hayashi 2009 foreign language annals

8/19/2019 Hayashi 2009 Foreign Language Annals

1/22

Student Preconceptions of

Japanese Language Learning in1989 and 2004

Atsuko HayashiCalifornia State University, Long Beach

Abstract: This study compares student preconceptions and expectations of Japaneselanguage learning from studies conducted in 1989 and 2004. Over the years, studentinterests and pedagogical approaches have changed. However, the changes do not reflecton the student preconceptions and expectations. They still believe in traditionalapproaches to language learning, and their instrumental motivation is still high. A totalof 374 undergraduate students studying Japanese in a four-year college participated inthis study. The participants responded to a questionnaire concerning the four areasof language learning: (1) difficulty, (2) nature, (3) strategies, and (4) motivation.In analyzing these findings, this study recommends that instructors impart the factsabout Japanese language learning to their students and assess whether their owncurriculums meet the students’ needs.

Key words: college-level language learning, questionnaire study, students’ expecta-tions, students’ preconceptions

Language: Japanese

Students hold a variety of preconceptions and expectations about the language they arelearning. The instructor who understands student preconceptions and expectations canassist them more effectively in achieving their goals and can evaluate the curriculum todetermine if it provides the training necessary to meet the students’ needs.

To be successful, learners must devote considerable time and energy to their

study, and they must study effectively. They need to be aware of the realities of learning the target language, such as its difficulty and the time required to reach theadvanced level more quickly. They also need to be informed about the most effec-tive way to learn a foreign language. To assist students to become successful, aninstructor must implement the curriculum with this in mind.

First, I discuss learners’ preconceptions and expectations about Japaneselanguage learning. Based on this discussion, I determine what facts the student mustknow. Finally, I examine whether our curriculum provides effective ways of teaching.

Dr. Atsuko Hayashi received her PhD in Linguistics from the University of Oregonin 2002. At the time of her death in 2007 she was an assistant professor of Japanesein the Department of Asian and Asian American Studies at California State Univer-sity, Long Beach. Before her appointment at CSULB, Dr. Hayashi taught as a lecturer at the University of Oregon and the University of California, Santa Barbara.

Foreign Language Annals vol. 42, No. 4 673


2/22

In adopting the questionnaire ‘‘Beliefsabout Language Learning’’ (Horwitz, 1988),this study surveys and examines studentpreconceptions and expectations in four ar-eas: (1) difficulty of language learning, (2)the nature of language learning, (3) learningand communication strategies, and (4) mo-tivation and expectation. The data onpreconceptions and expectations examinedhere were collected in 1989 and 2004. Thesecond set of data was collected in 2004 be-cause an interval of 15 years seemsadequate for identifying changes in Japaneselanguage education. From the perspective

of Japanese language pedagogy, these arevery different decades. The student popula-tions differ, and the teaching methodologyhas changed significantly in the interveningyears, including the adaptation of Standardsfor Japanese Language Learning in manyprograms. This study compares the twosets of student responses to examine the in-fluence of the different time periods. Thesurvey participants in both data sets were

native English speakers learning Japanese asa foreign language at the same four-year stateuniversity on the U.S. West Coast.

Before examining the students’ res-ponses, however, I review previous findingson the difficulty of Japanese, the character-istics of good language learners, andresearch findings on motivation. In addi-tion, I discuss the different factors relevantto Japanese pedagogy in 1989 and 2004, as

this study compares data from two decades.

Difficulty of JapaneseThe School of Language Studies of the For-eign Service Institute categorizes Japaneseas a Group Four language along withArabic, Chinese, and Korean. According tothe Institute’s analysis (Omaggio, 1986),native English speakers need an average of

1,320 hours to reach the advanced-levelspeaking proficiency of the ACTFL guide-line. It takes native English speakersthree times longer to reach the advanced-level proficiency in Japanese than in theRomance languages (Oh, 1996). In addi-

tion, mastering the reading and writing of Japanese requires significantly more timebecause Japanese has a complicated writingsystem. An educated user of the languageuses two phonetic syllabaries and about2,000 Chinese characters.

Successful Language Learnersand Effective Second LanguageAcquisition

Successful learners use language for com-munication and interaction (e.g., Ellis,

1994; Freed, 1995; Norton & Toohey, 2001;Rubin, 1981). They do not hesitate to usethe language and take advantage of oppor-tunities to communicate with it. In turn,having the ability to communicate moti-vates them further to continue to study thelanguage. For them, foreign language lear-ning is not merely gaining knowledge of the language, but is also acquiring a tool tocommunicate with its speakers. Because of

their strong desire to communicate, suc-cessful learners are willing to guess at themeaning of unknown words and guessaccurately using context, even at the riskof appearing foolish (Rubin, 1981). Highachievers focus on the meaning of singlewords and rely less on translation into En-glish (Mangubhai, 1991).

Research also suggests that interactionand communication in the target language

lead to acquisition. Habit-forming training,such as traditional drill practice, does nothelp learners acquire the language. Learn-ers must engage in a higher order of think-ing, such as hypothesizing and analyzing,for acquisition to occur (Lee & VanPatten,2003).

Interactive contacts also bring a greatergain in grammatical accuracy (Freed,1995). When communication breaks down

due to an inaccurate use of grammar,successful learners recognize their errorsand, therefore, learn the correct formsand take care to be accurate. Successfullanguage learners pay attention to bothform and meaning (Mangubhai, 1991).

674 Winter 2009


3/22

That is, the knowledge of grammar is nec-essary, but to acquire the language, learnersmust apply the knowledge to communicate.

Research demonstrates that learners’language skills do not improve when theydo not need to communicate. For example,most often in traditional language class-room settings, many learners fail to developfunctional oral proficiency, and proficiencyin reading and writing becomes higher thanspeaking proficiency (Ellis, 1994). This canbe attributed to class time typically spentworking on isolated sentence structuresin a sequence prescribed by a textbook

(Long, 2000). In short, to acquire alanguage, learners must actively use thelanguage to communicate.

The literature indicates that learnersmust be engaged in interactive communi-cation in the target language to developfluency. This raises several questions inrelation to classroom learners of Japanese:Are the sampled students from bothtime periods aware of the need to use the

language for communication and to takeadvantage of every opportunity to use thelanguage? Do they do so?

