Toyo Eiwa Jogakuin

This study examines the extent to which spoken academic English produced by the ChatGPT-4o model (ChatGPT) aligns with authentic discourse and is applicable for use in L2 speaking materials. As generative AI tools gain popularity among L2 learners for speaking practice, it is essential to assess the linguistic and discourse-level validity of such output. Ten dialogues generated by ChatGPT were compared with an authentic transcript of a doctoral dissertation defence from the Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English (MICASE) using a corpus linguistic and content analysis approach. Quantitative analyses revealed that ChatGPT produced language with higher lexical diversity, greater use of advanced vocabulary, and more complex syntax than the MICASE sample, but with lower readability. Content analysis showed that while ChatGPT simulated turn-taking and appropriate question–answer sequences, it lacked features of spontaneous interaction such as clarification requests, topic shifts, and overlapping speech. Speaker roles in the generated texts were consistent but followed more scripted and idealized patterns. These findings suggest that ChatGPT can serve as a useful supplementary tool for academic speaking practice, especially in providing structured, high-level input. However, its limitations in simulating authentic interaction highlight the need for guided integration alongside real human dialogue. The study is expected to contribute to the growing body of research on AI-assisted language learning.

新型コロナウィルス感染症は，未知の病気であるがゆえに様々な社会の脆弱性をあぶりだした。感染症，ウィルス，ワクチンについての科学的知見（エビデンス）は専門家の間でも異なるが，政府の対策に都合のよい情報が流布され，人々をワクチン接種に駆り立てている。医療・教育関係者や心理職は個人の意思とは無関係にワクチン接種を求められる。ワクチン接種を含むコロナ対策をめぐって，人々はマスコミ，うわさ，身近な事例などによって賛成論・反対論・中立の立場をとると思われるが，それらの間に対立や反目（極端な場合は差別）さえ生じている。また，長引く流行により，人々の働き方や対話，児童・生徒・学生の学びのスタイルが変わり，人間関係やメンタルヘルスにも様々な問題が生じている。このシンポジウムでは，いかに情報の偏りによって「コロナ禍」が作り出されてきたのか，そして「コロナ禍」が人々のメンタルヘルスにどのような影響を与えてきたのかについて話題提供をしていただき，コロナをめぐる諸問題について広く心理関係者の皆さんと一緒に考えてみたい。

Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Singapore are post-colonial states with diverse populations. By looking at how each state has combated Islamic extremism, this paper analyzes the state-Islam relations to identify their commonalities and differences. This paper argues that the Malaysian and Singaporean states frame Islam as a racial issue, thereby making Islam as public a matter is possible in order to achieve racial harmony. On the other hand, Indonesian and the Philippines states frame Islam as a private matter. Indonesian state lets mass Islamic organizations to manage Islam for the faithful. While in the Philippines, making the state’s influence over Islam is less effective, and it is further amplified by the state’s inability to tame Muslim’s grievances. These different policy patterns are critical in understanding the state-Islam relations during national crises, especially to explain how those countries managed the crises around the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack.