ＳＰＥＣＩＡＬ
ＯＲＩＧＩＮＡＬ ＣＯＮＴＥＮＴＳ
ポリ研オリジナルクロスワード
_edited.png)
_edited.png)
タテのキーワード
1当団体の略称
2「職業としての政治」著者（下から）
3無政府状態（英語；カタカナで）
4予想外の活躍をする対象の呼び名
5内閣の法律（下から）
6 party（日本語での意味/下から）
7米国16代目大統領
8内閣が流産した首相候補（濁点抜く）
9「永遠の平和のために」著者
10人が生まれながら誰しも持っている権利
ヨコのキーワード
①米国独立戦争で独立反対した人の呼び名
②自由主義（英語；カタカナで/右から）
③法令によって身分が保証された人を訴追により処罰する権利
④資金を引っ張ること、〇〇〇する
⑤ United Nation（日本語）
⑥米国二大政党、民主党と何党？(右から)
⑦ 94代内閣総理大臣の苗字
⑧当選確実の略称
⑨マックス・ウェーバーが主張した合理的組織〇〇〇〇〇制度（マートンはこれに言及し、〇〇〇〇〇の逆機能を主張）
⑩ tax（日本語の意味）
⑪王の権利を正当化する〇〇〇〇神授説
⑫2009-2011年、2015年～デンマーク首相を務めている人物〇〇〇・ラムセン
ポリ研 ゼミ・コラム題材(+論文置き場) EXTRA
ベーシックインカム
コラム
ベーシックインカムの日本国においての導入の是非について
社会の公平性と効率性は最大の課題である。この議論の中で最近話題に上がるのはベーシックインカムである。ベーシックインカムとは最低限所得保証制度の一部であり国民一人一人に一定の金額を給付するものである。最近だと、スイスにおける国民投票による是非が話題を呼んだ。
結論から述べると日本でベーシックインカムの導入には否定的な態度をとらざるを得ない。
そこには四つ問題がある。
①財源
②世代間格差
③生活保護との兼ね合い
④人口（デモグラフィック変数）
我が国における社会保障の費用は膨大なものである。平成27年度社会保障関係予算によると（厚労省）31兆5297億円 で実に全予算の32.7%にのぼり、増加傾向にある。財政を圧迫していることは事実であり、新たに社会保障を導入するとなると財源をどこから捻出するかが議論の鍵となる。
また、20-30代と60-70など世代間における貯金の差も問題である。マイナンバー制度が導入されたとはいえ、個人の銀行預金口座額を一人一人調べあげて値段を設定するのは現実的ではない。
生活保護との兼ね合いも問題である。生活保護を受給している対象者に支給するべきなのか。もしくは、生活保護を減額するのか、議論は多岐にわたる。
一番の問題は人口である。
スイスの例をあげたが、スイスの人口は800万人である。試験導入しているオランダ1680万人。検討しているカナダは3500万人、フィンランドは543万人である。ところが、我が国は、1億2000万人の国民を抱えている。金額的に莫大になるのが簡単に類推できる。人口規模が明らかに違うのである。
また、税金の使い道の不透明性などの問題も残っている。
結論として、我が国におけるベーシックインカムの導入には否定せざるを得ない。
政治と経済学
ゼミ
税や政策ついての解説
-
消費税
広く税をとれる、高い徴収能力、比較的安定した方法。しかし良いことだけではない。
-
益税：本来支払われた税が払われず、事業者の手元に残るカネ
-
逆進性：エンゲル係数問題；低中所得者は収入の中で食品が大きな割合を示す。逆に苦しめるかもしれない。
-
付加価値税
主に欧州で見られる税。必需品には低い税率で嗜好品には比較的高い税率をかける方法。
それぞれたくさんの税率が設定可能なため食品○○％ 医薬品○○％ 酒○○％など。
問題；
-
高所得者にも軽減税率が適用されるため、富の再分配がうまく機能しない。
-
事務手続き、審査の費用が膨大。
-
給付付税額控除型消費税
カナダなどで導入されている。支払った税金のうち、統計により測った一定最低支出額の還付。
-
-
嗜好品と必需品
ぜいたく品は弾力性が高い。単価は高いが、高い税率をかけると逃げられてしまう。
