Communicative Competence in the 21st Century : Issues in Japan’s University English Language Education

0
667

This paper is written with a view of preparing future global citizens for communicative competence in the 21 century from the perspective of university English program education and administration. The specific goal of this paper is to examine the issues that need to be addressed and discuss what it would take to solve the issues and make substantive changes in the way English is taught in Japanese universities. Now that communicative language teaching is becoming a standard for English language teaching in Japan, the paper also critiques how it is being implemented in the university and outlines topics for consideration for English language program enhancement. Divided Perspectives and Diverse Approaches The question of what objective University English language education in Japan should uphold has been a subject of debate for some time, divided roughly into those who view the objective as the acquisition of “intellectual acuity” and those who endorse the acquisition of language skills for communicative and other practical purposes. This divide is also reflected in a survey conducted by Japan Association of College English Teachers (JACET) in 2003 that received responses from 787 university English instructors. The survey indicates that 35.5 percent of respondents viewed the objective of foreign language education in the university as the acquisition of intellectual acuity and 51.7 percent viewed the objective as understanding of the culture and circumstances of other countries. Those who responded that the objective is the acquisition of an ability to use the new language for practical purposes such as communication was merely 24.0 percent (Morizumi et al., 2010). Some scholars suggest these are not mutually exclusive goals. For example, Tajino (2004) states that practical language skills are necessary to facilitate the comprehension of literary works and academic papers that ultimately facilitate “intellectual Communicative Competence in the 21 Century 22 acuity” and that “intellectual acuity” is critical in order to communicate substantive thoughts and arguments. Nonetheless, it is somewhat disquieting to note that such disparate thinking about the fundamental goals has existed among university English instructors. More importantly, it is a problem that a significant number of instructors have not supported the instruction of communicative English as a goal of English language education despite the widely-voiced need of the learners to acquire English in order to meet their career and personal goals. Today, more than ever before, a vibrant discussion of what curriculum and instructional approaches will best prepare students to develop the type of English language proficiency that meets the communicative needs of a rapidly globalizing world is imperative. As Tsui and Tollefson (2007) state, English proficiency along with information-technology skills are inseparable mediational tools that are critical in the global age. Not having one important mediational tool as a mother tongue is an incredible challenge for many countries including Japan. Although it is not known what results a similar survey conducted today will reveal, a cursory examination of the syllabus for first year English as Foreign Language (EFL) courses offered in private and public universities in Japan shows an amazing diversity in how EFL is actually taught in the university classrooms. For example, an English communication course in one university has as its goal, communicative competence in English which incorporates the four skills—listening-speaking and reading-writing. In another university, the emphasis is placed on pronunciation and basic conversation with no instruction in reading or writing. The diverse approaches to university English education have to do in part with the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) directives for university reform that began with the sweeping revision of the Standards for the Establishment of Universities and allowed the individual universities to push for innovative ways to enhance their uniqueness. Influenced by the reform initiatives, a significant number of universities have implemented English for Specific Purposes (ESP) courses, for example, English for Economics, English for Science and Technology, and English for International Studies to better meet the needs of their own students. More recently, an increasing number of university departments have also began to offer content courses using English as an instructional language with the aim of teaching both English and knowledge of the discipline. Called Content-Based Instruction (CBI), this approach is endorsed by MEXT as a way of attracting foreign students to internationalize Japan’s higher education. On the other hand, however, some universities continue to assign EFL courses to the general education unit which, often offers instruction focusing on English communication in order Communicative Competence in the 21 Century 23 to meet the basic needs of students coming from different departments, though the content of these courses too appears to be quite different across universities. Some universities are even outsourcing their English programs to language conversation schools, giving an impression that English education is not an integral part of university education or that it is too specialized and difficult to implement in-house. Such diversity would not be an issue if there are indications that English programs are turning out students whose English proficiency measures up to international standards. However, it warrants a closer examination when there is evidence to suggest that Japan’s English language education is lagging behind many countries as indicated by Educational Testing Service (ETS) (2008) which reports that in 2007, Japan was placed the 29 among the 30 nations in Asia in TOEFL scores. It is also a fact that multinational companies in Japan find it necessary to provide English training programs to their new recruits who are from top tier Japanese universities. Given the status quo of English language education in Japanese universities then, a search for new direction is critical. Hence, this paper endeavors to identify major issues in English language education which calls for modification. Then it examines the new middle and high school English curriculum (Shin Shidou Youryou), notes the discrepancy between the articulated curriculum and what is actually taught in the classroom that arises in part from the university entrance exam system, and discusses this as a source of difficulty for the university and another major issue which needs to be addressed. Finally, this paper explores the fundamental issues of communicative language teaching (CLT) which is becoming a standard for English language teaching in Japan and outlines topics for consideration for English language program enhancement. Issues for the university English programs An important issue for university English programs today is the articulation of learning objectives and establishment of a guideline to achieve the objectives. Two decades ago, in 1992, at the request of University Council (Daigaku Shingikai), JACET published a guideline for English teaching in the university, and according to this document, the objective of foreign language education in the university is the development of character (jinkakuteki na touya) at its foundation and communication skills at the practical level. Since then, the environment that surrounds the university and affects the students has changed drastically due to social and economic developments accompanying globalization. Therefore, reconsidering the fundamental question of what Japan’s university English Communicative Competence in the 21 Century 24 language education should uphold as its ultimate objective is particularly vital. This need for further discussion is in fact suggested by Morozumi et al. (2010) as an agenda for JACET. At the same time, in order to minimize the gap between the articulated curriculum and the implemented curriculum that tends to occur in the absence of effective curriculum implementation strategies, there is also an exigent need to discuss and arrive at a guideline for materials development and instructional practices, and to define the type of teacher training necessary for teaching to the curriculum and facilitating student learning. This discussion should involve the clarification of the meaning of communicative competence and Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) since there exists a tendency to consider communication skills in a limited scope and define it as basic conversation skills. Another important agenda for university English programs is to set clear proficiency standards and expectations that are connected to the curriculum and establish a system of learning outcomes assessment that does not have a negative washback effect on English teaching and learning. Actually, in 2003, MEXT facilitated a wide variety of reform projects across the schools from elementary to university under the initiative, “Action Plan to Cultivate Japanese with English Abilities” which resulted in an articulation of English proficiency standards (for example, Society for Testing English Proficiency (STEP) English Proficiency Exam Level 3 upon completion of Middle School, and English Proficiency Level 2 upon completion of High School). However, no specific proficiency standard was set for university English programs. This is perhaps a blessing since standardized test scores sometimes do not measure actual English proficiency (Choi, 2008). Also, it has been pointed out that STEP exams do not reflect the secondary school curriculum, and that proficiency standards designated by MEXT using the STEP exams are too be ambitious for the time allotted to English language education in the secondary schools (Hato, 2005). Additionally, standardized tests cannot assess the students’ learning out