The Uniqueness of Efl Teachers

8/3/2019 The Uniqueness of Efl Teachers

1/26

Feature Articles

The Uniqueness of EFL

Teachers: Perceptions ofJapanese Learners

JOSEPH J. LEEGeorgia State University

Building on the work of Borg (2006), this article reports on a

study of Japanese English as a foreign language (EFL) learnersperceptions of some of the unique characteristics of EFL teachersthat distinguish them from teachers of other subjects. The datawere collected by means of a questionnaire to which 163 college-level EFL students in Japan responded. Their responses wereanalyzed to identify the characteristics that are exclusive to theprovince of EFL teachers. The results of the study indicate thatthese learners perceive EFL teachers to be unique along fourcentral dimensions: the complex nature of the subject matter, the

content of teaching, teaching approach, and teacher personality.The findings also suggest that the particularity of the socio-cultural and educational context may ultimately influence howEFL teachers and their work are conceptualized by learners incrucial ways. I conclude by arguing that if language teachereducation is to provide a more nuanced explanation of theuniqueness of EFL teachers and teaching that may be meaningfuland relevant to teachers and students working within particularcontexts, the voices of all stakeholders involved in EFL educationneed to be included in the dialogue on what it means to be anEFL teacher.doi: 10.5054/tj.2010.214881

One of the key questions that educational researchers investigateinvolves understanding what it means to be a teacher. Researchersin general education have identified several universal teacher

characteristics that transcend various disciplines (Brophy & Good,1986; Dunkin & Biddle, 1974; Murray, 1991). These include knowingthe subject matter, being able to explain the subject matter in a clearmanner, and using concrete examples to explain concepts.

TESOL Journal 1.1, March 2010 23


2/26

Although educational researchers agree that these characteristicsare relatively consistent across different subjects, there is littleagreement regarding discipline-specific teacher characteristics (Bell,2005). To a large extent, however, teachers are characterized by thesubject they teach and the common practices they share in teachingthat subject (Borg, 2006). Though some teacher characteristics maybe discipline independent, various disciplines within the teachingprofession must have suppositions of what it means to be teachersof those particular subjects and that distinguish them fromcolleagues in different disciplines. As Borg contends, in preparingfuture language teachers, language teacher education presumes tohave an understanding of what specifically it means to be a

language teacher (p. 3). However, what are these distinctivecharacteristics? Are they immutable across various socioculturalmilieus? According to Borg, the construct of a language teacher isnot a one-size-fits-all phenomenon, and contextual factors mayultimately determine how this construct is conceptualized. For thatreason, understanding what it means to be a language teacher inparticular teaching and learning contexts is of central concern for

language teacher education.Though limited, the research available on foreign language (FL)teacher characteristics has focused primarily on how practicing andprospective FL teachers characterize themselves. Most existingstudies have not included the voices of one of the biggeststakeholders in English language teaching (ELT)the learners (butsee Brosh, 1996; Park & Lee, 2006). Tarone and Allwright (2005)remind us, however, that the word teach is not an intransitive verb;it is not an activity one does by oneself. One has to teach somethingto someone (pp. 1718, emphasis in original). Consequently, thereis a critical need to better understand how specific groups oflanguage learners in particular institutional and socioculturalcontexts characterize English language teachers (Borg, 2006).

Building on the work of Borg (2006), this study investigateslanguage learners perceptions of the uniqueness of English as a

foreign language (EFL) teachers. Specifically, the study seeks tounderstand the distinguishing characteristics of EFL teachers asperceived by a particular group of college EFL learners in Japan. Ibegin by providing a bit of background information regarding ELT

24 TESOL Journal


3/26

in Japan and reviewing relevant literature that informs this study. Ithen present the methodological procedure used in conducting theresearch. This is followed by the findings and a discussion of themajor themes that materialized from the research.

ENGLISH TEACHING IN JAPANSimilar to other Asian EFL contexts, such as China (Burnaby & Sun,1989) and South Korea (Li, 1998), English education in Japan wasfocused traditionally on developing students grammar, reading,and writing skills while oral communication skills were given littleor no attention (Butler & Iino, 2005; Honna & Takeshita, 2005;Mantero & Iwai, 2005).

More recently, however, the Japanese Ministry of Education,Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT; 2002, 2003) hasinitiated changes in its efforts to reform English education at alllevels in Japan. MEXTs current goal for English education is todevelop Japanese citizens who will be competently functional inEnglish in international settings (MEXT, 2003). At the tertiary level,the primary purpose of English education is to prepare graduates

who will be capable of communicating in English with speakers ofother languages for work purposes (MEXT, 2003). As long ascolleges and universities strive to reach this goal, they are able toestablish their own standards for instruction. Additionally, in itsefforts to enhance tertiary students communicative abilities, MEXThas urged Japanese college EFL teachers to use English morefrequently as the medium of instruction (Honna & Takeshita, 2005).In spite of MEXTs efforts, numerous factors (e.g., incongruent goalsbetween tertiary institutions and MEXT, realities of currenteducational institutions) have impeded significant educationalreformation.

CHARACTERISTICS OF FOREIGN LANGUAGETEACHERSAlthough specialists in second language teaching methodologies

have offered broad characteristics of effective language teachers(e.g., H. D. Brown, 2001; Hammadou & Bernhardt, 1987), andundoubtedly these broad treatments of language teachercharacteristics have been valuable in providing teachers with

The Uniqueness of EFL Teachers 25


4/26

guiding principles, these assumptions have been mostly devoid ofempirical evidence. Therefore, in order to examine and evaluatethese claims, a growing body of research has specificallyinvestigated the characteristics of FL teachers (e.g., Bell, 2005; Borg,2006; Brosh, 1996; Cortazzi & Jin, 1996; Mullock, 2003; Park & Lee,2006). These studies have attempted to explore behaviors andcharacteristics of language teachers because of the uniqueness oftheir work (Borg, 2006; Hammadou & Bernhardt, 1987). Althoughthe majority of the studies examined what a good or effectivelanguage teacher is, and not the distinctive characteristics oflanguage teachers that make them unique, they do provideempirical evidence into ways in which language teachers

characteristics have been conceptualized (Borg, 2006, p. 6). Theyshow that language teachers share characteristics with theircounterparts in other teaching domains; however, and moreimportant, they demonstrate that there are characteristics unique tothe domain of language teaching.

