Focusing on the controversy concerning "Reformpädagogik" (="New Education" in Germany) from the 1980s to the 1990s, this thesis aims to provide an outline of the specific methods of relativization of "Reformpädagogik" and their variations arising in this controversy and to explore the theoretical background that made this relativization possible. Through this research, I examine the methods of relativizing the pedagogical canon (the knowledge and texts viewed as standard in pedagogy) and their problems. After outlining the aims of this thesis in Section 1, Section 2 examines the following methods of inquiry as important studies that attempt to analyze "Reformpädagogik" as a conceptual construct and summarizes their distinctive characteristics: (1) the systems theory method of Niklas Luhmann and Karl-Eberhard Schorr; (2) the method of the "critical historical study of dogma" of Jürgen Oelkers; (3) the history of pedagogical philosophy method of Dietrich Benner and Herwart Kemper; and (4) the pedagogical history method of Heinz-Elmar Tenorth. In Section 3, I show that "postmodern thought" played a vital role as an important background to researches for "Reformpädagogik". The Section focuses especially on the fact that differences can be seen among relativization theories with regard to the fictional nature of "Reformpädagogik". While Oelkers stresses the fictional nature of "Reformpädagogik", Tenorth states that it can be described in terms of "historical-social recognizing," basing his argument on the results of social history, among other factors. In this section, I examine the validity of "historical-social recognizing". In Section 4, having confirmed that "Reformpädagogik"-relativization-theory still exerts considerable influence in pedagogical discussions today, I consider what significance the controversy of the 1980s and 1990s has for contemporary pedagogical theory.

View full abstract

Nowadays, it is probably difficult finding someone like Plato, who takes precautions against theatrical performance on stage. On the other hand, when we discover dramatical characteristics in interactions that unfold in various settings in real life, we tend to negatively assess that interaction as fiction as well as the agents as imposters who disguise their true selves. But if we take a look at ourselves, are we not - intentional or unintentional differences put aside - personally as well as on an everyday basis - like an actor in front of an audience - (ending up) manipulating the impression we give the other person in an interaction? If that is the case, what if we liken all our interactions to theatrical performances? At the Graduate School of Human Sciences of Osaka University in the research field of Anthropology of Education, having formed a joint research team centered around teachers and graduate students affiliated with this field of research, including extramural theorists and practitioners engaging in education or welfare, an attempt is being made to observe and analyze the various interactions that unfold in the respective areas of activity from such a point of view. In what follows, it is my purpose to define our joint research as well as present several propositions that constitute a provisional framework for our future research based on literature study and information gained in preliminary field research that has been conducted over the past one year. These propositions are as follows: (1) The human world is completely a stage. (2) A theatrical performance is being carried out on a physical or semantic stage or creates such stages. (3) A person seeks a "true self" and an "appropriate place" and constantly directs him or herself towards other stages and other roles. (4) As well as the performer can establish and keep up reciprocally differing theatrical performances on several stages defensive measures can be set up by the performer or by other persons. (5) The meaning and function of each component that makes up the stage is, in principle, being defined by arrangement of each component of the stage, but it is sometimes possible for them to be transported into another stage, undergoing selection or transformation. (6) An imaginary or real stage in which the performer feels that the role he voluntarily performs is in accordance with the role that is supposed to be performed as a duty and due to that is also able to feel "comfortable" is called an "appropriate place". (7) In the case of reciprocally differing theatrical performances being performed by several performance teams at the same time and in the same space, a struggle over the right of priority will occur between these performance teams and each performance team will compete over the arrangement of stage components. (8) Practical training that nurtures individuals towards becoming full-fledged performers and, moreover, full-fledged stage directors is education and activity that enables the individual maintenance of confidence and pride as performer and stage director is called welfare.