MotivationStudies have shown that motivation willinfluence learners’ success in learning thetarget language as well as in the lengthof time they continue to study the language

(Gardner & Lambert, 1972; Hernandez,2006; Oxford & Shearin, 1994; Ramage,1990).

Learning motivation is most often cate-gorized as integrative or instrumental moti-vation. Integrative motivation is defined asa desire to interact with native speakers of the target language and culture; instrumen-tal motivation is identified as interest instudying the target language in order to use

it to achieve a particular objective, such asobtaining a good job (Gardner & Lambert,1959).

A desire to use the language in thefuture seems to be a strong motivation to dowell in a course and to continue the study of

the language. Gardner and Lambert’s studyof learning French in Canada (1972) dem-onstrated that there is a correlation bet-ween integrative motivation and a learner’sachievement. Learners who want to use thelanguage to communicate with its nativespeakers achieve higher than learners whodo not. In addition, learners with integra-tive or instrumental motivation are mostlikely to continue studying the languagebeyond the required two years (Ramage,1990). Hernandez (2006) not only sup-ported the previous findings, but he alsofound that classroom activities that enhance

integrative motivation lead to success inthe course. He recommended promotingactivities and assignments that provideopportunities for students to interact inthe language communities, such as inter-viewing members of the target languagecommunity.

The final section of this study investi-gates student motivations and the possibledifferences in motivation that might be re-

flected in the 1989 and 2004 surveys.

1989 vs. 2004This study compares learners’ question-naire responses between 1989 and 2004;thus, I also discuss the different teachingmethodologies, the student populations,and the Japanese economy (which influ-ences job opportunities for learners of

Japanese).First, teaching methodologies have

changed since 1989. In terms of Japanesepedagogy, 1989 was still the audiolingualera for many institutions. In fact, at theuniversity where this study took place, stu-dents were required to memorize the shortdialogues in the textbook for each class,using tapes to memorize the conversationsand then doing mechanical drills at home.

The textbooks they used for the first- andsecond-year courses were grammar-basedand organized by sentence structures ormorphemes. Class time was spent in theexplanation of sentence structures andspeaking practice using the target sentence



4/22

structures. Some in the field strongly be-lieved that learners should not learn thewriting system until they learned to speakbecause it was a huge burden to also learnthe writing system. No written Japanesewas found in the textbooks, because thedialogues were written in Romanization.The writing system in this institution wasintroduced gradually: the phonetic systems,hiragana and katakana, in the first quarteror semester, and kanji (Chinese characters)afterward. The teaching emphasis was onproficiency in spoken Japanese, relying onRomanization to present the Japanese sen-

tences. As a result, quite a few studentsseemed to be negatively inclined towardlearning kanji even after they moved up tothe third-year level.

By 2004, a standard-based, proficiency-oriented teaching methodology had beenintroduced in the field of Japanese peda-gogy, replacing the grammar-based curric-ulum with one that was function-based.In fact, the functionally based textbook

Yookoso (Tohsaku, 2004) was adopted atthe university where this study took place.Yookoso does present grammar rules eventhough the goal is not to master the gram-matical rules but to be able to communicatein Japanese in the appropriate social con-text. In addition, students are exposed tothe Japanese writing system at the onset.The 2004 survey demonstrated that thosestudents did not seem to have a resistance

to the Japanese writing system and thusread better.

Second, the student population isdifferent. The 1989 student populationconsisted primarily of business majorswho were hoping for good job opportu-nities with their proficiency in Japanese.At a time when the Japanese economy wasat its peak growth, foreigners in Japan hadmany job opportunities, and Japanese

speakers were needed in the United Statesas well. The student population in the

Japanese program at the university wherethe study took place increased greatly. Infact, U.S. colleges overall reported a 95%increase of Japanese language learners

between 1986 and 1990 (Brod & Bettina,1992, n.p.).

More than a decade later, in 2004, thesituation had changed considerably. Withthe drop in the Japanese economy after1989, by 2004 there was a decline in thenumber of job opportunities that requiredproficiency in Japanese. Business majorshad disappeared from Japanese languageclassrooms and were replaced by the animegeneration and Nintendos players.

Considering these changes, student ex-pectations are likely to be different between1989 and 2004. By 2004, learners might

have come to expect communication prac-tice in their foreign language learning morethan dialogue memorization and the studyof grammar rules. In addition, because of the decline in the Japanese economy, fewerlearners might expect to find good job op-portunities.

The following is an analysis of stu-dent preconceptions and expectations asrevealed through the survey questionnaire

circulated among 374 students.

MethodologyThis study adopted the questionnaire ‘‘Be-liefs about Language Learning’’ (Horwitz,1988) and had students respond to 18 ques-tions in the four areas (see Appendix I). Thequestionnaires were distributed to 374 un-dergraduate students at a four-year insti-tution in November 1989 and January2004. Participants of this comparative studyare represented in Table 1.

Survey data were analyzed using SPSSs

v. 13.0. An alpha level of .05 was set a priorito determine statistical differences amongvariables. The statistical tests used werethe independent sample t test, to assessthe difference between responses from1989 and 2004, and ANOVA, to determinedifferences in the mean scores among the

levels within each time period.

ResultsCorresponding to the questionnaire, theresults were organized in these four areas:

676 Winter 2009


5/22

(1) difficulty of Japanese, (2) nature of lan-guage learning, (3) learning and communi-cation strategies, and (4) motivation andexpectation. Despite the fact that the teach-ing methodology has changed and thestudent population is different, most of theresults did not show significant differencesbetween the responses from 1989 and 2004.

Difficulty of Japanese Japanese was considered to be equally diffi-cult in both 1989 and 2004. Very few stu-dents (less than 5%) in either time periodthought of it as an easy language, t(365)51.394, p5 .164 (two-tailed). Japanese wasconsidered to be difficult or very difficult by76% of the students in 1989 and by 67% in2004, as seen in Table 2. Although less than

5% of the students in 1989 and 2004thought it an easy language, none thoughtof it as a very easy language. The first-yeargroups from 1989 and 2004 were the mostoptimistic of all.

