Community Schools and Educational Policy in Japan Kazuhiko HAYASHIZAKI Fukuoka University of Education Research Tea (12th September 2008) At the Research Centre for Learning and Teaching Newcastle University 1) Background to Community Schools in Japan In 1946, just after the war, an educational movement known as Sengo Minshushugi (after-war democracy) developed, aimed at democratising teaching and schools and developing student-centred curricula. Under this movement, educators stressed the importance of learning in the local community and through daily life activities such as

Seikatsu-tudurikata (writing on daily life). Despite this, thanks to the “modernisation of education” movement which arose in reaction to “the Sputnik Shock”, the Ministry of Education introduced a national curriculum which was more knowledge and test based. At the same time, during a period of rapid economic growth, the traditional Japanese local community shifted from being a tight, self-helping one, composed of several extended families into one made up of nuclear families, unfamiliar with each other or connected by much looser social ties. Some academics, such as Matsubara (1977, 1978) and Yano (1981), have argued that the resultant change in the educational environment for children produced problems for children and young people.

They advocated a new arrangement for adult and

community education and a new role for schools in the communities they served. However, although some local governments were persuaded, their arguments had little effect at the national level. During the 1980’s community issues remained peripheral to mainstream educational debates but after the late 90’s partnerships between communities and schools and the role schools could play in communities began to draw more attention, mostly because of what were perceived as increasingly malfunctioning schools and families, manifested by increasing juvenile delinquency, classroom disorder (Gakkyu

Hokai), and family breakdown, etc. Educators and academics argued that schools and families couldn’t work effectively alone, and that they should work together not in isolation from one and other. Since then, thanks to some voluntary movements and local governments, a number of partnerships between schools, families and communities have been developed that

1

mirror equivalent models of “community schools” in the USA and the UK. Moreover, when the Fundamental Law of Education was revised at the end of 2006 for the first time since 1947, one newly added article stated that “Schools, families, local residents, and other relevant persons shall be aware of their respective roles and responsibilities regarding education, and endeavour to develop partnerships and cooperation” (Fundamental Law of Education, Article 13). Although I would call some schools “community schools”, it doesn’t necessarily mean that we already have one agreed term for those schools in Japan. However it is safe to say that the daily practices in those schools have been developed with the purpose of improving educational abilities in and outside of schools through the realization of partnerships between schools, families and communities. 2) Three Main Community School Models in Japan I would argue that the development of community schools has been influenced by three different discourses prominent in Japanese society: 1) Neo-liberalism, 2) the movement to integrate school and social education, and 3) Dowa education and the Educational Community movement. The first community school model was conceptualised by Keio University’s Ikuyo Kaneko and his colleagues (2000).

This model was influenced by the school

council/board system in England and charter schools in the US, and aims to shift the control over a school from the central and local governments to local people who would like to put into practice their own theories of education without spending their own money. Kaneko had such strong influence to the policy makers and politicians that it has prompted MEXT (the Ministry of Education and Science) to try out Kaneko’s model of “Community Schools”, and led to changes in the law to enable this.

These schools

are officially called “Community Schools” but are basically schools which have a school council/board (Gakkou Unei Kyogikai) as a way to promote of parental and community involvement in school management. The first such schools came into being in 2004 and have been given an additional budget of 200 million yen (GBP 1 million) for SY 2008-2009.

Since 343 schools have been designated as “community schools”, this

means that each school can expect less than an extra 580,000 yen (GBP 2,900) per year on top of its annual budget, with which to fund “Community School” management and activities. Kaneko’s original concept for community schools involved the introduction of a “certain amount of market principles” into public education and has been supported by certain politicians and economics who are strongly dissatisfied with publically funded

2

schools which they perceive as concentrating too much on achieving equality of attainment at the expense of high quality learning opportunities for the most able children. Kaneko argues that “equal opportunity does not mean delivering the same education to all children but should be thought of as providing education according to each individual’s needs” (CMRP Website).

However, in reality, official sanctioned

“community schools” are currently not working as had been imagined since MEXT has been able to introduce only the school council/board system into some of the schools. As yet legislation to enable charter schools has not been enacted and the school choice system is not prevailing so far. In the meantime, MEXT and some local educational authorities are continuing to experiment with the school choice system.

