Introduction
English is regularly perceived to be the global language that is used for cross-cultural communication by people from around the world (e.g., Crystal, Reference Crystal2003). Following international trends, English has exerted a presence in the cultures, languages, and interactional patterns of the peoples of Asia (Kachru, Reference Kachru1998: 91). The status afforded English native and near-native speakers reflects the perceived importance and interpersonal functionality of English in the region, and efforts by Asian governments to teach English at younger ages, as well as the demand for English ability by corporations, the media, and individuals, demonstrate its perceived instrumentality. In spite of the presumption of usefulness, there have been surprisingly few studies investigating Asian learners' perceptions of and decision to use English in specific settings. There is also a need for research that extends beyond individual countries to include pan-Asian issues, particularly in the “lesser-researched expanding-circle societies, including … Japan … [and] Thailand” (Bolton, Reference Bolton2008: 9). In order to address this gap in the literature and inform discussions about the comparability of students across Asian Expanding Circle countries, the aim of the present study is to compare and contrast how students in one Southeast Asian Expanding Circle country (i.e., Thailand) and one East Asian Expanding Circle country (i.e., Japan) view the usefulness of English to their lives.
Background: Comparability of the two countries
There are several important similarities that facilitate a comparison between the attitudes of university students in Japan and Thailand. To begin with, applying Kachru's Concentric Circles framework, both countries are in the Expanding Circle, where English functions as a foreign rather than a first or second language. Neither country was colonized by Britain, nor is English an official language in either country. English use in these countries is norm-dependent (Kachru, Reference Kachru2005), with “standards set by native speakers in the Inner Circle” (Jenkins, Reference Jenkins2003: 16). Crystal (Reference Crystal2003: 4) notes that for a language to be considered global it must be “made a priority in a country's foreign-language teaching, even though this language has no official status,” and this is certainly the case in Thailand and Japan.
A second commonality, therefore, is the mandatory English education in the two countries. To begin with, both countries have incorporated English education into the curriculum for over sixty years (Darasawang, Reference Darasawang and Prescott2007; Schneider, Reference Schneider2011). Secondly, neither country has a bilingual education system, so for most students, English is taught as a foreign language. A third point of comparison is the importance of English on the university entrance examinations. It is required on the Thai National University Entrance Examination (Darasawang, Reference Darasawang and Prescott2007), and 98.9% of the Japanese students who take the Japanese National Center Examination take the English test (National Center for University Entrance Examinations, 2014). However, neither the Thai National University Entrance Examination (Darasawang, Reference Darasawang and Prescott2007; Jianrattanapong, Reference Jianrattanapong2011) nor most Japanese university entrance exams (Commission on the Development of Foreign Language Proficiency, 2011) include writing or speaking sections. Instead, grammar and receptive skills (i.e., reading and listening) tend to be emphasized; secondary English education tends to be devoted to grammar and reading comprehension (Darasawang, Reference Darasawang and Prescott2007; Commission on the Development of Foreign Language Proficiency, 2011). It is thus not surprising that a fourth similarity is the negative backwash effect of the entrance examination system. Finally, both countries share a “grave anxiety about their national proficiency in English” which has led to a variety of educational reforms in the past 10 years (Graddol, Reference Graddol2006: 95).
Objective measures of English ability are difficult to obtain, but international test results demonstrate further similarities between the two countries. The average TOEFL and TOEIC scores were almost the same (Bolton, Reference Bolton2008; Educational Testing Service, 2013: 5, 27), and the average TOEIC listening scores (284 in Japan, 280 in Thailand) were higher than the reading scores (229 and 219, respectively). One caveat of these comparisons is that the purposes for taking the tests differ between the two countries (Educational Testing Service, 2013: 5, 27).
Differences
Notwithstanding the comparability of the two countries, there are also two differences that must be considered. First, the number of years of education varies (see Table 1). Second, Japanese mandatory English education begins in upper elementary school with vague outcome expectations (e.g., “To experience the joy of communication in the foreign language” Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT): Japan, n.d.: 1), while Thai students who have completed elementary grade 3 are expected to, among other things, “be able to use foreign languages (focus on listening and speaking) to communicate about themselves, their families, schools, their surrounding environment, foods, beverages, free time and recreation around 300–450 words (concrete words)” (Thailand Ministry of Education, 2008: 268).
