Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 16 (1), May 2021, pp. 53-66

Reflections on translanguaging practices in English
education in Japan
Kiyu Itoi
Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University, Japan

Matthew Michaud

Capilano University, Canada

Abstract
This study is a reflection on critical incidents (Tripp, 1993)
addressing the use and promotion of a learner’s first language (L1)
and cultural knowledge as linguistic and cognitive resources for
learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL) in Japan.
Translanguaging, which was first introduced by Cen Williams
(1994) to refer to the practice of interchanging languages in the
classroom for productive use, was investigated to provide a deeper
understanding of what seems to be relatively common practice
across Japan. This paper outlines to fit with the broader study area
of a larger collaborative inquiry involving university-based
researchers providing English for Academic Purposes (EAP) in
Japan. This paper outlines the background of English education in
Japan and considers its current state to study possible additions
and changes in the broader curricula.
Keywords:

translanguaging, bilingual, first language, Japan,
EFL

Introduction
In 2009, Benesse Educational Research and Development found that
virtually all Japanese parents wished their children would be able to acquire
English to some extent at elementary school. 18.8% answered that their
children were studying English outside of school. Conversely, only 4.9% of
parents who had elementary school children in Japan did not feel the need of
having their children learn English. To summarize, approximately 95% of
Japanese parents saw the importance of their children learning English.
Presently, many Japanese companies require their employees to have high
scores on the Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC) or
the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) tests. In 2009, the
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)
released the English Education Reform Plan “in order to promote the
establishment of an educational environment which corresponds to

DOI: https://doi.org/10.25170/ijelt.v16i1.2552

54

Itoi, K. & Michaud, M.: Reflections on translanguaging ….

globalization from the elementary to lower/upper secondary education
stage” (MEXT, 2014, p. 1). Not only has English education become
compulsory from the third grade, but teachers have been required to teach
classes that are “conducted in English with high-level linguistic activities
(presentations, debates, negotiations)”, in “all-English” classes (MEXT,
2014, p. 2).
However, even after the English education reform, not many
Japanese are comfortable with their speaking abilities. According to the ALC
Actual Situation of English Education Report (2016), 98.5% of high school
students that participated in the research scored a range of 2 to 4 out of 10
(p. 12). Level 2 means that students can greet using phrases and
fragmentally talk about daily life using simple vocabularies and idioms.
Level 4 means that students can form simple sentences and briefly talk about
one’s studies and school life to maintain the minimum necessary
conversations. It seems reasonable to conclude that to “nurture the ability to
understand abstract contents for a wide range of topics and the ability to
fluently communicate with English speaking persons” (MEXT, 2014, p. 3),
more needs to be done. In this paper, we will review the background of
English education in Japan, followed by a literature review on
translanguaging. The reflections from the authors’ experiences will be
included in the conversation to extend the discussion. Finally, the paper
concludes with recommendations for focused use of translanguaging in
institutions across Japan.
Background of English education in Japan
Looking at English education in Japan, in the article: Education Minister
Proposes English Education for 3rd Grade (2014), Education Minister
Hakubun Shimomura proposed revised curriculum guidelines to “make
Japan more competitive on the global stage” (para. 5.), and he hoped that
“junior high students will develop their English capability to the point that
by the time they are seniors, they will be able to make presentations in near
native-level English, as well as partake in challenging debates with their
fellow students” (Para. 6.). Although the English Education Reform Plan
aims to have students be able to “fluently communicate with native Englishspeaking persons” (MEXT, 2014), the education ministry hoped that
students would acquire “near native-level English” (Para. 6.). The minister
failed to articulate whether or not these “English speaking persons”
constitute those who exist within what Kachru (1987) calls the “innercircle”, “outer-circle”, or “expanding circle” (Figure 1).
In Japan, many schools tend to have Assistant Language Teachers
(ALTs) or Assistant English Teachers (AETs). An ALT is a foreign national

Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 16(1), May 2021, pp. 53-66

55

working in a Japanese classroom assisting the Japanese teacher with
English. ALTs must have at least an undergraduate degree; however, they
are usually not licensed teachers. ALTs undertake a variety of duties with
their responsibilities varying widely dependent on the board of education or
private sector entity that employs them; for example, some are involved with
lesson planning and before and after school clubs. The title of “assistant” is
often misleading, as in elementary schools, it is often the ALT that leads
English classes. However, as the age of students increase, the appropriate
use of an ALT is dependent on the Japanese teacher or school
administration. ALTs work in The Japan Exchange and Teaching
Programme (JET) program, which is the largest of such programs in the
world. Moreover, the JET Programme is a Japanese government initiative
that employs over 5700 ALTs a year from 57 countries (JET Program USA,
2021, p. 2). If we take a look at the eligibility for the JET program, it says
that applicants must “be adept in contemporary standard pronunciation,
rhythm and intonation in the designated language (e.g., English for those
applying from English-speaking countries)” (JET Program USA, 2021, p. 8).
According to Matsuda (2003), Japanese secondary school students “perceive
English as an international language in a sense that it is being used
internationally, they do not believe it belongs internationally” (p. 484.).
Therefore, it seems reasonable to assume that Japanese people tend to see
English spoken by inner-circle people as desirable English, and the goal of
learning English would be to be able to speak like them.
Figure 1
Concentric Circle Model - Adapted from Kachru (1997)

56

Itoi, K. & Michaud, M.: Reflections on translanguaging ….

Literature Review
How L1 is treated in classrooms
Most English classes taught in Japan, both in high school and in university,
tend to focus on the monolingual instruction of English when a nonJapanese teacher is teaching (Carson & Kashihara, 2012). Often students
who have something to say, but cannot say it fluently in English, are most
often told to use simple English rather than using Japanese but will not out
of concern of being humiliated (Nation, 2003; Meyer, 2008). In such
settings, code-switching is valuable, but many educators have the sense that
code-switching shows inadequate L2 skill (Hawkins, 2015). When a
Japanese teacher is teaching, in some cases, they tend to minimise the use of
English in the classroom adding to student confusion about how they should
be communicating. This is most often caused from a lack of confidence a
Japanese teacher may have while using English in an English class (Nishino,
2011). In a country like Japan, where students have very little opportunity to
use English outside the classroom, teachers who tend to see the use of the
L1 as taking away from the Second Language (L2) may see the L1 usage
negatively (Yonesaka, 2005). Additionally, a general lack of pedagogical
knowledge for creating communicative classes based on experiential
learning many Japanese teachers have had (i.e. grammar focus over
communication focus) often guides how many teach English themselves in
their careers (Nishimuro & Borg, 2013).
Therefore, the two major issues that seem to exist in English
education in Japan are that it aims to have students acquire inner-circle
English and that teachers and students perceive using the L1 (in this case
Japanese) in classrooms as undesirable. However, considering the growing
number of bilingual people in the world, including not only people in the
outer-circle, but also in the expanding circle, English language learners
should first move on from looking at inner-circle English as the only desired
English. This paper considers the way individuals look at L1 usage in
Japanese K-12 English classrooms. Additionally, the paper will mainly
focus on the latter issue that English education in Japan faces, which is the
mixed usage of L1 and L2 in classrooms.
The role of L1 in English classes
Iida (2014) argues that in Japan, some people believe that “all-English”
classes are superior to those in which both Japanese and English are used
because “more exposure to English in the classroom is important for the
improvement of English skills” (p. 3). However, this last point is not always

Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 16(1), May 2021, pp. 53-66

57

true. Iida (2014) argues that using the L1 in an English class plays an
important role (p. 3). For instance, the L1 plays a role in cognitive tool
function during a task-based group, which enables students to use the
knowledge when learning English (p.3). Yukawa (2016) claims that the use
of a L1 can be a scaffolding tool to complete cognitively challenging tasks
while Ortega (2007) argues that the use of L1 in classrooms can be effective
in internalizing differences between the L1 and L2 as well as understanding
explanations of grammar. Also, recent research shows that “new language
practices only emerge in interrelationship with old language practices”;
therefore, English classes should be “creating opportunities for students to
use their entire linguistic repertoire and not just part of it to develop
bilingualism and/or develop language practices that conform to the academic
uses of language in school, as well as to learn rigorous content” (Hesson,
Seltzer, & Woodley, 2014, p. 3). Consequently, it can be stated that using
both a L1 and a L2 language in a classroom will benefit learners positively
towards their second language acquisition.
Lin (2013) introduced a case in Hong Kong, where a junior high
school teacher in a science class used English as medium of instruction
while allowing students to practice translanguaging in their science journals.
The teacher had been using science journals to encourage her students to
engage in scientific inquiry at home and later shared it with other students.
She allowed the students to use Chinese when they ran out of L2 resources,
so the students could express their ideas to the fullest without being
restricted by language. At the same time, the students were provided with L2
sentences that were needed to express their ideas in English in the margins,
so that they could express similar ideas in the future in English. Rather than
forcing the students to only use English, she encouraged them to expressing
their ideas freely and fluently, while not losing excitement in writing and
discussing their scientific inquiry. Although she assisted the students’
writings in English by providing students’ ideas in the margins of their
journals and shared some suggestions and language tips for writing in
English in a whole class setting, she focused most on encouraging students
to express their budding ideas using their full linguistic resources. This
allowed students to learn the content knowledge and English by using their
full communicative resources.
The concept of translanguaging
As demonstrated in Lin (2013), one concept that teachers can bring into the
classroom is the concept of translanguaging. Translanguaging is a
multilingual speaker’s “flexible use of their complex linguistic resources to
make meaning of their lives and their complex worlds” (Hesson, Seltzer, &

58

Itoi, K. & Michaud, M.: Reflections on translanguaging ….

Woodley, 2014, p.1). Moreover, translanguaging is the “act performed by
bilinguals of accessing different linguistic features or various modes of what
are described as autonomous language, in order to maximize communicative
potential” (García, 2009, p. 140). Additionally, this ‘communicative
potential’ of using language and artifacts flexibly across languages is what is
referred to as metalinguistic awareness. Metalinguistic awareness, moreover,
can be useful when explaining the implementation and transference of
linguistic understanding regarding code switching too.
Translanguaging is different from code-switching, which some
Japanese teachers and students see used because of inadequate English
skills. According to Hesson, Seltzer, & Woodley (2014), code-switching
“assumes that the two languages of bilinguals are two separate monolingual
codes that could be used without reference to each other”, whereas
translanguaging “posits that bilinguals have one linguistic repertoire from
which they select features strategically to communicate effectively” (p.1). In
other words, if multilinguals use different languages together, it can be
called translanguaging, and this skill can be an effective tool for learning.
Therefore, it should not be seen as failure, and teachers should not feel
“guilty” when they use their L2 in the classroom. Moreover, the most
important skill that bilinguals and multilinguals should have in the 21st
century is the ability “to use language fluidly, to translanguage in order to
make meaning beyond one or two languages” (2014, p. 2). Furthermore,
translanguaging “builds the flexibility in language practices that would make
students want to try out other language practices, increasing the possibilities
of becoming multilingual, of reaching out through technology to others, of
expanding their universe and local situations” (Hesson, Seltzer, & Woodley,
2014, p. 2). Therefore, translanguaging is a notion for educators to be
cognizant of, when regarding English classrooms not just in Japan, but in
countries where English is used as an L1.

Methodological approach
Critical incident reflection is a useful practice in the context of teacher
education as it is a way that teachers can share “stories of teacher’s
professional development within their own professional worlds” (Johnson
and Golombek, 2002, p. 6). Additionally, as Farrell says (2013), reflections
of “specific classroom events and experiences such as incidents that teachers
deem critical for their professional development” (p. 81) is of the utmost
importance for this paper specifically. Moreover, a critical incident does not
have to be a dramatic experience. This paper is composed of reflections
based on incidents in our own teaching as well as in the literature and this is

Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 16(1), May 2021, pp. 53-66

59

echoed in research done by Halquist and Musanti (2010) “In order to turn an
event into a critical incident, we do more than simply categorize or label it.
We investigate some of the underlying structures that produce that kind of
incident” (p. 450). In order to help us reflect on our own practices, we will
discuss a study of a classroom that applied translanguaging conducted in
Japan.
Translanguaging study conducted in Japan
Yukawa (2016) described a university English-medium seminar class
that used translanguaging. The study was conducted at a university in the
western part of Japan in 2014, and the participants were members of a
seminar class that the author was teaching. There were ten, third year
students, and nine fourth year students, as well as two graduate students that
were Teacher Assistants (n=21). For the seniors, they had a parallel course
in which they had individual guidance in Japanese with their research and
graduation thesis. All the participants’ L1 was Japanese except for one
Chinese student who had moved to Japan for university, and their L2 was
English. The seminar course was designed for students that were interested
in English education and bilingualism, and approximately 50% of the
students had experiences studying abroad for more than nine months.
Additionally, the students who enrolled in the course had higher English
skills than students in high school, or students enrolled in other courses
since the course was the highest-level course at the undergraduate level. The
author is a bilingual (L1 Japanese and L2 English), and she instructed the
course mainly in English using Japanese, as necessary. She explained the
purpose of translanguaging to support Japanese students who have deficient
English, and she used various techniques to explain/rephrase problematic
ideas that appeared in student presentations. She posits that listing important
and difficult points and concepts on a board is valid when wanting to get
ideas across to the students (Yukawa, 2016, p. 50). This helps prepare
students as they try to understand concepts in the L2 while using their L1 to
support their ideas.
Findings from the seminar
In the seminar class, students were required to acquire the knowledge of
each specific area regarding English education and bilingualism and design
their graduation thesis that would be written in English. They were also
required to conduct their research individually with the guidance of the
instructor and present their achievements in front of other members of the
seminar occasionally. Throughout the course, Yukawa (2016) highlighted
eight types of students’ L1 use (see Table 1). Type 1 was the use of L1

Itoi, K. & Michaud, M.: Reflections on translanguaging ….

60

translation from L2 to L1 to help students’ comprehension, type 2 was use
of L1 to attract listeners’ attention, and type 3 was use of L1 words specific
to Japanese culture or the course, and type 4 was use of L1 as a direct
quotation. Type 5 was use of L1 due to a lack of corresponding English
ability, type 6 was use of L1 in response to the previous speaker, and type 7
was use of L1 as private discussions among students themselves with their
neighboring students. Lastly, type 8 was an end of class discussion done
entirely in L1. From these 8 types of L1 use in her seminar class, it was
demonstrated that the use of a L1 does not occur due to insufficient L2
skills. The study also found that the parallel course offered in Japanese
helped students with their EMI class as students could discuss their research
in Japanese in the parallel course. The authors argue that strategic L1 use
would be beneficial, but it only works when students in the classroom share
the same L1.
Table 1
Yukawa’s eight types of L1
Type

Function

1

Use of L1 or translation from L2 to L1 to ease students' comprehension

2

Use of L1 to give a strong impact and/or attract listeners' attention

3

Use of L1 words peculiar to Japanese culture or to this particular course

4

Use of L1 sentences/phrases as a direct quotation of an imaginary/real
speaker

5

Use of L1 words/phrases due to lack of corresponding English
expressions/words in the speaker's English repertoire

6

Use of L1 in accordance with the previous speaker

7

Use of L1 as private 'off stage' talks

8

Complete switch to L1 at the end of the class to activate discussion
Adapted from Yukawa (2016)

Results
In the questionnaire that students filled out, it showed that all the
participants found that the L1 used on the blackboard assisted in
comprehension. Moreover, every student except for one found the

Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 16(1), May 2021, pp. 53-66

61

instructor’s L1 usage helpful. One of the comments was, “If they had to do it
all in English, even the ones who have full understanding may have
difficulty in explaining to others. I believe that a few minutes of ‘off stage’
session in Japanese is useful and should form the relevant schema for the
topic as well” (Yukawa, 2016, p. 68). This is an example that proves
“prohibiting” Japanese completely in class limits students’ learning. The
study also shows that “L1 use was necessary for most students and was used
strategically” (Yukawa, 2016, p. 52). Moreover, the use of L1 is useful and
necessary even for the university students that are taking one of the highestlevel courses.
Reflection about our own practice
In this section, we will reflect on our own practices regarding
translanguaging to explore translanguaging in our local context. There has
been a recent shift to move from quantitative studies to qualitative studies in
attempting to understand students’ perspectives of translanguaging. In these
observational accounts from the teachers, we aim to construct a detailed
description of a central phenomenon.
Author’s 1 Reflection
I am a Japanese English teacher living in Japan. Currently, I teach at a
private university using translanguaging in my classroom because of
positive experiences I have had as a learner myself. I have been in an
English course where the instructor of the course encouraged the use of
translanguaging in Japan. The pedagogical approach the instructor used,
which promoted translanguaging helped me with understanding the context,
and it allowed the students to “maximize communicative potential” (García,
2009, p. 140). I even felt empowered that they were able to communicate in
different languages freely, and I did not have to feel inadequate by not being
able to understand and express myself all in English. It can be argued that it
allowed me to see myself as a multicompetent speaker (Pavlenko, 2003)
rather than a deficient speaker of English. During the course in which some
of the 8 types of L1 use introduced in Yukawa’s (2016) study were used, I
had a positive learning experience in the classroom because of the L1 use.
Since the positive experience I had as a learner and research supporting the
effectiveness of translanguaging in L2 classrooms I studied, I started using
translanguaging when I moved back to Japan from Canada after my graduate
studies ceased, where I was unable to use my L1 to teach English due to
different languages I shared with my students.
When I teach, I use all the types of L1 (1 to 8) introduced by Yukawa
(2016). For example, when I explain and give feedback on student essays, I

62

Itoi, K. & Michaud, M.: Reflections on translanguaging ….

use L1 to provide more in-depth explanation and feedback. Students often
tell me that when they get feedback on their writing in English from other
teachers, they are not clear what they are asked to revise, but with Japanese
instruction, they are able to understand what exactly they need to work on.
In addition, other types of L1 use such as type 2 is used when I want to get
students’ attention switching from English to Japanese suddenly;
alternatively, I see the effectiveness when I switch to Japanese, as students
look at me and listen well. Moreover, type 5 is used when I tell my students
to discuss a reading they are assigned. Often, students have a good
understanding of the reading, but are unable to discuss it in English, and
they cannot deepen their understanding with their peers through discussion
due to their lack of proficiency in English. However, as Iida (2014) argues,
by allowing them to use Japanese, they can have an in-depth discussion on
the topic with the cognitive tool function that their L1 plays. Nevertheless,
as much as the positive feedback students have about translanguaging, some
students still seem to believe that “all-English” classes which provide more
exposure to English in the classroom are superior to classrooms in which
both English and Japanese are used. I believe that more initiatives to
promote the use of translanguaging need to be implemented.
Author’s 2 Reflection
I taught English in Japan for just under eight years. During that time, I
taught one year at elementary schools, five years at middle schools, and
three years at high schools. Additionally, in the tertiary domain, I taught at
five universities as a part-time teacher over a five-year period, and two years
full-time at one university.
Regarding my experience teaching in Japan, related to
translanguaging, Japanese was often used in classrooms mainly out of
necessity. In much of my experience, especially teaching students who is
English L2 levels were beginner to intermediate, students used
translanguaging to accomplish various goals. These goals ranged from
simply understanding daily class outcomes, explaining definitions, textbook
chapter purposes and goals, and to generally understand what I wanted the
students to do. Therefore, the L1 became a tool that I could use to aid my
pedagogical practice, rather than hinder it. Many classes I taught were made
up of beginner level Japanese students; hence, I used Japanese in class to
accommodate student learning and understanding. However, it could be the
case that many non-Japanese teachers cannot speak Japanese well enough to
make significant connections between the L1 and the L2. I noticed when
observing non-Japanese teachers’ classes that those who were fluent in
Japanese often did a great job teaching the target content if they were fluent

Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 16(1), May 2021, pp. 53-66

63

in both Japanese and English. Of course, this was dependent on the student
English ability level, in my experience the more advanced my students were,
the less Japanese I used.
Additionally, after spending several years in Japan, I became aware
of the fear many students had both due to a lack of fluency and culture.
When I mention “culture”, I specifically mean the general behaviour
Japanese students have of not wanting to stick out, either out of fear of being
embarrassed from making a mistake in public or being a fluent to
exceptional English speaker. Often, I found myself wondering how to
increase student involvement while establishing a positive classroom
experience for everyone. Moreover, if various lesson procedures and
objectives were to be conveyed, I sometimes used Japanese as necessary if it
facilitated the L2 growth within the class as a group or to an individual
student. In this way, translanguaging brought linguistic depth to the classes
when I taught in Japan. As found in previous studies (e.g., Lin, 2013;
Yukawa, 2016), considering that translanguaging can enrich students’
learning by utilizing students’ full linguistic repository, then I would argue
that it needs to be considered for use in English classrooms in Japan and in
other countries.

