Education Reform
Origins, concerns, and nature of current reform effort
National Council on Educational Reform
Council's diagnosis of education problems
Council's recommendations
Concluding observations
Education Reform
Japan is now engaged in a major education reform movement. Its scope
is such that if most of the major proposals under consideration are
adopted and implemented, the resulting level of change would rank with
the two previous watersheds in Japanese education history--the Meiji and
Occupation reforms. The continuing dynamic relationship between
education and national need is apparent in the reform debate. Problems
are being faced openly in public debate and political action, reflecting
the impressive self-corrective potential of a parliamentary democracy in
action.
Origins, concerns, and nature of current reform effort
The current effort can be traced back some 15 years through a number
of often critical reports, some government initiated and some not.
Separately and cumulatively, they have sparked much public debate. For
example. in the late 1960's the Central Council for Education called for
eliminating uniformity and promoting diversity in education. In 1970,
the Japanese government called upon the 24-nation Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) for an outside review of its
education policies. The international experts provided by OECD lauded
Japan's considerable accomplishments in education, but were critical of
a number of policies and practices, including the extent of centralized
control, standardization, conformity, institutional hierarchy, and the
emphasis on university entrance examinations.
[1]
Several subsequent reports, including one from the Japan Teachers
Union in 1975, added impetus to the reform movement. Reports from
various business groups, including one from the Japan Committee for
Economic Development in 1979, urged greater creativity, diversity, and
internationalism in education.
The reform movement has developed considerable momentum over the past
few years and education reform is now a major national issue. Political
and business leaders believe that Japan is moving into a complex stage
of economic and technological development that will require greater
individual imagination, creativity, and sensitivity to international
dimensions. Hence, current and future generations of youth must be
prepared appropriately. Many Japanese also believe that education has
been partly to blame for some deterioration in the nation's social
fabric in the 1970s and '80s. Yet it is understood that social tensions
and labor market changes affect education. For example, some believe
that home support for education has declined as a result of the increase
in children from broken homes and families where both parents are
employed away from home. The decline in student motivation for sustained
effort on the examination treadmill is manifested in part in an increase
in anti-social behavior in schools and the dropout rate.
Other concerns are turning up as well. In 1981-82, the Second
International Survey of Mathematics Achievement was conducted in 24
countries under the auspices of the International Association for the
Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). As in the first survey in
1964. Japanese 13-year-olds and high school seniors ranked first or
second in almost every area of mathematics skills tested. (The
performance of American students was well below the international
average.) However, in this latest survey, the average achievement of the
Japanese 13-year-olds was somewhat lower than their predecessors in the
1964 survey.
This is not the only sign of some educational decline. According to
Kazuyuki Kitamura, other indicators include "the increasing number
of low achievers in primary and secondary schools; increased school
violence, especially at junior high schools; and the emerging phenomenon
of voluntary dropouts from senior high schools."
[2]
For these and other reasons, opinion polls have been reporting
reduced public confidence in the education system. Some key findings
from a May 1984 survey by a major Japanese newspaper include:
...more than half (55
percent) of the adult respondents felt "unsatisfied" with the
primary and junior high schools, whereas only 24 percent were
"satisfied." (In a similar survey conducted in 1977, 49
percent of the respondents had been "satisfied". . . only 22
percent "unsatisfied.") . . . to the question, "Do you
think school education has become better or worse when you compare it
with your school days?" 32 percent of adults surveyed in 1984
answered "better," while 47 percent considered it
"worse." (In 1977, 44 percent had said "better" and
32 percent. . . "worse.")
[3]
Reformers are focusing on such issues as the enforced uniformity of
schooling at elementary and secondary levels that is believed to stifle
individuality, create frustrations and contribute to disorder in
schools, and the heavy emphasis on university entrance examinations
which is believed to hinder personal and intellectual development. Some
problems, such as those stemming from standardization in compulsory
education, are recognized as the other side of the coin of success in
school achievement during the compulsory school years.
