Participants and Context

The data collection for this investigation was conducted over a three-year period. During this time, three separate groups of participants took part in the study. While the three groups of participants were of a similar level in terms of English proficiency (low-proficiency), there were some important differences in regard to their experiences studying collocations and vocabulary. The three groups will henceforth be referred to as Toyo 1, Toyo 2, and HUE 1. In the Japanese university system there are two semesters per year, with the ‘spring’ semester beginning in early April and finishing at the end of July and the ‘fall’ semester begins in early October and finishes at the end of January. There are typically 15 weeks of instruction per semester, and each reflective cycle for this study was conducted over one university semester.

As a way of providing a background to the English educational experiences of these students I will briefly describe the approach used for English instruction in Japanese schools. All of the participants in the three groups studied English in Japanese elementary school (for three to six years depending on the school), junior high school (three years), and senior high school (three years). In Japanese elementary schools, English is taught as a second

language, where students typically take only two classes per week which meet for 40 minutes per class. The classes focus on simple greetings and basic vocabulary, and the classes are largely conducted in Japanese and are not very communicative (Matsuura, Chiba, & Hilderbrandt, 2001; Ryan, 2009).

In Japanese junior and senior high school classes, the students usually study English twice a week for one hour per class. The classes focus on English vocabulary which is thought to be useful on university entrance exams (Benson, 1991; Berwick, R. & Ross, S., 1989; Brown & Yamashita, 1995; Ryan, 2009), and grammar translation is still used as the major approach to English instruction. As a result, the students’ receptive knowledge of English can be at a much higher level than their productive abilities (Ryan, 2009). However, it is common for Japanese high schools to employ native speaking assistant language teachers (Kubota, 2002; Matsuura et al., 2001; Scholefield, 1996). Typically, the Japanese homeroom instructor will decide how often and in what capacity to use the assistant

language teacher (ALT). Some ALTs simply read dialogues and provide a ‘native voice’ to the text while other ALTs are given the freedom to conduct their own classes, which tend to be more communicative (Scholefield, 1996).

While there are some exceptions, Japanese students usually have a limited ability to communicate in English when they enter university despite having studied it since

elementary school. Nakata states (2006) “There is a general consensus that the

educational system has resulted in Japanese learners with weak English communication ability and low motivation to learn the language” (p.166). The students are familiar with grammar translation but have had limited experience in communicative English classes. Vocabulary has been emphasized during junior and senior high school, but the targeted words are chosen to aid the students in preparation for entrance examinations. Japanese students entering college often display decreased levels of motivation or confidence to speak English (Gilfert & Croker, 1997 as cited in Kubo 2009). Kubo (2009) states “Generally

[Japanese university students] do not possess the confidence to speak despite having studied the target language for six years or more” (p.40). For the reasons stated above, I will use the term ‘low-proficiency’ throughout this thesis to describe the students level. A

discussion of the students’ previous experiences studying is given in sections 5.3.4 and 5.3.5.

4.5.1 Toyo 1 participants.

The students who participated in the first reflective cycle in this study were all low-proficiency level Japanese university students (TOEIC scores 210 - 425) from a private university in Gunma prefecture. The students were in their second year and were all science majors. The majority of the students were 19 or 20 years old at the time of the intervention, and the students who participated in this reflective cycle were evenly divided over two classes (21 students in each class). Each class also had approximately the same number of male students as female students.

In their first year of university, every student had taken two communicative English classes: one in the ‘spring’ semester and one in the ‘fall’ semester. I taught both of these classes which met once per week for 90 minutes per class. It was during this first year that I used the approach based on the general service list, described in Chapter one. This

approach was largely unsuccessful in the goal of improving the students’ productive abilities and is the motivation behind this current study. To paraphrase, the area of concern (as described in section 4.3.2) for this investigation was the students’ lack of productive ability using previously taught individual words from the GSL.

In total, 41 students out of a possible 42 chose to participate. I was conscious of creating, as close to possible, a pressure-free research environment, so I did not enquire into the one student’s reason for not taking part in the study. As mentioned above, the

participants’ ESL proficiency was low but they were, for the most part, friendly and willing to engage in classroom activities. In brief, the important difference between this group and

subsequent groups was the fact that I had previously taught these students individual words from the GSL.

4.5.2 Toyo 2 participants.

The second group of students was from the same private university as the Toyo 1 group. This group participated in the second reflective cycle. They were also science majors, but this group consisted of only first-year students, so the majority of the students were 18 or 19 years old with approximately an equal number of male and female participants. The students were divided over six classes with the largest class having 32 students and the smallest class having 24. The overall English level was thought to be similar to the Toyo 1 group, but this level assessment could not be confirmed through TOEIC scores because only a few of the students in this group had taken the test at that time. The data collection took place during their first university semester, the spring semester. The treatment period was

therefore the first time I had taught this particular group of students (as opposed to the Toyo 1 group).

In total, 153 students chose to take part in this investigation. However, only 135 students completed the second questionnaire which was administered after the intervention period. Overall, this group of students, while not at a high English proficiency level, was friendly and engaged throughout the intervention period.

4.5.3 HUE 1 participants.

The final group of participants, involved in the third and fourth reflective cycles in this study, was from a public university in Hokkaido, Japan. While the change in research contexts was not originally anticipated, it was advantageous in that I was able to investigate the same topic but collect data from a different group of students. I believe this change adds an increased level of robustness to the findings. The students were all in their first year and majoring in education. The students were mostly 18 or 19 years old with approximately 60% being female. There were also two female students who were slightly older (22 and 25 years old). The students were evenly distributed over two classes.

The first intervention period (reflective cycle three) was during the spring semester (their first university semester), so it was also the first time I had taught this particular group of students. The fourth reflective cycle was conducted in the following semester, the fall semester. The students were also at a low-proficiency level. TOEIC scores were not available, but having taught this group and the Toyo 2 group with similar materials, I estimated their English proficiency to be at a similar level.

Initially 43 students agreed to take part in this study, but the post-intervention questionnaire was completed by only 21 participants for reflective cycle three and 38

participants for reflective cycle four for unknown reasons. However, the students were friendly and willing to participate in the activities during the treatment period.