Global Competence and Foreign Language Education in Japan

Participants

A qualitative questionnaire was used to canvass opinions from four self-identified participant groups: FL teachers at Japanese universities (n = 33); students studying at Japanese universities and majoring in a FL (n = 46); professionals with experience working inside and outside of Japan, or in Japan together with colleagues from different cultural backgrounds (n = 39); and researchers with experience in GC-related fields, especially pertaining to Japan (n = 12). See Table 1 for demographic details of participants.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Participant Profiles.

	Teachers	Students	Professionals	Researchers	Total
Gender
Male	20	9	21	5	55
Female	13	35	18	7	73
Other/no answer	0	2	0	0	2
First language
L1 = Japanese	3	45	18	5	71
L1 = English	27	0	18	4	49
L1 = other	3	1	3	3	10
Age
Under 24	0	46	1	0	47
25-34	4	0	5	1	10
35-44	11	0	20	2	33
45-54	12	0	6	5	23
55 and over	6	0	7	4	17
Total	33	46	39	12	130

Teacher participants were mostly EFL teachers (n = 33) with a small number of teachers of other foreign languages (n = 4). Students were all English-language majors, ranging from 1^st year undergraduates to postgraduates. Global business professionals all had experience either working in multicultural environments within Japan, or working in other countries (and were either Japanese themselves, or worked with Japanese colleagues). Researcher specialties lay in the fields of education, GC, communication, cognitive linguistics and organizational science.

Following research ethics approval by the relevant institutional committees, participants (N = 130) were recruited using a combined criterion-snowball sampling strategy. Open invitations to participate were disseminated via academic associations (i.e., Society for Intercultural Education, Training and Research Japan; Japan Association for Language Teaching; Japan Intercultural Institute; and The Japan Association for Global Competency Education) and other related organizations (e.g., Japan Exchange and Teaching Alumni). Volunteers were invited to complete the questionnaire, and to forward it to colleagues, acquaintances or students who they felt might be interested. Participation was voluntary, and participants were provided with information and consent forms prior to agreeing to complete the questionnaire.

Procedures

The primary research instrument was an anonymous online questionnaire. An online questionnaire was chosen to facilitate data collection from a large number of participants without geographical or financial restrictions. In line with the exploratory nature of this study, open-ended questions were used in an attempt to collect answers representative of the full spectrum of opinion related to the research questions.

The questionnaire was developed based on two focus groups conducted bilingually using a mixture of Japanese and English. Student (n = 4) and teacher (n = 5) focus groups were used to maximize active participation by all members and reduce the impact of hierarchical relationships (Liamputtong, 2011). These two focus group sessions allowed the researchers to hear the perspectives of representatives of groups who would ultimately participate in the study. Volunteers were recruited via fliers and emails distributed to teachers and students at the first author's institution. Participants in each focus group ranked, sorted and discussed various terms and questions provided by the first author as facilitator. Sessions were audio-recorded, transcribed bilingually by the first author and then checked by an L1 speaker of Japanese. Transcriptions were then used together with written facilitator reflections to inform the questionnaire design.

Japanese and English questionnaire items were created using a “dual-development” approach (Potaka & Cochrane, 2004) together with a bilingual L1 speaker of Japanese. The resulting questionnaire was piloted by three colleagues (all researchers in fields related to GC and also FL educators; one whose L1 is Japanese and two whose L1 is English) and two students (majoring in English as a FL; L1 = Japanese). Pilot participants completed the questionnaire and provided feedback about time taken, clarity of questions and online format. Revisions were made based on their comments and the final bilingual questionnaire comprised four to six demographic questions (depending on participant group) and eight questions related to GC. The questionnaire was administered online using Qualtrics software over a period of three months. Both languages were visible to participants to allow bilingual participants to check their understanding of questions (Potaka & Cochrane, 2004).

This paper focuses on participant responses to two of the GC-related questions asked in the questionnaire:

What do you think Japanese university students need in order to be globally competent? Think about specific attitudes, skills, knowledge, or qualities. Please list at least five.

