The 2017 PanSIG Journal 91
Appendix B - Revised paragraph organisation activity Organization Activity
Instructions:
The following paragraph is out of order. Write the correct number (1) to (5) beside each section to put the paragraph in order.
Also, use the phrases in the box to fill in the missing words.
one similarity is differ are different In summary However
# ___ _______, the festivals also _____ in some ways. The first difference is activities. At the Quebec Winter Carnival all of the activities are winter related. For example, there is snowboarding, ice canoe, snowshoes, dogsledding, and many beautiful ice sculptures are on display. On the other hand, the Kern county fair features dancers, bands, and magicians.
There are also a lot of farm animals and children can pet them. The main event is a Rodeo, and you can see cowboys riding bulls and trying to catch cows with a rope.
# ___ __________, the Quebec Winter Carnival and the Kern County Fair both have interesting mascots that teach the meaning of the festivals. However, they have some differences in what people do and when they started. If you like winter sports and ice sculptures, I think the Quebec Winter Carnival is a great event for you. If you like animals and watching rodeos, perhaps the Kern County fair is best for you.
# ___ The festival in my country, called the Quebec winter carnival and the festival in my partner Francisco's country called the Kern County are both very popular festivals. Both events have mascots that show the meaning of the festival, but they differ in activities and history.
# ___ Secondly, the histories of the two festivals __________. The Winter Carnival started in 1894. In contrast, the Kern County fair started in 1925. Therefore the Quebec Winter Carnival is 31 years older than the Kern County fair.
# ___ Firstly, ____________ that both festivals have a mascot. The Quebec Winter Carnival has Bon homme and in French this means “good fellow”. He is a snow man with a red and a large smile and he represents winter. The main meaning of the festival is a celebration of winter sports, so Bon homme shows the meaning of the festiva. The Kern County Fair also has a mascot that shows the meaning of the festival. It is a bull named KC which means Kern County. Because the meaning of the festival is to show the achievements of Kern County, this mascot shows the meaning of the festival.
The 2017 PanSIG Journal 92
Appendix C - Revised pair error correction activity A Wildfire to Remember (Partner A)
One of the scariest story from my childhood is about the time I survived a wildfire with my family in a California forest. I had gone camping with my family for one week in this forest. It was my first camping trip ever. We did many things like fishing, hikings, hunting, canoeing in a river, and swimming in a lake. The mountain air was fresh and we felt the beauty of nature every days. This continued until the last day of our trip when my cousin, Hector, saw some smoke on the horizon. Before we knew it, we were surrounded by a fire and it was hard to breathe due to the smokes. We even saw a few wild animal running away from the fire. It was frightening. Fortunately, one firefighters came quickly to the forest. They ran to our location and rescued us from danger. We lost a great number of expensive things in the fire, for example, our car and our tent, so it took a great number of money to replace everything, but we were alive.
We will always remember the firefighters’ bravery and how they saved our lives.
A Wildfire to Remember (Partner B)
One of the scariest stories from my childhood is about the times I survived a wildfire with my family in a California forest. I had gone camping with my families for one weeks in this forest. It was my first camping trips ever. We did many things like fishing, hiking, hunting, canoeing in a river, and swimming in a lake. The mountain airs was fresh and we felt the beauty of nature every day. This continued until the last day of our trip when my cousin, Hector, saw a few smoke on the horizon. Before we knew it, we were surrounded by a fire and it was hard to breathe due to the smoke. We even saw a few wild animals running away from the fire. It was frightening. Fortunately, some firefighters came quickly to the forest. They ran to our location and rescued us from dangers. We lost a great number of expensive thing in the fire, for example, our car and our tent, so it took a great deal of money to replace everything, but we were alive. We will always remember the firefighters’ braverys and how they saved our lives.
The 2017 PanSIG Journal 93
Appendix D - Revised focus and details activity Focus and Details Activity
Instructions: The paragraph below got a very bad grade in the "Focus and Details" section of the rubric. The teacher wrote question words over each section where information is missing. Read the paragraph and talk with a partner about what kind of information is missing.
For example:
S1: Why do you think the teacher asks this "Who" question?
S2: Because the student didn't write his partner's name.
S1: I think so too.
Who? Where?
My festival and his festival are similar and different. My festival is the Onsen festival and his
Where? What?
festival is the Tenjin festival. First, the festivals are similar in food. Both festivals sell similar festival food.
Secondly, they are similar about activities because they both have a water race. However, the Onsen How? How?
festival’s race is about going to onsens and the Tenjin festival race is about boats on the river.
Finally, When?
they are different in history. The Onsen festival started a long time ago, but the Tenjin festival started a
When? How?
longer time ago. In conclusion, the Onsen and Tenjin festivals are the same, but also different.
The 2017 PanSIG Journal 94
Appendix E
The 2017 PanSIG Journal 95
Appendix F
The 2017 PanSIG Journal 96
Author Biography
Kent David Jones is a lecturer at the Center for Language Education at Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific Univeristy, Beppu, Japan. He has taught ESL at universities and colleges in Canada, as well as EFL in universities in Japan. His curriculum development and research work is largely related to writing, particularly feedback.
