Bloomberg’s William Pesek on Japan’s (lack of) English ability, and why it hurts competition

12 Responses to “Bloomberg’s William Pesek on Japan’s (lack of) English ability, and why it hurts competition”

1. MS on April 27th, 2008 12:20 am

   This is a significant issue for Japan and it’s international standing. The idea of Tokyo being a finance hub is still far-fetched. The Tokyo Stock Exchange is not having an easy time getting foreign firms listed. Tax laws and accounting standards need to be brought in line with international standards.

2. Matt Dioguardi on April 28th, 2008 5:07 am

   The problem as always is that people want the state to coerce people into doing the right thing.

   Think about it. Education is mandatory. Although enforcement is lax, you *must* go.

   But put that all aside, just focus on English. There are students who really want to learn English and would excel if given a good program to follow, and there are all those students who don’t really want to study English but are put in the same classes. So you’ve got these really motivated students being held back by these students who don’t want to really be there. Not only this, but the resources needed to teach English are stretched so thin, the classes aren’t particularly good. In fact, they’re pretty bad.

   Oh, i guess that’s cause there’s something about being *Japanese* that keeps one from learning English. It must be DNA or something. (At least I have people tell this to me all the time in half seriousness.)

   Do you begin to see what I am talking about?

   If English were an elective and the number of people studying it diminished, the quality of the teaching could be vastly improved. Gasp, some people might actually learn it.

   Does anyone really care what’s good for *Japan*? How about what’s good for the individual. If English is useful for some individuals then they will seek out ways to learn it. However, currently these individuals are thwarted by a state which wants to mass produce English speakers.

   Note, Mr. Pesek says:
   “I feel a bit uncomfortable tackling this issue. Arguing Japanese need to learn English might strike some as an attempt to advance America’s cultural hegemony.”

   Yeah, right. He sees things in terms of states and what are good for them. Not in terms of individual needs. As one individual to another individual, how could he not endorse English? But as an *American* talking to a *Japanese* he feels hesitant.

   Listen to him here:
   “The longer any nation resists the need to improve its English skills, the more it limits its potential.”

   Nations can’t improve English. Sorry, but this is sickening. He’s endorsing the problem, not the solution.

   I realize he talks a little against patriotism and so on, but he notes that maybe there’s a happy medium between culture and English … say what? For who? For the nation?

   Give me a break. Sorry to disagree so completely, but far from excellent, I’d say the article is foul ball.

3. J on April 28th, 2008 12:34 pm

   good article but just as Japan couldn’t get its act together on getting rid of bad loans, they are doing the same with English language. The argument that they will “lose” Japanese language ability is just garbage. Look at how many kids learn 3-5 languages as they grow up. The best thing to do is stop diddle dallying (is that even a word?) around and make them learn it from the get-go. This will force them to be bilingual and learn both together. That’s it.

4. OperationNorthwoods on April 28th, 2008 3:41 pm

   Not a bad article. It didn’t get into a related issue, though, and that’s the need for improving Chinese ability. The US empire is coming to an end, and China is on the rise. It’s not likely that the Chinese are going to want to do business in English for much longer, at least when dealing with countries in their backyard.

5. Ken Worsley on April 28th, 2008 5:02 pm

   Matt, I do think you’re right in that the nationality of the person giving advice and the person the advice is targeted for shouldn’t matter. But we’ve seen so much nationalistic defensiveness and rallying around flags recently that it’s inevitable to come up.

   I think you have some great points, especially about the roles of individuals and the state’s obligation to provide education. I’m going to have to get to them when I don’t have a mountain of work here in front of me! Thanks.

6. Milo on April 28th, 2008 10:11 pm

   Matt:

   Does anyone really care what’s good for *Japan*? How about what’s good for the individual. If English is useful for some individuals then they will seek out ways to learn it. However, currently these individuals are thwarted by a state which wants to mass produce English speakers.

   This is the twist I don’t get. It seems that if Japan’s English classes are such low quality, as you say, then the state really isn’t looking to “mass produce English speakers”.

   I agree with you that what goes on at the JHS and HS level is for the most part a waste of time. However, that opportunity must be given because of the importance of English as a global business language. What happens when a kid graduates from uni and decides to seek a job with a foreign firm, or a job that might need some English, but hasn’t had any schooling in the language? It’s too late!

   There is a balance between what the individual wants or needs and what is good for the nation. I wonder how much of the education system anywhere is “good for the nation” if we pick it apart.

