Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Intenzive
Intenzive
Intenzive
The aim of this article is to report on a study that documented the views and practices of
communicative language teaching (CLT) by Japanese second language inservice teachers.
Compared to theoretical developments of CLT (e.g., see Savignon, 1991), little is known
about what second language teachers actually understand by CLT and how they implement
CLT in classrooms. Using multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and sur-
veys, the article reports how teachers defined CLT and implemented it in their classrooms.
The study identified how teachers actually dealt with CLT in their classrooms teaching Japa-
nese. It is interesting to note that their views and actions dealt little with the academic
literature pertaining to CLT or their education (be it preservice or inservice) in learning
about CLT. Instead, teachers resorted to their personal ideas and experiences, solidifying
their notions of foreign language (L2) teaching in further pursuing their evolving concep-
tions of CLT.
EVER SINCE HYMES (1971) DISCUSSED THE tion, we begin by defining CLT by using various
idea of communicative competence and Canale sources from academia and government policy to
and Swain (1980) considered its implications for highlight some of the numerous views from these
language teaching, communicative language particular perspectives. We further include an
teaching (CLT) (Savignon, 1991) has achieved Australian context to help define CLT from a
prominence. Conference papers, articles, and policy perspective, while also allowing such infor-
books abound that support and promote CLT. In mation to situate our study. We then explore the
the main, scholars advance CLT by exploring its relevance of teacher beliefs, knowledge, and
meaning and use in classrooms. Writers consider practices. Here we review CLT investigations and
various facets and mutations of CLT, providing highlight the complexity of understanding rela-
valuable codification of CLT elements (e.g., tionships among beliefs, knowledge, and prac-
Berns, 1990; Brown, 1994; Howatt, 1984; Little- tices. Inherent in such a presentation is the need
wood, 1981; Mitchell, 1988; Richards & Rodgers, to explore change. This we do briefly, with the
1986; Savignon, 1983, 1997; Savignon & Berns, discussion culminating in offering the research
1984, 1987; Schulz & Bartz, 1975). Even within questions. Our intent here is to argue for a theo-
the expanding literature concerning CLT, how- retical base from language teachers’ perspectives.
ever, its meaning for practitioners receives scant We next outline the research methodology for
attention. the project. This combined information positions
In this research project, we document second the presentation of our findings, followed by a
language (Japanese) teachers’ CLT using their discussion of issues.
perspectives.1 To set the stage for this investiga-
TABLE 1
Participants in the Study, Including Their Participation in the Three Data Collection Strategies
CLT: PRACTICAL UNDERSTANDINGS Four main conceptions about CLT were dis-
cussed by the teachers: (a) CLT is learning to
In this section, we bring together data from communicate in the L2, (b) CLT uses mainly
interviews, surveys, and observations to describe speaking and listening, (c) CLT involves little
teachers’ beliefs, knowledge, and prac- grammar instruction, (d) CLT uses (time-con-
tices—their understandings—of CLT. In the first suming) activities. How teachers talked about and
part, we outline the salient issues they conveyed defined their notions of CLT were developed
in the interviews and responded to on their sur- through these four main conceptions that were
502 The Modern Language Journal 83 (1999)
revealed through LOTE (Japanese) teachers’ 1989; Koide, 1976; Lange, 1982] and became par-
voices, responses, and actions. ticularly highlighted when foreign language or
LOTE instruction spread to primary schools
CLT Is Learning to Communicate in the L2. Almost [Clyne, 1977; Heining-Boynton, 1990]). The
all teachers globally defined CLT as learning to teachers relayed their frustrations when discuss-
communicate with other people using the L2. A ing these problems with (communicative) lan-
few specifically added to that definition the idea guage teaching.
of using language for real purposes. Participants As Japanese language teaching and learning
relayed their sentiments as the following teachers became popular (and required) in primary
did. schools, these high school teachers faced articu-
I would hope that I would, ought to teach students lation problems. Alicia described how the teach-
how to communicate both orally and in a written ers did not necessarily welcome previous lan-
form so that I would expect them to hold a conversa- guage learning experiences by their students in
tion at the best of their ability. (Debra) primary schools. Tracey maintained that LOTE
It’s teaching language that can be used by students in teaching needed to be accepted and supported
real life, in real life-like situations. It’s used for real within the school and wider community, and Yu-
purposes. There must be some need to communicate
miko yearned for collegiality.
in order to be able to challenge the students to use
language communicatively. (Joan)
I think the most difficult thing is [the] students com-
Learning to communicate was an important ing from [the] primary school. Some of them maybe
attribute of CLT, and, through the survey, these have 3 years, and some of them maybe have 1 year in
teachers agreed that the students’ motivation to primary school, some of them have nothing. Then,
they’re coming to Year 8. And it’s very difficult to
continue language study was directly related to
have the mixed classes. Then, when you’re getting to
their success in actually learning to speak the Year 9, you have students who are coming to do Japa-
language. They also suggested that students did nese in Year 9, who have no Japanese, who have
not have to answer a question posed in Japanese various experiences [and you start] all over again.
with a complete sentence and strongly agreed (Alicia)
that one could not teach language without cul- Another issue is at the moment, we’re in [a] real
ture, while concurring that cultural information transition period in the community with acceptance
should be given in the L2 as much as possible. and nonacceptance of LOTE teaching as valuable.
These teachers were clearly aware that simulated Some people value it, some people don’t value it at
real-life situations should be used to teach conver- all. And some of the people in the community don’t
value it, or colleagues [within the school don’t value
sational skills, yet were ultimately realistic in
it either]. So that’s very difficult until we have a cul-
agreeing that most language classes did not pro- ture of, no, not a culture of, uh, a mindset, where
vide enough opportunity for the development of having a second language is valuable. That’s the be-
such conversational skills. It is clear that teachers ginning and the end. Learning all languages is valu-
saw the value in what CLT offered; nonetheless, able. That’s it. So you learn it all through primary
their scepticism about attaining communicative [school], secondary [school]. It’s exactly the same,
skills surfaced. The participants neither agreed science, English, math you do it. It’s just part of what
nor disagreed that the ability to speak a language you do. But we are not there yet. So until we get to
was innate; therefore, they believed that everyone that point, this transition is very difficult. We have an
capable of speaking a first language should be opposition from others. (Tracey)
I also feel it’s difficult to receive support from the
capable of learning to speak a L2. Although there
school just because I’m not Australian. I think it’s
was the potential for communication in their true. We don’t usually communicate with other col-
classrooms, the teachers were unsure about the leagues. We talk to each other only within close
extent to which they had the time to promote it friends. Though it’s not related to language teaching
and whether or not all students were capable of directly, I think it is a problem. (Yumiko)
learning it.
Three challenges created further tensions for On the survey the LOTE teachers as a group
teachers in promoting communication in the L2. neither agreed nor disagreed that they needed to
These included subject matter articulation, lack be fluent themselves to begin to teach communi-
of institutional support, and their own lack of catively. Nonetheless, during the interviews, the
proficiency in the L2. (These three issues have teachers commented on their own (inadequate)
plagued the language professions in both Austra- language proficiency; however, many reported
lia and the U.S. [e.g., Ariew, 1982; Australian Lan- that they tried to use the L2 as much as possible.
guage and Literacy Council, 1996; Kawagoe, Tamara felt insecure about her language profi-
Kazuyoshi Sato and Robert C. Kleinsasser 503
ciency. Joan responded that, as she became more ing. In short, her L2 learning experiences
confident with her L2 proficiency and ability to seemed to have formed a belief that CLT used
meet students’ needs, she moved further away only speaking and listening.
from the textbook. Tamara was not afraid to be The survey results reinforced the significance
honest. Joan decided to go back to university to of speaking and listening skills, or at least sug-
finish her 3rd year of Japanese study. gested that there might be an order to how skills
were learned. The teachers agreed that the in-
Also, my ability to speak Japanese. Sometimes I feel struction of such skills preceded the teaching of
like my language is not sufficient to challenge the
reading and writing, that L2 acquisition was most
students, to push them. I don’t think I give them
enough listening experience, because I am insecure
successful when based on an oral approach, and
of my own Japanese. (Tamara) that students could still be successful in learning
In terms of the daily use of textbook, I am surprised to communicate in a L2 even if they did not read
to find that I am moving further and further away well. The teachers did not attribute weak oral
from [the] use of the regular textbook. Every year competence to a lack of objective means in teach-
level has one, but I find as I become more confident ing it. Nonetheless, assessment of students’ lan-
with my language, and as I become more confident to guage abilities caused some concern.