Conclusion
The project aimed to provide descriptions of translanguaging practices that
were implemented in classrooms, and at analysing the effects they had on
EFL students’ literacy engagement and learning, with a view to enhancing
existing practices and innovating new ones. We argue that translanguaging
can work negatively when the classroom L1 is not taken into consideration,
but it can also enhance students’ learning greatly when used as an asset and
done properly. Especially, in environments like Japanese classrooms where
students share the same L1, we believe that not only does translanguaging
enhance students’ learning, but it also helps them construct a positive
identity as a multicompetent speaker rather than inadequate speaker of
English. The findings from this paper suggest that teachers who adopt a
translanguaging stance in their classrooms using students L1 resources
effectively integrate students’ culture and language into classroom learning,
bringing about increased participation, engagement and confidence when
doing literacy work.
The present paper aimed to address the following questions: Are
classes completely conducted in English really the best option to nurture
students’ communicative ability in English? Is the use of L1 Japanese in
English class a result of inadequate L2 skills? Should inner-circle English be

64

Itoi, K. & Michaud, M.: Reflections on translanguaging ….

considered as desirable language that students should aim to acquire? In this
paper, we have tried to address the answers to these questions. Additionally,
the question of whether the use of L1 is not harmless in L2 learning or adds
positive outcomes to students’ learning is debatable. Also, in this era of
globalization, the most important skill that students should develop is not
“native like” English speaking skills. Therefore, what is crucial are the
meaning-making skills to negotiate the meanings of what is going on around
them. To get these skills, translanguaging should be promoted in classrooms
more as it enhances knowledge in learners with different levels of L2 and
helps them prepare for the future when they go out and use English in the
real world. It is admirable that Japanese English education has been
changing for the better. However, to make the most of it, educators and
learners need to change their false assumptions about English and L1 use.
We believe that in the future, there will be more classrooms applying
translanguaging, and that there will be more positive changes in English
education in Japan from it.

The authors
Kiyu Itoi is a lecturer at Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific university in Japan, and is
a PhD student at Simon Fraser University in Canada. She has a master’s
degree in Teaching English as an Additional Language (TEAL) from Simon
Fraser University. Her research interests include translanguaging, CLIL, and
academic discourse socialization.
Matthew Michaud is a faculty member in the English for Academic
Purposes Department and School of Communication at Capilano University
in North Vancouver, Canada, and he has an MA in Applied Linguistics from
the University of Newcastle, Australia. His research interests include
communicative competence, education technology, gaming, and
Indigenization. His research has been published in Canada, Germany,
Ireland, Japan, and the USA.

References
ALC. (2016). ALC report on the actual situation of English education.
Retrieved from http://www.alc.co.jp/company/report/pdf/alc_report
_20160422.pdf
Benesse Educational Research and Development Institute. (2009). Benesse
sogo kyoiku kenkyujyo. Retrieved from http://berd.benesse.jp/
berd/data/dataclip/clip0014/index2.html.

Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 16(1), May 2021, pp. 53-66

65

Education minister proposes English education for 3rd grade. (2014,
November 8). Japan Today. Retrieved from https://japantoday.com/
category/national/education-minister-proposes-english-educationfor-3rd-grade.
Farrell, T. S. C. (2013) Critical Incident Analysis Through Narrative
Reflective Practice: A Case Study. Iranian Journal of Language
Teaching Research, 1(1), pp. 79-89.
Carson, E., & Kashihara, H. (2012). Using the L1 in the L2 Classroom: The
Students Speak. The Language Teacher, 36(4), pp. 41-48.
García, O. (2009). Education, multilingualism and translanguaging in the
21st century. In Multilingual Education for Social Justice:
Globalising the local, eds. Ajit Mohanty, Minati Panda, Robert
Phillipson, Tove Skutnabb-Kangas. New Delhi: Orient Blackswan
(former Orient Longman), pp. 128-145.
Halquist, D., & Musanti, S. (2010). Critical Incidents and Reflection:
Turning Points that Challenge the Researcher and Create
Opportunities for Knowing. International Journal of Qualitative
Studies in Education, 23(4), pp. 449-461.
Hawkins, S. (2015). Guilt, Missed Opportunities, and False Role Models: A
Look at Perceptions and Use of the First Language in English
Teaching
in
Japan.
JALT,
37(1),
pp.
29-37.
doi:10.37546/JALTJJ37.1-1
Hesson, S., Seltzer, K., & Woodley, H. (2016). Translanguaging in
Curriculum and Instruction: A CUNY-NYSIEB Guide for Educators.
1st ed. [ebook] New York: CUNY-NYSIEB.
Iida, T. (2014). A Study on the Roles of L1 and L2 in Foreign Language
Classroom: Language Awareness, Language planning, and
Translanguaging.
Doshisha
Woman’s
University
Sougoubunkakenkyusyokiyo, 31, pp.1-15.
JET Program USA. (2021). 2021 JET Program Application Guidelines.
Retrieved
from
https://jetprogramusa.org/wp-content/uploads/
2020/10/2021-Application-Guidelines-Oct-Update.pdf.
JET
Programme.
Johnson, K. E., & Golombek, P. (2002). Teachers’ narrative inquiry as
professional development. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lin, A. M. Y. (2013). Towards Paradigmatic Change in TESOL
Methodologies: Building Plurilingual Pedagogies from the Ground
Up. TESOL Quarterly, 47(3), pp. 521-545.
Matsuda, A. (2013). The Ownership of English in Japanese Secondary
Schools. World Englishes, 22, pp. 483-496. doi:10.1111/j.1467971X.2003.00314.x.

66

Itoi, K. & Michaud, M.: Reflections on translanguaging ….

Meyer, H. (2008). The Pedagogical Implications of L1 use in the L2
Classroom. Maebashi Kyodai Gakuen College Ronsyu, 8, pp. 147159.
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Japan
(MEXT). (2014). English Education Reform Plan corresponding to
Globalization.
Retrieved
from
http://www.mext.go.jp/
en/news/topics/detail/1372656.html.
Nation, P. (2003). The Role of the First Language in Foreign Language
Learning. Asian EFL Journal, 5(2).
Nishimuro, M., & Borg, S. (2013). Teacher cognition and grammar teaching
in a Japanese high school. JALT Journal, 35(1), pp. 29-50.
Nishino, T. (2011). Komyunikashon apurocchi ni kansuru nihonjin koukou
eigo koushi no shinjou to jissen. [Japanese high school teachers’
beliefs and practices regarding communicative language teaching].
JALT Journal, 33(2), pp. 131-156.
Ortega, L. (2007). Meaningful L2 practice in foreign language classrooms:
A cognitive interactionist SLA. In R. M. DeKeyser (Ed.) Practice in
a second language: perspectives from applied linguistics and
cognitive psychology. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp.
180-207.
Pavlenko, A. (2003). "I Never Knew I Was a Bilingual": Reimagining
Teacher Identities in TESOL, Journal of Language, Identity &
Education, 2(4), pp. 251-268. doi: 10.1207/S15327701JLIE0204_2
Tripp, D. (1993). Critical incidents in teaching. London: Rutledge.
Yonesaka, S. (2005). A Proposal to use Classroom Discourse Frames to
Investigate Patterns of Teacher L1 use. Hokkai Gakuen University
Studies in Culture, 32, pp. 31-57.
Yukawa, E. (2016). Use of the First Language in an Undergraduate EnglishMedium Seminar Class: An EMI Case in a Japanese Context.
Studies in Mother Tongue, Heritage Language, Bilingual Education,
12, pp. 40-76.
Williams, C. (1994). Arfarniad o ddulliau dysgu ac addysgu yng nghyddestun addysg uwchradd ddwyieithog, [An evaluation of teaching
and learning methods in the context of bilingual secondary
education]. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis (University of Wales,
Bangor).