Data Analysis

Open-ended responses were coded thematically by the first author over several rounds using content analysis. A round of initial coding was conducted using an Excel spreadsheet to identify the main categories emerging from the data (see Saldaña, 2016). This stage was completed separately for Japanese and English responses to minimize the risk of losing nuances in the data through early translation. Tentative codes were organized using Mindnode software to look for conceptually similar themes and devise a coding scheme (Friese, 2019). The resulting codes were then applied to code all responses. Atlas.ti software was used to facilitate the coding process. A third round of coding was employed to eliminate redundancies and merge codes where possible. At this stage Japanese and English codes were compared and merged into bilingual codes where there was no discernable nuance difference by language.

To complete the final stage in the coding process we returned to the literature to explore possible theoretical frameworks with which to organize the data. As none of the existing frameworks aligned clearly with the questionnaire results, elements of three models – Deardorff's Pyramid Model of Intercultural Competence (2004), the Model for Twenty-first Century Skills (Binkley et al., 2012) and the Five Factor Model of Personality Traits (McCrae & Costa, 1987) – were incorporated to arrive at a tentative organizational schema (Figure 1). Specifically, the authors adopted Deardorff's three-part description of knowledge, Binkley et al.'s ten key skills and McCrae & Costa's categorization of traits into five key factors. The resulting organizational schema facilitated categorization of participant responses to the research questions in the final stages of the analysis. Specifically, it was used to bring terminological clarity to codes and to cluster individual codes into larger categories (code groups) in order to reveal “the big picture” that the data was painting. After coding was completed, some simple quantification was used to get a sense of the frequencies with which various codes and code groups occurred, and to facilitate exploration of trends within the data.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Tentative organizational schema.

Reliability and Validity

Following Lincoln and Guba (1985), we endeavor in this paper to demonstrate the credibility and rigor of our qualitative research through attributes such as truth value (acknowledging multiple viewpoints in the literature and presenting participants views accurately), trustworthiness (presenting our methods and analytic procedures in detail with clear decision-trails) and applicability (giving detailed consideration to the contexts to which the findings might apply, and the limitations associated with any generalizations).

Specific Components of Global Competence

Participants clearly focused on language as a key component of GC, together with various traits, attitudes, knowledge and experiences that support effective communication. Notably missing or infrequent in responses were references to career-related skills (such as IT or management skills). Table 2 shows the factors most frequently represented in participant responses.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 2.

Factors Contributing to Global Competence.

Factor	% participants	% comments
Language skills e.g., English proficiency, FL ability, language skills	77.7%	12.5%
Openness e.g., open mind, curiosity, inclusivity, flexibility	71.5%	18.6%
Knowing about the world e.g., cultures, politics, minorities, current events, history, religion	46.2%	8.5%
Communication skills e.g., discussing, explaining, persuading, listening	40.8%	6.7%
Extraversion e.g., boldness, initiative, nerve, passion, positivity, get up and go	30.8%	4.6%
Emotional stability e.g., confidence, determination, risk taking	23.1%	3.6%
Willingness to engage e.g., willingness to learn, to travel, to communicate	21.5%	3.6%
Experience e.g., overseas travel, communication with foreigners	21.5%	4.0%
Agreeableness e.g., consideration, cooperation, empathy, patience, humility	20.8%	3.4%
Knowing about oneself e.g., own culture, identity	20.0%	3.2%
Critical thinking skills e.g., problem solving, doubting, interpreting, logical thinking	16.9%	3.2%

Language skills was the most frequently cited element of GC, with 77.7% of participants considering it necessary. Approximately a third of all participants specifically referred to English skills (31.5%) or FL skills (26.9%), while others simply wrote “language” (or 言語; gengo). In the Japanese context, where the terms “foreign-language” and “English” are frequently used synonymously (Kubota, 2002), and there is a tendency to regard Japanese-English bilingualism as the solution for global communication (Butler & Iino, 2005), it seems reasonable to infer that most participants who cited “language” were referring to FL skills. Although the initial intention was to treat language as a subset of communication, the generalized terms used by most participants to describe language skills (like “proficiency” or 能力; nōryoku) led to a decision to code communication and language independently of each other, as there was no basis for the supposition that language was to be used as a tool for communication, and indeed some answers (e.g., Excerpt 1) suggested otherwise.