When considering speaking/listeningand reading/writing, learners consideredthem to be equally difficult in 1989 and2004, t(372)51.539, p5 .125 (two-tailed). In each time period, the difference

lay between the fourth- and fifth-year-levellearners and others, F(3,370)53.966,

p5 .008. In 1989, the fourth- and fifth-yearstudents thought it was easier to readand write than the other groups thought.However, among the groups in 2004, sig-

nificantly more of the fourth- and fifth-yearstudents thought that it was easier to speak/ listen to Japanese than to read/write it (seeTable 3).

In examining student expectations of the time it would take to become fluent in

Japanese, the researcher found no signifi-cant difference between their expectations,t(357)5 1.846, p5 .066 (two-tailed). The

most common response (i.e., 40%) in 1989was that it would take 3 to 5 years to be-come fluent if one were to spend one houreach day studying Japanese, but in 2004,students responded that it would take 5 to10 years, as seen in Table 4. A total of 20%of students from both groups believed thatone cannot learn Japanese in one hour aday. For both time frames, the most pessi-mistic groups were the fourth- and fifth-

year students, and the most optimistic werethe first-year students. In fact, the first-yearstudents expected significantly less time toreach fluency compared with other groupsin each time period, F(3,355), po.001.This result correlated with their assessmentof the difficulty of Japanese.

Although students expected that itwould take a relatively long time to learn tospeak Japanese, students from both time

periods were equally optimistic about theirfuture success in learning, t(369)5 0.628, p5 .53 (two-tailed). It is interesting to notethat more than half the second-year andfourth- and fifth-year learners believed thatit would take 5 to 10 years to become fluent,

TABLE 1

Students Sampled in ‘‘Beliefs about Language Learning’’ Questionnaire

(Horwitz, 1988)

Language Level1989

Sample5 251 students2004

Sample5 123 students

1st-year 141 25

2nd-year 59 37

3rd-year 38 32

4th- and 5th-year 13 29



6/22

T A B L E 2

H o w D i f fi c u l t I s J a p a n e s e ?

