When you study argument, propaganda and media manipulation this term...

Check out this article regarding the possible failure of Japan's mainstream media to investigate the flaws in the government's plans for dealing with the radiation incident.

How true is it? You be the judge:

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/fl20120108x3.html?fb_ref=article_japantimes

As part of our unit on critical thinking, argument analysis, and propaganda, I usually introduce Herman & Chomsky's Propaganda Model to my students and make sure they are familiar with the forces that can shape media content.

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

How will Japan reinvent itself? NYT article

Declining as a Manufacturer, Japan Weighs Reinvention (April 15, 2012)

“It is time for Japan to find a new model for its economy,” said Masatomo Onishi, a professor of business at Kansai University. “We can follow the United States into a more postindustrial economy, or we can follow Germany into high-end manufacturing, but we shouldn’t be trying to compete with China in mass production.”

I wonder how much my college students are aware of and considering this issue...In general, I think Japan society may be a bit over-optimistic or insensitive as to how quickly it is losing ground, and how quickly factors of economic instability may reach a tipping point. Or, perhaps they are aware, but detached. Perhaps they have philosophically detached themselves from being part of an economic rat-race and decided to pursue other things of value in life? If it is intentional and philosophical, perhaps it is admirable. But if it is from a refusal to look around them and figure out what is going on, it feels dangerous, like some will be shocked beyond recovery when they find out their world isn't going the way it was supposed to.

Unfortunately, it may turn out to be true that sustained periods of affluence and stability, coupled with a tendency to isolate itself from immigration and influences from other cultures, may lead to stagnation of will power and energy to create something new among its younger generations. I hope not, but signs are showing. While my university tends to attract students with ambition and sensitivity to the world, my experience with other fairly prestigious university classrooms is that apathy and pursuits of short term pleasure reign. The kids live in a cushy dream world created by their grandparents and maintained by their parents. There is little sense of economic crisis or need to be competitive, and I just wonder where that is going to end up going...perhaps the stagnation is temporary, especially after 3/11, but there is no denying that an awareness of what is going on is important.

How will Japan reinvent itself? Whatever the answer is, I hope my students will be carefully considering not only the necessary economic strategy, but also what is needed in terms of social and educational development in order to create a society that balances pursuit of gain and pursuit of happiness for self and others.

"5 Days of War" (2011) -- Practice Your Critical Thinking

I try to watch war movies that purport to be based on true stories, and many that I have seen have been both educational and moving. Some stories must truly be told, and film is an effective channel for helping people know more about the truth and human nature.

But a good dose of critical thinking is always needed, and this movie is an excellent platform for practicing critical thinking and the separation of emotion and biased thoughts from actual fact or an effort to present a situation in a balanced, objective way.

You should watch it for that purpose only, and probably NOT to learn about the 5-Day Russia/South Ossetia-Georgia war of 2008, seeing how it is funded by the Georgian government.

The movie starts with the line "The first casualty when war comes is truth." (1918 quote attributed to Hiram Johnson, a US senator) Very good line. After watching the movie and researching the content, the use of that line actually seems to be quite ironic.

Link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1486193/
Japanese DVD title = 5  デイズ

Here's my recommendation:

1. First, watch the movie without reading too much about it and note your reactions.

2. Second, go read about the 2008 5 Day War in a number of sources. Starting with Wikipedia is fine, but make sure you go to the External Links at the bottom of the also try to read reports by the EU or UN Investigation Commission or Human Rights Watch.

3. Third, read about how the movie was funded and why it was created. Think about the 3Bs:
Background (where did it come from),
Biography (who financed and/or created it and why),
Bias (what part of the story are they ignoring or misrepresenting).

From today's NYT in the article:
April 1, 2012, 11:13 pm

The Politics of Going to College

By THOMAS B. EDSALL

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/the-politics-of-going-to-college/?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120402

(Explanation of the graph above excerpted from the article) "...M.I.T. economists Daron Acemoglu and David Autor, shows what has happened to the wages of men with various levels of education working full time (high school dropout, high school graduate, some college, college graduate, greater than college)."

