In educational practice, "seeing" is very important. The sense of seeing is significant but it is difficult to discuss this seeing as far as we think about it within reach of educational methods. First, I will pick up a famous leader of teachers, Kihaku Saito. I'm sure he was expert in seeing. Secondly, I will try to unite what Saito implicates with Heidegger's thought and to explicate the essence of "seeing". Saito thinks that all of the teacher's history is condensed into seeing. Seeing is a kind of art. Seeing denies conceptual understanding. Teachers should see a child but at the same time they should perceive an atmosphere of the whole class. Here seeing means becoming inhabitant of the space. Seeing is listening to and harmonizing with the place. Here we have to pay attention to teacher's being. Seeing something is seeing oneself. Teachers should keep their eyes on their real finite selves but simultaneously should not find relief in such selves. Saito explicates that seeing doesn't relate with superficial methods and that the rich being of teachers brings out rich seeing. In "Being and Time", I-Ieidegger says that all sight is grounded primarily in understanding (Verstehen). Understanding is one of the fundamental structures for human beings. In short, seeing is one of the moments which constitute human beings. Seeing depends upon seer's being profoundly. Moreover Heidegger considers curiosity (Neugier) as superficial seeing. This Heidegger's emphasis on the way of being in seeing corresponds on what Saito says. Between Saito and Heidegger, there are some similarities. In conclusion, rich seeing calls for learning from children. Teaching is Learning. This task is, however, very difficult.
["I" am able to become "I" by establishing a relationahip with "You"] In this way, Mr.Martin Bubrt indidyrf that the human beings are a relational existence appeared only in the intersubjective relationship with "You", and thus, drastically converted the thought of human beings (children) into a modern "cogito" thought. In addition, Mr.Macrice Merleau=Ponty grasped the human being in physical existence who is going to maintain the relationship with the world as "Being-in-the-World" in view of phenomenology. According to his opinion, solely the body is the subject of a intersubjective, as well as relative existence. Such being the case, the situation based on viewing to grasp chidren who are "The children of intersubjective and relative existence", as well as "The children of I and you relationship" cleared by the above two persons is the situation based on viewing to be procured in today's education in Japan. In other words, fixed-ideally and substantially, in the first stage, good children, bad children, able children and unable children are not being existed. The identity of children is variable depending upon the closer relationship or not, established between a teacher and students or between students themselves in a schoolroom. On the other hand, children (human beings) are not closely fixed substances, but fluidly and openly related existences. It is prerequisite to establish a intersubjective, as well as mutual and responsive relationship in the schoolroom where a keen look and sympathize are observed at all times. As one of recent educational problems, "Refusal of attendance to school", is a typical problem to be solved, which must be corrected in view of a human "I and You" idea or physically relative and existential viewpoints.
1. "Objective observation" as a scientific method is not suitable as a way to understand children in educational fields. Because in education, the relationship between teacher and child is not the same as the relationship between reseacher and object in natural science. In field work, including educational practice, the teacher and her children interact with each other on an equal basis, not in teacher-pupil terms. 2. In educational process, teachers "interprete" the behaviors and words of children and the relationships among them. Educational practice can not do without teachers' interpreting classroom phenomena. Teachers' interpretation consists of meaning-giving and meaning-getting. Meaning-giving takes the form of evaluation by teachers and meaning-getting aims at systematization. Both processes proceed at the same time. Teachers can understand children through interpretation in face-to-face situation. Children can also learn how to give meaning to classroom phenomena in these procsses.
"Rhetoric" has currently been translated in Japanese as "study of figure of speech" , or "art of persuasive or impressive speaking" , and generally been understood as demagotic technique or art of elaborate writing. We must note, however, that "Rhetoric" has originally been developing as a part of methods of communication, conversation, and discussion with language as a central medium. Rhetoric places importance on a listener which is equal to or more than that on a speaker, in the meaning of speaking with the unification of ethos, parthos, and logos. That is to say, there exists a mutual independence principle where a listener and a speaker reach a standard of values with each other's situation in mind while deeply understanding and sympathizing each other. Man can establish a standard of values in his action and be "independent" as one human being only by the dual structure of conversation of mutual independence. Educational demand by a kindergarten teacher is communicated to children through external expression, gesture, look, and utterance. Children can read teacher's demands only through the teacher's daily talking and expression, while they themselves communicate their requests to their teacher by using their whole bodies. Thus you see, the technique of expression and response to convey one's demands to others and read the other's demands is a matter of Rhetoric. Therefore, under the present situation, I believe that kindergarten's teachers should continue talking to children "rhetorically" , so that the children can bring up their own "independence" while promoting their abilities of right self expression (art of Rhetoric). It should be noted that "Guidance" is not a forming action to "grasp and give" teacher's demands to children, but a responsive education development to "point at and lead" to communicate what the teacher.