View full abstract

What role can the Science of Education play in the actual process of educational policy formulation and implementation? In answering this question, it should be noted that many countries and areas draw up their educational policies by referring to the past experiences of other societies. In many cases, this approach has involved comparatively analyzing educational phenomena in different societies, thereby examining education as practiced in the respective societies from a broad perspective. This is the essence of Comparative Education. Research in Comparative Education has two main aspects: firstly, pure pursuit of universal truths from which laws and theories governing educational phenomena are deduced; secondly, study and evaluation of educational policies so as to contribute to future educational policy making and to the design and implementation of educational assistance. Research areas in the Science of Education in which the latter aspect dominates can be termed "policy-oriented." It is important for such research aseas to provide advice on actual policy formulation and educational practices based on demonstrative data. The objective of this paper is to examine the methodology of Comparative Education as policy science, using educational development studies as an example, in which remarkable quantitative and qualitative research achievements have been accumulating in recent years, among the branches of Comparative Education in Japan. On the basis of the above examination, the paper further studies a potential role of Comparative Education in actual educational policy formulation and implementation. Firstly, the paper provides an overview of the theoretical and methodological development of research in Comparative Education. This is followed in the subsequent section by a study on what should constitute Comparative Education as policy science, with a focus on educational development studies. The paper then discusses how we have attempted to identify an ultimate positioning of Comparative Education with reference to theories and methodologies of branches of related social sciences (Sociology, Political Science, Economics, Psychology, etc.). Secondly, focusing once again on educational development studies, which have played an important role in deepening the theoretical and methodological arguments of Comparative Education, the paper discusses roles played by educational development studies through suggestions in the formulation of educational policies of developing countries. In this context, the paper refers to the orientation and methodological trends of educational development studies in and outside Japan, and argues that such research should be viewed as an "integrative" discipline, given the diversity of its theoretical and methodological concerns and the broadness of its practical problem-setting nature. Thirdly, with regard to how research and practice have correlated with each other in the development of education in developing countries, we provide an overview of specific contributions of research. We point to the importance of responding to practical needs by combining various research methodologies that have been applied over many years to historical, ideological and area studies within Comparative Education.

View full abstract

The purposes of this paper are to point out the problems with the methodology of educational administration research in Japan, and to propose the method for improving the problem. Since traditional educational administration research had a strong tendency toward being domain-oriented study, it has had a strong interest in educational administration institution and policy. In other words, traditional educational administration research was concerned with independent variables. As a result, traditional educational administration research has formulated a description of educational administration institution and policy through observing a single example. However, traditional educational administration research was unsuccessful in accumulating descriptive inference and causal inference. These are the knowledge which should be accumulated as social science. This is because traditional educational administration research had had less concern about the dependent variable. Traditional educational administration research had a problem of research methodology, so the actually technical problem has arisen in research of educational administration. The problem is that, for example, although it is required to apply time series analysis to quantitative analysis by collecting the time series data, many quantitative analyses consist of one-shot surveys. The same problem has also arisen in qualitative analysis. In recent years, many studies are conducted which observe change of policy choice of the local government which was caused by decentralization reforms. However, many of those are analysis focusing on a single case. It is impossible to perform causal inference in these analyses. The viewpoints incorporating comparative theories and methods required for educational administration research are as follows: (1) Comparative study among the regions in one state is required. As a result of performing decentralization reform, the flexibility of the local government's policy option became high. Then, since the variation of the local policy increased, the comparative study of two or more areas became easy. (2) Comparative study among states is required. By comparing two or more national educational systems and education policies, it becomes possible to perform causal inference. (3) A time series analysis is required. In other words, comparative study between two or more points in time is required. (4) Comparative study between similar systems is required. The current system needs to be evaluated in consideration of a possibility that it is not the best system. (5) Comparison with educational administration and other administration domains is required. The required conditions are as follows when making a comparative analysis: (a) It is necessary to change the form of a question from the "How" question which is connected with descriptive inference to the "Why" question which is connected with causal inference. (b) It is important to have a question common to researchers as much as possible. A review and meta analysis are effective means to realize this goal.

