System 42 (2014) 81–92

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

System

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/system

L2 learners’ conceptions of academic reading and themselvesas academic readers

Kota Ohata a,*, Akiko Fukao b,1

a Ferris University, Department of English Literature, 4-5-3 Ryokuen, Izumi-ku, Yokohama 245-8650, Japanb International Christian University, English Language Program, 3-10-2 Osawa, Mitaka-shi, Tokyo 181-8585, Japan

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 28 July 2012Received in revised form 18 November 2013Accepted 18 November 2013

Keywords:Learner conceptionsMetacognitive knowledgeAcademic readingEFL learnersEAPLearner beliefs

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ81 45 812 8265; faE-mail addresses: kohata72@gmail.com (K. Ohat

1 Tel.: þ81 422 33 3369.

0346-251X/$ – see front matter � 2013 Elsevier Ltdhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.11.003

a b s t r a c t

Despite the recent proliferation of L2 research that examines learners’ conceptions abouttheir own learning (i.e., learners’ metacognitive knowledge or beliefs), little research hasbeen conducted to investigate how such conceptions are constructed and developed. Thisexploratory study attempts to describe EFL learners’ conceptions of academic reading andalso themselves as academic readers. Through in-depth interviews with 10 Japanese col-lege students in an intensive EAP setting in Tokyo, Japan, particular focus was placed on (1)how individual learners conceptualize academic reading/readers, and (2) what factorsindividual learners attribute to the development of self-conceptions as academic readers.As represented in the self-reflective accounts of the participants, their conceptions of L2reading have undergone considerable change through the experience of a major transitionfrom traditional EFL to academic, content-based EAP contexts. This suggests that learners’conceptions are constantly being revised or reconstructed as they become more aware ofneeds or expectations in a specific social and educational context.

� 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Studies in the area of second/foreign language learning suggest that learners’ metacognitive awareness is one of the keyfactors in the acquisition of a second language. L2 research that examines learners’ conceptions about their own learning, i.e.,learners’’ metacognitive knowledge or beliefs (Bernat & Gvozdenko, 2005; Graham, 2006; Horwitz, 1999; Kalaja, 2003; Li,2010; Wenden, 1986, 1998; Woods, 2003) has proliferated in recent years, providing insights into the role of learner be-liefs in second language learning, but the scope of such investigations seems to be rather broad, targeting EFL/ESL learners ingeneral.

According to Wenden (1999), “conceptions and beliefs about learning should not be viewed independently of context butrather as functional in a given context of learning” (p. 438). Since research approaches in the field of learner beliefs are mostlyquantitative in orientation (e.g., questionnaire surveys), they often fail to fully recognize the critical importance of the specificcontextual variables in which the learners’ perspectives would naturally unfold (Benson & Lor, 1999; Marton & Ramsden,1988). In addition, there is not much research on whether learner beliefs undergo change over time or how such changeswill become manifested in learner behavior (Bernat, 2008; Dole & Sinatra, 1994). Rather, most of the studies are snapshots oflearners’ beliefs withoutmuch insight into “their functions or theways inwhich they are open to change” (Benson & Lor,1999,p. 460).

x: þ81 45 812 9413.a), akiko.fukao@gmail.com (A. Fukao).

. All rights reserved.

K. Ohata, A. Fukao / System 42 (2014) 81–9282

In reaction to the relative paucity of qualitative research in language learners’ beliefs, this interview-based study seeks toexplore and describe Japanese EFL students’ conceptions or beliefs about their own learning in a 10-month college English forAcademic Purposes (EAP) program in Japan. In the interviews, a particular focus was placed on learners’ reading experiencesand their conceptions/beliefs as emergent L2 academic readers in an attempt to capture the impact of contextual change onthe ways in which learners make sense of or interpret the notion of academic reading.

2. Review of relevant literature

Second language learners’ metacognition and beliefs have been widely recognized and investigated as they have a po-tential impact on language learning processes and experiences. An increasing body of research in the field of SLA suggests acrucial role for learner beliefs in further understanding the nature of learner strategies and designing and implementingappropriate language instruction accordingly (Alanen, 2003; Bernat & Gvozdenko, 2005; Horwitz, 1999; Kalaja, 2003; Li,2010; Wenden, 1998; Woods, 2003). In SLA research, the term “learner beliefs,” often referred to as a component oflearner metacognition (Flavell, 1987), has been used interchangeably for learners’ metacognitive knowledge (Victori, 2004;Wenden, 1998, 1999). Although some scholars such as Wenden (1999) view beliefs as separate from metacognitive knowl-edge, claiming that beliefs are “value-related and tend to be held more tenaciously” (p. 439), there seems to be a generalconsensus that “the importance does not lie in the fact that knowledge differs from beliefs, but that beliefs themselvesconstitute a form of knowledge” (Gabillon, 2005, p. 236). When applied to the context of second language learning, learners’beliefs or metacognitive knowledge represent “the common assumptions that learners hold about themselves as learners,about the nature of language learning, the learning process, variables influencing their learning” (Öz, 2007, p. 54).

Research to date has attempted to identify aspects of metacognitive knowledge. Flavell (1987) argues that the concept ofmetacognition should be expanded to include not only cognitive but also affective variables and classifies metacognitiveknowledge into three functions: person, task and strategy variables. Following on Flavell’s (1979, 1981) three functions ofmetacognitive knowledge, Paris andWinograd (1990) categorized learner beliefs into three core dimensions: agency and self-efficacy, instrumentality, andpurpose. Thefirstdimension (agencyand self-efficacy) roughlycorresponds to Flavell’s (1979,1981)person variables in his categorization of metacognitive knowledge and refers to the role of personal beliefs of competence inaccomplishing a given task (Graham, 2006, p. 297). Flavell’s person variables include the individual’s knowledge and beliefsabout him/herself and others, as shown in the example of a person believing that one ‘can’ learn better by memorizing vo-cabulary items,orhis/her friendcan learn languagesbetterbecausehe/shehasabettermemory (Gabillon, 2005). Inotherwords,one’s beliefs about his/her own abilities or competences (i.e., agency and self-efficacy) encompass the idea of Flavell’s meta-cognitive knowledge about person variables aswell (Graham, 2006). In fact, the concept of self-efficacy, which originates in thetheory of Bandura (1993, 1995), has recently been paid much attention in the literature on second language learning as it wasfound to influence learners’ motivational behavior, especially for its maintenance in the face of difficulties often encounteredduring the learning processes (Dörnyei & Otto,1998; Graham, 2011; Pajares & Schunk, 2002; Tremblay & Gardner, 1995). Otherpsychological constructs relevant to this dimension include self-beliefs, self-concepts, and self-expectancy. In contrast to self-efficiency beliefs, which revolve around the notion of competency (i.e., the ‘can’ question), self-concept beliefs denote “a self-descriptive judgment that includes an evaluation of competence and the feeling of self-worth associated with the judgmentin question” (Pajares & Schunk, 2002, p. 20), reflecting the questions of ‘being’ and ‘feeling’. Similar to self-efficacy beliefs, self-expectancy is also influenced by one’s perception of success in learning and levels of expectancy (Bernat, 2006; Truitt, 1995;Yang, 1999). For instance, if learners have high expectancy to succeed in a certain task, based on a realistic evaluation of theirown competence, such beliefs might help build confidence or, alternatively, help build the feelings of incompetence.

