With the purpose of assessing the development of dynamic nature of personality with individual differences, we have been gathering, by repeated tests and observations, the data from the same groups of subjects in the Attached Schools and Kindergarten of Kobe University Faculty of Education. This longitudinal study which began in 1968, will eventually cover a span of twelve years when one of our groups of subjects (aged 3 at the beginning of this study) have reached the age of fifteen (in the third and the last grade in the Attached Junior High Schaol). However, in the present reports the results of our analyses of the data obtained from the three-year period of personality development of the Junior High School Subjects were presented. In order to determine the relationship between sexual maturation and the subsequent changes in personality characteristics, we divided the whole sample of 121 junior high school subjects into five Type-groups, and for each of these groups, the longitudinal data obtained before and after the beginning of maturation (identified on the basis of changing of voice for boys and beginning of menstruation for girls) such as measures of physical growth, self-concept,general and vocational interests, interests in school subjects and personality traits were compared. The results revealed: 1) As to the growth in stature, the same regular growth trend was found formost subjects, regardless of the differende in time of the beginning of puberescence. For an instance, maximum growth rate in standing hight was indicated in the growth-period just before the beginning of puberescence. 2) Self-concept measured by Semantic Differential technique indicated a trend toward stabilization in 40% of the subjects while the reverse trend was found in other 30%. The remaining 30% indicated no marked change in their self-concept. However, there was no regular change in accordance with the arrival of puberescence. 3) Measures of general and vocational interests indicated, as in the case of self-concept, irregular individual variations after puberescence. But, interests in school subjects tended to be stabilized in the course of the three years. 4) Measures of personality traits obtained by means of two personality tests showed also a trend toward stabilization. But, no marked changes which were directly related to the arrival of puberescence could be found in our data. From these findings, it was concluded that such aspects of personality as interests, selfconcept and traits in personality do not change in a uniform and regular way just after the beginning of puberescence, as shown in the development of physical side of personality.
The chairman first explained the aim of the symposium as follows. We must consider how educational or developmental psychology today can really contribute to the preschool education and what should be the direction and method of its contribution, now that the preschool education is brought to the fore as a big social concern. At the same time, here we want to ponder deeply on the very state of psychology that it ought to be, considering this problem. Then 4 members made sucdessively the following propositions. K. Matsumura insisted as follows. We should now establish pedagogy as a “dialectical science of relations” among children, things, adults and society. For that purpose, we should first of all make it clear how to concern ourselves with various standpoints, persons and things around us, and then we should establish a science which make it possible to organize a new community on the basis of their coexistence and cooperation. Moreover, he brought foreward 7 problems concerning the direction and method of research which it is desirable to take hereafter. H. Oka argued as follows. In order that the research results of developmental or educational psychology may be truly applicable to the practice of preschool education, it is indispen-sable for us to make a “circulation” fully between the “eyes”, as it were, of the practicians and of the researchers. Through this circulation, it is always to be definitely fixed the correspondence between the operations of research and the child,very complex living human organism. It is also needed here to think deliberately about what correspondences may be really useful to the practice of preschool education. Also, the accuracy of research is to be gradually increased through the manifold circulations. Without accumulations of such reflections and efforts, the true progress of psychology itself may not be expected. K. Miyake proposed as follows. Most of the researches psychologists have been made hitherto from the onlocking standpoint. Therefore, they have almost taken no account of the concrete factors, such as the various conditions in a nursery school, including the teacher as an important variable, which may greatly influence the children. On the other hand, the studies of practicians have mostly been lacking lacking of the precise control of these situational conditions. Hereafter, it is much needed to lay projects which can make a close tie-up between the research in psychology and the practice in preschool education. Y. Horiuchi asserted as follows. Many practicians taking part in today's preschool educationalternate really with new practicians in 3 or 4 years. They cannot afford to come to grips fully wite the problem such as the development or personality of children, so far as it goes the present standard of 40 children a class. Therefore, they cannot but rely on a “mere experientialism”. The curriculm for training the nursery governess usually contains the subjects of conventional general education and of ordinary professional education. But it is necessary that there should be many lecturers and exercises connected more with the actual problems of living children. To that end, though there may be various difficulties in reality, we need a closer connection with any establishment of preschool education and it is also necessary that not merely psychology but many other sciences should cooperate with one another. In the discussion many child psychologists and educators participated. They criticized, for the most part, the present state of researches by psychologists. When much more time is spent in finding the law through any psychological research and the concrete, living whole person is carefully taken into consideration, for the first time the “circulation” to make the practice of education more scientific may be accomplished, they discussed.
