A reaction to short story "Sonny's Blues" by James Baldwin

For those of you who are not familiar with the story Sonny's Blues, here is a link.

http://ja.scribd.com/doc/7086554/Sonnys-Blues-by-James-Baldwin

For more information on the author Baldwin, click here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Baldwin

This story was used in a workshop I attended today at ICU on how to teach literature in liberal arts. The special workshop was given by writer and professor Kathleen Hill, who I've introduced previously on my blog.

Kathleen has repeatedly stressed that literature, both in reading it and writing it, forces us to honestly look at what it means to be human, and what makes us "us." That is the value of including literature in liberal arts study, even in a foreign language. I think my students can learn a lot from reading stories and asking themselves what they feel about it, just as they can when they write about personal topics and share their thoughts and emotions with each other.

It was my first time to read this story, or any story by Baldwin, and I felt the impact of the writing grow on me as we discussed it.

The short story is about two brothers, with the older brother narrating the story and expressing his love and concern for his younger brother who ran away from home, joined the navy, and after returning pursues his dream to be a jazz musician, with some difficulty with drug abuse along the way.

To me, the most powerful theme in the story is the importance of "listening with an open heart" to those you love. When we love someone, brother/sister, parents, husband/wife, son/daughter, or anyone, it is easy to forget to listen. We know what is best for the other person, and because we love them so much and want them to be safe, we either do not, or can not, really wait for them to open up and tell us what is happening in their hearts. I know that from my own experience as a son, father, brother, husband.

I had a very valuable inner conversation, reading Sonny's Blues.

Upon re-reading To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

This was one of my favorite novels in my high school English classes, and I decided to read it again a few weeks ago because many of my students had read it for their summer reading.

Atticus Finch, the lawyer who defends a Negro slave wrongly accused of rape, is still one of my greatest heros, and I love these quotes:

"You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view - until you climb into his skin and walk around in it."

The whole novel's lesson is about learning to "stand in someone's shoes". In a sense, there is nothing more important than that concept of empathy as we try to live together with others in society.

He also says, in connection with telling his son why a certain crabby old lady was a very brave (she was kicking a morphine habit to die with a clear head):

"Courage is not a man with a gun in his hand. It's knowing you're licked before you begin but you begin anyway and you see it through no matter what. You rarely win, but sometimes you do."

That's a beauty as is the final one about why Atticus stands up to do what is right, rather than what everyone wants:

 "The one thing that doesn't abide by majority rule is a person's conscience."

My Summer Reading Reaction: The Giver by Lois Lowry

This summer, one of the books I read was The Giver by Lois Lowry. I decided to read it because one of my friends, who is a Japanese person working as an educational consultant, told me that this book was the first English novel he ever enjoyed reading, and that he started to like to read in English after he read this. To me, the novel looked like a children's novel in terms of length so I was skeptical about how good it could be.

After I read it, it became one of my favorites. The story takes place in a fascinating “perfect” human community in the future which has chosen to implement a social system of “Sameness.” The sameness policy is designed to eliminate all risk of danger or instability in human society in order to minimize pain and maximize equality and happiness. For example, there is no sex, because sexual urges lead to competition for mates and possibly violence. All reproduction is done artificially and children are born through women called “Bearers” who give birth as their job. Sexual urges are suppressed by taking pills and control of emotions and language and thought is taught to children. There are no colors either. Also, obviously, since there is no sex, there are no real families. People live in “family units” with no biological relationship that have been formed by the guidance of the Council of Elders, a group of wise persons who make all important decisions. Weak, disabled or old persons are “released” from the community so that they do not become a burden. The economy is also very stable, with jobs being also decided by the council; when children turn twelve years old, they are assigned to a work unit that is perfect for their personality and level of ability. The story focuses on the new job of a twelve year old named Jonas, who is selected to be the “Receiver of Memories.”

There is one special person in the community called the Giver of Memories, and he is the only person who has access to the memories of human history prior to the Sameness policy. In other words, he is the only one who knows of a world that includes both pleasure and pain. He is getting old, so he needs to pass on the memories to young Jonas, the Receiver of Memories.

The most meaningful theme in this novel is the dilemma that Jonas faces when he is exposed to the “real” human world that you and I live in today. He sees memories of family love, and pleasure. Then he sees memories of war. Is it better to live in a society that suppresses individual happiness for the stability of society? Or is it better to live in freedom with some risk of emotional pain by love and competition, and possibly war due to desire that grows into greed. Where is the balance and where is the position of Japanese society in this dilemma? As I read The Giver, I pondered the balance between suppression of freedom (choice) and suppression of inequality and risk. Is it better to have freedom to make mistakes? Or is it better for the “council” to make “wise decisions” for us. For example, in Japan, should elementary school teachers and principals be allowed to create their own curriculums freely, or should the central monkasho hand down their wise decisions from above??

I hope all of you will consider reading this novel and ponder some of the themes above. 
Leave me a comment!

Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses (in the US and Japan)

Just finished reading this. It is a quite detailed and ambitious research report trying to establish that US university students are NOT learning what they need to learn, namely the ability to read, think, and write critically and analytically at an advanced level. 

This claim is based on a standardized test called the CLA, or Collegiate Learning Assessment, which has questions like this (click). According to results of the CLA, many college students don't improve in those key abilities from their 1st year to their 2nd or 4th year.

The open ended writing prompts like these seem to assess very practical abilities, and I am happy to see that these are quite similar to the liberal arts core learning that we emphasize in the ELP at ICU where I work.



The following sample question is from this paper on the CLA "Facts and Fantasies" 
 

Figure 3: Example of a 30-Minute Break-An-Argument Prompt
The University of Claria is generally considered one of the best universities in the
world because of its instructors’ reputation, which is based primarily on the
extensive research and publishing record of certain faculty members. In addition,
several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields. For
example, many of the English Department’s faculty members are regularly invited
to teach at universities in other countries. Furthermore, two recent graduates of the physics department have gone on to become candidates for the Nobel Prize in
Physics. And 75 percent of the students are able to find employment after
graduating. Therefore, because of the reputation of its faculty, the University of
Claria should be the obvious choice for anyone seeking a quality education.

Hopefully, my ICU students will be able to take this argument apart and critique it successfully in an organized English paragraph that points out the main weaknesses of the claim "obvious choice".

Basically, the book Academically Adrift is a call to universities to boost the quality of their undergraduate programs, especially in terms of challenging students to read, think, and write critically. Professors and professors in training need to learn how to challenge students to engage in rigorous learning, and need to be given support and evaluation systems that encourage them to facilitate learning in an effective way.

I support this. I remember how my University of Washington undergraduate program (and graduate program, actually) rarely ever included any requirement for revising and improving a research paper. I rarely ever got more than a grade and a one line comment such as "Nicely researched but argument needs development. B+"  Being forced to write papers is good, but formative feedback is most likely critical to any substantial improvement in writing skills.  I had one professor, a young guy teaching me applied linguistics, who tore up a paper I wrote and asked me to revise it prior to a second deadline. I really enjoyed that process and learned a lot.

US universities will benefit from having more curriculum design with tasks that force the young writer to re-think and re-articulate the argument, and the same goes for Japanese universities, where the "academically adrift" situation is actually much, much worse.