Through a survey, Bell (2005) identified characteristics ofeffective FL teachers as perceived by tertiary FL teachers in the

United States. She found that teachers of various FLs (e.g., Spanish,French, German) showed a strong consensus on the types ofknowledge and behaviors that language teachers need to possessand display. Among these were enthusiasm for the target languageand culture, competence in the target language, extensiveknowledge about language, and use of group work to encourage agreater degree of learner involvement. Bell concludes that althoughsome of these characteristics are shared by teachers of differentdisciplines, certain characteristics are indeed specific to the sphereof language teachers, such as issues related to error correction, focuson form, and culture. Similarly, Mullock (2003) investigatedpreservice ESOL teachers perceptions of what constitutes effectiveEnglish language teachers. Even though some of the findingssupport conclusions about effective teachers in general, such asknowing the subject and being skilled in teaching methods (S.

Brown & McIntyre, 1999), Mullock explains that specific aspects areuniquely situated in the province of language teachers, includingissues of language proficiency and cross-cultural knowledge andskills.

26 TESOL Journal


5/26

Unlike Bell (2005) and Mullock (2003), whose studies encompassthe perceptions of only practicing and prospective languageteachers, Brosh (1996) and Park and Lee (2006) investigated thecharacteristics of effective EFL teachers as perceived by high schoolEFL teachers as well as students in Israel and South Korea,respectively. Both of these studies showed that teachers andstudents held knowledge and command of the target language,clarity of instruction, building students motivation, and treatingstudents fairly as some of the most important characteristics thatEFL teachers need to possess. Even though teachers and studentsdid not necessarily disagree on most of these characteristics, theydiffered in the degree of importance they placed on various

characteristics. Teachers gave higher priority to some characteristics(e.g., motivation) whereas students emphasized others (e.g.,fairness). Despite these differences in the level of importance givento various features, teachers and students alike, unsurprisingly,acknowledged that motivation and fairness are importantcharacteristics of effective EFL teachers.

Taken together, these studies reflect the perceived characteristics

of effective language teachers in a general sense. Unsurprisingly,these characteristics (e.g., knowledge of the subject, clarity ofinstruction, enthusiastic behavior, fairness) are not all that differentfrom those that teachers of any subject should posses and exemplify(Borg, 2006). It is important to note that the objectives of thesestudies were to identify characteristics believed to be effectiverather than those that are unique to FL teachers. Hammadou andBernhardt (1987), however, point out that being a foreign languageteacher is in many ways unique within the profession of teachingbecause the content and the process for learning the content are thesame. In other words, in foreign language teaching the medium isthe message (p. 302). Although in FL contexts where the teacherand students share the same first language (L1), they can clearlyresort back to their L1. This uniqueness is echoed by Grossman andShulman (1994) in reference to the nature of the subject of English:

The inherent complexity of the subject, with its separate domainsand subcomponents, may also offer teachers greater autonomy indeveloping curriculum (p. 4). These authors acknowledge thatbeing a language teacher is in many ways quite distinctive, and they



6/26

underscore the relevant issues in understanding the particularitiesof language teachers.

In an attempt to categorize domain-specific characteristics ofEFL teachers, Borg (2006) investigated the beliefs of pre- and in-service nonnative-English-speaking EFL teachers in variousEuropean countries. A particularly interesting dimension of thisstudy is the inclusion of the perceptions of four subject specialists,one each in chemistry, mathematics, science, and history. Findingssuggest that certain distinctive characteristics are particularlylocated in the sphere of language teachers, but as Borg rightlypoints out, the characteristics of language teachers cannot beconsidered in isolation from the characteristics of language

teaching. Therefore, in outlining 11 distinctive characteristics of EFLteachers as perceived by pre- and in-service EFL teachers andsubject specialists, Borg integrates the teacher with the teaching.The findings point to the dynamic nature and practical relevance oflanguage, the scope and complexity of language teaching, and thediversity of approaches aimed at creating conditions formaximizing student engagement in communication. The need to

maximize student involvement in a language in which they are notyet fully competent seems also to compel EFL teachers to be moretolerant and accepting of learners linguistic errors. Similarly, inlanguage teaching, the teacherstudent relationship is closer andmore relaxed because, according to Borg, there is more interactionbetween teachers and students and the topics and tasks are oftenpersonally relevant to the lives of students. Furthermore, Borgsfindings suggest that unlike with other subject teachers, there is awide range of recognized qualifications for EFL teachers, some asshort as 4 weeks in length, and often the status of languages andlanguage teachers is lower than other subjects and subject teachers.Finally, Borg states that there are more adult EFL learners thanthose in other subjects, and commercial interests often drive thelanguage teaching profession.

In sum, studies in this line of inquiry indicate that there are

indeed characteristics that are distinctive to FL teachers, and theseparticularities make them different from teachers of other subjects.Additionally, the studies demonstrate that there are differences inhow FL teachers are characterized that are dependent on the setting

28 TESOL Journal


7/26

in which teaching and learning occur (Brosh, 1996; Mullock, 2003;Park & Lee, 2006). In their call for a reconceptualization of theknowledge base of language teacher education, Freeman andJohnson (1998) argue that this knowledge base needs to address thediverse social, cultural, and political contexts of teaching andlearning. They contend that research on the knowledge base ofteaching in language teacher education (as well as in generaleducation) shows how the educational context in which teacherslearn and teach determines in profound ways how they and others(e.g., students, parents, administrators) define who they are andwhat they do (Johnson, 2006). As Prabhu (1990) contends, ateachers actions and behaviors in the classroom are mediated by

his or her sense of plausibility of teaching (p. 172, emphasis inoriginal) in the particular socioeducational environment. Thesociocultural norms and values underscored by the educationalcultures and institutional milieus seem to shape the normality ofteachers beliefs and behaviors in their specific situations (Johnson,2006).