The second dimensional category of metacognitive beliefs proposed by Paris andWinograd (1990) is called instrumentality,which concerns “learners’ perceptions of the relationship between the learning strategies they employ on tasks and learningoutcomes” (as cited in Graham, 2006, p. 297). Such metacognitive awareness also seems to be related to the learners’ sense ofcontrol over their learning (Dickinson,1995). According to Dörnyei and Otto (1998), learners’ control-beliefs are considered tohave a profound impact on learning processes as well as outcomes, assuming that learners who believe they have a sense ofcontrol over the outcome tend to exert more effort toward the process of achieving it than those who do not. As Gabillon(2005, p. 239) notes, learners’ control-beliefs, when combined with a sense of efficacy, may lead to learner self-regulationand autonomy during L2 learning process.

The third core dimension is purpose, which represents “learners’ ability to value success in the subject” (Graham, 2006, p.297). In second language learning, for instance, a learner’s personal evaluation of how important it is to learn a secondlanguage varies among individuals, depending on their specific goal orientations as well as “beliefs about the relativeimportance and interest of the task” (Pintrich & DeGroot, 1990 as cited in Bernat & Gvozdenko, 2005, p. 3). According toCovington (2000), there are two basic types of value orientation: a mastery goal orientation and a performance or ego goalorientation. Mastery goal oriented learners tend to attach importance to the intrinsic value of learning, with the belief that“both effort and effective strategies are important for success” (Covington, 2000 as cited in Graham, 2006, p. 298). On theother hand, learners with a performance goal orientation tend to pursue tangible results, so that they can heighten their senseof self-competence and self-worth, believing that “success is measured in terms of doing better than others, and the mostprized form of achievement is that which is attained without effort” (Jackson, 2003 as cited in Graham, 2006, p. 298).

As seen above, learners’ metacognitive beliefs or conceptions regarding their own learning are complex yet highlyinfluential of learner behavior and the actual language learning process. Most of the studies in this area, however, are quite

K. Ohata, A. Fukao / System 42 (2014) 81–92 83

broad in orientation, aiming to identify a list of general assumptions or beliefs that learners possess on language learning.Specific learner beliefs or conceptions in particular skill areas or contexts of language learning have not yet been fullyexamined, especially from a more descriptive/qualitative perspective. Moreover, although some research indicates thatlearners’ beliefs are relatively constant and stable regardless of external influences (Brown & Palinscar, 1982), it is quiteconceivable that a major contextual change or change of learning environment might have an impact on language learners’experiences and perceptions. Also Wenden (1999) emphasizes the influence of the setting in promoting changes in learnerexpectations and beliefs, with reference to White’s (1999) study on learner expectations in new environmental settings (i.e.,self-instructional learning).

This study adopts a holistic interpretive approach to explore learner beliefs or conceptions; a special focus was placed onEFL learners’ perspectives on L2 reading experiences in a 10-month EAP program. The following two research questions wereposed: (1) how individual learners conceptualize academic reading or readers, and (2) to what factors individual learnersattribute the development of such conceptions. It was assumed that different aspects of readers’ metacognitive knowledgeare influenced by a number of learner-associated variables, such as previous experiences of success or failure as secondlanguage readers, beliefs about L2 learning, or culture-specific instructional practices (Sheorey & Mokhtari, 2001). It was alsoassumed that their beliefs or conceptions are susceptible to change, rather than static and rigid.

3. Methodology

Adopting an interpretive rather than a positivist framework (cf. Denzin & Lincoln, 2003), this study employed qualitative in-depth interviews to answer the research questions posed earlier. The rationale behind the use of interviews as a research in-strument is that it can provide access to things that cannot be directly observed or surveyed in questionnaires, such as feelings,thoughts, intentions, or beliefs (Kvale & Brinkman, 2009; Merriam, 1998; Silverman, 2004; Talmy, 2010). In other words, in-terviewsallow the researcher toobtain a special kind of information, orwhat is “in andon someoneelse’smind” (Patton,1990, p.278). As Seidman (1998) notes, “at the root of in-depth interviewing is an interest in understanding the experience of otherpeople and the meaning they make of that experience” (p. 3). Thus, the process of interviewing provides participants withopportunities to select, reconstruct, and reflect upon details of their experience within the specific context of their lives.

3.1. The context of the study

This study was conducted within an intensive trimester-long EAP program at a private liberal arts university located in thesuburbs of Tokyo, Japan. The program focuses on skills for critically reading and analyzing English academic texts, discussingand presenting opinions, and writing academic research papers (see Appendix A for an overview of the program). Thisinstructional focus is quite different from typical Japanese high-school EFL instruction, where more emphasis is placed on thedevelopment of language skills through reading, such as structural grammar exercises, sentence-level translations, or true-false comprehension drills. In other words, most of their English reading training in high school has been limited to sen-tence or at best paragraph levels. In contrast, the students in the EAP program are expected not just to comprehend themulti-paragraph essays or research papers, but more importantly to respond to and evaluate the ideas given in the texts usingacademic discourse in English. Consequently, various tasks in the academic context, which include accurate interpretationsand synthesis of ideas in the texts, can have a powerful impact on the ways students perceive and approach their readingactivities. In brief, students in the program aremost likely to experience reading in a completely different way fromwhat theywere used to in high school.

