The purpose of this paper is a theoretical consideration of an ethics of international educational development. Main topics to be considered include a “public-private initiative to disseminate Japanese-style education overseas” (EDU-Port Japan), and the ideologies of anti/cultural imperialism and anti/neoliberalism.

 The field of international educational development has not been sufficiently related to educational ethics or normative theory in general. Global ethics research addresses the relevant issues, but hardly touches on education. It is, to be sure, difficult to develop and criticize any ideology theoretically today. However, this does not automatically mean that we can abandon issues of international educational development ideology, as international educational development practices are already based on or related to certain ideologies.

 EDU-Port Japan promotes the dissemination of “Japanese-style education” overseas, especially to so-called developing countries. It is proactively promoted by a public-private nationwide initiative.

 EDU-Port Japan is problematic from the ethical viewpoint of international educational development, which is asymmetry between the self and the other. Asymmetry ethics value “hesitation” before educating the other, but what EDU-Port Japan emphasizes is “dissemination” and “promotion.”

 Moreover, EDU-Port Japan has affinities with cultural imperialism and neoliberalism. Cultural imperialism represents the other one-sidedly in accordance with the convenience of the self, and positions the self as a universal. It also extends the selfʼs culture across the other to intensify the self. EDU-Port Japan also resonates with neoliberalism, which supports the free-market economy or capitalism, fuses the other into economic systems in the name of “Win-Win,” and tries to change their business surroundings, including government policies, for the self. EDU-Port Japan advances Japanese enterprises to exploit the new education markets in developing countries. Here, cultural imperialism and neoliberalism come together as one.

 Both are self-centered ideologies, since they use the other for the sake of the self. Therefore, anti-cultural imperialism questions the self or the subject and recalibrates the relationship between the self and the other. It also points out that self-reflection with negativity for the self is the key to criticizing and changing cultural imperialist situations. This applies to neoliberalism as well. It is difficult to listen to the otherʼs voice itself and narrate the other on behalf of the other. So negativity, which is the internal possible other within the self, is needed when reflecting on the self in order to create a revised self.

 How can we make negativity work for and criticize EDU-Port Japan? There are two ways. First, we make clear the meaning of “Japanese-style,” which is not explained by EDU-Port Japan. Second, we find and present not only the “successes” but also the “failures” as “Japanese-style education.” Straightforwardly, we can understand “Japanese-style education” as all educational ideas, practices and consequences in Japan. But under the circumstances, some cases may have arbitrarily been excluded from the category of “Japanese-style education,” such as educational inequity. Through these two approaches to mediating negativity in EDU-Port Japan, we can continue its deconstruction and our calls for ethical responsibility.

 Shuyo (修養) is one well-spring of the Japanese educational tradition. The term ‘shuyo’ predates the Meiji era. However, the term has not been used consistently since the Edo era. Today the ‘shuyo of the Meiji era’ is well-known, but much can be learned from investigating this understanding if we take into account the Edo era and translation into Western languages.

 For translations of this term into Western languages, the term of ‘cultivation’ is often given as an equivalent. Interestingly, not only shuyo (修養), but yojo (養生), shugyo (修行), and keiko (稽古), all of which are differentiated in Japanese, have been translated as ‘cultivation’ in Western linguistic contexts.

 In relation thereto, this paper considers: 1) Did shuyo foster virtues in government officials; or, what kind of relationship did shuyo have to politics? (Zhu Xi school and Ogyu Sorai) 2) Should we understand shuyo as the ‘discipline’ in Foucaultʼs governance theory, or alternatively as Foucaultʼs ‘le souci de soi’? (Nakae Toju and Ito Jinsai), 3) Does shuyo take as its goal to become ‘healthy’ or increase ‘well-being’, the same as yojo (養生)? (Kaibara Ekken), 4) Does shuyo aspire to something that transcends secular values, or does shuyo work only within secular values? (Kiyosawa Manshi), 5) Does shuyo need no skills or techniques, in contrast to keiko (稽古) which is the process of developing personality through learning some kinds of ‘skills or techniques’? (Nitobe Inazo).

 The intended purpose of this article is to share ‘non’-modern educational thoughts in an international context. It seeks not to understand them within the framework of ‘modern education’, but to investigate an appropriate alternative framework for the ‘non’-modern modus itself. Dialogues with other cultures are one of the best way to carry this out. This does not mean, however, to simply translate Japanese insights into other languages, but to learn how they are differently understood in other languages and to continue paying attention to differences or different articulations among different languages.

 Education in Japan has drawn Western attention several times in the past. For instance, Francis Xavier in the 16th century and other Western visitors in Japan from the late early-modern era to the early Meiji era were surprised by the literacy rate of the Japanese people and their reading customs.

