The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly

March 2018
Volume 20, Issue 3

Senior Editors:
Paul Robertson and John Adamson
Published by English Language Education Publishing

Asian EFL Journal

A Division of TESOL Asia Group
Part of SITE Ltd. Australia

http://www.asian-efl-journal.com

©Asian EFL Journal 2018

This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception no

reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of the Asian EFL Journal Press.

No unauthorized photocopying

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a

retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the Asian EFL Journal.

editor@asian-efl-journal.com
Publisher: Dr. Paul Robertson
Chief Editor: Dr. John Adamson
Associate Production Editors: Allison Smith and Dr. David Litz
Assistant Copy Editors: David Coventry, Karen Dreste, Amina Hachemi, Glenys Roberts, Stuart
Sotozaki-Leech, and Breda O’Hara-Davies.

ISSN 1738-1460

2
 Table of Contents

Foreword by AEFLJ’s Assistant Copy Editors….………………...…………....……… 5-7

1. Kemal Sinan Özmen, Abdulvahit Çakır, and Paşa Tevfik Cephe…………................. 8-30
- Conceptualization of English Culture and Accent: Idealized English
among Teachers in the Expanding Circle

2. Hongzhi Yang………………………………………….………………..………….....….. 31-53

- An Analysis of the Relationship between Chinese EFL Teachers’
Agency and Beliefs from an Activity Theory Perspective

3. Yunjeong Choi, Dongbo Zhang, Chin-Hsi Lin and Yining Zhang……............…....... 54-82
- Self-Regulated Learning of Vocabulary in English as a Foreign Language

4. Yi-Ching Pan………………………...……………….……...……….…....……............. 83-116

- The Effects of Remedial Instruction Associated with Graduation
Benchmarking on Low-Achieving Students’ English Learning at Technological
and Vocational Institutions

5. Ian Willey and Edmont Katz………………………………...……..…..…...….…....... 117-149

- Some Common Ground: Perceptions of Language Backgrounds, Classroom
Language Use, and Identity among University English Teachers in Japan

6. Dr. Hsiu Chiao (Sally) Fan…………...…………………………….……….…..…........ 150-171

- The Impact of Text Structure as a Metacognitive Mode on
EFL Learners’ Reading-to-Writing

7. Kamaludin Yusra / Yuni Budi Lestari….………...…………………………….……… 172-190

- Integrating Attitude, Knowledge and Skills in K-13 English Lesson Plans: Explorations
into Teachers’ Agentic Roles in Materials Development

8. Ryan Jayson V. Delos Reyes / Kristine May L. De Vera / Ramon S. Medriano Jr….. 191-202
- The Functions of Language in Facebook Posting

3
Book Reviews

1. Early Childhood Education in English for Speaker of Other Languages

Victoria A. Murphy and Maria Evangelou
Reviewed by Benjamin Thanyawatpokin.....…..……………………………….. 203-205

2. First and Second Language Use in Asian EFL

Ross Forman
Reviewed by Colin Walker….......……………………………………………….. 206-209

4
Foreword
By Asian EFL Journal Associate Production and Copy Editors

Welcome to another quarterly edition of Asian EFL Journal, which covers many modern
concepts in the sphere of English language education and research. In the first article,
Conceptualization of English Culture and Accent: Idealized English among Teachers in the
Expanding Circle, Kemal Sinan Özmen, Abdulvahit Çakır, and Paşa Tevfik Cephe delve into the
study of English as a lingua franca with regard to the perceptions of nonnative English teachers.
The researchers use a combination of questionnaires and interviews to explore the opinions of
nonnative English-speaking teachers in Turkish primary and secondary schools. Among their
discoveries is the trend for respondents to prefer the General American culture and accent (which
they had contact with through imported media) rather than British English (the accent and culture
they learned English in themselves). The article concludes that further study is needed into the
effects of nonnative English-speaking teachers’ perceptions of different English cultures and
accents on teaching practice and the impact of native speaker models on teachers’ self-
perceptions in the classroom.
Next, in An Analysis of the Relationship between Chinese EFL Teachers’ Agency and Beliefs
from an Activity Theory Perspective, Hongzhi Yang examines teachers’ ability to act and make
choices in the face of contradictions between their personal beliefs and aspirations, and their
classroom practices within the institution of a university in China. This is investigated through
the collection of data from teachers, students, and administrators. The data is analyzed through
the framework of Engeström's third generation of activity theory, developed from Vygotsky's
studies of cultural-historical psychology. The author attempts to understand how teachers’ beliefs
regarding learning shape students’ beliefs, and vice versa. She also examines the role of the
institution in relation to the formation of the beliefs of teachers and students, and how
institutional requirements can create contradictions within the minds of the people involved.
Then, in Self-Regulated Learning of Vocabulary in English as a Foreign Language, Yunjeong
Choi, Dongbo Zhang, Chin-Hsi Lin and Yining Zhang explore the relationship between

5
motivational factors, learning strategies and vocabulary knowledge in Korean high-school
students. The researchers examine the links between self-regulated learners, their learning
strategies and many of the intrinsic and extrinsic motivations which coincide to predict
vocabulary knowledge. There were many fascinating results regarding the students’ learning
strategies and their resulting vocabulary development as well as the subsequent influence of
motivation.
In the following paper, The Effects of Remedial Instruction Associated with Graduation
Benchmarking on Low-Achieving Students’ English Learning at Technological and Vocational
Institutions, Yiching Pan discusses the effectiveness of remedial English language classes on
student performance in their English graduation benchmark exam. Yiching Pan is concerned
with the effects of remedial classes on student performance as well as the participants' feelings
about the benchmark exam, their learning experience, and their levels of motivation. The study
examined the students’ pre- and post-test scores and the results of student questionnaires. Overall
findings were threefold: test washback varied among the three institutions; there were both
positive and negative effects of test washback on remedial instruction; in general, the benchmark
test did not motivate the students in their language learning;
Then, Ian Willey and Edmont C. Katz, in their paper entitled Some Common Ground:
Perceptions of Language Backgrounds, Classroom Language Use, and Identity among
University English Teachers in Japan, discuss the wider problematization of the use of the
dichotomous terms native and non-native in scholarly discourse. Data were derived from a
combination of timed free-writing and semi-structured interviews focusing on the self-
perceptions and reported language use of seventeen participants. Seven of the participants
claimed the language of the host country, Japanese, as their L1; and of the remaining ten, nine
had English as an L1 and one had L1 Dutch. It emerged that all shared concerns about their own
language attrition, the hybridization of the Englishes they used, and the mixing of languages as
media of instruction. The authors suggest Davies' (2013) term native users as a more apt
descriptor and examine the wider theoretical, research and pedagogical implications of the study.
The author Dr. Hsiu Chia (Sally) Fan has looked at using metacognitive strategies to improve
EFL students reading and writing by explicitly teaching text structure and linking reading to
writing. In her paper, The Impact of Text Structure as a Metacognitive Mode on EFL Learners’
Reading-to-Writing, Fan provides insight into how helping students identify text structures and

6
language used in specific genres such as comparison, cause and effect, etc., can affect both
students’ reading and writing. She chose undergraduate EFL students from Taiwan and divided
them into three groups. The study took place over a nine-week period. While all groups showed
improvement, the study determined that the students who received meta-cognitive awareness
training demonstrated the greatest strides in improving both their reading and writing.
The penultimre paper is by Yusra and Lestari from Indonesia. Spiritual and social attitudes,
scientific knowledge, and language-related life skills have been the main outcomes of learning in
Indonesian education system. Although spiritual and social attitudes have been respectively
assigned to the targets of Religion and Civics Education, the roles of teachers as agents of
changes within their community enforce them to take wider and more overarching roles
educating learners with attitude, knowledge and skills and leave their traditional roles as
providers of knowledge and trainers of skills. The study investigates how English teachers
exercise these agentic roles in lesson planning and materials development.
Finally, Aydin, 2012 describes the tremendous increase in the number of teenagers and
students using Social Networking Site (SNS) as a tool to communicate and express their ideas
and thoughts in the digital world. Ryan Jayson Delos Reyes, Kristine May De Vera and Ramon
Medriano’s The Functions of Language in Facebook Posting examines how students use
Facebook to express their feeling and emotions. The research studies the different functions of
the language based on posted FB statuses and concludes that middle-age Filipino learners use the
Referential and Emotive functions of the language.

7
 Conceptualization of English Culture and Accent: Idealized English
among Teachers in the Expanding Circle

Kemal Sinan Özmen, Abdulvahit Çakır, Paşa Tevfik Cephe

Gazi University, Turkey1

Bio Data:
Kemal Sinan Özmen, Gazi University, PhD, works as an associate professor at Gazi University,
English Language Teaching Program in Turkey. He holds a PhD degree in Teaching English as a
Foreign Language, with a specific focus on artistic dimensions of the teaching profession, and
carries out research studies on various aspects of teacher cognition. (Email:
sozmen@gazi.edu.tr)

Abdulvahit Çakır, Gazi University, is a professor of English language teaching and serves as the
head of the English Language Teaching Program at Gazi University. His research studies,
presentations and publications have addressed numerous aspects of foreign language teaching
and English teacher education over the last three decades. (Email: vahit@gazi.edu.tr)

Paşa Tevfik Cephe, Gazi University, is a member of the teaching staff in the Department of
English Language Teaching at Gazi University. He received his PhD from the same university.
He is particularly interested in teacher training and development and teaching language skills. He
has presented papers at several conferences and has published in ELT Journals. (Email:
pcephe@gazi.edu.tr)

Abstract
Studies on English as a lingua franca have extended the boundaries of inquiry well beyond the
traditional conceptualizations of nonnative English-speaking teachers (NNESTs) and their
attitudes toward culture and accent. Using a sequential mixed methods design, this study
investigates the perception of dominant English culture, accent choice and how these two factors
influence the practice of 851 NNESTs in Turkey. The results demonstrated that teachers tended
to idealize a specific English culture and accent, which was mostly General American. Teachers’
various sorts of contact with an inner circle country or culture were found to construct an
affective linguacultural attachment. In addition, interviews with 51 NNESTs revealed different
kinds of language input with different impacts, categorized as ‘received input’ (instructional) and
‘preferred input’. The exposure to popular imported media in English, coded as the preferred
input, without instructional purposes seemed more influential in the adoption of a specific
English culture and accent. The implications are that the studies on nonnative models in teaching

1
Gazi University, Gazi Faculty of Education, Department of Foreign Languages Education, English Language Teaching
Program, C-Block Teknikokullar, Ankara, 06500, Turkey

8
English should examine NNESTs’ perception of culture and accent choice as well as how native
speaker models influence teachers’ perceptions of their competences and methodologies.

Keywords: English as a lingua franca, expanding circle, nonnative English-speaking teachers,

perception of English culture and accent

Introduction
The widespread use of English in global communication has intensified the research into
nonnative English accents, identities and ideologies. The varieties of English in the expanding
circle2 (Kachru, 1985) have been examined with scrutiny over the last decades. One aspect of the
discussions in the studies of English as a lingua franca (ELF) centered on whether the varieties of
ELF could be a proper element of the instructional content (see Jenkins, 2011). Another aspect
revolves around the perceptions of nonnative speakers (NNSs) about English culture (Kachru,
1985; Cook, 1999), accent choice (Jenkins, 2007) and language identity (Fiedler, 2011). In this
respect, the theory and practice of ELF and related areas, such as English as an international
language (Smith, 1983), English as a global language (Crystal, 1997), and World Englishes
(Brown, 1993), are establishing pedagogical principles for the instruction of ELF.
However, the inquiries concerning which English to teach should consider how NNSs behave
when developing their English proficiency, and whether such behavioral patterns in establishing
a language identity in the expanding circle are pervasive. This paper argues that nonnative
English-speaking teachers (NNESTs) in Turkey forge their language identities in line with the
dominant linguacultural norms and canons of inner circle countries. In this respect, unraveling
why some of the NNESTs aspire to speak a source accent 3 and whether such a choice is a
pervasive behavioral pattern is critical for the future of ELF pedagogy.
Jenkins (2009) discusses the aspirations of some learners to develop a native-like proficiency,
and holds that such a tendency “is their choice, and of no concern to ELF researchers provided
that the choice is an informed one” (p.203). However, is it really their choice? In his standup
comedy, Weapons of Self Distraction, actor Robin Williams displays an attitude concerning how

2
Although the theory of concentric circles has been criticized for its validity, it is used in this study to refer broadly
to case: Inner circles: English as a native language: USA, UK, Canada, etc. Outer Circles: English as an additional
language: Singapore, India, etc. Expanding Circle: English as a foreign language: Russia, Turkey, etc.
3
The term ‘source accent’ is coined to refer to the major accents of English, such as General American (GA) or
British English (RP). This term was chosen as a metaphorical definition for the claim that NNESTs may aim at
approximating their L2 accent to a specific common accent, such as GA or RP, consciously or unconsciously. The
word ‘source’ defines the type of native English accent in that such accents represent the power, key cultural traits,
instructional materials and thus criteria of the effective use of English.

9
NNSs of English may be perceived in an inner-circle country. He talks about his struggle to
reach a representative of a call center on the phone, and complains about the challenge:
“If you’d like to talk to a person press one” [He acts like he is dialing on a phone]
Beep! “If you’d like to speak to someone in English press two” Beep! “Are you sure
you don’t want to talk to someone in Spanish? Press three” Beep! … “Press five if
you’re getting somewhat irritated” [He then acts like he is dialing on a phone.] Beep!
“If you’d like to speak to someone in English press two” Beep! “Press nine!”
…Beep! Beep! Beep! [He begins talking in an Indian accent.] Robin Williams:
Hello, did you want to talk to a real person?”
Here the bilingual is viewed as an incompetent person because of the evident Indian influence
in his speech. Of course, this example does not imply all NNSs are always perceived in this way.
However, the underlying psychological dynamic behind the joke may explain some aspects of a
study done by Jenkins (2007) in which the NNESTs displayed a negative attitude toward
nonnative English accents. Jenkins (2007) noted that “An attachment to ‘standard’ native speaker
models remains firmly in place among many nonnative English speakers, even though they no
longer learn English to communicate primarily with its native speakers” (p. 204). Jenkins’s
research study was conducted on English teachers in the expanding circle, similar to the scope of
this study. Jenkins (2007) also observed the feeling of obligation among English teachers to
acquire a native-like English proficiency so that they could present themselves as good English
teachers. The present study hypothesizes that such a feeling of compulsion, the need for the
nonnative posh, may be a universal behavioral pattern displayed by highly proficient English
users in the expanding circle, specifically among English teachers. Therefore, it appears
important to investigate NNESTs’ endeavor to sound like a native speaker by adopting or
imitating one of the source accents of English. Understanding this phenomenon will contribute to
a stronger pedagogy for ELF since ELF researchers need to know more about how instructional
publications based on native speaker models and the prestige of source accents influence the
English self of NNESTs as well as learners.

English as a Lingua Franca and the English Teacher

The English language no longer belongs to the native speakers (NSs) of the English-speaking
countries (Norton, 1997; Peirce, 1995; Widdowson, 1994) because the NNSs of English
outnumber the NSs (Crystal, 1997). This reality has linguistic and pedagogic consequences for
the analysis and the instruction of ELF. One of the linguistic consequences is that ELF actually

10
has many varieties and speech communities that are developed dynamically in the countries
where English is a foreign language. As for pedagogic consequences of the ownership of
English, concerns have already been raised about identifying one or some of the Englishes to
teach in the expanding circle: Which English should we teach in the expanding circle countries?
What linguistic, political and pedagogical choices do we make if we choose to teach ELF in the
expanding circle?
Theoretical approaches to English as a vehicle of international communication have been
developed and diversified significantly in recent years. Not long ago, the term ‘lingua franca’
was enough to describe the role of English in the international arena, including academia,
business and other forms of social and political interaction. However, the current zeitgeist of
applied linguistics has expanded the meaning of ELF and offered new perspectives on the field.
This area of inquiry addresses a basic sociolinguistic reality: English is constantly changing, not
only in its native territories but in countries where it is a foreign language, and this mere fact will
soon influence the linguistic content of teaching English as a foreign language. One of the
promising influences of this area is evident in Jenkins’ (2000) proposal in which she offered to
replace the terminology of ‘non-native speakers’ with ‘bilingual English speakers’, and ‘native
speakers’ with ‘monolingual English speakers’. Cook (1999, 2004) also values bilinguals more
than monolinguals in that the former possess a deeper insight into languages and cultures.
Characteristics of native-speakerism from a cognitive perspective have already been proven
elusive and ineffective (Cook, 1999). However, we can also criticize the term ‘native speaker’
from a sociolinguistic perspective. NSs are born into a specific variety of a language and can
speak more than one variety, even dialect. NSs also belong to different speech communities and
domains in their cultural contexts. Thus, the primary criterion of being a NS is validated by
social and geographical roots and origins. Then is it plausible to label English competences of
NNSs with such criteria? This approach results in the common understanding among many
second language acquisition (SLA) researchers that SLA is based on failure. However, applying
such insights of SLA research to the English classroom has no contribution to the motivation of
students or teachers. In other words, the microcosm of human cognition should not interfere with
how we socially and politically define and treat NNSs of English, which brings us to the need for
a common ground between the paradigms of SLA and foreign language teaching (Andreasson
1994; Mukherjee & Hundt, 2011).

11
Culture and the Nonnative English Speaking Teacher
The relationship between culture and language in ELF studies is based on the idea that because
English is not exclusively the property of NSs the cultural norms of the inner-circle are no longer
viewed as the major target culture in the expanding circle. Therefore, taking the NSs’ culture as a
standard shaping the NNSs’ communication is now viewed as a shallow approach. Instead,
developing the intercultural communication (Byram, 1997) and a non-native speaker model for
language teaching are more reasonable for a strong pedagogy. House (1999) accentuated that
“ELF interactions are defined as interactions between members of two or more different
linguacultures, for none of whom English is the mother tongue” (p.74). Such interactions do not
necessarily require an in-depth knowledge of a typical English culture of the inner-circle, but
how NNESTs perceive and internalize the norms and values of the English culture stands at a
critical point.
English as a foreign language is a challenging context to teach English as students are mostly
limited to the classroom or school environment to use English. Another difficulty stems from the
choice and instruction of English accents. The instructional publications and materials are still
strictly based on source accents of English, and this has not changed remarkably since Cook
(1999) pointed out that this was an unrealistic target for most English students in the expanding
circle. Even if an ELF perspective is adopted in classrooms, the pressure of the materials based
on exocentric norms (Kachru, 1996) worries teachers about their English proficiency (Seidlhofer,
2003). Surely, NNESTs as cultural representatives play an important part not only in identifying
the cultural and linguistic content offered to learners but also in instilling learners with a strong
disposition toward intercultural communication. Therefore, how perceptions of NNESTs of
English culture and accent are shaped by the sociocultural and educational pressures merits a
scholarly investigation (Llurda, 2005). Within this framework, the present study expands on
efforts to disentangle how NNESTs perceive native English cultures and accents and thus choose
which English to use and teach in the expanding circle. To this end, the following research
questions were addressed:

1. What are the NNESTs perceptions concerning native English cultures and
accents for instructional contexts?

12
 2. Do NNESTs prefer a specific culture and accent of English to model, use, and
teach in their classes?
Methods
The Context
In Turkey, the term ‘foreign language’ is almost synonymous with English. Among all foreign
languages offered by the Ministry of National Education, 98.4% of the students take English
classes (Eurydice, 2013), and the remaining 1.6% choose other languages, mostly German or
French. In state schools, learners take two-hour English classes by the age of 8 (2nd grade).
Although private schools constitute a small segment of education in Turkey (around 4%), they
offer English courses even at kindergarten level. The foreign language teaching curriculum has
been changed drastically over the last decade and now offers a European approach, based on the
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (Council of Europa, 2001). Many
universities also aspire to improve students’ English proficiency by offering one-year intensive
preparatory programs and compulsory courses in undergraduate programs (Eurypedia, 2013).
Apart from the educational contexts, it is quite easy for Turkish citizens to access British and
American TV channels, movies and all other forms of imported media abundantly available on
the market and internet.

The Participants and Procedure

The present study investigated the perception of culture and accent choice among NNESTs
teaching at state primary or secondary schools in Turkey. Among 60,000 English teachers
composing the universe of the study, a total of 1,174 English teachers were selected randomly
from the mail lists of professional associations, online forums, as well as personal networks, and
they were also invited by email; and 851 of them (684 females and 167 male) volunteered to take
part in the study. The participants were between 22 and 47 (M= 32, SD= 0.93) years of age and
their years of service varied between 1 and 23 (M=11.4, SD=1.56). In the survey, 94 teachers
were found to have some contact with certain inner-circle countries for training, projects or other
programs (11% of the scope); therefore, they were chosen for the interviews to understand how
their inner-circle experiences had influenced their perception of English culture and accent
choice. Among them, 53 NNESTs volunteered to participate in the interviews. The aims of the
interviews were to explore in more detail the issues that were covered in the survey and to gain a

13
deeper understanding of the participants’ English-related experiences. The interview sessions
focused on 1) the impact of their contact with English speaking countries, if any (Work and
Travel program, Fulbright experiences in the US, or projects under the EU programs) and 2) the
impact of native contact in their private and/or professional life in Turkey. The interviewees also
wrote an autobiography with a special emphasis on their English language teaching and learning
experiences. The survey was conducted using the online version of the questionnaire and the
interviews were done face-to-face. These procedures were carried out in English. The
participants were informed about the study and their rights.
The participants were native speakers of Turkish. They resided in 17 different provinces,
97.07% (F=826) worked in state schools, 2.93% (F= 25) taught in private school, and their
teaching hours averaged between 17 and 32 hours per week (M= 24, SD= 0.37). The proportion
of state and private schools is well-balanced because only 4% of education is carried out in
private primary and secondary schools in Turkey (Ministry of National Education, 2013). Based
on a curriculum prepared in line with the Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages (Council of Europe, 2001), the participants taught English between A1 and B2 levels,
including young learners and adolescents. Further details are given in the results section.

Instruments
The questionnaire survey, ‘Inventory of Perception and Attitude toward Major English Culture
and Accent’ (IPAMECA), has three sections including 28 items. The first section collects data
concerning teachers’ basic demography, self-evaluation on language proficiency and experiences
with English language teaching. The second section has 20 items offering Likert-type response
options (‘1=strongly disagree’ to ‘5=strongly agree’) on teachers’ perception of English culture
and accent in relation to their practice. The third section consisted of 8 statements about the
NNESTs’ choices and attitudes regarding English accents (US, UK, Both, Other).
Completed in two months in mid-2013, the development process of the questionnaire was
based on six stages: 1) developing an item pool, 2) checking content validity of the instrument
versions, 3) strengthening the language validity, 4) three piloting phases with three experts’
feedback for the construct validity, 5) comparing the survey results with the qualitative data and
6) measuring the reliability. Initially, a questionnaire item pool consisting of 86 statements was
generated. After three different pilots with limited scope (around 130 for the first two, 187 for

14
the third one), the third version of the instrument was considered to be more valid in terms of
experts’ views and participants’ feedback. The items of the instrument were reduced from 40 to
28 during the piloting phases. In the third piloting phase, Cronbach's α coefficient scores varied
from 0.84 to 0.91, which demonstrates that the instrument was well within the range of
acceptability.
Despite rich quantitative data, this study adopts an interpretive approach to understand the
phenomenon (Cohen & Manion, 2004) specifically by referring to the in-depth interviews
conducted with 53 teachers. The development of interview questions was guided by Glesne and
Peshkin (1992), who posit that “The questions you ask must fit your topic; the answers they elicit
must illuminate the phenomena of inquiry. And the questions you ask must be drawn from the
respondents’ lives” (p. 66). To this end, a pool of interview questions (24 items) was initially
prepared on the basis of the literature review (e.g. Kachru, 1985; Jenkins, 2007), questionnaire
and research questions. An expert consensus was reached on two factors and eight questions, and
this final version was piloted with three teachers residing in Ankara. The semi-structured
interview questions were then used in the interview sessions each lasting around 8 to 14 minutes.
The conversations were recorded with the permission of the participants and transcribed
verbatim.

Analysis
The results of the survey were analyzed by SPSS version 19.0. Descriptive statistics such as
frequency, means, chi square test, standard deviations and percentages were used in the analysis.
Chi square and the phi coefficient tests were used to find out the possible differences between
genders, ‘years of service’ and ‘native contact’ in terms of the NNESTs’ perception of culture
and accent. While frequency, means and percentages were utilized to illustrate the distribution of
participants’ responses to the survey questionnaire, standard deviation was used to elucidate age,
years of service of the participants and the mean scores in the survey.
In addition to the interviews, teachers’ autobiographies and comments written on the
questionnaires were included in the qualitative analysis process. A rigorous multi-step process
(Glaser & Strauss, 1967) was adopted to analyze the interviews. Initially, all of the interviews
and participants’ notes were read multiple times to become immersed in the data and to generate
an emerging thematic coding scheme. Through this immersion process, the themes and codes

15
were constructed through constant comparative analyses of the interview transcripts (Glaser &
Strauss, 1967). Then the thematic codes and the raw data were examined by an independent
researcher to evaluate the process and determine the credibility of the themes that emerged. As
the last step, the themes were conceptualized as given in Table 1, and each was interpreted in the
discussions section.
These concepts were then grouped under two different dimensions. The former, received and
preferred input, was labeled as local dimensions since these occurrences do not necessarily
possess a universal nature; that is, they may not be observed in other expanding-circle countries.
However, the latter dimension, affective linguacultural attachment, was considered a universal
behavioral pattern in the expanding circle, which claims that it may be pervasive in other
expanding-circle countries (See the Discussions section).

Table 1
Thematic Codes of the Qualitative Data

Categorical Themes Codes Definitions

Although the instructional materials are

predominantly in British English in Turkey, English
Received vs. speakers were found to prefer American English due
Local RI
Preferred to imported media (music, movies, etc). Therefore,
Dimension
Input PI while the instructional accent was named ‘received
input’, the students’ choice of English input was
called ‘preferred input’.

Affective The accent choice of the English speakers is

Universal Linguacultur significantly influenced by their contact with an
ALA
Dimension al inner-circle country and context. Affectively, they
Attachment feel closer to these cultures, and thus accents.

Results
Table 2 below presents the demographic characteristics, English-related experiences and self-
evaluation of 851 NNESTs. During their education, these teachers had not been instructed about
English as an international language, nor had they heard of any ELF approaches to teaching
16
English (84.47%, F=804). The NNESTs also had little contact with NSs in their workplace or
private lives (6%), and had very few opportunities to visit and stay in English speaking countries
(11%). However, most of them reported that they frequently (80%) consumed imported media in
English. In addition, 93% of them had learned English in Turkey, and only 1% reported to have a
native-like proficiency in English. Among the NNESTs, 42% were not pleased with their English
pronunciation. None of the participants had taught a proficiency level above upper-intermediate.

Table 2
Demography, English-Related Experiences and Self-Evaluation of the NNESTs

Variables Results

Total participants 851

Age M=28, SD=0.63

Gender 648 F, 167 M

Year of service M=7.4, SD: 1.56

Where/When started to learn English 93% state and 7% private schools, 98.7% learned in
Turkey and 97% began to learn by age 11.

Visits to Eng. speaking countries 11% to inner-circle, and 3% stayed more than three
months. 89% never been abroad.

Frequency of listening to songs in 78% often, 16% sometimes, 5% rarely, 1% never

Eng.

Frequency of watching media in Eng. 82% often, 15% sometimes, 2% rarely, 1% never

Amount of native contact 6% often, 15% sometimes, 43% rarely, 36% never

Rating of English pronunciation 1% native like, 57% mediocre, 42% poor

Age/level taught Age: 8 to 17, Level: up to intermediate

Weekly lesson load 17 to 32 (M=24, SD=0.37)

17
 The school you work 97.07 state schools (F=826), 2.93% in private

Input provided about ELF (pre- and 84.47 (F=804) had no instruction about ELF and related
in-service) issues

The IPAMECA survey produced no evidence of any differences between genders and years of
service in terms of NNESTs’ perception of English accents and cultures (p = 0.111, Chi-Square
= 2.545, df = 1). However, there was an association found between the native contact of
NNESTs and their specific English accent choice (chi square = 19.05, df = 1, p < .001). The
actual association between these two variables is high and extremely unlikely to have occurred
by chance (phi coefficient = .867).
The items of IPAMECA between 1 and 20 address the NNESTs’ perception of English culture
and accent in relation to their classroom practice, presented in Table 3 below. The NNESTs in
Turkey valued a native-like pronunciation in English (item 1), and believed that it was important
and necessary for an English teacher (item 6). Although they reported to practice English to
develop their fluency and pronunciation (item 3), most of them did not seem to practice a
specific accent (item 2). However, almost all of them also believed that a sympathy toward a
specific culture affected the accent choice of teachers (item 7).

Table 3
NNESTs’ Perception of Native-Like Culture and Accent in Relation to Their Practice

ITEMS M SD

A fluent use of English with a native-like pronunciation is a must for an

1 4.37 0.92
English teacher.

I try to speak English fluently with a specific accent (e.g. British or

2 2.21 1.08
American).

3 I practice English to develop my fluency and pronunciation. 4.06 0.62

I can understand a British movie (with a standard accent) without

4 3.08 1.75
subtitles.

18
 I can understand an American movie (with a standard accent) without
5 4.26 0.83
subtitles.

Speaking English with a specific accent is important and necessary for a

6 4.24 1.87
language teacher.

My sympathy for a particular English culture affects my choice of

7 4.21 0.56
English accent.

American singers and songs have had an influence on my accent choice

8 4.47 0.78
of American English.

British singers and songs have had an influence on my accent choice of

9 3.32 1.43
British English.

American movies, series, talk shows and other genres have had an
10 4.67 0.88
influence on my accent choice.

British movies, series, talk shows and other genres have had an influence
11 3.11 2.14
on my accent choice

12 The USA culture and accent is more accessible. 4.79 0.43

13 The UK culture and language is more accessible. 3.23 2.13

14 I teach a specific accent (such as British or American). 3.11 2.48

15 I raise awareness on different accents. 2.13 1.14

I use authentic materials that exhibit different accents of native or non-

16 2.18 1.67
native English speakers.

17 I promote intercultural communication in my courses. 3.77 1.32

The course books I use offer tasks and activities that promote intercultural
18 2.37 0.89
awareness.

19 My students give importance to using a specific English accent. 1.88 0.44

20 I feel confident about teaching a specific English accent. 2.65 0.59

19
This finding was also evident in items 5, 8, 10 and 12 to which NNESTs responded that
American culture, accent and popular media were more influential than British ones (items 4, 9,
11 and 13) on their perception of English culture and accent. Nevertheless, it was found that they
did not teach a specific accent (item 14), nor did they feel confident in teaching a specific accent
of English (item 20). The NNESTs also held that their students were mostly indifferent to
learning accents of English (item 19). Apparently, the NNESTs did not aim at raising awareness
of different accents of English in their classes (items 15 and 16) or promoting intercultural
communication either (item 17). Finally, they perceived course books as weak with regard to
promoting intercultural awareness (item 18).
Presented in Table 4, the last set of 8 items of the questionnaire is about ‘teachers’ choice of
target L2 culture and accent’. The NNESTs held that American English strengthened the power
of English as a lingua franca (item 26). Most of the teachers perceived that General American
accent best represents English culture (item 21), is more influential (item 22), more important
(item 23) and easier to understand for Turkish learners (items 24 and 25). The ‘Both’ option was
not chosen more than 22% for all of the items, and ‘British accent’ options were not selected
more than 35% in the questionnaire. Finally, the authentic materials in American English for
classroom use were considered more abundant, diverse and available than those in the British
accent (items 27, 28). This section of the questionnaire also offered another option, which was
‘other accent’; however, only 6 teachers out of 851 noted different accents, such as South
African, Canadian and Australian. Therefore, the option ‘other accent’ was excluded from Table
4 below.

Table 4
NNESTs’ Choice of Target L2 Culture and Accent

USA UK Both
ITEMS % % %

21 Which country or countries best represent(s) the culture of English?

57 21 22

20
 22 Which accent is more influential for you in developing your overall
61 26 13
English proficiency?

23 Which accent is more important for you to teach your English

54 35 11
learners?

24 Which accent is easier for Turks to speak? 48 33 19

25 Which accent is easier for Turks to understand? 62 26 12

26 Which culture dominates in the world and thus strengthens the

72 23 5
power of English as a lingua franca?

27 Which accent is more accessible for you to find authentic materials

59 21 20
for your class?

28 Which accent is more accessible in terms of diversity and quantity

59 22 19
of authentic materials?

Discussion
To investigate the NNESTs’ perception of English accent and culture, the following research
questions (RQs) were addressed: 1) the NNESTs’ perceptions concerning the superior English
culture and accent for instructional contexts and 2) whether the NNESTs prefer a specific culture
and accent of English to model, use and teach in their classes. The RQs were used as subtitles of
this section. The qualitative findings were presented in this section by synthesizing them with the
questionnaire survey results and under separate subtitles.

RQ1: English Teachers’ Perceptions of Culture and Accent

No matter what their accent choices were, NNESTs evaluated their English pronunciation mostly
as mediocre (57%) or poor (42%), which directly implies exocentric norms as a criterion. In
addition, most of the teachers reported that GA accent was more comprehensible (item 5: M=
4.26, SD= 0.83 and item 8: M= 4.47, SD= 0.78) and accessible (item 12: M= 4.79, SD= 0.43) for
them. This can be attributed to the dominance of imported American media (Rindal & Piercy,

21
2013; Scales, Wennerstorm, Richard, & Wu, 2006). The finding is interesting because the
English language teaching publications and materials in Turkey are still heavily RP oriented. The
NNESTs also viewed the American accent as more influential for them in developing their
English proficiency (item 22: GA= 61%, RP= 26% and Both= 13%), more important to teach
(item 23: GA= 54%, RP= 35% and Both= 11%) and easier to comprehend (item 24: GA= 48%,
RP= 33% and Both= 19%) and to speak for Turkish learners (item 25: GA= 62%, RP= 26% and
Both= 12%). The NNESTs also viewed GA as the dominant accent (item 26: GA= 72%, RP=
23% and Both= 5%) and abundant in diversity and quantity of authentic materials for classroom
use (item 27 and 28). Although no studies have reported similar types of findings in a Turkish
context, the impact of American English via imported media and popular culture was articulated
in the literature (e.g. Rindal & Piercy, 2013). However, a study by Çekiç (2009) helps infer why
teachers think that GA accent may be easier to learn for Turkish learners. Çekiç (2009) reported
on an experimental study in which a group of elementary learners of English were observed
during 20 hours of English instruction. The results showed that the group that received input in
American English was more successful in the standardized post-listening tests (Çekiç, 2009).
However, we need to be cautious in interpreting such data because more convincing evidence is
needed to resolve this issue.
One of the NNESTs noted in the interview: “Being exposed to American English is not a
choice. The movies we love, the music we listen to are mostly American. In Turkey, you can
watch most of the American series in English”. However, this specific result contradicts the
findings of Çetinkaya (2009), who conducted a qualitative study on 15 English learners at a
Turkish university. The learners reported that RP was preferable to GA and thus they preferred
RP (Çetinkaya, 2009). However, Çetinkaya’s study was conducted on a small sample of learners,
and thus should not be generalized to all learners or teachers. In a recent study conducted with 47
senior student teachers at an English language teaching program in Turkey, Coşkun (2011) found
that 31.9% of the participants chose RP while 38.3% preferred the GA accent, which confirms
the findings of the present study. However, the sampling in Coşkun’s (2011) study is not
sufficient to make a generalization, either.

Received and Preferred Input

22
Frequently made comments about the abundance of input in American English and its impact
naturally resulted in a need to code and classify the different input types of which English
learners and teachers are exposed in Turkey. On the one hand, the instructional input provided in
formal language teaching contexts can be named ‘received input’, which is not based on
learners’ choice; whereas the non-instructional input, which can be named ‘preferred input’, is
chosen and/or encountered by the individuals outside of language learning contexts. Inferred
from the qualitative data, such a classification is necessary for language users of the expanding
circle because it seemed that the preferred input exerted a more significant impact than the
received input in sympathizing with a specific native accent and culture of English. In other
words, a specific accent offered in a typical English language classroom in the expanding circle
may not necessarily result in idealizing that specific accent. Personal experiences of the
individuals with a specific inner-circle accent may be more influential, as the findings suggested
in the present study. It should be noted that preferred and received input may naturally overlap
under some circumstances in an expanding circle country.
The participants mentioned different versions of contact with a specific inner-circle accent in
the questionnaire, in their autobiographies and in interviews. In addition to living in or visiting
an inner-circle English speaking country or working with a native English colleague, the
participants reported a wide range of contacts based on preferred input. They were mostly in
American and British English encountered via the internet, movie theaters, television programs
and series, printed media such as novels, magazines and many other versions of imported media,
which are all easily accessible and affordable in Turkey. From this point of view, such input
types were regarded as more influential by the NNESTs in their perception of dominant English
culture/accent, and thus coded as the preferred input. A comment made by a novice teacher from
Ankara clarifies the case:
“I have discovered that the TV series I watch on internet have been more
effective than my, my course book-based learning of, of English.
Pronunciation, for example, I have learnt how to say things in a more natural
way thanks to American series. Friends, How I Met Your Mother, Two and a
Half Men or, or, Under the Dome- I am watching it nowadays, erm, all have
been very beneficial for me to sound natural as an English teacher. I definitely
learn new things in English that I have not been taught in the school”.

In addition to those regular ways of interacting with GA or RP accents, the NNESTs

mentioned social networking sites, forums and other sorts of professionally organized

23
communities for English language teachers on the internet. A teacher working in a small town
noted in her autobiography that “After graduation, the only way to improve my English is
internet. I had many friends, some native and some are nonnative teachers like me. I also watch
many movies, series and programs on internet”. Considering that the language learning
experiences of those teachers in primary and secondary education were completely based on
getting prepared for high-stakes tests including items on grammar and reading, the internet and
other sorts of preferred input provide them with an opportunity to use English to communicate.
Ironically, it explains the context in which perceptions of the NNESTs toward native English
cultures/accents are shaped before and during their career.

RQ2: English Teachers’ Choice of English Accent

The findings of the survey showed that, despite a slight sympathy toward GA (items 21, 22, 23),
the NNESTs did not teach a specific accent (item 19), nor did their learners seem to be interested
in focusing on one (item 20). Nevertheless, a minority of teachers who had various kinds of
contact with a native accent chose a specific accent to speak and teach. However, a great many
of the teachers viewed that GA was the lingua franca and displayed sympathy toward GA accent
and culture (item 26).
Some teachers also noted in the questionnaire that they taught GA and RP interchangeably,
based on the acceptability rationale. A total of 83 teachers wrote very similar comments on the
questionnaire, a representative of which is: “American and British English are taught
interchangeably in classes. Most teachers only know the major differences between these
accents, and mostly do not talk about these differences. I know many colleagues do it this way”.
Sifakis and Sougari (2005) asserted that most NNESTs value exocentric norms in their
instruction, which explains the approach of NNESTs on this issue. However, the acceptability
rationale does not refer to NNESTs’ awareness of the distinct linguistic properties of those
accents, but to their incompetence in teaching English pronunciation. Thus, the accent choice of
most of the NNESTs in this study was found to be at a more affective level than the classroom
practice level. Here we reach the critical point in the discussion where we should underline the
acute need for teaching English as an international language (Jenkins, 2011) so that exocentric
norms may not confuse NNESTs about what to teach in the expanding circle. Similar findings

24
have been reported from different contexts (Cogo, 2012; İnceçay & Akyel, 2014; Jenkins, 2007;
Matsuda, 2002).

Affective Linguacultural Attachment

Almost all of the interviewees reported that their visits to inner-circle countries or their contact
with a specific English-speaking country/context had a significant impact on their adoption of a
specific English accent. Among 53 interviewees, 15 had been to the US under a Work and Travel
program, 9 for language learning, 7 for professional courses and 1 for a Fulbright exchange
program. In addition, 5 participants had been to the UK and 7 had participated in the EU
educational programs in which they worked with British peers. The remaining 9 reported to have
worked or studied with British or American teachers in Turkey. A Fulbright alumna said: “I did
not deliberately choose American English to speak or to teach. It is a natural process. I know
how to handle things in American English, so feel safer. You know, it sounds smarter than the
bookish English”. Similar statements were made by 17 interviewees. It is evident that one aspect
of the accent choice is determined by NNESTs’ developed communicative competences (Canale
& Swain, 1980) in a particular English accent. This is a vital point because such reasons for
choosing a specific accent were attributed to the acquisition of appropriateness, register and other
socio-pragmatic features of the given accent of an inner-circle country. Another aspect of this
phenomenon was reported by 14 different interviewees, one of whom said:
“I have been watching Hollywood series mostly on computer for years.
Sometimes I watch more than four or five episodes of a season in a day. … One
day I was surprised to find out that I spent less effort in understanding American
English, say, when I watch CNN, and, and it also influenced my speech; I mean
the way I speak, my pronunciation, words I choose... So somehow you develop an
ear for, for this English version [GA accent] and I feel more confident in this
way.”

Therefore, one can suggest that not only do some of the NNESTs’ choose a specific accent of
English due to the developed communicative competences in that accent, but also due to its
developed comprehension competence (Carroll, 1972), resulting in less effort to comprehend a
specific accent. These cases were thus coded as an affective linguacultural attachment, which is
a result of intense contact with a specific native accent whether in the natural context of the
accent or even in the expanding circle. Affective linguacultural attachment is a result of a non-
native speaker’s choice of a specific accent and culture of the target language, modeling, using

25
and inevitably teaching it in the case of the teachers. This phenomenon may explain a dimension
of why NNESTs prefer to model a source accent (Chiba, Matsuura, & Yamamoto, 1995; Dalton-
Puffer, Gunther, & Ute, 1997; Timmis, 2002). However, the teachers who had contact with an
inner-circle country were observed to display a stronger affective linguacultural attachment than
those who were exposed intensely to a specific accent via imported media or native contact in the
expanding circle.
Offered as an interpretation, the classification of ‘received vs. preferred input’ was regarded as
local dimensions; that is to say, such cases may not be pervasive in all of the expanding-circle
countries. On the other hand, ‘affective linguacultural attachment’ as a behavioral pattern
elucidating accent choices of NNESTs was considered to have a universal value and thus
regarded as a universal dimension. However, the findings showed that although NNESTs
idealize the American accent in many ways due to the pressure of the exocentric norms on the
profession, most of them do not try to speak and teach it in their classrooms.

Conclusion
The increasing interest in ELF and efforts made to analyze nonnative English variations stand at
a critical point for the field. Above all, the greatest contribution of ELF studies to NNESTs’
teaching practice is to disregard the exocentric norms in evaluating their English competences
and identities. Bayyurt (2006) believes that teaching ELF in the expanding circle will contribute
to better intercultural communication. The results of this study state that NNESTs in the
expanding circle may need to idealize a specific source accent due to: 1) the pressure of native-
speakerism in educational institutions; 2) the prestige of native-speakerism among teachers and
learners; and 3) an affective linguacultural attachment, as a result of various kinds of contact
with inner-circle countries. One conclusion to draw from the findings is that developing
pedagogy for ELF should take such behavioral dynamics of NNESTs into account.
The study also shows that NNESTs in Turkey view GA as the lingua franca. This propensity
can be considered interesting because the teaching materials are heavily British in Turkey. It may
also suggest that the impact of teaching publications and materials is not as influential as
authentic input used for non-instructional purposes. The classification of ‘received input’ and
‘preferred input’ was offered to explain this phenomenon. Interaction in real English mostly
without any instructional purposes was coded as the preferred input, and found to be heavily

26
influential in NNESTs’ sympathizing with a specific English accent. In addition, teachers’
contact with an inner circle country was observed to exert a significant impact on their accent
choice, mostly due to developing communicative competences in that accent. This together with
the impact of ‘preferred input’ were labeled as an affective linguacultural attachment to a
specific native English accent. However, more research with similar research questions is needed
specifically into English language learners in this context.
Although English teachers tended choose a preferred English language culture and then adopt
its accent, a few of them were found to be teaching a different accent, the differences between
GA and RP accents, or an awareness concerning ELF and intercultural communication.
According to the interview results, most of the NNESTs reported that they taught pronunciation
in terms of the acceptability rationale, which was regarded as an incorrect instructional choice by
them because they largely believed that it would be better to stick to one particular accent in the
classroom. Acceptability rationale is based on allowing any possible pronunciation without
referring to its accentual roots, or just teaching the major accents of English in a blended way. As
teachers reported, learners were not interested in any accentual differences, and perhaps they
should not worry about accents at all. Nevertheless, further studies may shed light on the impact
of imported media on learners’ perceptions of dominant English culture and accent.
Most of the pressure on NNESTs’ choice of accents evidently stems from the prevailing native
speaker concept in teaching English in the expanding circle. Teaching through or about ELF has
a long way to go, at least in Turkey; however, it is not that far a stretch to establish stronger
teacher identities for NNESTs and allow them to become more confident English teachers by
providing them with the innovative perspectives of ELF. This can be seen as one of the duties of
second language teacher education programs and in-service training institutions of the expanding
circle countries.
The primary implication of this study is that English language teacher education programs in
Turkey should imbue student teachers with the perspective and insight of English as an
international language (EIL). Coşkun (2013) believes that English teacher education programs in
Turkey need to focus on EIL, and that the native speaker model in teacher education should be
abandoned immediately. Similarly, Doğançay-Aktuna and Kızıltepe (2005) doubt the necessity
of a native-speaker model of EFL in Turkey where students largely use English in cross-cultural
contexts. To this end, the EIL approach to teaching English can be embedded in the programs as

27
an overall curricular outcome, and various elective courses might be offered to teach student
teachers specific classroom applications and techniques. There are indeed few programs that
offer EIL related courses in the country; however, as the findings of the present study suggest,
there needs to be a wider application of the EIL perspective in English language teacher
education.