Most of the students entering the program have already completed at least six years of EFL study during junior and highschool, and their motivation is quite high in general. Since the program applies considerable pressure on students to achieve alevel of academic English sufficient for participation in English-medium courses at the university, the major change oflearning environment from high school EFL to EAP poses many difficulties or challenges, as learners struggle to apply “whatthey know into academic contexts; that is, in becoming academically literate” (Evans & Green, 2007, p. 14).

3.2. Participants

Participants of the study were drawn from first-year students enrolled in the EAP program, which included courses taughtin English aimed to develop their academic reading skills and strategies. Using a purposive sampling technique for “qualityassurance” (Creswell, 1999, p. 119), a total of 10 Japanese students were recruited on a voluntary basis after completion of thefirst-year EAP program. In response to a request for volunteers emailed by the researchers ormade in person to several classesat intermediate (average TOEFL ITP 450 at the time of college entrance) and upper-intermediate level (average TOEFL ITP 520at the time of college entrance), they all indicated their willingness to participate in the study.

At the time of volunteering, students were not informed of the details of the interview, and were only requested tovolunteer for a 60–90 min interview to reflect on their past year of study in the program. All students who volunteered werefamiliar with one or both of the researchers, having been in their courses during the academic year. However, at the time ofvolunteering (in late February 2008), no students were enrolled in courses taught by the researchers, and all grading forprevious courses had been completed to ensure honest disclosure of information by the participants. Interviews were con-ducted during the March spring break at the convenience of the participants.

K. Ohata, A. Fukao / System 42 (2014) 81–9284

3.3. Interviews

Given that the primary goal of this study is to explore and describe Japanese EFL learners’ conceptions of academic readingand also themselves as academic readers, in-depth individual interviews in Japanese, which is the participants’ mostcomfortable language, were used. In the actual interview session, the following general questions were used to gain anunderstanding of the participants’ individually unique perceptions and interpretations of learner experiences: (1) “What doesthe idea of academic reading mean to you?”, (2) “Who is an ‘academic reader’ to you?”, and (3) “Do you see yourself as anacademic reader?” Other relevant questions were also asked, if appropriate, in order to help them freely reflect on theirexperiences. It should be noted, however, that these open-ended questions, unlike leading questions, served just as promptsfor facilitating their self-reflection and free talk (see Appendix B).

In total, 10 interviews were conducted in an informal setting by both of the researchers and tape-recorded with theparticipants’ consent. Each interview, which lasted for 60–90 min, was transcribed verbatim in Japanese.

3.4. Steps of data coding and analysis

Referring to the specific procedures set out in Ely, Anzul, Friedman, Garner, and Steinmetz (1991), Merriam (1998) andWolcott (2001), the researchers devised the following steps of data analysis. Although the researchers’ general researchinterests had already been defined in the form of research questions, no specific thematic units and categories were deter-mined at the time of data coding. The reason for this was to let thematic units and categories emerge through the process ofdata analysis (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994), minimizing the imposition of predetermined categories or preconceptions on thedata (Strauss & Corbin, 1990).

Step1: Immerse in a continueddialogwith the collecteddata,while askingquestions andmaking reflective comments on it.The researchers went through transcribed interview data and jotted down notes, comments, impressions, or queries in the

margins of the texts, in the ways that would help establish a general framework/database for further analysis. At the sametime, further notations were made in the narrative texts by using a set of topical codes derived from the research questions(see Appendix C).

Step 2: “Winnowing” or sorting the data into thematic categories or “meaningful units” (Ely et al., 1991).All the notes and comments derived from Step 1 were summarized, and a list of tentative thematic categories within each

individual interview was created. Then the researchers refined and revised the emergent categories by going back to theentire database created in Step 1.

Step 3: Identifying verbatim or narrative evidence that would correspond to the thematic categories which emergedthrough the process of Step 2.

While linking the raw data (Japanese) to the categories that emerged in the process of Step 2, the researchers translatedinto English the selected episodes or stories that would represent the ‘emic’ perspective or the voice of each participant.

Step 4: Cross-interview analysisComparing and contrasting all the themes encapsulated in each of the individual interviews, the researchers sought to

build larger themes or explanations that would go across and even beyond the individual cases (i.e., commonalities orpatterns that underlie all the emergent themes or categories).

In the phase of linking the raw data (Japanese) to the emergent themes or categories, selected episodes or stories of theparticipants were translated into English by the researchers. Member checks were employed asking the participants if theselected quotes were accurately representing their perspectives in the given contexts or if the researchers’ understanding andinterpretations would be plausible.

The researchers also acknowledge other issues that might arise from the highly interactive and interpretive nature ofinterviewing. For example, the participants might attempt to adapt their answers to what they assume the interviewer wantsto hear; the interviewer might misinterpret verbal responses in favor of his/her own preconceived assumptions or in-terpretations. As Wenden (1986) critically notes, the participants’ verbal reports may not reflect or represent what wasactually happening in their heads at the time when the specific events had taken place and therefore “should not be equatedwith what they actually do or have done in specific instances” (p. 196).

Rich data gained from interactive interviews lend themselves to many types of analysis such as discourse analysis orethnomethodological interaction analysis. And the researchers acknowledge the importance and value of discursive andinteractive elements in making sense out of the qualitative data and also recognize the drawbacks of not including suchinformation in the findings (Potter & Hepburn, 2005; Wooffitt & Widdicombe, 2006). It should be noted, however, that theparticular focus of this exploratory study was to identify commonly shared themes across the 10 interviews, rather than toexamine and analyze detailed interactive processes in the interviews.

4. Findings

The following sections are devoted to presenting several common themes that emerged through content-analysis across10 interviews, especially in relation to the research questions posed earlier. In order to illuminate the common themes,selected quotations from the interviews are given. All the selected quotations from the interviews are translations by theresearchers, preceded by a pseudonym to mark the identity of the participants. The excerpts are summarized at times to

K. Ohata, A. Fukao / System 42 (2014) 81–92 85

highlight the themes, while care was taken to render the original meaning of the participants’words in as literal a translationas possible.

