Using Online Journal Writing
The challenges of getting students into the practice of focusing on output
Avoiding the Walls of Anxiety
When I began teaching English in Japan, it took me some time to realize that not all my students were happy to speak during a lesson. I assumed that students came to class with a pre-installed motivation and willingness to produce new utterances in their non-native language. While my younger, pre-teen students had little problems joyously exploring English as a new “toy” in the classroom, my older students were definitely not willing to focus on output to the degree that I would have liked. There were many conversations between myself and my English-teaching peers about how hard it was to get our students to actually talk. There are a host of reasons for this, and a few of them were already covered in my previous article here. However, no matter what the reasons are, this is an issue that second language instructors grapple with on a daily basis. In a more technical way of expressing it, students in Japan have a tendency to allow their anxiety to block their ability to produce output in English. Output comes in the form of either spoken or written language, and is generally preceded by forms of input like reading, listening, and watching. This anxiety then, needs to be minimized if students are to take more chances with English. Students need to feel that practicing output is not only necessary for their language development, but that it is also non-threatening and can be done without fear of exposing themselves to the embarrassment of making mistakes in front of their peers. In a perfect world, the teacher could give private 1-on-1 lessons to every student but due to time constraints and high student-to-teacher ratios, that is not an option. Therefore, I believe that using written output in the form of private online journals can serve as a way for students to reduce anxiety and increase focus on output in their second language.
Problems that Private Online Journals Solve
In addition to solving the anxiety problem outlined above, the use of private online journals can mitigate or eliminate even more dilemmas for teachers and students in English classes.
Output Theories
The first of these dilemmas is the matter of creating an opportunity for students to engage in ‘meaning focused output’. In Paul Nation’s 2007 work on his four strands in language courses, he outlines the conditions that need to be met in order for students to truly engage in meaning focused output. First, students need to create output about things that are familiar to them. The online journals encourage students to choose their own topics. This ensures that the first requirement is met. Second, students need to use English for the purpose of getting their meaning across to someone else. In the online journals students write in my classes, they are explaining their ideas to me in English and they know I will read and comment on what they write. Third, the students need to be using mostly language that they already know. This happens naturally with the online journals because students are told to limit their time on task. This means that they must write fluently and incorporate new words learned in class if possible. Fourth, students can use communication strategies, look back on their earlier journals, and even use dictionaries to look up new words if they like. This satisfies Nation’s fourth requirement. Finally, students need plenty of opportunity to write. With online journals, students are encouraged to write for 20 minutes per week, but there is no upper limit on how much they can produce. When coupled with in-class assignments and homework assignments, students using online journals as part of their language learning class are able to use English multiple times during the school week, and in the best cases students are motivated to start writing daily on their own.
In addition to satisfying Paul Nation’s requirements, online journals are also a good way to ensure that students are partaking in the cognitive requirements of language acquisition that are outlined in Swain’s (1985) output hypothesis. Swain explains that when students are focused on output they perform the three functions of “noticing/triggering” - where they attempt to explain their ideas in English and notice that they are lacking in some way, “hypothesis testing” - where students try out new language and then modify it based on feedback and success, and finally “metalinguistic (reflective)” practice - where students use language to solve problems. The importance of this benefit is particularly high in Japanese classrooms. This is due to the fact that most whole-class activities involve merely repeating new target language and target grammar while substituting key vocabulary items into their proper slots. This does not lead to a great deal of introspection or creativity for students. While those exercises have their place in the acquisition of the pronunciation and grammar aspects of English, they do not challenge students to make the language their own. When students are asked to spend twenty minutes a week writing their thoughts in an online journal, they are communicating and they are engaging in cognitive processes that cannot readily be promoted by rote learning or lecture-style teaching methods.
The Multi-level Conundrum
The second dilemma that online journal writing solves is the problem of having students of varying abilities and motivation in the same classroom. Grouping students by age and grade level means that students with different experiences and backgrounds will share the same curriculum. This assortment of levels cannot really be helped in a school setting, and while smaller class sizes go a long way towards limiting this burden, the reality is that most of the classes I have taught here in Japan have between 20 and 45 students in them. When you are spending anywhere from 45 minutes to 90 minutes per week with classes of this size, the amount of time you can spend with each student is limited. Educators want to spend time with students in activities that engage those students at a level comparable to Krashen’s ‘i+1’ or ‘input plus 1.’ This means that students understand nearly all of the language that they are using with a very small and manageable amount of newly acquired language added in(1981). While Krashen’s theories are concerned with input, Merrill Swain has adapted the ideas to her hypothesis of comprehensible output(1993). I believe that if students of differing levels can partake in exercises outside of the classroom, where they can operate in the gray area between what they know and what they are currently learning, they can escape any restrictions that fellow students or teaching materials put on them in class and they can push themselves to improve. Using online journals allows students to meet the language they are learning in class on their own terms, and experiment with it under the watchful eye of the teacher. In this manner, two students from the same class who are currently at different CEFR levels can be privately taught by the teacher with no negative effects on anyone.