Accordingly, the differences found among the various studies

indicate how the ways that FL teachers are characterized are contextspecific. Although many characteristics may converge among thevarious educational circumstances, there seem to be someundeniably divergent characteristics as well. As Borg (2006) posits,the concept of the language teacher is not a monolithicphenomenon amenable to globally meaningful definition (p. 26);rather, it is a pluralistic experience, entrenched and constructed inmultiple ways within and across diverse settings. Furthermore,with the exception of Brosh (1996) and Park and Lee (2006), most ofthe studies on FL teacher characteristics are based on Eurocentricnorms (Borg, 2006), reflecting Western notions of what it means tobe an FL teacher. As such, there is a critical need to investigate howFL teachers are characterized in other locations in order to identifyboth context-independent and context-dependent attributes (Borg,2006; Mullock, 2003). The research presented in this study aims to

identify those characteristics situated in the domain of FL teachers,and to distinguish them from teachers of other subjects, in oneparticular setting.



8/26

METHODS

Context

The study was conducted at a national college of technology in

southwestern Japan (henceforth, JNCT), a specialized 5-year schoolthat admits students after junior high school (or Grade 9 in the U.S.system). Education at JNCT progresses from a general educationprogram for Grades 1012 (high school level) to more specializedtraining for college-level students, ultimately leading to anassociates degree in electrical, mechanical, industrial, or civilengineering.

Unlike students at other institution of higher learning in Japan,

first-year college students1 at JNCT do not have options for their FLrequirements; rather, they are required to study English andGerman for 1 year. In addition, second-year college students arerequired to take one FL of their choice. Similar to students in manyother colleges and universities in Japan, however, most second-yearcollege students at JNCT take English because of their familiaritywith the language and the likelihood that they will use it for

instrumental purposes in the future.At the end of each academic year, JNCT students take a

standardized English proficiency test, the Test of English forInternational Communication (TOEIC). This is one of the mostwidely taken English proficiency tests not only in Japan butworldwide, recognized by various international institutions,corporations, and government agencies. The test measuresexaminees English reading and listening skills, with the primarypurpose of assessing the abilities of nonnative-English-speakingexaminees use of English for everyday work activities. Becausemany corporations in Japan require TOEIC scores of newemployees (Gilfert, 1996), JNCT students take this test to apply forjobs at such corporations. At the time of the research, the English-teaching staff consisted entirely of native speakers of Japanese,although there was one part-time native English speaker from a

local private language school who taught a few speaking classes.

1College students refers to JNCT students who are above Grade 12, or in their fourth or fifth year at thisinstitution, equivalent to first- and second-year college students in traditional colleges anduniversities.

30 TESOL Journal


9/26

Participants

The participants in this study were first-year college students atJNCT. Although the study would have been more extensive withthe inclusion of other college students at this school (i.e.,sophomores), these students were inaccessible at the time of thestudy due to several factors, such as preparing for graduation andsearching for employment. Initially, 174 first-year college studentsparticipated. However, 11 were excluded for a number of reasons,including returning blank or incomplete forms and ambiguous itemchoice selection (e.g., circling more than one choice per item). Thefinal number of participants was 163 (142 males and 21 females). Atthe time of the study, all were 18 or 19 years old. They were in the

second semester of their first year of college. Prior to the study, theyhad completed a minimum of 6 years of formal English education atthe secondary school level and at least one semester of college-levelEnglish. Including Japanese (their L1) and English, most studentsreported that they had some knowledge of other languages as well.

Instrument

The participants completed a self-report paper questionnaire aboutthe characteristics of EFL teachers as presented in the literature. Thequestionnaire consisted of three parts. Part 1 comprised twosections. The first section had 22 closed-response items thatexamined how participants perceived EFL teachers to be distinctivecompared to teachers of other subjects. In the survey, however, theterm EFL teachers was replaced with English language teachersbecause students might not have been familiar with theabbreviation EFL. Although the focus was on the distinctivecharacteristics of EFL teachers, the second section of Part 1 includedeight items about the characteristics of English language teaching(replaced with teaching English in the survey) because, as Borg(2006) contends, characteristics of language teachers . . . cannot beconsidered in isolation of the characteristics of language teaching(p. 4, emphasis in original). The 30 closed-response items were

developed from the categories Borg identifies as beingdistinguishing characteristics of FL teachers and teaching, and fromcategories presented elsewhere in the literature. The participantsrated each closed-response item on a 6-point Likert scale in terms of



10/26

perceived agreement: 6 (strongly agree), 5 (agree), 4 (partly agree), 3(partly disagree), 2 (disagree), and 1 (strongly disagree). Neutral choiceswere not made available because it has been reported that Japanesehave a tendency to avoid choosing extreme answers (Reid, 1990),which, according to Stebbins (1995), indicates their unwillingnessto express [their] personal opinions rather than a lack of preference(p. 111). The thinking was that by having options for degrees ofagreement or disagreement, participants might not feel obliged tochoose extreme answers and would clearly indicate positive ornegative preferences.

Part 2 consisted of one open-ended item. It was intended to givespace for participants to provide additional qualitative information

about EFL teachers that might have been neglected in the closed-response section, but might cover important characteristics ofJapanese EFL teachers. Part 3 comprised questions regarding theparticipants biographical information (e.g., age, gender, years ofstudying English). To minimize misinterpretations andmisunderstandings, the directions and questionnaire items wereavailable in both English and Japanese. Finally, the internal

consistency reliability of the instrument was checked. Cronbachsalpha of the scale was .87, indicating a high level of reliability.