4.1. Conceptualizations and relevant themes

One of the key questions asked in the interviews was “What does the idea of academic reading mean to you?” Thisquestion, combined with other related questions in the interviews, was intended to help the participants to self-reflectand explore how their conceptualizations of academic reading came into being during the first-year EAP program.Interview responses related to their conceptions of themselves as academic readers can be categorized into thethemes 1, 2, and 3 and those related to the factors that would influence their conceptual development into the themes4 and 5:

1. Renewed understanding of L2 reading: from ‘learning to read’ to ‘reading to learn’2. Going beyond comprehension3. Strategic nature of academic reading4. Contextual influences on learners’ developing conceptions5. Experiences of success that form learners’ conceptions

4.1.1. Renewed understanding of L2 reading: from ‘learning to read’ to ‘reading to learn’One of the recurring themes in the interviews was the participants’ renewed understanding of L2 reading. As all of the

participants often noted in the interviews, their perspectives on L2 reading after completion of the first-year EAP programwere quite different or rather in stark contrast to the ones they had held in their junior and high school EFL settings. Oftenreferring to different instructional orientations encountered in high-school EFL and college EAP courses, they pointed out thattheir assumptions and beliefs about L2 learning had also been revised or rather more appropriately broadened as they cameto recognize the fact that as Yori noted, “learning a foreign language is not an end in itself, but rather learning to do somethingin a foreign language is more important” (Extract 1). Another participant, Toshi, further elaborated on this point:

In my high-school English reading classes, I was always concerned about whether I have understood the given text ornot, because I knew toowell that what would come next after reading was a series of comprehension quizzes or relatedgrammar exercises. But as I went through the first-year EAP courses here, I started wondering if it’s really enough justto learn to read the given text accurately. Well, maybe that’s not an academic reading but just a skill learning or trainingfor exams, if you will (Extract 2).

The participants all agreed upon the idea that academic reading or reading in an academic context is different fromlearning to read certain texts written in a foreign language just to answer some comprehension quizzes or exercises to follow,but the interpretations of the nature of academic reading seem to vary among the participants, depending on the ways inwhich they conceive of ‘being academic’. For example, Yori characterized academic reading as distinct from ‘pleasure reading’such as reading romance novels or essays for personal enjoyment purposes. As she says:

If not for personal enjoyment, how comewe have to read difficult texts or articles by ourselves? There’s got to be somereasons or purposes for doing so. I believe the major motivation for academic reading is supposed to be not personallydriven but rather to acquire some knowledge or new insights so that we can contribute to others socially, namely as ascholar (Extract 3).

Taka, on the other hand, gave a similar yet slightly different perspective on academic reading experiences:

I think one of the major differences between academic reading and foreign language reading lies in their different goalorientations. In FL reading, reading seems to be part of language skills to be mastered, with emphasis placed on‘learning to read,’ while academic reading, I believe, has its own value in acquiring new knowledge or ideas throughreading. Although even in academic reading, language skills such as grammar or vocabulary are of course prerequisitesfor effective text comprehension, because English is not our first language, I believe the crucial difference is a matter ofemphasis, that is, ‘learning to read’ or ‘reading to learn’ (Extract 4).

Although there are some differences in the ways the participants interpreted their own experiences of academic reading(e.g., in terms of purposes or goal orientations for reading), they all seem to have acquired or added new meanings to theirperspectives on reading in a foreign language as they went through the first year of EAP program.

4.1.2. Going beyond comprehensionIn relation to the encounter with the idea of ‘reading to learn’, the participants also mentioned some important charac-

teristics of academic reading, which they believe might differentiate academic reading from other types of reading includingreading in a foreign language classroom. One of the major themes that underlie their characterization of academic readingwas the reader not being satisfied with merely comprehending the literal meaning of a given text. During the interviews, thefollowing points were frequently mentioned by the participants:

K. Ohata, A. Fukao / System 42 (2014) 81–9286

� Paying more critical attention to the content, text organization, and logic (e.g., Toshi, Keiko, and Sachiko),� Trying to find the author’s implicit or hidden messages behind the text (e.g., Yuki and Izumi),� Predicting what comes next while reading (e.g., Yu, Yori, and Mika),� Identifying connections of ideas within the text and beyond (e.g., Yuki and Taka),� Critically examining the author’s ideas or arguments in comparison to their own viewpoints (e.g., Yui and Toshi), or� Seeking any potential application for subsequent in-class discussions or other oral/written assignments (e.g., Keiko, Taka,and Yori).

This list reflects not only the participants’ ideal images of “academic reading” or “academic readers”, but it also is a clearindication of their renewed awareness or understanding as to what academic reading means to them and how they havecome to make sense of it as emergent academic readers. Yu, for example, observes her perceived change in self-reflection:

Well, I used to believe that what matters in L2 reading is just to correctly answer the guiding questions for compre-hension. In a sense, whether I could get high scores on exams was more important than understanding or appreciatingthe reading content in terms of how it can be relevant to my life situations or interests. Although I cannot openly claimmyself as a legitimate academic reader yet, I think I learned to acquire a new attitude or perspective on L2 reading as Iwent through this EAP experience. That is, academic reading cannot be done with just comprehension, and what youwill do after comprehension seems to be more important if you want to call yourself an academic reader (Extract 5).

Some other participants such as Izumi, Yu, or Toshi in turn emphasized the attitude of critical thinking as one of the mostcrucial aspects of academic reading activities. Toshi argues:

When I was a high-school student, I never tried nor even dreamed of criticizing or questioning the author’s argumentsor content presented in the assigned readings, because I somehow believed that’s not what I’m supposed to do as asecond language learner. But once I got into this EAP program, I have often been reminded of the importance of criticalthinking in our reading. Though it didn’t ring a bell initially, I often found myself critically analyzing the text with anattitude of “Is this really true? Any supportive evidence provided?” (Extract 6).

Toshi’s account seems to represent the participants’ self-conceptions as academic readers. One common image of an aca-demic reader among themwas that an academic reader ismore than a simple recipient of given information but a learner. Theydescribed that academic readers are learnerswho utilize critical thinkingwhile reading and readwith a clear purpose inmind.

4.1.3. Strategic nature of academic readingAnother important characteristic of academic reading, asmany of the participants’ accounts indicate, is the strategic aspect

of reading processes. All the participants were given ample instruction of reading strategies and practices in their EAP readingcourses, but it was not clear until the current interview sessions how and to what extent such instruction had an impact ontheir conceptualizations of academic reading. Yu argues the strategic nature of academic reading, while evaluating herself asan emergent academic reader.

Unlike any other types of reading, academic reading seems to require the readers to have some specific goals in mindwhile reading. Otherwise it’s just an act of reading that will get you nowhere, by following word to word or sentence tosentence to the end! In other words, if you have some specific reading agenda in mind, your reading is supposed to bemore purposeful and strategic naturally, for example, by skimming the main ideas in the text before going to details orpredicting the content from text organizations and transitional signals. I’m still struggling to changemy old habits, but Iwould say I’m surely going into the direction of being a strategic academic reader, I hope (Extract 7).