The 2017 PanSIG Journal 97
Parents' Interpretation of the Hafu Referent
Tenesha Kanai Osaka City Board of Education teneshachin@gmail.com
Most parents of mixed-race children living in Japan recognize the inescapably mainstream usage of the word hafu in reference to their children. This study therefore investigated parents’ interpretation and perception of the word hafu as used within Japan to describe their children’s appearance and whether parents’
interpretation affected their strategies in raising their children in Japanese society. Nine parents living in the Kansai and Chubu area participated in a semi-structured interview. Thematic analysis revealed four major themes: rejection, acceptance, reluctant acceptance, and deliberate racial socialization. Parents in the study recognized that because others see their children as different, they must make an effort to teach messages that racially socialize them. This research can be useful for new parents or intercultural couples thinking about settling and starting families in Japan.
日本に住む人種の異なる親の間から生まれた子供の大部分の親は、わが子に対してハーフ という言葉が必然的に主流であることを認識しています。本稿では、日本で用いられてい るハーフの言葉の解釈と認識を調査し、両親の解釈が日本社会における子育て方針に影響 を及ぼしているかどうかを議論しました。関西と中部エリアに住む 9 人の両親が、半構造 化面接に参加しました。テーマ別分析では、拒絶、受け入れる、消極的受け入れ、意図的 な人種社会化の 4 つの主要テーマに分かれました。研究対象の親は、他人が自分のハーフ の子供を生粋の日本人とは異なると見なすため、様々な人種の人たちと触れ合う必要を教 える努力をしなければならないことを認識しています。この研究は、新しい親や異文化の カップルが日本の家族を持つことについて考えるときに役立つと言えます。
Embracement of multiethnic and multicultural people in Japan has seen slow and there have been varied reactions throughout history (Tửrngren, 2017).These slow and varied reactions have been influenced by an education system that emphasizes similarities rather than differences (Okano &
Tsuchiya, 1999). Among individuals in Japan, homogeneity and conformity are valued and individuals who are different in any way are considered “less Japanese” and even “non- Japanese” (Oikawa & Yoshida, 2007). Children with one Japanese and one non-Japanese parent are a good case in point. The visible differences in the appearance of some of these children have determined different attitudes by multiethnic people themselves, as well as how people and society treat them as belonging to neither the minority nor the majority (Oshima, 2014). One way in which they are excluded from the majority is by the most commonly used
label in present day Japan “hafu” (“half Japanese”; Greer, 2003; Kamada, 2005; Oshima, 2014). Greer (2003) stated that although the hafu referent “enjoys many positive nuances, conferring on its recipient cosmopolitan qualities of internationalism, elite bilingualism and worldly experience”
(p. 18), some parents and their multiethnic children have contested and rejected this explicit ethnic categorization.
Many recipients of the hafu referent believe, when it is used by a Japanese speaker, the label constitutes “half Japanese-ness”
or “foreignness,” which some parents and their multiethnic children see as positioning multiethnic individuals in a subtractive manner (Greer, 2003; Kamada, 2005).
When individuals are described as hafu, they may be stereotyped in Japanese talk as gaijin [foreigner], lacking knowledge of Japanese culture, language, and sociocultural norms. (Kamada, 2005; Kashiwazaki, 2009). This may
The 2017 PanSIG Journal 98 influence some multiethnic individuals to hide their true
identities and attempt to pass themselves as Japanese because they want to fit in, as many only know Japan as their homes.
Almonte-Acosta (2008) interviewed 30 Japanese-Filipino children in Japan. Twenty-seven of the 30 children wished to be identified as only Japanese and not as Japanese-Filipino.
Participants described and identified themselves as Japanese by virtue of being born and raised in Japan and only understanding Japanese. The children in the study were believed to have internalized the ubiquitous theme of conformity in Japan: that being different was not always valued (Almonte-Acosta, 2008). Similar behavior was seen in another group of multiethnic children who preferred to hide their non-Japanese identities to fit in: Takeshita (2010) interviewed 59 Japanese-Brazilian children who revealed that they idealized English over their heritage language and tried to pass as Japanese or hide their identities.
Multiethnic individuals in Japan are not given the ability to identify as persons from more than one ethnic background (Shigematsu-Murphy, 2001). This can be problematic for many parents and their children who want to identify as Japanese or as a multiethnic individual, and the use of labels such as hafu can only seem to further marginalize and discourage them from choosing an ethnic identity. Some parents have tried to correct the negative nuance of this term and coined the term daubaru (“double”) as an alternative and more idealistic term than hafu. However, the term has failed to catch on in Japanese vernacular and hafu is used by many Japanese and non-Japanese. With this paper, therefore, I seek to add to the literature on the hafu referent in Japan by interviewing parents about their perceptions and interpretations of the term hafu when used to describe their multiethnic children.