生活必需品は弾力性が低い。単価は安いので高い税率をかけないとならない。
-
増税目的
財政再建 社会保障の財源
デフレとインフレ
-
デフレ時は紙幣の価値が低いので市場にカネがまわらない
これが循環するとスタグフレーション。このため、流動化促進のため政府は金利を低くする。
-
インフレ時は紙幣価値が高く、市場にカネはたくさんあるので金利を引き上げて市場にあるカネを抑制させる。
日本国債は現在8/25 10年もの0.35% デフレである。
2%のインフレ成長率とは
消費者物価指数（コアCPI）を2％にすること。この2%とは、失業率とインフレ率の曲線；フィリップス曲線で２％がこのましいから（それ以上はあまり意味がない）
-
ＣＰＩとは
「経済活動が停滞し需給が緩むと上昇率が低下する傾向があります。このため、消費者物価指数は「経済の体温計」とも呼ばれており、経済政策を的確に推進する上で極めて重要な指標となっています。家計調査やGDP統計における家計消費支出など他の重要な経済指標を実質化するためのデフレーターとしても利用されています。また、国民年金や厚生年金などでは、物価変動に応じて実質的な給付水準を見直すことが法律によって定められており、この物価の動きを示す指標として消費者物価指数が使われています。さらに、日本銀行が金融政策における判断材料として使用しているほか、賃金、家賃や公共料金改定の際の参考に使われるなど、官民を問わず幅広く利用されています。」
（統計局）
-
法人税
通例、法人税と消費税はセットで考えられることが多い。法人税を下げて消費税を上げるのは国民を軽視し大企業優遇にも見えるが、マクロ的に考えると、法人税引き下げにより企業が活発になり、利潤や雇用の増加にもつながる見方もできる。
そもそも税とは？
経済学的には消費者、生産者どっちが払っても同じ。しかし、実際は消費者負担(帰着)であることが多い。また、課税することにより本来の総余剰から余剰の一部が失われる(死荷重)
実際の税金はとても複雑で簡単に説明はつかないことが多い。
-
本当に消費税には逆進性があるのか
経済全体でみれば、所得税や固定資産税などで高所得者や財産保有者ほど支払いをしている。＝累進性 という見方もできる。よって、生涯的な所得を統合的にみると公平？
しかし政治ではこの低所得者対策が重要である。
-
人気取りに？
しばしば社会保障や弱者救済はマニフェストの“アメ”として扱われがちである。
バラマキなどは効果あるの？
現在の安倍政権の評価は？
①日経平均株価は好調で最近の上海株暴落やギリシャ危機を受けながら高水準を一応維持している。
-
2015年8/25日では経済成長率1.2%を記録。インフレ目標2%の達成できる可能性も。
-
輸出は好調、輸入は不調。少ない輸出の割合で経済を支えられるのか？
-
企業は一定の雇用の創設、賞与のアップも。
-
景気回復が伴合わない物価上昇だけが先行して国民資産から搾り取る！？
経済学的に考える。なぜ今増税か。
-
増税の機会費用：
政府の負債が膨らむ中、近い将来に増税すればそれだけ長い期間徴収ができて比較的に安い税率になる。一方、先延ばしにすると機会費用は高くつく。当然その間に負債は膨らむので高い税率をかけなければいけない。(図１)
社会保障と社会福祉：
社会福祉とは社会保障は分けて考えるべきである。社会保障とは年金や保険で財源がある。社会福祉は手当などで決まった財源はない。
⑴年金については、現在、今までのポートフォリオを改革し、投資をして元金を増やそうと努力している。しかし、将来足りない？
⑵医療費について、生活習慣病の増加、長寿化、医師による無駄な医薬の提供、“なんでも医療機関を受診する。”などにより圧迫。
⑶介護費について、今後、少子高齢化に伴い、拡大する。
⑷教育費について、高校無償化や手当は将来の担い手を育成するためにはなくしてはならない。
日銀短観：
経営者に景気のアンケートを行った日銀短観でよい評価が近年あったから
オリンピック景気に乗る：
オリンピック決定を受けて、建設業界や観光業界を中心に活発化。増税は基本的に景気がいい時に実行するものであり、今後オリンピック以外で爆発的に景気が良くなるものが来るかわからないため。