Similarly, Sachiko also points out the strategic or purposive nature of academic reading, along with her awareness ofchange in her way of reading.

Since English is not my first language, I had a habit of reading a text word by word from the very beginning, whileconstantly checking a dictionary at hand. But faced with many other tasks to do even after reading, I found it quite inefficientand time-consuming. Probably I need to bemore flexible and strategic, with specific purposes or objectives of reading inmind(Extract 8).

Such awareness of her own way of reading, thus, seems to be a clear indication of her activation of metacognitiveknowledge as to how she would approach reading tasks and how she could become a more effective and efficient reader tosuit the demands of academic community.

The encounter with new reading strategies introduced in the program and the participants’ interest in them seem to havedirectly influenced readingbehavior. All of the10participantsmentioned specific reading strategies learned in theprogramsuchas skimming and scanning, inferencing, or paying attention to transition expressions, and were able to offer detailed reports ofhow they used them successfully. One such example is the use of an English-English dictionary. For reasons of convenience,familiarity and time management, 7 of the participants had the habit of using only an English–Japanese dictionary beforeentering college. After learning how to use an English–English dictionary and how it can improve their English, however, theyseemtohave successfully incorporated this newstudy tool into their learning. Although the effect of explicit teaching sometimestook months before its benefits were recognized by the participants, it is part of their development as academic readers.

K. Ohata, A. Fukao / System 42 (2014) 81–92 87

4.2. Factors in the development of learner conception

The data revealed two themes that help answer the second research question for the study: To what factors individuallearners attribute the development of their conceptions of academic reading or academic readers.

4.2.1. Contextual influences on learners’ developing conceptionsThe interview data showed that the participants’ perspectives on academic reading underwent some modifications

through their 10-month EAP experiences. A variety of factors have contributed to the development of their conceptions, butthe transition from traditional EFL to academic and content-based EAP learning seems to be particularly influential. As theywent through this major transition, the participants may have come to recognize the need to renew or revise their previousbeliefs or assumptions on L2 reading, including their goals and inner criteria for excellence as academic readers. In otherwords, their deeply held assumptions about “excellent L2 readers”, which partly derive from their culture-specific instruc-tional practices that focus on accurate comprehension and grammar in Japanese high-school EFL, may have been shaken orthey perceived a need for some revision or reconstruction. Taka, for example, illustrated the prelude to such amajor change inhis perspective toward L2 reading.

In high-school English classes, I always got excellent scores on the comprehension quizzes and other accompanyinggrammar and structure exercises. Tome, L2 reading was a sort of technical skill that will help you get good scores on theexams. But here we had so many discussions on the reading content and essay writings on the author’s arguments! Inthe spring term, I was literally dumbfounded to realize that reading a text is just the beginning of a series of academicactivities to follow. As I look back, such a mind-jolting experience in a new environment made me reconsider or evenstart questioning my previous ideas or assumptions about L2 reading, including my goal settings and expectations(Extract 9).

Another participant, Izumi, also expressed her renewed understanding of L2 reading as she became more aware of herpreviously held assumptions or beliefs about “successful EFL readers.” She observes:

When in high-school, I was such a naïve and dependent reader, always checking every single word of the text in adictionary and mechanically “deciphering” the sentence by sentence meaning. Probably I was deeply stuck in theidea that being obedient to what teachers would tell us to do will provide a guarantee of success as an EFL student.But as I learned about the fact that there are a variety of approaches toward reading and supportive strategies, I cameto feel a little ashamed of my ignorance yet somehow relieved or even liberated as if a thick fog suddenly lifted. Ofcourse being a more independent and self-directed reader entails more of our responsibility to manage our ownlearning, but there also comes with a lot of enjoyment and a sense of personal development in return, I guess(Extract 10).

Similarly, Yuki offered an interesting classroom episode that prompted her perspective change toward L2 reading in anacademic context:

In class, we were just discussing the author’s ideas for clarifying our understanding when the teacher came over tocheck our progress. So I asked, “Is my interpretation correct?” Then he replied “yes!”, but another member of our groupasked him, “How about this way of interpretation?” The teacher said, “That’s also probable.” Then we all got confused,“whose interpretation is correct?” when the class was dismissed. Two weeks later, the same kind of exchangehappened again, and after class we talked about the incident. We said that probably we were all stuck in the idea ofwhether we can get it right or not when the reality is that there could be more than one interpretation of a text,especially in academic world (Extract 11).

4.2.2. Experiences of success that form learners’ conceptionsPositive experiences in classes and assignments also influenced motivation and confidence, and these in turn seem to

influence their conceptions of academic reading. Though they struggled, all of the participants said that their experience inthe EAP program in the first termwas enjoyable and satisfactory enough to lead them to believe that the programwould helpto improve their English as well as their academic progress in general.

Keiko used the phrase ‘turning point’ to describe what she experienced in the autumn term as it influenced her readingapproach:

I had a hard time writing an academic essay, but one day in the second term I found myself engaged in essay writingwithout much uneasy feelings. Maybe it’s because the topic was familiar, but as I was making an outline voluntarily, Isuddenly realized “ that’s what I’ve learned!” Then this awareness was connected in my mind to the importance oforganizing information, which I had learned in the reading class in the first term. I distinctly remember this as myturning point. Because of this important experience, I started thinking about elements of a text such as the main points,logic, and purpose of each paragraph while reading (Extract 12).

Keiko’s claim seems to suggest that strategies instruction does not automatically translate into actual or effective use ofstrategies by the learner, but that the change can occur at a later time.

K. Ohata, A. Fukao / System 42 (2014) 81–9288

5 Discussion and implications

As the interview data indicate, the participants’ conceptions of academic reading/reader are different from one another,reflecting their individually unique perceptions of reality in a given context. It was also found that their conceptions are rathertentative and emergent in nature, in line with their development as L2 academic readers in a new learning environment. Manyparticipants (e.g., Yori, Izumi, Yui, Keiko, and Sachiko) preferred to define themselves as ‘novice’ academic readers in the interviews,pointing atweaknesses or areas that need further improvement,which seems to be a clear indication of the developmental natureof their self-conceptions as academic readers.While previous research indicates that L2 learners’ beliefs are relatively constant andnot amenable to change, regardless of any external influences (Brown & Palinscar, 1982), these interviews generally concur withWenden’s (1999) claim that the setting motivates changes in learner expectations. The contextual change from traditional EFL toEAP, combinedwithmanydifficulties and challenges accompanying the adjustment to a newdiscourse community, seem tohave atremendous impact on learners’ways of conceptualizing the notions of academic reading and academic readers. Such experiences,in other words, may have facilitated the process of revision in their previous assumptions and beliefs about L2 reading, as well asthose about L2 learning in general (Taguchi & Naganuma, 2006; Tremblay & Gardner, 1995; Wenden, 1999).