In 2008,

MEXT’s Department of Lifelong Education launched another project called the “School Support Community Base” (Gakkou Shien Chiki Honbu) under which 2500 schools were provided with a total budget of 6800 million yen (GBP 34 million) that completely overwhelmed the “Community Schools” project. The second type of “Community Schools” has arisen out of a voluntary movement started by people mostly from the field of social and adult education. They formed a group called Yugoken, which can roughly be translated as “Research Group to Promote (the) Integration (of Schools and Community)”. Akidu Primary school in Chiba prefecture embodies a good example of the Yugoken movement as it has made adult education facilities and community rooms available in the primary school building. Interaction between children and adults and particularly the involvement of fathers and other males from the community men is also one specific character of these primary schools. The town Akidu was developed as a commuter town on reclaimed land along Tokyo bay. It was seen as having no character and few people wanted to live there for their whole life.

However, through the school becoming a popular focal point for the

community, some families have been able to establish connections with each other and build a community network. In the late 1990s, a documentary on NHK (the Japanese equivalent of the BBC) featured this school and made it famous. During the program men from the community were shown gathering in the school to do DIY, gardening, organize family learning and socialize with each other over a beer or two. Many other groups also make use of the school’s facilities. It was claimed that over 100 groups had registered as part of Akidu community. The leaders of Akidu still play a central role in

Yugoken, which has more than 600 teachers, coordinators, and researchers as members and which holds conferences to share good practices every year. A good description of Akidu Primary school and the Yugoken movement can be found in Kishi’s (Akidu’s

3

community head) books (1999, 2003, and 2005). The last driver behind “Community Schools” in Japan was the Dowa Education movement and its push to create “educational communities”. Dowa education was the result of a teachers’ movement to improve education for Burakumin, one of Japan’s major ethnic minorities. It is best known in western Japan mostly because Dowa districts tend to be concentrated there. Burakumin were thought of as outcasts during the Edo era but still suffer discrimination and higher rates of poverty. The idea of creating an “Educational Community” was developed by Ikeda (2000, 2001a, 2001b) from Osaka University, who was originally studying the low educational achievement of children from Dowa districts. Under his definition an “Educational Community” refers to the collaboration of people, groups and organizations within a community who are concerned with children’s education. As part of its 10 year educational plan, Osaka prefecture adopted this idea and rolled out a pathfinder project called the “Community Child Plan” in 41 Dowa districts. Osaka is one of the prefectures with the highest levels of poverty in Japan and was achieved the 3rd worst academic results (next to Okinawa and Kochi) out of 47 prefectures in national tests held in 2007 and 2008. In 2000 a “Social Educational Force Activation Project” was launched to promote educational communities in Osaka. This project aimed to set up community education councils (nicknamed the Sukoyaka-Net) over 3 years in all of Osaka’s 334 Junior High Schools’ catchment areas To fund this, each council was allocated 500,000 yen for each of the first two years and 200,000 yen in the third year. The project ran until 2002 but the prefectural authorities continued to fund some project based activities till 2005. It is well summarized in Takada’s edited book Introduction to Community Education (2007). Similar approaches were adopted in other prefectures, such as Koichi and Fukuoka, where Dowa education has traditionally been quite strong.

In the next section I will

describe some short case studies of schools in Osaka and Fukuoka to give a vivid image of Japanese community education to an English audience. 3) Some Case Studies of Community Schools (Partnerships between Schools, Families and Communities) in Japan (1) Osaka Prefecture’s Community Education Councils (Sukoyaka-Net)

Sukoyaka-Net is composed of councils with representatives from organizations based in each Junior High school catchment area. The councils sometimes include people from just local nurseries, primaries, families, and Community Based

4

Organizations (CBOs) but often they include representatives from a wider range of groups and organizations such as youth centres or colleges.

According to Osaka

Prefecture the councils have three functions: 1) to coordinate each others’ projects or activities: 2) to activate community activities: 3) to support school education. These roles are based on the ideas of Ikeda and his research group, many of whom were involved in the planning of this project in Osaka.

Good examples of some of the

activities which resulted can be seen in the video used to promote Sukoyaka-Net. Mishima Primary in Ibaraki City: the School Supporters Club Mishima primary school started a supporters club which acts like a kind of human resource bank for the school. People in the club write down any suggestions they have or skills/talents they can offer such as “I am a nursing care manager” or “I have a gate ball instructor’s certificate”.

One mother’s group grows plants and flowers in the

school garden and the school also has shopping patrol groups. The idea of these is that when people are out cycling if they display an “on-patrol” sign then they look as if they are actually on patrol.

This has reduced street crime dramatically.