Procedure

In order to collect the data, a request for participation was sent viae-mail to several EFL teachers in Japan who were familiar to me in aprofessional capacity. Among those who responded, only oneteacher agreed to participate; the others kindly declined due todemanding schedules and other institutional obligations. Thequestionnaire was sent to the one Japanese EFL teacher at JNCT,who assisted me in distributing and collecting the questionnaire.The participants were recruited through the support of the teacherand other EFL instructors at JNCT. The teacher informed thestudents that in order to participate they would need to complete aquestionnaire. Students were asked to complete the survey in class

and return the questionnaire before leaving class. Asking studentsto complete the survey in class ensured a maximum rate of return.The teacher informed the students that participating in this studywas voluntary and that they were not required to write their names.

32 TESOL Journal


11/26

Additionally, the teacher explained that they could skip any itemthey did not feel comfortable answering, and if they did not wish totake part in this study, they could simply return the blank survey.All of this was conducted in Japanese, the students L1. Completingthe survey took approximately 1520 minutes. As mentionedearlier, the returned questionnaires that were blank, incomplete, orambiguous were excluded from the study. Among the responses tothe questionnaire included for analysis, none of the participantsskipped any of the items.

RESULTSOn completion of the data collection, descriptive and frequency

analyses were conducted to describe the characteristics perceivedby participants to be specific to the domain of EFL teachers andteaching. In addition, because some participants providedqualitative responses, the data from the open-ended section werecoded and analyzed to identify and categorize emerging themes.The findings are described with the focus of identifying thecharacteristics of EFL teachers that distinguish them from teachers

of other subjects.Table 1 presents the results from the first section of Part 1 of the

survey: JNCT students perceptions of the characteristics of EFLteachers that distinguish them from other subject teachers. Asshown in the table, JNCT students perceived that English languageteachers have a more difficult job because they have to explainthings to learners in English (M 5 4.65), similar to Hammadou andBernhardts (1987) contention. The participants rated this item thehighest among all of the characteristics. The participants also agreedwith the statements English language teachers have more positiveattitudes (M 5 4.58) and English language teachers show moreenthusiasm (M 5 4.56) compared to teachers of other subjects,which Borg (2006) found to be essential traits for language teachers.

There was also agreement that English language teachersencourage more student involvement (M 5 4.48) and English

language teachers encourage more speaking in class (M 5 4.48),supporting Borg (2006) and Park and Lees (2006) findings. Thisdoes not suggest that Japanese EFL teachers do not lecture or applytraditional approaches. In fact, the participants only partly agreed



12/26

with the statement English language teachers use less traditionallecture-style approach (M 5 3.82), suggesting that Japanese EFLteachers may still use this approach, but may do so less frequentlythan other subject teachers. Similarly, there was less agreement thatEnglish language teachers use more progressive teachingmethodology (M 5 3.50) or English language teachers use moreauthentic activities (M 5 3.33). Moreover, unlike Borgs finding,there was less agreement with the statements English language

TABLE 1. Means, Standard Deviations (SD), and Ranks of DistinctiveCharacteristics of EFL Teachers (N5 163)

Item Mean* SD Rank

13. have a more difficult job because they have to

explain things to learners in English

4.65 0.79 1

18. have more positive attitudes 4.58 0.88 27. show more enthusiasm 4.56 1.03 3

15. encourage more student involvement 4.48 0.84 43. encourage more speaking in class 4.48 0.90 5

19. use less traditional lecture-style approach 3.82 1.33 616. have a better sense of humor 3.72 1.41 7

5. are more creative 3.69 1.35 86. are more flexible 3.56 1.19 9

10. have a closer relationship with students 3.55 1.31 1014. use English which creates a greater distance between

teachers and students3.53 1.44 11

1. use more progressive teaching methodology 3.50 1.43 1211. spend more time preparing for lessons 3.47 1.16 13

2. tolerate more of learners mistakes 3.47 1.29 1412. help learners gain skills which have more practical

relevance to real life3.42 1.28 15

9. have lower status 3.42 1.36 16

20. teach learners to use learning strategies and skillsmore

3.40 1.36 17

21. encourage learners to express their needs andpreferences for learning more

3.36 1.20 18

4. use more authentic activities 3.33 1.43 1917. are more motivating 3.24 1.30 20

8. are better trained 3.17 1.35 2122. know and understand students strengths and

weaknesses more2.79 1.10 22

*6 (strongly agree), 5 (agree), 4 (partly agree), 3 (partly disagree), 2 (disagree), 1 (strongly disagree)

34 TESOL Journal


13/26

teachers use English which creates a greater distance betweenteachers and students (M 5 3.53) and English language teachershave a closer relationship with students (M 5 3.55).

There were also other characteristics with which JNCT studentsdid not show strong agreement. They were less in agreement withsome of the personal characteristics described by Borg (2006) asbeing distinctive of FL teachers. There seemed to be less agreementwith the following statements: English language teachers have abetter sense of humor (M 5 3.72), English language teachers aremore creative (M 5 3.69), English language teachers are moreflexible (M 5 3.56), and English language teachers are moremotivating (M 5 3.24). These findings support Brosh (1996) and

Park and Lee (2006), who also found that students in their studiesgenerally did not place as much importance on these features ofeffective EFL teachers.

Additionally, there was less agreement with English languageteachers teach learners to use learning strategies and skills more(M 5 3.40), English language teachers help learners gain skillswhich have more practical relevance to real life (M 5 3.42), and

English language teachers have lower status (M5

3.42)compared to other subject teachers. Finally, JNCT studentsdisagreed that English language teachers know and understandstudents strengths and weaknesses more (M 5 2.79). In fact, thischaracteristic ranks the lowest among those listed in Table 1.

Because teachers cannot be characterized in isolation from thesubject matter they teach, I now turn to the data from the secondsection of the survey. Table 2 presents the results of JNCT studentsperceptions of the distinctive characteristics of ELT. The items thatthey generally agreed and disagreed with may not necessarilysuggest how ELT is thought of in Japan, but rather what is involvedin ELT or, perhaps, what it should reflect. In other words, it may bedifficult to ascertain, based on the data, whether the participantsactually perceived some of these characteristics to be the reality ofELT in Japan or the ideal conditions that they may prefer.