Table 1: Thai and Japanese education systems compared
Sources: Central Intelligence Agency, 2013; Thailand Ministry of Education, 2012; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), International Bureau of Education, 1999: 6; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), International Bureau of Education, n.d.
The research
A questionnaire exploring attitudes toward English as an International Language, perceived English use, and barriers to cross-cultural communication was developed for a five-year, thirteen country study. In each country, the questionnaire was administered in the students' first language after going through a translation-back translation process before being given to several in-country professors to ensure students would understand the language. The questionnaire was administered with the assistance of professors in each country; administration occurred primarily during language courses taken by students from various majors (for example, freshman English). Participation was voluntary, and students were allowed to opt out of answering the questionnaire if they did not wish to participate. International students were excluded from the study. Interviews supplemented the questionnaire data by providing more detailed responses and explanations. The interviews allowed the researchers to move beyond the quantitative statistics and develop explanations about the similarities and differences between groups of students.
In Japan, completed questionnaires were collected from 1,141 tertiary first-year students (59.6% male, 40.2% female, 0.2% no response). While the majority indicated they were “18 years old or younger” (74.5%), 23.0% of the students said they were “19–20 years old,” with the remaining 2.5% of the students indicating ages older than 20. Approximately 30% of the students said they had been to another country. Interviews with 29 students supplemented the data and provided explanations for students' choices.
Of the 1,193 students who completed the questionnaire in Thailand, 33.0% were male, 69.6% were female, and 0.4% did not respond. The students were studying in seven distinct areas of the country. The Thai students were slightly older than their Japanese counterparts, with 18.4% indicating “18 or younger,” 76.9% saying “19–20 years old,” and the remaining students selecting other ages. Over 25% of the students said they had been to another country. Interviews in either Thai with translation or English were conducted with 107 of the students who had completed the questionnaire.
In both Japan and Thailand, the majority were freshmen (100.0% and 95.1%, respectively). The decision to focus on freshmen was made for several reasons. First, by determining the entering students' beliefs, university instructors may better address students' needs during the remaining years of post-secondary education. Second, during university, tertiary education is aimed at developing global citizens who are prepared to engage in “unprecedented ways with the global community, collaboratively and competitively” (Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2007: 15). To facilitate this latter goal, it is imperative that instructors comprehend students' unconscious attitudes toward English and potential barriers that may limit their cross-cultural communication.
Results and discussion
Current ability
Students were asked which foreign language(s) they currently had the ability to speak. As Table 2 demonstrates, the proportion of Thai students who asserted they could speak English was significantly larger than the number of Japanese students. A Japanese student who did not choose any languages explained, “With English I think I can have some contact and communication, but I'm not good at English.” In spite of over six years of English education, more than a few students did not have enough confidence to say they spoke English, indicating that teachers could provide more opportunities for students, particularly in Japan, to gain confidence in speaking English.
Table 2: Languages students can speak (% response)
Statistically significant differences. p < 0.0001, df = 2.
1 x2 = 81.531, 2 x2 = 74.860
Perceived importance of English in own country
When asked which foreign language(s) were most useful to be able to speak in their country, the overwhelming response from participants was “English.” Not only was this answer given by 95.9% of the Thai students and 84.7% of the Japanese students, but 64.2% and 51.8% of the students, respectively, chose only English. During the interviews, the students gave three main reasons when explaining their selection. The most often mentioned was that English is an international language. For instance, a first-year Thai psychology major asserted, “Everybody in the world accept that English is the main language.” Second, students discussed the facilitation of communication since English is a lingua franca with foreigners both inside and outside of their country. For example, one Japanese student observed, “many people use it to communicate as a second or other language, so if we can speak English the number of people we can speak with is much greater. Even if we can't speak their first language, we can communicate through English.” One Thai student majoring in English noted, “Like in Europe they know they have to learn more than one or two languages, but for me, it's like, ‘OK English is enough.’” Finally, students noted the economic impact of English and communication in business. Thai students also mentioned communication with foreign investors and the importance of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Economic Community (AEC), which will create a region with the free movement of goods and labour when it is fully integrated at the end of 2015 (ASEAN Secretariat, 2014). One student pointed out, “English is the universal language, so I think in Thailand in the two following years we have to join ASEAN community and all ten countries use English as official language, so English is most important for Thai people.”
