Is an entirely English-speaking village coming to Tokyo?

I thought that was Hakuba and Niseko...

I doubt the whole world knows.

Immersion isn't a magic silver bullet. You only have to look at the studies of Canadian French immersion schools to see that while immersion programs may benefit the learner's receptive skills, they don't necessarily lead to major improvements in productive skills. If you want to look at something closer to Japan, look at the hordes of foreigners who spend years here and never get their Japanese beyond basic daily survival level.

What purpose of language is going to be used in this village? Maybe a very high level of language will be used by the staff who make big decisions for how the village operates. But for the typical staff member or the typical tourist who visits the village, most of the English that gets used will be greetings and daily survival English - the sorts of English that school eikaiwa (and eikaiwa schools) hammer Japanese students with. The sorts of English that honestly, I don't see my students having much trouble with. "Where is the cafe?" "How much does this sandwich cost?" and "Thank you, have a nice day!" this is all stuff that students do fine with and moreover it's stuff that no student really needs unless they are planning on traveling to an Anglophone country in the next couple months. "What did you think of that song?" "Let's analyze this problem and propose a concrete solution," "Tell me why you think this is the best idea, supporting your claims with evidence", this is where students struggle (not just in Japan, but all over the world). This is the sort of language that practices critical thinking skills that are useful in Japanese life, even if the student never goes abroad. And it's the sort of English I just don't foresee coming up that much for 90% of the people involved in an English village. But it can be prompted and practiced in a real Academic English class if the teachers are willing to make the students practice it.

Best of luck to the JET Programme and other folks working on this, but I don't see this village as a solution to Japan's English woes. At best, I foresee it being a mildly profitable place to send schools on field trips and a way of employing genki FOB foreigners who don't know how to teach or aren't interested in teaching.

I agree wholeheartedly with katsu78!

katsu78Jan. 03, 2015 - 11:10AM JST Immersion isn't a magic silver bullet. You only have to look at the studies of Canadian French immersion schools to see that while immersion programs may benefit the learner's receptive skills, they don't necessarily lead to major improvements in productive skills.

I'm not sure what studies you're looking at, because all the research I have seen on the subject shows that immersion schools produce consistently better results than non-immersion schools, and the worst criticism I've seen is that not everyone achieves "native-like" proficiency, but honestly that's setting the bar INCREDIBLY high.

I am, of course, open to correction if you could please provide me with a couple of studies (or even the right keywords to search for) that support your viewpoint?

If you want to look at something closer to Japan, look at the hordes of foreigners who spend years here and never get their Japanese beyond basic daily survival level.

The vast majority of foreigners who spend more than a couple of years in Japan speak enough Japanese to talk about most common topics comfortably. There are a very small minority who never get past "survival level" Japanese, but these are in the minority, and in almost every case it is a conscious choice by the individual to not learn Japanese. You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink.

Not only is this not a "big idea," but it's, at once, silly and ignorant. Is preparing for the 2020 Olympics really a reason to waste money in an already-endangered economy simply so that some Japanese people can speak English to foreigners? And those foreigners will be here fewer than 10 days--most even fewer than that. Think about it. This faux obsession with English in this country is truly maddening. If you want to learn English, learn it. But do not waste, ultimately, millions of yen--private or public--simply to make a show of it. So weird.

I'd love to live in English town.

Japanese officials have a stupid belief that if they snap their fingers it will become fact. Imagine this "village" if you will, all foreigners and probably some Japanese as well speaking "only" English. Who is actually going to live there? It will be a magnet for all the language leeches in this country. Also what happens after the Olympics? They will find a way to claim success and shut it down. It's a temporary plan for a long term problem.

Do more efficient and better job in the education system and people will learn better English. Get away from the institutional belief that making a mistake is a death sentence. Make using English on par with Japanese. There a better and smarter ways to improve the English abilities of people here, stop wasting money on shot in the dark ideas.

Plus pay attention to details, it matters.

With all the money printing going on, it would be simpler if government can just "reimburse" all expenses of students that went to the US for ESL program for example, and they must prove it by passing TOEFL or TOEIC. Problem with Japan is that there are no incentives, motivations to learn English other than to look "cool".

FrungyJAN. 03, 2015 - 12:10PM JST

I'm not sure what studies you're looking at, because all the research I have seen on the subject shows that immersion schools produce consistently better results than non-immersion schools, and the worst criticism I've seen is that not everyone achieves "native-like" proficiency, but honestly that's setting the bar INCREDIBLY high.