Van Hiele theory, especially its levels of thinking, is widely accepted by mathematics education communities in many countries, and is used as a framework for the research on geometry learning and teaching. The meanings of his theory, however, is not fully clear, and it sometimes causes controversy. The purpose of this paper is making clear the meanings of the van Hiele's levels of thinking and the five stages for facilitating transitions to higher levels, which are the central ideas of his theory. In order to do this, we first consider the relation between van Hiele theory and the theory about informal knowledge. From this consideration, we find the followings; (i) Recognition of figures at the first level can be taken as informal and situated knowledge about those figures; (ii) Transitions from the first level to the third level can be seen as the transition from informal knowledge to formal knowledge. Based on these results, next we analyze the relation between van Hiele theory and Vygotskian theory. Then we find the followings; (i) Recogniton of figure at the second level corresponds to the pseudconcept or potential concept; (ii) Transitions among the levels cerrespond to the development of scientific concepts based on everyday concepts; (iii) The span between the first level and the third can be considered to generate the zone of proximal development concerning the geometrical knowledge. Consequently, we obtain the following characterization of van Hiele theory; This theory deals with teaching geometry using the zone of proximal development so that children have the access to geometical knowledge and can use it with conscious awareness and volition. This result suggests the new research problems relating to van Hiele thery.
This paper is intended as an investigation of the development of learning theory in "neo-Vygotskian". The change of paradigm on activity theory influences some categories of learning theory. The first important point is the categorical change from individual learning to communal (collective) learning, because the unite of learning activity has been thinking as the "subject-object-subject" relation. Even more important is the methodological change from indoctrination to participation, because the principle of learning activity is not only internalization, but also externalization with interaction. Most important of all is the elucidation of meaning-making character of learning activity in peer interaction. This character is closely related to the theory of therapy. These categorical changes of learning activity have a great influence on the theory of didactics in Japan.
"The educative Instruction", presented by J. F. Herbart in 19th century, has been pursued als what instruction is till these days, though it was misinterpreted by Herbartians. But today, some problems concerning the educational praxis in schools undermines the existential basis of the school as the educational institution, and requests the reexamination of modern educative instruction theory. So, in this paper, the educative instruction, which has been examined only from instructional and educative viewpoint, is added to the investigation from the viewpoint of the school and institutional theory. For this purpose, at first, I investigate the theory of Herbart who developed the study of the educative instruction from the viewpoint of the school and institutional theory in the turningpoint from the feudal society to civil society in 19th century, and through critical succeeding his modern educative instruction theory, determine the practical problem of the educative instruction in these days. Today, I'm sure, it is possible to realize the educative instruction, only when we take up the paradigm of the integration of instructional, educative and institutional theory.
In 1978 Koshi Saito remarked that today's "Ability and Achievement" issues are caused by deteriorated school conditions in which the number of children who cannot keep up with their classes in the primary subjects in the jammed classroom has been increasing. And now we still have such problems in the classroom as the teacher with no intention to improve himself and students with no interest in the primary subject. Therefore, it is imperative for us to research into how the teacher should develop his teaching ability to help children develop their scholastic ability. This paper proves that "reflection in action," or the method of the reflective teaching may have the teacher recognize the significance of study of his/her major and, accordingly, develop his/her children's ability.
The purpose of this paper is to clarify the differences between the teaching-learning theory of directing-learning-activities and the theory of guiding-pupil-experiencing, concentrated its discussion on the shift from the emphasis on learning activities to that on learning experiences in American school curriculum early in the twentieth century. The major points of differences between the teaching-learning theory of the directing-learning-activities and the theory of the guiding-pupil-experiencing can be coordinated as follows. 1) The difference in the approach in initiating pupil activity and developing an effective motivating condition. 2) The difference in the degree of control exercised by the teacher. The teacher control is direct in the directing-learning-activities theory, whereas the teacher control is through setting the stage in the guiding-pupil-experiencing theory. 3) Advocators of the guiding-pupil-experiencing credited children with dynamic qualities. Though subscribers of the directing-learning-activities did not deny the dynamic qualities of children, they paied attention to only utilizing interests as dynamic active tendencies. 4) The difference in the degree of emphasis on the motivating condition within the pupil. The motivating condition within the pupil is an essential requirement in the guiding-pupil-experiencing theory. Though in the directing-learning-activities theory intrinsic motivation was considered effective, it was only a topic. 5) Whether pupils participate in instructional planning or not. 6) The difference between curriculum planned in advance and curriculum emerging as the pupil realizes his purposes. 7) The difference between the teacher as a director and the teacher playing various roles.