増税するとどうなるか。
-
社会保障の財源は確保できる（多少）
-
多少国債に充てられる
-
増税したらすべて消費者負担×→増税すると商品の値段は上がる。企業は売るためにコストの削減、値段の維持、商品個数の削減などの負担を負うことになる。エンゲル係数の問題は当然発生するが、必ずしも消費者だけが苦しいわけではない。
-
内需が縮小するのは必然
◆個人的見解◆
日本は莫大な社会保障、社会福祉、政府の負債を抱えており、増税はもはや不可避。
→問題はどこから捻出するか。
前途で説明したように、酒税などの嗜好品にかけても意味がなく、消費税自体にも逆進性という問題が実際にはあるしかし高い財源で安定的である。現状先進国より高い法人税いまよりを高くしては企業の成長を阻害してしまう。所得税をこれ以上あげると公平性と大きく離れて高所得者には不公平になってしまう。他の税だとそもそも低い額しか徴収できず、安定もしない。結果的に消費税が対象になってしまうのである。政府の思惑としては社会保障の負担及びこれに伴う法人税引き下げ。理想は、この引き下げで企業が活発化して賃上げや雇用を創設が生まれること。それどころか政府の労働法や派遣法の改正に着手している。労働者の流動化が狙いだが欧米の環境とは違い、なにがしたいか意味不明である。また、財務省の思惑としては高い税率の設定により軽減税率を求める各種業界の陳情と天下り先の確保が容易に予想できる。しかし、やはり増税は避けられないものではある。前回の8%は個人的に少し時期が早かったのではないかとおもう。また10%へのスパンが短すぎる。これでは、景気が上がるとメディアに言わせて、物価だけ上昇させて国民から搾取しているようにしか見えなくなってしまう。仮にも一国預かっている政府(自民党)や官僚がそのような考えをもっているとは信じたくないものである。大企業だけが恩恵をうけてその他の待遇は悪くなってしまう。公平性はどこへ行ってしまったのだろう。
増税の時期にしても景気が良くなったのは単なる災害やリーマンショックからの回復だと個人的におもう。オリンピックにしても過去の統計によりオリンピック後は景気が大きく落ち込む。そもそも増税の時期を誤っているのではないか。
再度、消費税のことについて言及すると、今後、高い税率が必要なのは言うまでもない。税の公平性の観点から欧州の導入している軽減税率や税額控除型消費税の導入の必要性はとても高いとおもう。
English Education
論文
The New Education Plan By MEXT’s Feasibility Among Seikei University Students（部員作成 英語論文）
( This mini-thesis was made for Seikei International Course and after submitting, it was shared)
1. Abstract
This paper investigates the English skills and perception of English learning among students in a private university in Tokyo, Japan, in order to identify the feasibility of the new education plan which was launched in 2015. The most remarkable outcome was that the freshmen scored higher in the TOEIC test than the MEXT average. The survey results showed the differences between the students who have experienced the new education plan and the old one.
