順天堂グローバル教養論集第一巻20160325
104/158

100Juntendo Journal of Global Studies, Vol. 1, (2016)407. Most of these were lower-level books with low word counts. However, there was no mechanism in place to monitor student word counts, except the XReading system, which was used for only some of the books read. With the exception of three classes, the students were not instructed in how to count and record words. Also, with no requirements for grades or credits, they did not record results with great ac-curacy. Therefore, in the term-end questionnaire (n=110), only 66 students were able to provide a word count gure (28 provided numbers of books, and 16 gave no answer). Figure 1 shows the break-down of the number of graded readers read by stu-dents after 14 weeks. It gives a rough idea of how many books students read per person. The results show that a very large number of students (29.3%) neither attempted nor nished a single book. Almost 40% of students read so little that no effect could be expected. In terms of success, however, we can infer that almost 15% of students are possibly on course to meet reading targets that will result in tangible gains in reading comprehension or reading speed (Nishizawa, Yoshioka, & Fukada, 2010; Beglar & Hunt, 2014). In order to meet reading goals, students should be reading at a pace of at least one book per week, ac-cording to the Extensive Reading Foundation’s Guide to Extensive Reading (Waring, 2011) and various studies (Nishizawa, Yoshioka & Fukada, 2010; Beglar & Hunt, 2014; Mason, 2006). For a program with 123 students, that should have amounted to more than 1800 books having been read by the end of the rst term. Less than 5% of the students were reading graded readers at that pace. The ER program cannot thus be called a success. One of the reasons for not requiring students to read and for not monitoring them more closely was to develop their intrinsic motivation for reading in a foreign language. This goal does not seem to have been met. After more than a month of summer break immediately following the rst term, only 15 stu-dents (12%) had accessed the online reading system, and only 2 of them were reading at the one-book-per-week pace. The program seemingly had failed to cultivate the necessary intrinsic motivation in stu-dents to read. 3. Discussion Successfully onboarding students into an optional educational activity, particularly one that features a new pedagogical intervention (extensive reading) and new technology (online graded readers) involves numerous challenges. This discussion section will at-tempt to identify possible areas for improvement, following Taboada and McElvany (2009) who base their guidelines on Dornyei’s (2001) moti-vational framework for teaching practice and Guth-rie’s L1 reading motivation-building approach (Guthrie, McRae & Lutz Klauda, 2007), which iden-ties ve motivation processes central to reading en-gagement: interest, autonomy support, self-efcacy, social collaboration, and mastery goals. This discus-sion will also include some elements of Dornyei’s (2009) L2 Self Theory, Self Determination theory (SDT) (Ryan & Deci, 2000), along with Dweck’s (2006) ideas on mindsets, and Porter’s (2006) stages of onboarding for interactive web design. Accepted Figure 1. Numbers of books completed per student (n=123)

元のページ 

10秒後に元のページに移動します

※このページを正しく表示するにはFlashPlayer10.2以上が必要です