As revealed in the participants’ self-reflective accounts, self-conceptions that include personal evaluation of competenceand goal orientations as L2 readers may also have undergone substantial revision as they became more aware of the differentassumptions and norms presented in the EAP setting (Gabillon, 2005; Graham, 2006; Paris &Winograd,1990). In fact, 7 of theparticipants claimed that they had held a secure sense of competence toward L2 reading in junior high and high school, butnot in the EAP program, where theywere often required not just to comprehend a given text but to engage in a variety of otheracademic tasks, based on their understanding of the text. They all remembered the initial encounter with the concept ofacademic reading as novel and some (e.g., Taka, Izumi, and Mika) even expressed that they were at a loss. As one of theparticipants noted, his attitude toward L2 reading used to be rather passive or receptive, in the sense that he had neverdoubted the traditional practice of being given tasks to complete by the teacher and then tested onmultiple-choice exams forcomprehension. As noted earlier in the section of the study context, in Japanese high school EFL, a particular focus hastraditionally been placed on the development of language skills through reading, such as grammar exercises, sentence-leveltranslations, or true-false comprehension drills. Such instructional practices naturally influenced the participants’ notion ofexcellence as L2 readers as well as L2 learners. As represented in Extract 5, 6, and 7, the participants also claimed that theirgoal orientations often centered around getting high scores in exams, passing necessary tests, or even “pleasing the teacher”.These self-reflective accounts support Spack’s (1988) argument that “there is often a large gap between what students bringto the academic community and what the academic community expects of them” (p. 30). Spack further suggests that suchgaps lie not only in the linguistic but also in the social and cultural factors that influence the students’ assumptions or beliefsabout the nature of ‘excellent students.’ The interviews indicate that the participants’ self-efficacy beliefs or expectationstoward themselves may have had to adjust to the educational norms or expectations of a new environment.

As indicated inExtract 3, 9,10, and11, theparticipants alsonoted their awarenessof theneedsorexpectationsof theacademiccommunity. Some of the tasks required in the EAP setting include discussing the reading, synthesizing themain points criticallyand writing assignments on the specific themes (Sengupta, 2002; Shih, 1992; Spack, 1993; Toh, 2011). The multidimensionalnature of academic tasks made them aware of the necessity to become more strategic and purposive as academic readers. Thisprocess of self-awareness as to the importanceof acquiringnewskills required in the newenvironment corresponds to Paris andWinograd’s (1990) core dimensions of metacognitive beliefs; that is, agency, instrumentality, and purpose.

To illustrate this point, 6 of the participants claimed that they hadmade desperate effortsmerely to survive thefirst term of theprogram by relying on previously learned strategies for dealing with academic reading assignments. In other words, even thoughthey had a vague understanding of ‘academic’ texts or ‘academic’ reading, they were unable to articulate what they had in theirminds in the first term, and it was in the following terms that they started activating their learned knowledge in actual practice.Through the interviews it thus became apparent that the participants made constant efforts to become “academically literate”(Evans&Green, 2007, p.14) bychanginghowthey read, according to the specific goal orientations in thenewenvironmentwith thebelief that “both effort and effective strategies are important for success” (Covington, 2000 as cited in Graham, 2006, p. 298).

The changes in their reading habits in turn influenced their conceptions of ‘academic reading’ and ‘academic readers’ insome cases. One participant stated that she felt at the beginning of the academic year that she was studying ‘difficult English,’but in the winter term, she began to realize that she was studying difficult content in English. Another participant also statedthat she began to see English as a tool for academic study, and realized that academic ‘reading’ is synonymous with academic‘analysis’. In both cases, it seems that their conceptions of reading for the purpose of learning English weakened and theirunderstanding of reading for academic purposes gradually emerged. That is, it is in this process that learners came torecognize the need to revise their perspectives as EFL readers in an academic context.

Such an emergent sense of academic personhood was often acknowledged by the participants themselves during theinterviews, suggesting a change in their self-perception from ‘language learners’ to ‘language users’. According to Dickinson(1995) and Gabillon (2005, p. 239), learner control-beliefs (i.e., locus of control beliefs), when combined with a sense ofefficacy, may lead to learner self-regulation and autonomy in the L2 learning process. In this regard, as the participantsstruggled to adjust themselves to academic educational norms or expectations, they came to value the new goal orientationsadvocated in the community, which entail the goal of being an independent learner. Such a sense of academic personhoodseems also to suggest a major shift of the learners’ value orientations from a performance or ego-goal orientation to a moreintrinsic, mastery goal orientation (Covington, 2000). Anderson (1991) notes a wide range of individual variations among

K. Ohata, A. Fukao / System 42 (2014) 81–92 89

readers in terms of metacognitive awareness, depending on the readers’ conceptualizations of reading or their set of beliefsabout their roles as L2 readers (Schraw & Bruning, 1996). The participants’ accounts seem to add to this claim, thus implyingan interactive relationship between L2 learners’ conceptions of academic reading and their metacognitive awareness.

6. Conclusion

This exploratory study describes L2 learners’ developing conceptions of themselves as emergent academic readers in anEAP setting. As represented in the self-reflective accounts of the participants, their conceptions of L2 reading have undergoneconsiderable revision or reconstruction in response to the transition from traditional EFL to academic, content-based EAPcontexts. This suggests that learners’ self-conceptions or beliefs about their own learning are constantly being revised orreconstructed as they become more aware of the needs or expectations in a specific social and educational context.