View full abstract

The purpose of this article is to examine how researchers use mixed method approaches in educational research. Mixed methods research (MMR) is to combine quantitative and qualitative approaches to investigate the research questions that could not be answered in any other ways. The field of MMR has expanded since the publication of "Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research (Tashhakkori and Teddlie 2003)". However, there are few researchers in Japan who discuss how to combine qualitative and quantitative techniques and how to evaluate these studies. In this article, I present major topics, advantages and future directions of MMR in educational research. Mixed methods are superior to single method because MMR provides strong inference and elucidates the divergent aspects of phenomenon. On the other hand, there are many issues in this field. First, the term, "Mixed Methods Research", has been defined in various ways. Second, there are too many philosophical foundations of mixed methods. Third, these different definitions and philosophical foundations complicate the discussions about research techniques and designs of MMR. There are multiple perspectives about MMR, so the researchers who use mixed methods have to be clear about their philosophical assumptions and theoretical frameworks. MMR is important for the further advancement of educational research in Japan. I provide one study using mixed methods to discuss these points. This study focuses on education and inequality in Japan through comparison of three primary schools which have different socio economical backgrounds. The research shows that high SES school's teachers often use discussion and computers in their classes, because this school has some pupils who go to crammers and feel boring their lessons. In contrast, low SES school's teachers do not use these teaching styles and focus on mastering basic skills, because many pupils who come from disadvantaged families do not master skills such as multiplication. In this study, mixed methods provide stronger inferences about the school's background and culture. In Japan, it is too sensitive to ask questions which relate to the pupil's background and other family characteristics. However, while researchers conduct participant observation (qualitative research), they develop relationships with schools and pupil's families, and finally they can implement written surveys (quantitative research) which includes family background. This study also shows that mixed methods in education are meaningful not only for educational researchers but also for teachers who reflect on their educational practices. We need further discussions about the following two points. First, although mixed methods are useful for educational research, few researchers can use and teach both qualitative and quantitative methods. We will need to discuss about teaching and training formixed methods research. Second, it is important to assess the quality of MMR in educational research, yet we have few criteria for doing so. Overall, frameworks for quality assessments are required.

View full abstract

This article examines methodological issues for case studies in educational research and suggests a methodological framework for qualitative research in education. Researchers tend to separate empirical research into two types: quantitative research and qualitative research. Quantitative research is often used as a means of making causal inferences and testing hypotheses. In the social sciences, however, we can examine cases that cannot be studied using quantitative methods, such as field survey, ethnography, discourse analysis, and historical analysis. We often think that quantitative research is best suited to hypothesis testing and a nomothetic, generalized approach. Quantitative research may also require a large number of cases (N is large). On the other hand, qualitative research is suitable for hypothesis formulation and an idiographic, differential approach. In social science methodology, however, we often examine causal inferences and test hypotheses in cases with only a small number of subjects (N is small) or even one single subject (N is one). In education research in Japan, however, when researchers analyze small- or single-N cases, they almost always choose the idiographic, differential approach. There are two problems with this trend. First, it creates a divide between quantitative and qualitative research. Many researchers tend to regard quantitative and qualitative research as different methodologies. Second, in educational research in Japan, research designs for small- and single-N case studies have been significantly biased. As a result, researchers have made many idiographic monographs concerning various topics, but their findings cannot be systematically combined or used for theory construction or testing. To solve these problems, this paper advocates the importance of the logic of inference. When we analyze small-N cases, for example, we can choose between the method of agreement and the method of difference. In the method of agreement, the researcher chooses cases in which the dependent variable is not dispersed. In the method of difference, the dependent variable in the cases is dispersed. The method of difference is usually the better choice, but the method of agreement can make finding new hypotheses easier. If researchers can only observe a single case, they can analyze the causal relationship to examine an outlier case or a most likely (unlikely) case or a counterfactual case. This paper discusses two implications for educational research. First, the view that quantitative and qualitative research are different methodologies and logical forms are biased and underestimate the potential of small- and single-N case studies. Small- and single-N case studies can be analyzed using quantitative and/or qualitative research (i.e., a hypothesistesting, nomothetic, generalized approach and/or a hypothesis-formulation, idiographic, differential approach). Second, educational researchers in Japan should be more conscious of methodology and theory. Many of them have been eager to investigate the facts but tend to be cool toward examining causal relationships and constructing theory. Researchers should be as interested in theoretical contributions as they are in factfinding inquiries.