2. Introduction
For decades, The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science, and Technology-Japan (MEXT) and Board of Education in Japan have been discussing English skills problems such as difficulties acquiring English in terms of speaking. Typically, like a stereotype of Japanese, Japanese may have some negative image of English and have difficulties to deal with learning the language. Thus, investigating government guidelines and education plans for current students is important to verify plans for Japanese students and teachers. An earlier education plan (Oka et al., 2011) , which was adopted for the years 2008 to 2015, had criteria which outlined goals for graduating high school students to have English skills at the level of A2~B1 in the CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages) or Eiken (Jitsuyo Eigo Gino Kentei; Test in Practical English Proficiency) pre-2nd ~2nd level. In addition, the aim was to equip students with communication skills in English.
In 2015, to equip students with high-quality English skills in terms of 4 skills; Speaking, Listening, Writing, Reading, a new education plan was adopted by MEXT 2014, and it recommends that students have a level of CEFR B1~B2, or Eiken 2nd grade~ pre-1st grade, or a TOEFL iBT score of more than 57 which is higher than the previous guidelines. Moreover, MEXT increased the vocabulary size requirement from 1500 to 1800 and recommended that students be allowed to practice discussion, presentation, and speech in the curriculum (MEXT,2015a). To reach these goals, MEXT issued a “Can-Do List”, which makes it easy to measure the skills step-by-step.
Moreover, MEXT conducted a survey of high school students who attend public schools, with regards to the four English skills (MEXT, 2015 b). This report outlined the data measuring the English skills of the population of students in public and national high schools. The data was collected in 2015 by surveying over 70,000 public and national high school students. The criteria of this survey were based on four categories: Reading, Listening, Writing, and Speaking. In each category, the skills were measured based on CEFR (A1-B2). From the data, it was found that most of the national high school students belong to CEFR A2 level in “Reading” and “Listening”. Furthermore, there were some students at the CEFR B1 level. On the other hand, in the section “Writing” and “Speaking”, the scores were lower. For public high school students, all scores were found to be far behind the government stated goals. Scores of “Reading” and “Listening” were mainly in the CEFR A1 level, but some were in CEFR A2 level. For the other two skills, 90% of students were at the CEFR A1 level. This shows that Japanese students in public and national high schools mostly have only CEFR A1-A2 level English skills.
3. Literature review
A review of MEXT’s education plan was conducted by Oka, et al. (2011). The researchers looked into the history and methods of English education by MEXT. For a long time, grammar had a heavyweight in English education in Japan. The government’s education plan for English changes every 10 years, and up until today, the education plan has been revised in every decade to adjust. From the wave of globalism, communication skills became more important. To take time for communication, the number of grammar classes was decreased. However, in fact, for university entrance examinations, grammar has been the most important factor to get a high score as mainly, still, there were few communication or speaking tests but grammar and vocabulary classes was an important issue in the past, around until 2000 (Oka, et al, 2011). Furthermore, the authors indicate that English education was mainly taught by Japanese teachers in Japanese, only 3~4% of the classes were held in English in 2006. Oka et al. claimed that the four-skills (Listening, Reading, Speaking, and Writing) are very important and teaching methods should be followed to teach all of these skills and that classes must be held in English. However, this study had some limitations. It explained the guidelines and curriculum well, but it did not discuss how effective these were at improving students’ English skills.
The data from this survey by MEXT and previous studies help us to judge whether MEXT’s education plan has succeeded or not. From this paper, it also becomes clear that there is a necessity to consider the new English plan launched in 2015 (MEXT 2015) as well. It should give hints to the argument on whether it is suitable or not. The purpose of this research paper starts from this issue. The present study aims to identify the current situation of English education among students at a private university in Japan (S. University) and to assess whether or not the former education plan and the new 2016 MEXT education plan for English is viable for high school students. The following research question guided this study: Is there differences between junior and freshers/ sophomore students in University by having Education Guideline launched in 2015 and the former education guideline, which started in 2002 and end-upped in 2014? And does it have an impact on students’ English and attitude toward English? The outcome of this paper can shed light on the effectiveness and the actual practices of English education in high school and education at S. University. It may help other scholars who study these issues and English teachers at S. University. Furthermore, this may give a hint for having efficient English classes in freshers and sophomore classes.
