The purpose of this article is to reveal the frame of “case method” that Lee S. Shulman recognizes as a means of preparing professional teacher, and to evaluate its implications and issues.  Therefore, in this article, following questions will be answered after confirming the logic of eliciting case method from his theory of teacher knowledge.  The questions are (1) what is “case”, (2) what is “case method”, and (3) what implications and issues does case method have.

 Case means a prototype that doesn’t have uniqueness, with narrative and context.  Additionally, the case which commits to teacher development is the case of “failure” that consists of intention, chance, judgment, and reflection.  Apropos of case method, since 1996, it has meant not only reading and discussing a well-known case, but also writing about one’s own experience of practice.  This method is called “The Analysis-Construction-Commentary-Community Cycle”.  This is a way of learning that integrates knowledge acquisition with reflection through “written language”.

 The significance of Shulman’s frame of case method is to present a model of teacher education that encourage deep reflection by using not “oral language” but “written language”.  On the other hand, though case method contributes to deepening one’s knowledge, whether it leads onto immediate improvement of one’s performance remains an open question.

 In this article, I clarified how interacted between students and affect their thinking and learning in class; particularly, students make value judgments regarding educational issues.  Specifically, I analyzed the discussion on corporal punishment and usage of violent language from the perspective of “discourse”.

 It was found that the past experience of corporal punishment from parents and teachers was an important linguistic resource for students who advocated corporal punishment; hence, the family logic of corporal punishment has been introduced within school education.  Second, the interaction between students was dominated by the image of a dedicated teacher, which functions similarly to discipline at home for children and a view of education similar to paternalism.  Third, a certain student’s resistance to discourse may be as a strategy to justify corporal punishment by parents when a student resists a different discourse.

 These results indicate that new interpretative frameworks can be constructed when students are confronted by the reality of educational issues; these ideas can contribute to the development of research methodologies for the study of students in the future teacher training stages.  Moreover, this paper also provides the opportunity to reconsider the role of classes in teacher training courses in relation to actual circumstances of the learners.

 The relationship between self-regulated learning (SRL) and CORI has been introduced by Wigfield, one of the developers of CORI, as an example in his books about SRL.  However, it was not made clear in detail how he had specified the instructions for SRL in CORI.  Clarifying this relationship is highly suggestive in practicing the instructions of SRL in Japan.

 Thus, the purpose of this study is to clarify how Wigfield’s SRL theory is specifically incorporated into CORI.  First, we specify the theory of SRL by Wigfield.  Second, as clarifying the theoretical features and the teaching materials of CORI, we find commonalities in CORI and SRL.

 As a result, the following has been made clear as the features of Wigfield’s instructions of SRL.  The three steps of SRL has been fit together with both inquiry science activities and reading strategy instruction.  These two processes were embedded in the process of CORI.  In other words, within the framework of instruction for building the general knowledge about the ecosystem, the lesson was planned in order to cultivate readers who can try to obtain that knowledge using the strategies of reading and interaction with others.

 This paper analyzes Peter Elbow’s composition theory of expressivism, which has flourished in the United States since the 1970s.  Expressivism originates from the criticism for traditional academic writing that emphasizes the acquisition of academic disciplines through mastering sentence forms such as grammar and organization.  It argues for the importance of expressing individual thoughts and feelings in first-year college writing.  In previous studies, a conflict has been shown between the criticism that expressivism privileges private and personal feelings and the vindications that expressivism contributes to helping students understand public and social matters.  Both lines of thought have been studied in theoretical and philosophical fields, although there have been no specific or practical studies.  Therefore, this paper specifically examines how to teach writing using expressivism through an analysis of the Elbow’s textbooks for first-year college students’ writing, aiming to clarify whether and how expressivism can help students realize public and social matters.

 This paper clarifies how expressivism leads students to realize public and social matters by introducing them to: (1) express one’s inner world thorough life writing with expressive language; (2) encounter others through a recursive process of responding and rewriting with peers using written materials; and (3) bring subjects from student’s life experiences into the realm of academic and social discussion.

 The purpose of this paper is to clarify Jena-Plan’s theory and practice based on historical development by focusing on the Peter Petersen’s reception and development of Pestalozzi’s concept.

 Petersen showed an interest in Pestalozzi in 1922-1932, and received educational metaphysics and thought of “living-room education（Wohnstubenerziehung） ” which supported Pestalozzi’s practice.  After that, Petersen positioned Pestalozzi as a pioneer of his own realistic educational theory, and systematized pedagogy by “educational science without illusion” based on human theory in 1932.  Then “school as living-room（Schulwohnstube）” described in 1937 had the “living-room（Wohnstube）” as an original image of education, and Petersen’s reception of Pestalozzi’s concept contributed to the development of Jena-Plan’s theory and practice. 