As shown in Table 2, the participants agreed that teachingEnglish involves teaching the cultures of English-speakingcountries (M 5 4.61), supporting Borgs (2006) and Mullocks(2003) findings. This item was the highest rated finding in this



14/26

category. Participants also agreed that teaching English involves

developing learners communication skills (M5

4.57). Similar toBorg, JNCT students also perceived that teaching English involvesmore than teaching listening, speaking, reading, and writing (M 54.47). In terms of error correction, participants generally did notagree that teaching English means correcting every mistakelearners make (M 5 3.18).

The participants seemed to agree only partly that teachingEnglish is difficult because mastering English takes a long time (M5 3.98), and there was even less agreement that teaching English ismore difficult than teaching other subjects (M 5 3.87). In JNCTstudents perceptions of the distinctive characteristics of EFLteachers (Table 1), the highest rated item was the statementEnglish language teachers have a more difficult job because theyhave to explain things to learners in English (M 5 4.65). Thisnotion is further supported with their relatively high agreement

that teaching English is difficult because teachers and learnerswork in a nonnative language (M 5 4.55). Finally, unlike a findingby Borg (2006), there was less agreement with teaching English is

TABLE 2. Means, Standard Deviations (SD), and Ranks of DistinctiveCharacteristics of English Language Teaching (N5 163)

Item Mean* SD Rank

24. involves teaching the cultures of English-

speaking countries

4.61 0.93 1

25. involves developing learners communicationskills

4.57 0.88 2

29. is difficult because teachers and learners workin a nonnative language

4.55 0.82 3

23. involves more than teaching listening,speaking, reading, and writing

4.47 0.91 4

28. is difficult because mastering English takes along time

3.98 1.17 5

27. is more difficult than teaching other subjects 3.87 1.20 630. is difficult because nonnative English teachers

abilities are compared to that of native speakers3.72 1.30 7

26. means correcting every mistake learners make 3.18 1.21 8

*6 (strongly agree), 5 (agree), 4 (partly agree), 3 (partly disagree), 2 (disagree), 1 (strongly disagree)

36 TESOL Journal


15/26

difficult because nonnative English teachers abilities are comparedto that of native speakers (M 5 3.72).

In the open-ended section of the questionnaire, 46 participantsprovided qualitative data on their perceptions of the characteristicsof EFL teachers. However, most of these were one- or two-wordphrases, and only a few students offered complete sentences. Eventhough participants were not explicitly instructed to respond inEnglish or Japanese, nearly all of those who supplied writtenstatements did so in English. This may be the reason for the limitedresponses in this section of the questionnaire. Some of the responseswere too general, referring to the overall assessment of EFL teachers(e.g., good, very fine,, smart, very bad). Still others

appeared to be related to teachers general appearance (e.g.,stylish, very neatly) and not necessarily to their characteristics.Some were not interpretable at all (e.g., sevral color, source,subtle).

Among the 31 responses that were specific, 22 includedcomments about EFL teachers personalities. They describedteachers as being positive, cheerful, eager, and displaying

an excess of enthusiasm, passion, and vitality. Althoughmost of these were positive, two students wrote that EFL teacherswere negative and stubborn. Overall, these comments supportthe quantitative data, illustrating the perception that EFL teacherstend to have a more positive attitude and show more enthusiasm.Five students also mentioned that EFL teachers were fun, toofunny, and showed humour. One student in particular statedthat English teacher is humour and makes everyone happy

feeling, although, as shown in Table 1, students were less inagreement with this characteristic overall. Two students touched onteaching approach. One student commented, They [EFL teachers]teach only to read English or take a examination. Finally, threestudents seemed to point to the teacherstudent relationship whenthey referred to EFL teachers as being friendly, sociable, andcasual, although this was not supported in the quantitative data.

DISCUSSIONAlthough many characteristics of EFL teachers may not seem to bediscipline specific, the participants in this study reported that there



16/26

are, indeed, specific characteristics of EFL teachers that distinguishthem and their work from their counterparts in other teachingdomains. The emerging themes encompass some of the uniquenessof EFL teachers and ELT speculated on by Hammadou andBernhardt (1987) and Grossman and Shulman (1994), and describedby Borg (2006): the interrelatedness of content and medium, theinteractive nature of language teaching, and the content of languageteaching. Additionally, the participants in the study reported EFLteachers as exemplifying some of the teacher personalitiespresented by H. D. Brown (2001, p. 430). Table 3 summarizes thedistinctive characteristics of EFL teachers and their work thatemerged in this study: the nature of the subject matter, the content

of teaching, teaching approach, and teacher personality.

The Nature of the Subject Matter

As mentioned earlier, Hammadou and Bernhardt (1987) contendthat FL teaching is unique and difficult because it is the only subjectin which the content of the subject and medium of instruction areone and the same. This creates challenges for English language

teachers and students alike, particularly in EFL contexts where the

TABLE 3. Summary of Distinctive Characteristics of EFL TeachersPerceived by Japanese EFL College Students

Theme Description

The nature of the subjectmatter

In English language teaching, the content andmedium of instruction are the same, and it

involves teachers and students operating in alanguage in which students are not yetcompetent.

The content of teaching EFL teachers teach beyond the four skills andgrammar; they also develop learnerscommunication and cultural knowledge andskills.

Teaching approach EFL teachers maximize student involvement by

encouraging more speaking in class andthrough judicious correction of student errors.

Teacher personality Displaying positive attitudes and enthusiasm iscrucial for EFL teachers.

38 TESOL Journal


17/26

teachers and learners may both be operating in a nonnativelanguage. Teachers often present and explain information in alanguage in which the students have yet to reach a certain level ofcompetency (Hammadou & Bernhardt, 1987), thus making the workof both groups difficult. This is unlike the situation for teachers ofother subjects (e.g., math, science). Although teachers of othersubjects teach the language or discourses of their particular fields,the medium of instruction is not in an FL; rather, the language usedfor instruction is in most cases the learners L1. Therefore, there is aclear boundary between the content of the subject and the mediumof instruction, which makes the teaching of these subjectsfundamentally different than ELT.