There has been considerable continuity in both debate and membership
of various reform bodies over the past decade and a half. While heir to
various concerns and debate since 1970, the present reform effort
differs in two respects. It cuts nearer the core of Japanese education
practice and challenges some basic principles that have governed the
present system for the past 35 years. It has also had the advantage of
strong political leadership from Prime Minister Nakasone himself.
The Prime Minister became actively involved in education reform
during the 1983 election campaign for the lower house of the Diet. The
extent of voter dissatisfaction with the education system led him to
make reform of education one of three issues which he believes need
priority national attention now and into the 21st century. (The other
two are financial and administrative reform of government.)
A recent study group with special significance for Prime Minister
Nakasone's subsequent initiatives in education reform was the Conference
on Culture and Education. This special advisory commission was
established by the Prime Minister in June 1983. As chairman, the Prime
Minister appointed the distinguished founder (now honorary board
chairman) of the Sony Corporation, Masaru Ibuka, long a strong advocate
of educational innovation, particularly in early childhood education.
The group reported on a number of topics that remain matters of concern,
including moral education, the emphasis on credentialism, university
admissions policies, teacher education, and internationalism in Japanese
education. The group hit especially hard at "the evil of uniform
education" and concluded that the Japanese education system
"must undergo a major reform so that every Japanese will grow more
at ease with himself and able to cope with the future
independently."
[4]
On the eve of the general election of December 1983, the Prime
Minister released a seven-point plan for reform that drew widespread
media attention. Among other things, he proposed reform of the
university entrance examination system and a reassessment of the 6-3-3
school organization. The Prime Minister's concern with education
extended beyond schooling, as he made clear in a February 1984 speech to
the Diet:
It seems to me that
postwar education has been heavily and exclusively dependent upon the
schools, and we have tended to neglect the importance of comprehensive
education from the broader perspective encompassing family education,
social education and other educational forms, and that this imbalance
lies behind the explosive increase in violence in the schools, juvenile
delinquency and other contemporary problems....I believe that the time
has come to institute sweeping reforms across the entire educational
spectrum in preparation for the 21st century.
[5]
National Council on Educational Reform
The following month, Prime Minister Nakasone proposed to the Diet
that an ad hoc council on education reform be established under his
direct control. After extensive debate, such a body was established in
August with a 3-year mandate to make a comprehensive study of various
government policies and practices in education and related areas and to
present recommendations for reform of the education system. The name was
changed in April 1986 to National Council on Educational Reform.
The National Council reports directly to the Prime Minister, not to
Monbusho. Vesting such responsibility in a body other than the Ministry
of Education is a major change from standard Japanese practice.
Because of the Council's direct link to the Prime Minister, one
leading Japanese scholar considers it to be the most powerful education
advisory body since the postwar Reform Committee.
[6]
Prime Minister Nakasone's vision for the Council was set forth in his
brief speech at the Council's first meeting:
Today we are facing
dramatic changes in our circumstances, both domestic and overseas, as
well as great changes in the times. I am convinced that the time has
come to develop new policies for implementing the necessary reforms in
political, economic, social, educational, cultural and other fields so
as to adequately cope with these changes and thus safeguard the future
of our nation. To this end, it is necessary for us I believe, to reform
our educational system with a long-term perspective and make this a
responsibility of the entire Government. . .
. . . It is my belief that educational
reform should aim to preserve and further develop the traditional
Japanese culture which we have inherited and to cultivate in children
lofty ideals, sound physical strength, well-balanced personalities and
creative power, as well as such moral and behavioral standards as are
universally accepted in human society, so that these future Japanese
citizens may be able to contribute to the international community with a
Japanese consciousness....
Finally I should like to add that
educational reform involves more than the reform of education alone. It
will inevitably lead to reform of Japanese society itself. Bearing this
in mind, I should like to ask you, Mr. Chairman and all members of your
Council, to deliberate on educational reform so as to respond to the
expectations of all segments of our population and take into account
their opinions to the greatest extent possible.