A. Tsudzuki explained the purport of the thema of this symposium as follows; So-called scientific research methods are used by educational psychologists to find the principles or reguralities of human behaviors. And the research process are made from serial abstruction. Accordingly, the research products (principle or law of behavior) do not bring the understanding with individuals. On the other hand, the teachers interact with thier pupils in every day class-room situation. And they are in need of the uncerstanding with individual pupil. Many of the educational psychologists have also same need of the understanding with students, as teacher in university or college. Therefore,it is clear that the methods for the understanding with pupils in teaching practice are necessary besides the scientific methods in educational psychology. So, the purport of this thema is what such practical methods are possible. N. Kitao expressed from the standpoint of learning and thinking as follows; In this speach,He restricts the topic within the learning of school-subject,or within the problem of understanding with the pupil in learning practice situation of school-subjects. The research on the school-subject learning process is not only different from the laboratory experiment of learning,but also is very multifactorial than the latter. There may be such five factors, i. e. the nature of subject mutter, the type of instruction, the amount of training, the readiness of pupil and the produce of learning. And the research product must be generalized through the interaction of these factors. But, actual research strategy is very difficult to interact all factors. Then, it is necessary to extract the fundamental subprocess from the schoolsubject learning process, because this learning process is a complex one and includes several learning activitities. Thereafter, this subprocess is related to the content of learning, the method of instruction, the level of pupiles and the produce of learning. In other words, the interaction between the subprocess as core and four factors is analyzed. In those way, may be conquered the gap between the learning practice of school subject and labolatory experiment of learning. There are many psychological information related to these subprocess, and it is the duties of educational psychologist to accumulate such information. T. Takuma indicated as follows in connection with the personalty research in educational psychology; The psychology is oriented at the present time to the objectivization, in which the object aimed at is the law of behavior. How-ever, the psychological processes are in the strict sence only once historical phenomena, which are not repeated and observed experimentally. Conseqently, psychologists can not give up the phenomenological method and Nacherleben or Einfahren, i. e. Jaspers's Verstehn. As the object in educational field is not an abstract human being, but a real actual living individual, so are necessary at first the observation and description of pupil's speech and conduct. However, education is essentially dyadic interaction, i. e. it is consisted of educator (teacher or parent), educatee (children or pupils) and reciprocal acceptance from both side. Nevertheless, educational psychologists have taken up mainly the problems of educatee side, andhave negrected the understanding of educator with educatee. The Verstehen may be synonimous empachy in recent psychological tern. For the understanding with educatee may be necessary the approach by such empathy, because the educatee is not only biological being, but also socio-historical being, and his personality core has an identity through the developement from past to future. Eventually, for educcational psychology is necessary the clinical method, which has in its background the deep insight into human nature.
The chairman first introduced the purposes of this symyosium to discuss, on the basis of the reports by the five members, how the students in Japan have changed since after the War, in what circumstances today's students are, and what kind of things they think and want, and to consider what we should do for them and for our college education hereafter. Akiba indicated that the people's demand for higher education is largely supplied in Japan by the private educational institutes and that, therefore, the college students are generally limited to those from the middle or upper classes. And this is a more and more increasing tendency in our education today. He also pointed out the extreme scantness of facilities and materials in both national and private colleges. Considering these two factors, he experessed his misgivings to discuss the studnts' disposition today solely. Analysing the increasing rate of applicants for admission to colleges, Kuse adduced the factors such as the increasing number of high school students who get the qualifications for examination of admission, change of the significance of college education in the society, and the people's rather excessive hope on their children. On this analysis, he anticipated an even more increasing number of applicants. He also suggested the queer procedure most students follow to decide their course finally: they choose first non-vocational high schools in hopeful prospect of entrance into colleges, and when they become sophomores or seniors decide which course they actually take in consideration of the possibility of finding a good employment, the future prospect, the hope of esuccess in the examination, etc. Thus these students have, he concluded, a very general, idealistic, abstract hope for college education. Fujiwara reported that many college students evaluate their own attitude of studying very high, while many of their teachers do not agree with them in this respect. His report mentioned also that young people today enjoy their spare time in various ways, reflecting the trend of the times, and it is characteristic to the youth that they spend a long time withtheir friends. Nishihira mainly considered the radical students movement. He analysed their characters; Firstly, they reject every kind of authority on one hand, and, on the other hand, they claim the right of the masses. Secondly, they are very weaK in finding their own status rightly in the whole stream of history, and yet they aim to have a great part in hisory. Thirdly, they lack independence; they bear their own estrangement. Fourthly, their fundamental doctrine seeks not for some partial political success but for its consumption itself only. Kosowa reported on the theme of non-coeducation, presenting the daata of his reserch performed in three women's colleges. He asserted that we cannot argue generally merits and had to consider this system not only about colleges but also about high schools and preceding schools. He warned against the danger that this system might be used as the breeding ground of the discrimination sex. In other words, he suggested, the non-coeducational system has “merits” for the conservative people, and “demerits” for the progressive. The presentation of these five reports were followed by questions and answers, and comments and discussions. As a conclusion, the chairman stated that this symposium was not sufficiently prepared but was certainly intended to begin with the problems which educational psychologists have to solve from now on.