It is

time-consuming for local people to patrol properly but easy to put a sign on their bikes. Kita Primary in Kaiduka City: the Community Room Kita Primary has a community room for local residents. Kita Primary is also known as a school belonging to the movement trying to integrate schools and communities. People in the community come and learn there, and also work as volunteers in children’s classes and after school clubs. Members of the community room and the school have regular meetings about the activities, children’s education and use of the school building. Aburatani, the head of the Community Education Council reminds us that schools and communities were originally not separate entities and worked together to educate children. No. 2 Junior High school in Matsubara City: Known To Each Other by Name This school has an exceptional coordinator called Mr. Sakuma. A lot of people know him because he is always looking out for others. For example, one day he spoke to some students who were playing truant and took care of them at his house. When the head teacher heard this he went to say thank you. Mr. Sakuma and the school started working together and school attendance improved within a couple of years.

Mr.

Sakuma invited local elderly people to the school and they organized activities with students. The annual school Festival that he helped to start now attracts more than 5,000 parents and community members and provides a good opportunity for teachers and local residents to work together and get to know each other. Jyonan Junior High School in Takatsuki City: the Formation of a Dads Club

5

A “Dads’ club” was launched in 1999. At the beginning they just gathered to have a party and make friends with each other. Then they started to talk about the school and ways in which they could support the teachers. The Community School Festival was organized mainly by fathers and men in the community. (2) Tagawa-City Tagawa city is an old mining town in the south of Fukuoka Prefecture. It used to have 100,000 residents but now only 50,000 live there. After they lost their main industry, the town became notorious for poverty and its schools were often marred by violence and delinquency. All schools were attended by children from Dowa districts. Kanagawa Primary is the leading school in Tagawa. It started to build partnerships with parents and the community by asking for the help of volunteers.

One day

somebody drew graffiti on the school building. The head teacher didn’t ask the janitor to erase it but asked for the help of parents and community members. He wanted to show parents’ working to keep the school building clean.

In this school parents and

community members help in many ways. For example, they buy second-hand books for the school library, replace the students’ wooden desks, and make bookshelves for the classrooms, etc.

An annual festival is also organised by the Kanagawa school

catchment area’s activation council (Koku kasseika kyogikai). This council is the result of the reorganisation of local services by the local government. Due to a limited budget the city government asked the community centre, local neighbourhood association, women’s association, and youth centre in each area to form integrated councils. Each council now has an office in their respective primary school, and a lot of activities like festivals are organized by them. 4) Characteristics of Japanese Community Schools In Japan it can be said that there are only small trials being carried out of community schools. They have not yet been examined in any great detail, but the characteristics of Japanese versions of community schools compared to their equivalents in the UK and the US could tentatively be listed as follows: 1) Small Budgets In England and Scotland the central and local governments are strong supporters of community school funding, while in the USA the main stakeholders supporting community schools are large charities and charitable foundations (plus some local authorities like Chicago and Baltimore).

In Japan only very limited funds are

available from the government’s annual budget and charities tend not to be active or wealthy enough to be able to push for community schools. As a result local volunteers,

6

parents and teachers are the main actors in community schools. 2) Less Attention to Concepts of Social Justice Only the Community School model which developed from the tradition of Dowa education is strongly based on an awareness of social and economic inequalities in Japan and aimed at reducing poverty or low educational achievement in deprived areas. In fact, Kaneko’s (and MEXT’s) model of “community schools” is, arguably, a tool to introduce “market principles” into the educational field. For example, in one famous example, a successful community school (Gosho Minami Primary school) in Kyoto city gained such a good reputation that the price of land rose in the neighbourhood as a result of richer people who wanted their children to attend the school moving into the area.

I would argue that this is one impact of community schooling that MEXT

secretly hoped to achieve and that it does nothing to address the needs of the poorer families forced out of the area. 3) Services Not Provided to Parents and the Wider Community It can be said that most Community Schools have tried to absorb a voluntary work force from the community in order to strengthen children’s education.

The main

beneficiaries from community schools are therefore always children or children plus other people. Rather than schools serving families and communities the aim is to encourage families and communities to serve schools. Indirectly this might also be beneficial to families and communities but from what I have seen families and communities seem better served by Community Schools in the UK (and sometimes in the USA). 4) Additional Work For Teachers Because of the shortage of funding, Community Schools have not been able to hire additional staff to set up and run projects for families and communities. This normally leads to a greater burden being placed on teachers and schools except where some volunteers are enthusiastic about becoming involved in this kind of work. However since there is no security or privileges attached to the position of Community School coordinator, volunteers cannot demonstrate their leadership and conflicting roles sometimes cause trouble between teachers and members of local communities. 5) Less Integration of Public Services Public social work and welfare systems have traditionally been weak in Japan and the failure of social welfare systems is not even a big issue. Similarly adult learning for people living in deprived areas is not encouraged. The integration of public services happens only on rare occasions and in a few areas. However, to some extent, Japanese schools have originally been “Extended Schools”