The purpose of this paper is to propose a new framework for the analysis of teaching materials and teacher questions. The framework proposed here is based on some of concepts deveroped in "linguistics", especially in "pragmatics". Therefore, the appoach to the study of teaching materials and teacher questions in this paper can be characterized as a "linguistic" approach. The concepts I adopt from pragmatics are mainly concerned with the study of "conversational implicature" and "indirect speech act", which is quite useful when applied to the analysis of teaching materials and teacher questions. Concerning teaching materials, the problem is what kind of teaching materials enable pupils to learn successfully the content of a subject, the content that teachers intend to teach. To solve the problem, it is necessary to analyze the relations between the content of a subject and teaching materials. I apply the framework which is used in the study of the interpretational mechanism of "figurative" speech. The analysis shows that teaching materials relate to the content of a subject "figuratively". Concerning teacher questions, on the other hand, the problem is what kind of teacher questins can prompt pupils to reason about teaching materials from various points of view. To solve the problem, it is necessary to analyze the function of the teacher questions. I apply the concept of "conversational implicature" to the analysis of the function. The analysis shows that such teacher questions comprise another questions by implication. In this way, I show that some linguistic concepts are quite useful for an improvement upon the framework for the analysis of teaching materials and teacher questions so far in use.
This paper describes the developmental principles of hyper media instructionalmaterials. The studies of hyper media in Japan give instructional environment some useful consequents. But their studies have the same method as CAI. Essentially hyper media instructinal materials differ from CAI. Especially they are distinguisched by Interactivity. Therefore we must study interactivity as such than ever. Current studies of hyper media instructional materials, nevertheless, trend to cognitive psychological approach, and make every effort to develop them. Here are some problmes of the studies of hyper media instructional materials. This study analizes Learner-Computer Interactivity as such, and tries to clear principles of behavior in interaction. Readers will discover the Hypermedia as drama and will explore philosophical, psychological and technological background to creat effective interaction.
As I examined some of Kihaku Saito's teaching, which even now are highly evaluated in this field, I have found some significant problems with his brilliant work. In this study I have tried to clarify these problems according to his method of teaching. For example, one of the typical ways of his asking questions is through "ambiguous questions", which aren't easy to answer since the answers aren't clear or obvious to the students. For example, "What kind of-was written?" or "What kind of picture is it (if it is a picture)?", etc. However, it might be possible for any teacher to use these types of questions. However, the teacher should give assisting words or hints to the students, but Saito never did in his class. He never uttered, "Where did you find the idea from the sentences?" or "Where was that technique used?", and the objective of reading and understanding the material was thoroughly unclear to the students. What I have pointed out reflects his other teaching methods. He would give answers and explanations to the important points before his students gave enough answers on their own. He would begin to explain after only two or three different answers were given. Also, he quickly showed other qualities of poems in his class by using other works of poets, models of creation, or classical works, such as "The Man-You-Shu". He would ask questions and direct the understanding according to those works. Many misreadings occurred from mixing "ambiguity" and "arbitrariness" of the poems. As a result, Saito seemed to have no idea that the most fundamental way of reading poems is nothing but to read each word and phrase objectively. This lack of understanding caused most of the problems in his teaching. It is necessary to clarify these negative aspects of his teaching method because he was such an excellent theorizer and doer that I think even his faults would help our progress in the study of the methodology of teaching.