I am, of course, open to correction if you could please provide me with a couple of studies (or even the right keywords to search for) that support your viewpoint?

Lydia White has commented on French-Canadian immersion programs, and shown that learners are not necessarily able to produce language nearly on the same level as what they can comprehend. Of course I have no research showing that immersion schools are inferior to non-immersion, because I never claimed that to be the case. What I'm saying is that immersion in and of itself is insufficient to facilitate useful language learning. The only information given so far about this village is that the immersion will involve "restaurants, shops and sports centers" and will be taught by a staff who "would be foreigners who have the support from the Japan International Cooperation Agency and also the JET Program", which suggests the purpose of this program is to have "teachers" whose only qualification seems to be their native-ness teaching basic survival English in an environment where students aren't able to just refuse to participate. What I'm saying is that's really not enough. Every school in Japan has the resources to implement a classroom English program that is more effective as what it sounds like this camp will be able to, there simply is a lack of will to make it happen.

I would however be very interested in seeing your research on immersion schools producing consistently better results than non-immersion schools. I would be very interested in seeing what measures the researchers take to ensure they're making an accurate comparison between programs, that the relevant factors being measured are the immersiveness of the programs and that differences in teacher abilities, family support, and curricular materials can be ruled out as significant factors in any differences in outcomes.

The silver bullet is immersion at a very very early age. Just like a 20 year old picking up a violin for the first time, most English learners in Japan might eventually become OK, but are simply too old to ever become really great.

I went to a French immersion school from the age of 4. Trust me, it works. I can think about what I want to say in French just as quickly as I can in English. I never get tired of speaking or listening to French for hours on end. My Japanese on the other hand is extremely mechanical even after years of study. Every sentence must be carefully manufactured and considered before it's spoken. Most of the time I just use one of the many stock phrases that I've memorized like a robot. It's mentally exhausting and feels unnatural.

katsu78Jan. 03, 2015 - 01:36PM JST Lydia White has commented on French-Canadian immersion programs, and shown that learners are not necessarily able to produce language nearly on the same level as what they can comprehend. Of course I have no research showing that immersion schools are inferior to non-immersion, because I never claimed that to be the case.

And the reason you have no research showing this is because immersion DOES produce superior results to non-immersion.

What I'm saying is that immersion in and of itself is insufficient to facilitate useful language learning.

Yes, there are a few people who come to Japan and manage to live here for years without learning Japanese, but the overwhelming majority DO learn Japanese. Now let's compare that against a control group of people who never come to Japan... hmm... only a tiny percentage of the world population speak Japanese.

But maybe you want to narrow the sample to those who WANT to learn Japanese. Well, every single person I've met who came to Japan to study Japanese and lived here for a few years can talk rings around someone who just studied it at college in a foreign country.

What I think you mean to say is that immersion is a necessary but not sufficient condition for learning a second language to a near-native level.

tiredofiron: "Yeah, if you want an idea of how well that will work then just look at Korea. Most of the English villages were a hit as a novelty attraction for a few months there and now they look like ghost towns on weekends. They are a big white elephant/pork barrel construction project with a veneer of internationalization sprinkled on top so the proposal looks good to the public."

If you want to talk about white elephant/pork barrel construction projects, why not address the big white elephant in the room? -- the Olympics themselves. It's true the popularity of the parks in Korea have gone down since the novelty wore off, but let's say the Olympics are coming again to the area; the popularity will again increase. With the Olympics coming this will definitely be a hit, and a successful one. Will it die down after? I would say absolutely, but then less so than most of the other Olympic venues that will cost even MORE, because the English villages can still be used for activities, schools, etc.

Katsu is right to an extent as to what sort of English will be used, but he's leaving out the part that it's MORE than that when they speak of total immersion. It's not just the language, it's the place. It's obviously not Disneyland, but if it is built right it will function in the same way -- an entire sphere set to be outside of the place it's in. They have 'foreign money' so people have to use it in the same way they would use regular money, but the denomination are different, etc. Hopefully aside from the shop clerks and staff that would engage in, yes, the regular sort of "Where is the restroom?" dialogue with the guests there will be staff sitting in the cafes or other areas that engage in regular conversation with them.