References
Andreasson, A-M. (1994). Norm as a pedagogical paradigm. World Englishes, 13(3), 395–409.
Bayyurt, Y. (2006). Non-native English language teachers’ perspective on culture in English as a
foreign language classrooms. Teacher Development, 10(2), 233–247.
Brown, K. (1993). World Englishes in TESOL programs: An infusion model of curricular
innovation. World Englishes, 12, 59–73.
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second
language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1–47.
Carroll, J.B. (1972). Defining language comprehension: Some speculations. In J.B. Carroll
& R.O. Freedle, (Eds.) Language comprehension and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 1-29).
New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Chiba, R., Matsuura, H., & Yamamoto, A. (1995). Japanese attitudes toward English accents.
World Englishes, 14, 77–86.
Cogo, A. (2012). English as a lingua franca: Concepts, use and implications. ELT Journal, 66(1),
97–105.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2004). A guide to teaching practice (5th ed.). London:
Routledge Falmer.
Cook, V. (1999). Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly,
33(2), 185–210.
Cook, V. (2004, 12-14 November). Bilingual cognition and language teaching. Paper presented
at the 13th International Symposium on English Teaching, Taipei.
Coskun, A. (2011). Future English teachers' attitudes towards EIL pronunciation. Journal of
English as an International Language, 6(2), 46–68.

28
Coşkun, A. (2013). Native speakers as teachers in Turkey: Non-native pre-service English
teachers’ reactions to a nation-wide project. The Qualitative Report, 18(57), 1-21.
Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR18/coskun57.pdf
Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:
Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Çekiç, A. (2009). Should we use American English to improve students’ listening skills? Novices
Royal – Research on Youth and Language, 3(2), 110 –116.
Çetinkaya, Y. B. (2009). Language of others: EFL students’ perception of and attitude towards
English. Cukurova Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu Dergisi, 18(1), 109–120.
Dalton-Puffer, C., Gunther, K., & Ute S. (1997). Learner attitudes and L2 pronunciation in
Austria. World Englishes, 16, 115–128.
Doğançay-Aktuna, S. (2008). Non-native English speaking teacher educators: A profile from
Turkey. In S. Dogancay-Aktuna & J. Hardman (Eds.), Global English teaching and
teacher education: Praxis and possibility (pp. 61-82). Alexandria, VA: TESOL
Publications.
Glesne, C. & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers. White Plains, NY:
Longman.
Eurypedia 2013. European Encyclopedia on National Education Systems. Retrieved from
https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/eurypedia_en.php
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine
Publishing Company.
Fiedler, S. (2011). English as a lingua-franca. A native-culture-free code? Language of
communication vs. language of identification. Apple – Journal of Applied Language
Studies, 5(3), 79–97.
House, J. (1999). Misunderstanding in intercultural communication: Interactions in English as
lingua franca and the myth of mutual intelligibility. In Gnutzmann, C. (ed.), Teaching
and learning English as a global language (pp. 73–89). Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.
İnceçay, G. & Akyel, A. (2014). Turkish EFL teachers’ perceptions of English as a lingua franca.
Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 5(1), 1–12.

29
Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Jenkins, J. (2007). English as a lingua franca: Attitude and identity. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Jenkins, J. (2009). English as a lingua franca: Interpretations and attitudes. World Englishes,
28(2), 200–207.
Jenkins, J. (2011). Accommodating (to) ELF in the international university. Journal of
Pragmatics, 43(4), 926–936.
Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language
in the outer circle. In R. Quirk and H.G. Widdowson (Eds), English in the world:
Teaching and learning the language and literatures (pp. 11-30). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Kachru, B. B. (1996). The paradigms of marginality. World Englishes, 15(3), 241-255.
Llurda, E. (2005). Nonnative language teachers: Perceptions, challenges, and contributions to
the profession. New York, NY: Springer.
Matsuda, A. (2002). Representation of users and uses of English in beginning Japanese EFL
textbooks. JALT Journal, 24(2), 80–98.
Ministry of National Education. (2013). National education statistics–Formal education 2012–
2013. MoNE: Ankara
Mukherjee, J. & Mariane H. (eds.) (2011). Exploring second–language varieties of English and
learner Englishes. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Norton, B. (1997). Language, identity, and the ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 31,
409–429.
Seidlhofer, B. (2003). A concept of international English and related issues: From ‘real English’
to ‘realistic English’? Retrieved from
http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/Linguistic/Source/SeidlhoferEN.pdf
Scales, J., Wennerstorm, A., Richard, D., & Wu, S.H. (2006). Language learners' perceptions of
accent. TESOL Quarterly, 40(4), 715–738.
Sifakis, N. C. & Sougari, A. M. (2005). Pronunciation issues and EIL pedagogy in the periphery:
A survey of Greek state school teachers’ beliefs. TESOL Quarterly, 39(3): 467–488.
Smith, L.E. (ed.) (1983). Readings in English as an international language. Oxford: Pergamon.

30
Sridhar, K.K. & Shikaripur N.S. (1986). Bridging the paradigm gap: Second language
acquisition theory and indigenized varieties of English. World Englishes, 5(1), 3–14.
Timmis, I. (2002). Native-speaker norms and international English: A classroom view. ELT
Journal, 56, 240–249.
Peirce, B. N. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29,
9–31.
Rindal, U. & Piercy, C. (2013). Being ‘neutral’? English pronunciation among Norwegian
learners. World Englishes, 32(2), 211–229.
Widdowson, H. G. (1994). The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 377-389.

31
 An Analysis of the Relationship between Chinese EFL Teachers’
Agency and Beliefs from an Activity Theory Perspective
Hongzhi Yang
University of Sydney, Australia4

Bio Data:
Hongzhi Yang is a lecturer in the Sydney School of Education and Social Work in the University
of Sydney. She obtained her PhD in Education at the University of New South Wales, Australia.
Her research/pedagogical interests include language education, teacher education, teachers’
emotions, sociocultural theory, and language assessment.
(Email: hongzhi.yang@sydney.edu.au)

Abstract
Built upon cultural historical activity theory perspective, this study aims to explore the
relationship between teacher agency and teacher beliefs and proposes to show how teachers
express their agency in resolving the contradiction between their beliefs and their practices. The
participant teachers were observed and interviewed over a period of one semester. In addition,
the head of the department was interviewed, as were the students, and the department’s policies
and documents were analysed. The findings suggest that teachers’ beliefs are constructed
socially and usually have contradictions within the context of the classroom. If teachers take
agentive actions to resolve these contradictions by creating tools or artefacts, the process of
resolving the contradictions will bring a transformation in their beliefs and these beliefs will
become internalized. The findings also indicate that teacher agency could be strengthened by
conducting research about teaching and reflecting on teaching practices. This study argues for
the necessity of teachers examining and reflecting on their pedagogical beliefs and practices, and
for the importance of theoretical knowledge as a kind of support for teachers to enable them to
make changes. Activity theory provides a new and complementary way to view teachers as
agents of making changes in their beliefs and practices.

Keywords: teacher beliefs, teacher agency, activity theory

Introduction
A longstanding truism in both social and cognitive psychology is that beliefs play a vital role in
guiding human behaviour. There are numerous studies and research papers about teachers’
beliefs from different theoretical perspectives. From a cognitive perspective, beliefs are regarded

4
The Sydney School of Education and Social Work, A35 – Education Building Room 808, The University of Sydney,
NSW 2006, Australia

32
as an inner property, steady and fixed (Horwitz, 1987, 1988; Tanaka & Ellis, 2003). From
contextual studies, beliefs are interrelated with context and personal experience. From a
sociocultural perspective, beliefs are viewed as a conceptualizing activity which takes place
during concept formation in the language classroom (Negueruela-Azarola, 2011). Barcelos and
Kalaja (2011) argue that beliefs develop through one’s agency in interpreting one’s actions and
in refining one’s thoughts. This process cannot be fully documented without taking into account
the participant’s agency in constructing meaning and making changes. Johnson and Golombek
(2011) define agency as a person’s capacity to act and make choices. In addition, Lantolf and
Pavlenko (2001) argue that teacher agency “entails the ability to assign relevance and
significance to things and events” (p. 143). Therefore, it is necessary to research the role of
agency in the process of the internalization of one’s beliefs.
This study aims to explore the relationship between teacher’s beliefs and teacher agency in
regard to EFL reading instruction in a Chinese university, from an activity theory perspective.
Activity theory, also known as cultural-historical activity theory, is based on Vygotsky and
Leontev's studies of cultural-historical psychology and further developed by Engeström. This
theory offers a framework to analyse object-oriented, collective and culturally mediated human
activity through the mediation of tools or artefacts. Activity theory incorporates the fundamental
concept from sociocultural theory that the human mind and human action are mediated by
cultural artefacts. Activity theory has a dialectical sensitivity to human agency, which emerges in
the dialectical system which links the individual with social structure (Johnson & Golombek,
2011). Therefore, this study will employ activity theory to illustrate the relationship between
teachers’ beliefs and teacher agency.

Literature Review
From a sociocultural theory perspective, the nature of beliefs is “complex and dialectical, related
to context and discourse, dynamic and contradictory” (Barcelos & Kalaja, 2011, p. 281). Many
studies have focused on the dynamic nature of beliefs. Peng (2011) uses an ecological approach
to explore the change in university students’ beliefs about learning English. The study indicates
that the changes in students’ beliefs are mediated by the classroom context. The ecological
approach is close to sociocultural theory, both of which argue that the emergence and
development of beliefs are mediated by the context.

33
Based on Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory, Yang and Kim (2011) explore the second language
learning beliefs of Chinese students studying abroad. The findings suggest that students’ beliefs
develop according to their learning goals. In addition, it is argued that beliefs should be
internalized to a certain extent, in order to be aligned with the language context, and they should
regulate students’ learning. Negueruela-Azarola (2011) argues that the change in beliefs is a
dialectical conceptualizing activity, which has to be understood through contradictions. He
argues that from a sociocultural perspective, beliefs are social and historical in origin but also
dynamically and personally transformed in the process of internalization. The change in beliefs is
viewed as a process of internalizing new meaning into conceptualization. From a sociocultural
theory perspective, it is not a question of whether there is congruence between beliefs and
actions, but a question of “conceptualizing beliefs and contradictions as ideas that emerge in the
very act of making sense of actions: beliefs-in-action-on-actions” (Negueruela-Azarola, 2011, p.
361). As Negueruela-Azarola (2011) argues, the process of conceptualization is to make sense of
the conceptual meaning in a personally significant way. A teacher’s agency in resolving the
contradictions plays an important role in the process of internalization (Yang, 2015).
There are few studies which use an inter-group interaction approach (Hart, 2009) to explore the
dialectical relationship between teachers’ beliefs and learners’ beliefs; most research tends to
only focus on how teachers’ beliefs influence students’ beliefs (Woods, 2003). Usually teachers’
beliefs are likely to dominate as they are usually in a position of authority in the classroom
(Barcelos, 2003b). Pan and Block (2011) examine the beliefs of Chinese EFL learners and
teachers about the status of English, the significance of English and the teaching and learning of
English. The findings indicate that both teachers and students are dissatisfied with current
teaching practices. The findings of their study indicate that beliefs are both social and political.
Nevertheless, the emphasis of the learning and teaching of English is still found to be
examination oriented, which may be an obstacle to the development of the students’
communication skills in English. However, their study fails to explore the interplay between
teachers’ and students’ beliefs. Wan, Low, and Li (2011) investigate one group of Chinese
university teachers and two groups of their English major students to analyse their beliefs about
the role of EFL teachers by using metaphor analysis and follow-up interviews. The findings
suggest a mismatch between the students’ and teachers’ beliefs about EFL teachers’ roles. In
addition, teachers’ responses to the students’ metaphors indicate that most teachers are willing to

34
see changes made in teaching practices. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the process through
which teachers reconstruct and develop their pedagogical beliefs when they are exposed to their
students’ beliefs. As Wan et al. (2011) suggest, an effective evaluation of a classroom should
involve the exploration of beliefs from multiple perspectives and multiple relevant stakeholders.
It is important to explore the relationship between teachers’ and students’ beliefs. Accordingly,
this study will explore teachers’, learners’ and the head of department’s beliefs about English
teaching and learning and further reveal the process through which teachers make changes
according to students’ beliefs. This study aims to answer the following question: How do
teachers take agentive action in resolving the contradictions between their beliefs about teaching
and their teaching practices?

Theoretical Framework
This paper builds upon Engeström’s (1987) activity theory to illustrate the interrelationship
between belief, agency, and action. As Negueruela-Azarola (2011) argues, it is necessary to view
beliefs through the logic of dialectics, as contradiction is an important part of understanding the
change in beliefs and actions. From an activity theory perspective, the concept of contradiction
can illustrate the conflict between the components within one activity system as well as the
interaction between different activity systems. In addition, contradiction is believed to have the
potential to generate transformation and development (Engeström, 2001). Activity theory can
also illustrate the origin and evolution of contradiction within and between (an) activity
system(s), which also indicates the development of a subject’s agency.
This paper will employ the third generation of the activity theory framework (Engeström,
2009) to explore the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and agency during social interaction,
because this framework enables the analysis of the interaction between two or more related
activity systems (Engeström, 2009).

35
 Figure 1. Minimal model for third generation activity theory (CRADL, 2003; Engeström,
2009; Olsen, 2008).
2008).2008)3C456E644E6F74653E3C436974653E3C417574686F723E435241444C3C2F41
7574686F723E3C596561723E323030333C2F596561723E3C5265634E756D3E3534313C2
As illustrated in Figure 1, each activity system consists of six components. In this paper, the
F5265634E756D3E3C446973706C6179546578743E28435241444C2C20323030333B20456
subject is the teacher, whose beliefs and agency are being studied. The object is the intended
E6765737472C3B66D2C20323030393B204F6C73656E2C2032303038293C2F446973706C
6179546578743E3C7265636F72643E3C7265632D6E756D6265723E3534313C2F7265632
activity the teacher aims to achieve, which may be the objectives of teaching set by the teacher or
D6E756D6265723E3C666F726569676E2D6B6579733E3C6B6579206170703D22454E222
imposed by others. In addition, the activity is conducted by the use of tools and signs, which can
064622D69643D227274706478727A39317774767037653932666E35746439617739356577
be7877787A737665222074696D657374616D703D2231343433303532343330223E3534313C
either physical or symbolic artefacts the teacher uses to achieve his or her goals. At the
2F6B65793E3C2F666F726569676E2D6B6579733E3C7265662D74797065206E616D653D
bottom level of each activity system, the rules refer to the explicit and implicit regulations
225765622050616765223E31323C2F7265662D747970653E3C636F6E7472696275746F72
733E3C617574686F72733E3C617574686F723E435241444C3C2F617574686F723E3C2F6
determining how the teacher practises. The community includes multiple individuals involved in
17574686F72733E3C2F636F6E7472696275746F72733E3C7469746C65733E3C7469746C
this activity. Finally, the division of labour includes the division of tasks among the community
653E43756C747572616C2D686973746F726963616C204163746976697479205468656F727
92028434841542920616E6420446576656C6F706D656E74616C20576F726B20526573656
members (Engeström, 2002). The multidirectional arrows indicate how each component in the
17263682028445752293C2F7469746C653E3C2F7469746C65733E3C6E756D6265723E32
activity system interacts with the others, either directly or indirectly. As illustrated in Figure 1,
342E30392E31353C2F6E756D6265723E3C64617465733E3C796561723E323030333C2F7
96561723E3C2F64617465733E3C75726C733E3C72656C617465642D75726C733E3C7572
the third generation of activity theory includes, minimally, two interacting activity systems. This
6C3E687474703A2F2F7777772E68656C73696E6B692E66692F637261646C652F6368617
framework can exemplify dialogue, multiple perspectives and voices, and networks of
42E68746D3C2F75726C3E3C2F72656C617465642D75726C733E3C2F75726C733E3C2F7
265636F72643E3C2F436974653E3C436974653E3C417574686F723E456E6765737472C3
interacting activity systems (Engeström, 2009). The changes in teachers’ beliefs are mediated by
B66D3C2F417574686F723E3C596561723E323030393C2F596561723E3C5265634E756D3
the context and key stakeholders in the classroom and the institute. If the contextual factors in a
E3132303C2F5265634E756D3E3C7265636F72643E3C7265632D6E756D6265723E313230
3C2F7265632D6E756D6265723E3C666F726569676E2D6B6579733E3C6B657920617070
classroom, such as activities, topics, support and teaching methods, match the teacher’s beliefs,
3D22454E222064622D69643D227274706478727A39317774767037653932666E35746439
this can generate affirmative thinking (Peng, 2011). This study, therefore, uses this framework to
6177393565777877787A737665222074696D657374616D703D22313333373735393332332
23E3132303C2F6B65793E3C2F666F726569676E2D6B6579733E3C7265662D7479706520
analyse the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and teacher agency within a joint-activity
6E616D653D22426F6F6B2053656374696F6E223E353C2F7265662D747970653E3C636F6
system, including the activity systems of the teachers, their students and the department.
E7472696275746F72733E3C617574686F72733E3C617574686F723E456E6765737472C3B
66D2C20592E3C2F617574686F723E3C2F617574686F72733E3C7365636F6E646172792D
36
617574686F72733E3C617574686F723E412E2053616E6E696E6F3C2F617574686F723E3
C617574686F723E482E2044616E69656C733C2F617574686F723E3C617574686F723E4B
2E20442E2047757469C3A97272657A3C2F617574686F723E3C2F7365636F6E646172792
D617574686F72733E3C2F636F6E7472696275746F72733E3C7469746C65733E3C746974
Methods
Cultural-Historical Context of the Study
Knowing the broader policy context within which the participants’ activities are situated will
enhance the understanding of the findings in this study. The study is concerned with the EFL
education of non-English major students in the Chinese tertiary level education context, known
as ‘College English’. The main course for College English is a highly condensed reading course,
called intensive reading, which is actually a foundation course, emphasizing reading, the use of
vocabulary, knowledge of grammar and translation. One prominent problem in College English
is test-oriented teaching. All non-English major students are required by their universities to take
the College English Test (CET). Although the test was reformed in 2006, requiring teachers to
focus on both global understanding and detailed information for EFL reading (CMoE, 2007), the
CET passing rate is still a criterion for ranking higher education institutions and determining
teachers’ evaluation and promotion (Jin & Yang, 2006; Li, 2009; Pan & Block, 2011; Wang,
2007). It directs teachers and the institutions’ attention to the test, instead of English learning
itself and directs students to mechanical multiple-choice skills, rather than towards
communicative competence (Huang, 2005). Chinese teachers focus on drilling skills and
competence, devoting much of their in-class time to explaining language points and grammar
(Chan & Rao, 2009). Moreover, students rely strongly on translation and more concrete word
decoding strategies rather than global understanding in reading (Zhang, 2001).

Data Collection
This research uses a case study approach to explore Chinese EFL teachers’ and learners’ beliefs
in a Chinese university located in central China. The process of data collection included six steps.
First, an initial questionnaire was used to select the case study teachers. The questionnaire aimed
to elicit information about teachers’ educational background, teaching experiences, and their
beliefs about College English teaching. In the second step, two people were purposively selected
from the 44 teachers who participated in this questionnaire survey. There were two sampling
criteria: The first criterion was whether teachers responded to the reform requirements to teach
main ideas and details of reading. The second criterion was whether teachers had received
teacher training for the College English course. One participant teacher, Cindy (pseudonym),
was chosen from teachers who had not received training, but who still followed some of the

37
reform requirements. Another participant, Linda (pseudonym), was chosen from teachers who
had received training and who also conform to all of the reform requirements. In the third step,
with the teachers’ and learners’ agreement, their lessons were observed and videotaped, with a
total of 18 hours of recording for three units of a class being carried out. During the observation,
the fourth step of the data collection was conducted by focus group interviews with six students
from each teacher's class. The student participants were selected mainly according to their
English proficiency levels; two students from a high level, two from a medium level, and two
from a lower level. The fifth step was the semi-structured interviews with the participant teachers
regarding their beliefs about reading and reading strategy instruction, and their agency to change
their teaching. For the last step, a semi-structured interview was conducted with the head of the
College English department, Daniel (pseudonym). This study has obtained ethics approval to
collect data and all the participants have given their consent to participate. The purpose and
procedures of the study were explained to the participants in advance to make sure that they
could make decisions based on a clear understanding of what would be involved. In addition, the
author is not a teacher or an administrative staff member in the university where the study was
conducted. Therefore, there was no institutional power relationship between the author and the
participants and there was no pressure on them to participate in this study.
Cindy is 28 years old. She has been teaching the course College English for about 5 years. She
majored in English literature in her undergraduate study and she had not received pre-service
teacher education before she became a teacher. However, she is regarded as a competent teacher
by Daniel. During the data-collection, she was also preparing for the TOEFL test and applying to
get her Master’s degree in the United States (USA).
Linda is 45 years old and has been teaching English for about 17 years, and teaching the
College English course for about seven years. Compared to Cindy, Linda is regarded as an
‘experienced’ teacher in the College English Department. She obtained her Master’s degree in
China, specializing in EFL reading instruction and the CET reform. She has been involved in
many teaching, research and leadership duties: She is the leader of the Teaching Research Office
in the College Language Department, the assessor of the Teaching Demonstration and
Competition at the university, and the ‘Research Backbone’ for the Department, which meant
she was regarded as an expert in both teaching and research.
In the interview with Daniel, the Head of the College English Department, he indicated that

38
increasing the CET passing ratio is the main objective of the teaching, this objective having been
set by the chancellor. To achieve this objective, he required teachers to teach grammar rules and
sentence structure. One criterion for recruiting new teachers is that they teach sentence structure
in their demonstration teaching. In addition, Daniel said he often observed teachers’ classes,
without giving notice in advance to check whether their teaching covered the curriculum plan
and focused on sentence structure. Moreover, he issued a special document, which specifies the
language exercises the teachers must cover in the textbook, which are thought to be directly
related to the CET.
Data were analysed by using the framework of the third generation of activity theory
(Engeström, 2009) in order to identify the contradictions between the activity systems of the
teachers, students and the Department. The data were coded based on the contradictions between
the three activity systems. The analysis also focused on the interactions among the three activity
systems.

Findings
Case 1 – Cindy
Contradiction between Cindy’s Teaching Objectives and Those of the Department
Cindy said that the goals of her teaching were to help students pass the College English Test
(CET) and to educate students morally through reading. She stated clearly that she set test
preparation as one objective because of the requirement from the head of the department.

39
 Excerpt 1 (C = Cindy; I = Interviewer)
I: Is the pressure for passing the CET test heavy?
C: Quite heavy. Daniel requires that you must teach the test, must! Therefore, my
main objective is preparing students to pass the test.
I: Is the test pass rate one of the criteria for teacher evaluation?
C: No…But this is a kind of affirmation for yourself.

Daniel required teachers to focus on test preparation, which determined the dominant object of
the Department and shaped the teaching objective and learning objective. In addition, the data
from the focus group interviews showed that four out of the six students in the group stated that
their primary goal for this reading course was to pass the CET.
Cindy’s classroom practices usually reflect the objective of the activity. In each unit, Cindy
only chose to teach the exercises relevant to the CET. For example, she emphasised to her
students that the part she covered was very important for the CET. In addition to the eight units
as the curriculum plan required, Cindy set two more weeks for CET preparation, during which
students did model tests and drilling exercises. Cindy thought that she had achieved the objective
as many of her students passed the test. From an activity theory perspective, beliefs are
psychological tools, originating from social planes as object-oriented action. The excerpt
indicates that Cindy has internalized the beliefs that an increased CET pass ratio is a kind of
affirmation and motivation for her teaching. During this process, her agency was to follow the
test-oriented teaching.
However, as for her second teaching objective, the observation reveals that Cindy did not give
students any opportunity to discuss what kind of moral principles they could learn from the
reading. In the interview, she admitted that she had given up on this objective because of time
pressure and some personal reasons:
Excerpt 2
C: As for this objective, I need to spend time and energy in organizing some
activities. But time is limited. In addition, I don't want to spend too much time
and energy because I have many things to do. I have my personal matters. I want
to study abroad. I have been preparing for this. This curriculum plan is another
reason. If you are a bit slower, you cannot finish.
In Cindy’s case, her objectives were mediated by particular social and contextual influences. She
set the first objective because of the Department’s requirements and gave up her second one
because of the stress of the curriculum plan and her personal needs for further study (the shaded

40
oval in Fig 2). To resolve the contradiction between the department’s objective and her second
objective, her agentive action was to give up her own objective of teaching. However, this
surrender did not bring improvement to her teaching because she lacked transformational tools to
change it. She expressed it thus: “(I) want to change, but don’t know how.” This indicates that
her limited knowledge of teaching theories and approaches weakened her agency in making
change.

Contradiction between the Department’s Objective and the Students’ Beliefs about EFL Reading
Instruction
Teacher’s beliefs are regarded as mediating tools for their practice (Barcelos, 2003a). Cindy’s
beliefs about teaching EFL reading have been mediated by her interaction with her students and
also mediate her teaching practice. Because Cindy had not received any teacher education, she
did not know the theories of teaching. For example, the terms ‘bottom-up’ or ‘top-down’
approaches to reading. After I explained these two reading approaches to her, she said firmly that
she preferred the bottom-up approach because she believed vocabulary and sentence structure
were very important. However, the classroom observation showed that her teaching incorporated
both, reflecting an interactive approach to reading (and sometimes were aligned with a top-down
approach). When I pointed out this incongruence and asked her about the reason, she explained
that she taught the main idea before detailed explanation because of student needs:
Excerpt 3
C: Yes, I think it is according to students’ characteristics. They do not have the
ability to learn the details first and then summarize afterwards…They still need to
understand (the main idea). And then they can understand the text. I think it
depends on the students.
The excerpt above shows that one reason Cindy chose to teach global understanding of texts
before detailed explanation is because of her knowledge of her students’ needs, which was
verified from the student focus group interview. Five out of six students in the focus group
believed that the top-down approach was more effective for their reading because it gave them a
direction and context for reading, and could cultivate their skills in summarizing the main idea.
Only one student preferred a bottom-up approach because he had been taught in this way since
he had started learning English.
However, after the conversation between us, Cindy firmly stated that she believed both main
ideas and detailed language points were the focal points of teaching. This indicates that Cindy’s

41
beliefs about reading were also influenced by her interaction with the Department’s requirements,
specifically the emphasis on sentence structure as a focus of teaching. However, in practice,
Cindy adjusted her teaching methods according to students’ needs. Without knowing it, she used
an interactive approach to reading. To a certain extent, this action has resolved the contradiction
between the Department’s objective and students’ beliefs about EFL teaching. However, the
findings suggest that Cindy was rather unclear about her beliefs because she lacked explicit
theoretical knowledge about teaching. As she said, she used theory, but could not name it. This
indicates that she only had practical knowledge of teaching developed from social interaction
with students, which is in accordance with Vygotsky (1978), who claims that social interaction
brings about the growth of knowledge on the internal plane. However, in order to improve
Cindy’s teaching, she needs more theoretical knowledge about the subject.

Contradictions between the Division of Labour in Cindy’s Activity System and Her Students’
Activity System
The students in the focus group described the division of labour in Cindy’s class as “The teacher
is teaching her own lesson, and we are learning our own things.” Classroom observation suggests
that there was not much interaction between teacher and students. Students also acknowledged
their language proficiency was low and they were not autonomous in learning. However, they
expressed their desire to be at the centre of the classroom and to have more interaction with their
teacher.
Excerpt 4
C: I feel now the classroom is the teacher’s Main Battle Field. Students cannot be
much involved in the classroom. The teacher should change the classroom into
our own Main Battle Field, so that we can be involved more.

The expression “Main Battle Field” is a term used in computer games, meaning the zone of
dominance. They also used the computer game to describe their ideal role in learning English:
Excerpt 5 (S = Student)
S1: Just like playing a game, if the enemy comes, we attack. If English is our
enemy, we will conquer it.

This suggested that students wanted to have more autonomy in learning. They complained that
they were not the dominant force in the classroom; instead their teacher was just “inculcating”
them with her teaching. They wanted their teacher to ask more questions and leave space for

42
them to look for answers and discuss. One student pointed out that “Our teacher asks us
questions but never gives us a chance to answer”. Cindy spent most of her class time delivering
knowledge, rather than engaging students in the class. This caused a contradiction between the
students’ perception of the classroom community and the actual division of labour in the
classroom.
Classroom observation showed that the interactional pattern in Cindy’s class was mostly under
the teacher’s control. Apart from calling students to read the text aloud, Cindy asked questions
about the text, and then often answered the questions herself without waiting for students to give
an answer. The teacher’s talk was very long, while students’ answers were usually very short,
often involving one word or giving Chinese translations. Classroom observation showed that
some students seemed eager to speak so they often spoke simultaneously with the teacher.
However, the teacher’s voice always dominated or stopped the students’ voices.
In the interview, Cindy described her ideal way of teaching, such as the use of new teaching
methods and classroom activities to engage students. As mentioned above, in spending little time
preparing for teaching, Cindy gave up redesigning classroom activities to involve student group
discussion. Cindy stated that she would like to use new methods of teaching but did not know
how. The distance between her ideal use of tools and the reality resulted in frustration:
Excerpt 6
C: I don’t want to teach because there is nothing new. If I don't feel I can improve,
always this pattern, it’s very boring, I don’t want to continue this pattern. If there
were new methods to make students and me more enthusiastic, definitely (I)
wouldn’t be like this. I am not sick of teaching, but sick of teaching in this way.

The excerpt above showed that although Cindy was dissatisfied with her current teaching
practice, she could not resolve her ideal-real contradictions because of the lack of time available
for preparing for lessons and the lack of theoretical knowledge for innovation in her teaching.
This unresolved contradiction caused a sense of helplessness and negativity towards her work.
Sometimes, Cindy used the textbook to cover her face during teaching because she said that she
did not want to see her students. This indicates that the unresolved contradiction between her
beliefs and practices has affected her professional well-being.
Generally, the analysis above shows that there was still a large gap between Cindy’s ideal form
of teaching and its reality. However, these contradictions in her activity system were either
unresolved or were incompletely resolved in a passive or unconscious way, for instance, by

43
giving up spending time for teaching preparation, giving up designing activities, or giving up
involving students. There was no new tool consciously created to resolve these contradictions –
as Cindy said, “nothing new”, which also caused Cindy’s negative attitudes and constrained her
agency in improving her teaching.
Case 2 – Linda
Contradiction between the Department’s Objective and Linda’s Objectives of Teaching
During the interview Linda stated that she set both ‘shallow’ and ‘deep’ level objectives for her
course. Her ‘shallow’ level objectives were to increase the students’ vocabulary and cultural
knowledge through reading. Her deep level objectives were to cultivate students’ abilities to
understand the main ideas and to critically read.

Significantly, these objectives are very close to the requirements of the curriculum reform
(even more than what the reform requires) regarding the need for students to understand the main
idea of the reading text. During the interview, Linda stated her reason for setting this objective
related to her desire to cultivate the students’ abilities for their long-term development:
Excerpt 7 (L = Linda)
L: A teacher should cultivate students’ comprehensive abilities. What are the
comprehensive abilities? Firstly, you should have a theme for your talk and
support your theme with other information. This is a person’s ability. Don’t
accept whatever other people say. Have your own idea. I told my students it was
a very important and useful ability for your future career if you can express your
theme in one sentence.

44
In contrast to Cindy, who set passing the test as a prime objective for her teaching, Linda said
that passing the test was not her main focus:
Excerpt 8
L: It is lying if I said my teaching is not for the test, because students need to pass
the CET. I will mention it (test), but it is not the focus of my teaching.

As for the conflicts between her teaching objective and the department’s, Linda agentive action
was to subordinate the test passing objective to her own teaching objective. This reflected her
own voluntary opinions and intentions to set her own goals rather than accepting those externally
imposed on her. Classroom observation revealed that she often introduced related cultural
background knowledge when teaching vocabulary and when reading the texts. With regard to the
‘deep level’ objectives, classroom observation showed that Linda usually asked students to
identify the main idea, then analysed the structure of the text, before moving to a detailed
explanation and a summary of the structure to finish the text analysis. In addition, she focused on
critical reading explicitly, for example, critically evaluating one text and asking students to
reorganise the text as an assignment.

Contradictions between Linda’s Beliefs on Teaching Reading and Students’ Low Language
Proficiency
In Linda’s Master’s Degree thesis, she reviewed three reading models: bottom-up; top-down; and
interactive models, and a range of reading theories. It can be concluded from the data that
Linda’s thesis provided her with theoretical knowledge about reading, which accorded with her
beliefs about reading.
In terms of teaching generally, Linda firmly believed that her teaching favoured a top-down
approach and that global understanding was the most important thing for reading, as articulated
below:
Excerpt 9
My beliefs about reading formed gradually, depending on my individual
understanding. Some people think structure or grammar is the most important,
but I believe global understanding is the most important thing.
During the interview Linda shared an example which showed that her beliefs about reading had
been formed as part of her life experiences. She said she had been listening to someone for half
an hour and could not understand what he/she wanted to express. She regarded this as a waste of

45
time. This excerpt reveals that Linda’s belief in the need to develop an effective mode of
expression led her to believe that understanding the author’s purpose was the prime objective of
reading instruction. She wanted to use this approach to train the students to express their purpose
clearly in daily communication. In addition, her beliefs were formed during her daily interaction
with others, which accords with the claim that social interactions shape the development of
human beliefs, values and ways of acting (Wertsch, 1991).
Although Linda firmly believed in a top-down approach to reading instruction, her method of
teaching reading reflected a more interactive approach. She spent a lot of time on vocabulary
explanation and detailed sentence analysis. Her explanation for this approach is that she was
responding to the students’ limited vocabulary. When asked whether the student’s limited
vocabulary affected the use of the top-down approach in the class, Linda confirmed that:
Excerpt 10
Eh, but, I still focus on Global understanding. I will use simplified language to
summarise the essence of the text according to what they can understand. Then there is
less vocabulary involved. I keep reflecting on this. Firstly, I need to understand the text
thoroughly, and then keep asking them questions.

In addition to the simplified language, modified questions and repetition, there are other
language artefacts Linda has used to cater for students’ low language proficiency. The classroom
observation showed that if no students expressed the intention of speaking, Linda often modified
the what/how questions to yes/no questions. Unlike Cindy, who seldom gave students time to
think and answer her questions, Linda also used eye contact and some waiting time to encourage
students to answer her questions. However, her students always remained quiet and most of the
time Linda had to answer the questions herself.
It is worth noting that in the focus group interview with Linda’s six students, the phrases “our
teacher told us” or “we learned from our teacher” occurred frequently when they were discussing
their beliefs about English learning. In addition, their beliefs about EFL reading were very
similar to Linda’s - that global understanding and the themes are important for reading
comprehension. It can be inferred that Linda’s teaching has made a transformation in her
students’ beliefs. To a certain degree, her beliefs about reading have been internalized into her
students by the mediation of her teaching. One interesting point is that students in the focus
group mentioned that Linda was like their mum, always caring for them. This indicates that
Linda’s rapport with the students also had an affective impact on their learning.

46
Contradiction between Linda’s Ideal Form of Classroom Interaction and the Reality
Linda attributed her students’ passive participation in the class to their low language proficiency,
even though she also acknowledged that the teacher talk was too much in her class.
Excerpt 11
I want to design more activities for students to be involved. But they are not so
active because of their low language proficiency. Is it the problem of my design?
Or because students are lazy, just wanting to be an audience instead of actors? I
hope they can participate more. But sometimes I can see they do not want to
participate. It is not good to force them.

The excerpt suggests that Linda has been reflecting on and analysing the problem of classroom
interaction and she had the intention of designing some activities to engage her students.
However, the classroom observation revealed that she just resorted to asking more questions in
an attempt to increase students’ input, and students remained unresponsive. At the same time, the
students in the focus group also acknowledged that they could see their teacher’s efforts:
Excerpt 12
S5: Very often, she uses eye contact to encourage us to speak, but most students
lower their heads, some even are sleeping and only few stand up (to answer her
questions).
S6: Sometimes, I do not know how to answer, so I just lower my head.
Linda’s ideal classroom interaction is the Initiation-Response-Evaluation (IRE) pattern (Mehan,
1979). She expects her students to be able to respond to her questions and demonstrate the
required knowledge. However, this indicates that she does not treat her students as independent
thinkers. In addition, the IRE pattern also puts teacher talk in a dominant position, where the task
is to give a question and check answers (Wertsch, 1998). Therefore, her beliefs about the IRE
pattern as the ideal interaction pattern have mediated her classroom teaching and caused the
problem. Even though Linda has put effort into creating more questions to elicit students’ talk,
her reliance on the IRE, the main cause of the problem, cannot resolve this contradiction.

Discussion
One implication from this study is that theoretical knowledge can help teachers to internalize
their beliefs during practice. Internalization is about making something one’s own (Lantolf &
Thorne, 2006). For instance, Linda’s theoretical knowledge gained from her research about
reading instruction has mediated her teaching practice, and has also constructed her beliefs about

47
teaching. During this process, the connection between her theoretical knowledge and the
practical experience enhanced her belief that global understanding is the primary purpose of
reading comprehension. Thus, she developed her own teaching objectives and teaching method
preferences and also designed instructional activities to achieve these objectives. This indicates
that her beliefs have been fully internalized and function as an effective tool for her teaching.
Unlike J. S. Yang and Kim’s (2011) finding that beliefs are constructed according to the teachers’
goals and should be aligned with the context to be the mediating tools, the findings in this paper
argue that teachers’ agency enables them to set up objectives according to their internalized
beliefs. In addition, Linda’s case suggests that an agentive teacher can make changes to the
context when there is contradiction between her beliefs and the context. For instance, Linda
ignored the test-oriented teaching objectives set by the Department and convinced her students to
accept her beliefs about reading. These actions not only resolved the contradictions between her
beliefs and the context but also caused some changes in her students’ thinking. Since the
outcome of internalization is self-regulation (Robbins, 2003), a teacher feels encouraged and
motivated during the process of resolving problems and internalizing beliefs. Linda’s agency in
innovation and learning has been strengthened when her beliefs have been internalized, as she
described “I am a person loving learning and willing to learn anything if there is opportunity.”
Linda’s research has empowered her to set a long-term vision for her teaching and her
continued research. She wanted to push the university to prepare for the new test reform rather
than waiting for the orders from above. This finding aligns with Kaniuka’s (2012) claim that
successful innovation can increase a teacher’s pedagogical agency and motivation for learning.
Moreover, she was not constrained by the test-oriented culture of teaching set by the head of the
department, but aligned her long-term teaching objectives with the national College English
reform requirements. This finding also conforms with Biesta, Priestley, and Robinson’s (2015)
claim that teachers achieve their agency through a long-term vision for their teaching. In addition,
Linda’s research about the latest College English reform connects her with wider educational
discourse and notions, such as “comprehensive ability”, “critical reading”, and life-long learning,
which also appeared in the College English reform policies. These educational discourses and
notions have also contributed to her agency and the internalization of her beliefs about EFL
reading instruction.
On the other hand, this less-internalized belief cannot function as an effective mediation tool

48
(Yang & Kim, 2011). In Cindy’s case, the test-oriented teaching approach she learned from the
Department and the tacit knowledge of a top-down approach to reading she obtained from her
practical teaching experience blended together and caused the incongruence between her beliefs
and practices. However, because of the lack of theoretical knowledge, her beliefs about teaching
could not be fully internalized and have less regulatory power for her to maintain her teaching
objectives. From a sociocultural theory perspective, the connection between a person’s
theoretical and practical knowledge creates the possibility for further development (Lave &
Wenger, 1991). However, Cindy did not have enough knowledge about reading approaches to
connect with her practical knowledge to achieve this internalization. As a result, there were
contradictions and incongruence in her belief systems and practice. In general, Cindy’s beliefs
reflect an instrumental view of teaching, which focuses on covering the syllabus requirements
and helping students pass the test (Biesta, 2010; Biesta et al., 2015). This is due to the constraints
of the test-orientated institutional context and her limited access to a wider repertoire of
education theories, notions, and discourses. As Biesta et al. (2015) suggest, the lack of a
systematic educational philosophy and this type of short-term vision for teaching tends to reduce
teacher agency. It is, therefore, suggested that access to wider educational discourses and notions
could enhance teachers’ understanding about their own beliefs and the beliefs of other teachers,
and also strengthen their agency to make choices (Biesta et al., 2015).
The findings in this study also reveal that it is important for teachers to have awareness of and
be reflective about their beliefs. For example, during the interview, Linda was able to explicitly
state her beliefs about teaching and how she formed those beliefs. This indicates that sufficient
theoretical knowledge can assist teachers in examining and reflecting on their beliefs. By
contrast, Cindy did not realize the divergence in her beliefs until being informed of it during the
interview. In addition, after articulating her beliefs and the reasons for her behaviour in the
interview, she expressed her desire to change her teaching methods. This behaviour reflects
Sveiby’s (1996) idea that when tacit knowledge is articulated in language, it can become a focus
for reflection and an object of critique. This is aligned with Borg’s (2011) claim that support
should be provided for teachers to examine their beliefs. Biesta et al. (2015) suggest that a clear
philosophy of teaching can help teachers to reflect on and evaluate their beliefs. This should also
be a dimension in teacher education and development.
Even though studies have claimed that teachers can be a resource in the construction of

49
learners’ beliefs (Alanen, 2003; Woods, 2003). Cindy’s case indicates that students’ beliefs are
also crucial in the construction of teachers’ beliefs about teaching. However, both Cindy and
Linda did not have a very thorough understanding of their students’ beliefs and conceptions
about English learning and classroom participation. As indicated by the interview data, the
students in the focus group expressed their desire to have more classroom participation, while the
teachers were complaining about students’ passivity. In both teachers’ classrooms, teacher talk
dominated their classroom teaching. Because of this, standardised curricula and test-oriented
culture can result in teachers’ heavy reliance on instructional questions (Wertsch, 1998) as they
have to follow institutional orders as well as look after students’ learning. The findings in this
study indicate that both participants were unaware of the problem of their discourse pattern.
However, language as a cultural tool can empower a person’s action and conception (Vygotsky,
1978). To resolve this issue, teachers need to understand that the origin of the problem lies in the
IRE pattern and become better equipped with a range of pedagogical discourse genres. Moreover,
the findings also indicate that it is important for teachers to have an understanding of their
students’ beliefs and preferences.

Implications and Conclusion

The main theoretical contribution of this paper is that it explores the relationship between
teachers’ beliefs and agency based on activity theory. From an activity theory perspective, a
teacher’s beliefs are developed and constructed during social interaction and there will be
conflicts between the beliefs and action and the context. If the contradictions are not well
resolved, this may cause confusion and frustration and even impact on the teacher’s professional
well-being. If a teacher takes agentive actions to create tools to resolve the contradictions, his or
her beliefs will be transformed and/or internalized and the teaching practice will be improved. In
addition, these internalized beliefs can strengthen a teacher’s self-regulation and agency. In order
to enhance teacher agency in resolving contradictions, the first step is to give teachers an
opportunity to reflect on and examine their beliefs and their practices. The analysis of the
distance between their beliefs and practices can help teachers to gain an understanding of the
situation and create tools to resolve the contradiction and internalize their learning. Teachers’
awareness of the existing problems in their practices is important for them to permit them to
come up with resolutions at a later stage.

50
 The limitations of this study are the small scale and context specificity, suggesting that
generalization should not be drawn from this and similar small case studies to the wider
educational community. However, the paper has some implications for teacher education and
teacher professional development in a similar cultural context. First, teacher education programs
in China need to help teachers to form a systematic philosophy of EFL teaching and provide
them with a range of tools to talk about and reflect on their beliefs and to be active agents for
change. Second, it is important for teachers to realize the significance of a long-term vision of
EFL teaching, so that they are not likely to be constrained by test-oriented teaching notions and
are able to assign relevance to their long-term vision with their present plan and the actions set
by the institutions. As for in-service teacher professional development, the findings in this study
suggest that institutions in China should provide teachers, especially novice teachers, with access
to wider professional notions, approaches and discourses about EFL teaching. In addition,
teachers’ research and theoretical knowledge can assist them in coming up with resolutions and
even go beyond the situational constraints to develop transformative ideas and practices. At the
same time, structured communication between teachers and students can give teachers access to
beliefs from multiple perspectives and enhance teachers’ agency to reflect on their own beliefs
and practices. The challenge for further research is to capture the development of teachers’
beliefs and to examine how they can be changed, if not adequate for their context, and how
beliefs shape learning and teaching activity (Barcelos, 2003a). Therefore, future research will
aim to document the process of transforming teachers’ beliefs into conceptualization.

References
Alanen, R. (2003). A sociocultural approach to young language learners’ beliefs about language
learning. In P. Kalaja & A. M. F. Barcelos (Eds.). Beliefs about SLA: New research
approaches (pp. 55-85). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Barcelos, A. M. F. (2003a). Researching beliefs about SLA: A critical review. In P. Kalaja & A.
M. B. Ferreira (Eds.). Beliefs about SLA: New research approaches (pp. 7-33).
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

51
Barcelos, A. M. F. (2003b). Teachers’ and students’ beliefs within a Deweyan framework:
conflict and influence. In P. Kalaja & A. M. F. Barcelos (Eds.). Beliefs about SLA: New
research approaches (pp. 171-199). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Barcelos, A. M. F., & Kalaja, P. (2011). Introduction to beliefs about SLA revisited. System,
39(3), 281-289.
Biesta, G. J. J. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy.
Boulder, CO: Paradigm.
Biesta, G. J. J., Priestley, M., & Robinson, S. (2015). The role of beliefs in teacher agency.
Teachers and teaching, 21(6), 624-640.
Borg, S. (2011). The impact of in-service teacher education on language teachers’ beliefs.
System, 39(3), 370-380.
Chan, C. K. K., & Rao, N. (2009). The paradoxes revisited: The Chinese learner in changing
educational contexts. In C. K. K. Chan & N. Rao (Eds.). Revisiting the Chinese Learner:
Changing Contexts, Changing Education (pp. 315-349). Hong Kong: Comparative
Education Research Centre, The University of Hong Kong.
CMoE. (2007). Daxue yingyu kecheng jiaoxue yaoqiu [College English curriculum
requirements]. (Report No. 3). Retrieved from
http://www.moe.edu.cn/edoas/website18/info34295.htm.
CRADL. (2003). Cultural-historical Activity Theory (CHAT) and Developmental Work
Research (DWR). Retrieved 24.09.15, from http://www.helsinki.fi/cradle/chat.htm
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to
developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: toward an activity theoretical
reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133-156.
Engeström, Y. (2002). Cultural Historical Activity Theory Web page. Retrieved 2 Feburary,
2011, from http://www.helsinki.fi/cradle/activitysystem.htm
Engeström, Y. (2009). The future of activity theory: A rough draft. In A. Sannino, H. Daniels &
K. D. Gutiérrez (Eds.). Learning and expanding with activity theory (pp. 303-328).
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Hart, G. A. (2009). Composing metaphors: metaphors for writing in the composition classroom.
(Unpublished PhD thesis), Ohio University.