坂の上の雲ー植民地主義と戦争の悲惨さに怒りを感じつづけさせられる全８巻

BookOffで買い込み７月にスタートして今週やっと第八巻を読み終えました。

Amazon.co.jp

日露戦争という大きな歴史の渦に吸い込まれながら読み進めました。

この長編歴史小説は「日本がどのようにしてロシアに勝ったか」という歴史を考えるために書かれているのですが、その時代と人物への理解はかなり深まります。陸軍の秋山古好・海軍の秋山真之という実在の兄弟の伝記を中心に書いているので、明治維新初期の教育制度、留学、外交、軍事制度、庶民生活などについてイメージが持てるようになりました。特に伝統的な古典教育から西洋の技術を取り入れるための近代化教育への転換が説明されていてとても興味深かいです。日本がロシアに勝った要因は天佑も含めたくさんあったことがこの小説から見えてきますが、一つの大きな要因は日本が優先的に行った教育の近代化と専門家養成のための留学の成功だっとと言えるのではないかと思います。このあたりは今後もまた研究してみたいと思います。

フィクション的な部分もいろいろあるのでしょうが、司馬遼太郎先生は文献研究をとても丁寧に行いながら書いている印象を受けます。中国など周辺のアジア諸国が欧米列強に植民地化されていく状況の中で、明治維新後の日本が経済と軍事を必死に発展させてロシアの東アジア侵攻を食い止め戦勝国となり、世界の列強の一つとある程度認められた、という事実はその後の日本の発展に良い意味・悪い意味の両面で大きな影響を及ぼしたことは確かです。

しかし悲すぎる歴史です。日本、ロシア、そして間に挟まれた満州や朝鮮の数万人の命の犠牲があり、涙を滲ませながらしか読めません。ロシア皇帝の植民地拡大主義を阻止するために朝鮮や満州における戦争が必要だった、ということは完全に賛成できないにしても現実的に見て理解できます。知識が浅いので他の文献も読まないと言い切れませんが、その当時の欧米諸国は弱肉強食の原理で次々と世界の国の主権を奪っていましたから、日本も立ち上がるしかないと決断したのでしょう。この小説を読んで以前以上にその必要性を理解できた気はします。日本帝国としては「日本を守った」大勝利として捉える気持ちは分かります。しかし朝鮮や満州の人々は二つの外国に主権と生活を侵害されましたし、日本（死傷２０万以上）とロシア（死傷１７万以上）の兵隊たちも皇帝の欲による侵略戦争と外交手段の失敗のために犠牲にされました。悲惨すぎる歴史です。どんな戦争にも「勝利」という言葉は不適切だな、と改めて思わされました。

つい１００年ほど前の話です。二度とそのような無駄な殺し合いがないようにするにはどうしたら良いのか、学校や家庭で話し合われなければならないと思いました。小説や映画を通して戦争の事実を被害者の観点から勉強し、事実関係をただ暗記するだけではなく、そのような歴史を起こす人間の個人や組織の性質について「どうして？」と考え、今後同じ間違えを繰り返さないようにしなくてはなりません。そのための教育体制と心がけは日本や他の国々で十分にできているのでしょうか？

私は小学校の頃(長野県浅科村、今は合併で佐久市）で通っていました、担任の中原先生の熱心な反戦教育・平和教育を受ける機会がありました。同時私は何故かその反戦教育が嫌いだった記憶があります。例えば、今も忘れられない授業としては東京大空襲で死んだ１０万人という被害者の数を実感するために、模造紙の方眼を１０万枚、はさみで切りとって、色を塗って「二度と戦争をおこさない」（確か）という横断幕のモザイクを作りました。数日の授業時間を使い、私はそれが面倒で無駄に思えて嫌でした。ただでさえ、戦争の間違えを考えることよりも格好いい軍艦や戦闘機の図鑑を見る方が好き（その年齢の男には多いと思います）だったり、歴史を読む時、他を侵略して大帝国を築くアレクサンダー大王、ジンギスカン、織田信長など、他を制服する強い国や人物を尊敬する傾向がありました。でもその時に受けた平和教育は今は必要で正しいものだと思いますし、深い印象が残っているので、中原先生には感謝の気持しかありません。

戦争で被害にあったことがない我々、授業やテレビで戦争の辛さや犠牲の大きさを知っても、多くの場合は実感がなく、その悲惨さを心に留めることができないのでしょう。私が受けたような徹底した平和教育はすべての国の学校と家庭において必要なのではないでしょうか。アメリカはそれをかなり欠いているのが現実で、大きな問題だと思っています。兵力という手段は防衛の目的でも最後の最後の手であり、必要な場合は使うが、その防御が成功しても人が死んでいる場合はお祝い事ではない。そういう教育を自分の子供には徹底したいと思います。

坂の上の雲の最終巻最終章、ロシアのバルチック艦隊を日本海海戦で全滅させ圧倒的勝利をおさめた時、秋山真之に喜びはない：

「秋山真之がそういう調子であるため、他の幕僚たちは大声をあげてはしゃぐわけにもいかず、ぜんたいの空気は病院の手術室のようにしずかだった(p.271)。」

損害　（from Wikipedia)
日本側 戦没88,429人， うち戦死戦傷死は55,655人[1] 病死27,192人 負傷者153,584人[2]	ロシア側 戦死25,331人 病死11,170人 戦傷死6,127人 負傷146,032人 [3]

John Grisham's "The Confession": Great read for a flight

Frankly, An Innocent Man which was Grisham's best-seller NON-fiction about the near wrongful execution of Ron Williamson was better. This was good, but couldn't beat the real thing.

Nevertheless, Grisham weaves a powerful narrative of how a young black suspect was forced to confess in an illegal police interrogation and how he was put on death row in a biased, unethical court (where the prosecutor was having an affair with the judge. A little melodramatic in parts, but a valuable analysis of what could potentially go wrong in America's justice system and how to fight against it more effectively.

Obviously, the most effective way to avoid wrongful executions like this fictional one, and Ron Williamson's actual case, is to abolish the death penalty altogether. How many mistakes or near misses will it take for Texas, Japan, China and other states to realize that any human system of justice is always going to fallible and death as a penalty should be abolished.

To all students of the legal system, in both Japan and the US, this a very effective introduction to how skewed and unjust justice can be.

竜馬がゆく、はまりました、刺激されました

春休みのちょっとした読書として司馬遼太郎の「竜馬がゆく」を１～８巻最後まで読み終えました。完全に司馬遼太郎の幕末の世界にはまりました。是非おすすめです。



数年前一巻だけを読んでストップしてものを、最近友人と飲み会で幕末・明治維新の話をしたのをきっかけでまた一巻からスタート。大学の授業が春休みなのをいいことにBook Offで買いこんできて「Daddy, let's play!」とせがむ息子・娘を無視して一気に読んでしまいました。

引きこまれる理由はやはり司馬遼太郎氏が歴史文献に基づいて作り上げる迫力と愛嬌を備えた竜馬という個性的かつ魅力的な人物像、そして繰り広げられる幕末の激動的な出来事のドラマです。本当の坂本竜馬がこのような人物だったかどうかもちろん分からないでしょうが、司馬氏が紹介する手紙や周辺の人物の日誌を参考にすると、ひょっとしたら本当にこうだったのかも？と信じそうになります。

歴史を動かした人物としての坂本竜馬を改めてすごい人物だなと感心します。しかし歴史的に正確かどうかということよりも、この話から何を得るか、だと思います。

竜馬の魅力は何と言っても権力者を恐れずに腐った制度を批判的に問う度胸、死ぬことを恐れずに事を成し遂げる使命感の強さと行動力、そして常識にとらわれない発想力でしょうか。刺激されます。自分にももっと必要な力だと思いますし、自分と共に学ぶ学生たちにも養ってほしい力です。

「世に生を得るは、事を成すにあり」

小説に出てくるこの竜馬の言葉は史実かどうかは別として好きな言葉です。自分の「成したい事」とはなんだろうか？と考え、小さくとも何か達成したい志を目指して進むことの大切さを改めて考えさせらる。



余談だが、先学期の英語のテーマは生命倫理で、学生の論文には日本の自殺問題に関するものが多かった。その中でも日本人にとって「腹を切る」武士の伝統やそれについての一種の美意識が現代の日本人の自殺とどう関係しているか分析しているものがあって、竜馬がゆくを読みながらそれを思いだしていた。竜馬がゆくの中ではかなり多くの武士が切腹する。武市半平太のように処刑方法としてのものもあるが、自分から何かの責任をとって自殺するものもある。確かに自分の腹が切れるという事自体すごい自制力で、感心するが、選択肢がある場合には自分はいつも「責任をとって腹を切るより、責任をとって生きて何かを成せ！」と言いたくなっていた。

Two Running Books I Got

Haruki Murakami, a frequent marathon and triathlon participant as well as Nobel Prize for Literature contender, shares his philosophy and experience related to running.