Excerpt 1

The trait of openness also featured in the answers of many participants (71.5%). Indeed, while students and researchers tended to focus on language skills, teachers and professionals were more likely to refer to the necessity of openness. According to the Five Factor Model, the openness trait encompasses curiosity, creativity, open-mindedness, having non-dogmatic attitudes, resourcefulness, and intelligence (McCrae & Allik, 2013). The most common response-types in this data set referred to curiosity (21.7% of openness-related comments) and open-mindedness (22.3%). Other answers related to flexibility, independence and inclusivity. Samples of these answer types are provided in Excerpts 2, 3 and 4.

Excerpt 2

While a degree of consensus was observed regarding the perceived importance of language skills and openness, there was far less agreement on other elements. Figure 2 shows the different code frequencies by participant group.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

Frequently occurring code groups by participant group.

While the third most frequent theme overall was knowing about the world, less than half of the participants listed this type of knowledge as important. Researchers were most likely to consider it relevant, while only a little more than a third of professionals (36.0%) did so. The emphasis in answers related to world knowledge was on knowing and understanding how people live in different parts of the world. Participants made specific reference to economics, politics, religion, work culture, gender roles and current events. Some focused on targeted cultural knowledge (e.g., Excerpt 5) but most used more general language suggestive of a broad knowledge base (e.g., Excerpt 6).

Excerpt 5

An even greater degree of discrepancy was displayed in the frequency of comments related to communication skills. This was the second most common response among the researchers (83%) but came in fourth for all other groups. The much higher frequency of references to language by these groups may be indicative of a tendency to equate linguistic accuracy with communicative ability in a global arena, perhaps as a result of the Japanese government's insistence on the importance of quantifiable FL ability. Most responses simply listed “communication skills” (or コミュニケーション能力; komyunikēshon nōryoku); some elaborated that it was important to be able to communicate with people from different cultural backgrounds; and a small number focused on specific communication-related abilities (e.g., discussion skills, being able to paraphrase, being able to communicate persuasively, effective listening).

The majority of GC factors listed by participants fit the traditional conceptualizations of GC as a composite of various skills, traits and knowledge, but a fourth category arose that lay outside of those standard dimensions. Almost a quarter (21.5%) of all respondents felt that intercultural experience was a necessary part of GC. Educators would traditionally consider experiences to be a means by which to arrive at the desired skills, attitudes, or knowledge, rather than a necessity or an end goal in and of themselves, but professionals in particular seemed to feel that experiencing life outside of Japan was an integral part of GC.

Closely related to the experience component was willingness to travel. This was categorized (together with willingness to learn and to communicate) as an attitude referred to as willingness to engage. This attitude was differentiated from traits in this analysis according to the definitions provided by Sherman and Fazio (1983), who explain that “attitudes must be directed toward something or someone” while “traits are more global concepts and need no object specified for them to be meaningful” (p. 309). Teachers were more likely to pick up on the importance of willingness to engage than other participant groups and to focus on the importance of willingness to communicate with culturally-different others.

Extraversion was the fifth most frequent theme overall, but received substantially more attention among students than other participant groups. Students’ answers here tended to relate to needing sufficient boldness to speak out and to the importance of 積極性; sekkyokusei, a code that was retained only in Japanese as no truly equivalent response was found in English answers. Sekkyokusei can be roughly translated as “get-up-and-go” but also contains elements of being positive, being active, and taking risks. Excerpts 7 and 8 show examples of student comments related to boldness and sekkyokusei.

Excerpt 7

While students were concerned with extraversion, teachers were more likely to suggest emotional stability as an important factor. This was one of the few areas in which researchers and teachers showed similar results. Participants who talked about emotional stability referred to a tendency among Japanese students to be anxious about making (linguistic) mistakes, and the importance of self-confidence and risk-taking. While a third of teachers perceived the need for students to develop confidence, only 13.0% of students felt that emotional stability was important for them. It seems likely, however, that emotional stability and extraversion are closely interrelated, as increased confidence is likely to result in increased boldness and willingness to engage, and less fear of making mistakes. It is interesting to note here that all comments related to confidence (an aspect of emotional stability) were made by L1 speakers of languages other than Japanese, and all but one of the references to the need for boldness (categorized as extraversion) were made by L1 Japanese speakers. It may be that although application of the Five Factor Model led these answers to be categorized differently, they are in fact different expressions of the same concept.

