This paper discusses the features of the Japanese and US educational assessment systems, analyzing the systems of university entrance exams and national educational surveys.
1. Educational Assessment as a Linkage of High Schools and Universities.
As a result of the expansion of higher education, both Japan and the U. S. have faced the same articulation issue: the need for systems that are suitable for the phase of mass education.
In the United States, for example, a guidance-type admission test (ACT) was introduced four decades ago to complement the conventional selection-type admission test (SAT). The new test has contributed to the efficiency of selection and placement processes, but has not enhanced students' motivation. Improving their academic abilities in their preparations for colleges still remains as an important issue.
Japan, on the other hand, has introduced the policy of “the diversification of an entrance examination” as a specific remedy in recent years, in order to cool off exam hell, a major complication of the “diploma society.” However, this new trial was not successful, in that it not only expanded the mismatch between admissions requirements and university education, but has also had ramifications for the high school curricula.
2. National Survey of Educational Achievement as a Tool for Educational Support
National educational surveys basically provide us with materials for considering the current reality of educational achievements and future prospects. With technological progress, however, we can combine various kinds of achievement test data in different settings, through the data scale of the national educational survey. This makes it possible to measure and compare achievement scores among different areas within one country, as well as among two or more countries.
Furthermore, this plan may contribute to the development of new articulation systems between high schools and universities in the U.S. in the near future. The proposal to restart a national education survey was also recently proposed in Japan, but the purpose is restricted to data collection concerning educational achievement and school assessment.
The result shows that Japan and the U. S. have different traditions of the educational assessment research and different social environments. In particular, there is a clear difference in the independence of evaluation organizations and in the autonomy of an evaluation system. It also tells us of the importance of separating schools and administration/evaluation agencies, in order to maintain the objectivity and freedom of choices of evaluation systems. For this reason, the U.S. has been able to continue to hold educational assessments.