A second study has been taken by scholars such as Michiko Toyama in 2015 (Toyama, 2015). Toyama described English education in terms of pronunciation and curriculum. Also, Toyama described student attitudes toward English. This study asked Japanese high school students in Japan to complete a questionnaire. It confirmed a linkage between motivation and English skills. When learning pronunciation, as English is very different compared to Japanese, students needed some help from their teachers. The most important idea in this paper was motivation. Japanese people have difficulties in speaking English, there was a necessity to give an incentive to the students. By giving motivation, students may have better efforts in English learning, but there are still difficulties to get to a CEFR level B1.
Another study was published in 2016. It focused on a different aspect. Steele et al. (2016) described English teachers’ levels and educational history. They claimed, “in the current stage, there is a clear gap between the goals outlined in the Ministry’s course of study guidelines and the reality of teaching practices” (Steele et al., 2016, p21). They pointed out that there are problems with teachers as well. Many teachers lack the ability or the training to teach English effectively to students. There is a lack of qualified teachers, and only 55% of teachers have TOEFL iBT scores of 80 or over, or TOEIC L&R scores of 730, or Eiken pre-1st grade, for instance (MEXT, 2015). Also, this paper enhanced Toyama’s (Toyama, 2015) argument, by showing that the curriculum needs some kind of additional material to give students motivation. Truly there is a gap between the government’s guidelines and the reality in the classroom, but this paper (Steel et al., 2016) only touched on teachers. It did not explain well about the education plan. For another limitation, these studies were mainly focused in earlier education plan which was adapted its curriculum in 2008, so it does not give enough information for a new plan which was adapted in 2016.
4. Methods
In order to identify the University students’ English level and their awareness of the type of education plan they experienced, 102 students, which included 50 female, 51 male, 1 other responded to a survey. The respondents consisted of 46 S University International Independent Course and 56 other courses or non-courses. Participants were collected from all four departments (61 for Department of Economics, 29 for Department of Humanities, 10 for Department of Law, and 1 for Department of Science and Technology). The survey was distributed in the paper-based form, internet-based form and was shared via SNS. The survey included 26 questions.
5. Result
As Oka et al. (2011) suggested, it could be said that English education in Japanese high schools still have a heavyweight on grammar or Read/ long-text. In Question 9, As a result, Understand/ Read long-text comes first with 14 %, Grammar and Listening follow with 13.1 %,12.5 %. In contrast, Discussion / Communication, Presentation / Speech and Debate had a low ratio (for each 5.6 %, 5.2 %, 2.4 % respectively). Figure1 shows the ratio of the lessons which participants experienced in high school’s English classes.
(figure 1: N=102)
From all lessons, 92 % of participants answered Understanding/Reading long-text, 86 % for grammar, 82 % for Listening, and 79 % for Vocab. This means that Grammar and Listening and the other two elements had heavyweight in high school’s English lessons as Oka (2011) suggested. However, still, Discussion /Communication and Debate remains at a low rate.
In University (see Figure 2), education of English may change in weight on more practical skills such as Presentation/Speech (16.3 %) or Discussion / Communication (14.1 %). By counting the responses, over 87 % of students had Presentation/ Communication, which is 55 % more than in secondary school. Also, at the same time, Grammar, Pronunciation, and Translation (Japanese), and Translation (English) had decreased over 10 % for each.
(figure2: N=102)
In University (figure 2), education of English may change the focus to more practical skills such as Presentation/Speech (16.3 %) or Discussion/ Communication (14.1 %). Moreover, many other items listed in figure 2 with higher than 7 % such as Grammar, Pronunciation, and Translation (Japanese) had decreased.
On students’ perception toward English, as figure 3 indicates, there seem to be not many students who strongly dislike using English. Surprisingly, there were over 40 students who liked using English, independent of whether their English skill is good or not. Students, especially in public school, have a tendency to like using English rather than private school students.
