Language-in-education policies worldwide have been influenced by neoliberal ideologies of globalization, prioritizing the ability to communicate in English for economic imperatives (Holborow, 2015). However, does the concept... [ view full abstract ]
Language-in-education policies worldwide have been influenced by neoliberal ideologies of globalization, prioritizing the ability to communicate in English for economic imperatives (Holborow, 2015). However, does the concept of communicative ability promoted in these policies correspond to what global economic activities actually require? Focusing on Japan, this paper demonstrates how policymakers’ conceptualization of communicative ability contradicts the communicative experiences of transnational Japanese workers of multinational corporations (MNCs).
English language teaching is keenly promoted worldwide based on two beliefs: (1) English is a universal language for international communication and (2) English skills guarantee economic success for individuals and nation states (Park, 2011; Sayer, 2015). Japan is a prime example of this neoliberal trend, as seen in policies such as teaching English to young learners, which reflect the recommendations for educational reform issued by a major business association seeking to foster “global human resources.”
However, these neoliberal beliefs have been challenged. One insight comes from interviews with Japanese workers of MNCs who have worked in non-English-dominant Asian countries (Author, 2013, 2015). It was found that various factors influenced language choice in their overseas workplaces, and English was not always used. Although English was indeed recognized as important, complex workplace demands required communicative strategies, multilingual repertoires, and communicative dispositions such as willingness to communicate and respect difference, demonstrating that communicative ability was viewed beyond basic language skills.
In order to further scrutinize the contradiction between language-in-education policies and the voices of transnational workers, this paper analyzed an interview and a government document. The two “policymakers” here include an interviewee at a major business association in Japan who is in charge of preparing recommendations for the Ministry of Education, and the 2017 Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications’ recommendations for language education based on its survey on corporate needs for global human resources.
The data suggest that the policymakers interpret communicative ability as linguistic skills only and consider the acquisition of English proficiency measured by standardized tests as the main indicator of developing “global human resources.” The study suggests reconceptualization of communicative ability in language-in-education policies, while questioning the potential neoliberal complicity of doing so.
