Steve Mierzejewski
(1985-86)
When I think of LIOJ, the one thought that comes to me is standing on the balcony on the top floor looking out at the ocean. It was always a good way to keep a clear perspective on the importance of events, whether those events were especially good or stressful. For in my time at LIOJ there seemed to be a little of both.
I think that I was at LIOJ during a particularly crucial time in its history. I believe the year 1986-1987 saw the end of a "Golden Age" and the beginning of a decline. I have no idea what the state of LIOJ is presently, perhaps it has entered a second golden age, but it clearly transformed in the time I was there. Part of this transformation was due to economic factors beyond the control of the institute while others were due to questionable administrative policies.
I felt privileged to get a position at LIOJ. It was considered by many professionals in the field as the leader in English language teaching in Japan. There must have been between ten and twenty foreign teachers on the staff (perhaps more). Our major clients were Japanese companies and we had no shortage of students. Cross Currents continued to extend its circulation internationally and was unique at the time for existing as a bridge between theory and classroom practice. Most teachers presented at JALT conferences and this further underlined the professional status of the school. Yes, there was the stress of teaching in an immersion program with all of its extra activities and there was the usual factionalism that will be found among any large foreign staff overseas, but all in all teachers were committed to the continued professional development of the school.
The new administration that took over when I entered had a somewhat different plan for the school, however. I was told that too many teachers were spending too much time on Cross Currents. The new administration also believed that hiring non-EFL professionals would bring more variety to the students. There was also what I would call an institutionalizing of creativity. By this I mean that projects or activities that a teacher may have successively done with students on his or her own had the habit of becoming unofficially (and sometimes officially) required by the administration from then on. These included such things as going out with students to lunch or after classes as well as various evening and weekend activities. I think most teachers would have done these things anyway but the institutionalization of them took away their spontaneity and made what were usually enjoyable times something more of a duty.
The hiring of non-EFL professionals was probably the single most important factor in the decline of the school. This idea that "anyone can teach English" is nothing new to the profession but it really had no place at LIOJ at this time. Some of these non-professionals had some classroom experience but others had none at all. It was impossible to talk of such things as "communicative competence" or "fossilization" with people who had no idea what a verb was. I observed some of their classes and they were what one might expect. No doubt, word of this decrease in standards filtered back to the companies at a time when companies were cutting back on their budgets because of the sudden appreciation of the yen. Cross Currents, which depended on professional articles from its staff, was put into a tough position since none of these people had the theoretical base from which to write articles that bridged the gap from theory to practice. As a result, the first issue by the new editorial staff consisted of anecdotes from people's overseas experience; hardly something that would help professionals meet their teaching needs in isolated parts of the world.
It was obvious to the staff, especially those who had seen the former system, that the school was putting itself in a dangerous situation. There was almost a revolutionary fervor of trying to stop its decline and measures such as a teacher strike were seriously considered. As is common during such times, there was more unity among the staff than ever before.
But more mundane solutions prevailed. Most of us were at the end of our contracts and the new people who arrived had no way of seeing the full scope of changes that had occurred. I kept in contact with people who remained at the school and learned that things had further worsened. The business program rapidly withered away to be replaced by focus on the community program which had before been nothing more than an afterthought. Cross Currents could not rebuild its market niche and eventually was out-competed by more sophisticated publications and eventually closed.
I went on to a competitor school (the International Institute for Studies and Training) which survived the bad business climate by offering more services to its customers such as MBA exchange programs with the American Graduate School of International Management (Thunderbird). We also had exchange programs with students throughout the US, Europe, and Southeast Asia. In 1992, I received a fellowship from the US government to set up teacher training colleges and do teacher training in Poland. I later went on to direct the biggest EFL program in Europe at a Polish-American joint venture university. I came back to Asia in 1999, to Korea, where I did testing for one of the country's biggest corporations, LG. I have now opened a small language school in Poland where I have built a log home in the nearby mountains. I have not given up on the idea of returning to Asia and have even had a tentative offer from a university in Japan.
I could give a lot of anecdotes about teaching at LIOJ, from drinking beer with Dianne Larsen-Freeman and Donald Freeman to watching lava flow down the slopes of Oshima's Mt. Mihara from the LIOJ balcony. I remember people like Larry Reisberg, Bev Curran, David Reilley, Bill McCombie and Paul Lehnert. I remember many others as well but I stayed in contact with these people for some time after LIOJ.
Academically, teaching at LIOJ was the best thing that could have happened to me. I worked with a lot of good people from whom I learned many different activities and techniques, some of which I still use today. You had to be creative as you often did not have the time to prepare elaborate lessons. Often teachers had to come in for an 8:00 a.m. class after a night of drinking with students and prepare a lesson. We often referred to this as "Three Step Lesson Planning": the lesson was planned during the last three steps we took before opening the classroom door. I remember a game we would play during breaks. Someone would point to an object, an ashtray for example, and give you a minute to think of as many activities as possible that you could make around the ashtray. And we could do it. It was something that I have taken with me throughout my career. I hope that current LIOJ teachers take something with them as well.
In any event, I am glad to see that LIOJ still survives, in whatever form. It has always been a monument to an ideal and that ideal, it seems to me, will always remain sound.
January 2003
Top |
Copyright (c) Language Institute of Japan (LIOJ) / 日本外語教育研究所 |  Back |