52
Horwitz, E. K. (1987). Surveying student beliefs about language learning. In A. Wenden & J.
Rubin (Eds.). Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 119-129). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Horwitz, E. K. (1988). The beliefs about language learning of beginning university foreign
language students. Modern Language Journal, 72, 283-294.
Huang, J. (2005). A diary study of difficulties and constraints in EFL learning. System, 33(4),
609-621.
Jin, Y., & Yang, H. (2006). The English proficiency of college and university students in China:
As reflected in the CET. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 19(1), 21-36.
Johnson, K. E., & Golombek, P. R. (2011). A sociocultural theoretical perspective on teacher
professional development. In K. E. Johnson & P. R. Golombek (Eds.). Research on
second language teacher education: A sociocultural perspective on professional
development (pp. 1-12). New York: Routledge.
Kaniuka, T. S. (2012). Toward an understanding of how teachers change during school reform:
Considerations for educational leadership and school improvement. Journal of
Educational Change, 13(3), 327-346.
Lantolf, J. P., & Pavlenko, A. (2001). (S)econd (L) anguage (A) ctivity theory: Understanding
second language learners as people. In M. Breen (Ed.), Learner contributions to language
learning: New directions in research (pp. 141-158). London: Pearson.
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language
development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Li, D. (2009). Activating strategies to fossilization for English learners in China. English
Language Teaching, 2(4), 75-77.
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Negueruela-Azarola, E. (2011). Beliefs as conceptualizing activity: A dialectical approach for
the second language classroom. System, 39(3), 359-369.
Olsen, B. (2008). How reasons for entry into the profession illuminate teacher identity
development. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35, 23-40.

53
Pan, L., & Block, D. (2011). English as a “global language” in China: An investigation into
learners’ and teachers’ language beliefs. System, 39(3), 391-402.
Peng, J.-E. (2011). Changes in language learning beliefs during a transition to tertiary study: The
mediation of classroom affordances. System, 39(3), 314-324.
Robbins, D. (2003). Vygotsky's and A. A. Leontiev's semiotics and psycholinguistics:
Applications for education, second language acquisition, and theories of language (Vol.
44). Westport, Conn: Praeger Pub Text.
Sveiby, K. E. (1996). Transfer of knowledge and the information processing professions.
European Management Journal, 14(4), 379-388.
Tanaka, K., & Ellis, R. (2003). Study abroad, language proficiency, and learner beliefs about
language learning. JALT Journal, 25(1), 63-85.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wan, W., Low, G. D., & Li, M. (2011). From students’ and teachers’ perspectives: Metaphor
analysis of beliefs about EFL teachers’ roles. System, 39(3), 403-415.
Wang, J. (2007). The College English Test in China: Challenges and suggestions. Asian Journal
of English Language Teaching, 17(0), 137-144.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Woods, D. (2003). The social construction of beliefs in the language classroom. In P. Kalaja &
A. M. F. Barcelos (Eds.). Beliefs about SLA: New research approaches (pp. 201-229).
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Yang, H. (2015). Teacher Mediated Agency in Educational Reform in China (Vol. 3). New
York: Springer.
Yang, J.-S., & Kim, T.-Y. (2011). Sociocultural analysis of second language learner beliefs: A
qualitative case study of two study-abroad ESL learners. System, 39(3), 325-334.
Zhang, L. J. (2001). Awareness in reading: EFL students' metacognitive knowledge of reading
strategies in an acquisition-poor environment. Language Awareness, 10(4), 268-288.

54
 Self-Regulated Learning of Vocabulary in English
as a Foreign Language

Yunjeong Choi5
Korea University, South Korea
Dongbo Zhang
University of Exeter, United Kingdom6
Chin-Hsi Lin
University of Hong Kong, People’s Republic of China7
Yining Zhang
Michigan State University, United States of America8

Bio Data:
Yunjeong Choi recently earned her PhD with a specialization in Language and Literacy and ELL
education from Michigan State University. She is currently a Research Professor in the Center
for English Language Education at Korea University. Her research interests include L2 reading
comprehension and vocabulary learning and teaching (Email: yunjeong816@gmail.com).

Dongbo Zhang holds a PhD in Second Language Acquisition from Carnegie Mellon University.
He is Professor of Language Education in the Graduate School of Education at the University of
Exeter, UK. He previously held appointments at Michigan State University (United States),
Nanyang Technological University (Singapore), and Shanghai Jiao Tong University (China). His
research interests include second language reading and vocabulary knowledge, biliteracy, and
language teacher education.

Chin-Hsi Lin is an Associate Professor at The University of Hong Kong. Dr. Lin’s research
focuses on computer-assisted language learning, online learning and teaching in K-12 and higher
education, and program evaluation.

Yining Zhang recently received her Ph.D. degree from Michigan State University. Her research
interests include the design, development, learning, and teaching of online courses, especially in
K-12 online learning settings. She is particularly interested in integrating self-regulated learning
process into online learning.

Acknowledgement: This study was sponsored by a fellowship to the first author from the
Michigan State University College of Education, and the MSU Graduate School.

5
Center for English Language Education, Korea University, Anam-ro 145, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 136-707, Korea
6
Graduate School of Education, University of Exeter, St Luke's campus, Exeter, EX1 2LU, United Kingdom.
7
Division of Chinese Language and Literature, The University of Hong Kong, Room 615, Meng Wah Building,
Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong.
8
Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education, Michigan State University, 620 Farm
Lane, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.

55
Abstract
Within the framework of self-regulated learning, this study examined how motivational factors
(extrinsic and intrinsic motivations) and use of learning strategies work in tandem in influencing
L2 vocabulary knowledge among 230 Korean high-school students in Korea learning English as
a Foreign Language (EFL). Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis revealed that
motivation had a significantly positive indirect effect on EFL vocabulary knowledge through the
mediation of vocabulary learning strategies. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations were positively
correlated, and both were positively associated with vocabulary learning strategies as well as
vocabulary knowledge. Separate SEM analyses further showed a similar pattern of an indirect
effect of these two types of motivation on vocabulary knowledge via the influence of the use of
learning strategies. Results are discussed in light of the importance of both intrinsic and extrinsic
motivations in high-school students’ English learning in the foreign language context in Korea.

Keywords: self-regulation, learning strategies, extrinsic motivation, intrinsic motivation,

vocabulary, English as a Foreign Language

Introduction
Second- or foreign-language (L2) learning involves a complex conscious process of interacting
with linguistic, cognitive, psychological, and sociocultural factors. To be a successful L2 learner
and go through this complex process, one needs to establish goals, find appropriate ways of
learning, and control one’s learning processes, that is, self-regulated learning (SRL). SRL refers
to the self-directive process and self-beliefs by which learners transform their mental abilities
into academic skills (Zimmerman, 2008). Good self-regulated learners, compared to poor self-
regulated learners, are in more proactive processes of learning in terms of setting learning goals,
implementing effective strategies, monitoring progress, seeking help, and exerting effort towards
and persisting in achieving their goals (Zimmerman, 2008; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2008). Good
self-regulated learners are likely to be successful in their learning processes and their subsequent
performance.
Although research on self-regulation in L2 learning is in its beginning stage, concepts related
to self-regulation in the field of educational psychology have long influenced research of L2
learning (Dörnyei, 2005; Nakata, 2010; Tseng, Dörnyei, & Schmitt, 2006). In general, the
literature consistently has shown that motivational beliefs and self-regulated use of learning
strategies are critical factors closely tied to successful L2 learning (Nakata, 2010; Schmidt,
Boraie, & Kassabgy, 1996). For example, Schmidt et al. (1996) found that more self-determined
learners were more active language learners with respect to their use of learning strategies than
were less self-determined learners. Nakata (2010) argued that intrinsic motivation helps learners

56
become autonomous both affectively and cognitively, which subsequently leads to successful L2
learning.
The literature has identified the impact of both motivational factors and the use of language
learning strategies on L2 learning, but little attention has been given to how these factors play
together within a SRL framework in explaining L2 learning, how differentially they may
influence different aspects of L2 learning (e.g., reading and vocabulary), and how self-regulated
language learning may be specific to a particular learning context. The last issue seems to
deserve special attention. For learning in a foreign language (FL) context to be successful,
learners are expected to be more self-regulated than learners in a second language context where
adequate language input and opportunities for productive use of the target language are present.
In other words, given typically limited exposure to and opportunities for using the target
language beyond the classroom setting (Dörnyei, 1990; Tsuda & Nakata, 2013), a more
conscious language-learning effort seems necessary for FL learners.
To address such a gap in the literature, we examined, within a SRL framework, how
motivation and the use of learning strategies work in tandem in influencing FL vocabulary
learning, focusing on adolescent learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) in Korea. For
two major reasons we focused our attention on vocabulary knowledge. First, although plenty of
studies in the L2 literature have addressed vocabulary learning (e.g., Gu & Johnson, 1996;
Nassaji, 2006), few have studied it within the SRL framework. Second, vocabulary learning is
ubiquitous and occurs throughout the learning of a language, which particularly seems to require
strong conscious efforts and strategic learning for knowledge increment and refinement.
In the next section, we review the literature on self-regulated learning in relation to L2 learning.
In particular, we present how motivation and learning strategies are intricately related to L2
learning within the framework of self-regulated learning. In the Method section, we introduce the
instruments used in the study, describe the process of data collection in Korea, and explain how
the data were analyzed. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) (Kline, 2011) was the primary
statistical method used to test if there was a direct and/or an indirect effect of motivation on EFL
vocabulary knowledge and how intrinsic and extrinsic motivation might be differentially related
to vocabulary learning strategies as well as vocabulary knowledge. Finally, results are discussed
in light of the importance of both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in high-school students’
English learning in the foreign language context in Korea.

57
Literature Review
Self-regulated Learning
The concept of self-regulated learning has been defined and proposed in different ways based on
different theoretical frameworks (e.g., social-cognitive theory, information-processing theory)
(Dinsmore, Alexander, & Loughlin, 2008; Pintrich, 2000). Drawing on different constructs and
mechanisms addressed in the previous literature, Pintrich (2000) proposed a general definition of
self-regulated learning as “an active, constructive process whereby learners set goals for their
learning and then attempt to monitor, regulate, and control their cognition, motivation, and
behavior, guided and constrained by their goals and the contextual features in the environment”
(p. 453). Schraw, Crippen, and Hartley (2006) postulated that self-regulated learning comprises
three major components: cognition, metacognition, and motivation. The cognition component
refers to skills and strategies to learn information. The metacognition component involves skills
for learners to monitor their learning processes. The motivation component includes learners’
beliefs and attitude in their learning and learning capacity.
Despite those different constructs and conceptualizations that researchers have proposed in
defining SRL, they seem to share two common features: systematic use of self-regulated learning
strategies (cognitive and metacognitive) and motivational beliefs (Pintrich, 1999; Zimmerman,
1990; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2008). Self-regulated learning strategies refer to “actions and
processes directed at acquisition of information or skills that involve agency, purpose, and
instrumentality perceptions by learners” (Zimmerman, 1990, p. 5). Specifically, self-regulated
learners are metacognitively and cognitively active and strategic in learning to achieve their
academic goals (Pintrich & De Groot, 1990). At a metacognitive level, self-regulated learners are
aware of their own learning process, and know what they need for learning and what they should
do proactively for their academic achievement. They establish their learning goals, plan
specifically to achieve those goals, and monitor their own learning for optimum outcomes. At a
cognitive level, self-regulated learners use various learning strategies to help them understand
information they have while learning and improving their knowledge.
In addition to self-regulatory strategies, SRL also ties closely to how and why learners choose
a particular learning strategy, which is an indication of their motivation to learn (Zimmerman,
1990; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2008). Because learners’ self-regulatory process in learning

58
involves their conscious efforts, intellect, and time commitment, unless the resultant outcomes of
their efforts are attractive enough, they might not be sufficiently determined to regulate
themselves to learn actively (Zimmerman, 1990). The literature indicates a general consensus
that self-regulated learners are more motivated in their use of learning strategies by which their
learning goal is more likely to be achieved (Lau & Chan, 2003; Pintrich & De Groot, 1990). In
particular, Zimmerman (2008) highlighted the role of motivational constructs as precursors,
mediators, concomitant outcomes of SRL, and the primary outcomes of self-regulatory learning
processes. For example, he explained that highly motivated learners are more attentive, show
better progress and task mastery, are persistent to learn on their own, and have greater
satisfaction when they are given the opportunity to learn.

Motivational Beliefs and L2 Learning

Motivation has long been recognized as one of the most critical factors impacting L2 learning.
Previous research findings generally have endorsed a close relationship between motivation and
L2 proficiency and performance of various kinds (e.g., Tsuda & Nakata, 2013; Vandergrift,
2005). Different theoretical approaches have been used to address motivational influence on L2
learning. Among the seminal works, Gardner (1985), in his Socio-educational Model, defined
language learning motivation as a combination of effort and desire to achieve the goal of
language learning. The Socio-educational Model differentiates between two types of language-
learning motivational orientations: integrative and instrumental. Integratively-oriented learners
want to learn the target language so as to integrate or assimilate with the language’s people and
culture, whereas instrumentally-oriented learners want to study the language because of the
practical benefits that language proficiency can provide, such as meeting requirements for
graduation or seeking higher-paid employment. While both integrative and instrumental
orientations are essential elements of successful language learning, in early research based on the
Socio-educational Model, it was argued that integrative orientation was more associated with
better performance in L2 (Gardner & Lambert, 1972). However, later studies showed that the
relationship between orientation and L2 achievement might depend on different linguistic and
cultural contexts or different definitions of orientation (Clément & Kruidenier, 1983; Dörnyei,
1990).
Although the Socio-educational Model has helped L2 researchers understand how and why one

59
learns a L2, it also has been contested in the L2 research community. For example, some
questioned that the two orientations - integrative vs. instrumental - are unclear and, more
important, that they seem unable to explain all possible aspects of motivations for language
learning (Dörnyei, 1990; Noels, Pelletier, Clément, & Vallerand, 2000). Consequently, some L2
researchers, such as Noels and her colleagues (2000), resorted to an alternative motivation
framework: Self-Determination Theory (SDT; see Deci & Ryan, 1985). According to the SDT,
the key factor in one’s motivation is autonomy, which indicates ‘a sense of choice in initiating
and regulating one’s own actions’ (Deci & Ryan, 1985, p. 580). Based on how autonomy plays,
the SDT defines two types of motivation - extrinsic and intrinsic, which are not so much
categorically different but rather on a continuum of self-determination. That is, intrinsic
motivation (IM) is the most self-determined form of motivation, whereas extrinsic motivation
(EM) is positioned at the other end of the continuum of self-determination, although this does not
necessarily indicate a lack of self-determination in behavior (Noels et al., 2000).
IM refers to a learner’s internal desire to perform a particular task because the task itself gives
pleasure and satisfaction. Vallerand (1997) identified a three-part taxonomy of IM, which
basically indicates pleasurable feelings or sensations people have while doing self-initiated and
challenging activities. Intrinsic motivation to know is the motivation for the desire to attain new
ideas and develop knowledge. Intrinsic motivation toward accomplishments refers to the feelings
of mastering a task or achieving a goal. Lastly, intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation
relates to motivation based simply on the sensations brought forth by the task.
People with EM do the task with an expectation that completing it will bring external rewards,
such as grades, promotion, and positive feedback. EM has four different types based on the
degree of autonomy: external regulation, introjection regulation, identified regulation, and
integrated regulation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). External regulation is the least autonomous form of
EM. One has certain behaviors to meet an external demand or to achieve externally imposed
rewards. Introjected regulation considers behaviors internally motivated by the feeling of
pressure to avoid guilt or to achieve self-esteem, which remains controlling in terms of
continuum of autonomy. Identified regulation is a more self-regulated form of EM, which
represents regulation accepted by identifying one’s own importance or value of a behavior.
Integrated regulation is the most self-determined form of EM, when one fully internalizes and
assimilates identified motivation to oneself by making it congruent with one’s own values.

60
 Over the last three decades, researchers have examined extensively how learners’ performance
can differ when they are extrinsically versus intrinsically motivated. Many studies have
highlighted the importance of IM in learning (Pintrich & De Groot, 1990; Reeve, Ryan, Deci, &
Jang, 2008). Similar findings have been reported in L2 learning as well (Noels, Clément, &
Pelletier, 1999; Pae, 2008). Noels et al. (1999), for example, in their study of French immersion
students in Canada, found that those motivated through more self-determined forms (e.g.,
identified regulation or intrinsic motivation) were likely to experience less anxiety and greater
motivational intensity and self-evaluation in competence.
While a positive relationship has been documented widely between IM and learning
achievement, no general consensus is apparent on the role of EM in learning achievement and
the relationship between IM and EM. Some studies showed EM to negatively correlate with or
undermine IM, thus negatively influence learning (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 2001; Ryan & Deci,
2000). Others found IM and EM to positively correlate (J. H.-Y. Wang & Guthrie, 2004) or to
show no significant correlation (Law, 2009), or that EM interacted with the level of IM in
explaining performance (Lin, McKeachie, & Kim, 2001). In the L2 literature as well, mixed
findings have been identified. For example, Vandergrift (2005) revealed that EM and its
subscales were all positively and significantly correlated with IM and its subscales in adolescents’
L2 (French) listening. Interestingly, neither EM nor IM had any significant correlation with L2
listening proficiency. In Wang’s study (2008) with Chinese college EFL learners, autonomous
EM correlated positively with IM and English performance, whereas controlled EM negatively
correlated with IM and English performance. Noels et al. (2000) also found in their study with
French-English bilingual university students that external regulation (i.e., the least autonomous
form of EM) correlated significantly only with IM-Accomplishment, but not with IM-
Knowledge nor IM-Stimulation. However, both introjected regulation and identified regulation
(i.e., the more autonomous forms of EM) correlated with each of the IM subscales.
Overall, debates remain about the relationship between EM and IM on the one hand, and that
of EM and IM with L2 learning on the other hand. A reason might be that previous studies were
conducted in different learning contexts with different learner groups and different L2
performance variables (e.g., Canadian adolescents’ L2 French listening in Vandergrift, 2005
versus adult EFL learners’ overall English achievement in Wang, 2008). Apparently, more
research is warranted to address further the relationship between IM, EM, and L2 learning.

61
Self-regulatory Strategy and L2 Learning
SRL involves learners’ conscious control over their thoughts and behaviors (Pintrich & De Groot,
1990; Zimmerman, 1990). This entails using self-regulatory strategies to control the process of
learning to achieve goals. Pintrich and his associates (Pintrich, 1999; Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, &
McKeachie, 1991) identified several types of metacognitive strategies (i.e., planning activities,
monitoring one’s thinking and academic behavior, and regulation strategies) and various
cognitive learning strategies (i.e., rehearsal, elaboration, and organizational strategies) that tend
to have an impact on academic achievement.
L2 researchers also have paid a significant amount of attention to strategy factors in various
aspects of L2 learning, and there tends to be a consensus that use of strategies enhances
performance in L2 learning and use, in both general and specific tasks (Park, 1997; J. Wang,
Spencer, & Xing, 2009). For example, Park (1997), found that all six categories of strategies (i.e.,
memory-, cognitive-, compensation-, metacognitive-, affective-, and social-strategy)
significantly correlated with adult Korean EFL students’ English proficiency measured by a
TOEFL test. J. Wang et al.’s (2009) study on college learners of Chinese in the United Kingdom
also showed that those who monitored their progress, persevered at tasks, and set realistic goals,
were more successful in a Chinese achievement test including listening, speaking, and writing.
Regarding studies focusing on L2 vocabulary learning in particular, Gu and Johnson (1996)
divided vocabulary learning behaviors into two major parts: metacognitive regulation and
cognitive strategies. Metacognitive regulation comprised two sub-dimensions: selective attention
and self-initiation. Cognitive strategies were more specified into guessing, dictionary use, note-
taking, rehearsal, encoding, and activation. The researchers found that two metacognitive
strategies (i.e., selective attention and self-initiation) of vocabulary learning were positive
predictors of Chinese college EFL learners’ general English proficiency; and cognitive strategies
in general were correlated positively with both general English proficiency and vocabulary size.
Nassaji’s (2006) study on adult intermediate ESL learners also revealed a close relationship
between learners’ lexical inferencing strategy use and depth of vocabulary knowledge.

Linking Motivation and Strategy Use with L2 Vocabulary Learning

62
The above two sections reviewed some foundational research that confirmed the relationship of
motivation with L2 learning on the one hand, and that of learning strategy use with L2 learning
on the other hand. However, within a SRL framework, motivational beliefs and self-regulatory
strategies are not isolated factors but rather closely intertwine in influencing learning and
academic achievement (Zimmerman, 1990, 2008). Pintrich and De Groot (1990) examined the
relationship between motivation, self-regulated learning, and classroom academic achievements
of seventh graders in science classes. Regression analysis revealed that intrinsic motivation did
not directly influence academic performance, but highly associated with the use of self-
regulatory strategies, a strong predictor of academic achievement. Credé and Phillips (2011)
meta-analyzed the studies using the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ;
Pintrich et al., 1991), which is “a single measure designed to assess task-specific cognitions and
motivations as well as the learning strategies used by students” (p. 2). Results revealed that
students achieved higher academic performance when they engaged in self-monitoring and
regulation, had intrinsic interest and value in tasks with high self-efficacy, and used appropriate
learning strategies. More importantly, the meta-analysis showed that students’ motivational
beliefs seemed to influence academic performance only through the mediation of their use of
learning strategies.
Despite L2 researchers’ strong interests in motivation as well as strategy use in L2 learning,
only few studies have considered both factors in their examination of L2 learning. MacIntyre and
Noels (1996), for example, found that highly-motivated adult learners of Spanish or Italian as a
foreign language reported knowing more strategies, used them more easily and frequently, and
viewed them as more effective, than did those who were less-motivated. Schmidt et al. (1996)
reported that adult Egyptian EFL learners, who were highly determined, instrumentally
motivated, and addressed personal needs for affiliation, tended to be active users of cognitive
strategies for learning English. However, the learners’ integrative orientation failed to correlate
significantly with their reported use of any learning strategies, although all dimensions of
motivation associated positively with their English proficiency.
Noteworthy is that almost all aforementioned studies with concurrent considerations of both
motivation and strategy use in L2 learning were focused on general English proficiency or
learning achievement. In addition, methodologically, relationships often were tested with
bivariate correlations or multiple regression analyses in which exactly how the two factors work

63
in tandem in influencing L2 learning failed to be addressed, such as a possible indirect effect of
motivation on L2 competence through the mediation of strategy use as revealed in Credé and
Phillips’s (2011). To date, few studies specifically have addressed L2 vocabulary learning within
a SRL framework with both factors of motivation and learning strategies considered. Tseng and
Schmitt’s (2008) SEM study of Chinese-speaking EFL learners’ vocabulary knowledge shed
some light on our understanding of such an issue. They tested a SEM model representing
relationships among motivation, self-regulating capacity, vocabulary learning strategies, and
vocabulary knowledge. The final structural model suggested a mechanism of vocabulary learning
as “a cyclic process” (p. 383), with initial motivation permeating the entire process through
different stages of vocabulary learning. Overall, findings provided interesting insights into
motivated vocabulary learning. The instrument for self-regulating capacity of vocabulary
learning in this study was developed from the previous study conducted by Tseng et al. (2006).
To address a problem that traditionally-popular instruments for strategic learning are not
psychometrically robust, they designed a new instrument based on a theoretical construct of self-
regulation and directly targeting the learner trait of self-regulatory capacity. Their pilot studies
showed that the instrument was psychometrically satisfactory, and that the hypothesized model
had a good fit with the empirical data collected. Later, Mizumoto and Takeuchi (2012)
conducted a validation study of Tseng et al.’s (2006) results in the Japanese EFL context, and
found the instrument to provide a reliable and valid measurement, but with a factor structure
different from the original study.
Although Tseng and his colleagues significantly contributed to understanding self-regulated
vocabulary learning, some issues remain. For example, in the final SEM model, motivational
beliefs only significantly predicted vocabulary knowledge through the mediation of self-
regulatory capacity; and they also had no direct influence on learning strategies. On the one hand,
such findings did not agree with those of previous studies documenting motivational influences
on strategy use. On the other hand, the study did not directly statistically test any possible
indirect effect of motivation on achievement through the mediation of strategy factors (Pintrich,
1999; Wang & Guthrie, 2004). The question thus remains whether motivation contributes to L2
vocabulary knowledge uniquely over and above strategy use, or its contribution is primarily
indirect through the mediation of strategy use. In addition, the study sub-categorized motivation
into three constructs (i.e., anxiety, self-efficacy, and attitude), but did not compare different types

64
of motivation in conjunction with strategy use and examine their influence on vocabulary
knowledge, which might give different insights in understanding self-regulated vocabulary
learning. This certainly warrants more research on self-regulated L2 vocabulary learning,
particularly by further examining how different types of motivation and strategy use are related,
how motivation and strategy use work together in influencing L2 vocabulary learning, and how
different types of motivation may be related differentially to L2 vocabulary learning.

The Present Study

To address the above research that pertains to self-regulated learning of L2 vocabulary, we
conducted a SEM study on how motivation and learning strategies work together in influencing
L2 vocabulary knowledge, focusing on Korean-speaking adolescent EFL learners. Specifically,
we proposed the following questions to guide the study:
1. How do motivation and use of learning strategies work together in explaining
English vocabulary knowledge of adolescent EFL learners?
2. Do extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation have differential relationships
with vocabulary learning strategies and, consequently, with EFL vocabulary
knowledge?

Method
Participants
Participants included 230 11th graders (164 males, 66 females; aged 16-17) from two high
schools in Korea. Four classes from each school participated in this study, and the average class
size was about 38. Those students had studied English for about 9 years since 3rd grade under
the Korean national curriculum, where English language learning is highlighted as a critical
global communication skill (Jeon, 2009). The students had five 50-minute English classes each
week.

Instruments
Motivation in English vocabulary learning
The motivation questionnaire, a modified version of the Language Learning Orientations Scale
(Noels et al., 2000), included 17 items covering both EM and IM. On a 7-point Likert scale, from

65
1 (not at all true of me) to 7 (very true of me), and students were asked to rate the extent to which
they agreed with statements. The EM part (8 items; Cronbach’s = .85) included external
regulation (3 items, e.g., I learn vocabulary in order to get high scores in exams), introjected
regulation (3 items, e.g., I learn vocabulary because I would feel bad if I have little knowledge of
it), and identified regulation (2 items, e.g., I learn vocabulary because I want to be the kind of
person who knows many words). The IM part (9 items; Cronbach’s = .93) included knowledge
(3 items, e.g., I learn vocabulary for the pleasure I experience in learning words),
accomplishment (3 items, e.g., I learn vocabulary for the satisfied feeling when I master difficult
words), and stimulation (3 items, e.g., I learn vocabulary for the pleasure I get from knowing the
English words around me).

English Vocabulary Learning Strategies

The questionnaire on vocabulary learning strategy use was developed on the basis of the
Vocabulary Learning Questionnaire (Gu & Johnson, 1996), Strategic Vocabulary Learning
Involvement (Tseng & Schmitt, 2008) and Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire
(Pintrich et al., 1991). It included 49 items with 14 for metacognitive strategies (Cronbach’s
= .93) (e.g., I check the progress I make when using a new vocabulary learning method), and
35 for cognitive strategies (Cronbach’s = .95) (e.g., I make use of context when guessing the
meaning of a word). Questionnaires for motivation and learning strategies were presented in both
English and Korean.

Vocabulary Knowledge
To have better representation of the construct of vocabulary knowledge for modeling how it is
predicted by motivation and strategy use, we measured learners’ vocabulary size as well as depth.
Participants’ vocabulary size was measured with Schmitt, Schmitt, and Clapham’s (2001)
revised version of the Vocabulary Levels Test (Nation, 1990). In the present study, given the
learners’ level, we used only the first three frequency levels (i.e., 2000, 3000, and 5000 words).
Each frequency level had 6 sets of 6 choice words that were accompanied by 3 target meanings.
Participants were asked to choose an appropriate word from a set of 6 choice words (e.g.,
business, clock, horse, pencil, shoe, wall) to match each of the three meanings (e.g., part of a
house, animal with four legs, something used for writing). Students gained one point for each

66
correct match of a meaning and a word, and received zero points for each incorrect answer.
Maximum possible score was 54. Cronbach’s = .89.
Read’s (1993) Word Associates Test (WAT) was used to measure participants’ depth of
vocabulary knowledge. In the WAT, a target word (e.g., sudden) was presented with eight words
in two different boxes, among which four were its associates. The four in the left box were all
adjectives (e.g., beautiful, quick, surprising, thirsty) and students selected the associates that
were either synonyms of the target word or indicated one of the various meanings the target word
might have (e.g., quick and surprising). The other four in the right box were all nouns (e.g.,
change, doctor, noise, school), and students indicated the associates that could collocate with the
target item (e.g., change and noise). There were 30 items in the WAT used in the present study.
To make this test less susceptible to guessing, participants were advised to choose as many
appropriate answers as possible, without being informed of the number of correct answers for
each question (i.e., 4). Participants received one point for both choosing an associate and not
choosing a non-associate. Maximum score for an item was 8 (4 for choosing 4 associates and 4
for not choosing non-associates). Total possible test score was 240, and the test had a high
internal reliability coefficient (Cronbach’s = .88).

Data collection procedure and method of analysis

Data were collected in the aforementioned two high schools in Korea during students’ regular
English classes. Motivation and strategy questionnaires were administered first in a regular class
session, followed by the vocabulary size and depth tests. SEM was the primary method used to
answer the research questions. SEM is a statistical technique that enables one to test a
hypothesized model representing structural relationships among a set of observed (measured)
and/or unobserved (latent) variables (Kline, 2011). All SEM analyses were conducted using
Amos 20 (Arbuckle, 2011) with a maximum likelihood estimation method. To evaluate on the
goodness of model fit, multiple indices were adopted in addition to significance testing through
chi-square values, including Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), Jöreskog–
Sörbom Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), Standardized Root Mean Square Residuals (SRMR), and
Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA). Typically, models are considered to have
a good fit when the GFI, CFI, and TLI are greater than .95, the SRMR is less than .08, and the
RMSEA is less than .06 (Hu & Bentler, 1999; Kline, 2011).

67
Results
Descriptive Statistics and Correlations
Table 1 shows the means, standard deviations, and bivariate correlations of all observed
variables. Based on Deci and Ryan (1985), the scores of IM and EM were gained from averaging
out their three indicators. Correlations were all positive and significant. To highlight, all aspects
of IM positively and significantly correlated, as did the three aspects of EM. Notably, the
correlation between IM and EM was also positive and significant (r = .603, p < .001). Both types
of motivation also positively and significantly correlated with the two aspects of vocabulary
learning strategies (i.e., cognitive and metacognitive) as well as the two types of vocabulary
knowledge (i.e., size and depth). Cognitive and metacognitive strategy use, which significantly
correlated with each other (r = .851, p < .001), both had positive and significant correlations with
vocabulary size as well as depth. Finally, the two indicators of vocabulary knowledge also
significantly correlated with each other (r = .507, p < .001).

Direct and Indirect Effects of Motivation on Vocabulary Knowledge

To answer the first research question, we tested a conceptual model in which the structural model
comprised three latent variables, including motivation, strategy use, and vocabulary knowledge.
The latent variable of vocabulary knowledge was represented by the two dimensions of size and
depth. The latent variable of strategy use had two indicators: cognitive and metacognitive
strategies. Because IM and EM were positively correlated with each other as well as with both
aspects of strategy use and vocabulary knowledge, they were used as the two indicators of the
latent variable of motivation. Based on the SRL framework and previous research findings about
the influence of motivation and strategy use on L2 learning, we hypothesized that vocabulary
knowledge was positively predicted by both motivation and strategy use, and strategy use was
also positively predicted by motivation.
The model showed a good model fit with (6) =13.340 (p < .05), GFI=.981, CFI=.990,
TLI=.975, SRMR=.023, and RMSEA=.073. In the measurement model, both EM and IM
significantly loaded on the latent variable of motivation, =.72 and =.84 (both ps < .001),
respectively. Observed variables also loaded significantly on the latent variable of strategy use,
=.91 and =.93 (both ps < .001), respectively, for metacognitive and cognitive strategies. Both

68
dimensions significantly loaded on the latent variable of vocabulary knowledge, =.85 and
=.60 (both ps < .001) for vocabulary size and depth, respectively.

69
 Table 1

Means, standard deviations, and bivariate correlations of all observed variables

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12
1.VOCASIZ
2.VOCADEP .507***
3.METASTR .526*** .379***
4.COGSTR .594*** .409*** .851***
5.EM .372*** .260*** .551*** .550***
6.EXTREG .250*** .150* .320*** .292*** .751***
7.INTREG .267*** .242*** .475*** .516*** .812*** .409***

70
8.IDNREG .364*** .224** .508*** .491*** .816*** .409*** .515***
9.IM .351*** .345*** .661*** .634*** .604*** .237*** .546*** .639***
10.KNOWL .335*** .314*** .645*** .575*** .535*** .175** .504*** .577*** .896***
11.ACCOM .345*** .323*** .628*** .599*** .584*** .315*** .513*** .553*** .902*** .707***
12.STIMU .269*** .296*** .516*** .540*** .515*** .150* .461*** .598*** .907*** .723*** .730***
Mean 28.10 138.57 3.73 3.82 4.12 4.69 3.58 4.12 3.98 3.65 4.14
4.14
SD 14.76 21.17 1.13 1.03 1.00 1.20 1.28 1.30 1.16 1.27 1.31
1.29
Note: N=230. VOCASIZ=vocabulary size; VOCADEP=vocabulary depth; METASTR=metacognitive strategies; COGSTR=cognitive
strategies; EM=extrinsic motivation; EXTREG=external regulation; INTREG=introjected regulation; IDNREG=identified regulation;
IM=intrinsic motivation;
KNOWL=knowledge; ACCOM=accomplishment; STIMU=stimulation.
* p < .05 ** p < .01 *** p < .001
 As shown in Table 2, in the structural model, the factor of motivation significantly predicted
that of strategy use ( =.83, p=.003), and accounted for 69% of the total variance of strategy use,
suggesting a very close relationship between learners’ motivation and their use of vocabulary
strategies. The factors of motivation and strategy use together explained approximately 52% of
the total variance of the factor of vocabulary knowledge. Over and above motivation, strategy
use uniquely and significantly contributed to vocabulary knowledge (β=.84, p=.002). However,
the direct effect of motivation on vocabulary knowledge, after controlling for strategy use, did
not achieve significance (β= -.146, p=.368). Given the close relationship between motivation and
strategy use on the one hand, and that between strategy use and vocabulary knowledge on the
other hand, we tested a possible indirect effect of motivation on vocabulary knowledge through
the mediation of strategy use; such an effect turned out to be significant (β=.697, p=.001). Figure
1 shows a graphic representation of the model.

Table 2
SEM analysis testing the effects of motivation and strategy use on vocabulary knowledge
Path Coefficient
BC Bootstrap 95% CI
β SE p
Lower Upper
Total effects
MOT → STR .83 .05 .003 .723 .909
STR → VK .84 .19 .002 .538 1.284
MOT → VK .55 .08 .003 .381 .694
Direct effects
MOT → STR .83 .05 .003 .723 .909
STR → VK .84 .19 .002 .538 1.284
MOT → VK -.15 .20 .368 -.602 .187
Indirect effects
MOT → VK .70 .18 .001 .468 1.227
Note. MOT=factor of motivation (intrinsic and extrinsic), STR=factor of vocabulary learning
stragtegy use (cognitive and metacognitive), VK=factor of vocabulary knowledge (size and
depth)
Figure 1. Structural model representation of the relationships between motivation, vocabulary
learning strategies, and vocabulary knowledge. MOT=factor of motivation, EM=extrinsic
motivation, IM=intrinsic motivation, STR=factor of strategy use, METASTR=metacognitive
strategies, COGSTR=cognitive strategies, VK=factor of vocabulary knowledge,
VOCADEP=vocabulary depth, VOCASIZ=vocabulary size. Parameter estimates are
standardized structural regression weights. All paths are statistically significant at the level
of .001 (two-tailed) while the path from MOT to VK is not statistically significant (p = .368).

Effects of Different Types of Motivation on Vocabulary Knowledge

The previous analysis focused on motivation as a higher-level construct comprised of both IM
and EM, given the close and positive relationship found between the two types of motivation
(see Table 1). To gain deeper knowledge about the specific contribution of different types of
motivation, together with vocabulary learning strategies, to vocabulary knowledge, two
additional sets of SEM analyses were conducted for the latent variables of EM (EM-L) and IM
(IM-L), respectively. In the conceptual model for EM-L, which had three indicators (i.e.,
external regulation, introjected regulation, and identified regulation), EM-L positively predicted
strategy use, and together with strategy use, it positively predicted vocabulary knowledge.
Similarly, in the conceptual model for IM-L, which also had three indicators (i.e., knowledge,
accomplishment, and stimulation), IM-L positively predicted strategy use and both IM-L and
strategy use positively predicted vocabulary knowledge. In both models, like the previous
analysis, the factor of strategy use was represented by cognitive and metacognitive strategies,
and that of vocabulary knowledge by size and depth measures.

72
Table 3
SEM analysis testing effects of extrinsic motivation and strategy use on vocabulary knowledge
Path Coefficient
BC Bootstrap 95% CI
β SE p
Lower Upper
Total effects
EM-L → STR .71 .07 .004 .556 .820
STR → VK .72 .12 .002 .456 .932
EM-L → VK .52 .09 .002 .349 .681
Direct effects
EM-L → STR .71 .07 .004 .556 .820
STR → VK .72 .12 .002 .456 .932
EM-L → VK .00 .13 .943 -.245 .302
Indirect effects
EM-L → VK .51 .10 .001 .338 .734
Note. EM-L=factor of extrinsic motivation (external regulation, introjected regulation, and
identified regulation), STR=factor of vocabulary learning strategy use (cognitive and
metacognitive), VK=factor of vocabulary knowledge (size and depth)

The EM-L model showed a good model fit with (11) = 16.7 (p > .05), GFI = .981, CFI
= .992, TLI = .984, SRMR = .023, and RMSEA = .048. The three observed variables of EM-L,
including external, introjected, and identified motivation, significantly loaded on EM-L, = .53,
= .73, and = .73 (all ps < .001), respectively. As Table 3 shows, EM-L significantly and
positively predicted strategy use (β = .71, p = .004), and accounted for 50.8% of the total
variance of strategy use. EM-L in combination with strategy use explained about 51.8% of the
total variance of vocabulary knowledge. Strategy use significantly and positively predicted
vocabulary knowledge (β = .72, p = .002) after controlling for the effect of EM-L. The direct or
unique effect of EM-L on vocabulary knowledge, however, did not achieve the level of
significance after the effect of strategy use was adjusted for (β = .00, p = .943). Once again, we
tested the indirect effect of EM-L on vocabulary knowledge through the mediation of strategy
use, and such an effect was significantly positive (β = .51, p = .001). Figure 2 shows a graphic
representation of the model.

73
Figure 2. Structural model representation of the relationship between extrinsic motivation,
vocabulary learning strategies, and vocabulary knowledge. EM-L=factor of extrinsic motivation,
EXTREG=external regulation, INTREG=introjected regulation, IDNREG= identified regulation,
STR=factor of strategy use, METASTR=metacognitive strategies, COGSTR=cognitive strategies,
VK=factor of vocabulary knowledge, VOCADEP=vocabulary depth, VOCASIZ=vocabulary
size. Parameter estimates are standardized structural regression weights. All paths are
statistically significant at the level of .001 (two-tailed) while the path from EM-L to VK is not
statistically significant (p = .943).

The model with IM-L predicting vocabulary knowledge together with strategy use showed a
similar pattern. Overall, the model had a good model fit, (11) = 35.74 (p < .001), GFI = .962,
CFI = .975, TLI = .953, and SRMR = .036, RMSEA = .09. The three observed variables of IM-L,
including knowledge, accomplish, and stimulation, significantly loaded on IM-L = .85, = .86,
= .84 (all ps < .001), respectively. In the structural model, as Table 4 shows, IM-L
significantly and positively predicted strategy use (β = .75, p = .002), and accounted for 55.6% of
the total variance of strategy use. IM-L and strategy use together explained about 52.1% of the
total variance of vocabulary knowledge. Strategy use made a significant and positive
contribution to vocabulary knowledge (β = .82, p = .001) after controlling for the effect of IM-L.
The unique effect of IM-L on vocabulary knowledge was negative but not significant (β = -.15, p
= .204), after the effect of strategy use on vocabulary knowledge was partialed out. Like EM-L,
the indirect effect of IM-L on vocabulary knowledge via the influence of strategy use was
significantly positive (β = .614, p = .001). Figure 3 shows a graphic representation of this model.

74
Table 4
SEM analysis testing effects of intrinsic motivation and strategy use on vocabulary knowledge
Path Coefficient
BC Bootstrap 95% CI
β SE p
Lower Upper
Total effects
IM-L → STR .75 .04 .002 .664 .820
STR → VK .82 .10 .001 .644 1.063
IM-L → VK .47 .07 .004 .308 .602
Direct effects
IM-L → STR .75 .04 .002 .664 .820
STR → VK .82 .10 .001 .644 1.063
IM-L → VK -.15 .12 .204 -.420 .063
Indirect effects
IM-L → VK .61 .09 .001 .462 .848
Note. IM-L=factor of intrinsic motivation (knowledge, accomplishment, and stimulation),
STR=factor of vocabulary learning strategy use (cognitive and metacognitive), VK=factor of
vocabulary knowledge (size and depth).

Figure 3. Structural model representation of the relationship between intrinsic motivation,

vocabulary learning strategy, and vocabulary knowledge. IM-L=factor of intrinsic motivation,
KNOWL=knowledge, ACCOM=accomplish, STIMU=stimulation, STR=factor of strategy use,
METASTR=metacognitive strategies, COGSTR=cognitive strategies, VK=factor of vocabulary
knowledge, VOCADEP= vocabulary depth, VOCASIZ=vocabulary size. Parameter estimates
are standardized structural regression weights. All paths are statistically significant at the level
of .001 (two-tailed) while the path from IM-L to VK is not statistically significant (p = .204).

75
Discussion
Focusing on high-school EFL learners in Korea, this study examined how motivational factors
and the use of learning strategies worked together in predicting L2 vocabulary knowledge. To
address our first research question, our SEM analysis revealed that the use of vocabulary
learning strategies significantly and positively predicted vocabulary knowledge, which confirms
previous findings about the importance of strategies in L2 vocabulary development (e.g., Oxford,
2011). Motivation also significantly predicted strategy use. However, over and above the
influence of strategy use, motivation failed to predict vocabulary knowledge significantly. SEM
results showed that motivation had only a significant indirect effect on vocabulary knowledge
through the mediation of strategy use. Regarding the second research question, such findings
also held for IM and EM (i.e., a similar pattern of indirect effect on vocabulary knowledge via
strategy use), which significantly and positively correlated with each other as well as with all
other variables.
A significant indirect effect of motivation on vocabulary knowledge via strategy use was not
unexpected, given the tenet of the SRL framework that learners are motivated by different
reasons to use self-regulatory strategies to achieve their learning goals (Zimmerman, 2008;
Zimmerman & Schunk, 2008). Notably, SEM analyses revealed that all tested models showed a
full mediation effect of the use of vocabulary learning strategies. This suggests that motivation in
learning without concomitant use of learning strategies would not lead to a significant
achievement in EFL vocabulary learning. Such findings also agree with the argument of Csizér
and Dörnyei (2005) that motivation itself is a concept accounting for why people behave as they
do rather than how successful their behaviors will be, so the indirect relation of motivation to
learning achievement is justifiable.
Empirically, the importance of IM in learning or an influence of IM on learning through
strategy use also accords with the findings of many previous studies (Noels et al., 2000; Pae,
2008; Pintrich & De Groot, 1990). Pintrich and De Groot (1990) showed that students with high
intrinsic value were more likely to use strategies than were students with low intrinsic value, and
self-regulation and strategy use were found to be strong predictors of academic achievement. In
L2 vocabulary research, Tseng and Schmitt (2008) found a cyclic and systematic process of
vocabulary learning where learners’ motivation influenced the use of vocabulary learning
strategies channeled through self-regulation, which, in turn, played a role in explaining

76
vocabulary knowledge. In the Korean context, Pae (2008) found that Korean university students’
intrinsic motivation was indirectly related to their English achievement.
On the other hand, it is interesting to note that in the current study, EM also had a significant
and positive indirect effect on vocabulary knowledge. Its effect on strategy use was significant
and positive. It also positively correlated with IM. Previous studies in SRL, while emphasizing
IM’s role as an important precursor of SRL, argued that extrinsic rewards undermined IM and
led to low performance (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999), or found that EM did not lead to the use
of strategy, or EM and strategy use were negatively correlated (Lau & Chan, 2003). However, in
the present study with Korean EFL learners’ vocabulary learning, EM did not seem to undermine
IM, nor was it associated negatively with strategy use and vocabulary knowledge. There seemed
to be no fundamental difference between EM and IM in their relationships with strategy use and
vocabulary learning (see Tables 3 and 4).
The question now becomes why extrinsically-motivated learners actually exerted themselves to
use learning strategies and then led to positive influence on their vocabulary learning. We
contend this might be related to the unique context of EFL learning in Korea. As the significance
of English as a global language has increased, a high level of English proficiency has become
important in Korea (and certainly in many other EFL contexts also). Specifically, a good
command of English seems to be one of the most critical skills that has direct practical
significance to youths in Korea, such as school performance, high school or university entrance,
and opportunities to study abroad. Among high school students, the perception seems
particularly strong as English test scores tend to have a determining effect on their performance
in the university entrance examination and, subsequently, the prestige of the universities in
which they desire to be enrolled (Seth, 2002). The high-stake of English learning seems to have
resulted in a strong extrinsic motivation among Korean high school students and led to their
investment of considerable time, money, and energy, and more importantly, active use of various
strategies in their English learning. Given the critical importance of vocabulary in learning any
language, the positive relationship of EM and vocabulary learning (and strategy use) seems
reasonable.
The next question is why such a close relationship between extrinsic motivation and L2
learning failed to surface in some previous studies that examined this issue (Noels et al., 1999;
Noels, Clement, & Pelletier, 2001; Pae, 2008; F. Wang, 2008). For example, Noels et al. (2001)

77
found no significant correlation between EM (as opposed to IM) and final course grades among
learners of Spanish as a foreign language. F. Wang (2008) showed that external utility regulation,
one factor of EM, correlated negatively with IM and English achievement in Chinese college
EFL learners. Pae (2008) also found that EM had no significant association with Korean college
learners’ English proficiency, whereas IM was significantly and indirectly related to English
achievement.
A possible explanation might reside in how learners perceived the immediate benefits of the
type of learning highlighted in the items of the motivation questionnaires, which varied across
studies. In the present study, the motivation questionnaire was customized to the L2 vocabulary
domain with items that addressed the factor of immediate relevance to their learning of words in
English (e.g., I learn vocabulary because my teacher says it is important to improve English; I
learn vocabulary in order to get high scores in English exams). This means that extrinsically-
motivated students learned vocabulary not merely because of external rewards or benefits they
might receive from their learning. Rather, they learned vocabulary because they believed it
would lead to good grades on English exams or quizzes or a higher level of English proficiency.
The immediate benefits of vocabulary learning highlighted in the items of the motivation
questionnaire differentiate the present study from previous ones where the focus seemed to be on
long-term or less immediate goals of English language learning (e.g., getting a good job).
Consequently, a significant positive relationship between EM, active use of strategies, and
English learning failed to emerge in those studies.
Another reason might be contextual variations across studies in relation to the purpose of
foreign language learning. For example, in Noels et al (2001), although the target language was
learned in a foreign context (i.e., California, United States), the purpose of students’ learning of
the target language might be to serve their long-term benefits such as better communication with
Spanish-speaking immigrants there rather than simply achieving a good test score or university
GPA. Therefore, it seems reasonable that a significant relationship between EM and L2 learning
failed to surface in that study. A lack of a significant effect of EM on Korean EFL learners’
achievement in Pae’s (2008) study seems explicable in a similar vein. In that study, participants
already had been admitted to university, so likely would feel less pressure regarding tests, exams,
and grade attainments in English than would high school students in the present study who still
faced the critical challenge of gaining such admission with good grades on tested subjects that

78
included English.
The present study enriches the literature of self-regulated learning and academic achievement
by highlighting a similarly-important role of intrinsic as well as extrinsic motivation in
vocabulary learning in a foreign language context. However, a few limitations also are noted.
First, based on the SDT, EM is divided into different types based on autonomy. Possibly the
relationships of these sub-types of EM with strategy use and vocabulary knowledge might vary.
Table 1 shows correlations of different strengths between different types of EM (and IM) with
strategy use and vocabulary knowledge variables. Given the purpose of the present study, we did
not focus our SEM analysis on the different subtypes of EM (and IM). Future studies may want
to explore how different types of EM and IM might function differentially in predicting L2
strategy use and learning outcome. Another limitation concerns the possibility of a reciprocal
influence of variables adopted in the current study. Although the SRL framework states that
motivation serves as a precursor for students to self-regulate and engage themselves in active
learning, a possibility exists that the relationship between motivation and strategy use might be
an interactive-, an interdependent-, or even a cyclical process in learning (Zimmerman & Schunk,
2008). That is, motivational factors might be not only a precursor to, but also the subsequent
result of, strategic learning. To discern clear relationships among motivational beliefs, learning
strategies, and L2 competence, including vocabulary knowledge, longitudinal studies are needed
that track learners’ development regarding these variables. With multiple waves of data,
statistical methods such as Latent Growth Modeling then could be used to explore possible
reciprocal relationships among these variables.

Conclusion
To understand what makes a good language learner, it is critical to know why one wants to learn
the particular language and what one does to meet that goal. SRL provides us with a nice
framework to understand the interplay of motivation and use of learning strategies in L2
vocabulary learning among adolescent Korean EFL learners. Specifically, we found that learners’
motivation for vocabulary learning positively impacts their vocabulary knowledge through their
use of vocabulary learning strategies. The findings particularly highlighted the importance of EM,
as well as IM, to vocabulary learning in a foreign language context. The study enriches our
knowledge of self-regulated learning of an L2 and prompts us to further explore how the

79
influence of different types of motivational beliefs on L2 strategy use and learning achievement
may be responsive to the context of learning.

References
Arbuckle, J. L. (2011). IBM SPSS Amos 20 user’s guide. Armonk, NY: IBM Corporation.
Clément, R., & Kruidenier, B. G. (1983). Orientations in second language acquisition: The
effects of ethnicity, milieu, and target language on their emergence. Language Learning,
33(3), 273–291. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1983.tb00542.x
Credé, M., & Phillips, L. A. (2011). A meta-analytic review of the Motivated Strategies for
Learning Questionnaire. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(4), 337–346.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.03.002
Csizér, K., & Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The internal structure of language learning motivation and its
relationship with language choice and learning effort. The Modern Language Journal,
89(1), 19–36.
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments
examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin,
125(6), 627–668.
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (2001). Extrinsic rewards and intrinsic motivation in
education: reconsidered once again. Review of Educational Research, 71(1), 1–27.
http://doi.org/10.3102/00346543071001001
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. New York: Plenum.
Dinsmore, D. L., Alexander, P. A., & Loughlin, S. M. (2008). Focusing the conceptual lens on
metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology
Review, 20(4), 391–409. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9083-6
Dörnyei, Z. (1990). Conceptualizing motivation in foreign-language learning. Language
Learning, 40(1), 45–78.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). Psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second
language acquisition. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes
and motivation. London: Edward Arnold Publishers.

80
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second-language learning.
Rowley, Mass: Newbury House Publishers.
Gu, Y., & Johnson, R. K. (1996). Vocabulary learning strategies and language learning outcomes.
Language Learning, 46(4), 643–679. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01355.x
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. http://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Jeon, M. (2009). Globalization and native English speakers in English Programme in Korea
(EPIK). Language, Culture and Curriculum, 22(3), 231–243.
http://doi.org/10.1080/07908310903388933
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York,
NY: Guilford press.
Lau, K., & Chan, D. W. (2003). Reading strategy use and motivation among Chinese good and
poor readers in Hong Kong. Journal of Research in Reading, 26(2), 177–190.
Law, Y.-K. (2009). The role of attribution beliefs, motivation and strategy use in Chinese fifth-
graders’ reading comprehension. Educational Research, 51(1), 77–95.
http://doi.org/10.1080/00131880802704764
Lin, Y.-G., McKeachie, W. J., & Kim, Y. C. (2001). College student intrinsic and/or extrinsic
motivation and learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 13(3), 251–258.
http://doi.org/10.1016/S1041-6080(02)00092-4
MacIntyre, P. D., & Noels, K. A. (1996). Using social-psychological variables to predict the use
of language learning strategies. Foreign Language Annals, 29(3), 373–386.
Mizumoto, A., & Takeuchi, O. (2012). Adaptation and validation of self-regulating capacity in
vocabulary learning scale. Applied Linguistics, 33(1), 83–91.
http://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amr044
Nakata, Y. (2010). Toward a framework for self-regulated language-learning. TESL Canada
Journal, 27(2), 1–10.
Nassaji, H. (2006). The relationship between depth of vocabulary knowledge and L2 learners’
lexical inferencing strategy use and success. The Modern Language Journal, 90(3), 387–
401. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00431.x
Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York, NY: Newbury House.

81
Noels, K. A., Clément, R., & Pelletier, L. G. (1999). Perceptions of teachers’ communicative
style and students’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The Modern Language Journal,
83(1), 23–34.
Noels, K. A., Clement, R., & Pelletier, L. G. (2001). Intrinsic, extrinsic, and integrative
orientations of French Canadian learners of English. Canadian Modern Language
Review/La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 57(3), 424–442.
Noels, K. A., Pelletier, L. G., Clément, R., & Vallerand, R. J. (2000). Why are you learning a
second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language
Learning, 50(1), 57–85.
Pae, T.-I. (2008). Second language orientation and self-determination theory: A structural
analysis of the factors affecting second language achievement. Journal of Language and
Social Psychology, 27(1), 5–27. http://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X07309509
Park, G.-P. (1997). Language learning strategies and English proficiency in Korean university
students. Foreign Language Annals, 30(2), 211–221.
Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning.
International Journal of Educational Research, 31(6), 459–470.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Zeidner, M.
Boekaerts, & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 451–502). San
Diego: Academic Press.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components
of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33–40.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of
the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, Michigan:
National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.
Read, J. (1993). The development of a new measure of L2 vocabulary knowledge. Language
Testing, 10(3), 355–371. http://doi.org/10.1177/026553229301000308
Reeve, J., Ryan, R. M., Deci, E. L., & Jang, H. (2008). Understanding and promoting
autonomous self-regulation: A self-determination theory perspective. In B. J. Zimmerman
& D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and
application (pp. 223–244). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and

82
 new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67.
http://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Schmidt, R., Boraie, D., & Kassabgy, O. (1996). Foreign language motivation: Internal structure
and external connections. In R. L. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning motivation:
Pathways to the new century (Vol. 2, pp. 14–87). Honolullu, HI: The University of
Honolulu Press.
Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behaviour of two
new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test. Language Testing, 18(1), 55–88.
http://doi.org/10.1177/026553220101800103
Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education:
Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science
Education, 36(1-2), 111–139. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8
Seth, M. J. (2002). Education fever: Society, politics, and the pursuit of schooling in South
Korea. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.
Tseng, W.-T., Dörnyei, Z., & Schmitt, N. (2006). A new approach to assessing strategic learning:
The case of self-regulation in vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 78–102.
http://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami046
Tseng, W.-T., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Toward a model of motivated vocabulary learning: A
structural equation modeling approach. Language Learning, 58(2), 357–400.
Tsuda, A., & Nakata, Y. (2013). Exploring self-regulation in language learning: a study of
Japanese high school EFL students. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 7(1),
72–88. http://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2012.686500
Vallerand, R. J. (1997). Toward a hierarchical model of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 271–360.
Vandergrift, L. (2005). Relationships among motivation orientations, metacognitive awareness
and proficiency in L2 listening. Applied Linguistics, 26(1), 70–89.
http://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amh039
Wang, F. (2008). Motivation and English achievement: An exploratory and confirmatory factor
analysis of a new measure for Chinese students of English learning. North American
Journal of Psychology, 10(3), 633–646.
Wang, J. H.-Y., & Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Modeling the effects of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic

83
 motivation, amount of reading, and past reading achievement on text comprehension
between U.S. and Chinese students. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(2), 162–186.
Wang, J., Spencer, K., & Xing, M. (2009). Metacognitive beliefs and strategies in learning
Chinese as a foreign language. System, 37(1), 46–56.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.05.001
Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview.
Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3–17.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background,
methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research
Journal, 45(1), 166–183. http://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207312909
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2008). Motivation: An essential dimension of self-
regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-
regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 1–30). New York, NY:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

84
 The Effects of Remedial Instruction Associated with Graduation
Benchmarking on Low-Achieving Students’ English
Learning at Technological and Vocational Institutions
Yi-Ching Pan
National Pingtung University, Taiwan9

Bio Data:
Yi-Ching Pan has a Ph.D. in Applied Linguistics from the University of Melbourne and teaches
as an Associate Professor in the Department of Applied English at National Pingtung University
in Taiwan. Her research interests include language testing, second language acquisition and
washback. (Email: yichingpan@yahoo.com.tw).

Abstract
With the primary goals of enhancing students’ competency, developing their global perspectives
and insights, and ensuring that they become active members of the international society, 90% of
tertiary technological and vocational education institutions in Taiwan have established
graduation benchmarks for English. To ensure that students are able to achieve the graduation
benchmark, nearly 80% of these institutions offer remediation or supplemental instruction to at-
risk students. The effectiveness of such remedial instruction remains an under-researched issue.
Despite increased focus on test use and its consequences for student motivation and performance,
research has focused primarily on test washback effects on teaching. Few studies have
considered students’ viewpoints when investigating the effects of graduation benchmarks and
associated remediation on the English learning of low-achieving students. In light of this gap, the
study reported in this paper focused on low-achieving students required to take remedial classes
to meet a graduation benchmark. Specifically, this study investigated: (a) their learning outcomes
under the test-driven policy; (b) their perspectives on the English graduation benchmark; and (c)
their experiences of remedial instruction, including effects on their motivation and their
perceptions of course content. The data for the study was drawn from questionnaires and pre-
and post-test scores of 115 Taiwanese technological university students. Three major findings
emerged: (a) washback effects on learning outcomes varied from one university to another, (b)
graduation benchmarking was not an effective motivator for these low-achieving students, and
(c) remedial instruction related to graduation benchmarking had both positive and negative
washback effects. The findings are discussed in terms of their implications for tertiary education
and language testing.

Keywords: test washback, graduation benchmarking, remedial instruction, technological,

vocational education

9
National Pingtung University, Department of Applied English, 51 Min-Sheng E. Road, Pingtung City, Pingtung County, 90004,
Taiwan (R.O.C.)

85
Introduction
As is typical in many Asian countries, English language proficiency is essential for success
across virtually all economic sectors in Taiwan because of its heavy dependence on international
business. Therefore, English has become the language of economics for Taiwanese people to
master in order to compete globally. Given the importance of English in the globalized
workplace, the Taiwanese government has recently expressed “grave anxiety about its national
proficiency in English” (Graddol, 2006, p. 95). With the primary goals of enhancing university
students’ competency, developing their global perspectives and insights, and ensuring they
become active members of the international society, the Taiwanese Ministry of Education has
imposed a range of measures since 2004:
1. Encouraging institutions of tertiary education to set their own English graduation
benchmarks, mandating students to take English certification tests to achieve a
certain level of proficiency.
2. Encouraging institutions to adopt the Common European Framework of
Reference for Languages (CEFR) in terms of English learning, teaching, and
assessment to establish appropriate English graduation benchmarks.
3. Monitoring pass rates for tertiary institutions’ English certification tests and
rewarding schools that perform well or show significant progress (Taiwan
Ministry of Education, 2004, 2011).
To meet English graduation benchmarks, Taiwanese students are required to achieve a certain
score in one of a range of external English proficiency tests, such as the TOEIC ®, TOEFL®,
IETLS™, IELTS, General English Proficiency Test (GEPT), and College Student English
Proficiency Test (CSEPT), in order to graduate. To assist those who do not pass the required
English proficiency test, “support/alternative/complementary measures” (literal translation of the
original Mandarin) are provided (Pan, 2014). To comply with these policies, the number of
tertiary technological and vocational education (TVE) institutions that have established English
graduation benchmarks increased from 5% in 2003 to nearly 90% in 2012. The basic English
proficiency pass rate, in turn, improved from 32% in 2006 to 56% in 2009 (Taiwan Ministry of
Education, 2012). To maximize the chances of their students achieving the English graduation
benchmark, nearly 80% of TVE institutions with such threshold benchmarks offer remediation to
at-risk students. Whether such remedial instruction has improved student motivation and learning,

86
resulting in higher rates of English graduation benchmark accomplishment, is an under-
researched issue worthy of further consideration.
Although increasing attention has been devoted to the consequences of test use in recent years,
most studies published in international journals focus on the washback effects of tests on
teaching (Cheng, Andrews, & Yu, 2010; Green, 2007; Ross, 2005; Shih, 2008; Smyth & Banks,
2012; Wall & Horak, 2006). Few studies have investigated how remedial instruction associated
with graduation benchmarking affects English learning among low-achieving students from such
students’ viewpoint. To address this gap in the research, this paper reports on a study that
focused on low-achieving students required to take remedial classes to meet English graduation
benchmarks, investigating (a) their learning outcomes under the test-driven policy, (b) their
perspectives on graduation benchmarks for English, and (c) their experiences of remedial
instruction, including effects on their motivation and their perceptions of course content.

Literature Review
A Historical Perspective on Washback Effects
Test effects have been most commonly investigated in terms of so-called “washback” (Alderson
& Wall, 1993; Buck, 1988) or “backwash” (Biggs, 1995, 1996; Hughes, 1993), with a focus on
teaching and learning. Hughes’ (1993) trichotomy of the backwash model described test effects
in terms of “participants,” “process(es),” and “product(s).” In his view, a test may affect the
participants, such as teachers and students, “all of whose perceptions and attitudes toward their
work may be affected” (p. 2). In terms of process, the model focuses on any actions undertaken
by participants to complete teaching and learning tasks, such as changes in teaching methods or
content, and learning and/or test taking strategies (p. 2). The product, in turn, entails the
“learning outcomes (e.g., skills) and the quality of learning (fluency)” (p. 2). In contrast to
Hughes’s comparatively simplistic model, Alderson and Wall (1993) proposed 15 washback
hypotheses (see Appendix A) by which the relevant processes were delineated in more detail
with regard to how tests affect teaching and learning. These authors hypothesized that tests may
affect the content, method, rate, sequence, degree, and depth of teaching and learning.
Furthermore, while the quality of a test may affect teaching and learning, the way in which a test
is used in different situations also affects the strength of the washback; Alderson and Wall stated
that “tests that do not have important consequences will have no washback” (p. 121). Bailey

87
(1996) combined Alderson and Wall’s fifteen hypotheses (1993) with Hughes’s trichotomy
(1993) to create her own “basic model of washback” (see Appendix B). Bailey explored
washback effects in terms of two categories, namely “washback to the learner” and “washback to
the program” (pp. 264-265). The former entails the influence of tests on what and how learners
learn in terms of the rate, sequence, degree, and depth of learning. The latter entails the way
tests influence the content and methods teachers use, and the rate, sequence, degree, and depth of
teaching. Thus, Bailey’s model explored washback effects from a broader perspective than did
Alderson and Wall, concentrating on more than just the “linear relationship between tests and
teaching or learning” (Shih, 2007, p. 137). Similar to Bailey’s model, Burrow’s (2004)
“curriculum innovation model” showed how participants’ perceptions of a test correlated with its
effects. Her results indicated that the more students agreed with the educational and
philosophical foundations of a government-approved test, the more willing they were to align
with the construct of the test. More recently, Green (2007) contended that students’ perceptions,
attitudes, and reactions toward the following variables may lead to various degrees of washback
intensity: (a) test demands (content, format, and complexity), (b) purpose of the test, (c) stakes of
the test, (d) difficulty of the test, (e) test preparation resources, (f) teaching methods, and (g)
learning content (see Appendix C for Green’s (2007) model).
Based on the abovementioned washback models, it can be inferred that both a test and its
meditating factors can influence students’ perceptions. The present study aimed, firstly, to
explore the interaction of a number of factors in affecting students’ perceptions of Taiwan’s test-
driven English graduation benchmarking policy, namely (a) test factors, such as purpose,
difficulty, and content, (b) test target, and (c) test preparation resources as a mediating factor (i.e.,
remedial English instruction). Secondly, this study aimed to explore students’ learning outcomes
under the test-driven policy.

Students' Perspectives on the English Graduation Benchmark Policy

Tertiary TVE institutions implementing English graduation benchmarks appear to have assumed
that this would motivate their students to learn English, thereby enhancing their English abilities
and market competitiveness. In this regard, however, several Taiwan-based studies have revealed
mixed findings. Sue (2005) studied 539 students at a technological university in southern Taiwan,
reporting that half had positive views on the test-driven policy, which obligated them to exert

88
greater effort in studying English to earn English certificates, placing them at an advantage for
further study or future employment. Similarly, Pan and Newfields (2012) revealed positive
changes resulting from the English graduation benchmark policy, finding that 737 students from
eight TVE institutions applying the policy reported being more motivated to study English,
spending more time studying English, employing more different language learning strategies,
and engaging in more test-related practices than did 678 students from nine TVE institutions that
did not apply the policy.
In contrast, Shih (2008) found that 58% (n=17) of the students surveyed engaged in little or no
preparation for the graduation test, although they considered it an important test. Shih speculated
that extrinsic factors (e.g., personal factors like part-time jobs), intrinsic factors (e.g., students’
learning attitudes), and test factors (e.g., the immediate importance of the test and the way the
test-driven policy was implemented) were responsible for these findings. Several studies in
Taiwan, such as those of Chu (2009), Liauh (2011), Shih (2013), and Pan (2014) also found that
students’ proficiency levels played a vital role in determining the effects of the test-driven policy.
These studies found that students with lower English proficiency had less favorable opinions of
the policy, expressed negative language learning motivation, and reported test-induced anxiety.
For example, Shih (2013) found among 982 technological university students that their English
abilities played an important role in determining the adoption of motivational regulations and
approaches to learning. Similarly, Pan’s (2014) survey of 589 Taiwanese university students
found that those of intermediate and high proficiency appeared to have benefited from the test-
driven policy, as they reported a higher frequency of completion of test-specific and language
skill-building activities.
Among the few studies conducted in Taiwan exploring the effects of English graduation
benchmarking on tertiary English education, researchers have cautioned that the provision of
remedial classes may actually be a shortcut, a backdoor option, or a loophole for students unable
to meet the benchmark (Chu, 2009; Pan, 2010; Shih, 2008), leading to a weak washback effect
on such students. However, there appears to be insufficient follow-up research investigating the
effects of remedial test preparation classes on low-achieving students.

Empirical Studies of Washback on Teaching

An overwhelming number of washback studies have focused on the effect of tests on what

89
happens in the language classroom from the perspective of the teacher (e.g., Alderson & Hamp-
Lyons, 1996, Burrows, 2001, 2004; Chen, 2002; Cheng, 2004, 2005; Ferman, 2004; Hawkey,
2006; Lewkowicz & Zawadowska-Kittel, 2008; Muñoz & Álvarez, 2010; Pan, 2011, 2013; Qi,
2005; Wu, 2008;). Four general claims have been made on the basis of such research.
First, the structure, format, and content of a test may promote instruction focused on
communicative activities. For example, Hawkey (2006) studied the impact of tests on the
Progeto Lingue 2000 (Year 2000 Languages Project), a state-school foreign language education
improvement program implemented by the Ministry of Education in Italy. The study showed
that such curricula, designed to align with test objectives focusing on communicative language
approaches in Cambridge exams, may be more inclined to encourage teachers to use additional
materials, rather than relying solely on textbooks. This included materials from a variety of
sources, such as “cut-out photographs, self-designed spider games, information-gap hand-outs,
audio-cassettes, [and] wall charts” (p. 143). Similarly, Muñoz and Álvarez (2010) found that the
implementation of the Columbia Oral Assessment System in 2001 encouraged teachers to adopt
more communicative activities, such as role-plays, giving opinions, and presentations. In their
study, teachers who received supplementary training on this new assessment system were found
to use narration and description tasks in meaningful communicative contexts, while the teachers
in the untrained comparison group used mainly grammar-oriented activities, such as repetition
and controlled question and answer tasks.
Second, tests have been found to promote the practice of “teaching to the test,” a term used for
education methods heavily focused on preparing students for standardized tests. This reflects the
prevalence of traditional teacher-centered instruction. For example, Cheng (2005), Green (2007),
Hayes and Read (2003, 2004), and Wall and Horak (2006) have reported more test-related
activities (e.g., offering test taking tips, analyzing questions) and instruction on test taking
strategies (e.g., a formulaic approach to writing, the use of preparation textbooks, less focus on
oral skills) in IELTS/TOEFL preparation classes than in regular classes. Similarly, Damankesh
and Babaii (2015) investigated the effects of high school final examinations on students’ test
taking and preparation strategies and found that “these examinations made students employ some
strategies which seemed to exert a negative influence on their learning by directing them toward
a measurement-driven approach to learning” (p. 62). The students prepared by reviewing
previous test papers and parts of the textbook from which the final test questions were drawn.

90
 Third, tests have been found to promote an eclectic mix of communicative methods, as
teachers are bound to conform to the test-oriented education philosophy within teacher-centered
instruction to improve student performance in mandated tests. Pan (2011, 2013) explored
washback effects on English teachers of graduation requirement policies at tertiary education
institutions in Taiwan. She found that teachers at schools with exit requirements adopted test-
related instruction and a variety of communicative activities at marginally higher rates than those
at schools without exit requirements. Such test-related instruction included a focus on test-related
skills, such as listening and reading, and a preponderance of lessons focused on the explanation
of text, vocabulary, and grammar. In contrast, an orientation towards communicative learning
includes participatory communication activities, such as group or pair work, problem solving,
role-plays, games, and simulations.
Fourth, research has suggested that teachers’ responses to test preparation and changes in tests
vary individually on the basis of their perspectives on testing (e.g., their opinions on test quality
and content) and other mediating factors (e.g., educational background, beliefs, concerns for
students’ proficiency levels, and psychological factors). For example, Burrows (1998, 2001,
2004) found that teachers responded to classroom-based assessments in the Australian Adult
Migrant English Program in one of three different ways, namely as resisters, adopters, or partial
adopters. The degree to which a teacher’s educational and philosophical beliefs agreed with the
theoretical and educational foundations of a new reformed assessment tool determined his/her
response to it. The adopters, who supported reform and the new tests, were those who agreed
most with their theoretical and educational foundations, whereas those who agreed the least were
resisters, who expressed concerns about the reforms and new tests.
As mentioned above, few washback studies have explored student attitudes toward the various
types of test-driven instruction. While it may be essential to determine how teaching practices
are affected by tests, it must be borne in mind that students are directly affected by such tests,
and their perceptions of and attitudes toward various teaching practices, including
communicative, test-oriented, traditional teacher-centered, and mixed approaches, ought also to
be considered.

Empirical Studies of Washback on Learning Outcomes

Researchers such as Wall (2000), and Wall & Horak (2006) state that many of the washback or

91
impact studies investigate more teaching practices than focusing on test results. In other words,
“[w]hat is missing… are analyses of test results which indicate whether students have learnt
more or learned better because they have studied for a particular test” (Wall,2000, p. 251). The
few studies of washback on learning outcomes have revealed mixed findings. Some suggest that
test-driven instruction may promote language learning; others indicate no significant impact; still
others imply that while certain language skills may be amenable to test-driven instruction, not all
skills accommodate such an approach. For example, Green (2007) investigated the effect of test
preparation classes on IELTS writing scores. He reported that test preparation courses offered
“no clear advantage” (Green, 2007, p. 75) in terms of IELTS grammar and vocabulary test
performance across a range of groups over a 4- to 14-week period. Similarly, Gan (2009) found
no significant differences in IELTS exit test scores between students who had taken an IELTS
preparation course prior to the test and those who had not. In contrast, Xie (2013) discovered
that two months of test preparation did improve the test scores of 1,003 learners completing the
CET4, but the effects were primarily due to practices that narrowed the curriculum, especially
that of drilling. On the other hand, both Robb and Ercanbrack (1999) and Lai (2008) found that
students who took a one- or two-semester TOEIC test preparation course scored significantly
higher on the post-test reading section, but not on the listening section. Moreover, Elder and
O’Loughlin (2003) examined the relationship between intensive test-driven English language
study and IELTS scores after 10 to 12 weeks of instruction among 130 students in New Zealand,
reporting significant gains in listening but not reading.
The above discussion suggests that there is a gap in the washback research, namely in (a)
student learning outcomes resulting from test-driven instruction, (b) learner perspectives on the
English graduation benchmark, and (c) learner perceptions and attitudes toward the content of
test-driven instruction. These three gaps are the focus of the current study.

Research Questions
As mentioned above, this study aimed to explore the effects of remedial English instruction
associated with graduation benchmarking among low-achieving students at TVE institutions. To
this end, the three research questions were as follows:
1. Do the test scores of students who receive remedial instruction associated with
English graduation benchmarking improve?

92
 2. What are the perceptions of students who receive such remedial instruction in
terms of the effects of the English graduation benchmark policy on their
motivation for English learning?
3. What are the perceptions of students who receive such remedial instruction in
terms of its effects on their English learning?

Methodology
Subjects
A total of115 subjects at three TVE universities (two public and one private) were recruited. All
three institutions had established an English graduation benchmark requiring their students to
pass an English proficiency test equivalent to the CEFR A2 level (e.g., the GEPT, CSEPT, or
TOEIC) in order to graduate. Students who did not fulfill this requirement paid fees to take
remedial English classes during the regular semester or summer vacation in their fourth year.
Subjects were selected for this study based on three criteria, namely (a) they were in their fourth
year of study, (b) they had not achieved the English graduation benchmark, and (c) they were
attending remedial English classes at the time of the study. The subjects consented to
completing the questionnaire and the pre- and post-tests (see below), and each was rewarded for
his/her participation with a small gift. Table 1 shows the number and gender of the subjects at
each institution, as well as the duration and hours of remedial classes. As is clear from Table 1,
institution A offered 54 hours of remedial classes during the regular semester, while the 36 hours
of remedial classes at institutions B and C took place during the summer vacation. This study
specifically recruited subjects from institutions that offered remedial English courses of different
lengths to determine whether the length of such a course would affect student performance.
Furthermore, it included both public institutions A and B, with similar admission requirements,
and private institution C, with lower admission requirements.

Table 1
Details of the Subjects from Institutions A, B, and C
Institution Public or Remedial Remedial Remedial N N Total
private class course course Male Female
hours duration timing
A Public 54 18 weeks Regular 11 42 53
semester

93
 B Public 36 6 weeks Summer 11 21 32
vacation
C Private 36 6 weeks Summer 11 19 30
vacation
33 82 115

Instruments and Data Collection Procedures

Data to inform the three research questions were collected by means of an elementary level
GEPT practice test (used as the pre- and post-test) and a questionnaire. Each of these instruments
is described in the sections below.

The Elementary Level GEPT Practice Test

The GEPT is a four-skill (listening, reading, speaking, and writing) general English proficiency
examination developed by the Language Training and Testing Center (LTTC) for the Taiwan
Ministry of Education in 1999 to encourage the study of English in a communicative manner
(Wu & Wu, 2007). The GEPT consists of four levels, ranging from elementary to superior, the
elementary level being equivalent to the CEFR A2 level. Due to time and logistical constraints,
the present subjects were required to complete only the listening and reading sections of the
elementary level GEPT practice test as a pre-and post-test. This GEPT practice test contains 30
items in the listening subtest and 35 multiple-choice items in the reading subtest. The same pre-
and post-tests were completed in order to determine whether or not the subjects, who had not
achieved the English graduation benchmark and had received remedial instruction, could
improve their test scores in order to reach the benchmark. The elementary level GEPT practice
test was completed by all subjects within the officially required time of approximately 45
minutes. The pre-test was completed in the first week of remedial classes, and the post-test in the
last week. The question papers were collected after each occasion to ensure that subjects could
not prepare for the post-test. According to the LTTC, the passing standard for the GEPT is a total
listening and reading score of 160, with a score not lower than 72 for either subtest. Those who
pass the elementary level GEPT listening and reading subtests are considered to have basic
English proficiency and can understand and use simple English sentences in their daily lives.

The Questionnaire

94
The questionnaire (see Appendix D) was developed on the basis of (a) an understanding of the
format and content of English proficiency tests (specifically, the elementary level GEPT) used
for English graduation benchmarking in Taiwan, (b) discussion with two English teachers at
Taiwanese technological universities, and (c) a review of washback studies (e.g., Cheng, 2004,
2005; Green, 2007; Wall, 2005). The questionnaire consisted of five parts. The first part
requested general information, such as the subjects’ gender, type of university (public or private),
and number of remedial English class hours. The second part targeted subjects’ opinions
regarding the effect of the graduation benchmark on their English learning motivation. The third
part focused on the frequency of various teaching activities in English remedial classes. The
fourth part targeted subjects’ opinions on (a) the effect of remedial classes on their understanding
of English tests, (b) the availability of preparatory resources, (c) their English proficiency and
study methods, and (d) their confidence in achieving the benchmark after remediation. The items
in parts 2 to 4 of the questionnaire used a 5-point Likert scale by which subjects indicated their
level of agreement with the given statements or the frequency of the given activity. The final part
of the questionnaire posed an open-ended question to allow the subjects an additional
opportunity to express any relevant opinions.
The questionnaire was presented to the subjects in Chinese in order to put them at ease and
facilitate its completion (Johnson & Christensen, 2000). Subjects completed the questionnaire
during the last week of their remedial classes. Prior to the present study, the questionnaire was
piloted among five students not in the sample. Two of these students were asked whether they
were confused by any of the item wording; both reported that all items were clear and
comprehensible, and no revisions were made. A Cronbach’s α reliability coefficient of 0.935 was
obtained for the 53 Likert scale items.

Data Analysis
The data were analyzed statistically using PASW Statistics version 18. Descriptive statistics
were utilized to calculate the frequency distributions, means, and standard deviations for the test
scores and questionnaire items. Inferential statistics (i.e., one-way ANOVA and paired and
independent t-tests) were used to determine the level of statistical significance (p <0.05).

Results

95
The findings of the present study are reported here in relation to the three research questions.
Research Question 1: Do the Test Scores of Students Who Receive Remedial Instruction
Associated with English Graduation Benchmarking Improve?
With regard to the question of whether the remedial English classes allowed the subjects to
improve their elementary level GEPT scores, consider the results in Table 2, which shows the
means and standard deviations of the subjects’ listening, reading, and total scores in the pre- and
post-tests. None of the subjects achieved a passing score of 160 in either the pre- or post-test.
However, the total scores of the 53 subjects at institution A and the 32 subjects at institution B
improved significantly (t(52) = 8.815, p<.05; t(31) = 8.813, p<.05). The post-test scores of the
30 subjects at institution C were lower than their pre-test scores, but the difference was not
statistically significant (t(29) = -.941, p=.355). These findings suggest that (a) the remedial
English classes, comprising either 54 regular semester hours or 36 summer program hours, were
insufficient to allow the subjects to achieve the English graduation benchmark, and (b) subjects
with higher initial English proficiency made greater progress with the help of remedial classes
than those with lower initial proficiency.

Table 2
Pre- and Post-test GEPT Scores (N=115)
Institution Pre-test Post-test
Listening Reading Total Listening Reading Total
M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD
A (N=53) 54.42 13.48 50.09 15.06 104.51 25.48 62.34 14.47 63.43 19.27 125.77 28.73
B (N=32) 65.63 20.15 44.75 16.27 110.38 31.27 69.38 14.69 81.00 15.47 150.38 25.42
C (N=30) 48.00 16.48 46.07 13.55 94.07 21.82 45.47 10.78 45.53 17.38 91.00 34.01

Research Question 2: What Are the Perceptions of Students Who Receive such Remedial
Instruction in Terms of the Effects of the English Graduation Benchmark Policy on Their
Motivation for English Learning?
With regard to the subjects’ perceptions of the effect of the English graduation benchmark policy
on their motivation to learn English, consider the results in Table 3. The items with the three
highest means indicate their perceptions that the English graduation benchmark policy led to (a)
enhancement in both listening and reading proficiency (m=3.93), (b) increase in vocabulary size

96
and grammar knowledge (m=3.87), and (c) improvement of job opportunities (m=3.83). In
contrast, the items with the three lowest means indicated that they had less positive perceptions
regarding the English graduation benchmark policy in (a) enhancing their interest in learning
English (m=3.23), (b) making them more willing to devote time to studying English (m=3.29),
and (c) enhancing their motivation to take the official English proficiency test (m=3.35). These
findings imply that the English graduation benchmark policy increased the subjects’ extrinsic
motivation to a certain degree, as evidenced by their increased study hours to pass the test.
However, it appears that the policy was not successful in motivating students intrinsically, with
the questionnaire item “enhances interest in learning English” scoring the lowest. These subjects
may have studied vocabulary and grammar in the reading materials, and practiced the listening
test questions, assuming that their reading and listening proficiency would improve as a result of
the test-driven policy. They also indicated that they regarded their improvement in reading and
listening as beneficial in future job hunting. However, the graduation benchmark policy was not
reported by these subjects to be a good motivator facilitating their interest in learning English.
Thus, the policy appears not to enhance intrinsic motivation.

Table 3
Effects of the English Graduation Benchmark Policy on Motivation to Learn English
Ranking Questionnaire item M SD Ranking Questionnaire item M SD
(top (bottom
seven) seven)
1 Enhances listening 3.93 .645 1 Enhances interest in 3.23 1.10
and reading learning English
proficiency
2 Increases vocabulary 3.87 .720 2 Increases 3.29 .962
size and knowledge of willingness to spend
grammar time on English
study
3 Is beneficial for job 3.83 .991 3 Enhances 3.35 1.00
opportunities motivation to take
the official English
proficiency test
4 Reflects English 3.79 .800 4 Enhances 3.37 .907
proficiency motivation for
learning English
5 Encourages learning 3.71 .876 5 Increases 3.41 .907
of the four skills willingness to spend
time preparing for

97
 the test

6 Improves benefits for 3.70 .973 6 Assists with the 3.45 .808
further education application of what
is prepared for the
English proficiency
test to daily life
7 Helps understanding 3.70 .868 7 Improves pass rate 3.45 .808
of the format and with school’s
content of the required educational
English proficiency resources
benchmark test

According to the results in Table 4, the subjects at the private institution C as a whole held
more negative views of the English graduation benchmark policy than did those at the public
institutions A and B, specifically with regard to three main categories:
1. Opinions about tests: whether the English proficiency test reflects ability,
whether it relates to the application of English knowledge in daily life, and
whether the English proficiency certificate enhances job opportunities.
2. Motivation: whether the English graduation benchmark policy (a) increases the
amount of time devoted to test preparation, and (b) enhances motivation to take
the English proficiency test.
3. Educational resources: whether the English graduation benchmark policy
enhances pass rates within the context of the resources offered by the institution
(e.g., English courses, test preparation books, and software).
These findings imply that the subjects at institution C may have found the graduation
benchmark difficult to achieve, and consequently had reduced interest in studying and preparing
for the test. This finding corresponds with Fransson’s (1984) contention that learner motivation
does not always have a linear relationship with learner behavior. Fransson asserted that learners’
performance declines when they reach a point at which the challenge of the task negatively
affects their motivation. Those who find a test difficult are therefore prone to becoming
frustrated and discouraged, and ultimately remain unprepared.

Table 4
Tukey Post Hoc Test of Differences in Perceptions of the Benchmark Policy Across Institutions

98
Student perception (I) (J) Mean (I-J) Standard p(Sig.)
Institution Institution differences error
Reflects English proficiency B C .660 .195 .003
Enhances pass rate with the school B C .708 .216 .004
English courses
Increases willingness to spend time on B C .648 .224 .013
test preparation
Assists with application of English B C .883 .244 .016
proficiency to daily life
Improves job opportunities A C .529 .222 .049
Enhances motivation to take the B C .619 .249 .038
official test

Research Question 3. What Are the Perceptions of Students Who Receive such Remedial
Instruction in Terms of Its Effects on Their English Learning?
To address the question of the subjects’ perceptions of the efficacy of the remedial English
classes in facilitating their English learning, the teaching activities used in the remedial classes
were first determined. The subjects were then asked about their perceptions of the extent to
which the remediation facilitated their English learning.
Table 5 shows the frequency of remedial instruction activities reported by the subjects,
arranged from most to least frequent. In general, traditional teacher-centered activities were
reported to be most frequently adopted, including lectures and practice exercises with reading
materials, vocabulary, and grammar, as well as regular vocabulary quizzes. Mean frequencies
ranged from m=3.96 to m=4.18. Test preparation activities came next, including explanation and
practice in listening and reading test questions, with means ranging from m=3.57 to m=3.77.
Communicative activities, such as individual and pair oral practice, group discussion, sharing
foreign cultural experiences, and short essay writing practice, were reportedly used least
frequently, with means ranging from m=2.19 to m=3.24. These findings imply that teacher-
centered activities were prevalent in the remedial English classes at the three institutions studied
here.

Table 5
Reported Frequency of Teaching Activities
Teaching activity M SD
Listening to lectures on reading materials 4.18 .768

99
Listening to lectures on vocabulary instruction 4.09 .790
Taking regularly scheduled vocabulary quizzes 4.06 .958
Listening to lectures on grammar and practicing grammar exercises 3.96 .892
Listening to lectures on listening test questions 3.77 1.00
Listening to lectures on reading test questions 3.74 .983
Practicing listening test questions 3.74 .992
Practicing reading test questions 3.73 .949
Completing assigned listening test questions 3.61 1.09
Completing assigned reading test questions 3.60 1.09
Listening to lectures on test taking strategies and skills 3.57 1.18
Pair or group oral practice 3.24 1.19
Pair discussion of assigned tasks 3.23 1.24
Group discussion of assigned tasks 3.22 1.22
Practice with individuals answering questions 3.17 1.16
Sharing of foreign culture and life experiences 2.96 1.18
Short sentences or short essay writing practice 2.96 1.27

The results in Table 6 indicate that the subjects at the private institution C reported a lower
frequency of certain teaching activities in the remedial classes than those in the public
institutions A and B:
1. Traditional teacher-centered activities: listening to lectures on vocabulary
instruction and taking regularly scheduled vocabulary quizzes.
2. Test-preparation activities: listening to lectures on test taking strategies and skills.
3. Communicative activities: performing pair or group discussions of assigned tasks
and practicing short sentences or essay writing.
These findings suggest that the subjects at institution C may have found the graduation
benchmark difficult to achieve, and consequently paid less attention to the variety of class
activities than did those in institutions A and B.

Table 6
Tukey Post Hoc Test of Differences in Perceptions of Frequency of Teaching Activities Across

100
Institutions
Teaching activity (II) (J) Mean (I-J) Standard p(Sig.)
institution institution differences error
Listening to lectures on vocabulary B A .375 .174 .033
instruction B C .442 .197 .027
Taking regularly scheduled vocabulary B A .788 .189 .000
quizzes B C 1.250 .214 .000
A C .462 .192 .047
Listening to lectures on test taking B C .760 .263 .013
strategies and skills
Individually answering questions A C .854 .249 .002
B C 1.096 .277 .000
Pair or group oral practice A C 1.295 .238 .000
B C 1.485 .264 .000
Pair discussion of assigned tasks B A .585 .240 .043
B C 1.606 .272 .000
A C 1.021 .245 .000
Group discussion of assigned tasks A C 1.424 .234 .000
B C .840 .261 .000
B C .619 .249 .038
Short sentences or short essay writing A C 1.115 .273 .000
practice

The data in Table 7 reflect the subjects’ perceptions on the effectiveness of the remedial classes
in facilitating their English learning, arranged from highest to lowest. According to these data,
the remedial classes helped the subjects to (a) increase their English study time, (b) increase their
vocabulary size, and (c) enhance their grammar knowledge. In contrast, the data suggest an
unfavorable view of the remedial classes in terms of the items with the three lowest means,
suggesting that the classes did little to (a) enhance their motivation to take the official English
proficiency test, (b) give them confidence in their ability to pass the official test, or (c) enhance
their interest in learning English. These findings suggest that the subjects benefited from the test-

101
driven policy in terms of increases in their reading skills and study time, but that the remedial
classes did not necessarily motivate them to study English, leaving them with a lack of interest.

Table 7
Perceptions of the Effectiveness of Remedial Classes in Facilitating English Learning
Questionnaire item M SD
Increase the amount of English study time 3.93 .835
Enhance vocabulary size 3.90 .772
Enhance grammar knowledge 3.84 .774
Increase opportunities to practice test questions 3.83 .840
Enhance overall English proficiency 3.83 .819
Enhance understanding of problem solving skills for tests 3.80 .786
Enhance understanding of problem solving strategies for tests 3.75 .782
Enhance reading proficiency 3.75 .846
Enhance listening proficiency 3.69 .799
Enhance oral proficiency 3.68 .884
Enhance understanding of test content 3.67 .769
Enhance understanding of test stakes 3.64 .850
Enhance motivation for learning English 3.57 1.05
Obtain information on the location of test preparation resources 3.43 .860
Enhance writing proficiency 3.37 .977
Enhance interest in learning English 3.37 1.02
Enhance confidence in achieving the English graduation benchmark 3.02 1.10
Increase motivation to take the official English proficiency test 2.79 1.10

Finally, according to the data in Table 8, the subjects at institution B reported more favorable
views on the effectiveness of the remedial classes in facilitating English learning than those in
institutions A and C, specifically in the following categories:
1. Test-related information: obtaining information on the location of test
preparation educational resources and problem-solving strategies for tests.
2. English proficiency: enhancing overall English proficiency, particularly in
listening and reading skills, and increasing vocabulary size.
3. Learning attitudes: increasing the amount of study time and the motivation for,
and interest in, learning English, and enhancing confidence in achieving the
English graduation benchmark.

102
 The more favorable views regarding the positive effects of the remedial classes associated with
English graduation benchmarking among the subjects at institution B may have been due to their
higher English proficiency, which enabled them to achieve the graduation requirements more
easily than the subjects at institutions A and C. Accordingly, they may have paid more attention
in the remedial classes. However, it remains surprising that the subjects at institution A were
ranked the lowest in terms of favorable views of the remedial classes. One reason maybe that the
subjects at institution A were disappointed at their low post-test scores, and consequently
expressed the least favorable views regarding the benefits of the remedial classes. These
subjects at institution A possibly had expectations of passing the test. On the other hand, those at
institution C probably had not expected to pass their post-test due to their low proficiency, and
were probably grateful for the benefits of the remedial classes.

Table 8
Tukey Post Hoc Test of Differences in Perceptions of Remedial Classes Across Institutions
Remedial instruction classes help to (III) (J) Mean (I-J) Standard p(Sig.)
Institution Institution differences error
Obtain information on the location of C A .511 .191 .023
test preparation resources

Obtain information on problem solving C A .453 .175 .029

strategies for tests
Enhance overall English proficiency B A .527 .178 .010
Enhance listening proficiency B A .560 .172 .004
Increase vocabulary size B A .445 .169 .025
Enhance reading proficiency B A .659 .180 .001
B C .521 .205 .003
Increase amount of study time B A .501 .181 .018
B C .579 .205 .015
Enhance interest in learning English B A .806 .217 .001
Enhance motivation to learn English B A .692 .228 .008
Obtain confidence in achieving the B A .657 .240 .020
benchmark

Discussion
The goal of this study was to explore the effects of English remedial classes associated with

103
graduation benchmarking on the English learning of low-achieving students at tertiary TVE
institutions. Questionnaire data were collected among 115 students at three technological
universities, and considered in conjunction with their pre- and post-test scores. All subjects were
fourth-year students who had not met the English graduation benchmark and were required to
pay fees to take remedial classes during the regular semester or summer vacation before they
could graduate. The main findings based on the present data are discussed below.

Washback Effects on Learning Outcomes Varied across Institutions

The 115 subjects were required to attend either 36 or 54 hours of remedial English classes,
having failed to achieve English proficiency test scores equivalent to the CEFR A2 level. Their
poor English proficiency was reflected by their elementary level GEPT pre-test scores, which
ranged from 94 to 104, while the passing standard is a score of 160. The objective of the
remedial classes was to assist these low-achieving students to attain the passing standard.
However, helping these students to improve their scores by 50 to 60 points within the duration of
the remedial classes appears not to have been an easy task, as their post-test scores ranged only
from 91 to 150. Nevertheless, the students at institutions A and B made good progress, with a
significant difference between their pre- and post-test scores; this may be taken as a positive
effect of the remedial classes. However, the students at institution C achieved a lower mean
score on the post-test than on the pre-test.
Contrary to in the findings of the studies by Green (2007) and Gan (2009), in which students
with lower pre-test scores showed more improvement in the post-test than those with higher pre-
test scores, the present findings indicate that the students at institution C, who had the lowest pre-
test scores, showed the least improvement in their post-test. While it seems reasonable to
assume that students of lower proficiency should make rapid progress, as the sentence structures
and vocabulary used at lower levels are simpler and easier to understand (Green, 2007), it may
be that students who feel frustrated or are unprepared find it difficult to pass the relevant test. In
this case, the students from institution C appear to have had less motivation and interest, making
less effort to pass the test.

English Graduation Benchmarking Failed to Motivate Low-Achieving Students

In general, the 115 subjects in the present study revealed favorable impressions of the English

104
graduation benchmark policy, reporting that their efforts to meet the requirements led to
improvements in their listening and reading proficiency, vocabulary size, and job opportunities
(m=3.83~3.97). These findings show that the subjects agreed with the positive effects of the
demands made by English proficiency tests like the elementary GEPT and the TOEIC.
However, the lack of the ability of the test-driven policy to enhance their interest in learning
English, increase the amount of time they devoted to studying, and motivate them to take the
official test (m=3.25~3.33) implies that the establishment of an English graduation benchmark is
not an effective motivator for such low-achieving students.
In this regard, Green’s washback model (2007; see Appendix C) proposes that students’
perceptions of and attitudes and responses to variables such as test demands, test purpose, and
test preparation resources would lead to variation in the degree of washback intensity. The
significantly lower test scores of the subjects at institution C in comparison to those institutions
A and B, and their lack of improvement in the post-test, may be partially accounted for by their
more negative views of the benchmarking policy. Specifically, they reported (a) more negative
opinions of the test (in terms of it reflecting their ability, being applicable to daily life, and
assisting in job opportunities), (b) less motivation (with less increased study time and desire to
pass the test), and (c) more negative opinions on whether the policy encouraged the use of test
preparation materials.
An implication of these findings is that external tests alone cannot be relied upon to enhance
motivation. Rather, students’ needs and difficulties should be determined in order to effectively
enhance their interest and increase their motivation. According to Saif (1999, 2006), test effects
on learning maybe strong and positive if the test matches the learners’ needs. Similarly, Chou
(2009) proposed that teachers and policy-makers should recognize the importance of
investigating students’ actual English language needs in establishing appropriate graduation
benchmark requirements. This may lead to optimal positive washback of an English exit exam.

Remedial English Classes Associated with Graduation Benchmarking Led to Both Positive and
Negative Washback Effects
The teaching activities reported by the present subjects may be categorized into three types.
Teacher-centered activities, such as lectures on text materials, vocabulary, and grammar, and
regularly scheduled quizzes, were the most prevalent activity. These teacher-centered activities

105
were followed in frequency of occurrence by test preparation activities, such as lectures,
listening practice, and reading practice tests, while communicative activities, such as pair and
group discussion of assigned tasks and sharing foreign cultural and life experiences, were the
least common. It appears that the English graduation benchmark policy affected what was taught
in remedial classes, but not the way in which it was taught. Teacher-centered activities
dominated the classes, with the addition of test preparation practice activities in terms of
teaching content. This finding is consistent with those of Cheng (2005), Green (2007), Hayes
and Read (2003, 2004), and Wall and Horak (2006), who reported that teaching to the test is
common practice, and traditional teacher-centered instruction remains prevalent. According to
the present data, the remedial classes had a number of positive and negative effects. Positive
effects included an increase in the amount of study time devoted to English, an increase in
opportunities to practice test questions, and improvements in vocabulary size and grammar
knowledge. Simultaneously, however, certain negative washback effects were also reported
regarding the subjects’ interest in learning English, motivation to take the official test, and
confidence in achieving the graduation benchmark. It cannot be conclusively determined
whether the remedial classes were beneficial for the present subjects, but their low motivation for
the official test and their lack of confidence in passing it suggest that the remedial classes did not
achieve their objective of intrinsically assisting students to achieve the English graduation
benchmark. However, if the additional class time of such remedial classes does encourage low-
achieving students to study, it may be that offering more hours of required remedial classes
would be beneficial. It is worth noting, however, that such an increased number of remedial
class hours may be more beneficial for those willing to spend time studying English in remedial
classes than for those with little interest or motivation, as suggested by the significant differences
in the perceptions of subjects at institution B in comparison to those at institutions A and C (see
Table 8). The more favorable views regarding the effectiveness of the English graduation
benchmarking and remedial classes among the former subjects may have partially contributed to
their greater score gains.

Conclusions and Implications

By analyzing data drawn from student questionnaires and pre- and post-test scores, this study has
offered a clearer understanding of washback in the context of test-driven remedial English

106
classes and students’ attitudes toward English graduation benchmarking and its influence on their
performance. A number of pedagogical implications are suggested below based on the findings
of this study. Firstly, the mean post-test scores of the present subjects failed to reach their
graduation benchmarks. This suggests that the remedial classes may have been insufficient in
length for these low-achieving students to make the required progress. In this regard, a recent
study by Jez and Wassmer (2015) found that “fifteen more minutes of school a day at a school
site (or about an additional week of classes over an academic year) relates to an increase in
average overall academic achievement of about 1%, and about a 1.5% increase in average
achievement for disadvantaged students.” (p.284). Thus, the extension of remedial classes over a
longer period may be of more help to low-achieving students. This possibility is further
supported by the reports of the present subjects that the remedial classes increased the amount of
time they devoted to studying.
Secondly, the subjects who showed the greatest improvement from pre- to post-test reported
more favorable opinions regarding the effectiveness of the remedial classes in facilitating their
learning. Specifically, the subjects at institution B reported that the remedial classes enhanced
their learning attitudes and therefore increased the amount of time they devoted to studying and
their motivation for and interest in learning English. This finding that students with higher
proficiency may benefit more from remedial classes than those with lower proficiency implies
that lower-proficiency students may benefit more from remedial classes if the graduation
benchmark is attainable for them. Such an attainable benchmark may allow such students to see
how the classes will help them to achieve the benchmark, leading them to pay more attention and
make greater efforts. To this end, analysis of students’ pre-and-post test scores over a period of
time should be used as a basis for benchmarking.
Finally, the present findings imply that the alignment of a curriculum with test content (such as
that of the GEPT) may also allow teachers to focus on relevant receptive and productive skills in
class. The use of carefully designed teaching programs and the selection of appropriate materials
might increase students’ motivation and interest in learning English. Professional development
should be provided to teachers to assist them in developing appropriate curricula that suit
students’ interests and skill levels, while also integrating the content covered in English
certification tests. In particular, the present findings imply that integration of traditional teacher-
centered activities, test preparation activities, and communicative activities using test content is

107
required for students to benefit optimally from a test-driven policy.
To sum up, the students may benefit more from remediation, and teachers find remediation
easier to achieve, if attention is paid to (1) time spent on remedial instruction, (2) class activities
during remediation instruction (including teacher-centered, test preparation, and communicative
activities), and (3) needs of students as reflected by test scores over time.
In addition to the above implications, two limitations of the present study are to be noted.
Firstly, the focus of this study was limited to the policy by which EFL proficiency is mandated in
a Taiwanese tertiary context, and more specifically to students taking remedial English classes at
three technological institutions. The generalizability of the present findings to students with
different educational backgrounds or in fields other than English remains an open question.
Future studies ought to explore how remedial classes associated with English graduation
benchmarking impact students in a range of learning environments. Secondly, this study relied
on self-reported student data. Subsequent research should include classroom observation,
interview data, and additional data sources, such as teachers and other stakeholders in order to
help researchers to generate a more accurate and holistic picture of how washback patterns are
perceived by different test stakeholders.

References
Alderson, C., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (1996). TOEFL preparation courses: A study of washback.
Language Testing, 13(3), 280-297.
Alderson, C., & Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics, 14, 115-129.
Bailey, K. M. (1996). Working for washback: A review of the washback concept in language
testing. Language Testing, 13(3), 257-279.
Biggs, J. B. (1995). Assumptions underlying new approaches to assessment. Curriculum Forum,
4(2), 1-22.
Biggs, J. B. (Ed.). (1996). Testing: to educate or to select? Education in Hong Kong at the cross-
roads. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Educational Publishing.
Buck, G. (1988). Testing listening comprehension in Japanese university entrance examination.

108
 JALT Journal, 10, 15-42.
Burrows, C. (1998). Searching for washback: An investigation into the impact on teachers of the
implementation into the adult migrant English program of the certificate in spoken and
written English (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Macquarie University, Australia.
Burrows, C. (2001). Searching for washback: The impact of assessment in the certificate in
spoken and written English. In G. Brindley & C. Burrows (Eds.), Studies in immigrant
English language assessment. (Vol. 2, pp. 95-187). Sydney: National Center for English
Language Teaching and Research.
Burrows, C. (2004). Washback in classroom-based assessment: A study of the washback effect
in the Australian adult migrant English program. In L. Cheng, Y. Watanabe & A. Curtis
(Eds.), Washback in language testing: Research contexts and methods (pp. 113-128).
Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Chen, L. (2002). Taiwanese junior high school English teachers’ perceptions of the washback
effect of the basic competence test in English (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The
Ohio State University, USA.
Cheng, L. (2004). The washback effect of a public examination change on teachers’ perceptions
toward their classroom teaching. In L. Cheng, Y. Watanabe, & A. Curtis (Eds.),
Washback in language testing: Research contexts and methods (pp. 147-170). Mahwah:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cheng, L. (2005). Changing language teaching through language testing: Washback study.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cheng, L., Andrews, S., & Yu, Y. (2010). Impact and consequences of school-based assessment
(SBA): Students’ and parents’ views of SBA in Hong Kong. Language Testing, 28(2),
221-249.
Cheng, L., Watanabe, Y., & Curtis, A. (2004). Washback in language testing: Research contexts
and methods. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Chu, H. Y. (2009). Stakes, needs and washback: An investigation of the English benchmark
policy for graduation and EFL education at two technological universities in Taiwan
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). National Taiwan Normal University.
Taiwan.Damankesh, M., & Babaii, E. (2015). The washback effect of Iranian high school final
examinations on students’ test-taking and test preparation strategies. Studies in

109
 Educational Evaluation, 45, 62–69.
Elder, C., & O’Loughlin, K. (2003). Investigation the relationship between intensive English
language study and band score gain on IELTS. In R. Tolloh (Ed.), IELTS Research
Report 4 (pp. 207‐254). Canberra: IELTS Australia Pty Limited.
Ferman, I. (2004). The washback of an EFL national oral matriculation test to teaching and
learning. In L. Cheng, Y. Watanabe & A. Curtis (Eds.), Washback in language testing:
Research contexts and methods (pp. 191-210). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Fransson, A. (1984). Cramming or understanding? Effects of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation
on approach to learning and test performance. In J. C. Alderson & A. H. Urquhart, (Eds.).
Reading in a foreign language. London: Longman. Gan, Z. (2009). IELTS preparation
course and student IELTS performance: A case study in Hong Kong, RELC Journal,
40(1), 23–41.
Graddol, D. (2006). English next: Why global English may mean the end of "English as a
foreign language". London: British Council.
Green, A. (2007). IELTS washback in context: Preparation for academic writing in higher
education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hawkey, R. (2006). Impact theory and practice: Studies of the IELTS test and Progetto Lingue
2000. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hayes, B., & Read, J. (2003). IELTS Test preparation in New Zealand: Preparing students for
the IELTS academic Module. In R. Tolloh (Ed.), IELTS Research Report 4 (pp. 153-206).
Canberra: IELTS Australia Pty Limited.
Hayes, B., & Read, J. (2004). IELTS test preparation in New Zealand: Preparing students for the
IELTS academic module. In L. W. Cheng, Y. Watanabe & A. Curtis (Eds.), Washback in
language testing: Research contexts and methods (pp. 97-111). Mahwah: Lawrence
Erlbaum. Hughes, A. (1993). Backwash and TOEFL 2000(Unpublished manuscript).
University of Reading, England.
Jez, S., & Wassmer, R. W. (2015). The impact of learning time on academic achievement.
Education and Urban Society, 47(3), 284-306.
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2000). Educational research: Quantitative and qualitative
approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Lai, Y. (2008). A study on effectiveness of college English-featured courses on TOEIC.

110
 Kaohsiung Normal University Journal, 25, 71-91.
Liauh, Y-H. (2011). A study of the perceptions of English faculty and students of exit English
examinations at Taiwan’s technological and vocational higher education institutions
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Montana Missoula, USA.
Lewkowicz, J., & Zawadowska-Kittel, E. (2008). Impact of the new school-leaving exam of
English in Poland. Research Notes, 34, 27-31.
Munoz, A., & Alvarez, M. (2010). Washback of an oral assessment system in the EFL classroom.
Language Testing, 27(1), 33-49.
Pan, Y. (2010). Consequences of Test Use: Educational and Societal Effects of English
Certification Exit Requirements in Taiwan (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
University of Melbourne, Australia.
Pan, Y. (2011). Teacher washback from English certification exit requirements in Taiwan. Asian
Journal of English Language Teaching, 21, 23-42.
Pan, Y., & Newfields, T. (2012). Tertiary EFL proficiency graduation requirements in Taiwan: A
study of washback on learning. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 9(1),
108-122.
Pan, Y. (2013). Does teaching to the test exist? A case study of teacher washback in Taiwan. The
Journal of Asia TEFL, 10(4), 185-213.
Pan, Y. (2014). Learner washback variability in standardized exit tests. The Electronic Journal
for English as a Second Language,18(2), 1-30.
Qi, L. (2005). Stakeholders’ conflicting aims undermine the washback function of a high-stakes
test. Language Testing, 22(2), 142-173.
Robb, T., & Ercanbrack, J. (1999). A study of the effect of direct test preparation on the TOEIC
scores of Japanese University students. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second
Language,3(4),1-22.
Ross, S. J. (2005). A book review of washback in language testing: Research contexts and
methods. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 459-463.
Saif, S. (1999). Theoretical and empirical considerations in investigating washback: A study of
ESL/EFL learners (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Victoria, Canada.
Saif, S. (2006). Aiming for positive washback: A case study of international teaching assistants.
Language Testing, 23(1), 1-34

111
Shih, C. (2007). A new washback model of students' learning. The Canadian Modern
Language Review, 64(1), 135-162.
Shih, C. (2008). A new washback model of students' learning. The Canadian Modern Language
Review, 64(1), 135-162.
Shih, P. (2013). The English benchmark policy for graduation: An investigation of perception,
motivation, and approaches to learning at a university of technology in Central Taiwan
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Durham University, United Kingdom.
Smyth, E., & Banks, J. (2012). High stakes testing and student perspectives on teaching and
learning in the Republic of Ireland. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and
Accountability, 24, 283-306.
Su, S. (2005). Graduation threshold of English competency: A needs analysis from the
perspective of technological institute students. Educational Review, 24, 47-66.
Taiwan Ministry of Education. (2004). 施政主軸 - 創意台灣、全球布局 2005-2008 教育部施
政 主 軸 [2005 - 2008 Main Scheme of Administration: Creative Taiwan; global
configurations]. Retrieved from
http://www.edu.tw/secretary/content.aspx?site_content_sn=19775
Taiwan Ministry of Education, (2011). 教育部施政理念與政策 [Educational belief and policy].
Retrieved from http://www.edu.tw/files_temp/site_content/B0039/991018 教育施政理念
與政策 (上網版-）.pdf.
Taiwan Ministry of Education, (2012). 年度教育部年度績效評估 [2006-2009 Educational
evaluation report]. Retrieved from
http://www.edu.tw/secretary/content.aspx?site_content_sn=19757
Wall, D. (2000). The impact of high-stakes testing on teaching and learning: Can this be
predicted or controlled? System, 28, 499-509.
Wall, D. (2005). The impact of high-stakes examinations on classroom teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Wall, D., & Horak, T. (2006). The impact of changes in the TOEFL examination on teaching and
learning in central and eastern Europe: Phrase 1, the baseline study. Princeton:
Educational Testing Service.
Wu, J. (2008). Views of Taiwanese students and teachers on English language testing. Research

112
 Notes, 34, 6-9.
Wu, J., & Wu, R. (2007, June). Using the CEFR in Taiwan: The perspective of a local
examination board. Paper presented at the Fourth European Association for Language
Testing and Assessment (EALTA) Conference, Sitges, Spain.
Xie, Q. (2013). Does test preparation work? Implications for score validity. Language
Assessment Quarterly, 10, 196-218.

Appendix A

Alderson and Wall’s Fifteen Washback Hypotheses (1993, pp. 120-121)

1) A test will influence teaching.

2) A test will influence learning.
3) A test will influence what teachers teach; and
4) a test will influence how teachers teach; and therefore by extension from (2) above,
5) a test will influence what learners learn.
6) A test will influence how learners learn.
7) A test will influence the rate and sequence of teaching; and,
8) a test will influence the rate and sequence of learning.
9) A test will influence the degree and depth of teaching.
10) A test will influence the degree and depth of learning.
11) A test will influence attitudes to the content, method, etc., of teaching and learning.
12) Tests that have important consequences will have washback; conversely,
13) tests that do not have important consequences will have no washback.
14) Tests will have washback on all learners and teachers.
15) Tests will have washback effects for some learners and some teachers, but not for others.

113
Appendix B
Bailey’s Basic Model of Washback (1996, p. 264)

114
 Appendix C
Green’s Model of Washback (2007, p.24)

Other stakeholders
Participant characteristics and values Course providers
Materials writers
 Knowledge/understanding of test demands
Publishers
 Resources to meet test demands
Teachers
 Acceptance of test demands
Learners

Perception of Perception of Washback to

test importance test difficulty participant

Important Easy No washback

Challenging

Unimportant Unachievable Intense Washback

115
Appendix D
Student Questionnaire

Strongly agree

Agree

Uncertain

Disagree

Strongly disagree
How does the Graduation benchmark influence me?

1. Helps my understanding of the format and content of the

English proficiency tests required for the benchmark policy
2. Enhances my motivation to take the official test
3. Enhances motivation for learning English
4. Enhances interest in learning English

5. Increases willingness to spend time studying English

6. Increases my willingness to spend time on test preparation

7. Helps establish my learning goals

8. Makes me study for the test, merely learning test taking
strategies
9. Increases my financial burden (e.g., fees for taking the test or
purchasing the test preparation materials)
10. Increases the size of my vocabulary and knowledge of
grammar
11. Enhances listening and reading proficiency

12. Enhances oral and writing proficiency

14. Reflects my English proficiency

15. Improves benefits for further education

16. Improves benefits for job opportunities

17. Encourages the learning of the four skills

18. Improves pass rates with the school’s educational resources

116
Appendix D (continued)
2. What is the frequency of the following Class Learning Activities
learning activities in the remedial class?

Always

Usually

Sometimes

Seldom

Never
1. Listening to lectures on vocabulary instruction

2. Listening to lectures on grammar and practicing

grammar exercises
3. Listening to lectures on reading materials

4. Practice with individuals answering questions

5. Pair or group oral practice

6. Pair discussion of assigned tasks

7. Group discussion of assigned tasks

8. Practicing listening test questions

9. Listening to lectures on listening test questions

10. Practicing reading test questions

11. Listening to lectures on reading test questions

12. Listening to lectures on test taking strategies

and skills
13. Taking regularly scheduled vocabulary
quizzes
14. Completing assigned listening test questions

15. Completing assigned reading test questions

16. Sharing foreign cultural and life experiences

17. Short sentences or short essay writing practice

117
Appendix D (continued)
3.Taking this English remedial class for the

Strongly agree

Agree

Uncertain

Disagree

Strongly disagree
graduation benchmark has helped me…

1. Obtain a better understanding of the test content

2. Obtain a better understanding of the test stakes
3. Obtain information on the location of test
preparation resources
4. Obtain a better understanding of problem solving
strategies for tests
5. Obtain a better understanding of problem solving
skills for tests
6. Increase the amount of time I study English
7. Increase my opportunities to practice test questions
8. Enhance my motivation for learning English
9. Enhance my interest in learning English
10. Enhance my overall English proficiency
11. Enhance my listening proficiency
12. Enhance my oral proficiency
13. Enhance my reading proficiency
14.Enhance my writing proficiency
15. Enhance the size of my vocabulary
16. Enhance my grammar knowledge
17. Obtain confidence in achieving the English
graduation benchmark
18. Increase my motivation to take the official English
proficiency test

118
 Some Common Ground: Perceptions of Language Backgrounds,
Classroom Language Use, and Identity among
University English Teachers in Japan
Ian Willey
Kagawa University, Japan10

Edmont C. Katz
The University of Fukui, Japan11

Bio Data:
Ian Willey, an associate professor in the Higher Education Center at Kagawa University, earned
an MA in TESL from Kent State University and a Ph.D. in second language writing from
Hiroshima City University. His research interests include English for specific purposes and
teacher identity. (Email: ianwill@cc.kagawa-u.ac.jp).

Edmont Katz has an MA in TESOL from California State University, Northridge and in Applied
Linguistics/Biblical Translation from Fuller Theological Seminary/University of Texas. He
taught at Fukui Prefectural University, Fukui Medical Association Nursing Technical School,
and the University of Fukui, where he retired after a fifteen-year tenure.

Acknowledgments: We thank Naomi Fujishima, Anne McLellan Howard, Chiaki Iwai, John
Unger, and the two anonymous reviewers for their insightful feedback on early drafts of this
paper. This study was supported by the Fund for Kagawa University Young Scientists, 2014.

Abstract
As is the case in many Asian countries, English curricula at Japanese universities often focus on
native English models and assign separate roles to Japanese and non-Japanese teachers. In this
study, we examined how English teachers (both Japanese and non-Japanese) employed at
Japanese universities perceive their own language backgrounds, classroom language use, and
identities. Data were collected in two phases: 1) timed freewriting tasks on the themes of
participants’ English and sense of identity, and 2) semi-structured interviews on the same themes
conducted in person or via Skype. Freewriting tasks were coded to identify common themes in
participants’ perceptions of themselves and their language use. Findings indicate that both
Japanese and non-Japanese participants shared several concerns, including attrition and
maintenance of their English abilities, a sense of using hybrid forms of English (e.g., American
mixed with British English), and a tendency to use both English and Japanese in the classroom.
These results suggest that the terms native and nonnative are imprecise and misleading in

10
Higher Education Center, Kagawa University, Saiwai-cho, Takamatsu, Kagawa 761-8032, Japan
11
Faculty of Medical Sciences, The University of Fukui, 23-3 Matsuokashimoaizuki, Eiheiji-cho, Yoshida-gun,
Fukui 910-1193, Japan

119
describing these teachers; both groups may function as “native users” of English (Davies, 2013)
in the classroom rather than as models of any one variety of English. Implications for theory,
research design, and pedagogy are then described.

Introduction
The Specter of Native-Speakerism
English has become the de-facto official language of most international fields, including
education, business, and medicine. This state has led scholars (e.g., Hino, 2012; Honna, 2008;
Jenkins, 2006) to question the value of English Language Teaching (ELT) methodology
grounded in native English models. Despite the growing popularity of World Englishes (Kachru,
1985), university English curricula in Japan remain rooted in native English models, as shown by
the central role of proficiency tests such as the TOEIC (Khan, 2009). However, an emphasis on
native English models in ELT can lead to native-speakerism (Holliday, 2006), or an idealization
of native English and native English speakers among language learners and educators (Houghton
& Rivers, 2013, pp. 2-3). According to Kabel (2009), native-speakerism perpetuates stereotypes
and leads to the exclusion and discrimination of nonnative speakers. Ruecker and Ives (2005),
for instance, found that online job recruitment sites in East Asian countries overwhelmingly
depict ideal candidates as white, young, and male.
However, native-speakerism can be harmful to those on both sides of the native fence. In
Japan, this mindset has caused a dichotomization of English teachers into native English-
speaking teachers and native Japanese-speaking teachers, with distinct roles assigned to each
camp (Rivers, 2013). Students and administrators may expect native English-speaking teachers
to teach entertainingly, to focus on oral communication, and to teach mainly in English (Shimizu,
1995), while Japanese teachers are presumed to be scholarly, to focus on grammatical instruction,
and to teach mainly in Japanese (Seargeant, 2009). This dichotomization can result in
discriminatory hiring practices and negative self-perceptions among both Japanese and native
English-speaking teachers (Hayes, 2013). In Japan, the practice of hiring native English speakers
on short-term, adjunct contracts, with no prospects for promotion and little involvement in
university activities outside of their own classes (Whitsed & Wright, 2011), is one lingering
legacy of native-speakerism.
In addition, students may come to view their own English usage negatively. Japanese
university students tend to favor “prestige” varieties of English, from the UK and US, and have

120
lower opinions of Japanese English (Sauzier-Uchida, 2008; Yoshikawa, 2005). Similar
preferences for a prestige variety of English, rather than the local variety, have been reported in
Korea (Ahn, 2014), China (Deyuan & Li, 2009), Fiji (Hundt et al., 2015), and India (Bernaisch
& Koch, 2015). In the worst-case scenario, students may become unable to view themselves as
successful English users, given their permanent status as nonnative English speakers, a
deficiency akin to a handicap (Matsuda, 2003).

Native Speakers and Native Users

The polarization of English teachers into native and nonnative camps persists despite the fact that
native speaker is a highly elusive term (Cook, 1999). Nao (2011) asserts that a native speaker is
a mythical figure “born of normative appeal” (p. 3770). Even if a widely acceptable definition of
native speaker can be established, the term itself may be of limited practical value. Jenkins (2009,
p. 87) posits that the term is not useful in a reality where multilingualism is the world’s norm,
and consequently identifying a person’s native language is problematic. According to Jenkins,
the term also lacks value in situations where English is used as an international lingua franca, in
which speakers “own” their own lingua franca English and therefore the native/nonnative
distinction matters little (p. 87). Farahnaz (2011) found that when instructors assessed the
English proficiency of 25 linguistically diverse teacher candidates, their evaluations did not mesh
with a facile native/nonnative dichotomy; what matters, Farahnaz asserts, is the unique linguistic
identity of each individual, which is context-dependent and influenced by a host of factors.
Davies (2003) posits that the opposition between native and nonnative speakers of a language
is primarily one of power, with membership determined mainly by the nonnative speaker’s
assumption of confidence and identity (p. 215). Davies (2013) claims that there is no significant
difference between native speakers and native users of English (native users are defined as those
who use a language regularly in their professional and/or personal lives). Davies defines the
construct of the native speaker as being “isomorphic” with the standard language (p. 1); through
education, L1 speakers come to represent the idealized native speaker, and thus through
education an L2 learner may also attain this idealization. Kramsch (1999) has also noted that
native speakers inevitably deviate from the rules of the standard language, and display regional,
occupational, generational, and class-related ways of talking that render the notion of the native
speaker artificial.

121
 Many language schools and universities in Japan use native English-speaking teachers as
selling points to attract students (Seargeant, 2009; Yphantides, 2013). However, a question can
be asked: Are native English-speaking English teachers in Japan qualitatively different from their
counterparts in English-speaking countries? Many native English-speaking English teachers in
Japan are long-term expatriates, who may have experienced attrition of their English skills (see
Porte, 1999; Schmid, 2013). Approaching the subject from a cognitive science perspective,
Schmid (2013) claims that language attrition is commonly faced by those who live for extended
periods in an L2 environment, though this attrition may not simply correlate to how often one
uses one’s first language (L1). Rather, cross-linguistic influence—such as communication in the
L1 with bilingual friends, family, or students—may have the most pronounced effect. Burrough-
Boenisch (2003), a professional editor in the Netherlands, supports this claim; she asserts that
language attrition can occur when native speakers are regularly exposed to errors produced by
nonnative speakers, and thus they become less able to identify errors. Regular visits to their
home countries in order to “refresh their English” are necessary (Burrough-Boenisch, 2006).
Most long-term expatriate English teachers in Japan have become familiar with the Japanese
culture and language (Nao, 2011), as well as the English abilities of their students. This
knowledge may lead them to slow down and simplify their speech in the classroom, and clip
away idiosyncratic “native” features of their English so that it becomes more like the standard
English employed by native users (Davies, 2013). Having taught at Japanese universities for over
two decades, the authors of this paper have found that this teacherese or teacher talk (Walsh,
2002) can carry over into the world outside the classroom, leading to comments from friends and
family in our home countries that our English has changed. It is thus possible that Japanese and
non-Japanese teachers of English have more in common with each other than they realize, as
they both make use of a watered-down, standard variety of English rather than one characterized
by idiosyncratic or regional features.

Teaching English in English

There may be further similarities between Japanese and non-Japanese English teachers. Research
suggests that both Japanese and native English-speaking English teachers in Japan make use of
Japanese in the classroom to achieve various goals, such as to establish rapport with students and
to give instructions (McMillan & Rivers, 2011). However, in 2013, Japan’s Ministry of

122
Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT) mandated that English classes in
Japanese high schools be taught, in principle, in English (Carson, 2015). Such a monolingual
approach, however, runs counter to the notion of multicompetence in language learning, and that
instructors can use students’ first languages as a resource in the classroom (Alptekin, 2010; Cook,
1999). It is also important to distinguish between teaching English in English (TEE) and English
as a medium of instruction (EMI), where academic courses such as chemistry and biology are
taught through the medium of English. Vu and Burns (2014) note that at universities in Asian
countries such as Singapore and Malaysia, a bilingual approach has been found to be effective
for social sciences courses, while EMI tends to be restricted to the teaching of scientific subjects.
In the Japanese context, the cultural expectations of students, as well as traditional teaching
methods, can impede Westernized, English-only teaching practices (Tsuneyoshi, 2005). In
addition, teachers who use Japanese in the classroom may experience feelings of guilt or
inadequacy for doing so (Hawkins, 2015). Willfully rejecting Japanese in the classroom can also
lead teachers to feel a sense of alienation from their students (Burden, 2000). An English-in-
English policy may also run against student preferences. Several questionnaire-based studies
(e.g., Burden, 2000; Carson, 2015; Carson & Kashihara, 2012) have shown that Japanese
students expect Japanese as well as non-Japanese teachers to use Japanese when necessary for
different purposes, such as to explain English usage or grammar or to create a positive
atmosphere. (Of course, they have greater expectations for Japanese use for the Japanese
teachers; see also Shimizu, 1995.)

Rationale
The authors of this paper have come to wonder why the native speaker myth persists in Japan,
and why some universities assign separate roles and different hiring conditions to Japanese and
non-Japanese English teachers. Drawing from Davies’ (2013) construct of the native user, we set
out to examine whether similarities exist between Japanese and non-Japanese teachers, in terms
of how these teachers perceive their own language backgrounds and classroom language use. To
the best of our knowledge, ours is the first study to examine university English teachers’ English
language backgrounds and usage in the classroom, using both Japanese and non-Japanese
participants, through the lens of Davies’ (2013) construct of the native user, as a way of
critiquing traditional native speaker models. As educators, we believe the native speaker myth is

123
preventing many students in EFL settings from becoming successful English learners (Willey &
Matsuda, 2010; Matsuda, 2003), and this gives importance and a sense of urgency to our study,
considering the increasing value of English to Japanese learners (Seargeant, 2009; Yphantides,
2013).
We also hoped to learn whether or not Japanese and non-Japanese teachers held similar
concerns related to the notion of identity. In this study, we approached identity as this term is
defined in Identity Theory (Burke & Stets, 2009): identity is a set of meanings that define who
one is when one occupies a role in society; people thus possess multiple and shifting identities
due to their multiple and shifting roles (p. 3). A number of studies have investigated how groups
of English teachers at Japanese universities define their professional identities (e.g., Kiernan,
2010; Nagatomo, 2012). As the notion of identity is crucial to a conception of one’s nativeness
of a language (Davies, 2003), we hoped to reveal how a group of Japanese and non-Japanese
English teachers define their own identities, and how these self-definitions stand in light of a
view that lumps people into binary oppositions (native and nonnative, Japanese and non-
Japanese, etc.). We believe that our study’s focus on language backgrounds and classroom usage
as well as identity, using both Japanese and non-Japanese participants, as well as our use of a
novel data collection method—freewriting—is what sets it apart from other studies (e.g., Kiernan,
2012; Nagatomo, 2012).
We are aware that the terms native and nonnative have become the subject of heated debate
(e.g., Kabel, 2009; Waters, 2007). In this study, we do not wish to add fire to either side of the
debate. Rather, we hope to show how a group of English teachers at Japanese universities, both
Japanese and non-Japanese, view themselves, their language backgrounds, and English usage, in
order to critically assess the present conditions at many Japanese universities, and MEXT’s
recent call for English-in-English teaching methods. As we state above, we believe that this
critical assessment is necessary not simply for the sake of teachers or any ideological principles,
but in order to ensure that students are enabled to become successful English learners—the
primary goal of the EFL enterprise.

Method
Research Questions
As research using timed freewriting tasks on the themes of English and identity has, to the best

124
of the authors’ knowledge, not been conducted, this study was exploratory in nature (Dörnyei,
2007, p. 39). We approached this study with five research questions:
1. How do the participants in this study define their own varieties of English?
2. How do the participants view their own identities?
3. Do the participants feel that life in Japan has affected their English usage? If yes, how?
4. To what extent do the participants use English and Japanese in the classroom?
5. Do the participants modify their English production in the classroom? If yes, how?

Participants
Seventeen English teachers, employed full-time at different universities across Japan,
participated in this study. Participants were selected through opportunity sampling (Dörnyei,
2007, pp. 98-99); participants known by the authors, and whom the authors judged to be likely to
continue with this two-phase study, were contacted. Participants were first asked to answer a
background questionnaire (Appendix 1) which inquired mainly about participants’ language
backgrounds and experiences teaching in Japan. All participants had taught at Japanese
universities for at least two years. In declaring their first language, seven participants stated
Japanese (J), nine stated English (E), and one stated Dutch (D). In this study, participants were
identified by their first language (J, E, or D) and a number (e.g., E1, J2, etc.), and this is how
they are grouped in Table 1 below. Participants came from Japan (7), the United States (6),
Belgium (1), Ireland (1), Ireland/Canada (1), and New Zealand (1). Three participants (E5, E6,
and E7) defined themselves as Japanese Americans (having been born in the United States to
Japanese immigrant parents). Table 1 shows participants’ countries of origin, gender, additional
languages spoken (apart from their stated first languages, in order of proficiency), highest degree
earned, number of years teaching in Japan, and position at their universities. J1, J2, and E3 were
enrolled in a Ph.D. program at universities in Japan at the time of this study.

Table 1
Participants in this Study
Additional Yrs.
No. Country Gender Degree Position
languages teaching
J1 Japan F English MA* 7 Adjunct lecturer
J2 Japan F English, Korean MA* 3 Adjunct lecturer

125
 J3 Japan M English PhD 23 Associate professor
J4 Japan F English, Spanish MA* 4 Adjunct lecturer
English, Korean,
J5 Japan F PhD* 13 Associate professor
Spanish, French
J6 Japan F English MA* 15 Associate professor
J7 Japan F English PhD* 2 Adjunct lecturer
E1 USA F French, Japanese PhD* 30 Professor
Ireland/
E2 M French, Japanese MA* 20 Adjunct lecturer
Canada
E3 USA M Japanese, Spanish MA* 6 Adjunct lecturer
Irish, French,
E4 Ireland F MA* 15 Assistant professor
Japanese, Russian
E5 USA F Japanese PhD* 20 Assistant professor
E6 USA F Japanese, Spanish MA 23 Professor
E7 USA M Japanese MA 27 Associate professor
E8 USA F Japanese MA* 25 Associate professor
Japanese, Thai,
New
E9 M German, French, MA* 28 Associate professor
Zealand
Spanish
English, French,
D1 Belgium M MA* 20 Assistant professor
Spanish, Japanese
M = Male; F = Female; * = At least one degree earned in a country different from country of
origin

Freewriting Tasks
In the first phase of the study, participants were given instructions and two sealed envelopes,
which contained two freewriting tasks (Appendix 2); participants who chose to type were sent
MS-Word files. The purpose of the freewriting tasks was to ascertain how participants define
their own varieties of English and view their own identities (the subjects of research questions
one and two). Participants were instructed to write freely for ten minutes about two prompts:
“Your English” and “Your identity.” We chose to keep prompts brief in order not to limit
responses. Only one participant (J5) chose to write in Japanese; all others wrote in English. The
length of freewriting tasks varied from 157 to 797 words. All hand-written freewriting tasks were
re-typed in MS-Word format by this study’s first author. Informed consent measures were taken
before tasks were distributed.

Interviews

126
Within one to two months of reception of the freewriting tasks, interviews following a semi-
structured protocol (Barbour & Schostak, 2011, p. 62) were conducted in English with all
participants. The interview questions were divided into two sections: general questions for all
participants, centering on participants’ language backgrounds, English usage, and classroom
language use (Appendix 3); and questions for individual participants to inquire after specific
issues in freewriting tasks. All participants received the interview questions, in order to give
them time to reflect upon their answers, at least one day prior to their interview. The interviews,
45-90 minutes long and audio-recorded, were conducted by the first author face-to-face or, when
long distances were involved, via Skype. It is our impression that there was no substantial
difference in the data collected through these two techniques, apart from a few disruptions in the
Skype connection in one interview. We had feared that the Skype interviews would tend to be
shorter than the face-to-face interviews, as people may be uncomfortable with the technology,
but in practice this was not the case. An active interview approach, as described by Holstein and
Gubrium (2004), was followed; rather than attempt to minimize the interviewer’s involvement
and feign an objective neutrality, the interviewer on occasion shared his own experiences and
observations in order to encourage responses and elaborations from interviewees. Interviews
were then transcribed, and participants were contacted when clarification was required.

Data Analysis
Participants’ freewriting tasks were entered into NVivo10 (QSR International) and thematically
coded by the first author in consultation with the second author. Coding was done in two cycles,
following procedures adapted from Saldaña (2009). In the first cycle, topics that participants
wrote about were identified and labeled by the first author; in the second, first-cycle topics were
grouped into categories. For example, J4 wrote the following statement in the first freewriting
task: “The more I stay in Japan, the more I lose my English proficiency.” During the first cycle,
this statement was coded as attrition of one’s English; in the second cycle, this language attrition
code was subsumed under a category labeled “changes in one’s English over time,” along with
several other codes that related to changes in one’s English (e.g., awareness of one’s English as
having hybrid features and effect of life in Japan on one’s English).
To ensure reliability, a randomly-selected sample of approximately 10% of the total data
collected was assembled and re-coded, using the list of codes prepared by the researchers, by a

127
third coder (a native English-speaking English teacher). Results indicated low agreement with
the first coding (kappa = 0.70). Following the strict criteria in Krippendorff (2004), we judged
this value to be acceptable for this study. After the reliability check was performed, the coding
framework was adjusted slightly; three similar categories were combined and several infrequent
codes (occurring only once in the data set) were eliminated. Interview transcripts were not
thematically analyzed in NVivo, as topics were introduced by the interviewer; analysis focused
on how participants’ responses related to the effect that life in Japan had on their English use; the
extent to which participants use Japanese and English in the classroom; and the extent to which
participants modify their English in the classroom (the subjects of research questions three, four,
and five).

Freewriting Task Findings

For the “Your English” freewriting task, the finished coding framework consisted of 46 codes,
grouped into 12 categories. The framework for the “Your identity” task was much more complex,
due to the more complex nature of the topic: 105 codes grouped into 19 categories, which in turn
were grouped into three macro-categories (the self, the other, and identity itself). The most
frequent categories, in terms of the number of references to these categories by participants in
their writing, are displayed in Table 2. In the table, “Sources” refers to the participants who
wrote about these themes, and “References” indicates each separate mentioning of a theme by a
participant. The following subsections will discuss the categories in each freewriting task most
relevant to this study, and provide representative quotations from the writings themselves. Codes
described in each category will be italicized (e.g., attrition of one’s English).

Table 2
Most Frequent Categories Identified in Freewriting tasks
Tasks Theme Sources References
1. Awareness of self as English user 11 27
2. Formative/Early experiences with English 11 22
Your 3. Changes in one’s English over time 10 28
English
4. Others’ perceptions of one’s English or self 7 12
5. Work and English 7 11
Your 1. Identity as fluid or hybrid 13 27
Identity 2. Work and identity 9 11

128
 3. Basic attributes of identity 8 40
4. Others’ perceptions of one’s identity 8 17
5. Issues relating to native/nonnative status 6 8

“Your English” Freewriting Task

1. Awareness of Self as English User
Eleven of the 17 participants expressed an awareness of themselves as speakers of a certain
variety of English, such as Midwestern American or Japanese English (though all acknowledge
that they have come to deviate from this variety, as will be discussed later). Four Japanese
participants wrote about differences or conflicts between native English-speaking and Japanese
English teachers, a topic mentioned by only one non-Japanese participant (E7). J1 described how
she once had a poor self-image as an English teacher because of her nonnative status, echoing
Matsuda’s notion of the deficit model (Willey & Matsuda, 2010), and explained how she was
liberated from this view when she was first introduced to the concept of English as an
international language (EIL):
At my PhD program, when I first learned about critical views of native speaker
models, how this put NNS in a hierarchical, power relationship, I felt strong
empathy for the theory/view based on my experience. It was an eye-opening
experience. The more I read some literature on EIL, the more confidence I got.

J1 went on to describe how the notion that English could be taught as an international language,
without focusing on native speaker models, gave her a sense of empowerment and equality
among other English teachers.
J3 described a different liberating experience. Although studies have found that Japanese

129
teachers can be wary of communicative language teaching (CLT) methods espoused by many
non-Japanese English teachers (e.g., Sato & Kleinsasser, 1999; Simon-Maeda, 2004), such as
using English as the language of instruction, J3’s attitude towards teaching English changed
when he was first taught by a native English-speaking teacher, and saw that English could be
used as a medium of instruction as well as to chat and joke around with students. He described
how he came to use English as often as possible when teaching, and how this approach
conflicted with that of many of his Japanese colleagues, who taught mainly in Japanese. He
realized that in order to teach English effectively he must be a user of English in his work,
research, and personal life (echoing Davies’ (2013) notion of the native user). The other Japanese
participants also indicated, in their freewriting and in the background questionnaire, that English
meant much more to them than merely the subject they were hired to teach; in this respect, they
were similar to the participants in Nagatomo (2012).
Three Japanese participants also indicated an awareness of themselves as a nonnative speaker
of English. J1, who, as described above, was liberated from a negative sense of herself as a
nonnative speaker by learning about EIL, wrote that she had become comfortable with her
nonnative English. D1, however, had mixed feelings about his nonnativeness, writing that he
envies people “with very strong intuitions as to what’s ‘right’ and ‘wrong.’’
2. Formative Experiences with English
Seven participants, both Japanese and non-Japanese, wrote about exposure to different varieties
of English at an early stage in life. E4, for instance, described how her family moved often when
she was a child in Ireland; each move brought exposure to different English dialects, which she
“unconsciously adopted quickly and easily.” E2 had a similar experience when he moved to
Canada from Ireland in elementary school. Both E2 and E4 felt that these experiences helped to
spark an interest in English. To E9, awareness of different varieties is what makes English
interesting:
I think I also enjoy exaggerating features of certain dialects/sociolects depending on
my audience—it’s fun to use your ‘Skills’ as a native speaker of English. I love the
depth and variety of English—I don’t have that ability in my other languages.

Five participants, four Japanese and one non-Japanese (D1) recounted experiences where they
had to use English in a foreign country, including study and work experiences in foreign
countries. J2 described her experience studying in the United States for three years, where

130
English skills were needed for survival, both at university and in her daily life. This experience
transformed her perception of English, from a foreign to a second language. J4’s experience
studying in an MA program in Australia also marked the peak of her English skills, which began
to deteriorate, she lamented, after returning to Japan.
With the exception of J3, the only male Japanese participant, all Japanese participants received
at least one graduate degree while residing in foreign countries, and these experiences helped to
shape how they used English as well as their perceptions of English and English-speaking
cultures. They may also have helped to establish what Gee (2000, cited in Nagatomo, 2012, p.
131) refers to as “institutional identity” or “I-identity” as scholars, with the aim of attaining
employment at a Japanese university. Interestingly, six participants, four Japanese and two non-
Japanese, had yet to attain a tenured position at the time of this study; although Whitsed and
Wright (2011) focus on non-tenured native English-speaking English teachers in Japan, this
study found that both Japanese and non-Japanese university English teachers struggled with
moving beyond short-term contracted positions.
The three Japanese American participants (E5, E6, and E7) described experiences growing up
in a Japanese-dominant household, where Japanese was spoken almost exclusively, though later
English became their dominant language. Both E5 and E6 wrote about how their Japanese-
language backgrounds caused problems for them in school; E5’s teachers often could not
understand what she wanted to express in her essays, which she felt may have been influenced
by her Japanese. E6 described a problem early in her education:
I was the first child, so [my mother] spoke to me in Japanese, which means that
technically, Japanese was the first language I spoke. However, when I got to
kindergarten, things changed. I wasn’t speaking the same language as everyone else,
and I have a bad memory of my kindergarten teacher. She was old and mean, and
scolded me for not speaking English.

Last, two participants, E2 and D1, wrote about growing up in a multilingual environment, and
considered themselves fluent in at least two languages. Their examples, and those described in
the preceding paragraphs, illustrate the inadequacy of a simple native/nonnative dichotomy, as
argued by Farahnaz (2011); such labels gloss over the complexity of a person’s linguistic and
educational background.
3. Changes in One’s English over Time
The issue of changes in one’s English—from living in Japan as well as exposure to different

131
English varieties—appeared in 10 participants’ writings. Some changes were viewed negatively.
Four participants (two Japanese and two non-Japanese), wrote about attrition of their English
skills. Burrough-Boenisch (2003, 2006) has noted that language attrition is a problem facing
expatriate English speakers; however, both Japanese and non-Japanese participants in this study
have thought about language attrition. For J4, the longer she stays in Japan the more feels that
she is losing her English proficiency—a feeling that she carries every day. J6 wrote that her
conversational skills in English were not as good as they were 15 years ago while residing in the
US. Similarly, E7, from the US, indicated that his conversational English skills had suffered after
years of life in Japan. He wrote about having difficulties in “generating spontaneous utterances,”
and in holding conversations with guests from abroad.
Six non-Japanese participants wrote about the effect of life in Japan on their English.
Typically, this meant that their English had become simplified, free from idiom or slang, and that
their speech had slowed. In the words of E8, from the US:

There is a saying in Japanese that you will get a sickness made up of symptoms that
come from your profession. My symptoms are slow and clear English and an ability to
rephrase what I say in a number of ways.

