Our culture of origin provides us with a program for behaviour which we carry with us all our lives. In the modern global age, people from different cultural backgrounds increasingly come into contact with each other. On such occsssions, a lack of awareness of cultural differences can lead to misunderstanding and a breakdown in communication.The foreign language classroom is an obvious example of one such inter-cultural interface. Indeed, different cultural backgrounds can be the source of divergent teacher and student expectations about classroom roles and procedures (Richards and Lockhart 1996). It would therefore be helpful for teachers to be aware of these differences, to understand the potential problems associated with them, and to know how to adapt to get the best results. Although many will be familiar with more widely-known cultural variables such as the individualism/collectivism paradigm, another influential characteristic is how comfortable people of a given culture are with the unfamiliar, which Hofstede (1980) labels “Uncertainty Avoidance” (UA). The Japanese typically have higher levels of UA, tending to seek structure and predictability, and often maintaining formalised codes of conduct. The presenter will offer detailed advice and examples to help teachers from cultures with lower UA, such as Britain, Canada and the United States, to adjust their teaching methodology in order to compliment Japanese university students' preferences. For example, the presenter will demonstrate how instructional scaffolding techniques provide support and direction for Japanese students, thereby improving their confidence and performance during production stages.

1. 37th JALT Annual International Conference
Saturday 19th November 2011
National Olympics Memorial Centre
Yoyogi
Tokyo
Bob Ashcroft
Soka University

2. 1. Educational Scaffolding
2. EFL: A Cultural Interface
3. Measuring Culture
4. This Research
5. Scaffolding to Avoid Uncertainty

3. • Lev Vygotsky
• More Knowledgeable
Other (That’s us!)
• Gradually Removed

4. • Advice
• Feedback
• Examples
• Materials
• Instructions
• Activities
• Goals
• Assessment
Teachers: What Kind & How Much

5. EFL ═ inter-cultural interface:
Cultural differences can cause different classroom expectations of
teachers and students. The best way to reduce the effect of these
inter-cultural incompatibilities is by understanding their sources.
(Richards & Lockhart, 1996 )
Teachers need to consider:
• Cultural variation
• Potential problems
• Teaching solutions

6. Geert Hofstede (1980)
• How?
Questionnaires
116,000 employees same company
40 countries
• Results:
Individualism/Collectivism
Power Distance
Masculinity/Femininity
Uncertainty Avoidance (UA)

7. TEACHERS STUDENTS
British 35 Japanese 92
Irish 35
Australians 45
Americans 46
Canadians 47
New Zealanders 50
(Hofstede, G.J. et al., 2002)

8. TEACHERS STUDENTS
• cope with ambiguity • structure and predictability
• find rules inhibitive • strict codes of conduct
• loose codes of conduct • prefer absolute truths
• tolerance of diversity
(Hofstede, 1986)

9. • What is the classroom impact of low UA teachers with
high UA students?
• Are teachers adapting their teaching to manage these
differentials?

10. Semi-structured Interviews:
A planned framework, but which also allows interviewees to
contribute longer answers and digressions.
(Mills, 2001)
• Interviews Recorded
• Clarified the Research Purpose
• Between 20 -35 minutes

11. 1 week before the interview:
• Definition of UA
• A summary of current research on UA
• “Are UA differentials between you and Japanese students
the source of different classroom expectations?”
• “How do you adjust your approach to account for these
differences?”

12. Interviewees
• 9 Native-speaker EFL Teachers (UK, USA & Canada)
• Master’s TESOL/TEFL or Applied Linguistics
• Same Tokyo University
• Aged between 32 and 60
• Between 5 and 14 Years Teaching at Japanese Universities
• 20-25 Student EAP Classes

13. UA impacts the following:
• Accuracy / Fluency Preferences
• Student / Teacher- Centredness Preferences
• Flexibility / Formality Preferences

14. 1. Accuracy versus Fluency
TEACHERS STUDENTS
DIFFERENCES
Fluency & communication Accuracy & correction
PROBLEMS
Teacher frustrated: quiet, shy, unresponsive students
Students expect feedback relating to form, not content
Students don't see the communicative applications of English
SOLUTIONS
Rapport building
Visits from post-sabbatical seniors
Preparation + practice → communicative activities
Individual → Pairs → Small Groups → Whole Class
Assign Roles
TBL
Exposure to non-standard Englishes

15. 2. Student versus Teacher- Centredness
TEACHERS STUDENTS
DIFFERENCES
T ═ facilitator not controller Prefer Teacher-centered Classes
Want active participation Compulsive note-takers
Want student collaboration
Encourage critical thinking
PROBLEMS
Teacher frustration: Students lacking initiative, shy, uncooperative
Stalled activities
Student Confusion / Panic
SOLUTIONS
Realistic Goals – break tasks down into achievable steps
Incremental handover of initiative
Modeling
Preparation + practice → communicative activities
Individual → Pairs → Small Groups → Whole Class

16. 3. Flexibility versus Formality
TEACHERS STUDENTS
DIFFERENCES
Improvisation Transparent activity / class / course
objectives, aims and content
Flexibility Visible measures of achievement
Deviation from lesson plan Formal codes of class conduct
PROBLEMS
Teacher frustration: students inflexible
Anxiety → demotivation
SOLUTIONS
Clear Instructions
Modeling
Start of course: Detailed syllabus and schedule
Start of Class: Objectives and H/W on the whiteboard

17. • Most teacher adaptations are examples of
Scaffolding
• Scaffolding reduces Uncertainty
(McKenzie, 1999)
• Providing well-scaffolded activities is
particularly important in high UA cultures
like Japan

18. Reading Journal
• A model
• Clarifies expectations
• Achievable activities in manageable steps
• Clear instructions

19. • Different levels of uncertainty avoidance of Japanese
students and foreign teachers can lead to problems:
o Accuracy / Fluency
o Student / Teacher- Centredness
o Flexibility / Formality
• Teachers adapt their teaching in order to deal with
such problems.
• Scaffolding reduces uncertainty, and is therefore
particularly relevant to teaching here in Japan.

20. THANKS FOR LISTENING!
ANY QUESTIONS?

21. Hofstede, G. (1980). Cultures Consequences. International differences in Work-related
Values. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Hofstede, G. (1986). Cultural Differences in Teaching and Learning. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol. 1O, pp.301-320.
Hofstede, G.J. et al. (2002). Exploring Culture. London: Inter-cultural Press.
McKenzie, J. (2000). Scaffolding for Success. [Electronic version] Beyond
Technology, Questioning, Research and the Information Literate School
Community. Retrieved January 17, 2011, http://fno.org/dec99/scaffold.html
Mills, J. (2001). Self-construction through conversation and narrative in interviews.
Educational Review, 53, 285-301.
Richards, J.,C. & Lockhart, C. (1996). Reflective Teaching in Second Language
Classrooms. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.