meet the needs or interest of the students and differ- The LOTE teachers found that assessment
ent topics, I want real Japanese language, not the tasks that were focused on the four skills offered
textbook. (Joan)
another slight obstacle. It is interesting to note
The teachers reported that CLT meant learn- that the LOTE teachers emphasized that CLT
ing to communicate in the L2. The interview and meant speaking and listening; however, the gov-
survey data showed how they coped with what this ernment guidelines for communicative assess-
meant to them. The challenges, however, seemed ment included all four skills, each seemingly
sometimes to outweigh the benefits of making given equal weighting. The teachers’ concerns
communication in the L2 a reality. Nonetheless, dealt with the number of tests and the lack of
the first conception served as a general reminder cohesion among the skill examinations.
about the global purpose of CLT. This focus on
And we have four tests at the end of each semester,
communication led to the second conception reading, writing, listening, and speaking. And the
that these teachers think writing and reading are middle of each semester, we have two tests. In the
not as prevalent (important) as listening and middle of [the] first semester, if we test reading and
speaking. writing, then, in the middle of [the] second semester,
we test speaking and listening. So by the end of the
CLT Uses Mainly Speaking and Listening. A sec- year we’ve tested four skills, three times. (Margaret)
ond trend from the data revealed that several Well, according to the senior curriculum, I am re-
teachers viewed CLT as focusing extensively on quired to give them a certain number of tests in what
speaking and listening skills. The following they call the four macro skills—reading, writing,
quotes represented this general view. speaking, and listening. They all have to be separate
tests. So I have to give them one of each kind of tests
The goal of the teaching is that at the end of learning each term. I basically just give them tests, you know. I
the language, people can actually talk in the language will have a passage written in Japanese on a topic that
with the native speakers understand[ing] what we’ve studied. And they have to read it and they have
they’re saying and be[ing] able to communicate their questions in English and they have to answer in En-
ideas rather than just being able to read and write. glish. So it’s just as a comprehensive test. Listening,
(Margaret) well, I’ll have [a] passage in Japanese. I’ll read it and
My understanding of CLT is that you teach so that then they’ll have questions in English. So they don’t
[the] students hear it and so that they speak it. I see it. They just think they read it. Then, they have to
would try where it’s possible to teach something new answer in English. And speaking, I just give them
by actually speaking. [. . .] I think writing needs a little some topics to talk about and they have to talk. (Role
explanation to teach the pattern and get them to play or interview?) Oh, both. So, that’s how I evalu-
write the pattern. [. . .] And perhaps because I ate, just standard, four micro skills tests. I’m not par-
learned Japanese as an adult and learned it commu- ticularly looking for communicative skills as such, but
nicatively, I didn’t learn a lot of writing at the time. just as four micro skills, which is the prescribed way
Writing was the neglected skill. So I suppose I’ve been of testing. (Sean)
very aware of CLT. (Alicia)
The tension between CLT and skills became
At the completion of her interview, Alicia re- apparent. The teachers saw two completely differ-
vealed again that she learned Japanese communi- ent issues and proceeded with what they per-
catively in speaking and listening, but not in writ- ceived they had to do in their classrooms for their
504 The Modern Language Journal 83 (1999)
students. It is interesting to note that many of nation. So that’s why I like [a] combination of both
them did not see, or present, how the competing systems. (Jane)
conceptions could be reconciled. They allowed Debra was in a dilemma, because she was not
their understanding of skills (through policy) to allowed to offer a grammar test according to the
outweigh their promotion of CLT (especially in government’s guidelines of communicative as-
using speaking and listening). Items from the sessment.
survey further revealed that the group thought
that dialogue memorization was an effective tech- I think that [the] writing test is the main worry. It is
nique in the process of learning a L2 but dis- the big worry, because it takes us a lot of time. Actu-
agreed over the belief that mastering L2 gram- ally this is the big problem with CLT, because our tests
have to be communicative, too. So we can’t have a
mar was a prerequisite to developing oral
grammar test. We can’t have a test where you have to
communication skills. This disagreement could
do multiple choice. No, we can’t. We can’t do it at all.
be why some teachers saw these other skills (read- So what we have to do is trying authentic material for
ing and writing) as a means to focus on grammar. students to read. (Debra)
These issues and challenges only seemed to rein-
force the third conception about the role of The participants were challenged over what to
grammar in CLT. do with grammar in their learning environments.
Most teachers did not discuss the role of gram-
CLT Involves Little Grammar Instruction. Quite a mar in CLT because they thought grammar was
few teachers understood CLT as not involving not part of CLT. Neither did they understand
grammar, or any type of language structure. Al- completely the guidelines for not allowing gram-
though some teachers did not directly mention mar to be included in their testing. Yet they re-
grammar usage, many alluded to the problem of layed difficulties in teaching it when it came to
how, if at all, to include it. discussing what went on with language teaching
in their classrooms. Although some did not know
Another issue in LOTE learning and teaching is that the role of grammar in CLT as revealed in the
“Is communicative teaching good?” Because people definitions above, others blamed English teach-
have taken it so far to the point of the banning of ers for not teaching grammar or felt it difficult to
grammar teaching or of the banning of drilling, of present grammar in an interesting way, or both.
the banning of all little parts. You have to do at some
points, to learn Hiragana [Japanese syllabary], you Uh, these are difficult questions. What’s the role of
have to write out over and over after practice. But in grammar? Uh, I think grammar is important so that
communicative language, you think, “I can’t do it. It’s meaning is not lost, but I try not to correct the stu-
not communicative.” So that’s the burden. . . . So dents’ grammar too much, when they speak, because
when I [was] first teaching grammar, it had very little, I don’t want to inhibit them. I don’t think it is [a] very
very little place. We did lots of talking, lots of reading important thing. I treat it as a building block, and
and writing and listening, but not so much grammar. then, hopefully that will make students practice what-
Which is the mistake of, I think, part of the flow in ever language they’ve learned before. And if there
communicative teaching. I almost expected that stu- are many minor mistakes on grammar, I don’t fix
dents would pick it up. They would somehow work it them up on it. Yeah, I can’t answer that question very
out without me saying “‘wo’ is the object. . . .” It well. (Tamara)
would work if you guess. Sometimes I still do that. For a number of years now, they haven’t really been
(Tracey) teaching even in English very much. I found a lot of
It’s using Japanese whenever possible in the class- my students at high school don’t really know much
room. But I’m not particularly a communicative lan- about the technical aspects of English language. So it
guage teacher, because I love teaching grammar. . . . was discouraged for some years. The teaching of En-
While I like some aspects of it, I very much dislike glish grammar was discouraged. So a lot of the stu-
some . . . aspects of it . . . while I was studying in Japan, dents have gone through the high school system not
I had a teacher who was studying [the] communica- really learning English grammar. So then, you know,
tive method. And she believed that she did not ex- I think it’s unfortunate. So it’s hard to teach them
plain grammatical points in the text. She believed you Japanese grammar if they don’t understand English
should get to understand them from the atmosphere. grammar. (Sean)
And that was very frustrating as a student. So that’s
The conundrum of grammar’s place within
why I don’t like it so much, because I love to under-
stand the grammar. And I think many of the best
CLT (or language teaching in general, for that
students do. And students we have doing Japanese matter) was further highlighted in the survey re-
are often very analytical thinkers. And Japanese to me sults. As a group, these teachers were uncertain
is a little bit like math. And students thought of it like about the importance of having students learn
math. So sometimes it’s possible to have a little expla- rules of grammar (they neither agreed nor dis-
Kazuyoshi Sato and Robert C. Kleinsasser 505
agreed) but were adamant that the grammar- Then, we give them . . . extra things they can add to
translation approach to L2 learning was not effec- it. Then, they must learn and present it in a class. Do
tive in developing oral communication skills. On role-play or so. And in Year 9 [it is] similar, but there’s
more freedom. By the time you get to Year 12, just
the one hand, these LOTE teachers accepted that
talk. (Laura)
student responses in the L2 did not have to be
linguistically accurate. They further agreed that
when a student made syntactical errors, the er- What Japanese Language Teachers Did: Traditional
rors should be accepted as a natural and inevita- Practices. Regardless of the role grammar had ac-
ble part of language acquisition and that ideas cording to the individual teachers or what teach-
can be exchanged spontaneously in a foreign lan- ers said about accommodating learning styles,
guage without having linguistic accuracy. On the many findings from classroom observations con-
other hand, the LOTE teachers agreed that if first founded the information given by the teachers in
language (L1) teachers taught grammar the way their interviews and on their surveys. Grammar
they should, it would be easier for them to teach was more central in their language teaching than
a L2. The participants further agreed that when these LOTE teachers admitted. The teachers
the foreign language structure differed from that were more didactic in their instruction than they
of the L1, sometimes extensive repetitions, sim- related and less concerned with individuals than
ple and varied, were needed to form the new with the class as a group entity. Whether or not
habit. They agreed that pattern practice was an they were teaching communicatively, grammar
effective learning technique and that the estab- was a central focus in the observed classrooms.