Her English has changed, she continued, because most of the people she speaks to in English,
including her own husband, are nonnative English speakers—which Schmid (2013) attributes as
a major cause of language attrition among expatriates. She then described how people who know
her well in the US express surprise upon hearing how her English has become slow and
simplified. Three other non-Japanese participants described similar experiences. E4, from Ireland,
related that she feels relief when she returns to Ireland, where she can hear a more colorful and
robust variety of English.
Several participants wrote about an awareness of their English as being hybrid in nature, with
features of different varieties of English (both native and nonnative). Unlike language attrition or
a slowness/plainness to their speech, this change was not necessarily viewed negatively. Both J1
and J7 described how their English can be classified as neither UK nor US English. E6, from the
United States, explained how her English was a “mish-mash” of UK and US features (though she
preferred UK English), and how she had to make an effort when speaking to people in her home
country:

132
 Even now, when I return to the States, I need consciously to change how I talk, to try
to speak more frankly and emotionally, than I would when I was in the U.K., where
sarcasm, irony and understatement make the use of the language more interesting and
amusing.

The experiences described above support Seargeant’s (2013) assertion that the category of
native speaker has permeable and ever-shifting boundaries. In this study, both the Japanese and
non-Japanese participants have come to use blends of English that give uniqueness to each
teacher’s voice.

“Your Identity” Freewriting Task

Several participants indicated in their freewriting, or afterwards in correspondences with the
researchers, that writing about their identities was difficult. As there are many facets of identity,
the participants wrote about a diversity of topics. In this section, examples will be shown from
two frequent and relevant themes: the notion that one’s identity has fluid or hybrid characteristics,
and issues relating to one’s status as a native/nonnative speaker of English.
1. Identity as Fluid or Hybrid
In the second freewriting task, thirteen of the 17 participants wrote about issues which we
categorized in an “identity as fluid or hybrid in nature” category, much as several had described
their own English in the first freewriting task (the notion of hybrid identities was also a major
theme in Kamada (2011) and Kanno (2011)). Codes within this theme included the notion of
dual identity, the effect of life in Japan on one’s identity, and the contingent nature of identity.
This view of identity as contingent meshes with Kiernan (2010), who writes that “identity is not
a fixed sense of self but is contingent on time and place both over a lifetime and even over the
course of a day” (p. 53). Burke and Stets (2009) posit that the multiple identities people possess
are arranged in a hierarchical control system which allows for change as external realities
fluctuate (p. 175). For instance, E4, from Ireland, stated that her character has chameleon-like
qualities; she can easily adapt to new situations and fit in, as she had to do when working on her
undergraduate degree in the UK and then again after moving to Japan. Several participants, both
Japanese and non-Japanese, expressed a feeling of living between two or more worlds, as the
below quotations illustrate:
I feel most comfortable when with Japanese-English bilingual/bicultural friends. With
them, I don’t feel stressed for not behaving properly in society because I found that

133
 they are not judgmental of the people like me who live between two cultures. (J6)
I don’t get a great deal of my feeling of who I am based on the passport I hold. I have
already surpassed the point where my life has been more than half lived in Japan. So,
I am a foreigner here, but a foreigner there. (E6)

For the non-Japanese participants, life in Japan has had a profound impact on their identities.
However, like the foreign English teachers interviewed by Kiernan (2010, p. 169), they are
acutely aware of their identities as non-Japanese expatriates. E9 described how people in Japan
tend to view him as a representative of New Zealand, when he saw himself as “50% Kiwi, 15%
Japanese, 15% English/British, and 10% Thai.” This can lead to frustration. Once a Japanese
colleague “lectured” him, in front of students, for being a vegetarian, because he was from New
Zealand and New Zealanders are supposed to eat meat. E4 wrote about how life in Japan had
altered who she was and how others saw her:
Flying from Amsterdam to Cork last week, the man sitting next to me thought I was
Dutch because I “spoke with an accent” & my speech was “so clear”. I felt that I am
“tidy” with my belongings (I roll umbrellas!), take up as little space as possible when I
sit down, & expect sales staff etc. to behave politely.

2. Issues Relating to Native/nonnative Status

Eight participants, both Japanese and non-Japanese, described experiences or feelings that
relate to their own status as native or nonnative English speakers. Codes within this category
include cultural stereotypes, perceived prejudice against L2 users and attitudes towards the
nonnative label. J4 described how non-Japanese English teachers’ attitudes towards Japanese
teachers’ English skills affected her own behavior, both professionally and socially:
Many native speakers seem to look down on Japanese teachers’ English language
level, and make fun of Junglish; and it’s started to bother me. I’ve been displaying
signs of feeling the need to defend Japanese speakers’ English.

D1, from Belgium, described similar experiences. As a nonnative English speaker, he initially
found these experiences upsetting, though later he came to ignore them, adding that he came to
the realization that his “vocabulary and knowledge of grammar are many times better than most
native speakers around me.” Farahnaz (2011) also notes that nativeness does not necessarily
correlate to English proficiency.
Three Japanese participants (J1, J4, and J7) described how early in their careers they felt a
sense of inferiority as nonnative English speakers (J1 and J4 also described this sense of

134
inferiority when writing the first task). J1 wrote about this sense of inferiority and how she
overcame it:
There was a time when I was confused with my Nonnative English speaking
teacher identity and felt inferior a bit especially in this teaching field. But I somehow
established my own identity and am happy with it after reading other peoples’
struggle, chatting with other people. Now I’m proud and happy that my education
apart from my M.A. was through Japanese as a medium of instruction, and that
makes me who I am.

J1’s initial feelings echo the dark legacy of native-speakerism (Hayes, 2013; Yphantides,
2013). D1 and J1 show, however, that they were eventually able to feel a sense of pride in their
status as nonnative English speakers. Native-speakerism is often characterized as a kind of
unspoken policy designed to benefit native English speakers (Kabel, 2009). However, as Hayes
(2003) makes clear, native-speakerism can also bedevil native English speakers. One non-
Japanese participant (E7) raised the issue of cultural stereotypes, describing how he often had to
struggle with the cultural perceptions and “baggage that Japanese people sometimes impose on
foreigners.” Two Japanese American participants (E5 and E6) wrote about how their identity as
Japanese Americans have been a source of struggle as English teachers in Japan. E5 described
experiences where jobs she had applied for were awarded to white men without doctoral degrees,
supporting Ruecker and Ives’ (2005) finding that EFL posts in Asian countries often go to white
males. Overall, these experiences partially support Kiernan (2010, p. 173), who argues that
language teaching is a venture where differences are pronounced and unavoidable, and a degree
of struggle between teachers should perhaps be expected—though clearly, Japanese and non-
Japanese teachers are united in that both groups face struggles..

Interview Findings
Table 3 displays findings from interviews, in four categories: the variety of English that
participants believe they use; how life in Japan has affected their English use; self-reported
classroom language use (English or Japanese); and whether or not participants believe that they
modify their English use in class. In the following subsections, these findings will be discussed.

Table 3
Findings from Interviews
Japan affected Classroom Classroom
No. Variety of English
English? English use? English modified?

135
 J1 UK+US Y Over 80% Y
J2 JE Y About 70% Y
J3 JE Y Over 80% Y
J4 JE+US+Australian Y Depends on class Y
J5 US+JE Y Depends on class Y
J6 US Y About 75% Y
J7 UK+US N 0% N
E1 US+UK N About 40% Y
E2 Canadian+Irish Y Over 80% Y
E3 US M Almost 100% Y
E4 International+Irish Y Almost 100% Y
E5 US Y About 50% Y
E6 US Y 95% Y
E7 US Y Almost 100% Y
E8 US Y Almost 100% Y
E9 New Zealand+UK Y Depends on class Y
D1 US+UK+JE Y Almost 100% Y
Y=Yes; N=No; M=Maybe; US=United States; UK=United Kingdom; JE=Japanese English

How Life in Japan Has Affected Participants’ English

Participants stated that they now speak a variety of different Englishes, including mixtures of UK,
US, Australian, and Japanese English. Most participants (except for J7 and E3) agreed that living
in Japan has significantly affected their English, and three of the Japanese participants (J2, J3,
and J5) believe that their English has characteristics of Japanese English. E3, from the US, stated
that he was unsure whether life in Japan has affected his English, as he has always spoken
English rather slowly. As was discussed in the previous section, several non-Japanese
participants described how friends and family members in their home countries have pointed out
that their English has changed; in almost all cases, these participants have come to speak slowly
and clearly and to avoid metaphor and cultural references. As E7 explained,
I learned quickly upon returning to my home area the first time that I was speaking
too slowly to my family, as if they were idiots.

E7 went on to describe how he took measures to speak “more naturally” on subsequent return
trips to his country, and came to believe that he now speaks—or can speak—more or less the

136
same way he did before living in Japan.
Expanding upon their freewriting tasks, several participants (both Japanese and non-Japanese)
voiced concerns about attrition of their English and explained the measures they took to stave off
this attrition. For instance, E4 (Ireland) and E5 (USA) read a great deal, and J2 tried to
communicate in English with friends and colleagues as often as she could. However, Schmid
(2013) would perhaps argue that these efforts could be in vain for the non-Japanese participants,
as language attrition relates more to use of the L2, where access to the L1 is inhibited, and to the
quality of one’s interactions in the L1, than to the frequency of L1 use. E9 gives his thoughts
about how his tenure in Japan has affected his English:
You lose some of the low-frequency words, such as, well naturally I can’t think of an
example! But interestingly you also lose some of those little superfluous words which
actually matter a great deal in normal speech, like “like” and “you know”.

Echoing E6’s experiences (above), E9 explained that it takes a few days for him to adjust to the
way people speak whenever he returns to New Zealand, and E4 shared similar experiences. They
stated that at first their own speech can sound stilted and formal and it takes some time to
“loosen up.” Research has long found that native English speakers adjust their speech when
speaking to nonnative speakers (e.g., Long, 1983); it has also been found that discourse markers,
such as “like” and “yeah,” are less often used by nonnative English speakers (Fung & Carter,
2007), which can give native speakers negative impressions in conversations (Biegner, 2008).
What happens to native English speakers who speak English predominantly to nonnative English
speakers, presumably filtering out, to use E9’s term, “those little superfluous words,” for years,
even decades? Future longitudinal studies involving expatriate English teachers could help to
answer this question.
Last, when asked about their thoughts on Japanese English, only one participant (J7) expressed
negative feelings about Japanese English. J2, J3, J4, J5, and D1 stated that Japanese English is a
part of their English repertoire, and that they occasionally use Japanese English—consciously or
otherwise—in class. The native English-speaking participants stated that they do not use it in
class (E4 reported that she does not want to seem as though she is mocking students), but do not
make efforts to banish it from the classroom, either. Unlike Hino (2012), no participants actively
sought to teach Japanese English in class, and all participants questioned whether a class that
focuses on Japanese English would be of value to students.

137
Classroom Language Use
The majority of participants have what could be called flexible classroom language policies,
using both English and Japanese while teaching. Six non-Japanese participants (E3, E4, E6, E7,
E8, and F1) stated that their classes are conducted mostly in English. They will, however, use
Japanese on occasion, for such purposes as humor and/or to confirm students’ understanding of
instructions. E8 initially said that she made it a rule never to use Japanese in class, but then
remembered that she sometimes uses Japanese “in emergency situations”—when she had little
time and wanted to be sure students understood something important, such as when, at the end of
one class, she suddenly remembered that she had forgotten to give a homework assignment. The
remaining non-Japanese participants indicated that using mainly English in the classroom is an
ideal that they cannot achieve in their own classes due to the low ability levels of some of their
students. In these instances, they reported using the L1 to give instructions as well as for class
management, like the teachers of German interviewed by de la Campa and Hossein (2009).
However, when teaching higher-level students, they stated that they do use mainly English. For
non-Japanese participants, Japanese may serve more of an affective role than an instructional
role, enabling the teachers to connect with their students through humor and shared cultural
knowledge, benefits noted by Burden (2000) and Yphantides (2013). Moreover, as several
participants noted, Japanese students generally expect their teachers to be able to understand at
least some Japanese, supporting the questionnaire findings of Carson (2015) and Carson and
Kashihara (2012).
Using mostly English in the classroom, or as much English as possible, was an ideal expressed
by Japanese participants as well. J1, J2, J3, and J6 stated that they conduct classes mainly in
English (over 70%); J4 and J5 indicated that they use English as often as they can, though like
the non-Japanese participants they tended to use more Japanese in classes with lower-level
students. These participants stated that they use Japanese mainly to explain class activities and
instructions, as well as vocabulary and grammar. In this respect, their use of Japanese may serve
more of an instructional role than for the non-Japanese participants. Indeed, three Japanese
participants (J1, J3, and J4) taught some classes, such as e-learning or TOEIC-focused courses,
where they were told by superiors not to teach in English, to ensure that learning occurs
smoothly. No non-Japanese participants reported such an experience.

138
 However, using Japanese can serve another important function for the Japanese participants.
J1 noted that her identity as a Japanese English teacher helps her to connect with students and
gives her credibility:
I feel it is unnatural for me to say things like “oops” in the classroom, so I will say
things like are or gomen instead. I want students to know I am just an ordinary
Japanese person like them. In the first class, some students will always think I am not
Japanese or that I was raised abroad but I want them to know I learned English the
same way they did.

In this manner, J1 positions herself as a teacher as well as students’ sempai, or senior, like one
teacher interviewed by Nagatomo (2012, p. 93). D1 also said that he wants to emphasize his
identity as a nonnative English speaker, and that students “seem to really admire him” for not
being a native English speaker. Interestingly, no participants, Japanese or non-Japanese, reported
any feelings of guilt or inadequacy for using Japanese in class, a finding noted by Hawkins
(2015). For the most part, they simply use Japanese when they feel it is necessary to do so, and
move on with their teaching.
Only one participant, J7, stated that she exclusively uses one language in class, Japanese
(interestingly, J7 was the only participant who had a strongly negative opinion towards Japanese
English). She said that she never uses English when teaching English classes. She recently
realized that she does not even say “repeat after me” in English, but this was the way she had
been taught in her secondary education in Japan. She added that she finds it difficult to
codeswitch; when speaking in English she has difficulty remembering Japanese words, and
prefers to use one language or the other.

Modification of Classroom English

Except for J7, who did not use English in class, all participants stated that they monitor their
English production while teaching. They tend to speak more slowly and clearly than they usually
would, simplifying their grammar and vocabulary and filtering out colloquialisms or cultural
references that students would have difficulty in understanding, and by using body language and
repetition. Although the issue of which variety to teach is a hotly contested topic in the World
Englishes literature (e.g., Matsuda, 2003), these participants did not seem to give that subject
much thought. They did not show attachment to any one variety of English (for example, US
English), but instead teach a simplified form of the variety they are most familiar and

139
comfortable with (which, as was described above, may have been influenced by different
varieties of English). Both Japanese and non-Japanese participants seemed to be aware that a
standard form of English is needed in the classroom, and in class they use this standard variety
(or at least, they believe they are using a standard variety). Both groups also seem to be united in
their distance, as individual speakers (with different dialects or personal ways of speaking), from
standard English, supporting Davies’ (2013) assertion that native and nonnative speakers are
united in their distance from a standard language. E4 lamented the fact that standard English was
colorless and not her “true language.”
In this respect, both groups may perform more as native users than native speakers of English
while teaching English. However, their speech in class could also be called a form of student-
centered teacherese (Walsh, 2002), or the simplified teacher-talk which is used also among, for
instance, primary and secondary school teachers in North America. Indeed, as Trudgill and
Hanna (2008) note, “standard English” is defined by its register and grammar, and has nothing to
do with pronunciation. Observing how English teachers speak both in and out of the classroom is
necessary to determine the extent to which they are behaving as native users, and the extent to
which they are simply being teachers.
Using a clear, standard English in the classroom can be difficult for both the Japanese and
non-Japanese teacher participants. J4 remembered how a student once told her that her English
was grammatically complicated and difficult to follow, when in fact she had been trying very
hard to simplify her English for students. She stated that the English she uses inside and outside
of class has to be different, but making this switch can be hard. E3 (USA) stated that while he
does simplify his English in class, it annoys him when he hears other native English speakers do
this when speaking to Japanese people. He has noted that some foreign teachers will drop articles
or the “-s” ending on words, imitating perhaps unconsciously the way Japanese people speak
English. He hoped that he does not do this, and makes an effort to speak as “English-like” as
possible.
Interestingly, three non-Japanese participants (E2, E3, and E6) spoke about how they listen to
how other non-Japanese English teachers in Japan speak English, both in the classroom and out
of the classroom, and make a concentrated effort not to sound like them. E2 explained his
feelings this way:
One thing I do not want to do is sound like one of those foreign people on English

140
 shows on NHK [the national broadcasting company], the way they speak so slow and
enunciate things so exaggeratedly and overdo the gestures and facial expressions and
all that. I tell my students this and they get a good laugh out of it, they understand
what I mean.

Although E2 and other participants acknowledged that their spoken English in class is slower
and clearer than how they would normally speak, there is a limit to how far they will modify
their speech. Clearly, they were paying careful attention to how English is being used in Japan
(Seargeant, 2009), as well as the way they and other English teachers speak; they then tried to
aim for something between digestible and natural—something that may not be quite the same as
intelligibility, which is often touted as a goal of EIL (e.g., Honna, 2008; Nelson, 2011).

Conclusion
Based on the findings, we can attempt to answer the research questions posed at the beginning of
this paper, which are reiterated below.
1. How do the participants in this study define their own varieties of English?
2. How do the participants view their own identities?
3. Do the participants feel that life in Japan has affected their English usage? If yes, how?
4. To what extent do the participants use English and Japanese in the classroom?
5. Do the participants modify their English production in the classroom? If yes, how?
These participants tended to view their own varieties of English as having attributes of
multiple varieties of English, including Japanese English, US English, UK English, and standard
international English. In general, they saw their English as representing one variety or culture,
but felt that their English has been shaped by their own education and life experiences and is thus
largely unclassifiable. Participants held a similar view of their own identities, as having been
influenced by different cultures and as being hybrid and constantly in flux. Participants, for the
most part, believed that life in Japan has affected their English and given it characteristics unique
to Japan. For Japanese participants, these characteristics were largely due to their speaking
Japanese as a first language, but also from their experiences speaking English to Japanese
students; the non-Japanese participants also felt that their English had been permanently changed
as a result of speaking most often to nonnative speakers in Japan, and also from mingling with
non-Japanese teachers from different countries, who speak different varieties of English.
Also, most of the participants made use of both English and Japanese in the classroom.
Although they aimed to use as much English as possible when teaching, they used Japanese on

141
occasion, for both affective and instructional ends. Their stance towards language use in the
classroom can perhaps be described as flexible and student-focused, rather than a dogmatic
principle. Last, most participants modified their English production in class. They tended to
speak slowly, simply, and clearly, and with much repetition. Most of these Japanese and non-
Japanese teachers stated that they use a standard form of English in order to be understandable to
students, but which might differ from the way they spoke English outside of classes.
To some extent, then, the terms native and nonnative have limited usefulness in describing
these participants—at least when they are teaching English. Not only are these terms hard to
define (Nao, 2011), but they do not allow for the porous boundaries (Seargent, 2013) in language
use and identity that these participants embody. It is also possible that the term native user
should be seen not as a permanent status, but as a role that speakers of a language can take on at
different times, such as when teaching. What is clear is that all the participants in this study
could be classified as multilingual and “transnational” teachers (Menard-Warwick, 2008). As
Menard-Warwick asserts, universities in EFL settings should be concerned less with static
dichotomies like native and nonnative and focus instead on the pedagogical value that
transnational English teachers can bring to language classrooms.Such a transformation in attitude
towards English learning is needed in Japan, and in Asia at large. English-only policies, which
have been criticized (e.g., Hawkins, 2015), should be implemented with caution. More
importantly, universities should recognize the linguistic diversity of their English-teaching staff
and view this diversity as a resource, one that is likely more meaningful to students than the
textbooks or materials used in classrooms.
Implications
This study has, we believe, shown the usefulness of Davies’ (2013) notion of the native user as a
theoretical lens through which to examine the issue of linguistic identity. Further research on
how English teachers of different backgrounds use English themselves, both in and out of the
classroom, should help to refine an understanding of the native user concept. Moreover, we
believe that this study has shown the value of freewriting tasks combined with interviews.
Participants often surprised us with their writing, and led us to questions and insights that would
not have occurred to us otherwise. After the study several participants told us that they enjoyed
doing the freewriting tasks, as the subjects were challenging but worth exploring. It is also
possible that use of timed freewriting tasks can reduce the social desirability bias that can come

142
into play in interviews (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 141); having to write quickly may turn off, or dim, an
awareness of the audience, thus leading to participants sharing their true feelings about complex
issues.
Finally, we believe that this study has implications for EFL pedagogy, in Japan and elsewhere.
This study has made clear that participants, both Japanese and non-Japanese, speak with a variety
of accents which have been influenced by numerous languages, cultures, and personal
experiences. Teachers may wish to bring the subject of the accent into the classroom, and find
ways to show students that an accent is not something that always requires correction, but rather
reflects a speaker’s cultural and personal heritage. Exposing students to different accents or
English usages (Kirkpatrick, 2007), perhaps even using the teacher’s—or the students’—own
accents as a model or topic for discussion, could provide meaningful learning experiences for
students. The underlying goal of such tasks would be to provide a shift away from a mindset that
sees different accents or non-standard usages as errors, and instead promote an appreciation of
the diversity of English and the importance of intelligibility (Kirkpatrick, 2010; Nelson, 2011).
Such experiences may well be eye-opening for many students in Japan or other Asian countries,
empowering them as one of our participants, J1, was also empowered when she first learned
about EIL.
We believe that such an approach can be executed while still focusing on a standard variety of
English as the target for instruction, as numerous studies have proven that students and teachers
generally prefer a standard variety over a non-standard one (e.g., Li, 2010; Mai, 2016). However,
by introducing the issues of accent and English variation in their classrooms, teachers can show
that they share common ground with students: everyone speaks with an accent, and deviates, in
some way, from the standard.
Limitations
This study was small in scale and exploratory in design; without a larger-scale quantitative
aspect, such as a questionnaire survey, any conclusions drawn must be tentative. Moreover, this
study focused on how teachers perceive their language backgrounds and usage. In order to
clarify how English teachers in Japan actually use English, different forms of data collection are
required, such as class observations. One of the authors is now involved in a longitudinal
research project involving observations of classes taught by Japanese and non-Japanese English
teachers and interviews; it is hoped that results from the present study would help to guide the

143
methodology of this recently-launched longitudinal study.

References
Ahn, H. (2014). Teachers’ attitudes towards Korean English in South Korea. World Englishes,
33(2), 195-222.
Alptekin, C. (2010). Redefining multicompetence for bilingualism and ELF. International
Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20(1), 1-16.
Barbour, R.S., & Schostak, J. (2011). Interviewing and focus groups. In B. Somekh and C.
Lewin (Eds.), Theory and Methods in Social Research (pp. 61-68) (3rd ed.). Los Angeles:
Sage.
Bernaisch, T., & Koch, C. (2015). Attitudes towards English in India. World Englishes. doi:
10.1111/weng.12174
Biegner, K. (2008). “There’s like the Galleria and like all these like really great shoe stores”:
Why non-native speakers do not speak this way and what it means for them. Norderstedt,
Germany: GRIN Verlag.
Burden, P. (2000). The use of the students mother tongue in monolingual English “conversation”
classes at Japanese universities. The Language Teacher, 24(6), 5-10.
Burke, P.J., & Stets, J.E. (2009). Identity Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burrough-Boenisch, J. (2003). Shapers of published NNS research articles. Journal of Second
Language Writing, 12, 223-243.
Burrough-Boenisch, J. (2006). Negotiable acceptability: Reflections on the interactions between
language professionals in Europe and NNS scientists wishing to publish in English.
Current Issues in Language Planning, 7(1), 31-43.
Carson, E. (2015). Introducing a new scale: Student preferences for instructional language.
JACET Chugoku-Shikoku Chapter Research Bulletin, 17, 19-36.
Carson, E., & Kashihara, H. (2012). Using the L1 in the L2 classroom: The students speak. The
Language Teacher, 36(4), 41-48.
Cook, V. (1999). Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly,
33(2), 185-209.

144
Davies, A. (2003). The native speaker: Myth and reality. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Davies, A. (2013). Native speakers and native users: Loss and gain. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
De la Campa, J.C., & Hossein, N. (2009). The amount, purpose, and reasons for using L1 in L2
classrooms. Foreign Language Annals, 42(4), 742-759.
Deyuan, H., & Li, D.C.S. (2009). Language attitudes and linguistic features in the ‘China
English’ debate. World Englishes, 28(1), 78-89.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Farahnaz, F. (2011). Reconceptualizing the native/nonnative speaker dichotomy. Journal of
Lanuage, Identity and Education, 10(4), 231-249.
Fung, L., & Carter, R. (2007). Discourse markers and spoken English: Native and learner use in
pedagogic settings. Applied Linguistics, 28(3), 410-439.
Hawkins, S. (2015). Guilt, missed opportunities, and false role models: A look at perceptions and
use of the first language in English teaching in Japan. JALT Journal, 37(1), 29-42.
Hayes, B.E.. (2013). Hiring criteria for Japanese university English-teaching faculty. In S.A.
Houghton & D.J. Rivers (Eds.), Native-speakerism in Japan: Intergroup dynamics in
foreign language education (pp. 132-146). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Hino, N. (2012). Endonormative models of EIL for the Expanding Circle. In A. Matsuda (Ed.),
Principles and practices of teaching English as an International Language (pp. 28-43).
Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Holliday, A. (2006). Native-speakerism. ELT Journal, 60(4), 385-387.
Holstein, J.A., & Gubrium, J.F. (2004). The active interview. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative
research: Theory, method, and practice (2nd Edition) (pp. 140-158). London: Sage.
Honna, N. (2008). English as a multicultural language in Asian contexts: Issues and ideas.
Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers.
Houghton, S.A., & Rivers, D.J. (2013). Introduction: Redefining Native-Speakerism. In S.A.
Houghton & D.J. Rivers (Eds.), Native-speakerism in Japan: Intergroup dynamics in
foreign language education (pp. 1-14). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Hundt, M., Zipp, L., & Huber, A. (2015). Attitudes in Fiji towards varieties of English. World
Englishes, 34(4), 688-707.
Jenkins, J. (2006). Current perspectives on teaching World Englishes and English as a Lingua

145
 Franca. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 157-181.
Jenkins, J. (2009). World Englishes: A resource book for students. Oxford: Routledge.
Kabel, A. (2009). Native-speakerism, stereotyping and the collusion of applied linguistics.
System, 37, 12-22.
Kachru, B. (1985). Standards, codification, and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in
the Outer Circle. In R. Quirk and H.G. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the world: Teaching
and learning the languages and literatures (pp. 11-30). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Kamada, L.D. (2011). Hybrid identities and adolescent girls: Being half in Japan. Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.
Kanno, Y. (2011). Negotiating bilingual and bicultural identities: Japanese returnees betwixt
two worlds. New York: Routledge.
Khan, S.Z. (2009). Imperialism of international tests: An EIL perspective. In F. Sharifian (Ed.),
English as an International Language: Perspectives and Pedagogical Issues (190-205).
Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Kiernan, P. (2010). Narrative identity in English language teaching: Exploring teacher
interviews in Japanese and English. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2007). World Englishes: Implications for international communication and
English language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2010). English as a lingua franca in ASEAN: A multilingual model. Hong Kong:
Hong Kong University Press.
Kobayashi, H., & Rinnert, C. (2012). Understanding L2 writing development from a
multicompetence perspective: Dynamic repertoires of knowledge and text construction. In
R. Manchón (Ed.), L2 writing development (pp.101-134). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Kramsch, C. (1997). The privilege of the nonnative speaker. Publications of the Modern
Language Association of America, 112(3), 359-369.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and
recommendations. Human Communication Research, 30, 411–433.
Li, D.C.S. (2010). Researching non-native speakers’ views towards intelligibility and identity:
Bridging the gap between moral high grounds and down-to-earth concerns. In F. Sharifian
(Ed.), English as an international language: Perspectives and pedagogical issues (pp. 81-

146
 118). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Long, M.H. (1983). Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 5(2), 177-193.
Mai, V.T.H. (2016). Pre-service teacher beliefs toward EIL pedagogy in teaching and learning
English. The Asian EFL Journal 18(1), 52-74.
Matsuda, A. (2003). Incorporating World Englishes in teaching English as an international
language. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 719-729.
McMillan, B.A., & Rivers, D.J. (2011). The practice of policy: Teacher attitudes towards
‘English-only’. System, 39(2), 251-263.
Menard-Warwick, J. (2008). The cultural and intercultural identities of transnational English
teachers: Two case studies from the Americas. TESOL Quarterly, 42(4), 617-640.
Nagatomo, D.H. (2012). Exploring Japanese university English teachers’ professional identity.
Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Nao, M. (2011). The pragmatic realization of the native speaking English teacher as a
monolingual ideal. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 3770-3781.
Nelson, C.L. (2011). Intelligibility in World Englishes: Theory and application. New York:
Routledge.
Porte, G. (1999). Where to draw the red line: Error toleration of native and nonnative EFL
faculty. Foreign Language Annals, 32(4), 426-434.
Rivers, D.J. (2013). Institutionalized Native-Speakerism: Voices of dissent and acts of resistance.
In S.A. Houghton & D.J. Rivers (Eds.), Native-speakerism in Japan: Intergroup dynamics
in foreign language education (pp. 75-91). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Ruecker, T., & Ives, L. (2015). White native English speakers needed: The rhetorical
construction of privilege in online teacher recruitment spaces. TESOL Quarterly, 49(4),
733-756.
Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles: Sage.
Sato, K., & Kleinsasser, R.C. (1999). Communicative language teaching (CLT): Practical
understandings. The Modern Language Journal, 83(4), 494-517.
Sauzier-Uchida, E. (2008). Japanese learners’ choice to overcome Babel: Standard English,
Globish, or Japlish? Journal of Liberal Arts, Waseda University, 124, 55-68.
Schmid, M.S. (2013). First language attrition. WIREs Cognitive Science, 4(2), 117-123.

147
Seargeant, P. (2009). The idea of English in Japan: Ideology and the evolution of a global
language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Seargeant, P. (2013). Ideologies of nativism and linguistic globalization. In S.A. Houghton &
D.J. Rivers (Eds.), Native-speakerism in Japan: Intergroup dynamics in foreign language
education (pp. 231-242). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Shimizu, K. (1995). Japanese college student attitudes towards English teachers: A survey. The
Language Teacher, 19 (10), 5-8.
Simon-Maeda, A. (2004). The complex construction of professional identities: Female EFL
educators in Japan speak out. TESOL Quarterly, 38(3), 405-436.
Trudgill, P., & Hannah, J. (2008). International English: A guide to the varieties of Standard
English. London: Hodder Education.
Tsuneyoshi, R. (2005). Internationalization strategies in Japan: The dilemma and possibilities of
study abroad programs using English. Journal of Research in International Education,
4(1), 65-86.
Vu, T.T.N., & Burns, A. (2014). English as a medium of instruction: Challenges for Vietnamese
tertiary learners. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 11(3), 1-31.
Walsh, S. (2002). Construction of obstruction: Teacher talk and learner involvement in the EFL
classroom. Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 3-23.
Waters, A. (2007). Native-speakerism in EL: plus ca change…? System, 35, 281-292.
Whitsed, C., & Wright, P. (2011). Perspectives from within: Adjunct, foreign, English-language
teachers in the internationalization of Japanese universities. Journal of Research in
International Education, 10(1), 28-45.
Willey, I., & Matsuda, A. (2010). Teaching World Englishes in Japan: Reflections on Aya
Matsuda’s presentation at JALT2009. Journal of Higher Education and Research, Kagawa
University, 7, 141-146.
Yoshikawa, H. (2005). Recognition of world Englishes: Changes in Chukyo University students’
attitudes. World Englishes, 24(3), 351-360.
Yphantides, J. (2013). Native-Speakerism through English-only policies: Teachers, students, and
the changing face of Japan. In S.A. Houghton & D.J. Rivers (Eds.), Native-speakerism in
Japan: Intergroup dynamics in foreign language education (pp. 207-216). Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.

148
Appendix 1: Background Questionnaire

I. General questions
1. Your name:__________________________________
2. Gender (please circle): M/F
3. Age range (please circle): 20~29 30~39 40~49 50~59 60~69

II. Country of origin and languages spoken

4. Country of origin: _________________________________
5. What do you consider your first language to be? _______________________________
6. Additional languages spoken (Please rank them in order of proficiency):
___________________________________________________________________________
7. (If your country of origin is not Japan): How often do you return to your country of origin?
(Circle the letter that applies)
a. Regularly (at least once per year)
b. Fairly often (once every other year)
c. Rarely (once or twice every ten years)
d. Never
8. Approximate amount of time that you spend in your country of origin if you return
Time spent: ____________ days / weeks (Circle one)
9. (If your country of origin is Japan): How often do you travel to a foreign country? (Circle the
letter that applies)
a. Regularly (at least once per year)
b. Fairly often (once every other year)
c. Rarely (once or twice every ten years)
d. Never
10. Purpose of travel (Circle any letter that applies)
a. Sightseeing/ Vacation
b. To visit friends or family
c. Business (to attend conferences, etc.)
d. Education (to take courses, etc.)
e. Other (please describe): ___________________________________________________
III. Education
11. Highest degree earned (please circle): Bachelor Master Doctorate/Ph.D.
Other: __________________________________
12. Are you currently enrolled in any graduate level degree programs? (please circle)
Yes / No Degree: Master Doctorate/Ph.D. Other: ________________________
13. Have you received any degrees, or are you enrolled in any degree programs, in a country
different from your country of origin?
Yes / No Degree(s) and country/countries: ______________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
IV. Career as an English instructor
14. Approximate number of years as an English instructor (including time outside of Japan):

149
 ____________ years
15. Approximate number of years as an English instructor in Japan
____________ years
16. Current position (job title): _________________________________
17. Number of years in this position: _____________ years
V. English usage
18. How often do you use (i.e., speak or write) English outside of the classroom? (Circle the
letter that applies)
a. Frequently (every day or almost every day)
b. Fairly often (a few times per week, on average)
c. Infrequently (once or twice per week, on average)
d. Never
19. In what situations do you use English? (Circle any letter that applies)
a. Communicating with colleagues
b. Communicating with friends, family, spouse or partner, etc.
c. Communicating with office staff or other professionals (e.g., in restaurants, shops, etc.)
d. Communicating with your own teachers or professors (if you are enrolled as a student)
e. Communicating with students
f. Other (please describe): ____________________________________________________
20. What media do you use when communicating in English (Circle any letter that applies)
a. Face-to-face
b. Telephone/ Skype
c. Email, online chatting (etc.)
d. Social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.)
e. Hand-written letters/cards
f. Other (please describe): ____________________________________________________
Thank you for taking the time to fill in these background questions!

Appendix 2: Freewriting Instructions and Prompts

Overview
This is the first of the two phases in this research project. In this phase you will be given two
freewriting tasks, each centering on one theme. These tasks are in the enclosed envelopes.
(Please do not open them yet!) The purpose of these tasks is to reveal your thoughts about the
two themes. You are probably familiar with freewriting, and may even have your own students
engage in freewriting exercises. The tasks in this research project are basically the same in nature
as the freewriting tasks that teachers give to students.

150
What is freewriting?
In this study, freewriting will be defined as rapid, unplanned and unstructured writing. You
should write whatever comes to your mind about a theme during the allotted time. The purpose is
to write fast and fluently. You should not stop to think about what you will write next, or
reconsider anything you have already written. Please remember these three rules:

1. Write fast! (Put down whatever comes to your mind.)

2. Write fluently! (Do not take long pauses to think ahead or look back.)
3. Write fearlessly! (Do not worry about mistakes in grammar, spelling, logic, etc.)

Instructions
We ask that you do each of the two tasks on different days (not both of them on the same day),
so that the first task does not influence the second. You will need a pencil, or your computer, and
a clock or watch to check your time. It is important that you find a time and place to do this
where you will not be interrupted, as these freewriting tasks should be done in one uninterrupted
sitting.

When you are ready, open the envelope labeled ④ Task 1. Take out the paper inside, and read
the instructions. Then, begin writing! Keep the three rules given above in mind, and just write!
You may write in English or Japanese. You may spend between 10 to 15 minutes on this task,
but no more. When you have finished please write down the amount of time you spent on Task 1
(a line will be provided for this information). Do not open the envelope labeled ⑤ Task 2 yet!

Then, take a break, for at least one day. When you are ready, find a place and time where and
when you can do the work without fear of interruption, open the envelope labeled ⑤ Task 2, and
do just what you did for Task 1 (write as much as you can, as fast as you can!)

When you have finished both tasks, please place your writing (both Tasks 1 and 2, and the
Background questions) in the return envelope (⑥) and send it by postal mail.

* If you completed the tasks using MS-Word, you can send the files to us as email attachments
rather than printing them out and sending them, unless you would prefer to do so. However,
please send the Background questions in the return envelope.

Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns about these freewriting tasks. Once
again, we greatly appreciate your willingness to participate in this study. Thank you!

Task 1 Time: ____ minutes

For this task you will need a writing implement and a watch. Please get these ready now.
In the space below, you will be given a theme. You should write whatever comes to your mind
about this theme. Try to write quickly, without long pauses and fear of mistakes, and as much as
you can. Two pages have been provided, so you have lots of space. Keep track of how long you
write; you should aim for between 10 to 15 minutes. When you’ve finished write down the

151
number of minutes you wrote on the line at the top of this page.
Here is your theme: Your English.

Task 2 Time: ____ minutes

For this task you will need a writing implement and a watch. Please get these ready now.
In the space below, you will be given a theme. You should write whatever comes to your mind
about this theme. Try to write quickly, without long pauses and fear of mistakes, and as much as
you can. Two pages have been provided, so you have lots of space. Keep track of how long you
write; you should aim for between 10 to 15 minutes. When you’ve finished write down the
number of minutes you wrote on the line at the top of this page.
Here is your theme: Your identity.

Appendix 3: Interview Questions (General Questions for All Participants)

I. Language background and current usage
1. How and where did you first learn (or acquire) English?
2. Which variety (or dialect) of English would you say that you use now?
3. Do you feel that living in Japan has affected your English? If so, how?
4. Do you experience any difficulties when communicating in English with [other] “native”
English speakers?
5. Do you experience any difficulties when communicating in English with [other] Japanese
English speakers?
6. If I mention “Japanese English,” what do you imagine? How do you feel about it?
II. Classroom language use
7. Do you use English in the classroom? If yes, to what extent?
8. Do you use Japanese in the classroom? If yes, to what extent?
9. How does the English you use in the classroom compare to the English you use elsewhere?
10. Do you aim for a particular model or variety of English in your classes? If yes, please
explain.

152
 The Impact of Text Structure as a Metacognitive Mode
on EFL Learners’ Reading-to-Writing
Dr. Hsiu Chiao (Sally) Fan
China University of Technology, Taiwan12

Bio Data:
Hsiu Chiao (Sally) Fan, Ph.D., is a full-time assistant professor in the department of Applied
English Studies at China University of Technology in Taiwan. She graduated from the
University of Kansas in TESL. Her research and teaching interests focus on reading
comprehension, metacognitive strategies of reading, self-regulated learning, and by extension,
linking reading to writing. (E-mail: sallyfan28@gmail.com).

Abstract:
Data have shown that exploiting text structure, a metacognitive strategy, could help ESL/EFL
learners improve their reading and writing. In recent years, the research has extended the focus
on metacognitive awareness of reading and writing (Negretti, 2012). Metacognitive process is a
subcategory of cognitive process (Flavell, 1979). According to Coutinho (2006), cognition
means the tendency to engage in effortful cognitive activity while metacognition is about one’s
thinking process: thinking about thinking (Fitzgerald & Shanahan, 2000). The author intends to
employ text structure as a metacognitive mode through linking reading to writing in order to
improve EFL students’ writing abilities. Three groups of Taiwanese EFL undergraduate students
received different approaches to textual analysis over a nine-week period to determine if any of
the approaches made a difference in their ability to analyze different aspects of writing. The first
group (N=22) followed a conventional approach of organizing ideas, writing a draft, and revising.
The second group (N=22) read examples of different texts: comparison, process, cause and effect,
and narration. In addition to reading the second group’s texts, the third group (N=22) also
received instruction on recognizing words and phrases that were distinctive of different writing
styles. Around half (N=36) of the students in each of the three instructional groups received
additional intensive metacognitive instruction in the analytical skills of reading and writing to
determine the impact on writing ability compared to a control group (N=30). The results
indicated that there was a significant difference among the three experimental populations, and a
difference between the group that received metacognitive awareness training and the control
group. When exploiting text structure as a metacognitive mode, students made greater
improvement in linking reading to writing measures.

Keywords: cognition, linking reading to writing, metacognitive mode, and text structure

12
China University of Technology: No. 56, Sec. 3, Xinglong Rd., Wunshan District, Taipei City 11695, Taiwan
(R.O.C.)

153
Introduction
Over the past decades, data have shown that exploiting text structure, a metacognitive strategy,
could help ESL/EFL learners improve their reading and writing. Empirical evidence included
Carrell’s (1985) study on the effects of using explicit teaching of various aspects of text structure
to facilitate first and second language reading; Latawiec’s (2010) study on the text structure
awareness as a metacognitive strategy to enhance EFL/ESL’s reading comprehension and
academic achievement; and Armbruster, Anderson, and Ostertag’s (1989) study of teaching text
structure to improve reading and writing. These studies, involving explicit teaching in the
structure of expository text curriculum and the rhetorical form of text structures, enable better
understanding of texts and text organization, demonstrate positive results, and show the
beneficial effects of academic skills in reading and writing (Carrell, 1985; Latawiec 2010; &
Armbruster, et.al. 1989).
Research on the relationship between reading and writing has also attracted much attention
(Fitzgerald & Shanahan, 2000). The research of Carson, Carrell, Silberstein, Kroll and Kuehn
(1990) examines relationships across languages (L1 and L2) between reading and writing
abilities of adult ESL learners and has indicated that there are strong relationships between
reading and writing abilities across the L1 and L2, but that the strength and nature of the
relationship vary for different language groups due to the variables of language and different
backgrounds. Fitzgerald and Shanahan’s (2000) study of using shared knowledge, including
metacognitive knowledge and motivational factors to enhance correlations across reading and
writing, also suggested that reading and writing may be taught more efficiently together rather
than separating writing instruction from reading development. Grabe’s (2003) research on the
impact of reading on writing provides significant perspectives on the uses of readings to help
students carry out writing tasks, and the reading-writing relations should offer a framework that
explains the ways in which reading and writing together enhance language, literacy and content
learning. These studies have had a great impact on the theoretical and practical implications for
the use of a developmental model on the relationship between reading and writing.
In recent years, research has placed an emphasis on connecting text structure as a
metacognitive mode while linking reading and writing in order to facilitate either ESL/EFL’s
learning on reading comprehension or writing proficiency (Negretti & Kuteeva, 2011; Negretti,
2012; Hong-Nam & Page, 2014). On the basis of research by Flavell (1979), metacognitive

154
knowledge and experiences pertain to any intellectual enterprise. Langer (1986) and Shell and
Bruning (1995) asserted that reading and writing principally require metacognitive knowledge
(as cited in Fitzgerald & Shanahan, 2000). Additionally, Magno (2008) used multivariate
approaches—reading strategy, amount of writing, knowledge of cognition, and regulation of
cognition—to investigate whether these variables had correlations with written proficiency.
These studies revealed that connecting reading and writing together with the metacognitive
process achieved significant results, demonstrating that these two skills are interconnected.
Academic study requires large amounts and various kinds of reading and writing, such as
summaries, essays, article reflections, book reviews, and/or thesis writing. Improving one’s
reading experience in English has attracted a great deal of research attention, demonstrating the
importance of refining one’s reading skills. For some time, English writing competence in Asia
was largely ignored either by educational institutions or EFL learners at the undergraduate levels
(Hyland, 2000). Students appear to be unaware of the purpose of and organization for writing
paragraphs (Alley & Deshler, 1979; Englert et al., 1988, as cited in Graham & Hebert, 2010).
Furthermore, they frequently lack sensitivity to the concept of textual structures (Englert &
Thomas, 1987; Englert et al., 1988; Englert et al., 1989; Graham & Harris, 1988; Houck &
Billingsley, 1989; Wallace & Bott, 1989, as cited in Graham & Hebert, 2010). Accordingly,
students presented irrelevant or inappropriate paragraphs when composing academic writing
(Graham & Harris, 1989). In order to ensure that EFL students in Taiwan can become skilled
writers to proficiently communicate with the international community, it is an absolute necessity
(Graham & Hebert, 2010) to upgrade their writing abilities.
With the aim of promoting EFL learners’ academic competence in Taiwan, preparing them for
further workplace competitiveness as well as the advancement of their global competitiveness,
the author employed the text structure as a metacognitive mode along with the process of
metacognitive awareness to conduct an intervention to see if these approaches can help advance
undergraduates’ English text organization and better writing abilities, and whether these
approaches can be generalized further.

Research Questions
The research questions posed for this study are as follows:
1. Does the mean change in the different modes of a writing course among the
three experimental groups: A) those who take the conventional writing class, B)

155
 those who take the linking-reading-to-writing class, and C) those who take the
linking-reading-to-writing class with text-structure instruction?
2. Does the mean change in the different processes of a writing course between
the group with metacognitive awareness and the group without metacognitive
awareness?
3. Do the mean differences among the different modes of a writing course vary as
a function of the metacognitive awareness process?