I'm going to run my 4th Tokyo marathon in 10 more days and decided to get this from Amazon to psyche myself up.

It is actually a very fun read. MH started running at about the same age I did (30), and he has run in more than 23 full marathons with times as fast as around 3hrs 30. He quit smoking at 30 and started to run to stop himself from getting fat, but his habit grew into longer and longer distances and eventually races.

We also agree that the main point of long distance running is the peacefulness. Get on the shoes, turn on the music, find a scenic path, and just jog away...thinking about nothing in particular.

The other book I got and have just started reading is:

Very entertaining so far. This Tarahumara "running tribe" in Mexico McDougall visits is fascinating. Will I be persuaded to discard my high tech jogging shoes and start running barefoot (or with only a protective foot cover) as McGougall recommends? Hmm...

小説の中の「父と息子の関係」が気になるこの頃

息子は４月から一年生。いろんな意味でもう独立した人間である。これからどんな人生の歩んでいくのかとても楽しみなのだが、今後父親としてどのように接していったら良いのか気になるところである。

そのためか、最近小説を読むと親子関係を見るのが面白い。

春休みになって気晴らしに大学と関係ないアメリカの大衆派Bestseller小説を何冊か読んでいる。



The Associateは法廷物の名匠John Grishamの最新作だが、過去の作品（The Pelican Brief, The Client, The Rainmaker, The Runaway Jury, The Innocent Manなど)に比べ今一つ引き込まれなかった。

しかし、その中の親子関係は面白い。主人公のKyleはYale大学法学部の新卒である事情（父親に簡単には言えないことが起き。。。）によりアメリカ最大の企業法弁護士事務所に入ることを選び年棒２千万円で大企業の尻拭い法務を行うエリートになる。彼の父親は小さな町の小さな法律事務所を経営していて、共同経営しながらKyleが庶民と正義のための弁護士活動をすることを願っている。卒業式間近の二人の会話：

"I've changed my mind about employment. I'm going to Wall Street. Scully & Pershing."
"Any particular reason?"
"It's the big leagues."
"It's a sellout."
"It's a nice firm, Dad. One of the best."
"You'll hate every minute of a big firm."
"Maybe not."
"I thought you wanted to help people."
"I've changed my mind."
"It's all about the money, isn't it. You were raised better."

すごい親子の会話です。
特に最後の"You were raised better"「そんな人間に育てた覚えはない」は厳しいです。
最近はこういう場面でどうしても自分の息子の将来を考えてしまいます。
私と息子の間でこういう会話にならないことを願っていますが。時には彼の決断に反論するのも愛情なのでしょう。
とにかく、何よりも願うのは息子が就職の時に気兼ねなく相談に来てくれることですね。


もう一冊は：
　
Christine by Steven King　


ホラーの巨匠Kingの旧作が友達の棚にあったので借りました。この中の様々な親子関係も非常に勉強になります。ずっと押さえつけて育てるとある日怖いことに。。。Steven Kingの中でいつも本当に怖いのは幽霊でなく人間です。自分がそういう人間になってしまうんではないかという恐怖を感じさせるほど描写している人間の言動や頭の中の思いがリアルで共感できる場合が多い。人間の観察力がすごいと思います。

高校の時よく読んだSteven King...またこの年齢になって読むと味がありますね。

Guiding Readers and Writers by Fountas and Pinnell

The new book for our research group is:

Guiding Readers and Writers: Teaching Comprehension, Genre, and Content Literacy

~ Irene C. Fountas

Irene C. Fountas (Author)

› Visit Amazon's Irene C. Fountas Page

Find all the books, read about the author, and more.

See search results for this author

Are you an author? Learn about Author Central

(Author), Gay Su Pinnell (Author) "We describe a comprehensive language and literacy framework that serves as a conceptual tool for organizing instruction..." (more)


Main Points / Reactions
--------------------------------
Introduction & Chp. 1

イントロとChp.1の中で最も強く伝わってくるメッセージは「A Lifelong Reader/Writerとしての自覚とは何か、そしてそれをどう育成するのか？」という学びのFrameworkが言語教育の中で大切だというです。

Are you a reader? Are you a writer?という質問をはじめとするp.12のLooking at Yourself as a Reader and a Writerという「問診表」があります。私はこの表を見て今だに恐怖というか、絶望を覚えます。まだReaderやWriterとしての自覚が深く形成されていないからです。もちろん本はたくさん？読みますし、文章もあれこれ書くのですが、自分を「読み手」や「書き手」として自覚し始めてからの歴史がまだあまりにも浅いのです。この研究会で勉強して約２年？ほど経ちますが、それ以前は英語教育関係で大学院まで行きながらReader/Writerとしての自分を考える機会は私の教育環境の中にありませんでした。基本的にとにかく与えられた課題をこなす毎日の教育を受け、それ以外に遊びの読み書きも多少しまましたが、「自覚」はありませんでした。

しかしその「自覚」は教師・学生・全ての社会人にとって大切なことだとFountas and Pinnellは強く訴えます。そして書き手・読み手としての自分を知らない教員はやはりLifelong Readers and Writersを効果的に育てることはできないでしょう。

このセクションで一番強く印象に残るQuoteは

p.11 "Teachers who themselves engage in reading and writing, and who examine their habits and attitudes as readers and writers, can best help students experience the power of their own literacy."

学生を指導する前に、または学生と一緒になってWhat do you read/ write? How do you feel about yourself as a reader / writer? What is the best part and the most difficult part of reading / writing for you? という質問に答えて行くことが必要です。

一緒にこの本を読んでいるみなさんはp.12の表の質問にすでに答えてみましたか？
みんなそれぞれ答えを書いてShareしてみませんか？

今度すこし時間ができた時にの以下に書いたその３７問に挑戦してみたいと思います。さっと質問を見てあまり明確に答えが出てこないものが幾つかあるので、書き出してみるときっといろいろ発見があると思います。Reading/Writingを教えている者として自分の自覚を磨きたいと思います。

そして是非自分の大学の学生にも「日本語」「英語」の両方でReader, Writerとしての自覚を少しづつ持ってもらえるように導きたいなと思います。
それから今６歳の自分の息子も日本語と英語両方のLiteracyを身につけ始めていますが、彼にもこの質問に答えられる自覚のある読み書き手になって欲しいです。

About Reading:
1. Are you a reader?
2. Do you read for pleasure?
3. When, what, how,
4. How do you feel about yourself as a reader?
5. What do you like most about reading?
6. What do you like least about reading?
7. What do you find easy to read?
8. What do you find difficult to read?
9. Who are your favorite authors? poets?
10. What types (genres) of books do you like to read?
11. What aspects of these books are particularly interesting or enjoyable?
12. What is the last book you read that you really enjoyed?
13. What are you reading now?
14. How do you find the books that you read?
15. How do you go about making your choices?
16. How often do you read?
17. How many books would you estimate you have read in the last year?
18. When do you find time to read?
19. What different kinds of material do you read?
20. What do you do following the reading of a book?
21. Choose a favorite book. Why do you like it?