   Quality English education, like any other subject, should be offered in schools from day one. This would benefit everyone.

   Ken:

   But we’ve seen so much nationalistic defensiveness and rallying around flags recently that it’s inevitable to come up.

   I don’t like your justification for the excuse of political correctness. Do you think that caveat was thrown in the essay just becuase it had to be? Did an editor stick it in? (I doubt it, given the wording) Opinions are opinions, and should not be shielded by, or defended from the passport that one happens to hold.

7. Ken Worsley on April 29th, 2008 12:49 am

   Milo, I am by no means trying to justify political correctness here. I’m sorry if you got that impression. I was agreeing with Matt that the nationality of one commenter or critic has nothing to do with the argument so long as it is sound and well-reasoned, as Mr Pesek’s article clearly is. At the same time, nationalistic defensiveness is rife, and sometimes one can help oneself by trying to head it off at the pass. Whether or not this brings undue attention to the issue of where one is from is another question.

   A much wiser man than myself once said, “We draw lines and stand behind them. That’s why flags are such ugly things.” The flow and discussion of ideas should have nothing to do with political identity, but we need to recognize that they are often intertwined as such.

8. Matt Dioguardi on April 30th, 2008 5:14 am

   “There is a balance between what the individual wants or needs and what is good for the nation.”

   Milo,

   The nation is just an abstract entity. It’s not a human being with feelings, concerns, and most importantly rights.

   Therefore the nations exist only at the service of the individuals who make up the nation. So what you must be saying is that if something is good for the majority, then it must be good for the minority … or something like that … I really don’t understand.

   You express concern that students won’t learn English if English were an elective. Therefore they should be (ultimately) coerced into learning English. I just don’t see this as necessary. Not *every* one needs to learn English. Clearly if English were an elective, it would still be in high demand. I would suggest that one way to weed out students in a public system would be only allow students who meet certain requirements in preliminary classes the ability to continue on. (Only if you pass English I, do you get to take English II.)

   Anyway, I’m only making a point. In the current environment, this is pure fantasy.

   But going along with what I am saying for a moment here. How about Chinese? Isn’t that an important language for business students in Japan to be learning? Wouldn’t it be nice if some students learned Korean as well? Hey how about Spanish or Portuguese?

   The point is not to try and force a size 6 shoe on everyone because it seems like a good idea for one segment of the population. Instead offer these things as electives, then we might have as a result *more* English speakers, and *more* Chinese speakers.

   Again, to exemplify my point. Think of how thinly stretched JETs are in Japan. If they were only focusing on one segment of the school population, wouldn’t they be used more effectively. As things stand now, teachers who can’t even speak English have to teach it, but what if not everyone had to learn English? Things wouldn’t be spread so thin. The current system is based on the idea that many English teachers will not be able to speak English themselves. This is a mere practical concern, but it also means English is not going to be taught very well.

   I could go on, but had better cut myself off …

9. Milo on May 2nd, 2008 2:02 pm

   Matt:

   The nation is just an abstract entity. It’s not a human being with feelings, concerns, and most importantly rights.

   No, but it is full of them, and it run by those who were elected by them. It is abstract, but it is an organization of people who strive for something together. It is up to their leaders to set the best course of policy, wouldn’t you agree? We don’t live under any other system.

   You express concern that students won’t learn English if English were an elective. Therefore they should be (ultimately) coerced into learning English.

   Coerced is a strong word. I would not use it myself, and did not. But, it would be for the betterment of Japan should more people be functional in the language. Economic benefits should help all members of the society. It should help businesses work better with overseas partners and thus bring in more tax revenue. Is my vision simplistic? Perhaps. But Japan needs to run its education system as though it is part of the global economic system, not as though it is intended to brainwash people into thinking they are part of some ‘unique’ nationalistic identity.

10. Kris on May 17th, 2008 2:59 pm

    Most Japanese people don’t need English on a level approaching fluency. The cost of educating all citizens to that level would be insane. Even if it’s optional, some people are bound to find out later in life that they missed an opportunity. It has to be all or nothing. Either make English fluency a goal of education or don’t. But I think the costs are too high.

11. socrateos on October 9th, 2008 12:34 am

    Ha, ha, ha.

    William Pesek gave up mastering Japanese and wants all Japanese to speak his language, in Japan.

    That will not happen.

12. shor on March 6th, 2009 3:10 pm

    ignorance and arrogance of the west……

Got something to say?