Review of the Literature

Theoretical Framework
The important aspects of the theoretical framework presented here are the main parts of text
structure, metacognitive mode, and linking reading to writing. “Text structure” refers to how the
text is organized in a written passage. This approach helps students understand that the style or
genre of a text serves a specific purpose of the writer. Text structure examples include
descriptive text, comparison and contrast, sequential or chronological order, cause and effect,
and problem and solution text structure (Dickson, Simmons, & Kameenui, 1995). Teaching
students to recognize text structures can help them monitor their comprehension as well as
identify and analyze various structures within nonfiction and fiction text (Dickson, Simmons, &
Kameenui, 1995). This strategy has been viewed as a valuable reading strategy to perceive the
organization of text materials (Niles, 1974, as cited in Tierney 2005). For example,
understanding how to form a logical structure in a text can help students bind key concepts
together to understand and remember the material better than just seeing the text as a series of
isolated ideas (Tierney, 2005).
Two major categories of text structure are well known: (1) narrative, or story-type, and (2)
expository, or information-type. The narrative type texts consistently exhibit structure like
setting, initiating event, internal response, consequence, and reaction whereas expository texts
include a variety of structures (Tierney, 2005). Understanding these text structures is also
designed to help students recognize either narrative or expository text structures to better
understand the content of basal reading and recall the informational-type texts (Tierney, 2005).
In Englert’s (1987) study, she also stated that text structures are important organizational
schemes underlying effective comprehension and production of expository discourse. In this
study, the author introduced types of structures that are most frequently encountered by students
in school, for example, comparison, sequential process, cause and effect, and narrative
description.

156
 The metacognitive process is a subcategory of the cognitive process (Flavell, 1979). According
to Coutinho (2006), cognition means the tendency to engage in effortful cognitive activity while
metacognition is about one’s thinking process, e.g., thinking about thinking. Metacognition
refers to how the thinking process relates to an intellectual task performance such as knowing
about the purposes of reading and writing; knowing that readers and writers are interactive;
knowing how to monitor one’s own meaning-making, recognizing word identification and
strategies use; and self-regulating one’s own knowledge.
John Flavell (1979) had a clear explanation about the concept of metacognition in his work in
Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring. In his study, the subjects, “preschool and elementary
school children, were asked to study a set of items until they [were certain to] recall them
perfectly. The older children studied for a while [and] said they were ready and they showed
perfect recall. The younger children, [on the other hand,] studied for a while [and also] said they
were ready, [yet they] were not” (p. 906). His study results suggested that young children are
quite restricted in their metacognitive knowledge, i.e., cognition about cognitive phenomena, and
do comparatively little monitoring of their own memory, comprehension and other cognitive
creativities (also see Brown, 1978; Flavell, 1978; Flavell & Wellman, 1977; Kreutzer, and
Leonard & Flavell, 1975).
In terms of the relationship between reading and writing, it is common knowledge that great
writers seem to be avid readers. In reading-to-writing, Grabe (2003) specified that better readers
tend to be better writers across a range of writing tasks and that recognizing and using the
organization framework of the text leads to better writing. Krashen (1998) also stated that
research is equally consistent in showing that reading and writing ability are related: those who
read more write better. Since the interrelatedness of reading and writing in the learning of
ESL/EFL is so important, the current research is focused on determining whether using text
structure as a metacognitive mode can enhance EFL learners’ learning on reading-to-writing.

The Research Literature

Empirical studies related to text structures in improving writing through reading, and text
structure as a metacognitive strategy, have provided strong evidence of its role in facilitating
reading and academic achievement. In the realm of teaching text structure to improve reading
and writing, Armbruster and Anderson’s (1989) study used the text structures of problem-

157
solution along with the frame of visual representations to teach fifth grade students to write
summaries. The results indicated that students learned fairly quickly how to attend to and
remember the main ideas from the passages in their textbooks and how to write summaries about
what they had read. The author also presented other text structures such as compare/contrast,
sequence, and cause-effect to help teach students improve content area learning and their writing.
In the field of using text structure as a metacognitive strategy to improve academic achievement,
Latewiec (2010) has demonstrated the positive correlation between the use of metacognitive
strategies and reading comprehension, and the top-level structure of the recalls and academic
achievement. Schunk’s (2003) exploration of self-regulation for reading and writing also
reflected that the knowledge of text structure and its effects on reading and writing greatly
impact students’ reading and writing processes.
In relation to metacognitive mode and/or awareness on the effectiveness of academic writing
and reading-writing relationship, Negretti (2012) applied theories of metacognition and self-
regulated learning to a study to investigate how awareness changes over time and how it relates
to students’ perceptions of the writing task, and how metacognitive awareness affects strategic
choices and evaluation of their writing. The findings suggest that metacognitive awareness seems
to have a reciprocal relationship with self-regulation and students’ development of individual
writing approaches. Nevertheless, no matter whether they are about text structure organization in
improving reading to writing, or metacognitive awareness on the effectiveness of academic
writing, these investigations did not examine whether teaching text structure can improve EFL
learners’ linking reading to writing, and whether metacognitive awareness has a strong influence
on undergraduate level students in EFL learning. Consequently, it is critical to conduct an
experimental study to see if using text structure together with linking reading to writing
instruction can benefit EFL learners’ writing proficiency, and if applying metacognitive
awareness can enhance learning and academic achievement.

Methods
Subjects and Sampling
The subjects recruited in the study were randomly assigned via the employment of Shavelson’s
(1995) table of random numbers to select samples from second and fourth year undergraduate
students who were in the intermediate levels of the academic writing courses at one technology

158
and science university in northern Taiwan.
Originally, the total number of subjects was 71 students. Five students were excluded from the
study for not completing the entire study. The remaining 66 participants included 13 males
(19.7%) and 53 females (80.3%) with an age range of 19-24 years. The uneven sample size in the
current study illustrates the overall ratio of male to female students in the Humanities
Department.

Procedures
The aim of the study was to assess whether exploiting text structure as a metacognitive mode
along with metacognitive awareness processes can enhance EFL learners’ writing skills and
proficiency through reading. The training procedure was divided into three sessions. In the first
session (conventional writing session), all subjects were taught the concept of the writing process
such as prewriting with organization of ideas, a hierarchical outline, free writing and
brainstorming to develop their interest and purpose to write, drafting, and self-correction and
revision (Diaz-Rico, 2004). In the second session (linking reading to writing), the randomly
assigned subjects were asked to read the different types of text structure paragraphs: comparison,
a sequential process, cause and effect, and a narration. Every type of paragraph was given as
examples for students to read (see Appendix A). In the third session (linking reading to writing
with text structures reinforcement), the randomly assigned subjects were taught how to recognize
words and phrases of text structures that are useful for writing logical comparison, sequence,
cause and effect, and narrative paragraphs (see Appendix B). Students were required to circle or
underline the taught text structure and then they needed to re-read the whole paragraph. If ideas
are logically arranged, the reader can quickly understand the main idea and follow the writer’s
thinking (Ruetten, 2003).
To reinforce the metacognitive awareness process, certain subjects were trained in
metacognitive modes: metacognitive awareness of the reading and writing process, planning,
monitoring text structure patterns, and self-evaluation. The recruited subjects were randomly
divided into two groups. One group (with metacognitive awareness process) received intensive
instruction on the concept of metacognitive awareness; they should have a purpose in mind when
reading and writing; they should skim the text first by noting characteristics like length and
organization while reading and writing; they should underline or circle sentence patterns, phrases,

159
and transitional words in the text to help them pick up any important information for the reading
and writing skills (Mokhtari & Reichard, 2002). Other metacognitive skills emphasized in the
training included picking out the organization of what they have read and critically analyzing and
evaluating the information presented in the text, and going back and forth in the text to find
relationships among collected ideas, etc. (Carrell, 1985). The other group (without metacognitive
awareness process) was not taught any concepts of metacognitive awareness.
The training procedure lasted for nine weeks. During the three training sessions, subjects were
taught text materials (see Appendix A) and text structures (see Appendix B). They were also
required to write exercise sheets and quizzes. The first exercise sheet was administered to
enhance students’ concept with sequential signal words in the context. The instructor gave
students two reading passages and asked them to read the paragraphs and underline or circle
the sequential signal words in the context. The second exercise was to ask students to combine
two clauses with transitional words: therefore, moreover, and however (Ruetten, 2003). For
example: Credit cards are useful. You don’t have to carry cash. The combined sentence is
“Credit cards are useful; therefore, you don’t have to carry cash.” The third exercise was to ask
students to use the spatial order signals: at the top of, next to, in back of, on top of, in front of, on
the left to express the spatial order location (Ruetten, 2003) such as “A picture of Beethoven
hangs above the piano.” The fourth exercise asked students to make the cause and effect
sentences according to the text structure with an example like “I admire my mother because she
is patient.” Students were required to fill in the blank in sentences such as “I admire __________
because _______________________.”

Instruments and Materials

The instrument utilized to collect data was the writing test adapted from both Great Writing 2:
Great Paragraphs (Folse, Muchmore-Vokoun, & Solomon, 2014) and Developing Composition
Skills, Second Edition (Ruetten, 2003) to fit into the text structure format purpose. The writing
test was administered to all subjects from each instructional group. The assessment consisted of
several short paragraphs that required the students to recognize the use of key grammar points or
vocabulary that demonstrated their mastery of a range of text types. For example, process texts
required the student to place the proper transition terms at the appropriate points within the text
to ensure the fluency and meaning of the writing. Similarly, with the comparison text, students

160
identified the comparative and contrasting terms that are found in that genre of writing. In
addition, the sequence transitional process required the students to put the sentences in order
according to the sequence signals: First of all, then, second, after that, next, and finally. Also,
students were asked to use transitional words—and, also, moreover, in addition—to connect the
paragraphs completely. Finally, students were asked to identify text structures in context
by circling items within the comparison paragraphs.

Data Analysis
A 3x2 analysis of variance (ANOVA) through SPSS software was employed to assess whether
the mean difference between the two variables was significantly different from each other. The
measurement consisted of two independent variables (the first factor and the second factor) and
one dependent variable. The first independent variable was that of the different mode of each of
the writing courses (group A: conventional writing, group B: linking reading to writing, and
group C: linking reading to writing with text structure reinforcement). The second independent
variable was the metacognitive awareness process (groups with or without metacognitive
awareness). The dependent variable was the writing scores after the training process. In order to
find the effectiveness of the metacognitive mode of text structure training on the groups,
marginal means were computed to reveal the main effect and interaction effect between the two
independent variables. The interaction effect was also tested to see if there was any relationship
between levels of the first factor and the second factor.
An alpha level of .05 (p < .05) was employed to determine statistical significance. To reduce
the Type I error across the two-way ANOVAs, the author corrected the alpha level using the
Bonferroni correction (alpha level / the number of tests). The 3x2 two-way ANOVA framework
is presented in Table 1.

Table 1
The 3x2 Two-Way ANOVA Framework

The First
The Different Modes of Writing Course
Factor

161
 Conventional Linking Reading Linking Reading to Writing
Writing to Writing with Text Structure
The Second
Factor (Group A) (Group B) Reinforcement (Group C)

With Metacognitive
Awareness Process 12 12 12
Guidance

Without Metacognitive
Awareness Process 10 10 10
Guidance

Results
The resultant analyss in this session included descriptive statistics, the tests of between-subjects
effects, and marginal means estimates.

Research Question One

The first research question was as follows: Does the mean change in the different modes
of a writing course among the three experimental groups: A) those who take the conventional
writing class, B) those who take the linking-reading-to-writing class, and C) those who take the
linking-reading-to-writing class with text-structure instruction?
The results of 3x2 ANOVA revealed significant main effects for the first factor of the different
modes of writing course among three group levels. The means and standard deviations for the
writing scores improvement as a function of the three groups are presented in Table 2. The
linking reading to writing with text structure group, M = 84.18, SD = 5.51, had greater
improvements than the linking reading to writing group, M = 79.09, SD = 6.52, which also had
greater improvements than the conventional writing group M = 75.73, SD = 5.82, on the writing
scores. This indicated that the subjects using the linking reading to writing with text structure
performed better after receiving instruction about text structure. This finding was consistent with
previously stated studies on literature that related to the effects of text structures in linking
reading to writing, such as Armbruster and Anderson’s study (1989).

Table 2
The Descriptive Statistics of Mean Scores and Two-Way ANOVA Tables for the First Factor

162
Groups M SD N
Conventional writing group (A) 75.73 5.82 22
Linking reading to writing group (B) 79.09 6.52 22
Linking reading to writing with text structure (C) 84.18 5.51 22

Source of SS df MS F p-value Partial 2

Variation
Group 783.88 1 391.94 12.13 .000 .288
Error 1938.48 60 32.31
Total 2722.36.00 61
Research Question Two
The second research question was as follows: Does the mean change in the different
processes of a writing course between the group with metacognitive awareness and the group
without metacognitive awareness?
The results of 3x2 ANOVA revealed significant effects for the second factor of the group
which had metacognitive awareness training compared to the group that did not have
metacognitive awareness training. The means and standard deviations for the writing scores as a
function of the two groups are presented in Table 3. For the writing scores, the group with the
metacognitive awareness process, M = 81.42, SD = 6.42, had greater improvements than the
group without the metacognitive awareness process, M = 77.57, SD = 6.82. This indicated that
subjects in the group performed better after receiving the metacognitive awareness process
instruction. This finding was also consistent with previously stated studies on literature that
related to the effects of metacognitive awareness process, such as Negretti’s (2012) study.

Table 3
The Descriptive Statistics of Mean Scores and Two-Way ANOVA Tables for the Second Factor
Groups M SD N
Group with metacognitive awareness process 81.42 6.42 36
Group without metacognitive awareness process 77.57 6.82 30

163
Source of SS df MS F p-value Partial 2
Variation
Group 242.55 1 242.55 7.51 .008 .111
Error 1938.48 60 32.31
Total 2181.03 61

Research Question Three

The third research question was as follows: Do the mean differences among the different modes
of a writing course vary as a function of the metacognitive awareness process?
The results indicated that at the p .05 level, the distribution of F (2, 32) = 3.29 (Shavelson,
1995, p. 623) was larger than the F (2, 32) = .904, which means there was no significant
difference between the different modes of the writing course and the metacognitive awareness
process group. The results, F (2, 32) = .904, p = .410 > .05, partial 2 (Partial Eta Squared)
= .029 also showed that the interaction effect was constant across all groups, so there was not a
significant difference between the first factor group and the second factor group on the
dependent variable (See Table 4). Thus, the focus of the interpretation is on the main effects,
rather than the relationship between the two factors. The experimental treatment of linking
reading to writing with text structure modes produced a greater effect than the conventional
mode (the first factor), regardless of the metacognitive awareness process (the second factor).
Similarly, subjects randomly assigned to the groups with metacognitive awareness process
performed better than did subjects assigned to the group without metacognitive awareness
process. The partial 2 = .029 indicated the group was medium in its effect size. According to
Green, Salkind, and Neil (2005), partial 2 ranges in value from 0 to 1. The conventional rule is
likely .01, .06 and .14 for small, medium, and large effect sizes, respectively (p. 187). The graphs
(See Figure 1 & 2) also showed parallel lines for each level of the two independent variables
indicating that there was no interaction between these two factors.

Table 4
The Two-Way ANOVA Table for the Groups
Source of SS df MS F p-value Partial 2

164
Variation
Group*GM 58.42 2 29.21 .904 .410 .029
Error 1938.48 60 32
Total 1996.90 62 34

Figure 1. Graph for the Relationship of Metacognitive Awareness Process * Different Modes of
Groups on Writing Test Scores. The linking reading to writing with text structure group (with the
top line), M = 84.18, SD = 5.51, had greater improvements than the linking reading to writing
group (with the middle line), M = 79.09, SD = 6.52, which also had greater improvements than
the conventional writing group (with the bottom line) M = 75.73, SD = 5.82, on the wring scores.

165
Figure 2. Graph for the Relationship of Different Modes of Groups * Metacognitive Awareness
Process on Writing Test Scores. The group with the metacognitive awareness process (with the
top line), M = 81.42, SD = 6.42, had greater improvements than the group without the
metacognitive awareness process (with the bottom line), M = 77.57, SD = 6.82, on the writing
scores.
Discussion and Implication
Teachers of English composition at the college level always expect students to be able to write
well with good paragraph organization, logical thinking, and enthusiastic interests (Spack, 1985).
We also hope for them to be able to communicate their thoughts to themselves or readers and
express those ideas clearly. What we can do to achieve these goals is to utilize the linking-
reading-to-writing approach, which has been identified as one of the best ways to advance
students’ writing ability (Carrell, 1985) along with providing them with the metacognitive mode
of text structure and the metacognitive awareness process.
The training intervention of this study yielded promising results, albeit moderate in effect size.
From the previously stated results, the linking reading to writing with text structure group, M =
84.18, SD = 5.51, had greater improvements than the linking reading to writing group, M = 79.09,
SD = 6.52, which also had greater improvements than the conventional writing group M = 75.73,
SD = 5.82, on the writing scores. The group with metacognitive awareness process, M = 81.42,
SD = 6.42, had greater improvements than the group without metacognitive awareness process,
M = 77.57, SD = 6.82, on the writing scores. These results demonstrated that linking reading to

166
writing, especially when including instruction in the metacognitive awareness process, could
help students a create well-organized writing text. This was shown by the higher mean score of
those receiving metacognitive instruction compared to those without it. These results indicated
that teaching the patterns of different texts to college-level students is an appropriate mode to
help them acquire additional skills for international written communications. Providing them
with metacognitive concepts could additionally direct their strategy use by helping them plan
what and how they want to learn, monitor, manage, and be motivated (Diaz-Rico, 2004, p. 124)
either by themselves or by the instructors, and to self-evaluate what they have learned. These
approaches can benefit their writing skills and competence.

Implications for Future Studies and Practice

Students (in Asia) often experience difficulties in writing, specifically when writing in English as
a foreign language, which frequently results in a decrease in their confidence to write well
(Hyland, 2000). Hence, several implications arise from the current study results. First, providing
undergraduate students with the reinforcement of text structures and sentence patterns can help
build their underlying framework of academic writing skills. Second, using the text structures
and the metacognitive awareness in the process of planning, monitoring and self-regulating in
their English language writing learning can elicit students’ attention and interests, and
conclusively lead to an increase in their writing confidence (Hyland, 2000). Third, knowing how
to organize thoughts using comparison, chronology, sequential pattern, cause-effect, and
problem-solution can assist both reader and writer to recognize and apply reasonable strategies
on reading and writing connections (Pennington, 2009).
Since the study produced positive results, there were some limitations to this study. First, the
complexity of the study process may obfuscate consideration of the distinctive procedure. For
example, even though the author provided the exercise sheets and quizzes as a baseline
measurement, a stronger measure would have been a pre-test at the start of the procedure.
Second, the uneven distribution of sample size by gender in the current study might be cause to
question its external validity; thus, the generalizability might not be testable. Third, the writing
test measurement provided at the end of the study presented the text structure identification
meaning there were not sufficient parts to reflect the learners’ capability of writing a completed
composition. Therefore, the author suggests future studies focus on the specific instruction of

167
metacognitive strategies which may include graphic organizers, semantic mapping, and visual
image strategies so that students can benefit from the complex instructional process with clear
visual pictures. An even distribution of sample sizes is also important and needed in order to
make further inference. Further expansion is recommended in the study of the combination of
reading and writing through task analysis to measure its impact on ensuring students have an
ability with text recognition to create good comprehension and strong writing skills.

Conclusion
To sum up, the results of the study revealed a moderate but significant outcome to the text
structure as well as metacognitive mode instruction, which not only elevates EFL learners’
conception of text organization and metacognitive strategy learning, but also academic reading
and writing abilities. Students benefit from outlining logical organization of a text (Hughes,
1989), structuring a sequential order and making a comparison. In Nation’s (2008) book of
Teaching ESL/EFL reading and writing, he cites comments from his student teachers that the
“learners needed to read, understand, and analyze models of the texts [so that] they could
produce writing collectively and individually.” When employing text structure as a
metacognitive mode, students made greater improvement in both reading and writing measures.
This study provides insights into how students who link reading to writing, along with applying
metacognitive awareness, help themselves to internalize the rhetorical organization of text-
structure knowledge in order to facilitate their writing process and achieve a coherent and
accurate picture of the overall writing process (Abraham, 1985).

References
Abraham, R.G. (1985). Field independence-dependence and the teaching of grammar. TESOL
Quarterly, 20, 689-702.
Armbruster, B. B., Anderson, T. H., & Ostertag, J. (1989). Teaching text structure to improve
reading and writing. The Reading Teacher, 43(2), 130-137.
Avermann, D. E. (1981). The compensatory effect of graphic organizers on descriptive text.
Journal of Educational Research, 75(1), 44-48.
Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. Handbook of Reading

168
 Research, 353-394.
Belcher, D. D., & Hirvela, A. (Eds.). (2001). Linking literacies: Perspectives on L2 reading-
writing connections. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Bennett, A. E. (2008). Reading pass 2. Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Carrell, P. L. (1985). Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure. TESOL Quarterly, 19,
727-752.
Carrell, P. L. (1989). Metacognitive awareness and second language reading. The Modern
Language Journal, 73(2), 121-134.
Carrell, P. L., Gajdusek, L., & Wise, T. (1998). Metacognition and EFL/ESL reading.
Instructional Science, 26(1), 97-112.
Carrell, P. L., Pharis, B. G., & Liberto, J. C. (1989). Metacognitive strategy training for ESL
reading. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 647-678.
Carson, J. E., Carrell, P. L., Silberstein, S., Kroll, B., & Kuehn, P. A. (1990). Reading‐writing
relationships in first and second language*. TESOL Quarterly, 24(2), 245-266.
Coutinho, S. A. (2006). The relationship between the need for cognition, metacognition, and
intellectual task performance. Educational Research and Reviews, 1 (5), 162-164.
Diaz-Rico, L. T. (2004). Teaching English learners’ strategies and methods. White Plains, NY:
Pearson Education, Inc.
Dickson, S. V., Simmons, D. C., & Kameenui, E. J. (1995). Text organization and its relation to
reading comprehension: A synthesis of the research. National Center to Improve the
Tools of Educators, College of Education, University of Oregon.
El-Hindi, A. E. (1997). Connecting reading and writing: College learners' metacognitive
awareness. Journal of Developmental Education, 21(2), 10-19.
Englert, C. S., & Thomas, C. C. (1987). Sensitivity to text structure in reading and writing: A
comparison between learning disabled and non-learning-disabled students. Learning
Disability Quarterly. 10(2), 93-105.
Fitzgerald, J. & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development.
Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 39-50.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–
developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
Folse, K. S., Clabeaux, D., & Solomon, E. V. (2015). Great writing 3: From great paragraphs to

169
 great essays. (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Folse, K. S. (2010). From great paragraphs to great essays. Cengage Learning.
Folse, K. S., Muchmore-Vokoun, A., & Solomon, E. V. (2014a). Great writing 2: Great
paragraphs. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Folse, K. S., Muchmore-Vokoun, A., & Solomon, E. V. (2014b). Great writing 4: Great essays.
Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Gajria, M., & Salvia, J. (1992). The effects of summarization Instruction on text comprehension
of students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 58(6), 508-516.
Gardner, P. S. (2005). New directions: Reading, writing, and critical thinking. 2nd Edition.
Cambridge University Press.
Grabe, W. (2003). 1 Q Reading and writing relations: Second language perspectives on research
and practice. Exploring the Dynamics of Second Language Writing, 242.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1989). Improving learning disabled students' skills at composing
essays: Self-instructional strategy training. Exceptional Children, 56(3), 201-214.
Graham, S. & Hebert, M. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve
reading: A report from Carnegie Corporation of New York. A report to Carnegie
Corporation of New York. The Alliance for Excellent Education.
Graham, S. & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of
adolescents in middle and high schools. A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York.
The Alliance for Excellent Education.
Green, S. B., Salkind, N. J., & Neil J. (2005). Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh analyzing
and understanding data (Fourth ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Hogue, Ann. (2008). First steps in academic writing (Second Ed.). Pearson Education, NY.
Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for language teachers. (Second Ed.): Cambridge University Press.
Hong-Nam, K., & Page, L. (2014). Investigating metacognitive awareness and reading strategy
use of EFL Korean university students. Reading Psychology, 35(3), 195-220.
Hyland, Fiona. (2000). ESL writers and feedback: Giving more autonomy to students. Language
Teaching Research. 4(1), 33-54.
Krashen, S. (1998). Teaching grammar: Why bother? California English, 3(3), 8.
Kucan, L., & Beck, I. L. (1997). Thinking aloud and reading comprehension research: Inquiry,
instruction, and social interaction. Review of educational research, 67(3), 271-299.

170
Latawiec, B. (2010). Text structure awareness as a metacognitive strategy facilitating EFL/ESL
reading comprehension and academic achievement. The International Journal of
Learning 17(5), 25-48.
Lee, J. F. (1985). The effect of research design on free written recall as a measure of reading
comprehension in a second language. Educational Psychology, 72(4), 561–574.
Magno, C. (2008). Reading strategy, amount of writing, metacognition, metamemory, and
apprehension as predictors of English written proficiency. Asian EFL Journal, 29(2).
Meyer, B. J. F., & Freedle, R. O. (1984). Effects of discourse type on recall. American
Educational Research Journal, 21(1), 121.
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students' metacognitive awareness of reading
strategies. Journal of Eductional Psychology, 94(2), 249-259.
Nation, I. S. P. (2008). Teaching ESL/EFL reading and writing. Routledge.
Negretti, R., & Kuteeva, M. (2011). Fostering metacognitive genre awareness in L2 academic
reading and writing: A case study of pre-service English teachers. Journal of Second
Language Writing, 20(2), 95-110.
Negretti, R. (2012). Metacognition in student academic writing a longitudinal study of
metacognitive awareness and its relation to task perception, self-regulation, and
evaluation of performance. Written Communication, 29(2), 142-179.
Ormrod, J. E. (2008). Human learning (5th Ed.). Pearson: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Oshima, A., & Hogue, A. (2007). Introduction to academic writing. Pearson/Longman.
Pennington, Mark. (2009). Twelve tips to teach the reading-writing connection. Retrieved
August 16, 2015 from
http://www.nwlincs.org/mtlincs/opi/DirectorsMeetings/Introto2014GED_Handbook.pdf
Ruetten, M. K. (2003). Developing composition skills: Rhetoric and grammar. (2nd Ed.). Heinle,
A Division of Thomson Learning, Inc.
Schunk, D. H. (2003). Self-efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modeling, goal setting,
and self-evaluation. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19, 159-172.
Shavelson, R. J. (1995). Statistical reasoning for the behavioral sciences. Allyn and Bacon
Boston.
Singhal, Meena. (2001). Reading proficiency, reading strategies, metacognitive awareness and
L2 readers. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 1(1).

171
Spack, R. (1985). Literature, reading, writing, and ESL: Bridging the gaps. TESOL Quarterly, 19,
703-725.
Taylor, B. M., & Beach, R. W. (1984). The effects of text structure instruction on middle-grade
students' comprehension and production of expository text. Reading Research Quarterly,
19, 134-146.
Tierney, J. (Ed.). (2005). Reading strategies and practices (Sixth ed.). Boston: Pearson
Education, Inc.

Appendix A: Instructional Materials

The materials were from Great Writing 2: Great Paragraphs (Folse, Muchmore-Vokoun, &
Solomon, 2014a); Developing Composition Skills, Second Edition (Ruetten, 2003).

No. 1 Chile and Brazil

Chile and Brazil are two important countries in South America. Although they are near each
other, they are very different in geography, population, and language. The easiest difference to
see is in geography. Brazil is much larger than Chile. In fact, Brazil is the largest nation in South
America and... In contrast, Chile is a very narrow country along the Pacific Coast of South
America... These two countries also differ in population. Brazil is home to almost 200 million
people, but only about 17 million people live in Chile. Finally, these two countries differ in
national languages. Like most countries in South America, the majority of people in Chile speak
Spanish. In Brazil, …These three differences make these countries extremely interesting (Folse
et al. 2014a, p. 4).

No. 2 Reasons for Not Voting

Although voting is one of the main ways that people of a country can participate in their
future, some citizens choose not to vote. Some people decide not vote because... Other people do

172
not vote because... Another reason that some people choose not to vote is that they do not know...
Finally, in some elections, people choose not to vote because they do not like any of the
candidates in the election. People's reasons for not voting vary considerably (Folse et al. 2014a, p.
20).
No. 3 Reasons for Exercise
Exercise can benefit people in several important ways. First, your body will look better...
Second, you will actually have more energy... In addition, your heart will be healthier... Finally,
exercise reduces stress and keeps your mind in shape. Therefore, if you want to improve your
overall health, you should exercise…to accomplish this goals (Folse et al. 2014a, p. 58).
No. 4 My Old Classroom
My old classroom was interesting because... I enjoyed sitting close to the windows and
looking at the view. On the left-hand side of the class, I could easily see... There was an…camp
in front of the playing ground... Farther in the distance, I had the advantage of seeing the city
of…, and the river close to it. The view from the back of the classroom was also panoramic.
Close to the school there was a beautiful park with many trees around it. Not far from the park
was a hippodrome for horse racing…On the right side of the class was the... Behind the road was
a thick forest, which was appealing... Although I was only a child when I studied in that
classroom, I will never forget it. -Andreas Andreou (Ruetten, 2003, p. 64)

Appendix B

The following words and phrases are useful for writing the Comparison, sequential, cause and
effect, and narrating paragraphs (Folse, Muchmore-Vokoun, & Solomon, 2014b; Ruetten, 2003):

Comparing:
 In comparison,
 Compare to ~
 both + N and + N
 ~be similar to
 Similarly.
 Likewise,
 Like,
 Although N1 and N2 are similar in ~, they are different in ~
 The same ~
 In the same way,

Contrasting:
 In contrast

173
  Contrasted with
 Although
 Unlike
 Some~ Others,
 Some~ Others~ Another
 On the contrary,
 In contrast,
 On the other hand,
 However,
 Nevertheless,
 On the one hand~ On the other hand
 Yet,
 In the country
 ~be just the opposite

Sequential:
 First/ Firstly,
 Second/ Secondly,
 Third/ Thirdly,
 After that,
 Moreover,
 Furthermore,
 In addition,
 Additionally,
 Finally

Cause and Effect:

 ~ because
 Due to
 For this reason
 N + ~ a positive/ negative effect on N
 On account of
 As a result
 Consequently
 In consequence
 Therefore

Narrating
 When the first time I went to~
 When I refused to listen to ~
 While I was driving away~
 Before I could think of what to do next, ~
 I can still remember~
 Two months/years ago my family and I went to~
 Whenever I think back to that time~

174
  This was my first + N
 As soon as I found out that
 After a moment of ~
 I will never forget the time ~

Concluding:
 In conclusion,
 To conclude,
 To sum up,
 To summarize,
 In summary,
 In sum
 In brief,
 In short,
 Indeed,
 To the end,

175
 Integrating Attitude, Knowledge and Skills in K-13 English Lesson Plans:
Explorations into Teachers’ Agentic Roles in Materials Development
Kamaludin Yusra
School of Education, Mataram University, Indonesia
Yuni Budi Lestari
School of Education, Mataram University, Indonesia
School of Education, The University of Queensland, Australia

Bio Data:
Kamaludin Yusra is a senior lecturer in Linguistics and English Education at the School of
Education, Mataram University, Lombok, Indonesia. He obtained a Bachelor Degree in English
Education at The School of Education, Mataram University, Indonesia, in 1991, a master’s
degree in Applied Linguistics at the School of English, Linguistics and Media, Macquarie
University, Australia, in 1998, and a PhD degree in Applied Linguistics at The University of
Sydney Australia in 2005. His research interest is in language teacher education and in applied
linguistics and his academic work has mostly been published locally and nationally in Indonesia
and in the Indonesian language. He is the author of Language and Social Solidarity (2012)
Academic Writing for ESL Learners (2012), Textbook Design and Analysis (2014), and Research
Methods for English Teachers (2015). His research has been published in Asian EFL Journal
(2015), the Indonesian Journal of Anthropology (2012; 2016), and Linguistik Indonesia [the
Indonesian Journal of Linguistics] (2016). He can be contacted at angsowinda@hotmail.com or
at kamaludin@unram.ac.id or at his office: Postgraduate English Education Department,
Postgraduate Program, Building B Room 101, FKIP Mataram University, 62 Majapahit Street,
Mataram, NTB, Indonesia 83125.

Yuni Budi Lestari graduated and earned her Master’s degree in Applied Linguistics from the
University of Sydney Australia in 2004. She is a lecturer at English Department of School of
Education, the University of Mataram, Indonesia and her responsibilities include teaching,
research and community services. Her subjects specialize on a number of subjects such as
curriculum studies, syllabus and material design, cross-cultural communication, ELT program
management and materials development. She is now doing her PhD in Education (TESOL) at the
University of Queensland Australia with her research concerned with teacher agency and English
language teaching.

Abstract:
Spiritual and social attitudes, scientific knowledge, and language-related life skills have been the
main outcomes of learning in Indonesian education system particularly when the 2013
curriculum is implemented nation-wide. Although spiritual and social attitudes have been
respectively assigned to the targets of Religion and Civics Education, the roles of teachers as

176
agents of changes within their community enforce them to take wider and more overarching roles
educating learners with attitude, knowledge and skills and leave their traditional roles as
providers of knowledge and trainers of skills. The study investigates how English teachers
exercise these agentic roles in lesson planning and materials development. Nine experienced
professional English teachers (i.e. 3 SMP, 3 SMA, 3 SMK) and their lesson plans were
purposively selected as samples. Analyzing the lesson plans and learning materials, the study
found that knowledge and skills in the lessons were planned to be associated with particular
spiritual and social attitudes. The study found that faithfulness and piety in the students’
respective religions were the most dominant spiritual attitudes in teachers’ concern. Self-
confidence, discipline, respect, caring, and responsibility were the most dominant social
attitudes. These attitudes were strategically planned and integrated, through games, group
discussions and other two-way interactive materials, with students’ knowledge of facts, concepts,
procedures and meta-cognition and skills obtained from their intellectual potentials, knowledge-
based competency, learning and working experiences and relevant cultural practices. Analyzing
interview data, the study explicates how the attitudes will be integrated into lesson
implementation and how they are integrated with the types of knowledge and skills above. Being
explorative in nature, the study opens up a new way of looking into teacher’s pedagogic role, that
is, an agentic role motivated by the need to facilitate learners with attitudes, knowledge and skills
relevant with job requirements and not by the urge to fulfill self-efficacy, curriculum target, or
minimum standard of attainment.

Keywords: language planning and policy, curriculum, teacher agency, materials development

Introduction

This study explores the roles that English teachers play in developing materials suitable for the
implementation of the 2013 curriculum (or K-13 for short). Policy documents for K-13
implementation have been set out and subsequent trainings of master trainers, facilitators, and
classroom teachers for correct implementation of the program have been implemented. While the
results of the trainings are not yet known, it is perhaps sufficient to suggest here that teachers still
perform teaching practices in the ways they perceive work best for their students. this study
explores how individual teachers of English at various local school types respond to the
curriculum.
Studies on teacher responses to language curriculum have been based on the ethnography of
language planning and policy (LPP). Perez-Milans (2017) has shown that the use of ethnography
in LPP research agenda will not be successful unless some unrelenting troubles are addressed.
Firstly, it teases out the dichotomy in the reproduction of structure and agency as discussed in the
well-established developments in social theories and discourse studies. Secondly, it explicates
how participants interpret policy documents and this interpretation is treated as the primary
source of interpretation of the policy documents. Next, it collects data primarily from events and

177
analyze them according to relevant standpoints in order to explicate the implementation and
adaptation of the policy in a given context. Finally, it aims at potraying how participants work
together to achieve what they have decided to achieve in agentic actions.
Ethnographic investigation of local implementation of LPP is not at all new. It has become a
trend in the last three decades (see Borg, 2001) and teacher beliefs about the best strategies for
learning to take place have been the prime concern. Studies by Ng and Boucher-Yip (2017) and
Harris (2017) have examined agency enactment in numerous contexts and found English
teachers dedicated themselves to the policy and brought changes to the students. On the contrary,
Glasgow (2015), Vijay (2014), Pessoa and Freitas (2012), and Chen and Goh (2011) have
reported the case where teachers have exercised their agency and resisted the imposed policy by
engaging themselves fully with students’ needs and orientation. Studies by Molina (2017),
Feryok (2012), Chen and Goh (2011), Menter et al (2010), and Gulburn and Holstein (1995)
have illustrated teacher agentic responses to classical and pedagogical problems in classroom
(class size, lack of motivation, lack of teacher professionalism) by using shared practices,
participant information, and immediate environment as the resources for classroom activities.
Ali and Hamid (2016) have classified teacher agentic strategies in three categories:
dedication, accommodation, and resistance. Dedication strategies are taken when teachers
devotedly adopt the policy and transform it as “transformative professionals” (Kumaravadivelu,
2003) and as “socio-political agents” (see Alhamdan et al, 2014) to the students by helping them
solve learning problems and obtain learning targets (Lin, 1999). Resistance is the total rejection
of the policy and teachers made their own choices of materials and teaching procedures.
Accommodation is a strategy whereby teacher bridge the discrepancies between the policy
expectation and the student situations and conditions at hand.
Studies of local responses to national policy in various contexts have now become a new trend
in LPP research. Nguyen and Bui (2016), for example, ethnographically observed 15 teachers
and minority learning community of English in remote areas of Vietnam and examined how they
implemented the national policy. They found that most teachers resisted the nationally made
materials and took agentic roles by changing and redefining them in such a way that they become
suitable with students’ needs. Martin (2005), studying ELT practice in Brunei, has exemplified
how the nationally-dumped textbooks have limited the roles of teachers in the classroom not as
educators of attitude, providers of knowledge and trainers of skills, but, rather as presenters of

178
texts and translator of knowledge by explaining it to the students or translating it into the native
language of the students.
In Indonesian context, Lestari (forthcoming) has investigated how teachers and students
responded to the 2013 curriculum and found that Indonesian teachers of English particularly in
the rural areas resort to the use of local texts and practices as a way of bridging the gap between
local realities (i.e. lack of students’ motivation and limited means of social and economic
supports for better learning). Lestari’s study has shown how rural English teachers dealt with the
expectation of the nationally-imposed ELT policy and found that local texts and practices were
the main modes through which the nationally-expected attitudes, knowledge and skills were
transferred to students during teaching and learning processes.
However, several questions remain unanswered, whether there is a need for teachers in non-
rural areas to enact similar agentic roles in developing learning materials. If they there is, there is
a need to explicate the primary concerns that they have when developing the materials. When the
materials are put into classroom implementation, there is an urgent need to examine how they
will integrate the key concerns in Indonesian education (i.e. spiritual attitude (KI-1), moral
attitude (KI-2), knowledge (KI-3) and skills (KI-4). These are the foci of the paper.

Teacher Agency and Materials Development

Before exploring how teachers enact agency in materials development, let us clarify theories
governing them.

Teacher Agency

Agency is sociologically defined as constraints enabling individuals to exercise power

voluntarily by transforming existing conditions with knowldge, expertise, and influence (Zhao &
Baldauf, 2012). In LPP, these constraints invoke responses strategic to resolving them. Thus,
agency, as Ali and Hamid (2016) have defined it, is a strategy that an agent takes when facing
challenges and deliberately bringing about changes in the situation (Biesta & Tedder, 2006).
Varying from contexts to contexts, the agency taken is different at macro and micro levels.
Agency exercise at macro levels produces policy documents, implementation guidelines, and
training modules and at these levels no actual teacher agency can be enacted. When the policy is

179
disseminated to schools, at micro levels, individual teachers must respond to it following the
conditions of the school and the students.
Nonetheless, Zhao and Baldauf (2012) have actually warned us that studies of teacher agency
should focus more at micro level agency enactment. At macro levels, agency exercises are
concerned with individuals imposing policies. At micro levels, agency is attributed to
individual’s responses to the policies by devoting, accommodating or resisting them (see Ali &
Hamid, 2016).
Agency exercise at micro levels has several characteristics. Emirbayer and Miesche (1998)
mention that agency is not a situated practice responding to casuistic cases. It is regularly enacted
on a routine basis. Biesta and Robinson (2013) argue that two factors are essentially necessary
for the routine exercise of agency to occur: firstly, the challenges to respond to and, secondly,
teacher’s freedom to enact agency. Biesta and Robinson (2013) and Biesta and Tedder (2006)
have also shown that agentic strategies are contextually-dependent as the strategies are relevant
only with particular circumstances, responsibilities, and resources. Finally, agency exercise is
motivational: agency enactment is motivated by agent’s need to bring about changes. It might be
motivated by self-efficacy as Biesta and Tedder (2006; 2007) and Priestley, Biesta, and
Robinson (2013) have theoretically assumed or by professional responsibility as Zhao and
Baldauf (2012) and Ali and Hamid (2016) have exemplified.
Bandura (1989) mentioned three ways in which teacher agency has been discussed in
literature: (a) autonomous agency is motivated by the teachers’ belief about their capacity and
self-efficacy. (b) mechanical agency is driven by the need for the teachers to reflect on
themselves, to react to particular socio-political agenda, and to themselves towards particular
directions, and (c). emergent interactive agency when agents are morally and professionally
required to readjust their roles in response to the changing situations.
In the contexts of Indonesia and Lombok, agency as highlighted in the curriculum is to train
students with English knowledge and skills in addition to educating them with national and local
characters. English learning is associated with inner-circle English culture learning (see Brown,
2001), but in Indonesia it is also expected to strengthen spiritual and moral attitudes. In fact,
these attitudes have become the essences of the current president’s mental revolution campaign:
integrity, work ethic, and cooperation. Integration of these attitudes enable the formation of a
‘third culture’ (Sarangi, 2009; Kramsch, 1998; Risager, 2006; Brown, 2001), a syncretic

180
accumulation of global, national and local cultures. While teachers might integrate attitudes,
knowledge and skills during classroom interactions, for to take place need careful planning in
lesson plans and the materials developed for them.

Teacher Agency in Materials Development

Tomlinson (2011) have mentioned various criteria for developing ELT materials. In the first
place, the materials should enable learners to achieve the standards of learning outcomes.
Secondly, the materials should help learners learn easily and be confident with their own
learning. Next, the materials are applicable in the students’ daily life and suitable with their
future objectives. Then, they are clear instructional points rich with authentic and uncontrolled
practice of language use. In addition, they are also appropriate with learners’ socio-cognitive
styles of learning with rooms and time for them to improve themselves. Finally, they enable
learners to acquire positive characters and moral values. Thus, by creating such materials, as
Baldauf (2006) and Holliday (2001) have suggested, teachers as micro-level policy actors should
accommodate between the targets at national levels and the poor conditions at local levels.
While attitudes, knowledge, and skills are integrated in classroom interaction, the creation of
materials enabling learners to learn them while practicing with them in the classroom becomes
essential. Because direct teaching has become impossible due to the fact that spiritual and moral
attitudes have been respectively assigned to Religion and Civics Education, indirect teaching has
become the only possible solution. Such integration has been the main concern in Lestari
(forthcoming), it is worthy of investigation here what attitudes, knowledge, and skills are
necessary for inclusion in lesson plans and learning materials.

Teacher Agency in Materials Development in Indonesia

In Indonesia, teacher’s response to materials development is shaped by how the policy has been
introduced to them and how they are expected to react to it. In general, positive response is
motivated by the teacher’s freedom to use the classroom as a space for agency enactment
enabling them to maneuver with the student’s needs and the policy expectations. This is very
much dependent upon the good will of the national agency for curriculum development as the

181
authoritative body in the capital city to share with teachers the autonomy to plan, design and
develop materials suitable for particular contexts of learning. This freedom, as Lestari
(forthcoming) has shown, was granted by the law and has been wholeheartedly implemented
since the implementation of the 2006 school-based curricula. Nonetheless, a new curriculum was
introduced in 2013 (or K-13) and the autonomy was slightly taken away and this, to a great
extent, has caused discomfort on the parts of teachers and students. Teachers and students need
to make use of the nationally distributed K-13 materials in any way they can. However, this book
being inaccessible, the teachers and the students have the opportunity to make use of older
materials in the learning procedures legislated in the K-13 policy.
Teacher creativity in developing materials is relative and the room for real creative
innovation, as Canagarajah (1993), is rather restricted. The prescribed national framework of K-
13 was dispatched by nationally trained National Instructors and they have trained local teachers
with the new perspectives in the curriculum. While attitude, knowledge and skill have been
determined to be the standards of learning contents, the trainings failed to empower the trainees
with competencies to integrate learning with national characters and moral values, two essential
cores in the current president’s mental revolution program. In such situation, samples of learning
contents and strategies of transforming them to the students have become essential resources in
training packages and these in turn become useful resources for the trainers and the trainee
teachers to use in the classroom and, consequently, teacher autonomy was taken away although
the training materials were not intended to be as such. Oftentimes, the trainings were based on
the recommended books for the curriculum (e.g. When English rings a [sic!] Bell) and scientific
approach has been considered as the teaching steps: (a) observation, (b) question, (c) experiment,
(d) association, and (e) communication. The introduction of the 2017 version with discovery
leaning and project-based learning as the bases has also brought a new teaching procedure: (a)
stimulation, (b) problem statement, (c) data collection, (d) data analysis, and (e) generalization.
The revision has also added four more orientations in teaching: (a) the need to integrate with five
characters (i.e. religious piety, nationalism, integrity, gotong-royong (togetherness), and
independence), (b) the need to integrate learning with development of literacy skills, (c) the need
to facilitate the students in learning to be creative, critical, communicative and collaborative, and
(d) the need to involve in learning high order thinking skills by enabling the students to
synthesize, analyze and evaluate learned knowledge and skills. With these agenda at play,

182
teachers’ autonomy and creativity to integrate the students’ need and orientation have become
minimum. The use of other sources and teacher-made materials and teaching procedures have
been limited only if the recommended books are unavailable or inaccessible. Consequently, the
teachers’ roles in assisting the students to fully develop themselves are fully granted.

As usual, however, policy might be well-planned but implementation at micro levels is below
standard of expectation. Ali’s (2013) and Lestari’s (forthcoming) observations of ELT classes in
Indonesia have shown that individual teachers usually changed lesson plans even though these
plans have been prepared independently or collaboratively with other teachers. The materials in
classroom are implemented in response to the situation of the classroom and the students. In this
way, teachers can exercise their agentic roles in setting up tasks and activities facilitating the
students to experience learning and attain learning goals. They can either adopt the materials and
activities in the assigned textbook, adapt them with their own materials and activities, or resist
them altogether by developing their materials and activities. As a result, every ELT practice will
be unique to itself and every ELT practice is a local practice.

Every ELT practice is also unique, not only in the materials and the activities, but in the
attitudes, knowledge and skills that they intend to highlight. Since teachers are the policy
planners and actors at micro and local levels, studying the documents that they develop in
response to policy documents became necessary.

Methodology

Research Design

This article is based on a qualitative research in which a situation facing teachers in Mataram is
identified and described. As documents of ELT policy and lesson plans will be ethnographically
analyzed, the study is essentially ethnographic and various concepts in the ethnography of LPP
(see Hornberger, 2015; Hornberger & Johnson, 2007) will be used as reference and various
examples of ethnographic analysis of LPP documents (see Baldauf & Hamid, 2017) will be
followed. As Davis (1999) has mentioned, with the ethnography of LPP, thicker description of
policy enactment can be provided and compared across settings.