About Writing:
1. Are you a writer?
2. How do you feel about your writing?
3. What types of writing do you do?
4. How often do you write?
5. Do you write for pleasure? When, what, why?
6. Do you write for communication? When, what, why?
7. Do you write to assist your learning? When, what, why?
8. How do you select topics for your writing?
9. Who are the audiences for your writing?
10. What is the best part of writing for you?
11. What is the most difficult part of writing?
12. How do you get feedback for your writing?
13. What is your most recent piece of writing?
14. How much writing have you done in the past year?
15. What "writers" do you know that help you think about your writing?
16. Choose a piece of writing you have done. Why did you write it and how do you feel about it?

--------------------------------
Chp. 2
Becoming Joyful Readers: The Reading Workshop

Key Points

• Reading Workshop is a reading instruction approach where students learn how to become lifelong readers who can choose their own books, discuss them, collaborate to learn about texts, and write about them.
  
• This approach believes that readers become good readers primarily by self-selected independent reading with support from the teacher or peers for how to select or how to read a variety of genres. Anderson et al (1988) has research results that show the amount of independent reading is the greatest predictor of a strong reader.
  
• Three main activities in Fountas and Pinnell's system are:
  1) Independent Reading: including time for the teacher to confer with readers periodically and readers writing in their reading notebooks.
  2) Guiding Reading: a group of students with similar needs read together and receive teacher instruction about strategies or genre knowledge, and
  3) Literature Study: a group discusses one or more texts with a certain theme or literary tool in mind. Example: Each person in a group reads a different book dealing with death of a loved one and discusss how they feel.
• Characteristics/Advantages of Reading Workshop (p.42):
  -Creates a community of responsible, engaged readers who spend time in genuine talk and writing about books they have selected themselves and find meaningful.
  -They learn how to read as they read and learn about themselves as readers.
  -Increases ownership of and commitment to reading
  -Broadens literary experiences (But only if a student decides to diversify genres)
  -Develops responsibility for reading (keep own records in notebooks, future reading titles list etc.)
  -It encourages personal connections to the texts (due to personal choice/ownership)
  -It teaches collaboration through guided reading and literature study, and though encouragement to share good books and reactions with peers.

Reactions/Questions:

• 生徒が２０～３０人いる教室で、Independent Reading, Guided Group Reading, Literature Studyの３つの違う活動が平行して行われている状態を想像するのが難しい。生徒たちが責任をもって自主的に取り組む態度がないと成立しない。
• 自主的に読んだりグループワークを行ったりする力はすぐにはつかないので、それをどう段階的にクラスの中で育てるかが課題だと思う。
  
  
• それと同時に、先生の力もかなり問われる。各生徒の力や興味を把握し、それに応じたGroupingやText-SelectionやMini-Lessonを行うには先生の教える力が相当ないとできないMethodに思える。
• では、先生がReading Workshopを効果的に運営できるようになるまでどのようなStepが必用か？著者たちは：As the first step, start with just 50~60 minutes of silent independent reading of books of their own choosingと書いているが、日本でそれを行うと教えることを放棄しているように見られるリスクがあるような気がする。そのリスクを回避するためにはどうしたらいいのだろうか？リスクを押さえ、段階的に、効果を少しづつ検証しながら導入できるシステムを考え提案することが理想的ではないだろうか。
  
  
• ICUの大学の英語の授業では、どうしても限られた貴重な授業の時間は読んだ内容に関するDiscussionやSkillのMini-Lessonに使いたいので、授業中にIndependent Readingをすることは考えられない。学生は基本的に宿題で読んで来る（来させる）のでなんとか成り立っている。
  
  
• しかし、"required reading"と平行して"self-selection of texts"はなんとか小さな規模でも導入したい。難点はRequired readingがかなり重く、一年生の共通試験に出てくるので、optional self-selected textsをやる余裕があまりないことである。
  

Book Review: When China Rules The World by Martin Jacques

Jacques writes at length a provocative, frightening and partially persuasive analysis that the 8 main differences that will define China as a major global power will be:

1. China is a "civilization-state" not a nation state, which seems to mean (Jacques is not the most coherent writer in the world) it feels it transcends any nation and era and draws on its past history for ideals and inspiration rather than conforming to western views of modernity and civilization. In other words, it will do its own thing.
2. China will see its relationship to East Asia and other parts of the world as a "tributary-state" relationship. In other words, when it becomes powerful, it will see other nations are inferior and in need of submission to its demands.
3. China will see the Han Chinese as a superior race, not just culturally but also biologically.
   
4. China is a continent as well as a country. Point not clear. Something about how the continent includes many different nations and regions and becoming truly democratic will not be likely to happen. One region will dominate the rest, just like in the EU system where strong economies dominate the weaker.
5. China will continue to have politics in the form of "imperial dynasties" that do not share power. One group will hold the mandate from heaven, whether imperial, communist, or other until it is overthrown and replaced by another. In other words, China is unlikely to become a western style democracy.
6. China's current rapid speed of development will continue, but unlike Japan, Taiwan and Korea which as smaller nations could attain relative equality within the modernized country, China will continue to face disparity of development among regions.
7. China has had a Communist Party based system since 1949. It has successfully overseen China's re-emergence as a global economic power and therefore has a strong level of legitimacy.
8. China will continue to be a mix of "developed" and "developing"--allowing it to relate and be involved in interactions with both types of countries, developed and developing, colonizer and colonized, the winners of the 19th/20th centuries and the losers.

Reading through the book gave me the impression that Martin Jacques accumulated a wealth of information about the current situation of China, economic, political and cultural, and did his best to make sense of it to write predictions and cautions for western observers of China. However, the task may have been fundamentally impossible on such a large scale and the books leaves the reader a bit confused and unsatisfied with the depth of the final analysis.

The facts he gives are well-documented and valuable. However, when it comes to drawing conclusions about where China is going to go in the future, most of his paragraphs become bogged down in rather unsatisfactory repeats of the historical or current situation. Yes, we know China had an imperial tributary system that dominated that region of the world for centuries, and we know that it has a soaring socialist market economy that is going to become by far the largest in the world. So where is China going to go from here? Jacques is able to tell us that China will dictate its own terms of modernization and global interaction, and is able to tell us what we might need to consider in predicting what that modernization path will entail--the 8 things above.

OK, we'll leave it at that and see where things go. The most valuable point Jacques makes is that we should not assume we know where China is going and we should be ready for deviations from the western model of the liberal capitalist democratic multicultural state.

Reactions to Anderson's "Assessing Writers"

This is the new book I'm reading with my research group on how to introduce the Reading Workshop and Writing Workshop method of instruction in college English classes and other levels of L1 and L2 education in Japan. We just finished reading How's It Going? and next is Chp.1 of our new book Assessing Writers. Unless I get lazy, I try to write all of my reactions in Japanese just like the other members who are all Japanese instructors and professors.