Furthermore, as Borg (2006) posits, the nature of the subject ofEnglish is more dynamic than other subjects and has morepractical relevance to real life (p. 24). This may certainly be true inmany English language learning and teaching contexts; however, itwas less true for the participants in this study, students at atechnical college in Japan. One explanation may be that because thegoal of JNCT students, in general, is to become engineers in one of

the subfields of engineering, the science and engineering coursesthey take may be perceived to have more practical relevance to theirfuture careers than English. In most countries where English is notthe language of education or commerce, English is used mostly inthe classroom and learners interaction with speakers of the targetlanguage is rare. The lack of opportunities for students in EFLcontexts to use English in their daily experiences may make itdifficult for students, at least these JNCT students, to perceive therelevance of learning English to their immediate lives.

The Content of Teaching

In line with some of the tenets of the communicative approach tolanguage teaching, Japans new policy on English educationemphasizes developing learners practical communication abilitiesand cultural awareness (Butler & Iino, 2005; Mantero & Iwai, 2005),

though clearly grammar instruction still plays an important role in acommunicative curriculum (Ellis, 2006). Furthermore, as languageteacher educators such as H. D. Brown (2001), Kumaravadivelu(1994), Murphy (2001), and Omaggio (1993) have argued, language



18/26

and culture are inseparable because whenever you teach alanguage, you also teach a complex system of cultural customs,values, and ways of thinking and acting (H. D. Brown, 2001, p. 64).The Japanese EFL learners in this study appeared to subscribe tothis philosophy of language learning and teaching. Perhaps part oftheir perceptions (that ELT involves teaching beyond the four skillsand developing learners communicative and cultural knowledgeand skills) may be attributed to Japanese EFL teachers changingphilosophy about the nature of ELT. In addition, as is discussed inthe next section, the participants seemed to believe that JapaneseEFL teachers encourage more student involvement and speaking inthe classroom. These perceptions may suggest that Japanese EFL

teachers conceptualization of the nature of language teaching maybe shifting toward a more genuinely communicative orientation.

Another possible explanation for the students perception ofthese characteristics as distinctive of ELT in Japan may be due to theTOEIC. As explained earlier, the students at JNCT take the TOEICupon completion of each academic year. The test not only measuresexaminees reading skills, but also assesses their listening skills in

everyday conversations and language. Because teachers beliefs andpedagogical practices are crucially influenced by the practicaleducational needs of the students they teach, the need for EFLteachers at JNCT to prepare learners to perform well on thisparticular test may necessitate the broadening of the scope of theinstructional content. This may include developing not onlystudents grammatical and literacy knowledge, but also their oralcommunication skills and cultural knowledge. This points to asituation unlike that of teachers of other subjects. Certainly, collegeteachers of other subjects teach learners to operate in the discoursesof their particular fields, but they do not need to develop learnerslinguistic competence in the grammar, reading, writing, speaking,listening, and culture of a new language. All of this suggests thatthe distinctiveness of the content of ELT distinguishes EFL teachersfrom teachers of other subjects.

Teaching Approach

Another characteristic that the participants seemed to perceive asbeing specific to EFL teachers is teachers maximizing student

40 TESOL Journal


19/26

involvement by encouraging more speaking in class and throughjudicious correction of students linguistic errors. The high valueparticipants placed on this characteristic might be anotherindication that Japanese EFL teachers are implementing a morecommunicative approach in the teaching of English. Acommunicative approach to language teaching involvesencouraging learners to interact and communicate in the targetlanguage. From this perspective, encouraging student speaking andmaximizing student involvement in the classroom are paramount.Teaching language through a communicative approach alsoinvolves leaning strongly toward message orientation withlanguage usage offering a supportive role (H. D. Brown, 2001,

p. 269). Teachers applying a communicative approach need to bejudicious with correcting student language errors in order to allowlearners to develop fluency in the language. Teachers of othersubjects in Japan may not need to apply this approach because theydo not teach an FL and, therefore, may still approach teachingthrough a more traditional transmission model of instruction.

It can be argued that teachers who teach in students L1 also

may apply a communicative approach in the teaching of thelanguage. However, one of the differences between acommunicative orientation to teaching an L1 and teaching an FL isthe fact that teaching an FL through this approach involvesattempting to encourage students to communicate in a language inwhich they have yet to develop high levels of competence andfluency. The one-way teaching approach, which many teachers ofother subjects might use, places limitations on student involvement.It may also involve overt correction of students content errors,rather than linguistic errors, when learners provide incorrectanswers. In contrast, a communicative orientation to ELT maximizesactive student involvement in the classroom by encouraging morestudent speaking and avoiding overcorrection of student languageerrors. As such, these features, at least for this studys participants,may be regarded as characteristics specific of EFL teachers.

Teacher Personality

Although not all of the distinctive personality characteristics thatBorg (2006) identified in his study are found here, the JNCT



20/26

participants seemed to perceive two of them to be distinctivecharacteristics of EFL teachers: positive attitudes and enthusiasm.Having positive attitudes and showing enthusiasm correlate highlywith increased rapport between students and teachers, and appearto promote productive learning, because these behaviors seem tomaintain student attention, encourage active student participation,and keep students engaged in the learning process (Murray, 1991;Prabhu, 1990). These attributes are also in line with findings ingeneral education (Murray, 1991; Perry, 1985; Perry & Penner,1990), which at first glance suggests that they are not particular toEFL teachers. Upon closer examination, however, there may be anexplanation as to why this studys participants perceived these

characteristics to be more distinctive of EFL teachers.In a study by Murray and Renaud (1995), a key finding was that

arts and humanities instructors value rapport with students morethan their counterparts in the social sciences or natural sciences.Because the Japanese participants of the current study weretechnical college students and most of the courses that they tookwere science courses, English is one of the few nonscience courses