Despite the struggles that they encountered in such a transitional process of adaptation to a new environment, all of thesestudents seem to have attained a sense of confidence and positive self-conception as emergent L2 academic readers.With thisrespect, our study may offer further insights into the study of learner beliefs and their development, especially for itsparticular focus on learner beliefs about L2 reading in a Japanese EAP setting. Such a descriptive account of their experiencesprovides rich pedagogical insights into what learners bring with them to the classroom as well as useful feedback for theprogram’s administration, especially considering that teachers’ idealized conceptions of what learners need in academiccontexts might be quite different from what they actually need. As Christison and Krahnke (1986) explain, “students can bevaluable sources of information on the language learning, socialization, academic preparation experience” (p. 77). In thissense, the present study also reveals some of the adaptive learning processes that learners engage in as they negotiate andreconstruct their own identities as language learners.

This was a small-scale, interview-based qualitative investigation. As such, the findings are not meant to be generalizable,but the themes and findings that emerged from the data can have immediate implications for researchers and practitioners.Furthermore, they lay the foundation for future longitudinal and in-depth investigations, especially into the process of howlearners’ conceptions or beliefs about L2 reading develop and how such belief changes can manifest themselves in actuallearning behaviors.

Appendix A

The goals of the EAP programwhere the participants of this studywere enrolled include the facilitation of English languageskills acquisition for academic purposes anddevelopment of basic academic critical thinking skills aswell as study skills. To thisend, instructions and practice concerning the following reading skills and strategies are provided within the content topics:

First term Second term Third term

Topic: Educational Values Topic: Culture, Perception and Communication Topic: Bioethics� Survey a text� Annotate the text� Identify key words and definitions� Reorganize information in the text

� Analyze text structure� Make an outline of the key points� Synthesize information from multiple texts

� Analyze the purpose of a text� Analyze the audience of a text� Make inferences� Analyze evidence

Topic: Argumentation Topic: Issues of Race Topic: Visions of the Future� Identify topic sentences, main ideas and

supporting details� Identify paraphrased statements� Make discussion questions from the text

� Distinguish facts from opinions� Evaluate the author’s argument

� Integrate reading skills

Note: This chart is adopted from ELP Staff Handbook 2007–2008 (English Language Program International Christian University Ed.).

Appendix B

Some sample interview questions asked in Japanese. [With English translations]過去 [Previous L2 Reading Experiences]

� 大学に入る前の英語に対する見方（特に英語Readingに関して）[What is your view of English/reading in English beforecoming to the EAP program?]

� 英語（学習）に対するイメージは？なぜ？[What images toward English learning do you hold? What comes to your mindwhen you hear the word ‘English’ or ‘English learning’? Why?]

� 英語読解・外国語による読解とはどういうものだと思うか？[What does it mean to read in a foreign (English) language?]� どんな読み物を読んだか？[What reading materials did you use in (junior) high-school?]

現在 [Current State]

� ELPという学術英語環境（EAP）のなかで英語学習者として自分をどう捉えているか？ [How do you evaluate yourself as anEnglish language learner in the EAP program?]

K. Ohata, A. Fukao / System 42 (2014) 81–9290

� ELP春学期が始まってからの感想は？（新しい環境で戸惑った事・難しいと感じた事など）Readingに関しては？ [In first,second, and third terms in the program, what events or episodes left an impression on you?]

� 以前（中高における「読解」）に比べてReadingへの印象・考え方・イメージに変化はあったか？印象に残っている出来

事･エピソード等。[Any changes of your reading habits? Do you think your view of reading has changed since you startedthe EAP program in first?]

� “Academic Reading” “Academic English”とは自分にとってどのようなものか？どんなイメージ？ [What does the idea of‘academic reading’ or ‘academic English’ mean to you?]

� “Academic Reader”とは何か？自分をAcademic Readerと認識しているか？または、“Academic Reader”とはどういう人？どんな人の事を指すのか？こうあるべき姿など。[Who is an ‘academic reader’ to you? Do you see yourself as an academic reader?]

� “Academic Reader”としての自己評価は？現在＋これまでの過程（ELP 春・秋･冬を通して）何らかの変化はあったか？Weaknesses/Strengthsなどに関してはどうか？なぜそう思うか？ [How has your view of L2 reading changed over the past10 months in the program? What do you think are your weaknesses/strengths as an academic reader?]

� どんな要素が自分の自己評価に影響していると思うか？ELP（春・秋･冬）の中で印象に残っている出来事・エピソード等

は？ [What factors do you feel influenced your view of L2 reading? In first, second, and third terms in the program, whatevents or episodes left an impression on you?]

未来 [The Future Prospect]

� 今後“Academic Reader”＋“英語学習者”としてどう自分を成長させていきたいか？[How do you want to self-develop as‘academic reader’ and ‘English language learner’?]

� 改善点及び自己成長のために何が必要だと思うか？なぜ？[As a L2 academic reader, what do you feel is important forgaining in confidence? Why?]

Appendix C. A scheme of topical coding

K. Ohata, A. Fukao / System 42 (2014) 81–92 91

References

Alanen, R. (2003). A sociocultural approach to young language learners’ beliefs about language learning. In P. Kalaja, & A. M. F. Barcelos (Eds.), Beliefs aboutSLA: New research approaches (pp. 55–85). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal, 75, 460–472.Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148.Bandura, A. (1995). Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies (pp. 1–45).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Benson, P., & Lor, W. (1999). Conceptions of language and language learning. System, 27(4), 459–472.Bernat, E. (2006). Assessing EAP learners’ beliefs about language learning in the Australian context. Asian EFL Journal, 8(2). http://www.asian-efl-journal.

com/June_06_eb.php.Bernat, E. (2008). Beyond belief: psycho-cognitive, socio-cultural and emergent ecological approaches to learner perceptions in foreign language acqui-

sition. Asian EFL Journal, 10(3). http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/September_08_eb.php.Bernat, E., & Gvozdenko, I. (2005). Beliefs about language learning: current knowledge, pedagogical implications and new research directions. TESL-EJ, 9(1).

http://tesl-ej.org/ej33/a1.html.Brown, A. L., & Palinscar, S. (1982). Inducing strategic learning from texts by means of informed, self-control training. In D. K. Reid, & W. P. Hresko (Eds.),

Metacognition and learning disabilities: Topics in learning and learning disabilities 2-1 (pp. 1–18). Rockville: Aspen Publication.Christison, M. A., & Krahnke, K. J. (1986). Student perceptions of academic language study. TESOL Quarterly, 20(1), 61–79.Covington, M. (2000). Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: an integrative review. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 171–200.Creswell, J. (1999). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2003). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Dickinson, L. (1995). Autonomy and motivation: a literature review. System, 23, 165–174.Dole, A. J., & Sinatra, G. M. (1994). Social psychology research on beliefs and attitudes: implications from research on learning from text. In A. Gardner, & P.