Chp. 7 "Conferring" & Chp. 8 "Linking Assessment to Instruction" Notes:

大切な点・勉強になった点
ーーーーーーー

• Chp.7はAndersonのHow's It Going?の著書に書かれたConferring・Tutoringのシステムが凝縮されており良い復習。学生と１対１で話し合う時がもっとも良くWriterとしての学生を理解し、力を評価し、的確に指導できるチャンス。そのとき学生を人間として尊重し、どんなWritingの問題に直面しているのか良く聞き、どんなことを教えるか対話の中で決定し、それに絞って指導し、その場で学生の理解を確認し、一度やってみてもらい、Follow　Upする。
  Andersonも書いたように、このようにやるべきことは分かっていても難しい。
  
  
• 最終章のChp.8はDesigning Units of Studyが主題で、学生全員に対して行うMini-Lessonをどう計画するかが主な内容。非常に具体的に書いていて参考になる。一つ大切なのはInstructionを入れすぎず、学生たちが授業の中で作家として自由に書き・話し合う時間を確保できるようにすること。
  
  １）Deciding what lines of growth to focus on, p.２１１のチャートはすごい。Writing Assessment項目のチャートに全員の学生の名前を入れ、誰が何を今上達目標にしているかを記入。これを基にどんなMini-Lessonがより多くの学生にとってためになるかを考える。大学でもこれができるようになれないだろうか。可能だろうか？
  
  ２）Initiative、Writing Well, Processに関する様々なMini-Lesson Unitの提案が参考になる。P.202.どれも「本物」のライターを育てるのに有効な技。Academic Writingを教える中でも「Writing with Detail」　「Writing for Social Action」 「Collaborating with Other Writers」などもっと組み込みたい項目が多くなった。
  
  
• Afterword：自分のクラスのライターたちが未来の有名作家、政治家、経済学者、演出家の卵だと思って責任をもってWritingを教えよう、とAndersonは提唱している。とてもインパクトのある考え方だ。これをいつも忘れずにいたい。私のICUのクラスの学生の全員が将来英語で様々なものを書き、世界を変える可能性をもっているのだ、と思って毎回の授業やTutorialｓに望みたい。
  

Writing教育の大先輩、Anderson氏に感謝！

考えたこと・やってみたいこと・疑問

• →やってみたいのはConference後に学生がEメールでConferenceの内容を要約すること。もしくはWritingのProcessを記述するNoteやBlogに学生が記入し、それをお互いに確認できるようにすること。
• →学生の強み・弱み・上達目標を記入するFormを作りたい。Web上で学生と共に記入していき、共有した情報によって焦点を絞った上達をクラス全員に提供していきたい。ノートも良いが、WebでGoogle Spreadsheetsを使えば全員の情報が一箇所に集約できるかも知れない。良いツールがあれば知りたい。要検索。
• →Afterword　ｐ.２２８にある大切な言葉をOfficeに貼りたい。”Imagine your student roster has Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Ghandi, John Lennon, Stephen Hawking, Robert Frost (or Ryoma Sakamoto, Yukio Hatoyama, Kuwata Keisuke...)”　You would do "the best assessment work of your career to ensure that what you taught them was exactly what they needed as they moved on their paths to greatness." "Even though I don't know my students' futures, I feel an awesome responsibility to them." "We are instrumental in creating our students' future's as writers." などいい言葉がたくさんありますが、私が最も好きなのは：
  
  「Dream of Your Students' Futures as Writers」です。これをスローガンにします。
  

Chp. 6 Notes: Assessing Students' Writing Processes

p. 143 Don't use good/bad labels for writers. All students are somewhere on the path to becoming lifelong writers. My job is to find where they are on that path and "nudge them forward." I like this way of looking at writing instruction!

p. 148 nice chart "What I am learning about this student as a writer?" "What do I need to teach this student?" I can't seem to do this for my current college writing classes. Why not? Nice example on p.151 of how he used it with Aurora.

p.157 "Like expert chess players, who through experience come to recognize...board configurations and know instantly what their next move should be, literacy teachers become able to quickly to spot the resemblances between students and know intuitively where to take students as writers." Just need to work on that step by step.



Chp. ５ Notes: Assessing Students' Writing Processes
summary:
Anderson starts by noting that all effective lifelong writers need to develop their own individual writing process preferences. An effective writing process is defined as the "tools and strategies he uses when he's rehearsing (preparing topics/research/ideas), drafting/revising, and editing that help him write well time and time again." Most of the strategies that Anderson mentions are classic or previously mentioned in his book--all good stuff: free writing or brainstorming or reading past entries in a writers notebook to find or develop a topic, refer to several examples of mentor texts to get ideas for organizing, do research to get ideas for details to include, draft and revise at the same time, ask a peer for help in making ideas/organization/voice/details clearer, and edit by reading with a voice or asking a partner for help or using computer checkers.

p.114-117 have good charts showing how knowledge of good writing will lead to good questions to ask during the process of preparing/drafting/revising, and which will lead to certain recommended writing strategies. For example, for the point "A good writer communicates meaning," one question is "Is what I'm saying coming through in this draft? Is it changing as I write?" and strategies to help at that stage are to Re-read the whole piece or ask a partner and ask "What do you think I am saying?" Showing students how we as teachers use processes in writing is invaluable too.

The most valuable part of the chapter is the discussion of how to get to know students writing processes. Observing how they write (in class), reading their writer's notebooks and drafts and edited drafts to see what they do, and discussing their processes with them in conferences are the best way.

☆学んだこと・やってみたい事 / Take-Aways

• I want to do more discussions about students' writing processes in conferences, asking questions such as how did you (or who will you) go about revising this?
• I want to take more note of writing processes as seen in student's edited drafts -- how they mark up their drafts after getting comments from peers and instructor. How can this be do with our current system of online documents? I am guessing students copy their draft file and then start revising on the computer--that makes it hard to see what was deleted or expanded. Perhaps just include a reflection question on how the draft was improved to the final. Emphasize the need for awareness of the process.
  
• I want to show students more examples of what it means to revise. Currently I usually don't write essays along the same assignment guidelines and schedule as my students, but that would be very effective.
  
• One thing I noticed in my classes this term was that peer reviewers were giving a lot of "editing" advice at the revision stage when commenting on drafts of classmates. I need to make the recommended process clearer -- Don't start polishing until the content is more finalized. Help each other revise on a essay-wide scale.
  

Chp. ４ Notes:　Assessing How Well Students Write
私にはPainfulなチャプターでした。まだ完全には消化できていません。

痛かった理由は読み始めた時にはI know what good writing is - I teach this every week...と思い込んでいた自分が次第に壊れていったからです。

とても価値ある痛みです。

Writingのクラスを普段から教えているInstructorとして恥ずかしいことに、ジャンルを超えて根本的に「上手に書くこととはどういうことか？」と詰めて考えたり人と語った経験は殆ど自分にありません。Master's ProgramのクラスでSecond Language Writingというのを受けたこともあるのですが、そこでそのような考察をした記憶もありません。

What does it mean to write well? Andersonがｐ１００のTeacher Actionで課題として出しているようにConstruct your own list of traits of good writingという事を一度じっくりやらなければいけないなと思いました。ReaderとしてもWriterとしても、そのような観点で文章を見つめた経験が非常に少ないので、はっきり言って何が「Good Writing」なのか自分の中でまとまっていません。

Andersonの６つの項目はすべて根本的な力だと思いました。Communicate Meaning, Use Genre Knowledge, Structure the Writing, Write with Detail, Include a Voice, Use Conventions--一つ一つ例を使って丁寧に説明されていてとても参考になりました。

いまでもAcademic WritingのChecklistみたいなものを学生に渡して「こうするともっとOrganized and Persuasiveだよ」と教えていますが、もっと根本的に書くことへのアプローチを考え直したいです。

Voiceは特に興味深い項目です。Academic Essayの指導の中で学生のVoiceを殺すような教え方をしている先生は とても多いと思います。Don't do this, Don't do thatみたいな指示が多いGenreです。I, you, weを使わない方がいい、The thesis statement must be at the end of the introductionなどなど。しかし、その指導の中でInspiringなModel TextやModel Writerが使われることは稀で、それはやはりInspiringな内容を書いているEssayには大抵豊かに作者自身の個人的なVoiceが入っているからだと思います。自分も"Objective"とVoiceのBalanceをもっと上手に学生に教えたいと思いました。