 Jena-Plan, recognized as a model of inclusion, is captured as a school reform that realizes thought of “living-room education”.  That shows the importance of designing pedagogy based on human theory and the necessity to examine whole school including space construction, group organization and curriculum design for securing children’s life space in school.

 The purpose of this study is to examine the theory and method of lesson study to promote teacher’s growth and self-reformation, focusing on Kaoru Ueda’s view of lesson study.

 First, to clarify the characteristic of Ueda’s theory and method of lesson study, I examined his perspective of lesson and his thought about effective documents and data for lesson study.  He mentions the three-dimensional documents, that is, he has importance on process of changes of teachers’ plans and their thoughts.  Second, I focused on representative practical methods based on Ueda’s educational theory, Karute and Zasekihyo.  Especially, I examined how teachers can change and grow their viewpoints of lesson and understanding of students by making use of Karute.  Third, I examined his educational theory, called Dynamic Relativism.  

 Through these examinations, some suggestions are found.  For example, it is clarified the importance of teachers’ prospections on lesson planning phase.  And to recognize their own viewpoints and develop them, it is effective that teachers reflect lessons focusing on the gap between plan and practice, and unexpected children’s speaking and activity.

 The characteristics of Katsuta’s concept of guidance are as follows: (1) In order to solve the real-life problems of oppression and alienation of children, he called for including the knowledge and recognition of these issues in guidance. (2) The perspective of “group” has been derived from Seikatsu-Tsuzurikata, and has come to the foreground as a result of moral education and the discussions of Japanese Society for Life Guidance Studies.  In other words, the concept of guidance focused on self-definition and the formation of individuals through self-recovery from alienation. (3) He considered guidance and Seikatsu-Tsuzurikata as inseparable, and wanted guidance and the curriculum to be linked together as he considered guidance to be a functional concept. 

 Guidance also has the function of introducing an element of “living” to the science curriculum.  This is the essence of the proposal to integrate these two elements. 

By positioning the “living problems facing children” discovered through the Seikatsu-Tsuzurikata in the curriculum, it becomes a “living” curriculum.  Through the completion of this curriculum, students gain knowledge, learn recognition methods, and acquire and practice the use of skills and techniques for problem-solving.  In the process, moral education helps develop independent judgment.  The combination of this Seikatsu-Tsuzurikata, the curriculum, and moral education achieves the goal of education: fully developing the individual character.  In other words, students progress toward establishment of the self and collective behavior and awareness.

 The purpose of this study is to clarify the characteristics of the “evaluation” theory by Eiichi Komiyama, who was an educational secretary in the Ministry of Education at that time, focusing on the introduction of 5 level relative evaluation into the 1948 child guidance summary.

 “Evaluation” was brought about from criticism of the “measurement movement” in the United States in the 1920s and 1930s, likewise during the postwar educational reform period in Japan. However, many scholars who claimed the need for “evaluation” in Japan also promoted 5 -step relative evaluation based on a fundamentally different “measurement movement”.

 In previous research, Komiyama was recognized to have played the role in the development of “evaluation”, meanwhile it was pointed out that he had a problem within the limitations of “individualization of education” because he had some claim against the purpose of “evaluation” by recommending the use of standardized tests based on the theory of “measurement movement”.

 Therefore, in this study, I analyzed the relationship between the structure of “evaluation” in Japan and the child guidance summary, the emergence of 5 levels of relative evaluation, and teacher’s responses.　In addition, I examined the limitations, following the writings and remarks of Komiyama.

 As a result, Komiyama’s “evaluation” theory is an approach that aims to improve instruction to achieve educational goals, focusing on the change of academic ability, while recognizing the constancy of intelligence, unlike “individualization of education”.

 Furthermore, in this research, I investigated the theoretical relationship between Miyasaka Tetsufumi and Nomura Yoshibee because both proposed life guidance theory similarly based on Buddhism.  While Miyasaka’s theory was based on the Soto-Zen Buddhism, on the contrary, Nomura’s theory was based on the Jodo Shin Buddhism.  However, Miyasaka found that there existed theoretical similarities between the Soto-Zen Buddhism and the Jodo Shin Buddhism and this led him to highly appraise Nomura’s life guidance theory.  Both of them took pedagogy and religion not as separate, but as co-determinate.  They took religion as a medium to go beyond egocentrism.  Then they both claimed to establish the theory and practice aiming at the objectivity that could recognize oneself through other persons, and thus transcend self-egocentrism.  This way of thinking is the essence of religion and is connected to the theory of otherization which means to be liberated through awakening to the connectedness with other persons.