View full abstract

Education is expected to solve every social problem in this century. However, the principles originating from the educational field-the principles of the educational field-have generally gone unnoticed by people from other areas. Due to this, people with political and business interests tend to disregard the educational process and focus their attention only on its result. The state of Japanese educational research is also responsible for this situation. Various methodologies from other academic areas were used to explore the educational phenomenon. However, educational research did not succeed adequately in developing its own effectual methodologies to elucidate the "principles of the educational field." As a result, the arguments about education have often been built on the principles of psychology, the social sciences and philosophical thought. The purposes of education have been considered to be the assimilation of children and learners into society, and the attainment of national or social objectives. However, the original bases of the values of education can be found in the intuition of the teachers. For example, Japanese teachers who had experienced very serious situations where they were not able to continue teaching because their students were rebelling and had overcome such situations often point out that "When we accept a student's being without reservation, we can see that even the most rambunctious student has his/her own reason." These intuitions reveal that "particularity," "relationship," "embodiment," and "responsiveness" are the fundamental values of education. D. J. Clandinin and her colleagues developed Narrative Inquiry (NI), which seems to be an important tool for elucidating the "principles of the educational field" and the teachers' practical knowledge in terms of these fundamental values. NI appears to succeed in explaining these principles by understanding various stories and their relations that are composed in schools, families and communities. The idea of curriculum of lives and restorying are extremely stimulating for reflecting about the quality of Japanese education. Children compose their own stories, and the teachers and families should support the children when they face various difficulties in curriculum making and restorying. Children need people who listen to them especially when they attempt restorying, i.e., retelling and reliving. However, teachers and families cannot afford to respond to children because "stories of schools" backed by dominant stories have flooded the school landscape in recent years. These trends are the results of the idea of "theory-practice relation." This idea depends on the conventional assumption that the purposes and principles of education originated in outside education. We should criticize such thinking and make the "principles of the educational field" the foundation of teachers' educational practices. Moreover, NI realizes the connection between educational research and other areas of academic study through the medium of the story, without losing the identity of educational research. Thus NI has the potential to bring in a different perspective to Japanese educational research.

View full abstract

The purpose of this article is to reflect on epistemology, methodology, and organization of studies of educational practice, and suggest frames and approaches of "sustained longitudinal research in and on educational practice as organized reflection in practice". For this purpose, epistemology and methodology of action theory of Cris Argirys and Donald A. Schön is analyzed in the first part of this article. In Inner Contradiction of Rigorous Research (1980), C. Argyris investigated process, system and consequence of "rigorous research" on social practice, and analyzed "inner contradiction" and function to restrict reflection in practice as "double loop learning." In The Reflective Practitioner (1983), D. A. Schön suggested mutuality between research and practice. "Sustained longitudinal analysis" in and on sustained longitudinal practice is a crucial approach for research of reflective practice, organization ,and institution. In the second part, the actual longitudinal development process of methodology and organization of Lesson Studies in Horikawa elementary school (Toyama city, Japan) from 1950's to 2000's is traced. The focus of lesson study in Horikawa elementary school shifted from short term achievement to a long term formational process of identity of learners and cultivation of the learning culture of the class. In the last part of this article, I suggest frames and approaches of sustained longitudinal research in and on educational practice as "organized reflection in practice" beyond the action research approach as intervention into practice from outside in short term.