Chp. 3 Notes: "Assessing Students as Initiators of Writing"

興味深かった点
ーーーーーーー

• p.54 "We need to discuss with students, both as a class and individually, the audiences with whom they can share their writing." 一番最近考えていることなので先に並べました。どんな「読者」と作品を共有できるか生徒と話し合う重要性。インターネット上には多くの読者がいるし、学内外にも機会はいろいろあるはず。教室内だけでしか共有しないことを早く卒業したい！（が思うように計画がまとまらない）
  
  
• p. 27 "Students want to write" p.28 "I have to write. But I love having written" (quoting Don Graves (1993, originally by D. Parker?) 　同感です！書くの辛いですが、書き終えて他の人から共感や反応を得た時の達成感は気持ちいいものです。
  
  
• p.28 "The true test of whether Writing Workshop (or any writing class like ARW) has made a difference is not whether all of our students become professional (English) writers, but whether writing (in English) becomes a tool they use for responding to the world--to comfort, to convince, to pay tribute, to commemorate, to celebrate, and to speak out." (My parentheses)　この目標はICUにおいてもっと意識しても良いのではないでしょうか。全員が英語で学術論文を書くようになる訳ではない。様々なジャンルの書き方を教え、Initiators of Writingになるようにするほうが良い気がする。もちろん、そうするとICUでの学びに必用なResearch Essayの力がそれだけ伸びないことになるが、最適なバランスは？
  
  
• p.30 "25 Purposes for writing (or speaking): Nice chart - To celebrate an important person or event, To persuade, To bear witness to an event, To show how fascinating a subject is, To let someone know how to do sth., To help create a better society, To disagree with a position, To make someone laugh, To learn something about yourself, To be understood by others, To get someone to vote for you, To teach a moral or a lesson, To complain, To recommend an action or solution, To tell what happened, To share a passion with others, To explore an idea, To imagine how your/our life could be or what it would be like to be somebody else, To make plans, To share how you feel about someone or something, To make money or solicit donations, To remember, To heal, To leave something behind you.　これらの内、ICUが書いている文章はいくつあるだろうか？主な種類は青い４つぐらい。もっとあってよさそうだ。ジャンルを自由に選ぶことができれば学生は興味や情熱を感じるものに関して自分で「目的」選んで書く経験を積むことができる。Persuasive Opinionに加え、Memoir/Personal Narrative、Short Story, Poetryがあっても良さそうな気がする。
  
  
• p. 33 A writing teacher should be a COACH, not a judge. The goal is to support, not to rank.
• p. 34-37 How to assess students as initiators of writing:
  1) Are they getting started smoothly,
  2) are they able to set their own purpose and audience for writing,
  3) are they developing good habits for developing their writing,
  4) are they actively asking for help from teacher and peers,
  5) are they actively seeking audiences to share their writing with,
  6) are they writing outside of the required class time/tasks?
  7) can they talk about why they are writing it, for who, and how they will write it
  「自分から作品を書き出す力 The ability to initiate writing」を評価するためには生徒を上記の観点から見ている必用がある。Writers with initiativeを伸ばすためには観察した上で苦労しているライターをサポートし啓発する必要がある。p.50の表　-困っている生徒をどうサポートするか詳細に書いてある。Nice ideas！
• p. 49～５４ - それ以前に、「自分で題材やジャンルを自由に選べる」Workshop的カリキュラムを作る必要がある。テストに振り回されすぎない。
  

考えたこと・やってみたいこと・疑問
ーーーーーーーーーーーー

• Initiators of Writingとしての力を明確に目標にしているところが新鮮。とても大切な力なのにAssessmentの項目になることが殆どない。それは教員が学生に「このジャンルをこの課題で書くように」と言い渡している限りは伸ばすことはできない。
  
  「Research-Based Argumentative Essay」とジャンルを決めてテクニックをマスターすることは決して悪いことではないが、それ以外のジャンルを勉強する必要もあるし、自分で自由に選ぶ経験も必要。しかし、時間が限られていると一つの優先的なジャンルに絞って極める方がいいのでは？というのがICUのカリキュラムの前提。
  
  今と違うやり方に学生がどう反応しどうライターとして成長するか見てみたい！

Chp. 2 Notes: "Getting Started, Developing an Assessment Lens"

興味深かった点
ーーーーーーー

• "Good writing teachers, have a vision of the kind of writers they hope their students will become someday...High quality assessment starts with a vision of success. Our vision is a lens through which we can look at student writers." どんな作家・書き手になって欲しいか、教員のビジョンが評価の始まり。
• Anderson's Vision: Help each student become a "lifelong writer" who initiates writing (knows that various genres of writing can DO things in the world), writes well (communicate meaning with details, structure writing, give the words a voice etc.), and has a process of writing that works for her. 生涯書き続けるライターは自分の力で「書き出す」ことができる。従来の作文指導に比べ、自分でジャンルも題も決めるワークショップ・メソッドの最大の強み。良い文章の特徴を理解し、自分にあった書き方・仕上げ方を見つけることも大切。
• In terms of the process, "each writer uses a process slightly different from others." Student writers have to discover their own process.　アイデアの出し方、ドラフトの作り方、チェックの仕方、それぞれ書くプロセスは違う。様々な方法を提示し、自分のプロセスを見つけるように試行錯誤してもらう。
• Develop your own vision, and gather and record information by observing what students are doing (see in class), thinking (ask in conferences), and writing (read in their writing pieces, also read in their reflections). ビジョンを発展させるためには教員自信がライターとしての自分を見つめなおし、他のライターや教員のビジョンから学び続けなければいけない。そしてそのビジョンへ学生をどう伸ばすか、観察を通して考え、レッスンやコンファレンス実行する。

考えたこと・やってみたいこと・疑問
ーーーーーーーーーーーー

• 自分のＶｉｓｉｏｎは確立されているのか？ある程度は評価項目みたいなものを使っているが、それは「Ｇｏｏｄ　Ａｃａｄｅｍｉｃ　Ｅｓｓａｙ」に特化したもので、「Ｂｅｔｔｅｒ　Ｌｉｆｅｌｏｎｇ　Ｗｒｉｔｅｒ」の教育にまだつながっていない部分がある。学生と「Ｂｅｔｔｅｒ　Ｌｉｆｅｌｏｎｇ　Ｗｒｉｔｅｒ」に関する話し合いから始め、考え直したいと思う。特に「Has kｎｏｗｌｅｄｇｅ　ｏｆ　ｖａｒｉｏｕｓ　ｇｅｎｒｅｓ」の部分はＩＣＵではやっていないのでどうにか組み込みたい。Ｒｅｓｅａｒｃｈ Ｅｓｓａｙだけではなく、他のジャンルも含めて自分で何を書きたいのか考え、書き出し、仕上げるライターになって欲しい。英語で書くことの意味を様々な角度から感じて欲しい。と思いつつ、限られた時間で一つのジャンルに強くなってもらうことにも価値があるのでそのバランスを考えたい。
  
• 学生が自分なりの書くプロセスを確立できるサポートをもっとしたい。Ｗｈａｔ’ｓ　ｙｏｕｒ　ｐｒｏｃｅｓｓ　ｏｆ　ｂｒａｉｎｓｔｏｒｍｉｎｇ，　ｔａｋｉｎｇ　ｎｏｔｅｓ，　ｄｒａｆｔｉｎｇ，　ｅｄｉｔｉｎｇなどの話し合いに価値がある気がする。Ｍａｒｋ’ｓ　ｐｒｏｃｅｓｓを示し、他のやり方も示し、いろいろ試してもらい、その中で有効なものをつかみ取って欲しい。
  
• ＥｓｓａｙやＰｏｒｔｆｏｌｉｏの最後のＳｅｌｆ－ＡｓｓｅｓｓｍｅｎｔやＲｅｆｌｅｃｔｉｏｎは今後も書かせていきたい。「ライターとしての自分」を発見してもらうために不可欠。ただ、締め切りに向けては学生は振り返りを書く余裕がないので、ＰｉｅｃｅのＤｅａｄｌｉｎｅを設定して、それが提出されてからＲｅｆｌｅｃｔｉｏｎのＤｅａｄｌｉｎｅを設定したいと思う。
  
• 疑問・みなさんへの質問：またメーリング・リストで書きたいと思います。

---------------------
Chp. 1 Notes: "Why Assess Writers?"