In any case, it's a chance for people to use a little bit of what they've studied, and I see nothing wrong with that, especially given that it's oriented towards more people using the language functionally with the Olympics coming up or with an eye for an increase in foreign tourists. For the critics, where's the harm? And if they say the harm is money, I'm guessing this will cost a WHOLE lot less than anything else related to the Olympics or construction in general, and it will earn some money back.

In any case, it'll be an interesting experiment, and I'm sure it will be fun for people who go there.

FrungyJAN. 03, 2015 - 01:52PM JST

And the reason you have no research showing this is because immersion DOES produce superior results to non-immersion.

Let's not be rude. You asked me for research terms you could look up and get information, and I gave them to you. It's only fair for you to do the same. While you're at it...

Yes, there are a few people who come to Japan and manage to live here for years without learning Japanese, but the overwhelming majority DO learn Japanese. Now let's compare that against a control group of people who never come to Japan... hmm... only a tiny percentage of the world population speak Japanese.

It would be nice if you could give me some evidence supporting your claim that the "overwhelming majority" learn Japanese, or a study comparing that percentage to the number of people outside Japan who study Japanese. I'd love to see the data.

What I think you mean to say is that immersion is a necessary but not sufficient condition for learning a second language to a near-native level.

No, what I mean to say is exactly what I did say, that immersion in and of itself is insufficient for useful language learning.

For language learning to happen, language learners need massive amounts of comprehensible input. Now one way of getting that input is to immerse the learner in the L2, and certainly I support that as an approach. But it's not enough. If the learner is immersed in language that is beyond their ability to comprehend, they're never going to learn anything. If the learner is immersed in language below what they already know, they're not going to learn anything. If the learner is immersed in an environment where they have massive amounts of input slightly above their level, but are never challenged to produce any meaningful language, then any learning they're going to do is going to be arduous at best. If the learner is immersed in language that they never again use in their daily lives, then any learning that does happen is likely to be over-written by "more important" learning the next time entrance exams roll around.

I have no doubt that students who go to this camp will come away with vastly improved fluency in asking to buy sandwiches or inviting friends to play a game of basketball or following directions to find the bathroom. I just don't think that's the sort of language learning Japan's educational system needs. It's not useful for students living in Japan, any classroom in any Japanese school could teach that sort of language just as effectively if the school administration decided it was necessary, and any student going abroad will pick up that kind of language very effectively the moment need makes it necessary that it be learned

Like I said in my very first post here, immersion is not a magic silver bullet. There may be benefits to immersion, but an effective language program needs more than just immersing students in the L2.

Another nonsensical idea. Tokyo is just fine for visitors as it is. More bilingual signage and machine displays in the transportation system would of course be good, but other than that the J-politicians should spare us their brain farts and leave well enough alone. Foreign tourists are doing just as it is is, and olympic athletes are no fools.

Just returned from a trip to my home town in the USA. Hotel cleaning and restaurant staff: spoke ONLY Spanish. Local liquor store owners: bilingual English and Chinese. Airport cleaning staff: bilingual and unknown language, unfamiliar culture (to me); Airport McDonald's staff: able to take customer orders in English, but all were speaking an unfamiliar African language among each other while working. (Ethiopian-guess?) Nearby town had public signs ONLY in Spanish; Food sold in regular supermarkets were targeted at many cultures, even Chinese cabbage was stocked. All advertisements were bilingual, Spanish and English.

TMG is sending its teachers to live for 3 months in Australia and the USA. One teacher said he just found out he will be living in the USA with a family that speaks Farsi at home.

Japan may have the only "English Village" in the world!

katsu78Jan. 03, 2015 - 02:21PM JST Let's not be rude. You asked me for research terms you could look up and get information, and I gave them to you. It's only fair for you to do the same. While you're at it...

To be fair you gave me the name of a respected authority I already knew, who's research you had completely misinterpreted. You claimed the research showed,

"immersion schools to see that while immersion programs may benefit the learner's receptive skills, they don't necessarily lead to major improvements in productive skills."

Instead what the research shows that at certain stages of learning productive skills lag behind receptive skills. Using numbers let's say that someone goes from productive 10 to productive 70 and receptive 10 to receptive 80. It doesn't show that there's no major improvement in productive skills, merely that the benefits are not spread equally across productive and receptive language skills.

You might want to read Johnson and Swain. It is a little old now, but deals extensively with the theme of immersion and language learning.