More Thai than Japanese students felt English is the most useful language in their own country, and during the interviews, two main factors emerged. In Thailand, English is important for tourism (Schneider, Reference Schneider2011), which contributed 16.7% of the kingdom's GDP (WTTC, 2013), and many Thai students mentioned using English with visitors and tourists. For example, a pre-med student noted, “Because in Thailand, the people learn English from childhood to adult. And tourists are foreigner, so we speak English to them.” In contrast, 6.9% of Japan's GDP comes from tourism (WTTC, 2014), and students mentioned tourists much less frequently. In fact, one student reflected on the lack of foreign visitors. “Recently I've been thinking about working in the prefectural government to work some way to bring lots of foreign tourists to [the area].” Perhaps even more important, in Thailand, the students and teachers are at an historic crossroads (Sangarun, Reference Sangarun2013). As Thailand continues to prepare for the AEC, Thais are considering both the positive and negative consequences of the free movement of labour (Saraithong & Chancharoenchai, Reference Saraithong and Chancharoenchai2012). The media, researchers, and the public are discussing the functions of English as well as the citizens' ability to use it (Loima, Reference Loima2014). There have also been calls for the government to place more priority on English (“Poll: Thailand,” 2013). It is, therefore, not surprising that during the interviews the Thai students frequently mentioned ASEAN, the AEC, and the need to be able to communicate in English with people from various ASEAN countries. In Japan, however, the functions of English may be, to use Kachru's term (2005: 75), more “invisible.” Unlike Thailand, in Japan, English is less often used for trade or commerce, and no sudden potential influx of foreigners is pending. Consequently, a sense of urgency to obtain English skills may be missing in Japan.
The results of the questionnaire indicate that Chinese was a distant second choice in both countries (32.6% of Thai and 38.5% of Japanese students). Although nearly four times as many Thai students said they could speak Chinese (Table 2), more than twice as many Japanese students (7.2% rather than 3.0% of Thai students) selected it as the only useful language in their home country. The reasons for choosing it were often similar to the choice of English. However, unlike English, many of the conversations focused on one specific country, China, with students viewing the Chinese language as a means of communication with Chinese people. The importance of both China and its economy were also frequently mentioned. One Japanese freshman noted, “Now China is really growing quickly … so for example in business and other things it will be necessary in the future.” An interview with a Thai freshman majoring in agriculture included the following observations:
Student I am very focused on China because it is a very large country so it has many people, so it will have a big impact for Thailand.
Interviewer What kind of impact?
Student Jobs.
Interviewer How about movies or TV or music or food or culture?
Student It may have some effect but not much.
Importance in Southeast Asia
Trialling of the questionnaire revealed that many students were unfamiliar with the location of and countries in Southeast Asia and East Asia. As a result, the final questionnaire incorporated some countries' names in the questionnaire items. Students were asked, “In Southeast Asia (Malaysia, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, etc.), which foreign language(s) do you think is/are the most useful to be able to speak?” Both groups of students asserted that English was the most useful language (Table 3). While 61.2% of the Thai students marked only English, the Japanese students had more diversity in their responses, with 40.8% choosing only English. Comparing students' responses for their home country and Southeast Asia, significantly fewer students selected English for the latter (Japanese students: p < 0.0001, df = 1, x2 = 68.272; Thai students: p < 0.0001, df = 1, x2 = 13.937).
Table 3: Useful languages in Southeast Asia (more than 15% response)
Statistically significant at p < 0.0001, df = 1.
1 x2 = 188.624, 2 x2 = 55.283, 3 x2 = 97.820, 4 x2 = 68.421
When asked to explain their preference for English, both the Thai and Japanese students' explanations emphasized cross-cultural communication. The students talked about how English is used all over Southeast Asia, with one Thai English major observing, “I think the custom is this: the system says it is international and useful and everyone should study [English]. Just we have to study it.” Although absent from Japanese students' discussions, Thai students also pointed out that people in Malaysia, Singapore, and Indonesia speak more English than they do.
