While Dewey's theory of moral education focuses on indirect aspects, recent Japanese scholarship has argued for the necessity of morality classes that provide direct education on methods of thinking, based on Dewey's philosophy. The purpose of this paper is to draw suggestions from Dewey's ethical theory regarding how to teach methods of moral thinking. Specifically, the study intends to clarify how “approval” and “disapproval” are involved in the process of formation of “social interest” as in the revised edition of Ethics (1932). Thus, the study focuses on one aspect of the concept of “social interest,” namely the “impartial” quality of interest.
The following three elements have been identified regarding the process of cultivation of the “impartiality” of interest. First, the “impartiality” of interest is cultivated through the formation of a reflective attachment to “true happiness” as the “satisfaction of the whole self” through the repeated exercise of impartial deliberation. And yet, second, this impartial deliberation is about what kind of “self” one becomes, not what one gains, and the conscious pursuit of one's own happiness is an obstacle. Third, many people actually carry out these moral deliberations; only, however, in interaction with social and cultural conditions, of which “approval” and “disapproval” are important parts.
As well, the following three elements have been identified regarding the significance of “approval” and “disapproval.” First, the function of “approval” and “disapproval” in the cultivation of “impartiality” of interest is to make people aware that their acts and their consequences are strictly correlated to their own character, and to support their taking “responsibility” for growth. Second, nevertheless, the actual exercise of “approval” and “disapproval” is in the context of emotional interaction with others, so that uncertainty is inevitable. Third, those who exercise “approval” and “disapproval” are required, based on the recognition that there is no fixed superiority or inferiority of morality, to deepen their own morality reflectively, while working with others to recognize and reconstruct social and cultural forces. Here we see the limits of “approval” and “disapproval” as an activity in direct moral education.
The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether the delayed formation of college aspiration causes disadvantages in educational achievements in Japanese high schools today, where post-graduation paths are no longer entirely defined by school type and over half of all students attend university.
This paper defines delayed formation of college aspiration in accordance with this context and investigates the relationship between students' socioeconomic backgrounds, such as household income and parents' educational backgrounds, and the periods in which their college aspiration was formed, also considering their school type as a mediator. The paper also examines whether delayed formation of college aspiration is connected to disadvantages in educational achievements.
The results of analysis based on panel data of high school students are as follows. 1) In all school types, a small but consistent number of students had not formed college aspiration before senior year. 2) Parents' educational backgrounds affect children's college aspiration formation periods; as well, college aspiration formation periods affect career paths after high school graduation, especially with regard to enrollment in highly ranked universities. 3) The mediation effect of college aspiration formation periods with regard to the relationship between socioeconomic backgrounds and post-high school career paths was 20%.
These results suggest that in the current era, when over half of all students enter university, socioeconomic disparity arises or grows during high school based on delayed college aspiration formation. Given this possibility, research on disparities in educational achievements should consider that the process of forming educational aspiration during high school plays an important role in the mechanism of generating disparities. In addition, there is room for consideration of the relationship between high schools' framing of students' post-high school career paths and disparities in educational achievements. Social change and policy directions in Japan have reduced this framing at the high school level. This may cause further delay in college aspiration formation and increase the socioeconomic disparities in educational achievements. More resources from high schools and political support for disadvantaged students to determine their aspirations after high school are needed.
The purpose of this study was to examine the situation of financing school facilities in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, North Carolina, USA, following grade span changes. It also clarifies how the local educational agencies secured financial resources for improving the facilities and how they improved the educational environment at this time. More specifically, taking this school district as a case study, the discussions between the Board of Education and the school district superintendent when changing the grade span have been analyzed in addition to their arrangements for the necessary financial resources.
The analysis results are summarized in three points as follows.
The first point concerns consensus building by the Board of Education. The capital budget of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, which does not have tax-raising authority, was financed through school bonds of the general-purpose government, the county. The Board of Education had been deliberating asking the county to issue bonds for capital improvement, as well as the direction of educational reform in the school district as a whole; it is clear that consensus building played a major role in the raising of funds.
The second point concerns the capital improvement plan laid out by the superintendent. Plans of this kind form the basis of the district's requests to the county to issue bonds and must be approved by the Board of Education and Board of County Commissioners. To fulfill their responsibility of improving the educational environment, the superintendent collected opinions on the ground, from schools and in public hearings, compiling requests for improving the facilities in each school and accordingly formulating a capital improvement plan based on priorities. In other words, county bonds are a means of raising funds to finance facilities reflecting the schools' needs on the ground, with the Board of Education examining the plan's suitability for fund-raising.
The third point concerns the referendum on the county's issuance of bonds. Since a majority is required in bond issuance referenda, the superintendent and school district office regularly released information and clearly disseminated the purpose of the bond issuance to the residents: not only to reduce student overcrowding and address deteriorating facilities, but also to improve the educational environment to provide attractive academic programs. It thus became clear that this was not simply a case of investing in the development of facilities; the referendum on the suitability of the bond issuance was also an aspect of educational improvement.
This paper identifies the characteristics of Michael Fielding's concept of ‘radical collegiality’ by tracing the context and ideological background of its formation through a focus on the relationships between teachers and students.
The concept of ‘radical collegiality’ was introduced in 1999 in the journal The Australian Educational Researcher (AER). This inclusive concept of collegiality as raised by Fielding includes students and the community.
This paper focuses on the following four issues. First, sorting out the positioning of the Fielding debate in the UK context. Second, tracing the context in which the concept of 'radical collegiality' was formed. Third, after identifying the concept of 'collegiality' as raised by Little, examining the linkage between these two concepts by organising the arguments of the "radical collegiality" concept. Fourth, examining the ideological background of the concept of 'radical collegiality' and identifying its influence on this concept as discussed by Fielding.
The four main findings are: first, the positioning of Fielding's argument in the UK context is summarised, showing its basis in Stenhouse's discussion and orientation: that is, the discussion of teachers as researchers themselves, exploring in collaboration with teachers and external researchers, and the orientation toward respect for students' awareness in this context.
Second is the link between the practical research (Students as Researchers: SAR) in which Fielding was involved and the concept of 'radical collegiality'. By placing SAR in the context of the formation of the concept of 'radical collegiality', it becomes clear that it was formed in close relation to practice. Moreover, it is suggested that the positioning and inclusion of students as (co-)researchers in SAR could lead to a change in their attitudes and a shift in the meaning of learning, school, and education. Furthermore, SAR was an influential early practical study in terms of implementing the positioning of students as (co-)researchers in the British context at the time.
Third is the new relation with Little's discussion. This paper indicates a new relationship by rethinking the debate as a development of the debate from Little to Fielding, with democracy at its core.
Fourth, two features of Fielding's discussion, based on Macmurray's philosophy, are identified as follows. First, the relationship and stance between teacher and student are viewed non-traditionally, blurring the roles and recognising both as equal subjects who create learning together. Second, the discussion is founded on personalities and values the transformative power that they evoke. The action of the transformative power of personalities gave rise to one of the arguments of the concept of 'radical collegiality': the equality of teachers and students.
Important in Fielding's discussion is its approach to the issue of power between teachers and students. This is a significant consideration in terms of its development into a discussion of transformative education and what is meant by "radicality" in "radical collegiality."