A

%

B

%

C

%

D

%

E

%

T o t a l

%

1 9 8 9 S u

r v e y

1 s t

2 3

1 6 . 4

7 7

5 5

3 6

2

5 . 7

4

2 . 9

0

0

1 4 0

1 0 0

2 n d

2 2

3 7 . 3

2 9

4 9 . 2

6

1

0 . 2

2

3 . 4

0

0

5 9

1 0 0

3 r d

1 3

3 4 . 2

1 8

4 7 . 4

7

1

8 . 4

0

0

0

0

3 8

1 0 0

4 1 5 t h

3

2 3 . 1

6

4 6 . 2

2

1

5 . 4

2

1 5 . 4

0

0

1 3

1 0 0

T o t a l

6 1

2 4 . 4

1 3 0

5 2

5 1

2

0 . 4

8

3 . 2

0

0

2 5 0

1 0 0

M e a n 5

3 . 9

8 ,

S D 5

0 . 7

6 0

2 0 0 4 S u

r v e y

1 s t

3

1 2 . 5

1 2

5 0

8

3

3 . 3

1

4 . 2

0

0

2 4

1 0 0

2 n d

9

2 5 . 7

1 7

4 8 . 6

8

2

2 . 9

1

2 . 9

0

0

3 5

1 0 0

3 r d

8

2 6 . 7

1 2

4 0

9

3

0

1

3 . 3

0

0

3 0

1 0 0

4 1 5 t h

6

2 1 . 4

1 2

4 2 . 9

8

2

8 . 6

2

7 . 1

0

0

2 8

1 0 0

T o t a l

2 6

2 2 . 2

5 3

4 5 . 3

3 3

2

8 . 2

5

4 . 3

0

0

1 1 7

1 0 0

M e a n 5

0 . 8

1 2 ,

S D 5

0 . 0

7 5

N o t e s : A 5

v e r y d i f fi c u l t , B 5

d i f fi c u l t ,

C 5

m e d i u m

d i f fi c u l t y , D 5

e a s y , E

5

v e r y e a s y

678 Winter 2009


7/22

T A B L E 3

I t I s E a s i e r t o R

e a d a n d W r i t e T h i s L a n g u

a g e T h a n t o S p e a k a n d U n d e r s t a n d I t

A

%

B

%

C

%

D

%

E

%

T o t a l

%

1 9 8 9 S u

r v e y

1 s t

1 8

1 2 . 8

3 3

2 3 . 4

4 6

3 2 . 6

2 9

2 0 . 6

1 5

1 0 . 6

1 4 1

1 0 0

2 n d

9

1 5 . 3

1 8

3 0 . 5

1 1

1 8 . 6

1 1

1 8 . 6

1 0

1 6 . 9

5 9

1 0 0

3 r d

5

1 3 . 2

7

1 8 . 4

5

1 3 . 2

1 2

3 1 . 6

9

2 3 . 7

3 8

1 0 0

4 1 5 t h

3

2 3 . 2

3

2 3 . 1

3

2 3 . 1

1

7 . 7

3

2 3 . 1

1 3

1 0 0

T o t a l

3 5

1 3 . 9

6 1

2 4 . 3

6 5

2 5 . 9

5 3

2 1 . 1

3 7

1 4 . 7

2 5 1

1 0 0

M e a n 5

3 . 0

2 ,

S D 5

1 . 2

6 8

2 0 0 4 S u

r v e y

1 s t

1

4

8

3 2

9

3 6

5

2 0

2

8

2 5

1 0 0

2 n d

5

1 3 . 5

1 0

2 7

7

1 8 . 9

9

2 4 . 3

6

1 6 . 2

3 7

1 0 0

3 r d

3

9 . 4

1 1

3 4 . 4

7

2 1 . 9

1 0

3 1 . 3

1

3 . 1

3

3 2

1 0 0

4 1 5 t h

0

0

3

1 0 . 3

4

1 3 . 8

1 2

4 1 . 4

1 0

3 4 . 5

2 9

1 0 0

T o t a l

9

7 . 3

3 2

2 6 . 1

2 7

2 2 . 0

3 6

2 9 . 3

1 9

1 5 . 4

1 2 3

1 0 0

M e a n 5

2 . 8

0 ,

S D 5

1 . 1

9 9

N o t e s : A 5

s t r o n g l y a g r e e , B 5

a g r e e ,

C 5

n e i t h e r a g r e e n o r d i s a g r e e , D 5

d i s a g r e e , E 5

s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e



8/22

T A B L E 4 I f

S o

m e o n e S p e n t O n e H o u r a

D a y L e a r n i n g J a p a n e s e , H

o w L o n g W o u l d i t T a k e H

i m o r H e r t o B e c o m e F l u e n t

A

%

B

%

C

%

D

%

E

%

T o t a l

%

1 9 8 9 S u

r v e y

1 s t

2

1 . 4

2 3

1 6 . 6

5 9

4 2 . 4

3 1

2 2 . 3

2 4

1 7 . 3

1 3 9

1 0 0

2 n d

1

1 . 7

4

6 . 9

1 6

2 7 . 6

1 3

2 2 . 4

2 4

4 1 . 4

5 8

1 0 0

3 r d

0

0

0

0

1 5

4 8 . 4

1 0

3 2 . 3

6

1 9 . 4

3 1

1 0 0

4 1 5 t h

0

0

0

0

5

3 8 . 5

4

3 0 . 8

4

3 0 . 8

1 3

1 0 0

T o t a l

3

1 . 2

2 7

1 1 . 2

9 5

3 9 . 4

5 8

2 4 . 1

5 8

2 4 . 1

2 4 1

1 0 0

M e a n 5

2 . 4

1 ,

S D 5

1 . 0

1 3

2 0 0 4 S u

r v e y

1 s t

0

0

6

2 4

8

3 2

7

2 8

4

1 6

2 5

1 0 0

2 n d

0

0

0

0

1 1

3 0 . 6

2 0

5 5 . 6

5

1 3 . 9

3 6

1 0 0

3 r d

0

0

2

6 . 7

9

3 0

8

2 6 . 7

1 1

3 6 . 7

3 0

1 0 0

4 1 5 t h

1

3 . 7

0

0

5

1 8 . 5

1 4

5 1 . 9

7

2 5 . 9

2 7

1 0 0

T o t a l

1

0 . 8

8

6 . 8

3 3

2 8

4 9

4 1 . 5

2 7

2 2 . 9

1 1 8

1 0 0

M e a n 5

2 . 2

1 ,

S D 5

. 9 0 4

N o t e s : A 5

l e s s t h a n a y e a r , B 5

1 – 2 y e a r s

, C 5

3 – 5 y e a r s , D 5

5 – 1 0 y e a r

s , E 5

o n e c a n n o t

680 Winter 2009


9/22

but that almost 70% of each group of learn-ers ultimately learned to speak Japanese(Table 5).

Nature of Language Learning This section focuses on a discussion of whatforeign language learning means to students.

Traditionally, foreign language learning wasconsidered to be learning grammar andtranslation. Practicing with tapes or repeat-ing after a tape was encouraged.

Knowing the grammar rules and vocab-ulary of the target language is certainlyimportant, but linguistic knowledge andvocabulary alone do not automaticallyenable learners to communicate in that lan-guage. Although fewer students in 2004

seemed to think that learning a foreignlanguage requires learning quite a numberof grammatical rules, the results were notsignificantly different from the responsesfrom the grammar-based teaching era,t(370)50.773, p5 .440 (two-tailed). Over-

all, little more than 25% of the students in1989 and fewer than 20% in 2004 agreedthat learning a foreign language consists of learning many grammatical rules (Table 6).However, in both 1989 and 2004, fewer thanhalf the students disagreed with that, al-though about 30% of respondents in 2004were not sure whether that was true or not.

In terms of translating from English,responses from 1989 and 2004 were notsignificantly different, t(368)5 0.124,

p5 .902 (two-tailed). When comparinglevel groups in 1989, however, the re-searcher found that the third-year groupdisagreed significantly more than the first-or fourth- and fifth-year groups with thestatement that learning a foreign language ismostly a matter of translating from English,

F(3,366)5

2.383, p5

.69.Approximately 13% of the studentsfrom the 1989 survey and 17% of the stu-dents from the 2004 survey were unsureabout translation from English being theway to learn Japanese (Table 7). Learning a

TABLE 5

I Believe That I Will Ultimately Learn to Speak This Language Very Well

A % B % C % D % E % Total %1989 Survey

1st 32 22.9 68 48.6 40 28.6 0 0 0 0 140 100

2nd 14 23.7 23 39.0 17 28.8 5 8.5 0 0 59 100

3rd 16 42. 1 14 36.8 5 13.2 3 7.9 0 0 38 100

415th 4 30.8 5 38.5 2 15.4 2 15.4 0 0 13 100

Total 66 26.4 110 44 64 25.6 10 4 0 0 250 100

2004 Survey

1st 3 12.5 12 50 8 33.3 1 4.2 0 0 24 100

2nd 11 30.6 14 38.9 9 25 2 5.6 0 0 36 100

3rd 12 37.5 6 18.8 12 37.5 0 0 2 6.3 32 100

415th 10 34.5 10 34.5 7 24.1 2 6.9 0 0 29 100

Total 36 29.8 42 34.7 36 29.8 5 4.1 2 1.7 121 100

Notes: A5 strongly agree, B5 agree, C5neither agree nor disagree, D5disagree,

E5 strongly disagree



10/22

foreign language is certainly not a matter of translating from English. Needless to say,there are many elements of communicationone simply cannot translate from Englishto Japanese and vice versa. Understandingthe culture behind the language playsan important role in acquiring proficiency

in the target language. Significantly morestudents in 2004 seemed to believe that itwas necessary to know the culture behindthe language, t(370)5 2.47, p5 .014F60% in 1989 and 80% in 2004. However,about 20% in 1989 and 15% in 2004 stillquestioned the necessity of knowing theculture, as can be seen in Table 8.

Concerning repetition and practice,because of the audiolingual approach,

in 1989 most students (77%) naturallybelieved that it was important to repeatand practice, as shown in Table 9. The re-sponses from 2004 were not significantlydifferent, t(340)5 0.304, p5 .761 (two-tailed). This could mean that those 2004

students who agreed with the statementdespite the fact that they were trained usinga different approach compared to those in1989 might be agreeing with the ‘‘practice’’portion of the statement rather than the‘‘repetition’’ part.

Significantly more students agreed with

the importance of practicing with tapes in1989 than in 2004, t(370)5 4.173, po.001(see Table 10). Although the survey askedwhether it was important to practice withthe tapes, by 2004 tapes had been replacedby CDs or online recording materials.Those students who practiced with othermeans of recorded materials might not haveagreed with the statement, ‘‘Practice withtapes.’’ The response from 2004 could have

been similar to that of 1989 had it beenphrased differently, to include CDs or otherrecorded materials, but I cannot confirmthis possibility.