lishment of new language habits required exten- For example, although most teachers said that
sive, well-planned practice on a limited body of they used role-play, games, simulations, and so
vocabulary and sentence patterns. on, classes observed for this study were heavily
It is interesting to note that puzzlement over teacher-fronted, grammar was presented without
issues surrounding grammar also manifested it- any context clues, and there were few interactions
self within another challenge teachers had with seen among students in the classrooms (this de-
learning styles. Most teachers acknowledged that scribes what we mean by “traditional practices”).
they had to be aware of students’ learning styles, Most Japanese teachers used English extensively
especially different styles between year levels. to explain grammatical points and give instruc-
They tended to agree with the survey item that all tions; L2 communicative use and speaking in the
students, regardless of previous academic success L2 by students, in particular, were not as preva-
and preparation, should be encouraged and lent as one might assume from listening to the
given the opportunity to study a foreign lan- interviews or reading the survey results. The Japa-
guage. Nonetheless, learning styles offered an ad- nese teachers readily allowed students to answer
ditional focus that some felt was not at all part of in English. A few teachers tried to integrate cul-
CLT. Moreover, here teachers related that some ture into their lessons. In short, most teachers
students wanted a grammar focus. displayed traditional practice tendencies. The fol-
lowing selected examples typically portrayed what
All Grade 11 and 12 want to study in a formal way. So
was seen in the Japanese language classrooms.
even though I introduce a communicative activity,
they don’t want to get involved in it. They are more For instance, Tamara started her lesson for
interested in grammatical explanations. But, for ex- Year 12 with a Kanji (Chinese characters) quiz.
ample, Grade 10 get along well with me. They really
like interesting topics and start to speak. So I feel At the beginning, she handed out quiz sheets to eve-
more comfortable with juniors. Seniors seem to have ryone. She gave students 10 minutes to complete the
acquired a formal way of studying like Japanese stu- quiz. While students were working on the quiz, she
dents. . . .This is where the difficulty lies, I feel. (Yu- wrote grammatical points on the board. After the
miko) quiz, she started to explain the grammar (passive
Uh, Year 8, they learn patterns. We teach them, you form) by using English sentences as examples. Then,
know, “This is the pattern.” If you want to say, I like she explained it with Japanese sentences. While she
French and I like math, and I hate science. Then, we explained verb conjugations, students wrote them
teach them to say, “. . . ga suki,” “. . . ga kirai desu.” down in their notebooks. After that, she showed verb
Then, we give them a list of subjects. And we get them cards and made students say passive forms. It was like
to talk. So they can express their own feeling in Japa- drills. Then, she asked students to open the text-
nese. We did the same things with sports and hobbies books, and they did exercises that transformed active
and families. . . . And then, if we are doing something sentences into passive ones. She called on each stu-
like [the topic of] restaurant, then, we give them a dent individually and let him or her answer. Finally,
dialogue. We get them to learn the basic dialogue. she asked students to create their own sentences by
506 The Modern Language Journal 83 (1999)
using passive forms. After a few minutes, the bell Students came in the classroom in a line. First, she
rang. (Observation of Tamara) reviewed the grammar structure (potential form) on
the blackboard. She asked a yes-no question to indi-
This was her lesson. There was little interaction vidual students. Then, she reviewed Kanji using
between the teacher and the students, and little cards. Students read several cards, each time the
among the students. Moreover, this lesson pro- teacher showed the card to them several times. After
vided little evidence of attention to varying learn- that, she told the students to open the textbook. They
ing styles. Grammar points were explained de- did translation exercises. She asked individual stu-
ductively without any context clues and were dents to answer them. Then, she asked two students
followed by mechanical exercises in textbooks. to read the short model conversation. She asked an-
Yumiko is a native Japanese teacher. She just other pair to read it. She gave the students five min-
utes to practice the skit in pairs. After that, she asked
started teaching in the academic year after she
for volunteers. Students were shy. So she asked two
finished her Postgraduate Diploma of Education. pairs to perform the skit without looking at the text-
The following is her Year 12 lesson. She said in book. The rest of the class helped the performers
her interview that communicative activities did when they got stuck. The bell rang, and she told the
not work for Years 11 and 12, because these stu- students that they would practice the skit more next
dents liked a more formal way of study, especially time. (Observation of Margaret)
grammatical explanations.
Margaret related in her interview that she had
She spent most of her lesson speaking Japanese. difficulty motivating Year 8 and 9 students and
First, she gave an example to introduce a new sen-
managing their discipline. Although she stated
tence pattern in context. She kept on giving other
that “in Year 10 and 11 and 12 by the students
examples in Japanese. Each student was checking
the new function with the handout the teacher had who have chosen to do the subject, my teaching
given them previously. Then, after several examples, method is totally different. I do lots of question-
she asked yes-no questions to students. But students naires, lots of games, and lot of more discussion,
answered in English. Sometimes students asked role-play . . . ,” she actually relied here on tradi-
questions in English about the content of the topic tional practices. As our interview, survey, and ob-
or examples. There were no interactions among stu- servation data coalesced, it became clear that ten-
dents. Then, she started to give another example to sions abounded over grammar instruction,
introduce another grammatical point. They re- learning styles, and CLT. The challenges of meet-
peated the same process. Finally, she introduced
ing students’ needs continued to give focus to the
three new Kanji words. She wrote them on the black-
teachers’ daily instruction, while their idea of
board and she made sure of the meaning of each
word by asking individual students. Students an- CLT as minimal grammar instruction was mud-
swered in English. There were no exercises with dled in the quagmire of what they did or thought
Kanji in sentences. The lesson stopped here. (Ob- they had to do.
servation of Yumiko)
CLT Uses (Time-Consuming) Activities. The final
This native-speaking Japanese teacher took conception evidenced in the interview data was
pride in her approach to introducing grammar in that CLT used activities that must be fun, and
contexts. In her interview, she stated, “I often use almost all teachers admitted that preparing such
many examples in Japanese to explain a new jovial activities was time intensive. Although the
word. I keep on saying it until students can guess survey showed that teachers disagreed with the
what it is. I like it that way.” Nevertheless, students statement that a good foreign language teacher
answered in English during this lesson. No inter- did not need audiovisuals to build an effective
action among students could be seen, and it program, they agreed that if language teachers
needs to be remembered that this teacher men- used all the audiovisual equipment, materials,
tioned that she relied little on communicative and techniques the experts say they should, there
activities because “they don’t want to get involved would be no time for eating and sleeping, much
in it.” At this stage, she seemed to give up even less teaching. These Japanese teachers also nearly
trying to get them involved. She believed that agreed (mean 3.4) that individualizing instruc-
certain students’ learning styles outweighed us- tion was really not feasible in L2 classes (which,
ing communicative activities. in a surprising way, ties in with their issues regard-
Margaret did a lesson for Year 10. Although she ing their reports of learning styles). Tracey com-
attempted to use role-play, it was in reality a dia- mented that teachers felt they were failing if the
logue memorization. Overall, she relied heavily class did not include fun elements, and Sean dis-
on traditional practices. cussed how he coped with the issue.