(figure 3: N=102)
(figure 4: N=102)
By asking an evaluation of one’s high school’s education based on perception, a positive answer can be seen from figure 4 (total “Yes” =59). As you can see in figure 3, students from public schools tend to have positive responses when comparing to private schools, many public school graduates answered “Yes” in figure 4 as well. In figure 3, 33 participants from public schools voted for “Yes” in total which is over 40 % of total votes by public students. On the other hand, students from private high school had negative image (over 25%), this means many students from private high schools are not really satisfied with their education in high school. In figure 4, “upper” and “intermediate” students tend to think their education was satisfied. When comparing figure 3 and 4, participants have a more positive image in high school rather than the university. However, many participants in university did not finish their English curriculum yet, those people answered “NB” or “I don’t know”.
(figure 5: N=102)
Figure 5 shows self-reported test scores of all participants before entering university. This also includes the TOEIC placement test held in March for all freshmen. Each score is a set in the same level of English zone based on CEFR made by Eiken Foundation of Japan (EFJ). The majority of students answered their TOEIC scores, and through TOEIC, over 70% belong in the score range of 300 to 699. Also, as you can see, none of the participants had a score under 225. For Eiken, 40 % of participants had grade 2, the volume zone can be set in a range of TOEIC 225-549.
6. Analysis
Former studies (MEXT,2015a); (MEXT,2016a) these gave the data of final grade high school student’s TOEIC scores. Figure 6, and figure 7 shows the both survey’s results based on the CEFR scale, as well, both figures show the comparison of MEXT surveys and the survey which have conducted currently in this paper.
*For survey of this paper, I had excluded each participants’ score which is duplicated. (figure 6)
(figure 7)
Looking in both figure 6 and figure 7 show the scores of both MEXT’s surveys, the score slightly grown and can be seen that there are improvements in three sections except CEFR level C1, ＋ 4.4 % in A2, ＋ 0.7 % in B1, ＋ 0.1 % in B2. The most remarkable outcome of the survey was that S University’s scores of TOEIC scores highly over-scored the average score of high school students in the final grade (MEXT, 2015＆2014), ＋ 40 % in B1, ＋ 30 % in B2. This data shows, truly, the S University’s students’ English level had high achievements.
MEXT (MEXT,2015a) did not collect all the perceptions, though MEXT (MEXT,2016) had collected perceptions toward English lessons. Due to the comparison of S University and MEXT’s survey, only survey held in 2016 (MEXT,2016) was used (see figure 8). In figure 8, it shows that MEXT collected a high number of under-performed perceptions (students who think their English skills are not good) in Presentation/Speech, Debate/Discussion, and Discussion/Communication when compared to S University students’ perceptions. This is surprising data because as you can see in figure 9, freshmen who belonged in final grade in which 2016 survey was conducted, and a sophomore which had similar education policy, only a few participants answered their English level as "basic", so this fact may not be true in S university, however lacking enough freshmen related data in the survey of this paper may give a big concern of whether if it is true or not for freshmen.
(figure 8) (figure 9; below)
(figure 10)
In figure 9 and figure 10, the English classes and English lessons are compared in their year, students in juniors, seniors, and others most likely belonged in the former English guideline, and students in freshmen and sophomores most likely belonged in new guideline. Figure 9 shows the differences in English level, the majority of juniors/ seniors/ others seems to be in “upper class” and “intermediate class”, however freshmen and sophomores may have an almost equal number in each class. In figure 10, by comparing freshmen/ sophomores and juniors/ seniors/others, only “Presentation/ Speech” and “Essay” had big differences, this means that there could not be seen a correlation between former English guideline (2008-2015) and the new one (2015~) in terms of asking contents of English lessons because there were fewer differences in each lesson.
Figure 11 shows the differences in the level of English class and TOEIC scores, compared by grade in university as well. There can be seen more than a double number of participants enrolling in High-upper class and Upper class. Also in TOEIC score, students in junior, senior, and other have high scores than the freshman and sophomore.