View full abstract

Clinical Sociology of the School is supposed to come from John Dewey's The School and Society, published in 1899. In 1896, Dewey founded the Laboratory School at The University of Chicago in order to research the development of children and to pursue a new curriculum that aimed to reform the old traditional methods, suggesting a teaching paradigm to address the changing community. As Dewey's work suggested, Clinical Sociology of the School is practice-oriented, aimed at addressing the various problems surrounding school education in a dynamic society. This notion forged a new relationship between teachers as clients and sociologists as advisers. Viewing the relationship as such, Clinical Sociology of the School may be classified into three types, ranging from low level of clinical relationship to high level as follows: (I) Low level of relationship: Sociologists are simply researchers using statistics or large scale surveys to research school educational problems such as social pathology which was once popular. (II) Middle level of relationship: Sociologists commit to long-term studies of a school organization. They observe classes and interview teachers. Using qualitative data they investigate school educational problems in the context of the school organization including the organizational culture of that school. (III) High level of relationship: Sociologists with teachers as clients commit to problem-solving tasks at the school via intervention. This level is the most important level for Clinical Sociology of the School. So the studies by intervention should be promoted much more in the future in order to affect better and more comprehensive results. Intervention method is introduced to practical research on problems of not only school crisis such as violence, child abuse, drug and so on, but school reform of teacher-student relationships, curricula, organizational culture and so on. This method consists of collaboration with researchers, teachers and other school staff members. In order to reflect this collaboration and to examine ethics of research, intervention method for clinical sociology of the school is classified into five stages as follows: (A) Clarifying the problems of school education from various view points and establishing the research theme. (B) Assessing the conditions of the school which is faced with problems and planning the intervention research. (C) Consulting and supporting teachers and staff members of the school to solve the problems and revise the plan of the intervention research. (D) Examining organizational culture of the school through promoting the intervention research and developing a new culture of school organization. (E) Evaluating all stages of the intervention research, planning the next research project, and generalizing information gleaned from the research results to solve the problems of other schools.

View full abstract

School Management Committee (Gakko Un-ei Kyogikai) is the system recently introduced in publicly funded schools. This system enables parents and local residents to express their opinions on school policy by participating in the process of school management. According to some research, however, the functions of School Management Committees differ from the expectation at the outset: they can not only tell what parents require the school to do, but also tell parents and local residents what the school wants them to do. This paper describes the latter function by analyzing the case study data of a primary school, which implements a "parents' contract" in order to improve parenting. The "parents' contract" includes intrusive conduct, such as obliging parents to supervise their children's homework every day. The aims of this case study are the following. The first is to describe the process of policymaking of the "parents' contract". The second is to describe the process of its implementation and how parents coped with conduct. The third is to examine the problems of School Management Committee as far as the case implies. I draw on data from a research project conducted by me, which includes observations of school events and discussions of School Management Committee; interviews with 18 parents, the head teacher, the vice head, classroom teachers, and local residents who are members of the School Management Committee. The results are as indicated below. (i) By analyzing data, good relationships between teachers and local residents were found. This good relationship enabled school staff to diffuse a discourse of 'problematic parents'. The intervention through "parents' contract" was introduced in order to solve this problem. Implementing such an intrusive request to parents is a precarious proposition. However, the age of local residents as "parents of parents", and their ambiguous position interpreted both as public and private sector, were intentionally [ab] used. In the end, accusation against parents surfaced as a logic legitimizing intervention into parenting. (ii) Class difference is found in parents' ways of coping, and difficulty is concentrated in lower class parents. Nevertheless, discontent by parents was not represented as a collective voice to change the situation because of parents' peer pressure and the power relationship within the School Management Committee. In consequence, problems and conflicts are made implicit within parents; and some parents became subjects who accuse other parents for their problematic attitudes and behaviors. (iii) I asserted the consistency and complicity between School Management Committee and School Choice and performance-based system, without regard to social factors. The School Management Committee can operate as an apparatus of governing parents.

View full abstract