Once again, the second most popular choice was Chinese. The Japanese students most often referred to Chinese as a language for communication. In contrast, Thai students tended to give three main reasons during the interviews. First, they focused on Chinese business and trading. For instance, one student observed, “China provides many exports. It's industrial country. If we want to buy something from China, we need to speak Chinese.” Another student asserted, “Chinese is one of the most powerful country in the world.” A second reason frequently given by the Thai students was the current population of China and the number of people who can speak Chinese both inside and outside of China. One Thai freshman, for example, pointed out that many people in Southeast Asia speak Chinese as a second language. During the interviews, a third recurring reason was the growth to-date and the projected continued expansion of China and the importance of the language.
As Table 3 demonstrates, proportionately more Japanese students chose other languages besides English and Chinese, resulting in statistically significant differences between the two groups of students. One Japanese student explained, “I should use their language if I'm in their country.” Since students did not have the ability to speak these languages, they were asked to explain, to which they indicated they would study before going. Thai students explained their selection of other languages by talking about frequency of use (Malay), inclusion in ASEAN (Indonesian, Thai, Vietnamese), and the ability to speak it (Thai).
Importance in East Asia
In response to the question, “In East Asia (Japan, China, Korea), which foreign language(s) do you think is/are the most useful to be able to speak?” the most popular response was once again English (Table 4), with students mentioning its function as an international language. Compared with the previous two items, fewer students (41.8% of Thai and 31.1% of Japanese students) selected English as the only useful language. When asked why she chose only English, one Japanese student explained, “Because people in Japan, China, and Korea all study English a lot.” A Thai student provided a similar explanation. “Japan, Korea, China, they use English to communicate with each other.” There were, however, several Thai students who had stronger opinions. One student declared English to be useful “to cross borders since people believe in their own language.” Another referred to English as a “middle language,” noting it can overcome “strong nationalism [because] they think their language is number one.”
Table 4: Useful languages in East Asia (more than 15% response)
Statistically significant at p < 0.0001, df = 1.
1 x2 = 17.508, 2 x2 = 22.094, 3 x2 = 23.796, 4 x2 = 70.611
Chinese was again the second most popular choice. Thai students once again cited Chinese industry all over the world and the number of Chinese people as the main motivators. When discussing the spread of the Chinese language, one Thai English major pondered, “One thing surprise me about China is they don't force people to learn their language and culture, but use by expanding people around the world … so they will impact, influence in that way.” While talking about East Asia, Thai students referred to historical factors more often than during discussions about their own countries and Southeast Asia. A Thai pre-med student asserted, “Japan and Korea is from China and their language is similar.” Likewise, a Thai tourism and hotel management student said, “Because I think the history of China, Japan, and Korea, they had the conflict before and I asked my Chinese friend before did you know the Japanese or little Korean, and they tell me they know a few words because of history. But some of them, they don't want to know because my Chinese friend doesn't like Japanese because of the conflict.”
Although Chinese was the second most popular response, there were two differences between the Japanese students' responses for East Asia and the previously discussed questionnaire items. First, Japanese students picked English almost as often as Chinese, resulting in no statistically significant difference in the choice of English and Chinese in East Asia (p < 0.001, df = 1, x2 = 4.931). One student explained, “There are many different tribes in China but there is unity in the one Chinese language. Of course Cantonese is different, but the groups are united with Chinese. If there is a group you can use the language with and you study the language, it's good because you can expand who you can talk with … To be useful, the language should be used by many.” Second, each of the East Asian languages was selected by more than one-quarter of the Japanese students, resulting in the greatest diversity of the three regions on the questionnaire (i.e., home country, Southeast Asia, East Asia). One Japanese education major explained her choice of more useful languages in East Asia than Southeast Asia when observing, “Japanese and Korean are really popular and well known in East Asia.”