7

compared those in the UK. One of the researchers who responded to a presentation I made on extended schools in England said that the presentation had made him realize that schools in England lack of lots of the functions already common for schools in Japan. For example Japan has had a system of school nurses for more than 50 years. School activities before and after school as well as during the holidays are common, especially in Junior High schools. Child care in primary schools is normally available for single parent families and working parent families. Home visits are part of home room teachers’ normal duties. Recently the government introduced school councillors and a school social workers system (although it is sometimes thought not to be functioning). 6) Not Mainstreamed Within Government Educational Policies With the exception of some local authorities, community schools are not mainstreamed as part of the national educational project. Even MEXT’s Community School initiatives only affect 1% of publicly funded schools and the approach seems to be having difficulty in terms of being rolled out. Some schools are well known for their success while others are not actively committed to being community schools even though they receive some type of funding from the national/local government. For example, one prefectural officer in Osaka told me that their target was for 30% of all their educational communities to become active. Since Japan doesn’t have a proper evaluation culture of policy implementation I wonder how they can move to another stage or finish the trials. 5) Tentative Conclusions Since Koizumi’s premiership, education has always been a target for budget cuts. At the same time, teachers have come under even greater pressure to raise students’ attainment levels due to the shock revelation in 2004 that Japan’s position in the PISA ratings had fallen drastically.

According to Saito (2000) neo-liberalist educational

reforms in Japan have three features: 1) Introduction of “market principles” such as a school choice system, charter schools, and a voucher system, 2) the Enhancement of moral education and the improvement of teaching skills, and 3) the Enhancement of nationalism and Federal family values. Koizumi’s successor, ex-Prime-Minister Abe saw Margaret Thatcher as his ideal educational reformer and worked hard to introduce greater competition into Japanese primary and secondary schools. The government remains busy reforming education in ways which promote competition and nationalism. At the moment community schools are just an add-on project to the central curriculum and have not affected people’s life on the national scale. They are not yet private

8

schools run with public money as Kaneko intended, and it remains unclear whether community schools will ever be mainstreamed into Japanese educational policy. From another point of view Japan doesn’t have a need for community schools based on a deprivation model. Few immigrants and still comparatively high attainments by international standards still prevent people from paying attention to those excluded from mainstream society.

References Ikeda, Hiroshi (2000). Chiki no Kyoiku Kaikaku: Gakkou to Kyodosuru Community. Osaka: Kaiho Shuppan. Ikeda, Hiroshi (2001a). Gakkou Saisei no Kanosei: Gakkou to Chiki no Kyodo niyoru

Kyoiku Community Dukuri. Osaka: Osaka Daigaku Shuppankai. Ikeda, Hiroshi (2001b). Kyoiku Community Handbook: Chiki to Gakkou no Tsunagari to

Kyoudou wo Motomete. Osaka: Kaiho Shuppan. Kaneko, Ikuyo et al (ed). (2000). Community school Kousou. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten. Kishi, Yuji (1999). Gakkou wo Kichi ni Otosan no Machidukuri. Tokyo: Tarojirosha. Kishi, Yuji (2003). Chiki-Kurashi Sengen: Gakkou wa Community Art. Tokyo: Tarojirosha. Kishi, Yuji (2005). Chukonen Power ga Gakkou to Machi wo Tukuru. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten. Matsubara, Jiro. (1977). Community to Kyoiku. Tokyo: Gakuyo Shobo. Matsubara, Jiro. (1978). Community no Shakaigaku. Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai. Saito, Takao. (2000). Kyoiku Fubyodo. Tokyo: Kodansha. Takada, Kazuhiro (ed) (2007). Community Kyoikugaku heno Shotai. Osaka: Kaiho Shuppan. Yano, Shun. (1981). Chiiki Shakaigaku Jyosetu. Tokyo: Toyokan Shuppan. About Community Schools (the MEXT Website) www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/community/index.htm Community Schools Media Contents (CMRP Keio University) www.cmr.sfc.keio.ac.jp/cs/cs-top.htm Yugoken Website http://yu-go-ken.net/ Sukoyaka-net Suport Centre (Osaka prefecture Education Board) www.sukoyakanet.net/ Gosho Minami Primary School www.edu.city.kyoto.jp/hp/goshominami-s/

9