 In the mid-1960s, some researchers such as R. P. Dore and H. Passin refocused on the high literacy rate of the people of the early-modern era in the context of the theory of “modernization in Japan.” Other researchers mentioned the high literacy rate as a reason for the rapid economic growth of Japan in the 1980s while discussing education reform in the U. S.

 However, the high literacy rate in early-modern Japanese society is not axiomatic. Most studies either simply consider school enrollment as the literacy rate, or base their argument on the subjective observations of foreigners. Considering the above circumstances, there are some new studies which attempt to reveal the accurate literacy rate.

 As R. Rubinger mentions, however, the meaning of the popularization of literacy in early-modern society has not been considered. With an eye to this issue, this paper attempts to examine the meaning of the peopleʼs literacy in early-modern society.

 Previous studies have mentioned that the early-modern society was a “society of letters”: letters were indispensable. It is true that literacy among the people spread, mostly in urban areas, in the seventeenth century. Even in rural districts, various account books, records and diaries were created. In the process of the establishment of a documentism society, the business of scriveners appeared in some areas. We can see that literacy was imperative in society. The creation of various documents shows both aspects of the control and governance of the people and the self-assertion and security of the people by documentation. Thus, while the people were controlled and governed, they petitioned and self-asserted by documentation such as peasantsʼpetitions.

 The characteristics of the early-modern society of letters are the nationwide homogenization of letter writing style (the Oie school), phrases, grammar, and formats. It is true that it is difficult to address the legal grounds of the standardization and homogenization. However, the writing style and formats had a certain force as a social custom. The people wrote, read, and learned their letters at Tenarai-juku, private educational institutions.

 The high literacy rate was the attainment of a “society of letters,” in which the people read books. Needless to say, the “society of letters” became the significant foundation of language education in terms of national education in early-modern Japan.

 This paper clarifies the transformation process of the Teacher Consultant Program for the Ryukyus dispatched by the Japanese Ministry of Education under the rule of the United States of America, with special attention to the tripartite relationship between Japan, USA and the Ryukyus.

 In June 1958, the Educational Bureau of the Government of the Ryukyu Islands submitted the “Guidelines for Invitation of Teachers from the Mainland” to the Japanese Ministry of Education. In the social and educational environment of Okinawa, the request called for the dispatch of skilled and experienced teachers able to coach inexperienced young teachers while conducting educational practice at schools in Okinawa for two years each.

 Upon receipt of this request, the Ministry of Education immediately started working toward a budget for its realization as educational support for Okinawa. The 1959 Japanese government budget enabled to dispatch of teacher consultants, not skilled teachers, to Okinawa for six months each. Therefore, the budget was limited to adopting only part of the request of the Educational Bureau of the Government of the Ryukyu Islands.

 In contrast, the United States Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands (USCAR) was critical of the Teacher Consultant Program. In particular, it paid attention to the background and ideology of the teacher consultants dispatched to Okinawa. USCAR demanded the authority to monitor and repatriate them. It also incorporated this mutual agreement into the understanding between Japan, America and the Ryukyus.

 In September 1959, 24 teacher consultants arrived in Okinawa to coach and guide Okinawan teachers at elementary and junior high schools.

 From 1960 onwards, USCAR requested that the Japanese Ministry of Education to screen teacher consultants to ensure that only those opposed to leftist viewpoints would be sent. The Ministry of Education responded to the criticisms and indications from USCAR, prioritized dispatching teacher consultants and systematized the Teacher Consultant Program as an opportunity to spread Japanese education in Okinawa. The program was suspended in fiscal year 1961. However, it resumed from fiscal year 1962 and continued until fiscal year 1982―after Okinawa was returned to the Japanese rule in 1972.

 The purpose of this paper is to articulate the mechanism of Japanese students' high performance achievement in the past PISA surveys. Using the PISA2015 dataset, we focus on the perception of the Japanese case as the exception.

 The Japanese case has been perceived to be the exception because, based on the secondary analysis of PISA 2003 data, the social economic and cultural status (SECS) of high schools has a greater impact on achievement than the SECS of students in Japan compared with other countries.

 Previous studies that conducted a secondary analysis of PISA data have adopted a simplified distinction between tracked and comprehensive schools. They also excluded East Asian high performance countries such as Japan and Korea. To overcome this deficiency, F. Taki revised N. Monʼs original typology of secondary education systems (separation model, Nordic inclusive model, individual choice model, and mixed model) within OECD countries that participated in PISA2003 and added the East Asian exam competition model (Japan & Korea). We then added Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan within East Asian countries because of their rapid increase in the number of high school students, and used this typology to assess R. Boudonʼs primary and secondary effects on inequality of educational opportunities.