Students both in 1989 and 2004seemed to understand that learning a for-

TABLE 6

Learning a Foreign Language Is Mostly a Matter of Learning a Lot of

Grammar Rules

A % B % C % D % E % Total %

1989 Survey

1st 4 2.8 28 19.9 47 33.3 53 37.6 9 6.4 141 100

2nd 0 0 17 28.8 9 15.3 21 35.6 12 20.3 59 100

3rd 0 0 15 39.5 10 26.3 7 18.4 6 15.8 38 100

415th 0 0 3 23.1 4 30.8 4 30.8 2 15.4 13 100

Total 4 1.6 63 25.1 70 27.9 85 33.86 29 11.6 251 100

2004 Survey

1st 1 4 1 4 11 44 11 44 1 4 25 100

2nd 0 0 8 22.2 12 33.3 13 36.1 3 8.3 36 100

3rd 0 0 6 19.4 11 35.5 9 29.0 5 16.1 31 100

415th 1 3.4 6 20.7 6 20.7 13 44.8 3 10.3 29 100

Total 2 1.7 21 17.4 40 33.1 46 38.0 12 9.9 121 100



682 Winter 2009


11/22

eign language consists of more than trans-lation, and that the culture behind thelanguage is important. Quite a few studentsdid not deny that foreign language learningconsists of the study of grammatical rules,and they perceived repeating and practic-ing, as well as practicing with the tapes, asimportant.

Learning and CommunicationStrategiesAs mentioned previously, effective languagelearners (1) are eager to communicate,(2) are not afraid of making errors, (3) attendto overall meaning instead of single word,and (4) are willing and accurate guessers.

In terms of making errors, studentsfrom 1989 and 2004 did not respond any

differently in a sense of statistical sig-nificance, t(349)51.799, p5 .73 (two-tailed). However, difference in the totalnumber of responses was observed. Se-venty-seven percent and 83% of the total

number of students in 1989 and 2004, re-spectively, disagreed with this statement.‘‘One should not say anything in the foreignlanguage until s/he can say it correctly,’’as in Table 11. Among the 1989 studentgroups, however, the fourth- and fifth-yeargroups disagreed with the statement sig-nificantly more than the first-year group.

With respect to guessing the definitionof unknown words, there was an increasein the acceptance of guessing between the1989 and 2004 groups, t(370)5 3.774,

po.001. In 1989, only 50% of the stu-dents thought it was acceptable to guessat the meaning of an unknown word, butin 2004, 75% thought that guessing wasacceptable. This is a possible effect of newmethodology or the newly adapted text-book, which is based on a more contem-porary approach. Still, more than 25% in1989 and 20% in 2004 were unsure, asshown in Table 12.

Are students eager to use Japanesewhen given the opportunity? The students

TABLE 7

Learning a Foreign Language Is Mostly a Matter of Translating From English

A % B % C % D % E % Total %

1989 Survey

1st 2 1.4 10 7.1 19 13.6 72 51.4 37 26.4 140 100

2nd 0 0 4 6.8 8 13.6 28 47.5 19 32.2 59 100

3rd 0 0 1 2.6 2 5.26 15 39.5 20 52.6 38 100

415th 1 7.6 0 0 3 23.1 5 38.5 4 30.8 13 100

Total 3 1.2 15 6 32 12.8 120 48 80 32 250 100

2004 Survey

1st 0 0 1 4 3 12 14 56 7 28 25 100

2nd 0 0 1 2.9 6 17.1 20 57.1 8 22.9 35 100

3rd 0 0 1 3.2 5 16.1 18 58.1 7 22.6 31 100

415th 0 0 2 6.9 6 20.7 12 41.4 9 31 29 100

Total 0 0 5 4.2 20 16.7 64 53.3 31 25.8 120 100





12/22

T A B L E 8

I t I s N e c e s s a r y t o K n o w t h e F o r e i g n C u l

t u r e i n O r d e r t o S p e a k t h e

L a n g u a g e

A

%

B

%

C

%

D

%

E

%

T o t a l

%

1 9 8 9 S u

r v e y

1 s t

1 1

7 . 8

6 9

4 8 . 9

2 7

1 9 . 1

2 9

2 0 . 6

5

3 . 6

1 4 1

1 0 0

2 n d

1 2

2 0

2 8

4 6 . 7

1 0

1 6 . 7

9

1 5

1

1 . 7

6 0

1 0 0

3 r d

9

2 3 . 7

1 4

3 6 . 8

6

1 5 . 8

5

1 3 . 2

4

1 0 . 5

3 8

1 0 0

4 1 5 t h

3

2 3 . 1

6

4 6 . 2

0

0

2

1 5 . 4

2

1 5 . 4

1 3

1 0 0

T o t a l

3 5

1 3 . 9

1 1 7

4 6 . 4

4 3

1 7 . 1

4 5

1 7 . 9

1 2

4 . 8

2 5 2

1 0 0

2 0 0 4 S u

r v e y

1 s t

2

8

1 3

5 2

4

1 6

6

2 4

0

0

2 5

1 0 0

2 n d

5

1 4 . 3

1 9

5 4 . 3

6

1 7 . 1

5

1 4 . 3

0

0

3 5

1 0 0

3 r d

8

2 5 . 8

1 3

4 1 . 9

6

1 9 . 4

4

1 2 . 9

0

0

3 1

1 0 0

4 1 5 t h

6

2 0 . 7

1 9

6 5 . 5

3

1 0 . 3

1

3 . 5

0

0

2 9

1 0 0

T o t a l

2 1

1 7 . 5

6 4

5 3 . 3

1 9

1 5 . 8

1 6

1 3 . 3

0

0

1 2 0

1 0 0

N o t e s : A 5

s t r o n g l y a g r e e , B 5

a g r e e ,

C 5

n e i t h e r a g r e e n o r d i s a g r e e , D 5

d i s a g r e e , E 5

s t r o n g l y d i s a g r e e

684 Winter 2009


13/22

sampled were learning Japanese as a foreignlanguage, without much of an opportunityto use it. Were they taking advantage of every opportunity they had to speak

Japanese? Significantly fewer students in2004 than those in 1989 agreed that, if theyheard someone speaking Japanese, they

would take advantage of the opportunity topractice speaking Japanese, t(362)52.267,

p5 .024. Fewer than half the students in1989 were not sure if they would approacha Japanese speaker to practice, and almosthalf in 2004 would be reluctant to do that,several commenting that it was rude. Agreater percentage of students in 2004 sim-ply would not approach Japanese speakersto practice Japanese, as shown in Table 13.