Implications
It has been suggested that Chinese could replace English as an international lingua franca, but the Japanese and Thai university students' selection of Chinese was dwarfed by their choice of English for all three regions investigated: the students' home country, Southeast Asia, and East Asia. The degree of agreement varied, however, by region. Students were most positive about the usefulness of English in their own country and least certain about East Asia (Table 5). Although over 60% of the Thai students thought only English is useful in Thailand and Southeast Asia, significantly fewer (41.8%) felt English was the only useful language in East Asia (p < 0.0001, df = 2, x2 = 142.642). Likewise, compared to the 40–50% of the Japanese students who indicated English was the only useful language in Japan and Southeast Asia, significantly fewer (31.1%) picked only English for East Asia (p < 0.0001, df = 2, x2 = 100.886).
Table 5: Attitudes toward English (% response)
Statistically significant at p < 0.0001, df = 2.
1 x2 = 383.361, 2 x2 = 148.522
When asked why they had chosen a language, students consistently equated usefulness with cross-cultural communication. This suggests that, in spite of the emphasis on grammar in secondary English classes and the negative backwash effect of the university entrance examination systems, students view English not just as an academic subject but also as a real language with practical uses. During the English educational reforms in both countries in the past 10 years, the Ministries of Education have emphasized the need to further develop communicative ability (Thailand Ministry of Education, 2008; Commission on the Development of Foreign Language Proficiency, 2011). The findings of the current study suggest that students do view English as a means of communication, but are less certain about the practicality of using English outside their country, particularly in East Asia. There is, therefore, a need to expose students to ways in which English is used in other countries. Classroom discussions could incorporate the uses of English in East Asian countries, including information such as the fact that English is the official language of Japanese companies such as Bridgestone, Rakuten, and Fast Retailing, which owns the clothing brand Uniqlo (Einhorn, Reference Einhorn2013). In addition, there is a need to incorporate more Asian non-native speakers, particularly East Asian speakers, into English study materials and classroom discussions so students will be exposed to their English accents, realize the usefulness of English, and be better prepared for future English interactions.
Conclusion
This study explored Thai and Japanese students' perceptions of the usefulness of English in the students' home country, Southeast Asia, and East Asia and found Thai and Japanese first-year university students had similar perceptions of the usefulness of English, always picking it the most often. Students indicated that they believe English is an international language that facilitates communication and noted that it is studied in various countries. They also discussed the economic impact of using English and its importance in business. More Thai than Japanese students were likely to select English as a useful language, and when explaining their choices, the Thai students provided more reasons. For example, the Thai students talked about foreign investors, the impact of the pending AEC, and communication within the ASEAN block. The study also found that students were most divided about the usefulness of English in East Asia.
The two Expanding Circle countries of Japan and Thailand have many similarities when it comes to English education, so in one sense, it may not be surprising that students' attitudes were similar. However, the amount of agreement between students in the two countries was significantly different, suggesting the need to explore learners' opinions in other East and Southeast Asian countries to better understand how East and Southeast Asian students, as a whole, feel about the usefulness of English. ■
Acknowledgements
The study discussed in this paper was partially funded by a five-year Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research Grant, 基盤研究（Ｂ）22401028.
The author would like to thank the numerous instructors who assisted him with questionnaire distribution in Japan and the following, without whose help the Thai data could not have been collected: Dr Nopporn Sarobol (Thammasat University, Bangkok Campus), Dr Unchalee Sermsongsawad (Chiang Mai University), Dr Suchada Nimmannit (Chulalongkorn University), Dr Anamai Damnet and Mr Piyapong Laosrirattanachai (Kasetsart University, Kamphaeng Saen Campus), Ms Aungsu-orn Na Nongkhai (Khon Kaen University, Nong Khai Campus), Dr Pragasit Sitthitikul (Walailak University), and Ms Narada Ruthirago (Rajamangala University of Technology Isan).
SCOTT MENKING is a Professor in the Department of English and European Languages and Culture at Shimane University, Japan. He has just completed a five-year research project, partially funded by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS), investigating the choice of English for communication in Asia. His research interests include international communication in Asia, sociolinguistics, curriculum design, and study abroad, incorporating the promotion of exchange agreements between universities. Email: smenking@soc.shimane-u.ac.jp
[Overview of the Fiscal Year 2014 National Center for University Entrance Examinations’ Results].’Online at < 