[7]
The Council has 25 general members and 20 specialist members,
including representatives from elementary and secondary education,
higher education, organized labor, and business and industry. All are
proponents of education reform of one sort or another. The Council is
chaired by the former president of Kyoto University, a longtime personal
friend of the Prime Minister. The two vice-chairmen are the president of
Keio University and a senior consultant for the Industrial Bank of
Japan. Two-thirds of the group are graduates of national universities.
Ten of the 25 members are alumni of Tokyo University.
[8]
The Council identified the eight major issues to be
considered:
- Basic Requirements for an
Education Relevant to the 21st Century (Aims of education;
analysis of the past and present of education; and future prospects
for education.)
- Organization and
Systematization of Lifelong Learning and the Correction of the
Adverse Effects of Undue Emphasis on the Educational Background of
Individuals (Correction of the adverse effects of undue emphasis
of the educational background of individuals; development of a
lifelong learning system; vitalization of formal education; and
vitalization of educational functions of family and community.)
- Enhancement of Higher
Education and Individualization of Higher Education Institutions
(Diversification and individualization of higher education
institutions; scientific research and graduate schools; and the
organization and management of institutions of higher education.)
- Enrichment and
Diversification of Elementary and Secondary Education (Basic
direction of the substance of education; structure of the school
system; moral education; health education; education of the
handicapped; and class size and other educational conditions.)
- Improvement of the
Quality of Teachers
- Coping with
Internationalization
- Coping with the
Information Age
- Review of Educational
Administration and Finance (Distribution of functions between
governments and nongovernmental bodies; responsibilities of the
national and local governments and the distribution of functions
between different levels of government; school administration and
management; and educational costs and financing of education.)
[9]
The Council identified these concepts in considering all the issues:
emphasis on individuality, fundamentals, creativity, expansion of
choice, humanization of the education environment, lifelong learning,
internationalism, and dealing with the information age. Emphasis on
individuality is considered the fundamental guiding principle.
[10]
The Council has organized itself into four committees. Work is done
in plenary sessions, too; and two dozen of these were held in the first
year alone. The Council is taking the Prime Minister's charge to
consider public expectations and opinions seriously. It has conducted
public hearings in several prefectures throughout Japan, and has held
special hearings to which key organizations were invited to express
their views on education reform. The Council received written proposals
and comments from approximately 100 organizations before the end of the
first year of its work.
The Council has already produced two reports, the First Report on
Educational Reform, presented to the Prime Minister in June 1985,
and the Second Report on Educational Reform, submitted in April
1986. A third report is expected in 1987.
The first two reports provide an unusually candid summary of Japan's
education problems as perceived by many leading Japanese. Many of the
concerns will seem exaggerated to American readers, given the greater
extent and severity of some related problems in the United States.
However, the Japanese do consider their problems to be serious. This is
clear from the urgent tone of these documents, the vigor of the ongoing
debate, and the heavy attention that the mass media now give reform
matters. The evidence makes a persuasive case that the Japanese believe
their education system needs more than a simple tuneup, and that the
prospect for some fundamental change is greater than it has been at any
time since the war.
Council's diagnosis of education problems
The Council's First Report discussed the Japanese tendency to
attach too much importance to the educational background of an
individual, especially to graduation from certain prestigious
institutions, and on excessive and prolonged competition in entrance
examinations. Under the heading, "An educational wasteland,"
the Council's Second Report speaks of a "state of
desolation" in Japanese education. It is conceivable that this
phrase will become the Japanese equivalent of the "rising tide of
mediocrity" metaphor that helped galvanize education reform in the
United States.
Three sets of reforms are articulated in the Second Report.
The first concerns efforts to "invigorate education and inspire
public confidence" in all sectors of the education system. The
second centers around "coping with the changes of the times,"
and reintroduces the topics of internationalism in Japanese education
and the "information age." The third area includes educational
administration and finance.
