English, I presented the following information to them: The number and types of words needed to perform specific communicative tasks at various levels (Saville-Troike, 2006), the reasons for communication breakdown (Yoneoka, 2008) and effective presentation strategies such as; ‘how you say something has a greater impact than what you say’ (Dwyer, 2003). Communicative-based Classroom Activities The classroom activities aimed at providing the students with authentic conversation patterns. Tasks involving pair and group-work and were conducted using a communicative workbook to enhance productive and receptive language skills. Talking about specific topics allowed students to have more interactively-focused conversations, which can be related to Pask’s (1975) ‘conversation theory’. Interviewing was used here to replicate real-life, North American-type conversation situations. Speech/Presentations in front of the class were intended to help the students gain experience in public-speaking, another essential aspect of communication that Parvis (2001) argues is both ‘complex’ and ‘significant’. The interviews were also used to assess the students’ productive and receptive abilities while giving them experience presenting ideas to a large group of people. All of these tasks were intended to strengthen the students’ oral ability and give the students the opportunity to develop their communication strategies in order to develop communicative competence as outlined in the 2009 course of study specifies by MEXT. Therefore, these tasks complied with the national guidelines and the immediate needs of my students. 34 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan I also introduced the information on how many words are needed to read English text books at the university level compared to how many words are needed to conduct personal and general conversations, as well as the most frequently used words in the English language (Saville-Troike, 2006). This and other essential information was presented in a seminar-type setting. The students could relate this information to what they intended to use English for in the future helping them develop their study goals. Table 3. The students’ answers to the question, “what do you want to use English for'”  247 Students Wanted to use English to travel to foreign countries and or speak with foreigners using English  73 Students Wanted to use English for future employment  71 Students Wanted to use English for academic reasons such as passing entrance examinations Table 4. Number of words needed to conduct tasks in English Words needed to read English books Words needed to read University level textbooks Words needed to conduct general conversations (Saville-Troike, 2006) 10,000 ~ 30,000 100,000 ~ 200,000 1,000 ~ 3,000 63.2% of the students wanted to use English to travel overseas or for talking with foreigners. These students would now be able to set their vocabulary study goals around the 1,000~3,000 words. The 18.7% who wanted to use English for future employment and the 18% who were interested in using OC for academic purposes could set their study goals higher, above 10,000. The important point was that students now had meaningful parameters with respect to vocabulary knowledge to locate their study goals. All of the students were now aware of the number of words needed to conduct general conversations and perform the other tasks expected of them in the OC class. This number was dramatically lower than most of the students originally thought, and those students who had no idea of a minimum vocabulary level to set their goals on before the intervention, did so now. This made it explicit to the students that a goal of learning between 1,000 and 3,000 words before graduating from SHS was reasonable and fundamentally attainable. The realization that basic conversations can be conducted with a vocabulary of only 1,000 words gave some students more confidence. In an attempt to help the students better understand some of the things it takes to become an effective communicator I provided them with the following information: “It is not what you say but how you say it!” supported by Dwyer (2003). Dwyer states that words are 7% effective in getting the message across, tone of voice is 38% effective, and non-verbal clues are 55% effective. This led to discussion on how ‘what’ you say can be perceived by the listener. 35 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan Information on Communication Breakdown The knowledge of why some conversations fail was presented in an attempt to facilitate better communication among the students. The ‘Five Reasons for Communication Breakdown’ Yoneoka (2008) was used to do this. We paid careful attention to numbers 3 and 5. Table 5. Five Reasons for Conversation Breakdown 1. A wants to say ~ to B, B doesn’t understand 2. A wants to say ~ to B, A doesn’t know how to say it 3. A wants to say ~ to B, B understands but gives no feedback 4. A says ~ to B, B cannot respond 5. A asks B ~, B answers then the conversation stops (Yoneoka, 2008, personal communication) I felt that numbers 1 and 2 could be addressed in other English classes and improve with time. Number 4 was too vague to deal with appropriately in this context. Therefore, we focused on numbers 3 and 5 in the OC course. The implicit problems that number 3 implies was dealt with by implementing the information outlined earlier in this paper. Providing Question and Answer patterns with follow-up questions that facilitate continued conversations addressed problem number 5. As a result of this, the importance of follow-up questions in the flow of conversations became another important focus of the OC syllabus. Furthermore, through pattern practice and exposure to authentic conversation patterns the students developed their communicative competence. Communication strategies and communicative competence are closely related. Saville-Troike (2006, p. 100) described communicative competence as “what a speaker needs to know to communicate appropriately within a particular language community.” Communicative competence involves more than just grammar and vocabulary. It involves attaining knowledge of such things as when to speak or when not to, what to say to whom and how to say it effectively. Furthermore, it involves how to say things appropriately given the situation the speaker may find him or herself in. In support of spending time on such things as communication strategies in the classroom, Wada and Cominos (1994, p. 25) argue that “content and linguistic items necessary for interaction are only two pieces of the equation.” Students should also be exposed to information that will help them develop ‘communication strategies’ in order to develop strategic competence that Richards, Platt and Weber (1987, p.25) define as “the ability of speakers to compensate for breakdowns in communication and deficiencies by relying on knowledge in other areas.” It was in this context that we looked at the reasons why some conversations fail; in order to build on their knowledge of communicative strategies. 