学校と家庭・地域の連携施策の有効性を規定する行政的条件に関する研究 : 高知県の地域教育指導主事に着目して(II 研究報告)

抄録

In the last 30 years of Twentieth century, school education confronted with some difficult problems such as bullying, juvenile delinquency, escape from class, vandalism and school refusal in Japan. There are many causes, but it is certain that three main educational forces (family, community and school) have declined. It is necessary to restore these educational forces and to create school, family, community partnership (SFCP). But in Japan, the management of many schools has had a 'closed nature' to parents and residents. For that reason, SFCP is not going ahead easily. Although this partnership policy is emphasized in recent educational reform, it has not spread to the national level. It is necessary for prefectural and municipal boards of education to show leadership and to create various conditions for SFCP. The aim of this paper to clarify the necessary conditions and roles of educational administration to promote SFCP. We chose Kochi prefecture as a research field. In this prefecture, educational reform has been promoted under the leadership of a governor since 1997 and SFCP is positioned as an important policy. In the concrete, the 'Community Conference for Education' in all municipalities and the 'School Council for Openness of School' was established. In addition, a 'Community Education Supervisor' (CES) was dispatched by all municipalities from the prefecture. We tried an interview survey for 5 CESs and a questionnaire survey for 53 CESs. Contents of the interview are recorded and all protocols were transcribed. Responses to the questionnaire survey were 39 (73.6%) of 53 CESs. As a result of analysis of this data, it was confirmed that next four conditions are important to promote SFCP. The first condition is to create a place of meeting for school staff, parents and residents. In other prefectures, opinions of these parties are heard but many are laid aside or neglected. In Kochi prefecture, each CES reported these opinions to the superintendent, and if possible, planned and implemented educational programs. The' Community Conference for Education' in Kochi prefecture is a typical model. The second condition is to arrange a coordinator. In Kochi prefecture, each CES planned and practiced many SFCP activities. This data showed that human conditions are very important. The boards of education should arrange a coordinator for SFCP if possible, but in general it is difficult to arrange the CESs in all municipalities due to budget conditions. But each school and community can establish a small organization which is composed of parents, residents and teachers. The third condition is exchange of information among CESs. They have little experience of SFCP activities. Because they need various ideas, the boards of education have to hold a training meeting periodically. The last condition is financial aid to SFCP activities. Many CESs pointed out that SFCP activities need some budget, but it is not an indispensable condition. In other words, finance is a supplementary condition. Fortunately, Kochi prefecture is disbursing a subsidy to many municipalities, because there is a difference in financial power among municipalities, so many SFCP activities have been developed.