Motivation
The third dilemma that online journal writing solves is the one that surrounds motivation. In Japanese schools motivation to learn another language is already high, however, motivation can take a big hit in a system that places overly large importance on testing. Japan is notoriously obsessed with testing and there is even a term for the high stress and anxiety that is placed on students from the junior high level onwards. This “Examination Hell” or “Shiken Jigoku” has the undesired affect of making students prioritize grammar, listening, and reading over the more productive skills of speaking and writing(Japan’s Education System, 2020). In the worst cases, this prioritization on testing may even lead to low motivation to explore their own opinions and express themselves in their own language(Burns, 2010). One way for students to regain the motivation to focus on output in English is to give them the satisfaction of choosing their own topics to write about. In my own experience, I have found that when a student is faced with a homework assignment that is open-ended, where they are allowed to choose the topic they write or speak about, there is a greater intrinsic motivation to express themselves. In my last group of journal writing students, more than half of them expressed how happy they were to write a journal every week where they could choose the topic. In a survey I conducted at the beginning and at the end of the course, the number of students who expressed this increased by 16 points from 39% to 55%.
In addition, students are also motivated by their own progress. By writing for the same amount of time each week - 20 minutes - students can see an increase in their own fluency. While most of my recent students started at about 70 words on average in April, that increased to around 80 words by July. After writing only 12 or 13 entries(about four hours of writing in total), students could increase their average word count by a sizable margin. While learning a new language should not be a competition, I believe that some students can benefit from the pressure to “beat their best” each week. Different students are motivated by different things, and a balanced language course should try to provide a variety of activities that can meet the special needs of each student.
Finally, in this increasingly digital age that we are living in, many students are motivated to do anything that is associated with their devices. Whether that device is a smartphone, tablet, or laptop computer, writing journals online means that students are always able to access their assignments. Using software like Microsoft’s Teams can make it easy for teachers to create digital notebooks with pages for each student in their class. On the student’s end only their pages are visible, while at the teacher’s end all students are kept together in each classes ‘team’. This means that the teacher can keep up with each student’s writing and comment and edit at any time during the week. An added benefit is that students cannot lose their notebooks and if a teacher wants to discuss a particular entry, calling up the page on the teacher’s device is possible.
Conclusion
In a world where the business and academic circles are increasingly using English, and communication is being conducted online more and more, students need to be encouraged to focus on producing output in order to gain the skills they need for higher education and the professional arenas they will join after graduation. The metaphorical walls of our classrooms need to be expanded to afford any advantage we can give to our students. Using online journals as an extension of our classrooms means that students can operate in an environment that makes them feel safe, challenges them at any level, stimulates them cognitively, and motivates them. Many years ago the act of carrying around a small notebook was the way a young Canadian in Japan become fluent in his adopted language of Japanese. Now, all students can benefit in this same way by using their smartphones or tablets to share their opinions in their newly adopted language of English. It is my hope to continue providing the feedback, advice, and the space that will help these courageous young learners gain an advantage that they will use to make their future dreams a reality.
References
Burns, K. (2010). Japan and its standardized test-based education system. Japan Today. https://japantoday.com/category/features/opinions/japan-and-its-standardized-test-based-education-system. retrieved on July 27th, 2021.
Japan’s Education System. (2020) https://www.wa-pedia.com/politics/japanese_educational_system.shtml.
Krashen, S. (1981). Second Language Acquisition and Learning. http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/sl_acquisition_and_learning.pdf
Nation, P. (2007) The Four Strands,Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1:1, 2-13, DOI: 10.2167/illt039.0
Nation, P. (2001). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge University Press. New York.
Swain, M. (1993, October). The Output Hypothesis: Just Speaking and Writing Aren't Enough. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 50(1), 158-164.