I'll report some views of some researches for studying the relation between the terms in Social Studies textbooks and the acquisition of the glossary by school children. The social studies textbook has something in common with the Japanese Studies textbook in that there are more glossaries in both of them than the other subjects and school children understand the contents of the textbook mainly by reading it. So I think the glossary has a heavy responsibility in social studies textbook. Already some researches have been made on how many glossaries there are in the Japanese studies textbook. But it has never been done about the social studies textbook. Therefore I researched chiefly the points. I An analysis of glossaries in social studies textbooks in the elementary school II An analysis of historical terms in social studies textbooks in the elementary school III A research on the communication of historical terms in social studies textbooks in the elementary school IV A comparison of historical terms in social studies textbooks in the elementary school with the junior high and sinior high schools in Japan The following results have been obtained from these researches: I The glossaries at the 6th grade increase remarkably. They are especially in the historical terms. II Historical terms work differently in their meaning from ordinary words in social studies textbooks. III Historical terms can't be communicated sufficiently to the elementary school children.
The education respecting individuarity is one of the greatest matters of concern to us in the present education. But the theory of the individual education already appeared in about the thirtieth year of Meiji in Japan. This theory was proposed by the normal school teachers, Otohiko Hasegawa, Tsunejiro Okamoto and others in Meiji era. The features of the theory were that they criticized the classroom teaching and approved the existence of various individuality. Hasegawa mainly studied the theory from the "Special Pedagogy" of the German pedagogical scholor, H. Kern and Okamoto chiefly studied from the practice of the one-class school teaching. The educational policies after the war between Japan and Shin affected this theory of the individual education. That is to say, Meiji government, which aimed at the aggression, negated the man of uniform and looked for the man of ambition and drive. In that sense, the proposal of the theory of the individual education agreed with the negation of the formal and uniform education, in the end. The theories of Hasegawa and Okamoto influenced the other theories of individual education in later age and the theories of individualization in teaching practice. The education respecting individuality grew to be one of the principles in the "New Education Movement" in the Taisho era.
Enosuke Ashida is known for the "Zui-i Sendai (voluntary theme setting)" system; one of his ways of guidance for pupils/learners in teaching composition classes, the method of which is in high repute. Through his guidance, the pupils are well motivated towards deeper insights. His method, therefore, is reputed of "pupil-oriented" (or child-centered). On the contrary, however, the Ashida-method encounters criticism for its "teacher-oriented" (or teacher-centered) approach. The criticism is mainly incurred from the fact that teacher's contribution seems to be higher than pupils', since a major portion of dialogue during the class works are initiated by the teacher. In this paper, I deal with the contradiction, i.e., the two confronted assessments given to Ashida. In order to give a deeper observation to his class working records (titled "A guidance in writing compositions-Takinogawa Dai-ichi Elementary School" ), the below-mentioned two different approaches are taken as analytical measures, 1) to apply a demonstrative analysis method called "KI system (revised version)", and 2) to set sights on the concept called "Doppelseitige Erschliessung" (a dual structure of open-mindedness) proposed by Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Klafski, one of the world's known educational researchers. By giving these two different dimensional insights simultaneously, Ashida's teaching method is analyzed and interpreted. The analysis leads to a conclusion that the above-mentioned contradictions can exist dialectically. I.e., the Ashida-method, in teaching composition classes, is that the teacher makes the pupils express their "hibiki" (mental/spiritual vibrations) by means of "introspection". "Hibiki" is the result of pupils focusing heavily on their internal mental spheres. Ashida's personal experience in the same process towards "self-disclosure" (or self-mind-awakening) is heavily reflected in his teaching method. Hence, this particular aspect is the real substance of the method developed by Enosuke Ashida for teaching composition as well as reading.
This article refers to child's and youth's cultural activities mainly in school. At first, the modern cultural situation of child and youth is analysed. Consamptional culture, isolated culture and passive culture are characterized there. And then theories of cultural activites in school education and social education are analyzed and compared with each other. In school educational theories formal cultural activities are insisted. At the case of social education informal cultural activities are insisted on the contrary. In theories of SEIKATSUKYOIKU, conection of subject, formal cultural activities and informal cultural activities are contained. In order to solve this opposition, it is clarifyed that the essence of cultural activities is in the play. Play's charactericity is being pleasant. And it contains fiction. In the play and between the play and other activities, fiction and reality take turns one another. This essence of play teaches that formal cultural activities and informal cultural activities supplys each other. Without informal culture activity, formal one cannot play its role absolutely, and without formal activity. informal one cannot either. But in the modern collaspe of resions, informal one is about to disappear. In this situation, school must contain both informal and formal activities in it. And social education, too. This leads that school locates the play in its curriculum. At last the method of organizing cultural activities in school which contains formal and informal activities is refered. The point is to understand the character of leadership as acceptance and protection.