Columbia professor Edsal summarizes the exchanges between Obama and Republican hopefuls Romney and Santorum regarding an expansion of federal support for less advantaged students to be able to go to college, and cautions (reasonably in my opinion) that the Republican party take a hard look at the illogical and self-contradictory statements its candidates are making on this issue.

Some of things Santorum has said such as the quote below are just shockingly ignorant. Scary.

Santorum: “President Obama once said he wants everybody in America to go to college. What a snob,” Santorum told a Tea Party meeting in Troy, Mich., on Feb. 25. “I understand why he wants you to go to college. He wants to remake you in his image.”

??

It is true that not everyone needs to college. Some people can have very meaningful lives and develop themselves a lot by starting a career after high school (or after dropping out) and learning on the job or in technical schools, and learning in their personal lives. On the other hand, some may go to college and squander their opportunity (like many college kids in Japan--but very rarely at my university, fortunately). However, the issue is not increasing the absolute number of college goers or college graduates, but increasing the fairness of opportunity that each individual student has for going to a higher education program if they choose so and if they plan to put in the work that is needed to benefit from the opportunity.

Expanding opportunity for students who want to go to college and make efforts to get sufficient funding but can't (assuming there are such students) is not "snob" ism. To me, it seems to be a simple support of equal opportunity, which should be strengthened if the US wants to continue to be a active and prosperous society where the best ideas and best efforts are rewarded regardless of family economic status.

I included the graph above because it shows how the value of a college degree has increased over the past few decades in terms of financial compensation, and how the gap between college educated workers and high school grads is increasing. This gap is wider than I had thought. I assume this gap is widening because employers of companies with competitive jobs believe (and have found from experience) that those who go to college actually offer something that their employers have found of value, that those students would not have had if they had not gone. This graph in itself is not a case for increasing federal support for college tuition, but it explains the motivation that students and their families will have to try to get to college and further their education.

I think it is quite reasonable that our taxes be used to level the playing field on a federal level, assuming, of course, that the playing field is skewed. And my sense is that it is.

TED Journal 1: "Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity"

I had seen this TED talk a few years ago, but watched it again this week in connection with a curriculum idea to use TED talks for extensive listening practice and a sort of "Listening Journal" in a course I am coordinating.

The idea will be to ask students to choose a TED talk, listen, take notes, summarize in 100 words or more, and react in 50 words or more, most likely on a weekly basis.

This blog post is part of "eating my own dog food" as software engineers at Microsoft? like to say. I'm doing a TED journal sample using the Ken Robinson talk above. So, here I go.

Process: I watched the talk and took one page of notes yesterday. As a native speaker and an education professional, I have no problem catching what he is trying to say after just one listening, but his accent and rate of speech may be hard to catch for some of our students--they may need to read the interactive transcript or refer to the subtitles, and that is fine if they need the scaffolding, as long as they also attempt to listen one or more without any assistance. His main points are not too complex, and mostly come at the end of the talk. For most of the time he is telling stories and jokes, some related to his points, and some not. I wonder how first year ICU students will react to this because humor can be frustrating when listening in another language.

 Today, I am using my notes to summarize and react. Then, I think I might watch it again to see if I have really caught the main points.

_______________________________
Summary:
In his 2006 TED talk titled "Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity," British creativity expert Sir Robinson argues that education systems must re-think how human talent and potential is developed. He believes schools kill creativity by over-emphasizing literacy and academic subjects. He calls this a hierarchy of subjects. Schools fail to develop creativity, which should be just as important as literacy, and students interested in dance, art, or music are not encouraged because they can't get a job with those skills. The example of the successful Broadway choreographer who was considered as a child to be deficient because she couldn't sit still is very powerful. Robinson argues that the education system was created by university professors in their own image for largely "industrial" purposes, and the system tries to evaluate with a bias toward academic ability (to make everyone like a professor), leaving out development of creativity. Robinson argues that we must recognize that intelligence is diverse, and create a new human ecology for developing creative capacities.