 The main findings are as follows: (a) Before examining the results of the multilevel analysis, we compared ICCs (intraclass correlation coefficient) among five models, indicating the proportion of the variance between school levels for the null model. As expected, the early separation model, composed of several tracks, showed the highest ICC, and the Nordic inclusive model, in which tracking does not exist and grade retention and ability grouping are rare, showed the lowest ICC. (b) Among the five models, students from more advantaged school-level SECS in the exam competition model perform better than those from higher student-level SECS. In the Nordic inclusive model, the impact of school-level SECS is almost the same as that of student-level SECS. (c) Compared with four countries from each model (Austria, Finland, the USA, and France, as well as the other four East Asian countries except for Singapore where the age of first educational selection is 12 years old), Japan shows the steepest gradient of school-level SECS against math performance, a result which supports the findings demonstrated by Taki using PISA2003.

 (d) Among the eight countries, the cross-level interaction of high school- and individual-level SECS in Japan shows negative effects on math performance and aspiration. This result suggests that ‘compensatory effectsʼ which homogenize inequality among students work within high schools. (e) Another characteristic of the exam competition model (Japan & Korea) focusing on math performance is that consciousness variables such as test anxiety and desire to achieve higher marks play a positive and significant role in the mediating mechanism.

 These results may suggest that the catch-up mentality of the exam competition model and attempts to avoid the new risk of downward educational mobility exist in the globalized age. It is hoped that educational researchers will further analyze the accumulated PISA dataset to identify more aspects of its Japanese characteristics.

 This paper discusses how to evaluate projects for overseas dissemination of Japanese-style education models from the perspective of comparative education methodology, focusing on the EDU-Port Nippon Project. The Project is promoted by a private-public cooperative platform that unites ministries, government agencies, local governments, educational institutions and NPOs, and so on, in response to overseas countries' enhanced interest in Japanese education. The Project consists of two parts; one that focuses on exporting a Japanese-style education model, and one that creates networks or consortia focused across multiple countries or regions. With the Center for Asian Legal Exchange of Nagoya University as an example of the latter, a shift from a receptive model to an emissive one can be noted while considering the transmission of the Japanese educational experience through collaboration and networking with the goals of assisting other Asian countries to develop legal systems, legal education, and human resources. In addition to the policy-level significance of promoting the internationalization of Japanese education, enhancing the understanding of Japan abroad, and positively affecting Japanese economic growth, Japan may also be able to reconstruct its own model based through interaction with foreign counterparts and to create a platform for shared educational research.

 In implementing the Project, it is noted that the Japanese-style education model should be introduced with consideration for the political, economic, social and cultural contexts of the host society and its social needs. The Project is characterized mainly from the viewpoint of cultural and diplomatic policies and international cooperation from the Japanese side, but should also be meaningful to the host society's educational development. In this process of the sharing of ideas and collaboration, the comparative perspectives should be important, namely “what and how we compare” and “why we compare”. It is also necessary to reconsider what comparative elements should be examined and how we can extrapolate a model from a specific case.

 Comparative education as a methodology is likely to become more important as educational issues diversify and transnational frameworks increase. The origin of comparative education research was to obtain information from overseas countries for national education policies and systems amidst nation-state building processes; while this was the case in the era of “borrowing”, today we are seeing a new era of “creating”. Education policy and systems must be reconsidered in a more diversified multinational and regional context. While the EDU-Port Nippon Project was initiated with the idea of exporting a Japanese-style education model, its focus has shifted from dissemination and reception alone to include the creation of an international education platform as well. The Japanese-style education model is expected to become an international common good that aligns with the common interests of international society. In this process, comparative education methodology will play a crucial role in disseminating the model, collaborating with host countries and generalizing the model for the international society.

 Lesson study as a promising policy to improve teaching skills has been transferred to developing countries through technical cooperation projects. In Africa, for example, starting from cascade training sites, lesson study is now reaching clusters and classrooms where actual teaching and learning activities take place. It has expanded from secondary to primary schools, from a pilot to a nationwide scope and from mathematics and science to other subjects. Zambia is one of the few countries that has endorsed lesson study as an effective continuous professional development model for the country. Utilizing the existing school-based training system was certainly an advantage, helping the stakeholders perceive lesson study as compatible with their system. Achievement of a higher pass rate in national examinations in an early pilot state contributed to improving users' perception of lesson study. However, the practice of lesson study has not resulted in positive gains in students' understanding or achievement in Africa. When lesson study is appropriately implemented, it serves as an effective professional development model and provides meaningful learning opportunities to teachers. Unfortunately, due to the overcrowded curriculum, teachers have difficulty finding substantial time for lesson study. As a result, when they conduct lesson study, insufficient time is spent on researching curriculum materials or post-lesson discussion, both of which are critical to effective lesson study. In addition, a lack of local facilitators and knowledgeable others who can support research on curriculum materials and critical reflection is another barrier. It is necessary to increase the capacity of local educational leaders as well as to provide professional learning opportunities to teachers by preparing resource books to enhance their content knowledge for teaching.