Kazuyoshi Sato and Robert C. Kleinsasser 507
It’s from CLT or I’m not sure where it comes from. exercise. But I don’t teach from the textbook, usually
But there is an understanding that as LOTE teachers I teach something new, before they look at the text-
we must have our classes, [they] must be fun, they book. So we need more time to prepare our own
must be entertaining, and so [we] play lots of games materials. It’s quite hard. It’s not like Japan where
and kill ourselves trying to entertain our students. If they use, everybody uses the same, and same day,
they are not, if it is not entertaining, we feel like we’re same page. . . . I think I need time to prepare the
failing. And students also [say], “That’s boring, Miss.” resources for the students. I think that’s really impor-
And you think, of course, everything has some bor- tant. To make flash cards, to make the lesson interest-
ing, bad, some not interesting parts, right? So that’s ing, we need to have really more time. (Debra)
another part. (Tracey) The time to reflect as a teacher. [. . . ] And I teach 27
My understanding of communicative teaching is, I out of 35 lessons a week. [. . . ] I might have three or
suppose, teaching in a way rather than just learn[ing] four lessons a week at most of my own preparation
grammar or translat[ing] from one language to an- and correction time. What I would really love is the
other. It involves using learning activities where the luxury of something like a position, a head of Depart-
students are actually engaged in communicating with ment, where you have [a] half time table, half teach-
other people, of course, usually within [a] class ing, half managing, where you would have time to
group. . . . In that way, I suppose, they are supposed look at resource materials available and slowly and
to learn how to use the language more easily than just carefully put together a course. (Joan)
to try [the] grammatical translation [way] to learn-
ing. . . . But I have not really used them very much. Another major challenge to CLT and its activi-
Well, it’s time-consuming. Of course, it’s so much ties was discipline. Margaret revealed in her inter-
easier to use [a] textbook. I mean it would be nicer if view that discipline was the priority and that there
it was a textbook with a lot of communicative learning was little room for her to use communicative ac-
activities in it. To be always making every week, for tivities in Grade 8 classes. Jane also used a similar
every lesson, to make activities in it, it’s very time-con- technique to “settle students down.”
suming and [I] just wonder, I don’t have that much
time to spend on it. Because I have other subjects and But unfortunately a lot of our students, lots of stu-
another class to teach, too. (Sean) dents I am teaching at high school at Year 8, they are
forced to study Japanese. So they have very negative
Quite a few participants said they occasionally
attitudes. So if I speak to them in Japanese in the
used CLT activities in classrooms. Alicia described classroom, they switch off from what they want to
her use of a fun activity. know. So all of the time I have to speak in English
anyway. And they are quite badly behaved students
So you can use group activities or pair activities, inter-
anyway. So the way that I teach Japanese is not really
views, they can be interviewing. For instance, another
communicative. It’s more like I’ve got to keep these
thing the Year 10 just learned is to say when is your
kids quiet, more behaved for 35 minutes. And the
birthday. So they have to go around and ask 10 peo-
main idea is not that I’m teaching at all. The main
ple that question. . . . So that’s communication. They
idea is discipline. (Margaret)
can go around and ask. This school is very interest-
Nearly everyday I give them a little quiz to start with
ing. Hardly anybody was born in [suburb]. So I use
the lesson, quite often. And it might be grammar or
activities like that as often as I can. And then also for
vocabulary or Kanji or something. Almost everyday,
listening, for instance, today, with one of my Year 10
particularly with Grade 8, it settles them down. If they
classes, I was pretending to be their phone answering
write something, they can concentrate on it. (Jane)
machine. I’m the answering machine. So they had to
take notes. So I pretended to be the person. So I
Although LOTE teachers agreed that language
made suggestions. (Alicia)
learning should be fun, they disagreed that L2
Almost all teachers reported they needed more acquisition was not and probably never would be
time to prepare materials for CLT activities, relevant to the average Australian student. But
which related directly to the fact that these teach- they neither agreed nor disagreed as a group that
ers perceived there existed a lack of good materi- one of their problems in teaching a L2 was that
als including textbooks for communicative lan- they tried to make learning fun and games. Some
guage instruction. teachers agreed, others disagreed, and there was
no consensus.
We don’t use the textbook everyday. My Grade 8, they Yet, student motivation and LOTE teachers’
have no textbook. Next year we’ll have one, but this
concerns about it appeared throughout the inter-
year we don’t, because the textbook was not commu-
nicative. It was too boring. For Grade 9 we have Is-
views. As seen in previous quotations and discus-
shoni just for the first time this year. So I use this sions, these teachers struggled to motivate their
perhaps half of the time. So after four lessons maybe students. This particular issue gained momentum
I’ll use it for part of the lessons. And then, we’ll use when the teachers admitted to their difficulties
this to practice. And they can use this for a homework with subject matter articulation, grammar in-
508 The Modern Language Journal 83 (1999)
struction, acknowledgment of individual learn- music, then, they can read a music magazine or watch
ing styles, and questionable assessment items. Stu- the video clip, or [sing] some Japanese songs or
dent motivation also affected the decision on something like that. And that makes them more in-
terested. (Debra)
whether or not to try out CLT. Jane expressed her
difficulty in motivating students who, especially in CLT activities appeared, at first glance, to influ-
Grade 8, had to take the subject. Note further ence student motivation, but this was not neces-
that she again highlighted and integrally related sarily the case. Instead, their focus on form and
the issue of learning styles. student discipline made these teachers shy away
from CLT activities, or relegate them to the more
The most critical issue at the junior level is that be-
cause they are not streamed academically, we have [a] advanced language learners. Moreover, it ap-
very wide range of ability from very good to very poor peared that the lack of availability of CLT activi-
[students in the] language class we have today. And ties (or time to create them) caused these teach-
so we must teach “Hiragana.” But some students can’t ers practically to ignore them. Time was not what
master that. So they are already dropping behind. So these teachers had, so CLT activities were not a
by the end of the year, there’s a very wide gap. And priority. This low priority was apparent in the
those students who are very poor become very resent- scarcity of CLT activities (of any kind) seen dur-
ful. And it’s very hard to maintain the interest level of ing observations.
everyone, when there’s such a wide gap. So that’s one
of the most critical issues. And I don’t know what the What Japanese Language Teachers Did: Innovative
answer is, we should stream or what we should do. But Practices. It was obvious that the teachers believed
that also subtracts from CLT, because, of course, they that CLT activities created too much work for
can’t understand. They’re slower learners. So they them, because few participants were observed to
can’t write, they can’t stand what is happening as well
use such activities in the classroom. In contrast to
as the better students. So that’s one of the most criti-
cal issues. (Jane)
their use of the traditional practices mentioned
previously, only a few teachers used student-stu-
Tamara revisited the value of learning another dent interactions or made students use the lan-
language: guage for real purposes. Of these, two teachers
also attempted to use Japanese to a greater extent
And also I think it important that students see a value
than the other teachers did. As mentioned above,
in learning another language, because if they don’t
see it as just another subject that they have to do, I Alicia reported using some innovative ideas. Her
don’t think we’re going to have a right attitude to lesson for Year 9 gave further insight into her
learning about cultures. And if they are not inter- practices.
ested in culture, then, it’s also going to make it diffi-
First, she reviewed some Kanji numbers. She held
cult for them to pick up the language. (Tamara)
cards and asked each student to read one. The stu-
Debra lamented the fact that students lacked dent picked up the card. She told the student in Japa-
motivation because they did not particularly care nese to show the card to everyone. Others repeated
the number. She tried several cards. All these words
for discrete-point learning:
were related to the topic “restaurant.” Then, she
I think sometimes, [students] lack the motivation to showed a Japanese tea cup, a sake cup, and other
really study a language, the skills of the language. For things asking questions in Japanese. Students an-
example, I can teach them some new words or new swered in Japanese. She checked homework. Those
Kanji, but students find it very hard to learn. The who did not do the homework stood up, and they
students must realize that they need to study. And, of were told to come back to the classroom during
course, if they had a trip to Japan, that would be good lunchtime to show the homework. Then, they did
motivation for them. (Debra) translation exercises from the textbook. After giving
instruction for the next homework assignment, she
Debra did encourage students in Years 11 and gave students 10 minutes to prepare for a role-play (at
12 to involve themselves in the Japanese language the Japanese restaurant) in groups of 3 to 4. One stu-
by watching TV programs and reading. These dent was a waiter/waitress, and the others were cus-
activities would, she felt, encourage the students tomers. She walked around the class and sometimes
to be motivated to learn in her advanced classes. answered students’ questions. Then, four groups per-
formed in front of the class. Three groups mainly fol-
And I’m trying to build up the materials that we have lowed the model dialogue, but the last group was in-
at school so that students can be interested in the teresting because the students did not follow the
subject. So, for example, if we have students in class, model dialogue. They made the class laugh. She made
who are interested in sports, they can read some some comments on their performance—“Well done”
sporting magazine, so [we] watch the baseball or and a little tip about how to order at a Japanese restau-
Sumo on TV. Or if the students are interested in rant. (Observation of Alicia)
Kazuyoshi Sato and Robert C. Kleinsasser 509
Although she used role-play, she used it to prac- “Think, think about it.” She encouraged students to
tice grammatical patterns, and there were few guess the meaning. After that, they practiced asking
opportunities for genuine communication directions in pairs. They went outside to the basket-
ball court to play games in pairs in Japanese. One of
among the students except in the last group’s
each pair was blindfolded and the other partner gave
unexpected role-play. The overall focus for the
directions to the goal in Japanese. This game was a
class was to complete tasks from the book, not to competition. The students were enthusiastic about it.