36 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan Phase 5 Reflection In order to determine whether or not the implementation of this material had had a positive effect on the students, I conducted follow up interviews and questionnaires at the end of the school year. I used the reflection phase to review the data gathered and to support future actions. The following data was collected using the questionnaire given to all of the students of the 2008/2009 academic year. 1) What did you think about with regard to the importance of communicating in English before this class and how do you feel now' Table 6. Students’ answers grouped into the following five categories:  No importance before this class 217 Students (55.4%)  Important before this class 88 Students (22.5%)  Important now 329 Students (84.1%)  Not important now 8 Students (2.0%)  No Answer 40 Students (10.2%) When the number of students who felt that there was no importance to communicate in English (before the intervention) is compared with the number of students who later felt this to be important a 28.6% growth in the students’ appreciation for attaining English communicative skills can be observed. Therefore, the inference that the OC syllabus did have a positive affect on the students’ level of appreciation for the necessity of attaining English communicative abilities is reasonable in this case. In order to assess the effectiveness of the activities and tasks included in the syllabus and to get a better understanding of whether or not the students felt the syllabus, as a whole, was helpful I asked the students the following question: Do you think the OC course activities were helpful for your English language communicative development' A majority of students felt that the information presented to them in the OC course helped their English language development: “Yes, I do” – 305 students (78.0%); “No, I don’t” – 43 students (10.9%); “No Answer (were unsure)” – 43 students (10.9%). In order to assess whether or not the OC syllabus had any effect on the students ability to set realistic study goals I asked the students this question: Do you feel the information provided to you in the OC course helped you set better goals for studying English' A majority of students felt that the information presented to them in this OC course helped them 37 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan set better goals for studying English: “Yes, I do” – 330 students (84.3%); “No, I don’t” – 39 students (9.9%); “No Answer (were unsure)” – 22 students (0.5%) This data is evidence that the information provided had a positive impact on this group of students and reinforces the rational for its inclusion in the final draft of the OC syllabus. Phase 6 Report the Findings The publication of my study acts as the final phase in the AR cycle. Examples such as this one may resonate with teachers who are looking to improve their classroom situation. Therefore, it is important that the data gathered from studies such as this one are published so that they may offer examples to fellow educators who may find themselves in similar situations. The findings from my study, as part of an AR methodology, are obviously not generalizable, but the reporting of the usefulness of the method and my experiences in implementing it are professionally relevant and potentially instructive within a collaborative frame of reference. Major Outcomes of this Study This AR study produced four major outcomes, three of which dealt with the students’ growth and appreciation for OC skills in English. The fourth outcome dealt with my professional growth. These outcomes are listed in the following table (Table 7). Table 7. Four Major Outcomes of this AR Study  Students’ appreciation of OC skills There was a growth in the student’s appreciation for the necessity of OC skills in their language study.  Increased confidence among students The students displayed increased confidence levels while performing tasks such as interviews and giving speeches. This increased level of confidence was noticed through such things as extended eye contact and speaking in a louder voice.  Students’ desire to improve their OC The students displayed a strong desire to use skills English for more than just academic purposes but rather in real-life type settings such as traveling overseas and communicating with foreigners.  Attainment of a level of professional The attainment of a higher level of professional competence competence regarding designing and teaching an OC syllabus based on the needs of a specific group of learners was achieved. 38 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan The OC syllabus, upon the completion of this AR, included two semesters which aimed to help the students identify their strengths and weaknesses as language learners. Together as a class we built on our communication strategies and communicative competence through the process outlined, and the experience formed the pedagogical template for later classes through the emerging syllabus. Final Reflections and Concluding Remarks The phases of the AR cycle helped me organize my data collection and gave structure to the way I assessed specific problems. Each phase guided me to a deeper understanding of my classroom environment. This process gave me experience which developed my confidence in the classroom helping me better assess and meet the needs of my students. Completing this AR also helped me realize that the inability to set realistic study goals was a major problem hindering my students’ WTC; they were not apathetic towards the OC course. They wanted to improve their English