興味深い点
ーーーーーーー
Assessmentの定義とは生徒を「書き手」として知り、それを次の教育に反映すること
p. xiv "Assessment is the challenging intellectual work of getting to know students as writers and using what we learn about them to help us decide what they need to learn next (in conferences and mini-lessons)."
p.2 Good writing teachers are "constantly learning about their students as writers." (a habit of mind)

書き手としての生徒を知るとはどういうことか： Know why they write and for whom, Know what they know about writing well, Learn their writing processes

p.4-5 の表はすごい　右の欄がWhat am I learning about this student as a writer? 左の欄がWhat do I need to teach this student? 自分はこのプロセスはInformallyにEssayのコメントでやっているが、Formallyにやることが重要。

p.6-9 一年生Kaylaちゃんの例を使い、Learn About the Student -> Decide What to TeachのAssessmentのCycleを描写している。

p.11の表：
　　　縦が書くことに関する目標の一覧 これを読むだけでかなり面白い
　　　　Voice: The student includes details that reveal who she is as an individual...creates intimacy with the reader. など
　　　横は生徒の名前一覧
　　　もしそのライターにその目標が必用ならば＋をつける、目標の達成が見られるとそれに○をたす。

考えたこと・やってみたいこと・疑問
ーーーーーーーーーーーー

1. まず、Assessとは「Get to know your students as writers and assess their needs」と再認識。下手するとAssess（評価）とは生徒にどれだけ問題があるかを並べることや、Gradeをつけることと間違えやすい。
2. やってみたいのはAndersonのような表の作成である。一人ひとりのライターに関する知識や上達目標エリアを書いてみたい。一覧表にしてみたら確かにMini-Lessonのトピックが選びやすい。
3. 疑問：大学で人数が多かったり、授業時間が少ない場合、先生のLearning about the student as a writerのプロセスを学生にどう補助してもらうが大切だと思うが、どうやれば良いか？
   やはりPortfolioが頭に浮かぶ。学生がこれまで書いた作品、チェックリスト、上達したこと、難しかったこと、先生と設定した目標、今後書きたいことなどなど、学生と共同で作り上げたいものだが、どうやって？

The Giverの新しい和訳が出ました！

http://thegiverisreborn.blogspot.com/

日本語の新訳が完成し、予約数が十分あれば再出版されることになったようです。
☆新訳のサンプルはここです。

英語のオリジナル版The Giverしか読んだことありませんが、私の大好きな短編小説です。何度読んでも感動し人間社会の構造と個人の欲求や感情の関係について考えさせられます。

中学・高校・大学の学生だけでなく日本人の大人全員に一読をお薦めしたい哲学的なフィクションなので、是非上記のリンクからアクセスして購入の予約や協力者としての申し出をしてみてください。

Lois Lowryが作り出す「Sameness」の異質なSF世界は日本の社会を考える上でとても面白い材料だと思います。中高生が国語・社会・倫理の時間に読んでDiscussionするのも良いでしょうし、大学生や社会人が教養のために読むのも大事だと思います。全国の図書館に是非置いて欲しいです。

Hope you will have a chance to read it! A movie seems to be in production for release in 2011.

Mark

Links:
http://www.amazon.co.jp/ザ・ギバー―記憶を伝える者-ユースセレクション-ロイス・ローリー/
http://www.amazon.com/Giver-Lois-Lowry/
http://www.shmoop.com/the-giver/

How Different Are We? By H.G.FitzGerald (2003)

http://bookweb.kinokuniya.co.jp/htmy/1853596191.html

Most of the English classes I teach at my Japanese university only have Japanese students. The students have discussions with each other, and based on those interactions with each other (and the limited interaction they each get with me), are expected to develop their ability to eventually (hopefully) communicate cross-culturally in English with non-Japanese speakers of English.

Does it work? In other words, based on this limited foreign language learning context, plus possibly a summer of overseas study and some coincidental conversations with international students or faculty on campus, how well-prepared are my students for participating in advanced interactions in English with persons from other cultures? Of course, each of my students has different charactertistics as a language learner and will face different interactional demands in different contexts, so it may be difficult to generalize what "well-prepared" for "advanced interactions" means, but I still need to have some general sense of where they are in relation to where they need to be, and what is needed in order to help them move closer to where they want to be. Given that most students rarely have had a chance to converse with people of different cultures, one of the greatest challenges they may face is achieving successful communication by adapting to a wide variety of cultural differences and communication styles.

So that's why I was interested in this work by FitzGerald. What tendencies, successes or failures do Japanese speakers have when they interact in English with persons of other cultures, and what might we recommend in terms of preparing for more successful interaction?

In "How Different Are We?" FitzGerald's examination of 40 hours of spoken discourse involving 155 non-native speakers from 104 different countries and 6 native-speakers provides many valuable insights for what seems to "work" or "not work" for smooth communication in collaboration tasks between persons of different cultural backgrounds.

Some competencies recommended are: (p.173)

• bring out into the open any cultural differences you feel may be impeding understanding
• if there is a misunderstanding, rephrase. Do not repeat exactly
• clarify the intention behind your words, knowing others may not share your worldview
• expect other ways of structuring information and emphasizing a point
• use fillers to avoid pauses when you have not finished what you want to say (Apparently because different cultural norms of turn-taking can cause you to lose the floor if you pause too much. Sees true from my experience. This can be a big challenge for Japanese speakers who come from a culture where longer pauses are accepted and respected.)
  
• soften negative statements where culturally appropriate
• do not break up units of meaning with pauses (Because it is hard to follow?)
• Repeat difficult ideas using different words; Ask questions to confirm understanding of the listener
• Use introductory phrases "What I want to emphasize is..." to make the function of important utterances clear
• Give instructions or information in correct sequence without extraneous comment

On rhetorical style and discouse organization, Asian and Middle Eastern background speakers tended to use a "more indirect, inductive organization of information" (reflecting the organization and rhetorical styles preferred in their first language).

FitzGerald's view, based on the intercultural interaction data, was that the inductive style often led to interruptions and misunderstandings. In other words, when a speaker took a long time to get to a point, building up to it implicitly and indirectly, the communication became confusing and frustrating (even when the interactants were familiar with the different styles of communication).

I like the quote on p.109 because it confirms my own conclusion on organization style for English in intercultural contexts:

"(With indirect approaches) ...it is more difficult to work at inferring meaning in intercultural interactions and, in such communication, there is a preference for more explicit, direct verbal messages."

Some may criticize this view of a preferred direct style as ethnocentric and biased, possibly even imperialistic, and that may be true to some extent. With more exposure to indirect styles in the future, the international preference may change, or they may become equally effective. Even today, in some contexts, an inductive, indirect style may be more effective. However, given FitzGerald's data that indirectness tends to lead to confusion in intercultural interaction, and given a tendency among advanced English learners from many countries to learn the rhetorical style preferred by Anglophone countries, it seems most practical for learners to try to use a direct style if they want to achieve smoother communication.