negotiate meaning within the tasks. (Observation of Laura)
Laura attempted to involve her students in free
conversation during a Year 11 lesson. This teacher used a range of activities accord-
ing to grade levels. For Year 8, she used more
First, she checked the homework and reviewed the physically related games such as the total physical
key expressions which were related to the topic “ill- response (TPR) through which students inter-
ness.” One key expression was reviewed briefly on the
preted Japanese. For Year 11, she allowed more
blackboard. Then, she introduced Kanji for some key
free conversation. She also used Japanese for
words such as medicine, hospital, and illness by using
mnemonics. Next, using handouts and pictures, she most of the lessons. Laura was originally a music
added some other expressions patients would often teacher. This teacher’s experiences in Ja-
use. She asked students, “How would you say, when pan—learning history in Japan and teaching
. . . ?” Students answered in Japanese, picking up ap- English—influenced her teaching. Her interview
propriate new expressions. After that, she gave the data also documented that she used different ap-
students 10 minutes to prepare for a role-play be- proaches with different grades. As she readily ac-
tween a doctor and a patient. There were no model knowledged, she had difficulties implementing
skits. She went around the class to help some stu- communicative activities, especially when trying
dents. But most students seemed comfortable and
to incorporate grammar into her lesson. None-
worked on their original skits. Then it was time to
theless, her classroom teaching demonstrated
perform. They did not hesitate at all. They all seemed
to be used to role-play. Each of the five pairs per- that, as she related in her interview, it was her
formed in front of the class. (They really seemed to personal L2 learning and teaching experiences
enjoy it.) Finally, she gave some feedback about use- that tended to form her conceptions of (commu-
ful words and expressions to supplement the lesson. nicative) language teaching. (Such a perspective
(Observation of Laura) will be discussed more thoroughly in the section
below on how teachers learned about CLT.)
This observation data provided evidence that
Through interviews, observations, and surveys,
Year 11 students did get involved in a form of
the participants in this study revealed that they
communicative activity. In fact, they enjoyed it. It
found CLT activities too time-consuming, and
is interesting to note that this teacher used a
they reported numerous challenges to their
different practice for Year 8. In this instance she
teaching that, in essence, allowed them to avoid
paid more attention to discipline.
developing CLT techniques while also avoiding
All the students were outside the classroom. They the consequences of their challenges and what
entered in a line, one by one. Some said hello in this meant for their instruction.
Japanese to me. Everyone was seated, but the class
was still noisy. She said in a loud voice, “Those who Summary. The three data sources revealed four
don’t behave yourselves have no lunch time. It’s your
conceptions of these LOTE teachers’ ideas about
choice. So think about it.” Then, she called the roll in
Japanese. Students had to say “Yes” in Japanese. She
CLT as well as challenges that provided tensions
would not accept English, so some students had to that affected those conceptions. The observation
repeat in Japanese. Then, she said, “If you behave data showed reluctance on the part of teachers to
yourself, I will take you to the basketball court and promote CLT and indicated that many teachers
we’ll have a game. Today’s topic is ‘asking direc- avoided (or at least challenged or mutated) the
tions.’” First, she reviewed some key words. She used few conceptions of CLT that they held. The inter-
a quiz like “Bingo.” Instead of saying “Bingo,” the view and survey data explained perhaps why
students said “Yatta” (I made it!). The students were teachers did and thought what they did. Al-
familiar with the procedure and concentrated on it.
though most teachers reported using communi-
All the words were related to the topic. They repeated
cative activities such as role-play, games, survey,
this game three times. By that time they seemed to be
comfortable with these words. Then, she gave the group work, and simulations, unfortunately,
students a handout. It was a map with a school, bank, these things were rarely observed. There were few
McDonald’s, and so on. She started to use a new observed student-student interactions in most of
expression using the map. She gave a couple of exam- the classrooms. Only two teachers actually used
ples. Some students asked, “Miss, what is it?” She said, role-play of any type, while most relied on tradi-
510 The Modern Language Journal 83 (1999)
tional practices: teacher-fronted, repetition, is less than it should be, because I don’t want them to
translation, explicit grammar presentation, prac- feel put down. So that impacts as well. (Tracey)
tice from the textbook, and little or no L2 use or
culture integration. Their conceptions of CLT Personal L2 Teaching: The Significance
appeared to have little chance for extensive devel- of Trial and Error
opment. Furthermore, their L2 instructional be-
liefs, knowledge, and practices were rarely guided The teachers also learned about CLT by teaching;
by their conceptions of CLT. that is, experience in actually teaching Japanese
We examine next how these LOTE teachers taught them about what they perceived as commu-
thought they learned about CLT and reveal how nicative possibilities. They described how they
they personally made sense of Japanese teaching gained this knowledge through trial and error.
and learning. The following section unravels just I learned about CLT when I became a teacher, be-
how teachers thought they developed their ideas cause I don’t have any language training. So, apart
about CLT. from experiences teaching English in Japan, I didn’t
have much language teaching methodology at all. So
HOW JAPANESE LANGUAGE TEACHERS I think I’ve done a lot of learning in the last couple
LEARNED ABOUT CLT of years about how to write an assessment item. So
that’s real experience from the students rather than
As the teachers discussed their various ideas something really theoretical. Yes, so trial and error.
about CLT, they were also asked how they learned (Tamara)
But also I think you learn by trial and error, trying
about CLT, how they came to hold these concep-
something. And if it doesn’t work, you change it so
tions of CLT, and what their sources of learning that it will be suitable in the situation. (Alicia)
were. Responses from the interviews showed that I think, initially when I started teaching, I did try to
the teachers learned about CLT from a variety of some extent to use [the] communicative language
things that included personal L2 learning, per- method, but I’m afraid of, [the lack of a] period of
sonal L2 teaching (trial and error), teacher devel- time, especially this year, when I have virtually no
opment programs, inservices, and other teachers. students with [a] higher motivation level to study
Although the teachers learned about CLT Japanese. Maybe one or two at most. I’m afraid, I
through multiple avenues, personal L2 learning haven’t put much energy into it in developing [a]
and teaching experiences seemed to have had the communicative style in normal activities. . . . But I
must admit, I suppose, when I did try to use that type
greatest influence.
of activity, students are more enthusiastic about study-
ing. I think that’s true. They attempted, particularly
Personal L2 Learning younger students, liked to play games rather than
engaging in formal lessons, you know. But again, you
How teachers learned L2s as students seemed know, most of them are not really interested in learn-
to influence heavily their beliefs about language ing Japanese anyway. So for them, they would rather
teaching and, hence, their personal views about play anything, sorts of games than do any sorts of
CLT. In particular, those who learned L2 in real formal study, whether it will be Japanese or any other
situations had strong beliefs about how students subjects, you know. They are not, on the whole, aca-
learn a L2. demically oriented students in my class, very few, par-
ticularly Japanese classes. (Sean)
In high school I learned French and I learned French
not in a communicative way at all. I learned French It became evident from the teachers’ com-
rather like Japanese students in Japan learning En- ments that they perceived both the negative and
glish. So that was not very much help. When I learned positive sides of trial and error learning and
Japanese in university, I did so much, so much trans- teaching with CLT ideas and concepts. This am-
lation and that was not really communicative. I think, bivalence was further reinforced with interview
when I went out becoming a student teacher and I and observation data; the teachers spoke about
watched other teachers teach Japanese, and then, the numerous challenges they faced and how
after that it’s just talking to other teachers and just they found it more prudent to implement tradi-
learning, keep learning. How I teach is very personal
tional practices over innovative ones.
and I teach every class in a different way. (Debra)
My own LOTE learning history affects, of course, how
I learn. I think. That’s effective for me. And I say my Teacher Development, Inservice Programs,
preferences. Oh, yeah, another thing is my beliefs and Other Teachers
about kids and how they learn. I feel that kids feel
embarrassed, they don’t want to keep trying, so I try The teachers spoke about learning from these
not to embarrass them. Perhaps my error-correction three sources. Nonetheless, the majority of the
Kazuyoshi Sato and Robert C. Kleinsasser 511
LOTE teachers, most of the time, would always watching good and bad teachers and learning
digress to how they relied upon themselves and about their experiences was quite influential.
their experiences as described above. They ac-
I was teaching Japanese without having any training
knowledged these sources, yet in the wider inter-
at all in teaching a foreign language. And the other
views, it appeared that their own beliefs filtered
teachers on the staff helped me. And I started to go
what these sources offered, and the context of to inservice trainings, seminars, and I enrolled in a
their own teaching seemed to determine what course for 1 year at the University of [name]. It was
they would use from the sources. What they supposed to be the course about how to teach Japa-
picked up is offered next. nese, but it was also to upgrade Japanese language. A
The four LOTE (Japanese) teachers who re- lot of it wasn’t actually how to teach Japanese, but it
ceived Postgraduate Diplomas of Education were was still a good course. (Is the teacher Ms. [name]?)
initially exposed to CLT in teacher development Yes, she is a good teacher. Ms. [name] showed the
programs, and the others spoke of inservice in- model of communicative method in her teaching
style. I was able to see what [a] communicative lan-
volvement. (Note that because about half of the
guage teacher was supposed to be like. So I could see
participants had little to no LOTE teacher educa- how I should be teaching. (Margaret)
tion involvement, inservices were one way of in- I think over the years, you see good teachers and you
creasing their knowledge). see bad teachers. And you develop your own methods
according to what you see. So I learn more by exam-
Communicative language teaching was the style of
ple than I learn by reading a book. And of course, we
teaching that they favored at the University of
must always adapt to the environment that we’re
[name], when I studied [the] Diploma of Education.
teaching in. You know, that students in every school
So everything was supposed to be aimed at develop-
differ and you must adapt your methodology to suit
ing communicative language teaching skills. (Sean)
the students where you are. (Jane)
I learned about CLT at a Postgraduate Diploma of
Education course at the University of [name] last
year. It was like a cram school. So I actually learned
Summary
when I did my teaching practice at a high school.