communicative skills but were unsure about how to do this. This personal stress translated into a lack of confidence to use English in the classroom. It may be argued that a good teacher would be able to realize this without using AR. However, without AR I may have misinterpreted the cause of this problem and handled it very differently. This AR helped me accurately identify and effectively deal with the problem among this group of students in an explicit and disciplined manner. Similarly, it may be argued that the steps I took, to improve my classroom environment and design a syllabus are what good teachers do anyway and that the same outcomes may be achieved without the aid of AR; that the process may not be necessary in order to reach these conclusions. However, as a teacher new to this field, AR was exactly the method I needed. AR helped me identify and address the problems present in my classrooms quickly. Furthermore, the AR model provided me with an organized step-by-step progression that helped me test out ideas and evaluate the effectiveness of the actions taken by helping me draw data directly from the students’ answers to specific questions. Through this process I realized that designing and teaching a syllabus is a never-ending process of refinement and growth. References Ahmed, M. K. (1993). Teaching oral communication skills in academic settings: A case study in task-based approach to syllabus design, [online] Available at: http://www.iuj.ac.jp/faculty/mkahmed/workingpaper.html [Accessed 10 November 2008] Altrichter, H., Posch, P. & Somekh, B. (1993). Teachers investigate their work. London: Routledge 39 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan Brown, J.D. (1998). Understanding Research in Second Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Browne, C. & Evans, B. (1994). The ALT as Cultural Informant: A Catalyst for Developing (p. 17-28) Students’ Communicative Competence. In Wada, M. & Cominos, A. (1994). Studies in Team Teaching. Tokyo: Kenkyusha Publishing Co., Ltd. Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative action research for English language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Butler, Y. G., & Iino, M. (2005). Current Japanese reforms in English language education: The 2003 “Action Plan.” Language Policy 4(1): 25-45, 2005. Celce-Murcia, M. & Olshtain, E. (2000). Discourse and Context in Language Teaching A Guide for Language Teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press. Dadich, A & Fitzgerald, JA 2007, Module 3: Action Research, Self learning module prepared for Business Research Skills Seminar, 2nd edn, University of Western Sydney, Australia. DeRolf, J.D. (1995). English Communication Through Practical Experiences. The Internet TESL Journal, Originally published in Kanto Gakuin Daigaku Kogaku Bu Kyoyo Gakkai No. 24, March 1995, [online] Available at: http://iteslj.org/Articles/DeRolf-PracExper.html [Accessed 12 October 2008]. Dwyer, J. (2003). The Business Communication Handbook. (6thed). French’s Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia. Ellis, R. (1997). SLA Research and Language Teaching. Oxford. Ferrance, E. (2000). Themes In Education, Action Research. Brown University Ferriss, T. (2007-2009). How to Learn any Language in 3 Months. The Blog of Tim Ferriss Experiments in Lifestyle Design. [online] Available at:http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2009/01/20/learning-language [Accessed 10 October 2008]. Juppé, R. (2000) Regressing Forward Resurrecting Upper Secondary AOC Courses in Japan, [online] Available at: http://www.kasei.ac.jp/library/kiyou/2000/6.JUPPE.pdf [Accessed 10 November 2008]. 40 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (1988) The Action Research Planner, third edition. Victoria: Deakin University. Kuramoto, C. (2002). Improving Motivation in Oral Communication Classrooms in Japan: An Action Research Project. ELTED Newsletter, Volume 6, Summer 2002. [online] Available at: http://www.elted.net/issues/volume-6/V6Kuramoto.pdf [Accessed 12 November2008]. MacIntyre, P. D. (1994). Variables underlying willingness to communicate: A causal analysis. Communication Research Reports, 11, 135-142. Martin, D. (2008). Talk a Lot Starter Book (2nded). EFL Press Japan. Martin, D. & Scheibner, K. (2005). Just Talk. EFL Press Japan. Melrose, M. J. (2001). Maximizing the rigor of action research: Why would you want to' How could you' Field Methods, 13(2), p. 160–180. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2003, March 31). Regarding the establishment of an action plan to cultivate Japanese with English abilities. [online] Available at: http://mext.go.jp/english/topics/03072801.htm [Accessed 13 May 2008] Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (1998, April), (1998, July). Synopsis of the Curriculum Council's Midterm Report. [online] Available at: http://www.mext.go.jp/english/news/1998/07/980712.htm [Accessed 13 May 2008]. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (1999). Senior high school’s courses of study. Tokyo: National Printing Bureau. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2009). Senior high school’s courses of study. Tokyo: National Printing Bureau. Nation, I.S.P. (2001) Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge: Cabridge University Press 41 The Asian Conference on Language Learning 2011 Official Proceedings Osaka, Japan Nunan, D. (1993). Action research in language education. In Edge, J. & Richards, K. (Eds.) Teachers develop teachers research: papers on classroom research and teacher development (p. 39-50). Oxford: Heinemann. Ogasawara, M. (2008). Classroom Analysis of an Oral Communication Class at a Japanese High School. Asian EFL Journal, 2. Richards, J.C. & Lockhart, C. (1996). Reflective Teaching in Second Language Classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Saville-Troike, M. (2006). Introducing Second Language Acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press Thanasoulas, D. (2001). Constructivist Learning. ELT Newsletter, Article 54. [online] Available at: http://eltnewsletter.com/back/April2001/art542001.htm [Accessed 15 November 2008]. Wallace, M. J. (1991). Training foreign language teachers: A reflective approach. New York: Cambridge University Press. Zuber-Skerritt. (1996). New Directions in Action Research. London: Falmer Press. (p.3). 42