104Juntendo Journal of Global Studies, Vol. 2, (2017)through such tracking, grading weights, greater allo-cation of orientation time, and the integration of ER-related activities into regular classroom contact time all delivered a message that ER was valued, ex-pected, and important (Dweck, 2006). The results showed that the corrective interven-tions made a fairly drastic change in student engage-ment with ER. If we compare the results of books read (in Table 1 and 2), obvious improvements can be seen. The number of students who had either not attempted or not completed a single book fell to 0%. Approximately 15% of students showed only some engagement with ER, albeit to an insufficient de-gree. And fully 85% of students were possibly on course to meet reading targets that would likely re-sult in tangible gains in reading comprehension or reading speed (Nishizawa, Yoshioka, & Fukada, 2010; Beglar & Hunt, 2014).4. Conclusion: Choice architecture In the fast-paced world of internet start-up com-panies, the question often asked by potential inves-tors is whether the new service is a vitamin or a painkiller (Eyal, 2014). That is, is the service selling slow, long-term improvements or quick relief for an acute need? Investors tend to favor painkillers, but educators need to both nurture positive, intrinsic be-haviors and leverage extrinsic motivations to ensure sufficient engagement. For ER, we know that mas-sive quantities of text need to be read to see reading speed improvements or improvements on standard-ized proficiency tests. This takes sustained effort over months, if not years. This sustained engage-ment can result from established habits of behaviors formed in the context of a social setting into which learners become socialized and whose reality they come to accept and trust (Yashima, 2014); and whose tasks they believe they can accomplish (Mercer, 2015) and benefit from (Hulleman et al., 2008). Pro-viding a system that makes it easier for students to understand what ER is and how it can benefit them, where they are onboarded sufficiently so that pro-gram behaviors are familiar enough, and where the institution’s system and teachers’ intentions are clear and accepted and align with those of the learner are all crucial. Another important feature to consider using is choice architecture design (Thaler and Sunstein, 2009) to make it easier for students to take notice of, understand, accept, and make choices to participate in an ER program.Acknowledgement The author is most grateful to all the members of research committee in Faculty of International Lib-eral Arts, Juntendo University, for their support in the process of reviewing the paper. ReferencesBeglar, D., & Hunt, A. (2014). Pleasure reading and reading rate gains. Reading in a Foreign Lan-guage, 26, 29–49.
Berger, R., Rugen, L., & Woodfin, L. (2014). Lead-ers of their own learning: Transforming schools through student-engaged assessment. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Burke, L., Wang, J., and Sevick, M. (2011) Self-monitoring in weight loss: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of the academy of nu-trition and dietetics. 11(1), (pp 92–102). http: //dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jada.2010.10.008Carney, N. (2016). Gauging extensive reading’s re-lationship with TOEIC reading score growth. Journal of Extensive Reading 4(4). Retrieved Sept. 1, 2016 from http://jalt-publications.org/jer/ Day, R., & Bamford, J. (2002). Top ten principles for teaching extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 14, (2), ( pp. 7–8).Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the