It would be nice if you could give me some evidence supporting your claim that the "overwhelming majority" learn Japanese, or a study comparing that percentage to the number of people outside Japan who study Japanese. I'd love to see the data.

Sure. Here's a handy graphic showing pass rates for the JLPT by level for Japan (Immersion) and Overseas (presumably not immersion, but may be mixed).

http://www.jlptwallchart.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/How-many-people-pass-the-jLPT.jpg

Note that for every level except N3 the pass rate is higher in the immersive environment (Japan).

If the learner is immersed in language that is beyond their ability to comprehend, they're never going to learn anything. If the learner is immersed in language below what they already know, they're not going to learn anything.

... by this logic babies would never be able to learn their first language. I see this sort of logic a lot in Japan and frankly it is in no small way responsible for the low level of English education in Japan. If you only teach what the students already know then they're learning nothing new, and there's no progress.

L1 studies found that parents who dumbed down their English for their children just impeded their children's English language development. The same goes for L2 students. But you see this approach is incredibly wide-spread in Japan. Say what you have to say in normal English, THEN give a simpler version if they don't understand. Doing it the other way around results in zero learning.

RecklessJan. 03, 2015 - 04:59PM JST @Frungy you are a scholar and a gentleman.

Thank you kind sir.

Anyways, my experience being immersed in Japan, I bulldozed through sheer effort to pass JLPT level #1 and declined from there because I simply have no interest in speaking Japanese.

This is why I hold that immersion is a "necessary but not sufficient" condition for language learning. Motivation is a key factor, but not in the way that most of the current generation of EFL teachers seem to think it is.

Anyways, anyways, the new village should be fittingly called "Gaijin Zoo".

They pay peanuts? Who knows, with the way the yen is going that might be a good deal.

I'm all for these English-speaking villages as long as it's open to all and there are UK/US supermarkets selling things at UK/US prices!

"English Village" is too ambitious for Japan.

Perhaps "English Hamlet" would have more chance of success...

M3M3M3 and Kibousha made some good points. As there is little incentive to really learn English here it is obvious that many Japanese don't. Why learn something that isn't really that useful? I am teaching a young 12 year old student who is bilingual,from a mixed marriage, having grown up with two languages, he is fluent in both.However, in the future without some sort of academic record such as Toeic or Aiken, his bilingual ability will count for zero.In actuality, Japan does not reward learning for it's own sake but to pass a test. And that is why most Japanese intensely dislike English.I hope that the village takes off but it should be based on a theme park not a classroom.

kurisupisuJan. 03, 2015 - 07:42PM JST As there is little incentive to really learn English here it is obvious that many Japanese don't. Why learn something that isn't really that useful?

English is tremendously useful in every single profession. Want to be a programmer? Then you need English. Want to be a scientist? Then you need English. Want to be a doctor? Then you need English. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Sure you could be a BAD scientist, programmer, engineer, doctor, etc. by not learning English and operating off research done years ago, but if you want to be good at your job you need English.

Of course I work in a university environment where the latest research is important, and doubtless there are many, many so-called "professionals" out there who haven't looked at a journal since they qualified, but that's not what people should be aiming to be.

I am teaching a young 12 year old student who is bilingual,from a mixed marriage, having grown up with two languages, he is fluent in both.However, in the future without some sort of academic record such as Toeic or Aiken, his bilingual ability will count for zero.

Eiken, not Aiken.

Also, his English will pay off in a myriad of ways. Not only has research shown that bilingualism conveys many mental benefits, but it'll also allow him to access knowledge internationally.

In actuality, Japan does not reward learning for it's own sake but to pass a test.

We all know the tests are bad. Some of us are working on it.

I don't like it. It sounds frivolous and a waste of time. Instead, you can read English novels, or go to US colleges in Japan, or work for foreign companies in Japan, etc.

There are Japanese Nobel Prize winners who do not speak English. You may need Chinese in the future, not English.

We all know the tests are bad.

Eiken is quite a good test IMHO. It has a speaking/interview component which, I believe, is conducted with a native speaker at the highest grade.

FrungyJAN. 03, 2015 - 04:27PM JST

It doesn't show that there's no major improvement in productive skills, merely that the benefits are not spread equally across productive and receptive language skills.

I never claimed immersion leads to no major improvement in productive skills, I said it doesn't necessarily lead to major improvement. It depends on the quality of the program. The difference is subtle, sure, but it all goes back to my original claim which you've surprisingly taken issue with- immersion is not a magic silver bullet.

