La naturaleza de la satisfacción del cliente

teachers’ oral feedback on my lesson demonstration. First, I discuss the findings from the cross-analysis of the three interviews, and then discuss the findings from the analysis of individual teachers’ views of cultural teaching. The discussion is concerned with RQ1: What are Japanese teachers’ views of teaching culture using English textbooks in English lessons?

Discussion of the thematic-cross analysis

The findings from the thematic cross-analysis of the three teachers’ views of culture teaching give meaningful insights in relation to criticality and practicality of cultural teaching in English lessons. First, critical aspects of teaching can be developed by importing a wide range of cultural information from other sources. The subjectivity or limited knowledge could lead to students’ limited interpretation of the cultural content of textbooks. Questions or activities which aim to elicit various ideas from students offer them the opportunity to develop multiple perspectives regarding culture. However, those questions or activities need to be carefully designed; otherwise, students would only respond to the points which interest their teachers. In this vein, collaboration with other teachers or the use of other materials would be helpful. New ideas or views might help teachers to avoid sticking to specific points or limiting students’ original ideas. In terms of practicality, too much effort exerted on searching other materials or arranging team- teaching with teachers of other subjects does not seem to be realistic when teachers’ heavy daily workload is considered. Simply talking with other teachers about the content of the textbook could be a practical approach to collaboration.

Second, linguistic and cultural aspects could be taught together in a practical and critical way. English teachers would be more confident of employing their knowledge of English language than teaching cultural knowledge. They could teach cultural aspects

embedded in the language and its use in context. Questions or activities that focus on the specific aspects of language use in texts could direct students’ attention to the assumptions, effects and purposes of the texts. Those questions and activities would enable students to read the texts from other people’s perspectives. Paying attention to English use in context could also help students to decode the texts. Therefore, cultural and contextual aspects could be incorporated into English language teaching in practical and critical ways.

Discussion of individual teachers’ views

From the analysis of Emi’s interview, two important issues relevant to my action research were raised. One is on the authority of teaching. Although Emi used various sources of information, she also had students search for additional information. Moreover, her task to read the text from different points of view suggests that a textbook is not an authority that involves one correct interpretation and students’ responses are different. Another important issue concerns students’ use of English. Encouraging students to speak and write English is an important aspects of English teaching. However, tasks to express their opinions only in English would be demanding for some upper secondary school students. In particular, expressing abstract ideas would be more challenging. As Emi demonstrates, tasks to produce short sentences could be completed within the limited time of a lesson.

The three themes identified from Yuka’s interview, teacher’s subjectivity, output activities, and collaboration with ALTs can be summarized as “different views and ideas.” Yuka encouraged students to express their own ideas and share them with their classmates. Although, as she said, teachers’ subjectivity may lead students to one answer, it is also one of different opinions. Teachers’ views and ideas can shed light on students’ interpretations of texts, or offer clues to students who find it difficult to generate their own ideas, as this can be demanding for some students. Yuka’s lesson and her concern

about her subjectivity offer additional insight for critical teaching. Questions and activities can lead students in a certain direction. Some students accept others’ ideas as their own, but others expand them or develop their own original ideas. Teachers can express their own ideas without worrying too much about its negative effect on students in critical teaching, which involves eliciting and sharing students’ various ideas.

Ken’s view of culture teaching reflects the reality of English teaching in Japan to some extent. In some academic-oriented schools, precise understanding of the language in a text which often involves detailed linguistic knowledge is important for students’ future career. Since they hope to pass university entrance exams, some teachers may focus more on the linguistic aspects than the contextual or cultural aspects. However, this would not necessarily mean that those teachers underestimate the latter aspects. As Ken stated, different cultures discussed in lessons give students opportunities to respond to those differences. Students’ various responses can be shared with each other. By so doing, they can widen their views. In this sense, opportunities for students’ exchanging their opinions would be valuable for widening their cultural views even in schools where considerable time is spent teaching detailed linguistic knowledge in order to assist students to prepare for university entrance exams. Nevertheless, teachers’ full commitment to discussions would not necessarily be required for teaching culture, because some teachers would resist the idea that culture teaching is the main role of an English teacher. Therefore, suggestions for culture teaching, whether it is critical or not, should be based on the considerations of teachers’ various teaching approaches.

7.1.2 Teachers’ feedback on a lesson demonstration

The discussion in this section is concerned with RQ2: What are Japanese teachers’ views of critical reading lessons?

I gained feedback on my lesson demonstration from the teachers who observed the lesson. The two themes, views of text and transferability, which emerged from the analyses of teachers’ feedback on my lesson demonstration are related to critical thinking and intercultural communicative competence, which I mentioned as rationales for my lessons in the handout for my lesson demonstration. In those rationales, the term ‘various perspectives’ was used. In this sense, the teachers kept the rationales in mind as they focused on the students’ perspectives during the observations. They evaluated that the students presented from various points of view. Also, the theme, transferability, suggests that the students’ critical thinking skills would be helpful in their future careers.

On the other hand, transferability raises two other issues. One is concerned with whether or not critical reading lessons can be implemented in other upper secondary school contexts, where the lesson schedules are inflexible due to their focus on preparing students for university entrance exams (Section 6.2.5). This is related to the issue that Ken, one of the interviewees, raised. He talked about lessons, which focus on forms of English, for academic oriented students (Section 5.2.2.3). This is also related to one of the comments I received at a study group meeting. As stated in the reflective narrative of teaching (Section 6.1.1), I was asked if students could read other texts critically. Whether or not students can do critical reading independently is thus another issue regarding transferability of critical reading.

The theme, delivery of English, refers to my teaching skills and task design. As one of the groups pointed out (Section 6.2.5), the students were not able to deliver their messages to their audience well because they had insufficient time to prepare their presentations. Presentations require students to integrate various skills, including language skills. In my lesson demonstration, students were asked to give group poster presentations based on their critical interpretations of the text in English; this required students to read the text

critically, organize their ideas logically, create posters, write and speak in English, communicate with their audience, and work with their group members collaboratively. As I mentioned in the reflective narratives (Sections 6.1.1 & 6.2.1), I implemented group presentations three times in my lessons before the lesson demonstration, in order to familiarize the students with delivering presentations. However, I did not focus on the accuracy of their English. Also, as I mentioned in the reflective narrative (Section 6.2.1), I found a considerable gap between the students’ general intellectual abilities and English skills. On the one hand, they were able to show their critical analytical skills in Japanese. On the other, they were not able to convey their messages effectively in English. This is the matter of the use of L1 or L2 in English lessons.

The other theme, opportunity to speak, refers to designing the task. The students were asked to discuss their presentations in groups. As one of the teachers’ groups commented (Section 6.2.4), not all the students had the opportunity to express their opinions during the discussions. This is an important aspect of critical reading lessons. As discussed in the literature review (Section 3.2.4), Wallace (2003) discovered that her students developed critical reading skills by sharing, negotiating and construction opinions with peers. This interactional process is also concerned with the philosophy of CP. As stated in the literature review (Section 3.2.4), “CP is a pedagogy that includes teaching understood as part of the teaching/learning process viewed as the dialectical and dialogical reproduction and production of knowledge” (Guilherme, 2002: 17). This means that students engage in the process of producing knowledge. As mentioned in the reflective narratives (Sections 6.1.1 & 6.2.1), I started to implement group work and kept doing so until the end of Year 3 so that they could exchange and negotiate their opinions. I did not focus on whether all the students participated in discussions. However, if students’ engagement in discussions contributes to the development of their critical