Reaction:
My own experience matches what Robinson says to some extent, and I agree that the development of creativity (defined as the ability to create original ideas of value) can and should be emphasized more in education. In my case, I was strong on academic subjects such as literature and math, and felt successful and encouraged in my education system. However, I was not as good in creative subjects such as music and art, or creative writing projects where I could do whatever I wanted. Now I wish I had been pushed to be more successful in them--given more open, creative assignments, for example. In this talk, I think the most important point is that the education system, especially teachers, should not dismiss students just because they do not conform to the academic traditions that have been created by the industrial model. Teachers should try to help all types of students find and develop their talents. However, at the same time, I wonder how much Robinson accepts that basic literacy in reading/writing/math/science is actually more useful for most students to get a good job, and therefore it is natural for parents/teachers to emphasize those over art/dance/music. Clearly, some optimal balance has to be found.


Reflection:
In terms of listening and taking notes (20 min.), writing the summary (150 words in about 15 min?) and writing the reaction (150+ words in about 15 min.), this was roughly a one hour task for me. I enjoyed it, but I wonder how students will react. _______________________________ For some students, it may take longer, but I hope students can get used to doing a good TED journal to get exposed to some powerful ideas as well as practice their listening, note-taking, and skills for writing a summary and reaction. In the future, we could also add an oral summary and reaction (1~2 minutes or audio/video)...but that will require a bit of technical logistical preparation that may be beyond the scope of spring term. We will see how it goes!

INTED 2012 Conference, Valencia, March 4-7

INTED 2012, the international conference on technology, education, and development, March 4-7 was a very productive conference.

Conference Website

The oral presentation I made was about language learning anxiety (See details). This was with two other research partners, and we got some good reactions and questions from the audience that underscored our theory that language learning anxiety is a significant, wide-spread psychological phenomenon that instructors of EFL/ESL working with many different types of students from different cultural backgrounds are struggling to deal with. Several audience members commented how they agree with the importance of understanding factors of anxiety and solutions using qualitative interview-based methodology as we did. Another interesting discussion we had was regarding the balance between positive, encouraging feedback from the instructor to the student, or among peers, and ha certain degree of strictness, authoritarianism, and constructive criticism to challenge students.

We also made a poster presentation about Japanese students' academic performance in university in relation to that in the United States (See details) and how efforts to reform university education in each country (or the lack thereof) should take into consideration an international perspective of what is effective and what may be misguided. The points in the poster led to very active discussion with attendees from several countries about their own country's student performance and reform efforts in various levels of education. There was much interest in how Japanese industry developed successfully in the 20th century in spite of a very lenient university academic culture that does not demand much engagement in terms of attendance or coursework, and how that model may or may not need to change if Japan wishes to remain competitive in the future.

Both papers have been published in the proceedings and are available for those interested.

Attending oral and poster sessions at the conference was also beneficial. I focused my attention on university language instruction-related sessions, and got some useful insights on helping students deepen their ability to conduct research while avoiding plagiarism. The Center for Academic Integrity was cited by many professors from various countries as being a very helpful resource--which may be a good addition to what we share with students at ICU. I also attended sessions on blended learning with a few good tips for using Moodle and Blackboard more effectively for research paper instruction. Another emphasis of the conference was "m-learning" or e-learning using mobile devices such as iPhones and iPads, and it was interesting to see how many institutions are introducing m-learning tools for in-class and homework assignments.

Some other things I enjoyed were:

1) Seeing a very smoothly run international conference. As a member of JACET's convention steering committee, I have participated in conference administration for the past few years, and it was instructive to see how the IATED / INTED organization enhanced the conference experience with a) highly capable room staff--I wonder if they were free volunteers or paid staff--they were very much in charge and very helpful to the presenters and facilitators, and b) a comfortable schedule for mingling and getting to know people--coffee time twice a day and an attractive lunch where I met people from many countries and learned a lot about the issues various countries and institutions are facing--possibly even more than in the presentation sessions.

2) Listening to many different varieties of English interacting with each other. As a presenter, I was asked questions in many different accents, and as an audience member watched interactions between presenters and listeners of various cultures. Some speakers were intelligible and effective communicators, while others really struggled to get through. In all cases, it was interesting to watch the communication strategies that were used, including asking others in the room for help to interpret what somebody was trying to say, and asking for repetitions, rephrasing and even just bluntly "Your question is too complex. Please ask me an easier question."