However, it is important to remember that one size does not fit all. Just because "direct and explicit and deductive" seems to generally work more efficiently does not mean it is always the best way to go. Intercultural communicators need to be ready to adapt styles to the persons they communicate with.

FitzGerald's chart on p.168 can lead to stereotyping, and so I am not in favor of matching categories of styles to certain regions. The valuable part of identifying communication styles is that communicators can reflect on their own style and realize that their way may not be the only way.

Communication styles identified by FitzGerald based on her data and literature:

• Instrumental/Exacting - Values individual autonomy. Linear, goal-oriented. Deductive, unemotional, objective, logical.
  
• Spontaneous/Argumentative - Values sincerity with blunt, direct style. Negative emotions are honestly expressed and not hidden. Arguments are forceful. Speak in length to say views in full to persuade the other side.
  
• Involved/Expressive - Warm, emotional, giving face to others, collaborative, enjoying the interaction, and sometimes like to digress from the goal on to tangents.
  
• Elaborate/Dramatic - Speaks take long turns to develop a dramatic, embellished story with metaphors, similes, rhythmic repetition and parallel structures. Positive, harmonious, but often full of sweeping assertions and overgeneralizations.
  
• Bureaucratic/Affective - Value harmonious relations and positive face. Stress form rather than content with formal bureaucratic language. Preference for inductive style of organization, including both sides of an issue.
  
• Succinct/Subdued - "These cultures value harmony, modesty and conformity and stress positive face, particulary position face. They express this by masking negative emotions and avoiding unpleasantness. Talk is status -oriented and should be deferential and indirect in many situations. People are expected to infer meanings. Turns are short and talk is concise except when an inductive organization of information and a conciliatory approach are used to avoid open disagreement. Talk and verbal skills are not highly valued: People are comfortable with silences."

So, which communication style do you use? Culture and school training affect the person's basic style, but ultimately I believe it is a personal choice, and all people can learn to adapt to different styles.

効果10倍の(学び)の技法 シンプルな方法で学校が変わる! (PHP新書)

生徒も先生も頑張ってはいるが、従来のシステムに束縛され、学びの改善に関する進歩は滞っている。そう感じている教員は多いのではないでしょうか？私も同じ気持ちを持っています。

人はどういう時に効果的に学べるのか、「良い学び」の本質を理解し、教員たち自身が自分たちの仕事に関して良い学びの技法を実践することは非常に重要で す。そのための実用的な方法や導入例を書いています。是非おすすめです。また、著者のEmailが後部に掲載されており、お願いすると追加で学校改善とン 学びの「理論編」を送ってくれます。この内容もよくまとまっていて参考になります。


さて、あとは、読んだだけのままにせず、自分が何をやるかです。

自分が何をやるか：

まず、第一章に出てくる内容で、学校の中で教員同士で行う学びを実行したいと考えます。

１）何人かで持続可能的な教育研究レポートの作成・発表のサイクルをスタートする
この本で紹介されている上越市高志小学校の例を参考にしたいです。
・大きなビジョンを共有し、それに向かって実践する
・「やってみてよかった」ことのレポートを書く（A4サイズ一枚の簡単なもの、月に一枚なら問題なく可能なはず）
・レポートを貯蓄し、共有する
・月に一度のワークショップで情報の共有をする（グループで２０～４０分シェアし、感想を全体に一人４０秒で報告するなど）

２）同僚とコーチング形式で、お互いの授業を見て、批判的友達として１）良い点を指摘し、２）気になる点を質問し、３）感想のラブレターを書く
今の大学でお互いに授業を見て意見を交換したいと思うのに、スケジュールの関係などで実践できていません。その解決として３人のグループで一人が二つのクラスを合同で教えるま間に授業観察を行う、という手法がとても実用的です。

とりあえず、上記の二つができたら満足です。

この他にも
・計画・実行・改善の３部の振り返りジャーナルの持続的な使用（自分は今不定期）
・他の先生と同じ疑問を持ったら実践研究をおこなう（これはある程度行っている？）
・学びサークルやBookClubを作り、本を読み、課題を話し合う（これは学外ではあるけど、学内ではない）
・まじめに雑談をする時間の確保（これは今ほとんどない。廊下の立ち話のみ）
・学びのリーダーと模範は校長である（しかし先生同士でも十分だと思います）

第一章でこれだけいいアイデアがありました。
このほかにも学内の会議や研修を元気にする方法、学生主体の授業、Cooperative　Learningを実践する方法、親たちと協力して元気のある学びの環境にする方法など、アイデアがたくさんです。

自分自身の学び・教育の方法を考え直すきっかけになる良い本です。

Mark

Keeper of Genesis (Hancock and Bauval 1997)

Taking a little break from writing my research papers, I picked up a book from one of the shelves in our department and entered the world of ancient Egypt for a few hours.　Hancock is the author of Fingerprints of the Gods, which I read back in...1997? I remembered having fun contemplating Hancock's somewhat far-fetched theories about a high-tech civilization that gave Egypt and other ancient cultures the ability to make structures as amazing as the pyramids of Giza or Machu Picchu in Peru.

This book focuses on the purpose of the Sphinx and its relationship to the pyramids. Hancock's whole idea since the Fingerprints of the Gods is that in 3000 B.C. there is no way that the technology for something like the pyramids appeared suddenly. The book expounds on how amazingly accurate and difficult the engineering of the pyramids is and suggests that a higher civilization preceding the Egyptians (something like Atlantis, which Hancock thinks may be buried under Antartica) gave them the technology and blueprints. Hancock's theory is that Sphinx is part of an intricate astronomically based treasure map based on the pyramids and the stars they point to. This map supposedly leads to the location of a hidden storage room of ancient knowledge buried 100 feet under the Sphinx.

One of the main points of support is the Orion Correlation Theory, that the pyramids and Sphinx are aligned in precise imitation of the stars in Orion's belt circa 10500 BC, which apparently is not accepted by mainstream Astronomers or Egyptologists.

Conclusion: Hancock wants the Egyptians to dig and see. Fair enough, but I tend to think there must be sufficient technology in 2009 to do some kind of sonic testing to figure out something like that, isn't there?

Creating a World Without Poverty by Mohammed Yunus

Amazon Link

I strongly recommend this for my ICU students' summer reading.

The concept of social business as envisioned by Yunus may have some weaknesses in terms of the reality of balancing financial self-interest of corporations and the desire to do social good. However, I want to believe in his assertion that financial self-interest is not the only force that drives humans, and that there is enough interest in helping others among various capitalists to make a "social business" a viable legally protected system.

Many economists and capitalists also doubted his Grameen Bank model built on trust of the desire of the poor to improve themselves through micro credit, but he has proven them wrong. The book gives a real life example of the Danon-Grameen social business. I hope more examples will follow.

The Obama Book "Dreams of My Father"

The fact that this book is worth reading has nothing to do (in my opinion) with the fact that the author is the current President of the USA.

Amazon link.

I recommend it as a person who has roots in more than one culture and has split his life living in different parts of the world, just like Barack Obama has. Particularly powerful are 1) Obama's identity search as half-white half-black returnee from Indonesia in a Hawaiian prep school, 2) his development as a political organizer in the Chicago South Side, and 3) his introspection on his relationship with his father's family in Kenya.

Whether he turns out to be a good president or not, I think it is beneficial that our president has a multicultural background, has lived in a variety of different social-economic subcultures, and possesses the ability to put his past (or at least his version of it) up for scrutiny and reflect on it in a intriguing way.

Check it out.