If you only teach what the students already know then they're learning nothing new, and there's no progress.

This would be a stinging rebuttal if I'd ever proposed teaching what students already know. Of course, I never did. I said students must be able to comprehend the input. Which is basic input theory, with support from Vygotsky. A beginning language learner isn't going to learn anything if I immerse them in language they're incapable of comprehending.

Which gets back to why I keep saying immersion in and of itself isn't enough to teach useful English. If students are going to learn any language at this English village at an efficient pace, they need very skilled teachers able to give them L2 input at a level just slightly beyond what they've mastered while scaffolding it in a way that keeps it comprehensible. That's not something you can just get from any old native speaker hired to work at an English village. You need skilled teachers.

I hope next time we converse, you're less inclined to argue against things I never proposed as though I proposed them.

Gimics and "novel ideas" aren't going to do it, Japan. Improve your current education system with regards to English. Fix the nuts 'n bolts before applying glowing lights and a whacky paint-job.

katsu78Jan. 03, 2015 - 08:53PM JST

It doesn't show that there's no major improvement in productive skills, merely that the benefits are not spread equally across productive and receptive language skills.

I never claimed immersion leads to no major improvement in productive skills, I said it doesn't necessarily lead to major improvement. It depends on the quality of the program. The difference is subtle, sure, but it all goes back to my original claim which you've surprisingly taken issue with- immersion is not a magic silver bullet.

There are equally a number of low quality non-immersion programs. Taken overall immersion programs produce better results.

And I acknowledged that immersion is not, on its own, a guarantee of learning. There are motivational factors.

However your claim about productive skills was in contrast with receptive skills. You misunderstood the research, and it was that point that I was taking issue with.

Also the idiom is "magic bullet" or "silver bullet", not "magic silver bullet".

If you only teach what the students already know then they're learning nothing new, and there's no progress.

This would be a stinging rebuttal if I'd ever proposed teaching what students already know. Of course, I never did. I said students must be able to comprehend the input. Which is basic input theory, with support from Vygotsky. A beginning language learner isn't going to learn anything if I immerse them in language they're incapable of comprehending.

Actually this is precisely what Montessori and several other techniques have demonstrated DOES work. You immerse the student in a learning environment and provide them with input. Eventually the student accumulates sufficient incomprehensible input to begin seeing patterns and they suddenly leaps up a level. This is how babies learn, and there are numerous teaching methods that have demonstrated that it work well for a number of other subjects too.

Vygotsky's theory of Zone of Proximal Development is a solid and relevant basis when the learner is instructed directly, but it doesn't hold for most classroom situations in Japan, where classes are not streamed and where input cannot be tailored to the ZPD of every student, but rather merely to the "average" ZPD. And it is my belief that, looking at the output from English education in Japan, that actually classes are being targeted at the lowest ZPD.

Which gets back to why I keep saying immersion in and of itself isn't enough to teach useful English. If students are going to learn any language at this English village at an efficient pace, they need very skilled teachers able to give them L2 input at a level just slightly beyond what they've mastered while scaffolding it in a way that keeps it comprehensible. That's not something you can just get from any old native speaker hired to work at an English village. You need skilled teachers.

You're operating from a teacher-centered theory of language learning. What you're ignoring entirely is that students are not little machines that you feed input into and they all produce identical results. Students start at different levels, have different learning styles, and have different motivations for learning.

Immersive language learning is student-centered where the student receives a massive amount of input. The input may be incomprehensible at that time, but it becomes comprehensible later. Consider your own learning, was there ever a time when you saw something and went, "I've seen this before. It didn't make sense then, but I understand it now". Incomprehensible input is not discarded, it stays in the student's memory like an incomplete puzzle until enough pieces are added to complete the picture.

I hope next time we converse, you're less inclined to argue against things I never proposed as though I proposed them.

Your understanding of the theory of immersive language learning is clearly flawed. You made mistakes. I was kind enough to clear them up. I suppose gratitude was too much to hope for.

There are Japanese Nobel Prize winners who do not speak English.

They probably understand English receptively... by reading and listening .

It's just so sad that they can't communicate their wonderful ideas themselves to the world in English .

If they could

I see Tamarama already spoke of Niseko. I 2nd that statement.