 This study addresses the characteristics of Japanese-style education that emerge from the relationship between countries that have implemented Japanese-style education, such as Vietnam, Zambia, Bangladesh, and South Africa, and the Japanese side producing the education. Japan has experience in establishing new educational policies and practices, including imported education. The Japanese-style education that has developed through this history also considers what conditions can bring out sustainability in the partner country.

 First of all, detailed case studies include Vietnamese lesson studies, Zambian lesson studies, Bangladesh peer tutoring, and a “Homework Project with Parental Support” in South Africa, in an attempt to highlight the characteristics of Japanese-style education through comparison between the national situations and the implementation of Japanese-style education in each case. In the case study of lessons in secondary education in Vietnam, the efforts of both countries established Japanese-style education and the pilot project produced excellent teachers through teacher contests. These results were applicable to the incentive system for teacher transfer opportunities, ensuring the sustainability of the pilot project. In the Zambian case study of secondary education as well, students' performance improved compared to the period before the pilot project. However since the pilot project system did not apply to the local circumstances, the project was not sustainable beyond the pilot period. In the pilot project of peer tutoring in primary education in Bangladesh, the implementation of Japanese-style education was effective, learning effects were improved, and mutual understanding among ethnic groups was deepened. However, the project team was not able to establish a system enabling development of the peer tutoring method within the country. In South Africa, the “Homework Project with Parental Support,” in which students did their science homework with their parents, improved parents' understanding of education in addition to improving students' science performance. The homework education culture in Japan was new to South Africa, but checking homework has been shown to burden teachers, leaving issues for dissemination to other regions.

 Characteristics of Japanese-style education in international education cooperation through the comparative case studies of these four countries are (1) a history of ingenuity and development in Japan, (2) the cultural grounding of respect for education among Japanese educational stakeholders, and (3) efforts toward learning improvement based on spontaneous motivation in school teachers.

 The purpose of this paper is to clarify the potential for and issues involved in the international adoption of the Japanese ‘Lesson Study’ model, by conducting a comparative review with German pedagogical researchers of the models used in Germany and Japan. International academic achievement surveys such as TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) and PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) have shown that Japanʼs ‘Jugyou Kenkyuu’ or ‘Lesson Study’ has attracted worldwide attention. Following Germanyʼs ‘PISA-shock’ and the revelations of the TIMSS Video Study, there has been increased attention to research on teaching and learning processes (Unterrichtsforschung) in German-speaking countries, rather than to ‘lessons’ or the ‘Lesson Study’ model of Japan. This trend, sparked by TIMSS and PISA, has become what is known as the ‘empirical turn’ (empirische Wende) in educational research, leading to the rise of ‘empirical research on teaching and learning’ (empirische Unterrichtsforschung).

 There are two types of ‘empirical research on teaching and learning’ in Germany, using quantitative and qualitative research methodology respectively. Qualitative (interpretive and reconstructive) research on teaching and learning has been established in response to criticism of researchers mainly applying the traditional quantitative research methodology. Qualitative researchers regard this ‘empirical turn’ as a ‘reflective turn’, and use qualitative research methodologies from social sciences, such as ethnography, documentary methods, qualitative content analysis, videography and objective hermeneutics, for research on teaching and learning.

 In order to compare the systems and cultures of lessons and lesson studies in Germany and Japan, this paper compares the process of analysis of lessons in Hiroshima and Leipzig and the process of lesson study at Hiroshima University and Leipzig University, enabling clarification of the significance of the selected research methodology, which is dependent on the purpose of research and lesson analysis. Further, based on feedback on two lesson analyses provided to teachers in Leipzig, the paper considers the possibility of adopting micro-analysis of lessons for teacher education in Germany and the rest of the world.

 Based on the review, the possibilities for and issues of the international adoption of the Japanese ‘Lesson Study’ model are summarized as follows: First is the task of clarifying the logic of relationship-building between researchers and practitioners unique to the ‘Lesson Study’ model, and the significance thereof in the international context and in each educational culture. Second is the task of clarifying the research methodology of lesson study. This paper suggests the importance of clarifying what kind of research methodology - quantitative or qualitative - should be selected for the targeted lesson. Third is the possibility and issues of making the targeted lesson accessible to various researchers and practitioners through lesson video archives, etc.