While students thought it acceptable tomake errors, they did not seem inclined touse every opportunity to practice Japanesein 1989 and even less so in 2004. An in-crease was shown in 2004 in the acceptanceof guessing.

Motivations and ExpectationsThis final section discusses student re-sponses to why students learn Japanese.Potential job opportunities were a big mo-tivation in 1989, as there were certainlymore jobs that required Japanese profi-ciency in 1989, as discussed above. The

instrumental motivation was still high in2004, even after the Japanese economy haddeclined from its peak growth and businessmajors had disappeared from Japanesecourses.

In the students’ expectation for futureopportunities to use Japanese, the re-sponses from both time periods were notsignificantly different, t(369)50.195, p5.846. Overall, almost 85% of students in

both 1989 and 2004 believed that theywould have opportunities to use Japanese.Although first-year students and fourth-year students in 2004 seemed to have helda stronger conviction than their counter-parts in 1989 (Table 14), the differences

TABLE 9

It Is Important to Repeat and Practice a Lot

A % B % C % D % E % Total %

1989 Survey

1st 67 60.4 42 37.8 2 1.8 0 0 0 0 111 100

2nd 36 62.1 19 32.8 1 1.7 0 0 2 3.5 58 100

3rd 26 68.4 12 31.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 100

415th 5 38.5 7 53.9 0 0 0 0 1 7.7 13 100

Total 134 60.9 80 36.4 3 1.4 0 0 3 1.4 220 100

2004 Survey

1st 11 44 13 52 1 4 0 0 0 0 25 100

2nd 28 77.8 8 22.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 100

3rd 17 53.1 12 37.5 3 9.4 0 0 0 0 32 100

415th 14 48.3 14 48.3 1 3.5 0 0 0 0 29 100

Total 70 57.4 47 38.5 5 4.1 0 0 0 0 122 100





14/22


15/22


16/22

The difficulty of speaking/listening andreading/writing was overall perceived to beequal in both groups. All the groups in the1989 groups held the same perception, ex-cept for the fourth- and fifth-year group.The groups from the 2004 survey seemed to

believe that it was easier to speak/under-stand Japanese than to read/write Japanese;they believed that they must become moreproficient in speaking and listening thandid the students in 1989. They were morelikely to have more opportunities to prac-tice speaking due to changes in curriculumand teaching methodology. It is encourag-ing that a large number of students believedthat they would learn to speak Japanese

despite the large percentage of studentswho did not think it is an easy language.

Nature of Language Learning Students seemed to know that learning a for-eign language was more than translating from

English. They also seemed to believe that itwas necessary to know the foreign culture inorder to speak the language, especially in2004. Nonetheless, a small percentage (4.2%)of students still did not deny that learning aforeign language required the study of gram-

matical rules even in 2004.Although a proficiency-oriented curric-

ulum seems to have replaced the grammar-based curriculum in Japanese pedagogy,learners still associate foreign languagelearning with the study of grammar rules.Students probably feel that they have learn-ed something tangible when they studygrammar, and learning grammar and vocab-ulary is deeply embedded in their language

learning system. It is reasonable to as-sume that some students may come toequate language learning solely with gram-mar learning. Although students mustknow grammar as well as vocabulary, oneimplication of this study is that the focus of

TABLE 12

It Is OK to Guess If You Do Not Know a Word in the Foreign Language

A % B % C % D % E % Total %

1989 Survey

1st 16 11.4 50 35.7 43 30.7 24 17.1 7 5 140 100

2nd 3 5.1 30 50.8 12 20.3 8 13.6 6 10.2 59 100

3rd 12 31.6 10 26.3 9 23.7 5 13.2 2 5.3 38 100

415th 3 23.1 3 23.1 5 38.5 1 7.7 1 7.7 13 100

Total 34 13.6 93 37.2 69 27.6 38 15.2 16 6.4 250 100

Mean5 3.36, SD5 1.094

2004 Survey

1st 1 4 13 52 7 28 4 16 0 0 25 100

2nd 9 25 20 55.6 5 13.9 2 5.6 0 0 36 100

3rd 9 28.1 12 37.5 8 25 2 6.3 1 3.1 32 100

415th 5 17.2 17 58.6 5 17.2 1 3.5 1 3.4 29 100

Total 24 19.7 62 50.8 25 20.5 9 7.4 2 1.6 122 100

Mean5 3.8, SD5 0.899

Notes: A5 strongly agree, B5 agree, C5neither agree nor disagree, D5disagree,E5 strongly disagree

688 Winter 2009


17/22

the curriculum should not just be grammarand vocabulary. As the results showed, amajority of the students expected to use thelanguage to interact with Japanese speakersand wanted to obtain a good job. In orderto respond to the students’ expectations,instructors can design the curriculum

around language functions, such as havingstudents talk about themselves and theirlikes/dislikes, and learning to make plans.Then students can learn to perform thelanguage functions through communicativeactivities in the classroom. That way, thestudents’ need to use language for commu-nication will be met.

While a majority of students in the2004 survey believed that it was important

to understand the culture behind the lan-guage, not everyone did. Instructors mayneed to reexamine our curriculum anddetermine whether or not to incorporatesociolinguistic components into teaching.To reach advanced proficiency, learners re-

quire a greater degree of sociolinguisticcompetence. For instance, learners of Japa-nese seem to have difficulty in acquiringinterpretive skills to successfully commu-nicate in Japanese. They often rely toomuch on what is spoken, but they are un-aware of messages sent to them through

body language and tones. Being able to un-derstand unspoken messages is crucial tobecoming a successful user of the language.A deeper integration of culture and lan-guage must be presented in the classroom.