In summary, findings in response to the first question show that FL skills are considered to be a key aspect of GC development in Japan, and that experiences and affective traits are perceived to play an important role in the ability to use those linguistic skills effectively.

Difficulties Faced by Students in Developing Global Competence

The particular challenges for GC development most frequently named by participants showed considerable overlap with the factors suggested as important for GC. Of the ten most frequently suggested challenges, seven relate directly to factors contributing to GC (e.g., willingness to engage emerged as an important factor and apathy as a corresponding difficulty that needs to be overcome). The remaining three challenge-types all relate to external obstacles; specifically a lack of experience, problems with the education system and cultural factors inherent in Japanese society. Table 3 shows the challenges most frequently listed by participants.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 3.

Challenges Students Face in Developing Global Competence.

Challenge	% participants	% comments
Language skills e.g., insufficient English-speaking skills, low FL proficiency	46.2%	14.2%
Openness e.g., lack of open-mindedness, little independence, ethnocentrism	43.1%	13.3%
Social issues e.g., lack of opportunities to use English, lack of diversity	28.5%	9.2%
Emotional stability e.g., lack of confidence, excessive risk avoidance, fear of failing	28.5%	9.0%
Extraversion e.g., not bold/assertive enough	26.9%	4.8%
Education issues e.g., problems in education system, ineffective FL education	21.5%	6.7%
Lack of experience e.g., lack of experience interacting with other cultures	21.5%	6.0%
Apathy e.g., little interest in the world, low motivation	17.7%	5.6%
Communication skills e.g., poor communication skills	13.1%	4.1%
Knowing about the world e.g., not knowing about people and countries outside of Japan	11.5%	2.9%

Insufficient language ability was the most frequently raised difficulty, cited by 46.2% of participants. This underlines once again the perceived importance of linguistic skills for GC. FL ability was the focus here, and while some answers simply cited low levels of FL proficiency as problematic, those who answered in more detail tended to focus on issues with using language appropriately and effectively for communication, rather than on accuracy or degree of linguistic mastery. See Excerpts 9, 10 & 11 for examples.

Excerpt 9

Teachers were the only group who did not pay the most attention to linguistic ability (see Figure 3 for a by-group breakdown of responses). They were more likely to comment on challenges concerning openness and emotional stability. Their focus was on the challenges of ethnocentrism and insularity (e.g., Excerpt 12) and students’ lack of confidence.

Excerpt 12

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 3.

Frequently stated challenges by participant group.

Other groups were also concerned about a lack of openness and it was the number two concern overall (43.1%). A closer look at responses assigned to this code group suggests a connection between openness and effective language use. For example, according to the Five Factor Model, the trait of openness includes aspects of individuality. Several participants (and especially students) commented on the difficulty students have in formulating an opinion and finding something to say (e.g., Excerpt 13); and their subsequent problems with saying it (e.g., Excerpts 14 and 15).

Excerpt 13

Extraversion was an especially frequent focus for students, and even more prominent than responses related to assertiveness were those concerning the aforementioned concept of 積極性; sekkyokusei (get-up-and-go), which more than a quarter (26.1%) of students specifically listed as problematic. Attitudinal problems with apathy (in relation to FL learning motivation and general interest in the “outside” world) were also raised by students, and more than 20% of researchers and teachers agreed. Apathy has been found to correlate with a lack of extraversion (Bjornsen et al., 2007) and also with low emotional stability.

Some participants suggested that difficulties connected to speaking up stem from societal values and circumstances rather than individual traits. Teachers problematized external factors more often than other participant groups, with many of their comments on societal issues referencing the insularity of Japanese society (e.g., Excerpt 16) and the difficulty of learning a FL in a society that offers little opportunity to use it (e.g., Excerpt 17). Professionals also noted challenges due to insularity, as well as referring to the difficulties of trying new things within the traditional framework of Japanese society, as illustrated in Excerpts 18 and 19.