they took. Arts and humanities teachers generally value rapportwith students, so this may be an explanation for the participantsperceptions that these characteristics distinguished EFL teachersfrom their other teachers. On the one hand, positive attitudes andenthusiasm may not necessarily be exclusive to EFL teachers, butthey may relate to arts and humanities in general. On the otherhand, as pointed out by Hammadou and Bernhardt (1987), thecomplex nature of the subject of FL teaching may compel EFLteachers to display more of such characteristics than other arts andhumanities teachers. This is not to suggest that other subjectteachers do not display enthusiastic behaviors or positive attitudes.The point is that, as many of the participants in Borgs (2006) studyhighlight, these characteristics may be essential for EFL teachers inorder to sustain learner motivation and interest in learning Englishin an EFL context, where exposure to the language is largely limited

to the classroom.However, unlike Borgs (2006) study, in this study EFL teachers

were not strongly characterized as being more creative, flexible, orhumorous than teachers of other subjects. There was less agreement

42 TESOL Journal


21/26

among the participants that EFL teachers were humorous, but thisinclination may be more of an individual trait than a subject-dependent characteristic. In other words, some Japanese EFLteachers who taught the students might have been humorous, as thequalitative data suggests, whereas others may not have been.Humor, therefore, may not necessarily be indicative of JapaneseEFL teachers in general, but rather of individual teachers.

In terms of flexibility and creativity, the participants appeared tobe in less agreement as well. As mentioned earlier, JNCT studentsare required to take the TOEIC upon completion of each academicyear. The test and its implications for the students futures mayultimately compel Japanese EFL teachers to teach to the test, leaving

little room for creativity and flexibility in the curriculum. Inaddition, because the institution that these students attended is acollege of technology, science teachers who may be using state-of-the-art technology and having students engage in hands-onexperiments may be perceived as more creative and flexible thantheir EFL counterparts. In many ways, in order to conductexperiments, one needs to be creative with the implementation of

the experiments and flexible with the results. For these students,connecting the theories of science that they were learning withactual practical applications of those theories may have seemedmore creative and flexible than learning a language for which theymight not have seen immediate application. Although the studysparticipants generally perceived EFL teachers as being notnecessarily more creative, flexible, and humorous than otherteachers, they did seem to perceive that their EFL teachers

displayed certain subject-dependent personality characteristicspositive attitudes and enthusiasmthat distinguished them fromother teachers.

CONCLUSIONThis study investigated the distinctive characteristics of EFLteachers as perceived by a particular group of Japanese college EFL

students. The participants in the study perceived EFL teachers andteaching to be unique along four central dimensions:

1. The nature of the subject matter is complex in that the medium and content ofinstruction are the same.



22/26

2. The content of EFL teaching includes developing not only students linguisticskills but also their communication and cultural knowledge and skills.

3. A good approach to EFL teaching involves maximizing student involvementthrough encouragement and judicious error correction.

4. Displaying positive attitudes toward and enthusiasm for learners and thesubject is crucial.

Additionally, the study shows that even though there areidentifiable characteristics of EFL teachers that may cut acrossdifferent contexts, being an EFL teacher is essentially a sociallysituated construct that is dependent on particular sociocultural andeducational milieus in which teachers carry out their work.

Before concluding, some limitations of the study need to beaddressed. First, the data for the study only included first-yearcollege students at this institution. Future research could investigatehow teachers and students at various grade levels and differentinstitutions characterize EFL teachers in order to compare thesimilarities and differences among the different groups.Furthermore, student responses to the open-ended section of thequestionnaire were mostly in English and very superficial. Furtherresearch could explicitly state to participants to respond to this

section in their L1, thus potentially allowing researchers to gatherdeeper and more substantial responses. Finally, the quantitativenature of this study has limitations. Continuing lines of inquiry inthis area could use qualitative or mixed methods to get thicker andricher descriptions and understanding of why students andteachers in various locations perceive certain characteristics, but notothers, to be exclusive to the province of EFL teachers.

Despite these limitations, by bringing students into the dialogue,this study offers greater insights into the discussion on what makesEFL teachers and teaching unique. As the study suggests, EFLteachers and teaching are perceived as being unique in variousways, but contextual factors may ultimately affect and shape theways in which teachers and their work are conceptualized incrucial ways (Johnson, 2006). For language teacher education toportray more complete, complex, and inclusive images of what it

means to be an EFL teacher, the voices of all stakeholders involvedin EFL education must be included in the dialogue. By doing this,language teacher education can gain a better understanding of howEFL teachers are conceptualized and, more important, provide a

44 TESOL Journal


23/26

more nuanced explanation of the uniqueness of EFL teachers andteaching that may be meaningful and relevant to teachers andstudents situated within particular socioeducational contexts.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSAn earlier version of this article was presented at the 2009 TESOLConvention, in Denver, Colorado. I would like to thank JohnMurphy and Sara Weigle, at Georgia State University, for theirguidance and feedback; the anonymous reviewers for theirconstructive feedback; Akiko Kondo for her assistance in collectingthe data; and the students for participating in the study. Anyremaining errors are entirely my own.

THE AUTHORJoseph J. Lee is currently a doctoral candidate in the Department ofApplied Linguistics and ESL at Georgia State University. Hisresearch interests include L2 teacher education, genre analysis,classroom discourse, and L2 pedagogy.

REFERENCESBell, T. R. (2005). Behaviors and attitudes of effective foreignlanguage teachers: Results of a questionnaire study. ForeignLanguage Annals, 38, 259270. doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.2005.tb02490.x

Borg, S. (2006). The distinctive characteristics of foreign languageteachers. Language Teaching Research, 10, 331. doi:10.1191/1362168806lr182oa

Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and studentachievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research onteaching (3rd ed., pp. 328375). New York, NY: Macmillan.

Brosh, H. (1996). Perceived characteristics of the effective languageteacher. Foreign Language Annals, 29, 125138. doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.1996.tb02322.x

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles (2nd ed.). White Plains,

NY: Pearson.Brown, S., & McIntyre, D. (1989). Making sense of teaching.