Learning and CommunicationStrategiesAlthough this study does not give a clear in-

dication of whether students have the char-acteristics of good learners, their responsesmay reveal their learning approaches. Goodlanguage learners have been defined as(1) eager to communicate, (2) not afraid tomake errors, (3) attentive to the overall

TABLE 13

If I Heard Someone Speak Japanese, I Would Go up to Them so That I Could

Practice Speaking the Language

A % B % C % D % E % Total %

1989 Survey

1st 6 4.3 19 13.5 65 46.1 36 25.5 15 10.6 141 100

2nd 1 1.7 11 18.6 26 44.1 19 32.2 2 3.4 59 100

3rd 1 3.3 7 23.3 10 33.3 8 26.7 4 13.3 30 100

415th 1 7.7 1 7.7 5 38.5 5 38.5 1 7.7 13 100

Total 9 3.7 38 15.6 106 43.6 68 28.0 22 9.1 243 100

2004 Survey

1st 0 0 3 12 9 36 11 44 2 8 25 100

2nd 1 2.9 3 8.6 12 34.3 18 51.4 1 2.9 35 100

3rd 1 3.1 4 12.5 14 43.8 9 28.1 4 12.5 32 100

415th 1 3.4 1 3.5 9 31 15 51.7 3 10.3 29 100

Total 3 2.5 11 9.1 44 36.4 53 43.8 10 8.3 121 100





18/22

meaning instead of single words, and (4)willing and accurate guessers.

While students seem to believe that it isacceptable to make errors in communicat-ing in a foreign language, they do not seemto be eager to maximize their use of Japa-nese when given the opportunity. Are they

too shy, or afraid of speaking Japanese out-side of class? Several students commentedin personal communication that it is rude toapproach a Japanese speaker to practicespeaking. Or it could be that they are notcomfortable or confident speaking Japanesewith native speakers. Do students commu-nicate in Japanese with each other in class?Are instructors patient enough to use Japa-nese to communicate with them as much as

possible even in the beginning level? In-structors must begin providing ampleopportunities for speaking practice at thebeginning level and continue habitually.

More students in 2004 thought it ac-ceptable to guess the meaning of unknown

words. As mentioned above, 1989 was thetail end of the audiolingual era and gram-mar-based teaching approach. Grammaticalrules were explained in class, and studentsmemorized new vocabulary words andmodel conversations. The grammar rulesand vocabulary items used in class were

limited to previously introduced items.There were very few opportunities for stu-dents to communicate and almost noopportunities to derive the meaning of un-known words from context. However, evenin 2004, 20% of students still were not sureif it was acceptable to guess, and with addi-tional years of study, the data remained thesame. It is probable that they did not knowhow to extract the meaning of an unknown

word from its context. Class activities couldmore actively address this skill. Authenticmaterials, such as tourist brochures, canbe used when the topic of the lesson istraveling, for example. While it is impro-bable that students will be familiar with all

TABLE 14

If I Learn to Speak Japanese Very Well, I Will Have Many Opportunities

to Use It

A % B % C % D % E % Total %

1989 Survey

1st 55 39.3 59 42.1 24 17.1 2 1.4 0 0 140 100

2nd 24 40.7 28 47.5 2 3.4 4 6.8 1 1.7 59 100

3rd 23 60.5 11 29.0 2 5.3 2 5.3 0 0 38 100

415th 6 46.2 4 30.8 0 0 2 15.4 1 7.7 13 100

Total 108 43.2 102 40.8 28 11.2 10 4 2 0.8 250 100

2004 Survey

1st 8 32 15 60 2 8 0 0 0 0 25 100

2nd 11 30.6 20 55.6 5 13.9 0 0 0 0 36 100

3rd 16 51.6 7 22.6 6 19.4 2 6.5 0 0 31 100

415th 10 34.5 15 51.7 4 13.8 0 0 0 0 29 100

Total 45 37.2 57 47.1 17 14 2 1.7 0 0 121 100



690 Winter 2009


19/22

the words in a brochure, they can guess themeanings of new vocabulary words becausethey have an idea of what kind of informa-tion a travel brochure contains. Since stu-dents are expecting to use the language forcommunication, authentic materials thatare culturally rich in nature will more read-ily engage their interest. Similarly, students

should learn to rely on the meaning of akanji (Chinese character) or the meaningof the radical of a kanji. Very often, one canguess a meaning of unknown kanji when heor she knows the meaning of its radicalusing the context as a clue. These wouldbe valuable skills and strategies to developin class and maintain after completinglanguage study.

Motivations and ExpectationsInstrumental motivation was high in 1989and still remained high in 2004. Althoughthe Japanese economy is not as good as itwas in the 1980s, a large number of stu-

dents still believe in job opportunities.Surprisingly, the results of the 2004 surveydid not vary much from 1989 even thoughin reality there may not be as many jobopportunities. This result may reflect anoverall high motivation to learn Japaneserather than one type of motivation (i.e., in-strumental or integrative), as evidenced by

high scores in both years.This study indicates that in 2004 stu-

dents still expected to use Japanese forcommunication and wanted to get to knowits speakers better. A classroom with stu-dents who are already motivated to learnthe language to communicate with nativespeakers creates an ideal situation whereeffective learning only requires languagefunctions to meet their needs. Grammar

and vocabulary must also be learned, but if the class provides nothing further, highlymotivated students may lose their interestin learning Japanese.

This study reveals that students aremotivated to learn Japanese despite their

TABLE 15

If I Learn to Speak Japanese Very Well, It Will Help Me Get a Good Job

A % B % C % D % E % Total %

1989 Survey

1st 47 33.3 55 39.0 29 20.6 8 5.7 2 1.4 141 100

2nd 22 37.3 25 42.4 9 15.3 1 1.7 2 3.4 59 100

3rd 18 50 10 27.8 6 16.7 2 5.6 0 0 36 100

415th 5 38.5 4 30.8 2 15.4 1 7.7 1 7.7 13 100

Total 92 40.0 94 37.8 46 18.5 12 4.8 5 2.0 249 100

2004 Survey

1st 6 24 10 40 8 32 1 4 0 0 25 100

2nd 10 27.8 14 38.9 10 27.8 2 5.6 0 0 36 100

3rd 15 48.4 9 29.0 6 19.4 0 0 1 3.2 31 100

415th 10 34.5 13 44.8 6 20.7 0 0 0 0 29 100

Total 41 33.9 46 38.0 30 24.8 3 2.5 1 0.8 121 100





20/22

realization that it will take a long time tobecome fluent. They seem to expect to de-vote the necessary time to become fluent in

Japanese. At the same time, some studentshold traditional ideas of language learning inwhich only grammatical rules are necessaryand communicative practices do not matter.