3) Being in Valencia and trying to get around in a city that is not particularly English-visitor friendly. Knowing very little Spanish, it was interesting to have to navigate subways, buses, and street signs for getting from the airport to the conference and around the city to restaurants and order food etc. You notice a lot of things about where signs should be, how they should be consistent, when English should be added, and how a country that depends on tourism for a large part of its GDP should work a bit harder on making the city easier to navigate. These are good lessons for Tokyo and other cities in Japan as well.

Finally, a few amateur photos of Valencia from my camera.

From the tower of the Cathedral overlooking the city center

The cobble-stoned city center of Valencia

A little paella and beer with my research partners to celebrate a job well done

Reflection on Winter Term, 2012 - AE TOEFL

My main new challenge this term was teaching a TOEFL iBT preparation class.

I had taught TOEFL Prep for the paper-based TOEFL many years ago, but teaching the iBT involved becoming familiar with quite a different combination of tasks. In addition, the course titled 'Advanced English: TOEFL" had no method of screening what level of student could take the class and that led to having a mix of different types of students with different expectations among the 20 who enrolled. Most were first year students finished with Program C, which meant their TOEFL was already over 550, many close to 600, and good enough to study abroad almost anywhere with just a few things to polish up--mostly in terms of academic language, logic and vocabulary. Mixed in with them were some juniors and seniors who had lower proficiency and less confidence especially in their speaking and listening skills; and paradoxically, the lower level older students were more in need of TOEFL score improvement for going to graduate school while the first year students, who were at a higher level (many as returnees) had enrolled for...it seemed just a vague sense that they wanted to keep studying English. It was a strange situation made worse by the fact that it was a once-a-week, two-hour evening class and energy levels were notably low after attending classes all day, and it was difficult to communicate with each other because I chose to use a computer classroom to do iBT activities on the computer. And we only met once a week, often interrupted by holidays, and it was even hard to learn names. Weird situation.

As it turned out, it was one of the weirdest courses I ever taught, and one of the least satisfying. It is an interesting one to analyze in retrospect, with hopefully some lessons for avoiding similar difficulties in the future.

So...to cut to the chase, what made it strange and how can I change or avoid that in the future?

1) Filter out students who are too high or too low, or a least define what kind of test prep will be done in the course description in advance so that those students can avoid enrolling. This was my first year, so I had no way to control the content of course description given to students in advance of registration. But for future years, I think a new description is needed. With test prep, a class with mixed levels and varying need-profiles really does not work well. In the case of AE: TOEFL, my preference would be that the "returnee type" students be filtered out and moved to College Composition or Presentation Skills or some other content-based class somehow.

2) Set up a better cycle of weekly homework to identify weaknesses and needs, and then in class addressing those needs with explanations and strategies. Lacking experience with the iBT format and how students should do homework to practice the skills, I wasn't able to take control of the homework cycle and assign work that would lead to active discussion in the next class. This time, I used one week per skill -- Speaking, Writing, Listening, Reading, and then Speaking, Writing again -- because I wasn't sure what students would benefit from the most. Next time, it would be ideal to spend the first two weeks flushing out levels and needs in each area before setting up the schedule. I need a clear profile of the students' weaknesses and expectations and motivations before deciding how much time to spend on what. Also, the first two weeks should be used to get some kind of score indication for all students that can be used as a benchmark of improvement to compare with in the final weeks. Doing a full TOEFL iBT takes 4 hours, so that is not realistic, but in retrospect even doing a two hour "half test" in the first or second week would help me see where they are with taking the test under time pressure. For writing, a 30 minute typed timed writing, with submission by email would be good for starting off. For speaking, one or two 1 minute recordings to see whether they are. For listening and reading, 30 minutes each or so to see how well they can get through the questions and formats. Then, possibly require them to self-score by working through that question and model answers step by step.

3) Set up a running TED based journal as well. TED is ideal for all skills - listen / read transcript / pick up new vocab / write a summary and reaction / and finally record an audio summary reaction of 1 minute or so. This can be easily posted on Moodle as a record of week to week effort to improve English, and can be done on top of practicing the textbook exercises and preparing questions for class.