The Council avers that the rigidity and uniformity of the system have
created problems. It notes such manifestations of the "state of
desolation" as bullying, school violence, juvenile delinquency, and
the refusal to go to school. These phenomena are viewed as serious, deep
rooted, and related to each other and to present conditions of the
family, school, and community. The Council asserts that the rigid,
uniform school programs, excessive controls on students, and other
factors prevent sound character formation, increase pressures on
children, and create frustration. Moral education, the Council says, has
been downplayed, and there is an imbalance between assertion of rights
and awareness of responsibilities.
The Council fears that an excessive emphasis on memorization has
produced many conformist people who are unable to think independently
and creatively. It also believes that some people do not understand
traditional cultural values and lack a Japanese identity. The Council
has been concerned about the quality of higher education, as well.
Finally, in a thinly veiled reference to the Ministry of Education and
the Japan Teachers Union, the Council notes that even within the
education sector there is an atmosphere of serious mutual distrust and
suspicion that must be rectified if public confidence in education is to
be restored.
Council's recommendations
While phrased in general terms, the Council's recommendations to date
have dealt with a number of fundamental issues, including
diversification, decentralization, and moral education. The
recommendations stress the importance of increasing individuality,
choice, and flexibility throughout the education system.
The Council has said that centralized control over education should
be loosened. National authorities should set minimum standards to
maintain and improve the quality of education, but should allow for
local innovation. At the elementary and secondary levels, national
guidelines should emphasize basic knowledge and skills and moral
education, but at the same time encourage development of school programs
in accordance with local circumstances. The Council has also asserted
that more importance should be attached to the role of private schools
with their distinctive aims and principles and that consideration should
be given to ways of facilitating the establishment of more private
schools for the first nine grades.
The Council recommends further diversification of higher education,
with each institution having greater freedom to develop its own
programs. Admission to postsecondary institutions should be made more
flexible through changes in eligibility requirements and entrance
examinations. Regulations should be revised so that students can change
institutions and departments more easily. Graduate education and
research should be improved, ways of obtaining private sector funds
found, and joint industry-government-higher education research expanded.
Among the measures proposed to improve teacher quality, the Council
suggests that newly appointed teachers undergo a year of inservice
training under the supervision of veteran teachers. In a related
recommendation, the Council proposes that the ongoing program to lower
the present pupil-teacher ratio in compulsory education should be fully
implemented and the staffing situation further improved. The Council
also calls for strengthening teacher training in moral education.
The Council recognizes the "bullying" problem as having
reached a serious level and believes that all-out efforts are needed to
eliminate it. It has encouraged parents to strengthen discipline at home
and has stressed that efforts by home, school, and community are all
necessary. It has suggested measures to achieve greater
internationalization of education, such as steps to facilitate
enrollment of foreign students and improve foreign language instruction.
It has suggested reforms to cope with the development of information
technologies. The Council also stresses the importance of developing a
lifelong learning system, reducing the current emphasis on formal
education credentials of individuals, giving additional opportunities to
adults, and serving an aging population in the future.
The Council acknowledges the education problems of Japanese children
living abroad as well as those who re-enter schools in Japan. The
Council believes that children who return to education in Japan should
be seen as an asset because of their experience abroad, and that special
selection procedures and placement provisions should be developed to
ensure equitable treatment in their admission to high schools and
universities.
Concluding observations
In addition to being concerned over the challenge of meeting new
national needs in science and technology to remain competitive in a
changing world economy, the Japanese are alarmed by what they perceive
as a growing sense of student disaffection from the education system.
Anti-social attitudes and behavior by students strike at the heart of
Japanese culture, attacking such core values as respect for authority
and education and social harmony.
The growth of ijime (school bullying) is particularly
upsetting to the Japanese because it represents group behavior gone out
of control. However small the scale at present, the unwillingness of
alienated students to participate constructively in formal education and
to observe group norms is seen as a rejection of the larger social
system which Japanese leaders and the public believe bodes ill for the
future. Ijime is a vexing problem for a society that prizes order,
harmony, and predictability. While disaffection appears to be growing in
the face of the rigidities of the present system, there is
understandable anxiety on the part of the authorities about opening the
system to greater diversity and
individualism--"liberalization"--because of the uncertainties
that would be induced. The debate over "liberalism" and coping
with "individuality" is, therefore, heated and earnest.