To assist learners in achieving their

goals, instructors can realistically and ex-plicitly inform them of the facts aboutforeign language learning. Students needto know the time required to achieve anadvanced level of proficiency and that theymust interact with other speakers, practic-ing the language to become proficient. Theclass activities and assessments must beconsistent with the information given tostudents about effective ways of learning

to speak the language. Since the students’integrative and instrumental motivationsare high, it should not be difficult to engagethem in true communication during class.One cannot overemphasize the importanceof teaching Japanese as a tool for commu-

nication, including proficiency-orientedcurriculum, integration of cultural ele-ments into language study, and teachingstrategies of learning and communication.

Many language instructors are aware of the proficiency-oriented approach, includ-ing communication strategies. Further, it iscommonly recognized that interaction and

communication are important to learningthe foreign language, as well as the need toknow the culture to communicate effec-tively. These data show that not all learnershold the preconceptions and expectationsof learning a foreign language through aproficiency-oriented approach. Therefore,as language instructors, we should stop andreflect upon the most effective way to teachlearners with various understandings about

language learning and its process.

References

Brod, R., & Bettina, H. (1992). Foreignlanguage enrollments in United States institu-

TABLE 16

I Would Like to Learn Japanese so I Can Get to Know Its Speakers Better

A % B % C % D % E % Total %

1989 Survey

1st 35 24.8 63 44.7 34 24.1 5 3.5 4 2.8 141 100

2nd 24 40.7 23 39.0 11 18.6 0 0 1 1.7 59 100

3rd 24 63.2 8 21.1 4 10.5 1 2.6 1 2.6 38 100

415th 4 30.8 7 53.9 1 7.69 0 0 1 7.7 13 100

Total 87 34.7 101 40.2 50 19.9 6 2.4 7 2.8 251 100

2004 Survey

1st 5 20 15 60 3 12 2 8 0 0 25 100

2nd 12 33.3 20 55.6 4 11.1 0 0 0 0 36 100

3rd 15 46.9 11 34.4 5 15.6 1 3.1 0 0 32 100

415th 12 41.4 13 44.8 4 13.8 0 0 0 0 29 100

Total 44 36.1 59 48.4 16 13.1 3 2.5 0 0 122 100



692 Winter 2009


21/22

tions of higher education, Fall 1990. ADFLBulletin, 23, 6–10.

Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second languageacquisition. New York: Oxford University Press.

Freed, B. (1995). Second language acquisition ina study abroad context. Studies in Bilingualism9. Philadelphia: University of PennsylvaniaPress.

Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. (1959). Moti-vational variables in second language acqui-sition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13,266–272.

Gardner, R., & Lambert, W. (1972). Attitudeand motivation in second language learning .Rowley, MA: Newbury.

Hernandez, T. (2006). Integrative motivationas a predictor of success in the intermediateforeign language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 39, 605–617.

Horwitz, E. (1988). Beliefs about languagelearning of beginning university foreign lan-guage students. Modern Language Journal, 72,283–294.

Lee, J. F., & VanPatten, B. (2003). Making communicative language teaching happen (2nd

ed.). San Francisco: McGraw-Hill.Long, M. (2000). Focus on form in task-basedlanguage teaching. In R. D. Lambert &

E. Shohamy (Eds.), Language policy and peda-gogy (pp. 179–192). Philadelphia: Benjamins.

Mangubhai, F. (1991). The processing behav-iors of adult second language learners and

their relationship to second language profi-ciency. Applied Linguistics, 12, 268–298.

Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2001). Changingperspectives on good language learners. TE-SOL Quarterly, 35, 307–322.

Oh, M. (1996). Beliefs about language learning and foreign language anxiety: A study of Ameri-can university students learning Japanese.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universityof Texas at Austin.

Omaggio, A. (1986). Teaching language incontext. Boston: Heinle.

Oxford, R., & Shearin, J. (1994). Languagelearning motivation: Expanding the theore-tical framework. Modern Language Journal, 78,12–28.

Ramage, K. (1990). Motivational factors andpersistence in foreign language study. Lan-guage Learning , 40, 182–219.

Rubin, J. (1981). Study of cognitive processesin second language learning. Applied Linguis-

tics, 2, 117–131.Tohsaku, Y. (2004). Yookoso. San Francisco:McGraw-Hill.

APPENDIX I

Please choose the most appropriate answer for each question.

A5 strongly agreeB5 agreeC5 neither agree nor disagreeD5 disagreeE5 strongly disagree

The Difficulty of Language Learning1. Some languages are easier to learn than others.

A B C D E2. Japanese is: A) a very difficult language, B) a difficult language, C) a language of

medium difficulty, D) an easy language, E) a very easy language.3. I believe that I will ultimately learn to speak this language very well.

A B C D E4. If someone spent one hour a day learning Japanese, how long would it take him/her

to become fluent? A) less than a year, B) 1–2 years, C) 3–5 years, D) 5–10 years,E) You cannot learn Japanese in one hour a day.

5. It is easier to read and write this language than to speak and understand it.A B C D E



22/22

The Nature of Language Learning6. It is necessary to know the foreign culture in order to speak the language.

A B C D E7. It is better to learn a foreign language in the foreign country.

A B C D E8. Learning a foreign language is mostly a matter of learning a lot of grammar rules.

A B C D E9. Learning a foreign language is different from learning other school subjects.

A B C D E10. Learning a foreign language is mostly a matter of translating from English.

A B C D E

Learning and Communication StrategiesLearning Strategies11. It is important to repeat and practice a lot.

A B C D E12. It is important to practice with the tapes.

A B C D ECommunication Strategies13. You should not say anything in the foreign language until you can say it correctly.

A B C D E14. If I heard someone speak Japanese, I would go up to them so that I could practice

speaking the language.A B C D E

15. It is OK to guess if you do not know a word in the foreign language.

A B C D E

Motivations and Expectations16. If I get to speak this language very well, I will have many opportunities to use it.

A B C D E17. If I learn to speak this language very well, it will help me get a good job.

A B C D E18. I would like to learn this language so that I can get to know its speakers better.

A B C D E

694 Winter 2009

hayashi 2009 foreign language annals

Documents