Edinburgh, Scotland: Scottish Council for Research inEducation.



24/26

Burnaby, B., & Sun, Y. (1989). Chinese teachers view of Westernlanguage teaching: Context informs paradigm. TESOL Quarterly,23, 219238.

Butler, Y. G., & Iino, M. (2005). Current Japanese reforms in Englishlanguage education: The 2003 Action Plan. Language Policy, 4,2545. doi:10.1007/s10993-004-6563-5

Cortazzi, M., & Jin, L. (1996). Cultures of learning: Languageclassrooms in China. In H. Coleman (Ed.), Society and thelanguage classroom (pp. 169206). Cambridge, England:Cambridge University Press.

Dunkin, M. J., & Biddle, B. J. (1974). The study of teaching. New York,NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLAperspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 83107.

Freeman, D., & Johnson, K. E. (1998). Reconceptualizing theknowledge-base of language teacher education. TESOLQuarterly, 32, 397417.

Gilfert, S. (1996). A review of TOEIC. Internet TESL Journal, 2(8).Retrieved from http://iteslj.org/

Grossman, P. L., & Shulman, L. S. (1994). Knowing, believing, andthe teaching of English. In T. Shanahan (Ed.), Teachers thinking,teachers knowing: Reflections as literacy and language education(pp. 322). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Hammadou, J., & Bernhardt, E. (1987). On being and becoming aforeign language teacher. Theory Into Practice, 26, 301306.doi:10.1080/00405848709543290

Honna, N., & Takeshita, Y. (2005). English language teaching inJapan: Policy plans and their implementations. RELC Journal, 36,363383. doi:l0.1177/0033688205060055

Johnson, K. E. (2006). The sociocultural turn and its challenges forsecond language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 235257.

Kumaravadivelu, B. (1994). The postmethod condition: (E)mergingstrategies for second/foreign language teaching. TESOL

Quarterly, 28, 2748.Li, D. (1998). Its always more difficult than you plan and imagine:

Teachers perceived difficulties in introducing the

46 TESOL Journal
http://iteslj.org/http://iteslj.org/


25/26

communicative approach in South Korea. TESOL Quarterly, 32,677703.

Mantero, M., & Iwai, Y. (2005). Reframing English languageeducation in Japan. Asian EFL Journal, 7(2). Retrieved fromhttp://www.asian-efl-journal.com/

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology.(2002). Developing a strategic plan to cultivate Japanese with Englishabilities. Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/english/news/2002/07/020901.htm

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology.(2003). Regarding the establishment of an action plan to cultivateJapanese with English abilities. Retrieved from http://www

.mext.go.jp/english/topics/03072801.htmMullock, B. (2003). What makes a good teacher? The perception of

postgraduate TESOL students. Prospect, 18(3), 324.Murphy, J. (2001). A time for local perspectives. In J. Murphy & P.

Byrd (Eds.), Understanding the courses we teach: Local perspectiveson English language teaching (pp. 310). Ann Arbor: University ofMichigan Press.

Murray, H. G. (1991). Effective teaching behaviors in the collegeclassrooms. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook oftheory and research, Vol. 7 (pp. 135172). New York, NY: Agathon.

Murray, H. G., & Renaud, R. D. (1995). Disciplinary differences inclassroom teaching behaviors. In N. Hativa & M. Marincovich(Eds.), Disciplinary differences in teaching and learning: Implicationsfor practice (pp. 3139). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Omaggio, A. C. (1993). Teaching language in context: Proficiency-oriented instruction (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.

Park, G.-P., & Lee, H.-W. (2006, September). Characteristics ofeffective English teachers perceived by high school teachers andstudents in Korea. Paper presented at the 19th English AustraliaEducation Conference, Perth, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.englishaustralia.com.au/ea_conference2006/proceedings/pdf/Lee.pdf

Perry, R. P. (1985). Instructor expressiveness: Implications forimproving teaching. In J. G. Donald & A. M. Sullivan (Eds.),Using research to improve teaching (pp. 3549). San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.

http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/http://www.mext.go.jp/english/news/2002/07/020901.htmhttp://www.mext.go.jp/english/news/2002/07/020901.htmhttp://www.mext.go.jp/english/topics/03072801.htmhttp://www.mext.go.jp/english/topics/03072801.htmhttp://www.englishaustralia.com.au/ea_conference2006/proceedings/pdf/Lee.pdfhttp://www.englishaustralia.com.au/ea_conference2006/proceedings/pdf/Lee.pdfhttp://www.englishaustralia.com.au/ea_conference2006/proceedings/pdf/Lee.pdfhttp://www.englishaustralia.com.au/ea_conference2006/proceedings/pdf/Lee.pdfhttp://www.englishaustralia.com.au/ea_conference2006/proceedings/pdf/Lee.pdfhttp://www.englishaustralia.com.au/ea_conference2006/proceedings/pdf/Lee.pdfhttp://www.mext.go.jp/english/topics/03072801.htmhttp://www.mext.go.jp/english/topics/03072801.htmhttp://www.mext.go.jp/english/news/2002/07/020901.htmhttp://www.mext.go.jp/english/news/2002/07/020901.htmhttp://www.asian-efl-journal.com/


26/26

Perry, R. P., & Penner, K. (1990). Enhancing academic achievementin college students through attributional retraining andinstruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 262271.

Prahbu, N. S. (1990). There is no best methodWhy? TESOLQuarterly, 24, 161176.

Reid, J. (1990). The dirty laundry of ESL survey research. TESOLQuarterly, 24, 323338.

Stebbins, C. (1995). Culture-specific perceptual-learning-stylepreferences of postsecondary students of English as a secondlanguage. In J. Reid (Ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom(pp. 108117). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.

Tarone, E., & Allwright, D. (2005). Second language teacher learning

and student second language learning: Shaping the knowledgebase. In D. J. Tedick (Ed.), Second language teacher education:International perspectives (pp. 524). Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum.

Documents

The Uniqueness of Efl Teachers