A. Alexander (Eds.), Beliefs about text and instruction with text (pp. 245–265). Hillsdale, NJ.Dörnyei, Z., & Otto, I. (1998). Motivation in action: A process model of L2 motivation. Working papers in Applied Linguistics (pp. 43–69). London 4: Thames

Valley University.Ely, M., Anzul, M., Friedman, T., Garner, D., & Steinmetz, A. (1991). Doing qualitative research: Circles within circles. London: Falmer Press.Evans, S., & Green, C. (2007). Why EAP is necessary: a survey of Hong Kong tertiary students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6, 3–17.Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive development inquiry [Special Issue] American Psychologist, 34(10),

906–911.Flavell, J. H. (1981). Monitoring social cognitive enterprises: something else that may develop in the area of social cognition. In J. H. Flavell, & L. Ross (Eds.),

Social cognitive development: Frontiers and possible futures (pp. 272–287). New York: Cambridge University Press.Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculation about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert, & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation and

understanding (pp. 1–29). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Gabillon, Z. (2005). L2 learner’s beliefs: an overview. Journal of Language and Learning, 3(2), 233–260.Graham, S. (2006). A study of students’ metacognitive beliefs about foreign language study and their impact on learning. Foreign Language Annals, 39(2),

296–309.Graham, S. (2011). Self-efficacy and academic listening. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(2), 113–117.Horwitz, E. K. (1999). Cultural and situational influences on foreign language learners’ beliefs about language learning: a review of BALLI studies [Special

Issue] System, 27, 557–576.Jackson, C. (2003). Motives for ‘laddishness’ at school: fear of failure and fear of the feminine. British Educational Research Journal, 29(4), 583–598.Kalaja, P. (2003). Research on students’ beliefs about SLA within a discursive approach. In P. Kalaja, & A. M. F. Barcelos (Eds.), Beliefs about SLA: New research

approaches (pp. 131–152). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Kvale, S., & Brinkman, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Li, F. (2010). Relationship between EFL learners’ belief and learning strategy use by English majors in vocational colleges. Journal of Language Teaching and

Research, 1(6), 858–866.Marton, F., & Ramsden, P. (1988). What does it take to improve learning? In P. Ramsden (Ed.), Improving learning: New perspectives London: Kogan Page.Maykut, P., & Morehouse, R. (1994). Beginning qualitative research: A philosophic and practical guide. Bristol, PA: the Falmer Press.Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Öz, H. (2007). Understanding metacognitive knowledge of Turkish EFL students in secondary education. Notivas Royal, 1(2), 53–83. http://www.

novitasroyal.org/Oz.html.Pajares, F., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Self and self-belief in psychology and education: an historical perspective. In J. Aronson, & D. Cordova (Eds.), Improving

academic achievement: Impact of psychological factors on education (pp. 3–21). New York: Academic Press.Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In B. F. Jones, & L. Idol (Eds.), Dimensions of thinking

and cognitive instruction (pp. 15–51). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Pintrich, R. P., & DeGroot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 82, 33–40.Potter, J., & Hepburn, A. (2005). Qualitative interviews in psychology: problems and possibilities. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2, 38–55.Schraw, G., & Bruning, R. (1996). Readers’ implicit models of reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(3), 290–305.Seidman, L. E. (1998). Interviewing as qualitative research. New York: Teachers College Press.Sengupta, S. (2002). Developing academic reading at tertiary level: a longitudinal study tracing conceptual change. The Reading Matrix, 2(1). http://www.

readingmatrix.com/articles/sengupta/index.html.Sheorey, R., & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29, 431–

449.Shih, M. (1992). Beyond comprehension exercises in the ESL academic reading class. TESOL Quarterly, 26(2), 289–318.Silverman, D. (2004). Qualitative research: Theory method and practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Spack, R. (1988). Initiating ESL students into the academic discourse community: how far should we go? TESOL Quarterly, 22(1), 29–53.Spack, R. (1993). Student meets text, text meets student: finding a way into academic discourse. In J. E. Carson, & I. Leki (Eds.), Reading in the composition

classroom: Second language perspectives. Boston: Heinle and Heinle Publishers.Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage.Taguchi, N., & Naganuma, N. (2006). Transition from learning English to learning in English: students’ perceived adjustment difficulties in an English-

medium university in Japan. Asian EFL Journal, 8(4). http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/Dec_06_nt&nn.php.Talmy, S. (2010). Qualitative interviews in applied linguistics: from research instrument to social practice. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30, 128–

148.Toh, G. (2011). Facilitating critical reading in the teaching of English for academic purposes in a Japanese EAP classroom. TESL Reporter, 44, 1–2.Tremblay, P. F., & Gardner, R. C. (1995). Expanding the motivation construct in language learning. Modern Language Journal, 79, 505–520.Truitt, S. N. (1995). Anxiety and beliefs about language learning: A study of Korean University students learning English. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.

Austin, TX: The University of Texas.

K. Ohata, A. Fukao / System 42 (2014) 81–9292

Victori, M. (2004). Eliciting and fostering learners’ metacognitive knowledge about language learning in self-directed learning programs: A review of datacollection methods and procedures. Barcelona: Autonomous University of Barcelona.

Wenden, A. L. (1986). What do second-language learners know about their language learning?: a second look at retrospective accounts. Applied Linguistics,7(2), 186–205.

Wenden, A. (1998). Metacognitive knowledge and language learning. Applied Linguistics, 19(4), 515–537.Wenden, A. (1999). An introduction to metacognitive knowledge and beliefs in language learning: beyond the basics [Special Issue] System, 27, 435–441.White, C. (1999). Expectations and emergent beliefs of self-instructed language learners. System, 27(4), 443–457.Wolcott, H. F. (2001). Writing up qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Woods, D. (2003). The social construction of beliefs in the language classroom. In P. Kalaja, & A. M. F. Barcelos (Eds.), Beliefs about SLA: New research ap-

proaches (pp. 201–229). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Wooffitt, R., & Widdicombe, S. (2006). Interaction in interviews. In P. Drew, G. Raymond, & D. Weinberg (Eds.), Talk and interaction in social research methods

(pp. 28–49). London: Sage.Yang, N. D. (1999). The relationship between EFL learners’ beliefs and learning strategy use. System, 27(4), 515–535.