However, figure 12 shows the differences between freshmen/ sophomores and juniors/seniors/others in terms of perceptions toward English education in high school. For Perception 1, over 60 % of students through their education was efficient but the freshmen/ sophomores had negative answers (37 %). In Perception 2, both freshmen/ sophomores and juniors/ seniors/ others had positive answers, still, the latter had a more positive impact on their perceptions.
(figure 11) (figure12; below)
7. Conclusion
In conclusion, comparing S University and the MEXT’s 2016/ 2015 survey, S University students had remarkable percentages in B1 to C1 level based on the outcome of English skills collected by examination based on CEFR scale. However, by collecting perceptions, most English courses have lack of 1) speech/ presentation 2) debate/ discussion 3) discussion/ communication in high school English education. Currently, S University’s students have higher skills than the survey of MEXT based on new education guideline. However, there seems to be no correlation between new and old English guideline in terms of English lessons because the differences of English lesson in high school between freshmen/ sophomores and juniors/ seniors/ others were too small so that it can be ignored.
Overall, students in S University had high-performance of English abilities, the new English plan of MEXT (MEXT,2014) did not really show clear merit when comparing freshmen/ sophomores and other students(old MEXT English plan). Therefore, New MEXT’s English plan may not have a feasibility among University’s students. Still, the former plan had a more positive impact on both English skills and perceptions, for instance, seniors and juniors' (former education scheme) answer toward the effectiveness of English education remarked higher than the youngers.
At last, this report still has certain concerns; three limitations. Firstly, the number of participants were not enough to strongly conclude. Secondly, as this report was based on one private university, this may not show the answer as the whole. Thirdly, as the data was not collected equally from each department, the conclusion of S University’s English abilities and perceptions may be imperfect. However, this report can help the future study of English education, especially at S University.
References
Izeki,T., Sakai, H., Aihara, K., Kubota, Y., Ichizaki, & I., Hidai, S. (2014). Korekara no eigo no kenkyu to kyouikurenkei kyouiku no tenbou to kadai [Future english study and education: Partnership education’s future and issues]. Tokyo: Seibidou.
Ministry of Education. (2014). Gurobaru-ka ni taiou-shita eigo kyouiku kaikaku jisshi keikaku [New english education scheme to deal with globalization]. Ministry of Education, Japan. Retrieved from http:// www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/kokusai/gaikokugo/__icsFiles/ afieldfile/2014/01/31/1343704_01.pdf
Ministry of Education. (2015a). Eigo kyouiku kaizen-no-tame-no eigoryoku cyousa jigyou houkoku [Survey of high school students in public schools regarding english 4 skills]. Ministry of Education, Japan. Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu /education/detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2015/07/03/1358071_01.pdf.
Ministry of Education. (2015b). Eigo kyouiku jisshi jittai cyousa [Survey of current education in the reality situation]. Ministry of Education, Japan. Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp /component/a_menu/education/detail/__ icsFiles/afieldfile/2015/06/10/1358566 _03.pdf.
Ministry of Education. (2016). Eigo kyouiku kaizen-no-tame-no eigoryoku cyousa jigyou houkoku [Survey of high school students in public schools regarding english 4 skills]. Ministry of Education, Japan. Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education/detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2016/12/16/1375533_1.pdf.
Oka, H., Iino, A., Kanazawa, Y., Tomino, Y., Nakahachi, K., & Nakamura, T. (2011). Guro-baru jidai no eigokyouiku :atarashii eigokakyouikuhou [English language education in the global era: A course for future teachers of English as a foreign language]. Tokyo: Seibidou.
Steele, D., Zhang, R., & McCornacc., D. (2016). Policy change in teacher training: challenges to enhance English education in japan, Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Management 4(2), 12-26.
Toyama, M. (2015). Japanese EFL learners’ beliefs about pronunciation learning and their pronunciation skills. Bunkyo University Journal of Language and Culture (26), 92-114.