Excerpt 16

In addition to problems attaining GC that were rooted in living in Japanese society, researchers, professionals and teachers (and to a lesser extent students) expressed concerns that the education system was itself a hindrance. Most comments simply remarked that the education system was inadequate, but some specified problems related to test-oriented teaching and passive learning.

Overall, linguistic ability and openness were deemed both important and challenging for students. Furthermore, if students lack confidence, motivation, and the ability to speak up, it will be difficult for them to apply their language skills effectively.

Implications

The potential benefits of intercultural experiences for GC have been widely acknowledged in the literature, and participants in this study suggested that they are key. However, as participants pointed out, opportunities for experiences such as overseas travel are limited, and low levels of confidence and motivation may also impact on students’ willingness to expose themselves to new experiences. Rather than relying on students’ out-of-class experiences, Ushioda (2011) argues that FL educators “need to engage [students’] own identities and interests in [the teachers’] lessons and promote a sense of continuity between what [students] learn and do in the classroom, and who they are and what they are interested in doing in their lives outside the classroom, now and in the future” (p. 204). The stark reality is that GC is not something that can be imposed by a teacher; it will come only as part of an identity that individuals choose for themselves.

It is tempting to suggest international mobility experiences as a “solution” to the acquisition of GC among university students. However, as Hyett et al. (2019) point out, there can be a range of financial and other barriers to participation in exchange or study abroad programs. Hyett et al. (2019) discuss the implementation of an innovative virtual intercultural activity bringing together students in Australia and Hong Kong, involving an individual cultural self-assessment, a virtual group meeting, and a reflective narrative task. Findings suggested that the participants engaged reflectively in vital intercultural learning, and gained valuable experience in navigating “out-of-comfort-zone” experiences. Such approaches would be readily adaptable to the Japanese context and provide a concrete blueprint for embedding GC into the curriculum.

It is also important to consider underlying traits and attitudes of students. In the literature, traits are often perceived as stable and applied as predictors of the degree of GC that an individual can attain rather than as trainable factors (Yarosh, 2013). Yet if all students are expected to develop GC, it is important to find a way to mitigate trait-based obstacles. In the Japanese context, where self-esteem and anxiety have been identified as hindrances to development of GC, building confidence and mitigating anxiety may be effective places to start. Bjornsen et al. (2007) suggest that providing an open-minded, supportive and encouraging atmosphere can promote emotional stability among university students. This in turn can filter into reduced apathy, increased extraversion and willingness to engage, improved application of language to communicate, and, ultimately, progress in the development of GC. From a practical standpoint, this is likely to necessitate reducing the test-focus and emphasis on accuracy that is often ingrained into students in Japan from a young age. To meet the needs of their learners, teachers need to understand them as individual people with whom they can co-create the learning experience.

The aspect of GC most emphasized by participants in this study is one that is often overlooked in GC literature: FL ability. Participant responses indicated a deep connection between emotional factors experienced by learners in Japan and the development of FL ability perceived as necessary for GC. Results of this study suggests that conceptualizations of GC are culturally relative and that applying frameworks underpinned by Western cultural norms may be problematic in other contexts.

Limitations and Future Research

This study sought to begin mapping the terrain of GC in Japan by examining the perspectives of multiple stakeholders. However, we can identify two limitations. First, the disproportionately small size of the researcher participant group means that percentages shown for that group can be significantly skewed by the opinion of a small number of participants. Future research would benefit from a more balanced representation of stakeholder groups. Secondly, to protect participant identity no information about affiliation was collected in the questionnaire. It is thus not known to what extent participant group opinions may reflect a shared organizational context (such as students studying in the same university).

This study has attempted to shed light on the construct of GC in Japan from a range of stakeholder perspectives. The themes uncovered in this preliminary investigation have laid the foundations for further research, discussion and exploration, which will in turn facilitate the development of a comprehensive framework, and associated pedagogies, to support effective GC-oriented education in Japan.