Theoretical Background
In this paper, Day’s (1998) framework of negotiating identities and the concept of being ascribed and resisting an ethnic identity will be incorporated. In Day’s study investigating linguistic ethnic group categorization at two work places in Sweden consisting of a large number of immigrants, he showed how people were categorized into ethnic groups and described ways in which people resisted
ethnic categorization.According to Day, ‘ethnic group’
categorizations were often…treated as inappropriate and were contested.’ (pp.154) He further found that, individuals may react against the categorization altogether since these categories and who they apply to are contestable in themselves.Day found five ways in which resistance to ethnic group categorization was done verbally at the two workplaces he studied: (a) one can dismiss the relevance of the category;
(b) one can minimize the supposed “difference” between categories; (c) one can reconstitute the category so that one is excluded; (d) one can ethnify the ethnifier; and (e) one can resist “ethnification” by actively avoiding it. Although Day’s study wasn’t conducted in the context of Japan, it, however, shed some light on being categorized and labelled. In this paper, I assume that parents interpret the term hafu in different ways when used towards their children. I also assume that their interpretations will have an impact on their parenting strategies. The first place children learn the meaning of race and racial labels is within the family (Roth, 2005). Therefore, parents’ interpretation of the term will be passed on to their children. This study will seek to answer the following two questions:
1. How do parents interpret the label hafu when used to describe their children?
2. How do parents’ interpretation affect the strategies taken in raising their children in Japanese society?
Method
Participants
Nine parents living in the Kansai and Chubu areas in Japan participated in the study. Participants consisted of one Japanese, one Canadian, one British, one Italian, three Jamaicans, one Australian, and one American. The median age was 35 years old. Eight participants were married and one was single and they all had children below the age of 5. Parents with children under the age of 5 were selected because of the newness of their parenting journey, and initial thoughts and strategies could be communicated. Moreover, only parents with biologically related mixed-race children participated in the study. Therefore, a purposive sampling method was used to recruit participants.
The 2017 PanSIG Journal 99
Procedure
A semistructured interview was developed for the study. The interview focused on three areas of parents’ interpretation of the hafu label: (a) frequency of use of the term hafu towards their children; (b) parents’ interpretation of the term; and (c) its impact on their parenting goals. Examples of the questions include the following:
What do you know about the label hafu?
How often is it used to describe your child?
How do you feel when you hear this word used to describe your child?
How does your interpretation of the term hafu impact the values instilled in your child?
A total of 16 questions were asked. Interviews were conducted at a mutually agreed-upon location. The interviews were recorded with a digital audio recording device and were transcribed verbatim. All names were changed to protect participants’ identities.
Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data.
Thematic analysis is the process of “identifying, analyzing and reporting patterns [themes] within interviews” (Braun &
Clarke, 2006, p.79). Each interview was read several times line by line before the initial themes were created. Memos were created to keep track of significant events, concepts, and ideas. Initial codes were created during the data analysis.
Themes were developed and defined to represent participants’
interpretations of their experiences.
Results
Four major themes emerged from the analysis of parents’
interpretation of the hafu referent and the influence of their interpretation on their parenting strategies. The themes were rejection, acceptance, reluctant acceptance, and deliberate racial socialization.
Rejection
The theme rejection refers to parents’ interpreting the term as either an inaccurate description of their children or a term that connotes differences or excludes their children from being considered Japanese. Parents who saw hafu as an inaccurate description believed that the label limits the true nature and complexity of their children’s ethnicities and diverse backgrounds. One parent explained, “I think they
must use a more encompassing word because I think the word hafu neglects one side of the parent” (Tina). Similarly, another parent said, “I believe it’s too broad and simplistic. I would rather her identify with all of her racial identities so … I don’t want her to just be in this box that’s half when she is more than just hafu” (Aiko). Parents also spoke passionately about using a term that was more inclusive and highlighted their children’s multiethnicity. One parent mentioned, “I would prefer the term ‘mixed’ as opposed to hafu. If I know the person, I let them know he is mixed and not half and that he is a whole person, just with parents from two different nationalities” (Kelly).
Other parents interpreted the term as connoting distinction between their children and general population.
One parent described her child as Japanese and believes that the term is unhealthy and unhelpful for her child. The parent said, “I feel like hafu is kind of dividing you from Japanese.
She has Japanese nationality, so she is not hafu; she is Japanese”
(Yuki). The parent went on to describe an occasion when she was questioned about whether her child was Japanese because of her daughter’s appearance:
A woman asked me, “Are you Japanese?”
Then she asked about her: “Is she Japanese?”
I said, “Yes.” She said again, “No. Is she Japanese?” I said “Yes! She is Japanese.” I don’t know. If I’m Japanese, then of course she is Japanese. It’s difficult to make people understand. (Yuki)
Acceptance
The theme of acceptance consists of parents’ interpretation of the term as a positive linguistic discourse. For these parents, the term was complimentary and empowering for their children. One parent reported, “I take it like a compliment, as I think he has got something more, right? Like having half vanilla and half chocolate ice cream. It’s better than having just vanilla ice cream” (Liz). Another parent said, “My wife said it’s actually a compliment to say that a baby is [hafu] even if you know both parents are Japanese” (Andrew).
Some parents explained that some Japanese were fascinated and intrigued by mixed-race children because their features were different than those of the majority. One parent listed