183
Research Setting and Samples

The study was conducted at public junior, senior and vocational schools in the city of Mataram
and its surroundings based on geographic distribution: city centre, suburb, and fringe. To some
extent, the distribution represents quality and the schools at city centers are better than at the
suburbs and the fringe areas. Three schools were purposively selected at each area, and the most
experienced professional English teachers were selected from these schools. Altogether there
were nine schools as the research site and nine English teachers as research subjects The range of
teaching experience is between 10 to 15 years. For ethical reasons, the identities of the schools
and the teachers remain anonymous and when necessary pseudo names are instead used

Data Collection

Lesson plans, materials and activities that the teachers developed were collected. Most of the
data came in electronic forms and historical information about the data was collected by means
of informal face-to-face conversational interviews to the teachers. Thirty lesson plans with
materials and learning activities were collected. While eighty percents of the lesson plans were
made collaboratively in various meetings of respective teachers’ networks, the sampled teachers
were most dominant in the network and identifiable as the creator of the plans. Informal
observation of classroom was also conducted in order to evaluate if the plans were implemented
accordingly and, due to the limit in space, the analyses of the observation will presented
elsewhere.

Data Analysis

The lesson plans, materials and activities as documents were analyzed by combining Bowen’s
(2009) document analysis and Hornberger’s (2009; 2013) and McCarty’s (2015) ethnographic
analysis of LPP documents. It involves selection of policy themes, sampling and preliminary
observation of the documents, coding relevant information, tabulating data, checking and
rechecking validity and reliability, cross-tabulating information, and reporting results. For
descriptive purposes, frequency and percentages will also be used.

184
Findings and Discussion

Below are the findings and the discussion elaborating answers to the questions raised in this
article. Lesson plans, materials and learning activities collected for the study varied across the
types of schools. While there is homogeneity with the lesson plans of junior and senior high
school English in terms of text types and activities, those at vocational schools were different as
they differ in vocational foci. Nonetheless, there is continuity in terms of highlighted attitudes,
knowledge and skills.

Attitude, Knowledge and Skill Dimensions in Materials Development

Although spiritual attitude has been assigned to be the core of the subject called Religion,
English teachers felt the need to indirectly integrate it into their lessons. Out of numerous
spiritual values teachers have included three spiritual values as the top priority: faithfulness,
piety and tolerance (see Table 1). This is interesting. While being faithful and pious in one’s
religion is the essential core of the first Core Competency (KI-1), tolerance is not and English
teachers felt an urgent need for indirectly teaching tolerance due to inter-ethnic and inter-
religious native of the classes. In fact, “beriman [faithful]” and “bertaqwa [pious]” have become
colloquial and coexistent that one is absent and unachievable without the other.

Table 1: Spiritual Attitudes

No Spiritual Dimensions F %

1 Faithfulness 15 50.00

2 Piety 7 23.33

3 Tolerance 5 16.67

4 Others 3 10.00

185
 While spirituality is mostly defined in the form of menghargai [valuing] and menghayati
[contemplating] student’s religion, the dominant inclusion of beriman [faithful] and bertaqwa
[pious] in English lesson plans and classroom activities developed from them indicate the
teachers’ accommodating exercises of agentic roles as agents of particular religious groups. By
the same token, the integration of other spiritual values such as mensyukuri [appreciating] the
chances to learn English as an international communication and semangat belajar [motivated
learning] situations. Again, this is another form of accommodating teacher agency at micro
levels.
The moral values are highlighted in the lesson plans and within the personal views of the
teachers. Actually, only several moral values are accentuated in the ELT policy documents:
santun [polite], peduli [caring], jujur [honest], disiplin [discipline], percaya diri [self-confident],
and bertanggung jawab [responsible]. Teachers, however, also include other morality in the
lessons and classroom practices and these are summarized in Table 2. Note, however, that
dominant appearance (i.e. 30 times in 30 documents) of particular morality is simply because
teachers have apparently copied those words from the policy documents while the limited
appearance of others in the documents (e.g. life style, respect and good citizenship) result from
teachers’ creativity and agentic practices.

Table 2: Moral Dimensions

No Moral Dimensions f %

Confidence 30 100
Personal
1 Discipline 30 100
Morality
Responsibility 30 100

Honesty 30 100

Politeness 30 100

2 Social Morality Discipline 30 100

Responsibility 30 100

Caring 30 100

186
 Healthy Lifestyle 23 77

Respect 22 73

National Good citizenship 19 63

3
Morality National Pride 12 40

Knowledge in the ELT policy documents covers that in science, technology, arts and culture
and it is further delineated into factual, conceptual, procedural and meta-cognitive knowledge.
Factual knowledge refers to awareness about specific information in science, technology, arts
and culture available in school environment. Conceptual knowledge is the piece of information
enabling the learners to classify and make use of scientific principles in science, technology, arts
and culture for individual and social benefits. Procedural knowledge is the intellectual capacity
to carry out specific technical activities relevant with the individual and social needs. Finally,
meta-cognitive knowledge is mental awareness about a body of knowledge and consciousness
about self strengths and weaknesses. As shown in Table 3, knowledge is predominant in culture
while in science, technology and arts, it is unavailable.

Table 3: Knowledge Dimensions

No Knowledge Dimensions F %

Science 0 0

Technology 0 0
1 Factual Knowledge
Arts 0 0

Culture 13 43.45

Science 0 0

Technology 0 0
2 Conceptual Knowledge
Arts 0 0

Culture 6 21.22

187
 Science 0 0

Technology 0 0
3 Procedural Knowledge
Arts 0 0

Culture 3 7.5

Metalinguistic Awareness 8 25.64

4 Meta-cognitive
Self-Awareness 0 0

The absence of knowledge specific to science, technology and arts is expected rather than
exception. This type of knowledge is the core of other subjects and while it is thematically
expected to be integrated into English such integration require rigorous knowledge of the matter
on the part of the English teachers. The same is true to the dominance of cultural knowledge:
language is the essential core of culture and when learning it learning the cultures of the speakers
and the learners become inseparable (see Brown, 2001; Kramsch, 1998; Sarangi, 2009).
Let us finally explicate what skills are planned to be trained in English classes. In ELT
practices, the term “skill” have been narrowly limited to be language-related and such
theorization does not really help us delineate it in much detailed. Gardner (2011), Gardner
(2008), and Gardner and Hatch (1989) have identified it to be manifested in various forms: (a)
skills resulting from physical, personal and intellectual potentials and biological developments,
(b) skills resulting from knowledge and formal trainings, (c) skills indirectly obtained from
learning experiences, and (d) skills obtained as a result of growing in particular groups. While
the ability to produce sounds is potentially biological, the skills in arranging them in
grammatically correct sentences and texts when informing other students about how to make a
Sasak delicacy in English will require essential knowledge and skill in procedure texts obtained
from trainings and practices in English classes but the procedural knowledge and skill in
processing the food will require cultural skill obtained from experiences of growing up in the
Sasak culture.
In the Ministrial Regulation Number 24/2016, however, skills have been limited to the ability
to
experiment, analyze, and present within concrete domains (by using, deconstructing,
rearranging, modifying, and constructing) and abstract domains (by drafting, reading,

188
 calculating, visualizing, and composing) what is learned at school and from other sources with
similar points of view or theories (Permendikbud No 24/2016, Our translation).

Thus, it is essential to examine the lesson plans within this framework and the result is presented
in Table 4.

Table 4: Skill Dimensions

No Skills Domains Subskills f %

Concrete Deconstructing skill 30 100
1 Analysing Skill Reading skill 30 100
Abstract
Calculating Skill 0 0
Using skill 30 100
Experimenting Concrete
2 Rearranging skill 23 77
skill
Abstract Drafting skill 27 90
Modifying skill 23 77
Concrete
Constructing skill 30 100
3 Presenting Skill
Visualizing skill 3 10
Abstract
Composing Skill 25 83

The dominant appearance of experiential skills (i.e. using and drafting skills), analytical skills
(i.e. deconstructive and analytical reading skill), and presentation skills (i.e. composing,
constructing and modifying skills) is also expected rather than exception. Since teachers are
expected to follow the KI-4 statements and the standard of learning process, the lesson plans, the
materials and the activities will be staged according to the assigned learning procedures (i.e. 3M,
4M or 5M) and, as a result, the activities of analyzing model texts, collaboratively and
individually de-constructing, constructing, drafting, modifying, and composing oral and written
texts become the main menu. However, the minimum appearance of visualization skills indicate
that teachers have not seen visual presentation as essential in oral and written use of the target
language. The absence of calculation skill is understandable as it relates with analytical skills in
science.

Strategies of Integration

189
Attitudes, knowledge and skill above is planned to be integrated in classroom implementation by
means of various strategies.

Table 5: Integration Strategies

No Strategies f %

1 One-Way Task 30 100

2 Individual Assignment 30 100

3 Group Assignment 24 80

4 Two-Way Task 23 76.3

5 Small Group Discussion 21 70

6 Language Games 18 60

One-way fill-in-the-blank types of activities and in-class or take-home individual or group

assignment activities being dominant in the documents, teachers expect learners to integrate
spiritual and moral attitudes (e.g. by being faithful, responsible, or collaborative), knowledge
(e.g. lexico-grammatical knowledge), and skills (e.g. analytical, modifying, or constructing
skills) in particular episodes of learning. Through the use of two-way interactive materials, small
group discussions, and language games, teachers expect the students to experience first-hand
how to enact proper attitude when making use of particular knowledge and skills.
One teacher exemplified in one of her lesson plans how two-way activities were planned to be
implemented as a way of education attitude, knowledge and skills in a game she called “Pesona
13” (the Thirteen Charisma). The students will be divided into two groups of five. One of them
will act as the Answerer and four others will act as the Questioners who will take turn asking
yes-now questions. The teacher will show to the Answerer a word or a picture in a piece of paper
and these could be animals, professions, names of persons or buildings. Each group can only ask
10 yes-now questions and when finished they have to guess the word or picture. When correctly
guessed, each word will give the group 1 point and the group with the highest point wins the
game.

190
 In playing the game, they can practice English but at the same time learn to be faithful to the
rule of the game and respectful to each other by asking politely, avoiding racial or deprecatory
questions while at the same time using vocabulary knowledge (e.g. words for describing things
and profession) and grammatical knowledge (e.g. yes-no questions) as well as practicing
listening and speaking skills in addition to using skills in analyzing the generic structure and
language features as well as the skill in making generalization.
Although the effect of such practices needs furthermore careful scrutiny, it is indeed a
breakthrough for Indonesia where improper spiritual and moral attitude have always become an
additional issue to lack of knowledge and skills among Indonesian students of English.

Conclusion
The study has shown that spirituality and social morality has been directly and indirectly
integrated with scientific knowledge, and language-related life skills. Although spiritual and
social attitudes have been respectively assigned to the targets of Religion and Civics Education,
English teachers have always played their roles as agents of educating the students with
spirituality and morality in addition to training them with language-related knowledge and skills.
The study has shown that knowledge and skills in the lessons have been planned in association
with particular spiritual and social attitudes. The study also found that faithfulness, piety,
confidence, discipline, respect, caring, responsibility, and other dominant attitudes in the policy
documents have been integrated and indirectly taught to students through games, group
discussions and two-way interactive materials when teaching the students with factual,
conceptual, procedural, meta-cognitive knowledge and skills. The study has also shown that
through games and other communicative activities teachers can actually accommodate the need
for the integration of attitude, knowledge and skills. In this way, the English teachers can
actually make use of the classroom materials and activities as a way of agency enactment.

191
References

Alhamdan, B., AL-Saadi, K.P., Baroutsis, A., Plessis, A.D., Hamid, M.O., Honan, E. 2014.
Media Representation of teachers across five countries. Comparative Education, 50 (4),
490-505.
Ali, N. L. (2013). Language Policy and Planning in Malaysia: Managing English-Medium
Instruction at Tertiary Levels. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, The University of
Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Ali, N.L, & Hamid, M.O. (2016). English-Medium Instruction and Teacher Agency in Higher
Education: a Case Study. In Chua, S.K.C., & Taylor-Leech, K. (Eds.), Issues in
Language Planning and Policy: from Global to Local. Boston/Berlin: Mouten de
Gruyter.
Baldauf, R.B. (2006). Rearticulating the case for micro language planning in a language ecology
context. Current Issue in Language Planning, 7(2-3), 147-170. doi: 10.2167/cilp092.0
Baldauf, R.B, and Hamid, M.O (2017). Language Planning “Schools” and their Approaches and
Methodologies. In M. Sloboda, J. Nekpahil, & L. Fairbrother (Eds.) The Language
Management Approach: Focus on Methodology. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. In Press
Bandura.(1989). Human Agency in Social Cognitive Theory.American Psychological
Association, 44 (9), 1175-1184
Biesta, G. J. J., and Teddler, M. (2006).How is Agency Possible? Towards an Ecological
Understanding of Agency as Achievement.Working Paper 5, Exeter, the Learning Lives
Project.
Biesta, G. J. J., and Teddler, M. (2007). Agency and Learning in the Life Course: Towards an
Ecological Perspective. Studies in the Education of Adults, 39, 132-149.
Borg, S. (2001). Self-Perception and Practice in Teaching Grammar. ELT Journal, 55 (1): 21-29.
Bowen, Glenn A. (2009). "Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method", Qualitative
Research Journal, 9(2), 27 - 40.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (3rd edn). Eaglewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

192
Canagarajah, A.S. (1993). Critical Ethnography of a Sri Lankan Classroom: Ambiguities in
Student Opposition to Reproduction through ESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 27(4): 601-626.
Chen, Z and Goh, C. (2011). Teaching Oral English in Higher Education: Challenges to EFL
Teachers. Teaching in Higher Education, 16 (3), 333-345.
Davis, K.A. (1999). Dynamics of indigenous language maintenance.In Huebner & K.A. Davis
(Eds), Sociopolitical Perspectives on Language Policy and Planning in the USA, 67-97.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Emirbayer, M and Mische, A. (1998). What Is Agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103(4):
962-1023.
Feryork, A. (2012).Activity Theory and Language Teacher Agency.The Modern Language
Journal, 96, 1, (2012). DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01279.x.
Glasgow, B.P. (2017). Policy Agency and the (non) Native teacher. “English Classes in English
in Japan’s High school. In Ng, P.C.L. and E.F. Boucher-Yip (Eds.) Teacher Agency and
Policy Response in English Language Teaching.New York, Routledge, 58-73.
Gulburn, J.F., and Holstein, J.A. (1995). Individual Agency, the Ordinary, and Postmodern Life.
The Sociological Quarterly, 36 (3): 555-570.
Harris, J. (2017). Teacher Agency during the Introduction of English Activities in Japanese
elementary Schools.In Ng, P.C.L. and E.F. Boucher-Yip (Eds.) Teacher Agency and
Policy Response in English Language Teaching.New York, Routledge, pp. 26-40.
Holliday, A. (2001) Achieving cultural continuity in curriculum innovation: dealing with
dominant discourses. In: D.R, Hall. And A, Hewings, (Eds.), Innovation in English
Language Teaching: A Reader. London: Routledge. pp. 169-176 ISBN 0415241235.
Hornberger , N.H. (2015).Selecting appropriate research methods in LPP research. In F.M. Hult
and D.C. Johnson (Eds.), Research Methods in Language Policy and Planning. West
Sussex, Willey Blackwell, 9-20.
Hornberger, N.H, and Johnson, D.C. (2007).Slicing the Onion Ethnographically: Layers and
Spaces in Multilingual Language Education Policy and Practice.TESOL Quarterly, 41
(3): 509-532.
Kramsch, C., (1998). Language and Culture. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Beyond Methods. Macrostrategies for Language Teaching. London:
Yale University Press.

193
Lestari, Y. B. (forthcoming). Integration of Local Texts and Practices in EFL Classrooms: an
Ethnographic Study of a Rural Indonesian School. Unpublished PhD Thesis at The
University of Queensland, Australia.
Menter, I., Elliot, D., Hall, S., Hulme, M., Lowden, K., Payne, F. and Christie, D.
(2010).Research to Support Schools of Ambition 2007 Annual report. Edinburg, Scottish
Government.
Molina, S. C. (2017). English Language Teaching in China.In Ng, P.C.L. and E.F. Boucher-Yip
(Eds.) Teacher Agency and Policy Response in English Language Teaching. New York,
Routledge, pp. 7-25.
Ng, P. C. L, and Boucher-Yip, E. F. (2017).Introduction.In Ng, P.C.L. and E.F. Boucher-Yip
(Eds.) Teacher Agency and Policy Response in English Language Teaching. New York,
Routledge, pp. 1-9.
Perez-Milans, M. (2017). Metapragmatics in the ethnography of language policy. In .W
Tollefson & M. Pérez-Milans (eds.) Handbook of Language Policy and Planning.
Oxford: OUP.
Pessoa, R R., &Freitas, M.T.D.H. (2012).Challenges in Critical Language Teaching.TESOL
Quarterly, 40 (4): 753-776.
Priestley, M., Biesta, G., and Robinson, S.( 2013). Teacher as Agents of Change: Teacher
Agency and Emerging Models of Curriculum. In Priestley, M., and Biesta, G. (Eds.)
Reinventing the Curriculum, London, Bloomsbury, pp. 187-206.
Risager, K. (2006) Language and Culture: Global Flows and Local Complexity. Clevedon,
England: Multilingual Matters.
Sarangi, S. (2009).Culture.Östman, J. S., and Gunter Verschueren, J. (Eds) Culture and
Language Use: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp, 81-119.
Tomlison, B. (2013). Introduction: Principles and Procedures of Materials Development. In
Tomlison, B. (Ed.) Materials Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge, UK,
Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-34.
Vijay, G. (2014). Constraints of teaching English in Engineering colleges.Language in India. 14
(12): 687-693.
Zhao, S., and Baldauf, R. B. (2012).Individual Agency in Language Planning.Language
Problems and Language Planning, 36 (1): 1-24.

194
195
 The Functions of Language in Facebook Posting

Ryan Jayson V. Delos Reyes

Kristine May L. De Vera
Ramon S. Medriano, Jr.
School of Advanced Studies, Pangasinan State University, Urdaneta City Pangasinan Philippines

Bio Data:
Ryan Jayson V. Delos Reyes is a MAEd in Communication Arts - English graduate at School of
Advanced Studies, Pangasinan State University, Urdaneta City Pangasinan. He is currently a
Ph.D. student at Benguet State University and works as Instructor III at Urdaneta City
University. He can be reached at ryanvdelosreyes@gmail.com.

Kristine May L. De Vera is a MAEd in Communication Arts - English graduate at School of

Advanced Studies, Pangasinan State University, Urdaneta City Pangasinan. He is currently a
Ph.D. student at Benguet State University and works as a Senior High School Teacher III at
Rosales National High School. She can be reached at kristinemayldevera@gmail.com.

Ramon S. Medriano, Jr. is currently the Sales Executive and Training Manager of TESOL Asia.
He is a post graduate student at School of Advanced Studies, Pangasinan State University,
Urdaneta City Pangasinan. He can be reached at angelmon1106@gmail.com.

Abstract
This observation phenomenological study determined the functions of language used in
Facebook posting among middle-age Filipino ESL learners (Senior Teacher Education Students
in Urdaneta City University). Purposive selection of the respondents account for balance in
which the respondents are chosen on the basis of their knowledge of the information desired and
on the judgment of the researchers who is best qualified to the objectives. Online social
networking sites have become a way for individuals to keep in contact with others around the
world, with Facebook being one of the most popular sites. Facebook allows individuals to
express themselves through its features, one of which is the status update. This study focused
only to the respondents’ text posts (statuses) in determining the language function. Referential
and Emotive functions were the majority of the text posts of the respondents. Therefore, middle-
age Filipino learners are expressive of their emotions and feelings that they transfer into contents
of the posts in Facebook. This study adds to the literature on Facebook. For future studies
researchers should measure the personality along with the content of Facebook posts.

196
Keywords: Functions of Language, Facebook Text Posts (Statuses)

Introduction
In today’s generation, fact-to-face is no longer the only means to interact socially. Social
networking sites are becoming more popular as users continue to use these sites as means of
staying connected with others. Facebook is one of the most popular networking sites according
to Khan and Jarvenpaa (2010). Consequently, it is the fastest growing online social utility with
more than 800 million users worldwide according to the Facebook IPO (2012). The initial
purpose of the website was to connect students, but this purpose was soon expanded to connect
high school students, college students and adults worldwide.

Literature Review
Connecting in Facebook has become easier and more convenient with the increased popularity of
wireless technology. Nauert’s (2011) study as cited by Claridad et al. (2015), such sites provide a
convenient platform for students to enhance and maintain friendships, build social
networks/establish virtual relationships, diminish barriers to make friends, follow peer trends,
share photos, fun and leisure and to keep in touch with family. Carballo (2010, in Claridad,
2015) added that students are spending hours looking through pictures, answering their page
comments, sharing, and chatting with friends on the site. Additionally, Facebook also allowed
them to connect with faculty and other students, parents and extending beyond friendship/social
relationship. Even more, the internet has emerged as the most effective means of disseminating
information. It is worth mentioning that social networking platforms such as Facebook, has been
in use since its beginning (Jha et al., 2016).
Meanwhile, Facebook posts are the best way to connect and to re-connect with relatives and
colleagues. In the study of Ayres (2014), the different types of posts that can be posted in
Facebook are text only posts (statuses), link posts, photo posts, and video posts. It corroborates
with the study of Campbell (2012) that posts can be classified as quotes, questions, tips, captions
of images, fill-in the blanks, memes, and topical trendy questions. These studies support the
present research that posting covers sharing, commenting, and tagging in updating Facebook
statuses.

197
 According to Ancheta (2013), Facebook status is one of the key interactive features on
Facebook. It allows users to post and share a small amount of content on their profile, on their
friend’s walls and in Facebook newsfeeds. Users often updates their statuses about their day or to
post clever quips; website, videos, and photos which provides opportunities to comment and
interact with other user.
Generally, language is a tool to unify the society because as human being people need to
interact, share or express their felling by using language. Trudgill (2000:16) said that the social
environment can also be reflected in language, and often have an effect on the structure of the
vocabulary. Therefore, there are two aspects of language behavior which influence to social
point of view: first, the function of the language in establishing social relationships and second,
the role played by language in conveying information about the speaker. From those aspects it
can be referred that language behavior are reflections of the fact that there is a close inter-
relationship between language and society. Furthermore, Style, as a part of language variation, is
a different variation of a language used by a person in different situation and need. It recognized
the speaker’s background and the reason of using a variety of language from the style that he/she
used (Trudgill, 2002:2).
From Gleason and Holmes’ (1992:2), it can be said that in conversation, the use of language
can be adjusted with whom the people we speak. Wardaugh (2006:51) also added that we can
speak very formally or very informally, our choice is being governed by circumstance. A similar
opinion was also expressed by Holmes (1992:276), he said that styles are analyzed along a scale
of formality.
The study of Wahidah (2014) entitled “Language Function in Advertisement” made use of
Jakobson’s function of language to determine the language functions used in advertisement. She
stated that the advertisement posters are based on the sign model related to the sender, receiver
and referent and can be interpreted in more than one way. The present study inspired in using the
same function of language of Jakobson but this determined the language function of Facebook
posting.
Jakobson’s Functions of Language is an effective act of verbal communication that interprets
person’s ideas and meanings. These are emotive/expressive (It relates to the Addresser (sender)
and is best exemplified by interjections and other sound changes that do not alter the denotative
meaning of an utterance but do add information about the Addresser's (speaker's) internal state),

198
conative (It engages the Addressee (receiver) directly and is best illustrated by vocatives and
imperatives), phatic (It is language for the sake of interaction and is therefore associated with the
Contact/Channel factor. This can be observed in greetings and casual discussions of the weather,
particularly with strangers. It also provides the keys to open, maintain, verify or close the
communication channel), poetic (It focuses on "the message for its own sake" (the code itself,
and how it is used) and is the operative function in poetry as well as slogans), referential (It
corresponds to the factor of Context and describes a situation, object or mental state), and
metalingual (It is the use of language (what Jakobson calls "Code") to discuss or describe itself).
Therefore, with the growing number of Facebook users among the faculty and other students,
parents and extending beyond friendship/social relationship, this present study needs to identify
the functions of language in Facebook posting. Therefore, Facebook is used for communication.

Materials and Methods

This study used observation phenomenological-grounded theory qualitative research design. The
aim of phenomenological researches is to focus on describing and understanding lived
experiences from the perspectives of the people involved (Creswell, 2007 in Ambong, 2015).
Prior the observations as the bases of the data formulated with the knowledge of the respondents
to emerge the essence of the posts studied. Grounded Theory is an inductive methodology.
According to Charmaz, grounded theory refers to a set of systematic inductive methods for
conducting qualitative research aimed toward theory development. The researchers approached
the respondents individually to verify the interpretation of the posts.
From the twenty-one English majors who are actively posting in Facebook, the researchers used
purposive sampling. Purposive sampling, also called deliberate sampling is a design in which the
respondents are chosen on the basis of their knowledge of the information desired and on the
judgment of the researcher who is best qualified to the objectives of the study (Guevara &
Lambinicio, 2011). This method involves the taking of the desired number of respondents with
the required characteristics proportionate to the population under study. This study focused to the
Jakobson’s Functions of Language in Facebook posts that helped the present research show the
usual posts of the respondents. The researchers found out that the model is very useful in
understanding the words of the respondents’ posts. There were few researchers used the said
model.

199
This study considered only the text posts (statuses) without any attachments of videos, photos
and links. The posts were found in the respondents’ timeline. The posts can function in more
than one way.
In gathering the data from the respondents, the tool used in this study is the social networking
site, Facebook, and the accounts of the respondents’ text posts (statuses) only. The posts of the
respondents were from October 14- November 19, 2016 only.

Analysis of Results and Discussion

From the posts of the respondents, the researchers gathered text posts (statuses) only. It was
stated that, the Facebook posts were only delimited with the posts without attachments of videos,
photos and links.
From the study of Wahidah (2014), an advertisement poster of linguistics function is based on
the sign model which functions through it relations to sender, receiver and referent. Further, the
advertisement is interpreted in more than one way. This study supports the interpretation of the
posts using the function of language. A post can function in more than one language function.
The research conducted by Chen (2007) on Fong (2011) identified the expressive, referential
and metalinguistic as the most common functions of code-switching in online forum discussions.
Further, Thurairaj et al (2015) found out that most respondents set their own preferred
language as a default language in social networking sites.
According to Sudaryanto (1993: 13), posts are language style and function in Facebook that
are spoken languages and assessed in written, either in the use of words, sentences, or
abbreviations. He also added that the writer revealed the language function of students and
teachers in their updated status.

Data Presentation
These are the interpretation of the different posts found by the researchers along the functions of
language. These are the following posts.
1. Go on murder me with your insecurities and I will kill you with my Kindness.
2. That feeling when your students want you to come back and teach them again! Thank
you so much HRM &MIDWIFERY students! #sohappyandproud

200
3. Even how great my day is, still at the end of it I can say that it would be better if I’m with
my Mom. I miss you Mama.. I love you so much..
4. Sana kahit pag luha may katapusan din.. #justsaying
5. In ILOKANO, we don’t say “I don’t have cash!”. But we say” AYNA, URAY
LABOSAN NAK!” – Addo Selga
6. 3 downs! 1 more to go! #thankyouLord

The Findings of the Research

This study focused only to the respondents’ text posts (statuses) in determining the language
function. Referential and Emotive functions were the majority of the text posts of the
respondents.

The researchers found 3 language functions in this Facebook post. The language functions are:
1. Referential Function.
Referential Function describes a situation or mental state. The Addresser (speaker) states in her
post what she feels that time. She expresses indirectly her irritation to someone that best shown
through the emoticons (an added wordless feeling in a text). The word “your insecurities” and
“will kill you” magnify its referent.
2. Conative Function.
Conative Function engages the Addressee (receiver) directly by vocatives or imperatives. The
message is being directed to the speaker’s receiver because of the pronoun “you”. This statement
identifies directly who is concerned and this expresses authoritatively and absolutely directive or
expresses an order, “Go on murder me”.

201
3. Emotive Function.
Emotive function relates the Addresser (sender) that best exemplified by interjections that adds
the speaker’s internal state. This post shows the irritable feeling of the speaker that she nearly
wants to spill everything in words but due to her kindness this refrains her in doing so. The
message best magnifies the emotive feeling of the speaker to the receiver.

In this second post, there are 3 language functions. These are:

1. Phatic Function.
Phatic Function is a language for the sake of interaction and is therefore associated with the
Contact/Channel factor and can be observed in greeting or casual discussion particularly with
strangers. The speaker expresses her thankfulness to the students. The speaker used “Thank you
so much” that draw attention to the receivers. The readers are aware about the message but not
definite who are these students.
2. Referential Function.
Referential Function is a descriptive statement in both definite description and deictic word. In
the post, it describes the mental state of the speaker whose meaning of the text is dependent on
context that she was uplifted, “come back and teach them again!”. These words are considered
comparison that complement each other.
3. Emotive Function.
Obviously, the speaker is really happy and proud through the text, “so happy and proud” and the
punctuation marks (exclamation point), that expresses a great emotion in her post. The statement
is noticeably and understandably do add information about the internal state of the speaker. She

202
expresses her feelings of satisfaction and contentment of what she had done that made her post
this message.

In this post, there are 2 language functions. These are:

1. Emotive Function.
This states a feeling that the speaker is confused. The emotion of the speaker is
exemplified within the context of the message, “nakaiinspire ba o nakakawala ng
konsentrasyon”. Thus, the speaker adds information about himself about an event during his
examination that his crush passed by. The speaker doesn’t know what to do in the exam. He felt
overwhelmed and lost his concentration in taking the examination.
2. Referential Function.
The message delivers the speaker’s situation state that exists in time. He describes his crush
passing in front of him that he doesn’t know if this will help him or lose his concentration.
Confusedly, the speaker is deciding what to focus and talks to himself. The way he loses reflects
the way the speaker will overcome the existence of his crush.

This another post has 2 language functions. These are:

1. Poetic Function.
Poetic function focuses on “the message for its own sake”. The speaker’s voice for herself that
she only knows what about the message. Readers of this post may or may not have ideas because

203
it might be quoted from someone where she likes it. This is an operatively function as slogan or
poetry.
2. Emotive Function.
This post shows untruthfulness of the statement. The speaker is maybe really hurt that is why she
wishes for this. When we are hurt, inevitably, we cannot control the tears from our eyes.
Anyway, this message shows an emotion that she cannot handle anymore the problem.

This post has 2 language functions. These are:

1. Poetic Function.
This post states an operative function in slogan. The speaker quoted the statement from a person.
This is maybe related with her practices. The post attracted the speaker because of the message
imparted by the slogan.
2. Metalingual Function.
Metalingual function focuses in the use of language or code using a vernacular in expressing her
message. The post used another language aside from the language being used in Facebook post
such as English and Filipino (in the Philippines). Some of the Facebook friends are not speaking
the same vernacular that they cannot understand the Iloko message.

This post has 2 language functions. These are:

1. Metalingual Function.

204
Metalingual function is the use of language that states “code” in discussing oneself. The words
“3 downs” is unclear to the reader because the meaning is ambiguous. “1 more to go”, this
sentence doesn’t give enough meaning too. This statement has its code understood only by the
speaker or readers within the same context.
2. Emotive Function.
The speaker has hidden ideas in posting this message but with the message “thank you Lord”,
this shows emotion that something good had happened why the speaker posted “3 downs! 1 more
to go!”. This uplifts herself with an accomplishment that is why the speaker posted this message.
Conclusions
This paper presents the results of the language function of Facebook posts among the Senior
Teacher Education students of Urdaneta City University. The respondents are soon professionals
in the field of Education. Teachers are the source of information and learners are imitating them
even outside the classroom. Presently, teachers and learners are exposed into social networking
site like Facebook, Twitter and the like. But many of them have Facebook and more exposed in
SNS. Teachers of 21st century are using SNS in communicating to learners. Posting in Facebook
is very crucial in the part of teachers because this can influence the learners and can misinterpret
the teachers’ teaching toward the learners.
This study corroborates the study of Wahidah (2014) in Language Function in Advertisement
that the main representations anti-smoking advertisement poster of linguistic functions are based
on the sign model which functions through its relations with the sender (addresser), the receiver
(addressee), and the referent (context). And also it can be interpreted in more than one way as we
infer from the chosen advertisements posters.
The respondents are expressive of their emotions and feelings then they transfer it through
writing. But through technology, it is easier for them to share and post in Facebook about their
feeling. Most of the posts, as the result of this study, the respondents describe a situation, object
or mental state and speakers have exemplified their feeling in interjection. Thus, Text Posts
(Statuses) also can be interpreted in more than one way or language function.

References

205
Ambong, et al (2015). Whole-class Scaffolding Techniques in Teaching Using Mother Tongue
as a Medium of Instruction in a Linguistically Diverse Classroom. SLU
Unpublished Thesis.
Fong (2011). Functions and Reasons for Code-switching on facebook by UTAR English-
Mandarin Chinese Bilingual Undergraduates. Retrieved from: http://www.linguistik-
online.org/perez-sabater.pdf
Galioto, et al (2013). An Investigation of Status Posts and Happiness of Facebook Users.
Retrieved from http://www.kon.org/urc/v13/galioto.html
Hebert (2004). The Functions of Language. Retrieved from
http://www.signosemio.com/jakobson/functions-of-language.asp
Salvador (2014). Function of Language in Society. Retrieved from
http://dameanusabun.blogspot.com/2014/03/function-of-language-in- human-
society.html?m=1
Siborboro et al (2014). Facebook Usage of Tertiary Students in Urdaneta City University.
Unpublished Thesis of Urdaneta City University.
Thurairaj, et al (2015). Reflections of Students’ Language Usage in Social Networking Sites:
Making or Marring Academic English. Retrieved from: http://www.ejel-volume13-
issue4-article440.pdf
Wahidah, A (2014). Language Function in Advertisement. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/8068382/Language_Function_in_advertisement
Wardhaugh, R. (2006). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. London: Blackwell Publishing Lt.

206
Book Review
Early Childhood Education in English for Speakers of Other Languages.
Victoria A. Murphy and Maria Evangelou. British Council, London. 2016. 315 pp.

Reviewed by Benjamin Thanyawatpokin

Himeji Dokkyo University, Japan

Many parents the world over consider instilling English proficiency in their children as they
believe it will lead to social or economic benefit. Globally, many children attend English
language learning lessons before they reach the age of five. In Early Childhood Education in
English for Speakers of Other Languages, Murphy and Evangelou have reported on research
from several countries about English education related to Early Childhood Education and Care
(ECEC). Although there have been similar studies in this area before (e.g. Garcia and Frede,
2010; Mouro and Lourenco, 2015), the current volume is one of the few to not only include the
most recent research, but also contain a section dedicated to the discussion of how ECEC English
programs are conducted internationally.
The volume is divided into three different sections. The first section, "Global Perspectives," is
written as a series of reports from North America, South America, Europe, India, Africa,
Australia, and Eastern Asia. These reports detail programs, beliefs, and challenges present in
these regions. Many of the chapters focus on one or two themes, which are of pressing concern
to language-teaching professionals in that region. Chapters 1.1-1.2 and 1.5-1.6 shed light on
bilingual education and the myths surrounding it, stating: "Dual language acquisition is not a
zero-sum game...development of ELLs' heritage language may facilitate English language
development" (p.37). In particular, chapter 1.6 discusses competency amongst young children
who are trying to learn several languages at the same time. Chapter 1.3 focuses on the different
English learning contexts in Europe. The chapter highlights the lack of coherence and
consistency in teacher training and quality of curricula across several EU countries, while
recognizing the difficulty in creating proper guidelines that fit the needs of the different contexts.

207
Chapter 1.4 discusses the current situation in India focusing on developments in creating suitable
curricula and pedagogical practices for use in Indian ELF classrooms. Lastly, chapter 1.7
outlines the current state in East Asian countries with a focus on Hong Kong. The author
explores current teaching techniques used in class, such as team teaching. There is an emphasis
on the extent to which EFL instruction at a very young age is effective and the need for a more
learner-centered approach to teaching children in the current East Asian context.
The second section, "Case studies in immersion / English Medium Instruction contexts," is
dedicated to quantitative and qualitative case studies conducted in various contexts around the
world. Chapter 2.1 includes suggestions for supporting the home language in children who have
developmental disorders and are also learning English as a second language. Chapter 2.2 details
an oral production-based teaching intervention done on nursery-aged children and discusses the
benefits of such intervention. Chapter 2.3 presents a case study from the Maldives and provides
evidence that the overuse of English in the classroom can impede the developing mother tongue
of students. For example, literacy skills were shown to improve in the students' L2 (English)
while the same skills in the students' L1 were ignored; and thus, lower achievement overall was
observed over time. Chapter 2.4 poses the question of whether pre-school teachers in Hong Kong
are using effective teaching activities for vocabulary development and attempts to search for an
answer were collected via a survey conducted at over a hundred schools. Chapter 2.5 evaluates
pre-school curriculum in Singapore by sharing a snapshot of one school and how classes are
conducted there. Lastly, chapter 2.6 introduces a study using nursery rhymes for young learners
to boost listening comprehension and math skills. This study did not utilize any formal
assessment tools, but observation notes were included to illustrate how learners reacted to the
rhymes. It was concluded from this data that students slowly began understanding the concepts
in the nursery rhymes over the course of six months.
The third section, "Case studies in EFL contexts," presents case studies in EFL settings.
Chapter 3.1 is a series of vignettes comprised of observation notes and interviews with teachers
from three kindergarten classes. The goal of these classes was to bilingually teach both English
and Spanish. Activities presented are simple role-plays, book reading, and songs. Each activity
was shown to spur communication improvements in the students. Chapter 3.2 introduces multi-
sensory teaching to improve comprehension of English phonemes. Students aged between four
and five were taught phonemes but were also encouraged to make certain gestures when

208
reproducing each phoneme. Gestures were not found to be of any particular benefit; however, the
researchers stated that the repetition of phonemes enhanced student comprehension and thereby
recommended that phonic teaching be included in more EFL contexts. Chapter 3.3 highlights the
benefits of collaborative teaching at a pre-primary institution in Portugal. It was observed that
having one teacher using more conventional pedagogical methods to teach the students, as well
as having another teacher informally motivating and planning the students' education, was
beneficial to their English comprehension. Chapter 3.4 reports on a training course for English
educators in France. It outlines teacher education classes such as how to ease teachers' anxiety
related to personal English language skills and provides suggestions for what could be taught to
increase the teachers' class activity repertoire. The chapter also reports on the benefits for
teachers who attended these types of courses. Participant feedback is included to give data on
what was learned by the teachers who attended.
The book offers a very broad look at the current state of early childhood English education in
different parts of the world. This can be overwhelming to readers wanting a tighter focus on one
topic. Reports on educational contexts in addition to case studies from these places make the
content seem lengthy at times. However, as repeatedly stated by the editors, this approach is
intended to: "illustrate the significant diversity of research and areas of discussion...in relation to
ECEC in English” (p.6). This point, in conjunction with the fact that ECEC through English is
still at a relatively early stage, shows how this kind of book is needed for the current research
and education landscape. It provides valuable information on curriculum ideas from countries
throughout the world. In conclusion, the impressively vast array of studies and reports included
in the book are of value to those interested in English language education for young children in
foreign contexts.

References
Garcia, E. E., & Frede, E. A. (2015). Young English learners: Current research and emerging
directions for practice and policy. New York: Teachers College Press.
Mouro, S., & Lourenco, M. (2015). Early years second language education. Abingdon:
Routledge.

Bio Data:
Benjamin Thanyawatpokin is an instructor of English at Himeji Dokkyo University in Japan. He
graduated with a MEd from Ritsumeikan University. (Email: btpokin@gmail.com).

209
Book Review
First and Second Language Use in Asian EFL
Ross Forman. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 2016. Pp. vii + 224.

Reviewed by Colin Walker

Myongji University, South Korea

Answering Üstünel & Seedhouse’s (2005) call for research into “how pedagogical focus and
language choice are related in the teaching of other languages” (p.47), First and Second
Language Use in Asian EFL by Ross Forman presents an in-depth, ethnographic analysis that
aims “to create new knowledge which can be useful to both academics and teachers, many of
whom have English as a second or additional language (p.42) and “to bring theoretical
perspectives which can elucidate and enrich our understanding of the classroom” (p.43). The
book is divided into four parts.
Part 1 provides the reader with an overview. In Chapter 1, Forman gives background
information outlining his teaching experience in Australia and Southeast Asia. Delineating
theoretical foundations and issues, Chapter 2 reviews three variables that derive from Halliday’s
(1975) functional linguistics: field – how language varies according to what is being
communicated; tenor – how language varies according to whom is being addressed; and mode –
how language varies according to how it is communicated. This serves as a prelude to Hasan’s
(1985) concept of verbal art, an extension of functional linguistics which Forman describes as
“spoken language – from everyday genres of anecdote, joke or song to the ‘oratory’ of public
occasions; as well as through written language – from everyday genres of fairy tale or magazine
story to literary works” (p.61). Also within the theoretical fabric of the book are concepts of
identity and culture. In Chapter 3 the in-depth description of the research participants (8 Thai
Professors, 1 Australian Professor), institution (Isara University), data collection & analysis
(interviews, classroom observations), and results showcases Forman’s knowledge of Thai culture.
Part 2 focuses on pedagogic uses of L1 and L2 in the language classroom. Chapter 4 identifies

210
six functions of bilingual teacher talk. In addition to the familiar acts of Translating and
Explaining,

211
excerpts discuss bilingual teachers Animating (i.e. reading aloud parts of a monolingual script)
and Creating (i.e. allowing students opportunities to use L2 in the spoken mode). The last two
functions, Prompting and Dialoguing, occur when “the teacher directly solicits responses from
students” (p.214). Chapter 5 examines classroom excerpts in relation to how L1 language is used
explicitly (e.g. quoting, reciting, or mimicking) and implicitly (e.g. to discuss past ideas); and
thus, lending valuable insight into intercultural communications. Reflecting on his observations,
Forman compiles Ten Principals of L1 Use neatly arranged into four categories in Chapter 6.
Cognitively, the use of L1 helps transmit L2 knowledge. Affectively, it promotes solidarity and
collaboration. Pedagogically, it saves time, assists with classroom management, and ensures
comprehensibility, inclusivity, and contingency. Politically, the use of L1 can help students
frame their culture within globalization through code switching, yet in a counter sense, it can
represent a resistance to the spread of English.
Part 3 examines the personal dimension of classroom discourse. In Chapter 7, identity and
alterity are examined through five interpersonal roles of L2: Enacting – meaning-based
communication where “the speaker’s voice may be regarded as performing a relatively
unmediated, ‘authentic’, or ‘natural’ self; and thus represents her/his core identity” (p.339-340);
Playing – a type of communication where the speaker not only uses her/his voice as much as
possible but also “now has the latitude to pretend that s/he, students, or the situation which they
are in, are other than they are perceived to be” (p.357); Displaying – a communication type
where the speaker explains or illustrates an L2 form or function; Acting – communication that
“requires the projecting of a persona which is clearly and unambiguously not the self; and yet, of
course, the self remains part of the performance” (p.369); and finally Animating – which was
reviewed in Chapter 4. Forman concludes, bilingual “teachers […] while committed to the use of
L2 in class, often saw it as artificial, time-consuming or constrained by the relatively low
proficiency levels of many students” (p.386).
Focusing mainly on classroom discourse, Chapter 8 explores the interactional role that
language plays. Forman reports it “has the potential to raise students’ metalinguistic awareness,
with marked forms of L2 serving to draw attention to form and/or function” (p.439). Chapter 9
investigates how the professors feel when they use each language in class. Analysis of interview
data shows that teachers feel more regimented and strict when using L1. Like Chapter 7, Forman
concludes by stating “the selection of language can be seen to inevitably function as role choice,

212
with bilingual options now constituting a wider and qualitatively different repertoire of one’s
identity” (p.480).
Part 4 looks at teachers’ professional contexts. Chapter 10’s critical analysis of two global
textbooks (Richards & Sandy, 1998 and 2000) identifies cultural complexity within certain
linguistic functions. In Unit 10, for instance, Forman reports that the authors fail to
“acknowledge that different cultures might conceive of ‘complaining’ in different ways” (p.498).
In Thai culture, complaining could be construed as a form of public shame causing a person to
lose face. In Chapter 11 – ESL and EFL Domains, Forman calls on publishers to collaborate with
local teachers so that ELT textbooks avoid such negative cultural nuances. Forman suggests that
local teachers should be wary of certain western teaching methods. Highlighting the linguistic
benefits of L1, Forman presents arguments for local teachers to avoid English only instruction.
For native English teachers and teacher trainers, Forman argues that any criticisms should be
framed within an in-depth understanding of the local environment, needs of the learners, and
constraints experienced by local teachers. Chapter 12 provides a summary of the book’s contents.
This book was a joy to review, though readers should be aware that it is a case study analysis
that is limited to one EFL context. In this sense, the book’s title is slightly misleading. However,
Forman’s research is referenced in relation to a number of studies from other Asian EFL contexts.
Another observation is that all of the participants in this study are bilingual. Therefore, it may be
difficult for teachers with limited L2 communicative ability to replicate some of the skills
discussed in Chapters 4 and 7. Overall, however, the book’s in-depth analysis and well-written
narrative accomplishes its aims in creating new knowledge and theoretical perspectives.

References

Halliday, M. A. K. (1975). Learning how to mean: Explorations in the development of language.

London: Edward Arnold.

Hasan, R. (1985). Linguistics, language, and verbal art. Geelong: Deakin University Press.

Richards, J. C., & Sandy, C. (1998). Passages 1: Student’s book. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Richards, J. C., & Sandy, C. (2000). Passages 1: Student’s book. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Üstünel, E., & Seedhouse, P. (2005). Why that, in that language, right now? Code‐ switching

213
 and pedagogical focus. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15(3), 302-325.

Bio Data:
Colin Walker has an MA TEFL/TESL from the University of Birmingham and currently works
in the Department of English Language & Literature at Myongji University where he teaches
Presentation & Debate, Written Composition, Listening Comprehension, and three levels of
English Conversation. He is the Managing Editor of the KOTESOL International Conference
Proceedings and Chair of the KOTESOL Research Committee (Email: cwalker@mju.ac.kr).

214