(Yumiko) The way that these teachers made sense of
Teachers who attended a teacher development their L2 teaching and learning was based on
course gained some ideas about CLT but did not their personal experiences; little that we found
seem to have very thorough explanations of what showed development of their approach within
CLT meant. The teachers who attended inser- any type of program or inservice. Although the
vices related that they had difficulties finding the teachers said they learned about CLT from oth-
time necessary to implement the classroom activi- ers by attending teacher development programs
ties that they learned there. and inservices and by watching other teachers,
personal L2 learning and teaching experiences
So I think most inservices are giving us techniques filtered through as the primary variables that
which are really encouraging students to use the lan- nurtured their beliefs, knowledge, and practices
guage they know and encourage them to learn from
in L2 teaching and learning. It is interesting to
each other. Yeah, they are not teacher-oriented. It’s
more group work-oriented and interaction. But every
note that these personal experiences seemed to
time I go to inservices, I think, “Oh, I should use this. lead to more global beliefs about what they per-
I should use that.” And then, sometimes when I get ceived as L2 teaching and learning, and those
back to school, I just don’t have the time to plan all beliefs did not necessarily include CLT. In the
those things. (Tamara) final analysis, the teachers were reluctant to give
much credibility to what other teachers or lec-
One teacher lamented the fact that she could
turers said. In this study, our attention was fo-
not go to a workshop while school was in session.
cused on how these teachers developed their
These days we can’t go in school time. It’s terrible. own personal understandings within their teach-
And it was so busy after school. So I haven’t been to ing and learning situations and through their
any workshops at all. There was one that I was invited individual beliefs. There was a tendency for
to after school, but it was only discussing exam pa- some teachers to rely on what they thought they
pers. It wasn’t a workshop. From the [region], they saw some teachers in various classrooms do, and
haven’t given any. There are some for beginning
they rarely indicated that they discussed ideas,
teachers, but not for experienced teachers. (Jane)
notions, and perceptions concerning CLT with
Regardless of their preservice backgrounds, their colleagues or university classmates. The
the teachers found an additional source in other teachers in our group learned many lessons
teachers. In particular, the majority said that about L2 teaching from trial and error in their
512 The Modern Language Journal 83 (1999)
teaching experiences. Their own classroom suc- about CLT. They believed that CLT (a) empha-
cesses and failures influenced the development sized communication in the L2, (b) relied heavily
and efficacy of their use of CLT. The classroom on speaking and listening skills, (c) involved little
experiences of these LOTE teachers (in the grammar teaching, and (d) used time-consuming
roles of teacher or student, or both) revealed activities. These conceptions were not static; how-
their beliefs about L2 teaching and learning in ever, numerous difficulties challenged them, and
general (and in many cases CLT played a minor it was the difficulties that helped give meaning to
part, if any, within their L2 learning and teach- and clarify the four conceptions. Through the
ing repertoires). In short, beliefs formed from difficulties, we learned to view CLT as a fluid
personal experiences monitored what the teach- concept that the LOTE teachers were still devel-
ers knew and what teacher practice meant to oping, and we acknowledged the practical ramifi-
these participants. cations of their use of CLT. The teachers knew
CLT was part of their practice of L2 teaching
DISCUSSION5 within this Australian context. Nonetheless, the
extent (or development) of CLT as part of their
A recent special issue of The Modern Language L2 instructional repertoires was related to their
Journal entitled “How Language Teaching is Con- own perceived conceptions, understandings, and
structed” provided an academic perspective on challenges.
the topic (VanPatten, 1997). In the analysis pre- The interview data highlighted the fact that the
sented here, an attempt was made to understand teachers believed CLT was possible, even though
L2 teaching from the teachers’ perspectives, espe- it was evolving and time-consuming. The observa-
cially with regard to CLT. Together, the data set tion data revealed the teachers’ reluctance to im-
highlighted the beliefs, knowledge, and practices plement either interactive or innovative prac-
of these 10 Japanese LOTE teachers. We offered
tices, whereas the survey data showed that they
glimpses into how these participants understood
had tendencies to use both CLT and traditional
L2 learning, L2 teaching, and general teaching
(form-focused, teacher-centred) teaching as-
and learning notions. The interplay among the
pects. Together, all three data sets uncovered the
issues was complex, yet it was a complexity that
complexity teachers faced in defining their CLT
these participants dealt with daily.
knowledge, sharing their CLT practice, and ten-
The beliefs, knowledge, and practices of these
dering their CLT beliefs. Through this study we
teachers created webs of tension that intensified
have learned that practice and theory for these
the act of L2 teaching and learning for the par-
L2 teachers created tensions that not only chal-
ticipants in this study, regardless of the number
lenged their conceptions but also affected their
of years of experience in teaching and (L2)
teacher education background. Additionally, the actions in their learning environments. The data
information from this study provided evidence analysis and presentation articulated what teach-
from the L2 community that supported Pajares’s ers thought and, as much as possible, we avoided
(1992) 16 fundamental assumptions about teach- comparing their conceptions with other defini-
ers’ educational beliefs. The data here confirmed tions, views, or policies. By so doing, we hope we
the tendencies reported in general education have begun to create a practical database for CLT.
studies and described their manifestations, using There are some further questions for future
information from the L2 teachers’ interviews, ob- study that need to be asked with regard to the
served classroom instruction, and completed sur- answers to the first research question. How much
veys. In the discussion that ensues we seek to give time do teachers think it will take to complete the
(partial) answers to our three research questions, evolution of CLT? How do teachers consciously
discuss what was learned by investigating them, understand their fluid conceptions of CLT? How
and develop questions concerning them and do they feel about their conceptions of CLT? To
their answers. Finally, we offer ideas for future what extent do teachers want to implement CLT?
research. How would reflection on these and other issues
affect teachers’ conceptions of CLT: their beliefs,
What Are Japanese LOTE Teachers’ Beliefs knowledge, and practice? How do teachers think
and Knowledge About (Communicative) their beliefs about L2 teaching interact with their
Language Teaching? conceptions of CLT? How would teachers react to
seeing or hearing their own ideas about CLT pre-
By using three data sources, we learned that sented in narrative form? These and other ques-
the teachers in our study held four conceptions tions provide ample fodder for eventual study.
Kazuyoshi Sato and Robert C. Kleinsasser 513
How Do Japanese LOTE Teachers Implement CLT would teachers classify various happenings (ac-
in Their Classrooms? tivities, strategies, techniques) in their classroom
when videotaped? How would teachers complete
We learned that these LOTE teachers imple- a study to demonstrate how CLT is implemented?
mented CLT sparingly in their classrooms. Al- Do teachers find the challenges in promoting
though the participants said that they wanted to and implementing CLT too numerous to over-
teach Japanese for communication and priori- come? How can teachers explicitly detail their L2
tized speaking and listening over writing and instruction? How do teachers evolve from a gram-
reading, in their classrooms they explained the mar-oriented classroom to a communicatively ori-
Japanese language in English and promoted dis- ented one? What CLT activities support language
crete-point grammar and vocabulary learning at acquisition and learning from a teacher’s per-
the expense of interactive, negotiated, and inter- spective? How would teachers clarify the role of
preting activities. They reported that they had grammar in CLT if pressed?
little time to create activities that promoted the
acquisition of Japanese. We learned that evolving
How Are Japanese LOTE Teachers’ Beliefs and
CLT conceptions constrained and influenced L2
Knowledge About (Communicative) Language
teaching and learning.
