2006 Teachers' Retreat, June 11^th

Plenary Discussion

The plenary started with a number of teachers talking about key points for them from the earlier discussion groups. Jean Pierre voiced praise for the way things were organized at Chuo Law and how teachers were supported in developing their teaching. He said that such a set-up was unique in his experience and that it gave him a very positive sense of involvement. Michael picked up on the vocabulary group discussion and mentioned that he would try to give vocabulary learning a bigger focus in end-of-cycle reviews and self-assessment. Zorana said it had been very useful to talk about how students can develop and reflect on their vocabulary learning. Andy Martin mentioned that presentations can be done in different formats and that presentations to small groups, rather than the whole class, seem more effective.

Several people talked about the importance of helping students to do research. Rob identified the 'leap' from extensive reading (in Introduction to Communication Skills) into research in English on topics and issues as a key challenge for students and said that mid-level students need to know where to go to do their research. Mary Jo said simplified articles on the Chuo website, as well as other websites that have sections of simplified educational materials, are useful for students. Many teachers said they sent their students to the Chuo website to do research, but it was pointed out that students could get lost using the site without some guidance. Ellen suggested that we offer a new course in the curriculum that would focus centrally on doing research.

Mike said that a breakthrough at this retreat was that we all seemed to have a much clearer picture of the English curriculum than in the past, and so could talk more effectively about it. It was also mentioned that discussion about the curriculum was now focusing on the development of academic literacy, especially research skills, and on what students can become able to do -- with help --rather than what they can’t do. Andy, Mike and Steve all said that in the last year or two it had become clear that the curriculum was ‘working’. Most third year students were coming into classes ready and capable of doing academic work and research in English, as a result of developing their academic literacy in their first and second year taught in English classes. Meg felt too that third-year students’ academic writing ability and research skills were generally stronger than a few years ago. Other full-time teachers mentioned said the focus on academic literacy in taught in English classes was running parallel to the focus on the development of academic literacy in Japanese in first-year introductory seminars for Law Faculty students. And Steve noted that the Law professors have commented positively about the improving quality of the students’ English skills and their confidence and ability to use English sources.

The role of reading in the curriculum - - both in the taught-in-Japanese Reading classes and as part of the research process in taught-in-English classes -- was another focus of discussion. We talked about how the approaches to reading in these two parts of the curriculum are very different and about the desirability of a dialogue on reading across the curriculum. It was noted that this was the first retreat at which reading was a focus of discussion for the taught-in-English teachers, and Saeko said it great to see the importance given to reading at the retreat. Milt said it was also great that several Japanese full-time teachers, who have Reading classes, joined the Retreat.

The plenary ended with a sense that a dialogue between the teachers of taught-in-Japanese Reading classes and taught-in-English classes had begun.

(Summarized by Mike, Steve & Andy)