2013 Volume 80 Issue 4 Pages 414-426
During the two shifts in political power between the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) and the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) on 2009 and 2012, teacher education policy in recent Japan seems to be in confusion. New policies to raise teachers' basic status to Master Degree level has been promoted by DPJ, while LDP has started to consider about new plan of long-term internship at schools for new teachers. This confusion has quite a long historical conflict as its background between 'university' and 'pre-service teacher education' in Japan. In Japan, as well as other East Asian areas with Buddhism and Confucianism, teachers are usually expected to have more humanities knowledge in addition to their professional competencies. However, universities in modern Japan have been established as those like the Western model, while universities in modern China have their origin in 'Shuyuan' where young people make total development: both academic and human. Universities in Japan have inevitable insufficiency from the beginning, to develop prospective teachers of 'East Asian' image. In addition, there are no effective nationwide policies of governmental quality control for pre-service teacher education in Japan. Thus in Japan, universities providing pre-service teacher education programme under the 'Open System' are obliged to make 'selection' for excellent prospective teachers with higher motivation, during their undergraduate course by their own way. In this sense, teaching practices in Japan usually take more important roles than other curriculum contents as a way of the 'selection'. Students teachers in Japan are often directed to have good behaviours when they do their teaching practice at schools including their looks such as their dresses, their hair styles, their accessories and so on. These phenomena are quite unique in Japan among East Asia nations. On the other hand, the 'approval system' by the Ministry of Education in Japan has been remarkably fortified these years against universities providing pre-service teacher education programmes. Recent operations of the 'approval system' seem to be led by an opinion that pre-service teacher education programmes in Japan should be provided in certain organizations specialized for teacher education in each university. However, the 'approval system' has its origin in previous 'permitted schools' system for post-secondary schools and institutes with teacher training courses, so 'external factors' such as facilities, subjects, teaching staffs, and plans for teaching practice usually make up much of the procedure. In this way, strengthened operations of the 'approval system' are fearful of infringing upon universities' independence, which are necessary for prospective teachers with enough competencies. At this point, it is no longer effective that teacher education reform in Japan led by authority and control should be reinforced. The crucial content for pre-service teacher education should receive more attention among future discussions on teacher education reform in Japan. Each educator should provide their own teacher education programme in university with enough academic freedom and independence.