Teaching Acquired and Developed?
It is interesting to note that the teachers re-
ported that CLT involved little grammar learn- We learned that the Japanese LOTE teachers
ing. Nonetheless, a major challenge mentioned in this research found out about CLT individually
by many of the teachers pertained specifically to and personally. Although they stated that pro-
grammar instruction. Just what was grammar’s grams, inservices, and other teachers influenced
role? They said they did not know how to handle their teaching, they readily offered evidence that
grammar in their classrooms, especially when, ac- it was their reliance on themselves that deter-
cording to their perceptions, guidelines, scholars, mined to no small extent their understandings.
or policy-makers suggested that grammar was not Even when reporting that they watched other
an integral CLT component. These teachers pro- teachers or included other teachers as a learning
vided evidence that not only did they have diffi- source, they seldom described in any detail these
culty ignoring grammar in what they perceived as conversations with their colleagues. In essence,
CLT, but they had a further problem with how to they watched good and bad teachers and decided
teach it because most believed it was important for themselves what good and bad practices were
for language learners. Regardless, in the class- with regard to the particular observed strategy or
room it was not unusual to see teachers present- activity. Challenges also played a role with teach-
ing grammar explicitly, in English, and adhering ers in acquiring and developing their CLT acu-
to texts that were grammatically based. men. The LOTE teachers’ CLT beliefs, knowl-
Celce-Murcia (1991) acknowledged “that TESOL edge, and practices were not complete and
methodologists have not offered consistent ad- continued developing, by the teachers’ own ad-
vice to teachers about the role of grammar in mission. They appeared willing to pursue their
language teaching over the past 25 years” (p. understandings of CLT. Just how they pursued it
462). LOTE methodologists may have a similar would be worthy of in-depth case studies that
problem. Not only are there conflicting practical monitored them daily.
issues pertaining to grammar (highlighted by Individual, if not isolated, stances provided a
these LOTE teachers), but there are also conflict- gatekeeping element for what these L2 teachers
ing theoretical issues in the literature as well (for learned and how they learned it. The analysis
discussions, see, e.g., Celce-Murcia, 1991; Larsen- provided sufficient evidence to substantiate one
Freeman, 1991). Finding a means for both prac- of Pajares’s (1992) fundamental assumptions that
tice and theory to work together and improve the “beliefs are instrumental in defining tasks and
learning and acquisition of L2s may be one chal- selecting the cognitive tools with which to inter-
lenge that practitioners and theoreticians can pret, plan, and make decisions regarding such
work on together. Nonetheless, the place of gram- tasks; hence, they play a critical role in defining
mar within CLT needs some type of attention behavior and organizing knowledge and informa-
from the practical perspectives of these LOTE tion” (p. 325). Participants in this study relied on
teachers. themselves, and their descriptions and actions
Further questions promoted by the concerns in reflected their understandings not only about
this section include, among others: To what ex- CLT but also about general L2 teaching as well.
tent do teachers think they implement CLT? How The LOTE teachers’ instruction was guarded by
514 The Modern Language Journal 83 (1999)
their beliefs and actions and guided by their per- ence L2 teachers’ beliefs and practices. Further
ceived constraints and possibilities. inquiries need to continue uncovering, examin-
Richardson (1994) wrote, “Teachers make de- ing, and clearly articulating the multiple layers
cisions on the basis of a personal sense of what of understanding beliefs, knowledge, and prac-
works, but without examining the beliefs underly- tices. Moreover, other data sources and varying
ing a sense of ‘working,’ teachers may perpetuate analyses will provide further insight into the in-
practices based on questionable assumptions and teractions of beliefs, knowledge, and practice.
beliefs” (p. 6). This leads us to some additional Such multiplicity and diversity will allow for both
questions that require perusal. Whose perspec- perceptual and conceptual information (see dis-
tive of questionable assumptions and beliefs cussion in Kessels & Korthagen, 1996) that can
should guide a study? How would teachers feel truly offer possibilities for significant, gradual
about examining their beliefs? How would the improvement that is needed in L2 education at
university handle teachers studying academi- all levels. In revisiting some issues in his seminal
cians’ beliefs, knowledge, and practices concern- piece Schoolteacher, Lortie (1998) developed his
ing CLT? Do teachers see a connection between claim “that considerably more research is
how they acquired their (CLT or L2 learning and needed on teachers and their work” (p. 161).
teaching) beliefs and how they teach? How do We would only add that this includes research,
teachers select what they learn from their experi- in its various forms, on L2 teachers and their
ences, from their preservice or inservice pro- work as well.
grams, from the literature? How do students per-
ceive CLT in the classrooms of these LOTE
(Japanese) teachers? NOTES
study of 160 secondary teachers found that teachers in trepidation, as does Wolcott (1990, p. 55). Yet, the pro-
varying stages of their teaching career mentioned simi- fession still demands some type of closure, so we attempt
lar tendencies related to their teaching careers. More- it. We return to the three research questions that out-
over Huberman reported some challenges when trying lined our narrative and follow Wolcott’s advice to review
to predict various stages of job satisfaction: “In some of “succinctly what has been attempted, what has been
the statistical analyses conducted in the study but not learned, and what new questions have been raised”
reported in this text, we did arrive at reliable predictions (Wolcott, 1990, p. 56).
of levels of satisfaction at the beginning of the career.
We were able to situate the determining factors at mid-
career, and to account for the reasons given by teachers REFERENCES
who were approaching retirement. But we were not able
to predict the intermediary phases of the career. This Ariew, R. (1982). The textbook as curriculum. In T. V.
suggests that professional career journeys are not ade- Higgs (Ed.), Curriculum, competence and the foreign
quately linear, predictable or identical—-are often, in language teacher (pp. 11–33). Skokie, IL: National
fact unexplainable using the tools at our disposal” (pp. Textbook Company.
263–265). Nonetheless, perhaps a secondary analysis of Australian Language and Literacy Council. (1996). Lan-
this data set using the ideas suggested by Kinginger guage teachers: The pivot of policy. Canberra, ACT,
(1997) may provide additional insight and more thor- Australia: Australian Government Publishing
ough understandings. This notwithstanding, the data Service/National Board of Employment, Educa-
offer evidence from teachers who are dealing daily with tion and Training.
CLT issues and provide documentation of teachers’ be- Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in lan-
liefs, knowledge, and practices. guage teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4 We are concerned with some of the current writing
Berns, M. S. (1990). Contexts of competence: Social and
being completed in L2 education regarding L2 teach- cultural considerations in communicative language
ers. Its lack of detail and rigor in (research) methodol- teaching. New York: Plenum Press.
ogy and its tendency to talk about the data rather than Board of Senior Secondary School Studies. (1995). Japa-
presenting them are two areas that are particularly trou- nese senior syllabus. Brisbane, QLD, Australia: BSSS.
blesome. We are mindful to acknowledge that we are Board of Senior Secondary School Studies. (1996). Com-
reporting our data through our perspectives (see discus- municative assessment: Criteria & standards. Bris-
sions, for example, in Eisner, 1991; Glesne & Peshkin, bane, QLD, Australia: BSSS.
1992; and Wolcott, 1990), yet, we also wish to highlight Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and
the teachers’ voices more completely in order to codify teaching (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
their perspectives (beliefs, knowledge, and practices). Hall Regents.
We wish the manuscript to represent the story and text Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to
we create by relying heavily on the teachers’ data. To communicative language pedagogy. In J. Richards
have the teachers explain what they meant in providing & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication
the data would require another further data analysis (pp. 2–27). London: Longman.
and writing of another manuscript. Only the teachers as Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of
the researchers working with the data could truly en- communicative approaches to second language
lighten us as to what they meant or why they said what teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1–47.
they said (and then we would still have to be careful of Carter, K. (1990). Teachers’ knowledge and learning to
the bias within that type of analysis and presentation). teach. In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research
The approach we take here appears to differ from what on teacher education (pp. 291–310). New York:
some people within the L2 community do. We can only Macmillan.
agree with Wolcott when he states, “Qualitative re- Celce-Murcia, M. (1991). Grammar pedagogy in second
searchers seem particularly vulnerable to the ten- and foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly,
dency—and urge—to go beyond reporting what is and 25, 439–480.
to use their studies as platforms for making pronounce- Celce-Murcia, M., Dornyei, Z., & Thurrell, S. (1997).
ments of what ought to be. A critical divide separates the Direct approaches in L2 instruction: A turning
realm of the observable from the realm of values about point in communicative language teaching?
good and better. This is not simply the matter of a big TESOL Quarterly, 31, 141–152.
leap. You cannot bridge the chasm between the descrip- Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers’ thought
516 The Modern Language Journal 83 (1999)
processes. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of re- Karavas-Doukas, E. (1996). Using attitude scales to in-
search on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 255–296). New York: vestigate teachers’ attitudes to the communicative
Macmillan. approach. ELT Journal, 50, 187–198.