Although several problems have come into clearer focus for the
Japanese, there is not yet consensus on solutions. Considerable
opposition to change exists in various quarters. A common concern is
that, given the formidable successes of Japanese education, the baby not
be thrown out with the bath water. Ken'ichi Koyama, a university
professor and Tokyo graduate, summarizes some of the difficulties ahead,
including inflexible adherence to the status quo and the national
challenge of finding a new balance between group harmony and
individuality in Japanese culture:
Implementing educational
reform will not be easy. Ironically, this is partly due to the very
success Japanese education has had in assisting the catch-up process. As
in the case of people who come to a bad end precisely because they were
once winners, so successful systems and policies tend to become
inflexible and invite disaster by clinging to tried and true methods.
Japanese education may be on the verge of this sort of 'tragedy of the
winner' ...
Educators are inclined by nature to adopt a
negative and passive stance on reform questions. The education system
today, however, is suffering from a devastating blight whose symptoms
are grueling exam-score competition, juvenile delinquency, and violence
in the schools. If the cause of this disease is the uniform modern
school system itself, medicine targeted only at the symptoms will have
little effect. The responsibility of educators is to diagnose the
disease from a long-term and comprehensive perspective and to implement
a bold program of treatment.
[11]
Broadly speaking, because (apart from higher education) Japan has
essentially "caught up" with or surpassed the West in
education performance, there are no longer any comprehensive foreign
models likely to offer much help. Other nations are struggling with
education problems of like complexity, trying to find solutions within
their own contexts. The questions Japan is asking itself now are
questions of culture as well as pedagogy:
How will Japanese culture,
which has traditionally placed paramount importance on the individual's
place within the organization, adapt to the coming 'age of the
intellect?' How can we achieve a balance among intellectual, moral, and
physical education? How can we foster individuality and creativity while
at the same time maintaining respect for harmony as part of our culture?
These are among the questions that we must address as we face the
monumental task of educational reform.
[12]
While there may not be packaged solutions for cross-national import
or export, there are still many ideas and approaches which nations can
share and learn from each other. There are also some interesting
analogies. For example, the powerful influence of Japanese higher
education on secondary education will remind students of American
education history of the battle cry of the late 1930's and the 1940's,
"let the colleges set our high schools free!" This will be
more difficult in Japan. While the higher education sector is by
widespread agreement the weakest part of the Japanese system and not
world class in educational terms, it is also the most resistant to
change because of its status as the stronghold of tradition and of the
national "power structure." Moreover, the American example of
higher education reform shows how resistant to change this sector can
be.
Perhaps the most remarkable feature for American observers of the
current reform movement in Japan is that it is tending to move in the
opposite direction from that in the United States. Education reformers
in Japan are seeking some decentralization of control, greater
diversification of institutions, less uniformity and standardization of
curriculum, more flexibility in teaching, and more individualization of
instruction.
Americans already have state and local control, great diversity in
education programs at elementary and secondary levels, and an open,
diversified higher education system. Having gone far toward providing
pupil-centered instruction and a inroad array of curricular choice, most
serious American reformers are now seeking a greater measure of
commonality in the curriculum and higher academic standards for all.
Educators, political leaders, and parents in both countries are more
interested now than in the past in comparing educational perspectives,
approaches, and achievements and welcome information that enables them
to do so. This report by the U.S. Department of Education and the
counterpart report on American education prepared by Japan's Ministry of
Education are unusual examples of cooperative activity toward mutual
understanding in education.
Will the combined effort genuinely assist those seeking better
education for the children of the two nations? Will each nation find
lessons of value for its own reform needs? Let's look at some possible
implications of the Japanese experience for improving American
education, as seen by Secretary of Education, William J. Bennett.
Up to Top
Contact Us
U.S. Dept. of Education Study