Immersion won't work in Japan until the students are able to accept how immersion works. Like others said, it involves being able to accept things beyond your comprehension and learning to adapt. Unfortunately this idea is quite uncomfortable for the average Japanese person. I enjoy trying to understand Japanese every day, even though I often make mistakes. It makes life interesting.

Here, save yerself the trouble and just continue to send students to ..... British Hills 1-8 Aza Shibakusa, Oaza Tarao, Ten'ei-mura, Iwase-gun, Fukushima 962-0622 Japan 0120-131-386 [ Reception hours 9:30 - 19:30 ] TEL:0248-85-1313 FAX:0248-85-1300

http://www.british-hills.co.jp/english/access/

Some high schools in Tokyo had annual trips in the summer to have students immerse themselves in the British Hills English only program, complete with cricket and high tea. The courses were run so that a certificate of completion was earned. The March 2011 disaster put a dent in the trip but, hey, they could start the ball rolling again and rejuvenate the local economy and thereby lessen the resentment in Fukushima toward the Tokyo Olympics!

http://www.british-hills.co.jp/english/concept/

"What is British Hills? British Hills was established by the Sano Education Foundation, the owners of Kanda University of International Studies and Kanda Institute of Foreign Languages in 1994. It was designed as a place where people could experience British culture without leaving Japan."

Wow!!! Some of the JET teachers brought over were ......in diapers when this English Immersion program began.....and so it goes, on and on, far into the night.....

http://www.british-hills.co.jp/english/lesson/ http://www.british-hills.co.jp/stay/

(disclaimer: I have nothing to do with this place, and have never been there...though wouldn't mind going and learning how to be British!) ;o)

jpntdytmrowJan. 04, 2015 - 12:36AM JST Wow!!! Some of the JET teachers brought over were ......in diapers when this English Immersion program began.....and so it goes, on and on, far into the night.....

Not many people know this, but the JET Programme (note the British English spelling) is actually just the latest incarnation of a much older programme. The British government had a language teacher exchange programme with Japan since before WW2. It underwent a hiatus (naturally) during WW2, and then was restarted as the JET Programme, and has slowly lost its way since then, in no small part because it has been used as a bargaining chip in way too many international deals.

The details of the plan will be finalized within the next three years So the plans will be finalized by 2018. Then they start building it. I wonder when it will be completed by...

with plans to open it to every citizen also in the plans. Keyword: "also" They plan to open this to a select group first??

Eiken is quite a good test IMHO. It has a speaking/interview component which, I believe, is conducted with a native speaker at the highest grade.

I wonder are you Japanese? If you are not this would be the first time I have ever heard any call the EIKEN "quite a good test", and yes while it's your opinion, and I respect that, I strongly disagree.

The written portion of the test includes way too much idiomatic English, which is not allowed in the interview portion of the test. Problem is though that the EIKEN Association here has too much power and while they make claims that the EIKEN is accepted at many overseas colleges and universities, just take a look at the list of schools that accept it.

IELTS, TOEFL, and TOEIC are light years above the EIKEN, in my most humble opinion. The way kids study for the EIKEN here is similar to how they study in school, everything by rote memorization. Not too much on the practical side, and getting to the interview portion for the 1Grade test is difficult beyond belief for the typical Japanese learner.

Try it, you'll be surprised.

Good luck but after 2024 it will go right back to where it was before. Most Japanese I've encountered don't seem to want to speak English except in the Japanized form and this is just for Olympic window dressing anyway.

I've meet many foreigners from all over who have lived in Japan 10 or 20 years and can't speak a word of the language. Well, maybe konnichiwa, but that's it.

@Reckless, I wish I could give your first post ten thumbs up as I feel exactly the same way.

What's the point of this? Doesn't make any sense if a person visits "English Town" with friends and decides to speak Japanese amongst themselves. How are they going to monitor that? One can only come to English Town alone? Another "micro" solution to a "macro" problem. Standard English education should be offered by 3rd grade of elementary education and get rid of Romanji English education.

Learning a language isn’t difficult but it does require time and effort> The writer of this article doesn't seem to realize the above is a very self-contraditory statement. I would think anything that requires time and effort is difficult. Especially learning a foreign language and bring it to a level where you feel comfortable using it is very, very time-consuming and difficult for most people unless the target language is closely related to your own language. The idea of an English village might produce some result, but it will certainly not be sufficient to warrant the kind of money required to build and run it. Like some comments above suggested, it will probably be a sort of a ghost town soon.