Clyne, M. (1977). Some experiences with primary Kawagoe, N. (1989). A report on Japanese language
school German in Melbourne—A first report. Ba- teaching in secondary schools in Queensland,
bel, 13 (2), 3–9. Australia. Journal of Japanese Language Teaching, 67,
Clyne, M., Jenkins, C., Chen, I. Y., Tsokalidou, R., & 118–127.
Wallner, T. (1995). Developing second language from Kessels, J. P. A., & Korthagen, F. A. J. (1996). The rela-
primary school: Models and outcomes. Canberra, ACT, tionship between theory and practice: Back to the
Australia: National Languages and Literacy Insti- classics. Educational Researcher, 25 (3), 17–22.
tute of Australia. Kinginger, C. (1997). A discourse approach to the study
Committee on the Teaching of Migrant Languages in of language educators’ coherence systems. Modern
Schools (CTMLS). (1976). Report of the Committee Language Journal, 81, 6–14.
on the Teaching of Migrant Languages in Schools. Can- Kleinsasser, R. C. (1993). A tale of two technical cul-
berra, ACT, Australia: Australian Government tures: Foreign language teaching. Teaching and
Printing Service. Teacher Education, 9, 373–383.
Donmoyer, R. (1987). Why case studies? Reflections on Koide, F. (1976). First Australian seminar on Japanese
Hord’s and Hall’s three images. Curriculum In- language teaching. Journal of Japanese Language
quiry, 17, 91–102. Teaching, 30, 13–37.
Eisner, E. (1991). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry Krathwohl, D. R. (1993). Methods of educational and social
and the enhancement of educational practice. New science research. New York: Longman.
York: Macmillan. Kumaravadivelu, B. (1992). Macrostrategies for the sec-
Elbaz, F. (1991). Research on teachers’ knowledge: The ond/foreign language teacher. Modern Language
evolution of a discourse. Journal of Curriculum Stud- Journal, 76, 41–49.
ies, 23, 1–19. Kumaravadivelu, B. (1993). Maximizing learning poten-
Floden, R. E. (1997). Communication: Reflections and tial in the communicative classroom. ELT Journal,
implications. In D. M. Byrd & D. J. McIntyre (Eds.), 47, 12–21.
Research on the education of our nation’s teachers (pp. Kumaravadivelu, B. (1994). The postmethod condition:
277–284). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc. (E)merging strategies for second/foreign lan-
Foss, D. H., & Kleinsasser, R. C. (1996). Preservice ele- guage teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 27–48.
mentary teachers’ view of pedagogical and mathe- Lamb, M. (1995). The consequences of INSET. ELT
matical content knowledge. Teaching & Teacher Journal, 49, 72–80.
Education, 12 (4), 429–442. Lange, D. L. (1982). The problem of articulation. In T.
Fox, C. A. (1993). Communicative competence and be- V. Higgs (Ed.), Curriculum, competence and the for-
liefs about language among graduate teaching as- eign language teacher (pp. 113–137). Skokie, IL: Na-
sistants in French. Modern Language Journal, 77, tional Textbook Company.
313–324. Larsen-Freeman, D. (1991). Consensus and divergence
Freeman, D. (1993). Renaming experience/recon- on the content, role, and process of teaching
structing practice: Developing new under- grammar. In J. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University
standings of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Educa- Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1991: Lin-
tion, 9 (5/6), 485–497. guistics and language pedagogy: The state of the art
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded (pp. 260–272). Washington, DC: Georgetown Uni-
theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Al- versity Press.
dine. Littlewood, W. T. (1981). Communicative language teach-
Glesne, C., & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming qualitative ing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
researchers. New York: Longman. Lo Bianco, J. (1987). National policy on languages. Can-
Heining-Boynton, A. L. (1990). Using FLES history to berra, ACT, Australia: Australian Government
plan for the present and future. Foreign Language Printing Services.
Annals, 23, 503–509. Lortie, D. C. (1998). Unfinished work: Reflections on
Howatt, A. P. R. (1984). A history of English language Schoolteacher. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M.
teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fullen, & D. Hopkins (Eds.), International hand-
Huberman, M. (1993). The lives of teachers. New York: book of educational change (pp. 145–162). Nether-
Teachers College Press. lands, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Hymes, D. (1971). Competence and performance in Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate? Educational Re-
linguistic theory. In R. Huxley & E. Ingram (Eds.), searcher, 17 (12), 13–17.
Language acquisition: Models and methods (pp. Mitchell, R. (1988). Communicative language teaching in
3–28). London: Academic Press. practice. London: Gower.
Johnson, K. E. (1994). The emerging beliefs and in- Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice
structional practices of preservice English as a sec- teaching. Curriculum Studies, 19, 317–328.
ond language teachers. Teaching and Teacher Educa- Neustupny, J. V. (1981). The analysis of foreign user
tion, 10, 439–452. situations and the teaching of Japanese: A sum-
Kazuyoshi Sato and Robert C. Kleinsasser 517
mary. Journal of Japanese Language Teaching, 45, in communicative language teaching II. Reading, MA:
105–106. Addison Wesley.
Nunan, D. (1987). Communicative language teaching: Scarino, A., Vale, D., McKay, P., & Clark, J. (1988). Aus-
Making it work. ELT Journal, 41, 136–145. tralian Language Levels (ALL) guidelines. Canberra,
Okazaki, H. (1996). Effects of a method course for pre- ACT, Australia: Curriculum Development Centre.
service teachers on beliefs on language learning. Schulz, R., & Bartz, W. (1975). Free to communicate. In
Journal of Japanese Language Teaching, 89, 25–38. G. Jarvis (Ed.), Perspective: A new freedom (pp.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational 47–92). Skokie, IL: National Textbook Company.
research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Senate. (1984). National language policy. Canberra, ACT,
Educational Research, 62, 307–332. Australia: Australian Government Printing Ser-
Queensland Department of Education. (1989). In other vice.
words: A sourcebook for language other than English, Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge
senior primary/junior secondary. Brisbane, QLD, growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15 (2),
Australia: QDE, Curriculum Development Ser- 4–14.
vices. Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Founda-
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and tions of the new reform. Harvard Educational Re-
methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cam- view, 57, 1–22.
bridge University Press. Silverman, D. (1993). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods
Richardson, V. (1990). Significant and worthwhile for analysing talk, text, and interaction. London:
change in teaching practice. Educational Researcher, SAGE Publications.
19 (7), 10–18. Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New
Richardson, V. (1994). Conducting research on prac- York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
tice. Educational Researcher, 23 (5), 5–9. StatView. (1993). The solution for data analysis and presen-
Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs tation graphics [Computer software]. Berkeley, CA:
in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook Abacus Concepts, Inc.
of research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. Thompson, G. (1996). Some misconceptions about
102–119). New York: Simon & Schuster Macmil- communicative language teaching. ELT Journal,
lan. 50, 9–15.
Sato, K. (1997). Foreign language teacher education: Teach- Vale, D., Scarino, A., & McKay, P. (1991). Pocket ALL.
ers’ perceptions about communicative language teaching Carlton, VIC, Australia: Curriculum Corporation.
and their practices. Unpublished masters’ thesis, Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnog-
University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. raphy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Savignon, S. J. (1983). Communicative competence: Theory VanPatten, B. (Ed.). (1997). How language teaching is
and classroom practice. Reading, MA: Addison- constructed [special issue]. Modern Language Jour-
Wesley Longman. nal, 81.
Savignon, S. J. (1991). Communicative language teach- Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon, B. (1998). A
ing: State of the art. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 261–277. critical analysis of the research on learning to
Savignon, S. J. (1997). Communicative competence: Theory teach: Making the case for an ecological perspec-
and classroom practice (2nd ed.). Sydney, NSW, Aus- tive on inquiry. Review of Educational Research, 68,
tralia: McGraw-Hill. 130–178.
Savignon, S. J., & Berns, M. S. (Eds.). (1984). Initiatives Wenden, A. (1991). Learner strategies for learner autonomy.
in communicative language teaching. Reading, MA: Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
Addison Wesley. Wolcott, H. F. (1990). Writing up qualitative research. New-
Savignon, S. J., & Berns, M. S. (Eds.). (1987). Initiatives bury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Look for paper sessions, poster sessions, and a business meeting at ACTFL Annual Meetings. Proposals
for sessions are solicited.