This study aims to determine the process and factors whereby proactive conflict resolution in problem-solving learning strengthens the will to create a better society.  Transcript-based lesson analysis  (TBLA) was conducted for a social studies lesson in the 3rd year of junior high school on “conflict and consensus” and “efficiency and fairness.” In this lesson, students conducted interviews with the stakeholders of a local public work and held whole-classroom discussions.  The analysis proceeded as follows: 1) The lesson was divided into segments to clarify the process of the whole classroom discussion, 2) the topics that appeared in the lesson were visualized with a “cumulative relative frequency graph,” and 3) the utterances that caused a significant shift of the topic were interpreted.  This analysis allowed the transitions in the topic of “efficiency” and “fairness” in whole-classroom discussion to be identified.  In this transition process, students empathized with the stakeholders and pursued the realization of their interests while referring back to their voices.  In addition, the students participated in social decisionmaking by sharing responsibility for the interests of the stakeholders.  This result suggests that proactive conflict resolution enhances students’ will to create a better society.  Based on the above, a model of proactive conflict resolution in problem-solving learning was developed.

 The purpose of this article is to examine the view of assessment that was developed by A. D. C. Peterson, who shaped the philosophy of the International Baccalaureate (IB) education, focusing on the relationship between his educational objectives and the curriculum.  Peterson criticized the “examination” when he was involved in the reform of the British Six Form in the late 1950s.  However, he reconsidered that “examination” can be used to embody the objectives of education after participating in the development of the IB curriculum in the late 1960s.  In order to understand this shift, this article refers to Peterson’s writings and analyzes the detail of his objectives of education, as well as the relationship between the objectives and the “examination”.   Throughout his career as an educator, Peterson consistently thought that the objectives of education are for learners to understand selves and the society that each learner lives, in order to find a way to engage with the community and enjoy their lives.  Peterson’s view of assessment, which was derived from the educational objectives, is an opportunity to understand selves.  However, the word “examination” couldn’t express Peterson’s view of assessment.  Peterson found the word “assessment” more suitable while working on the curriculum development of the IB.  Later, he also successfully acquired the way to state the view of assessment clearly in the curriculum and embody the view of assessment accordingly to the objectives of education.  Although the assessment has become more high-stakes for students, parents, teachers and schools, what is important for the unique way of IB assessment should be how teachers and students in the IB education view the meaning of assessment.  Therefore, how teachers and students perceive assessment of the IB needs to be investigated in order to improve the quality of assessment.

 The purpose of this paper is to clarify the original significance of practice by reviewing from a phenomenological point of view the significance of “practice” presented by Bollnow.  To achieve this goal, I verify the educational significance of “practice” elucidated by Bollnow by organizing the aims of Vom Geist des Übens viewed from an anthropological perspective by Bollnow and confirm the remaining issues in Vom Geist des Übens  by overviewing previous studies.  Next, I confirm the phenomenology in Bollnow’s “pedagogy from an anthropological point of view,” especially the generative phenomenology position in Husserlian phenomenology.  I examine the educational significance of “practice” reviewed from the perspective of generative phenomenology.  In the generative analysis of Husserlian phenomenology, a method of consciousness analysis called “deconstruction” (Abbau) is used to clarify whether the lower layer holds even when the upper layer is blocked, in the underlying structure of the object meaning.  The “practice” in this generative analysis has a structure like a dialogue with oneself.  Here, it is demonstrated that “practice” has a goalless intrinsic teleological value in the sense of infinitely pursuing the ultimate liberalization of “way” (Bewegungsweise).  At the same time, “self-dialoguing” with the content of practice in the “practice” confirms that education exists precisely to reach what Bollnow claimed: “inner freedom.”

 Ryosuke HOMMA, a member of the New Drawing Education Association, criticized the Free Drawing Education by Kanae YAMAMOTO, and advocated the “Creative Drawing Education” in which children acquire knowledge and skills by trial and error while adhering to basic theory.  This paper clarifies what kind of theory of sewing education was conceived based on his idea of drawing education.  His theory of sewing education belongs to a genealogy in which the significance of the theory is reexamined in relation to art in the course of sewing education reform.  His “Creative Sewing Education” theory has three characteristics.   First, as a skill to build an industrial nation, he equated sewing with other handicrafts.  He reconsidered sewing as a public work, not as a private work in a family.   Secondly, sewing was considered as one of shape education for both Japanese dressmaking and Western dressmaking.  Shape education encompasses all subjects dealing with shapes, such as drawing, sewing, and calligraphy.   Third, he proposed sewing education that emphasized color theory.  By emphasizing color theory, he also showed the possibility of children making designs by themselves.   His theory of sewing education was based on the nationalistic thought, but it was not limited to the field of sewing and was designed as a general concept of manufacturing, so it showed the form of sewing education that was different from the thought of practitioners of the time. 

 The purpose of this paper is to clarify the characteristics and limits of Peter Petersen’s concept of autonomous educational science.  Thereby this paper focuses on his pedagogical fact research and academic teacher education, and discuss the meaning of the independence of pedagogy as science.  First, I’ll clarify character of education science by Petersen.  Second, I’ll examine the relationship between pedagogical fact research and school reform.  Third, I’ll argue academic teacher education, that is applied by pedagogical fact research.  Through this paper, the following were revealed as characteristics of Petersen’s concept of educational science:（1）  he described pedagogy as a science of reality, that distanced from both human science and positivism pedagogy,（2）  he used pedagogical fact research as a meditation to connect his educational science to academic teacher education,（3）  by approaching the future practice through teacher education, he got the idea to realize the school reform idea of “free and common national school” known as Jena-plan.  On the other hand, this research pointed out the limits of his concept that it was impossible to overcome the circularity of the framework deriving what should exist from what existed.  Because Petersen approached school reform from a pedagogical perspective that included teacher education, as a discussion point for school reform, this research referred to the importance of discussing how the pedagogy should be as a science.