自己学習力が強調される今日の教育において, 学習者自身のもつ「学習観」は極めて重要である. 現在の学校教育で形成されがちな学習観として, 失敗は悪いことであり, 正答さえ良ければ良いといった「結果主義」があげられよう. 本研究では, 「失敗に対する柔軟的態度」, 「思考過程の重視」という2つの側面に着目し, 基本的な学習観の尺度を作成した. さらに, 学業成績との関連について検討した結果を報告する.

抄録全体を表示

Many countries including Japan have promoted radical education reforms guided by neo-liberal and quasi-market ideas. But no appropriate evidence has been provided to show their validity and effectiveness. They are promoted by ideological preferences and in the populistic political atmosphere.
Given this situation, this paper first identifies some major features of the following five quasi-market models; simple school choice, education voucher, alternative schools, charter school, and school management by for-profit company. The aspects examined are the institutional idea, framework of school choice, school budget, school management system, freedom from government control, form of parent participation, and the influence of each model over the whole education system.
Secondly, the paper discusses the five major problems that are neglected in their arguments and will damage the public education system.(1) Due to the fact that school is an institutional good, school choice will differentiate schools both substantially and relatively on such evaluation criteria as academic success, school safety and social attributes of students and neighborhood atmosphere of each school.(2) Due to the fact that school is a collective and unfinished (or half-finished) good at the time of choosing and entering, the school performance and its evaluation depend on the students who are recruited to each school, and accordingly, school choice differentiates schools in terms of students' and their parents' attributes.(3) Under the system of alternative school, charter school or for-profit management school, school choice and other privileged conditions applies only for those schools and their clients, and accordingly, those schools should be recognized as ones for the privileged small number of students. It should be also recognized that if these systems spread widely, then the utility of their privileges will diminish and various problems intrinsic to school choice will also spread.(4) School choice ideas put a prior value on institutional choice, while neglecting the importance of practical choices within each school as well as the fact that someone's freedom of institutional choice restricts the range of the other's.(5) Deregulation of government control and the accountability requirement will result in the rise of market control and other type of government control for quality assurance like the school inspection by quasi-public agency and testing of achievement standards. Under the system of school choice, parents are likely to behave as consumers/claimers rather than organizational members who should cooperate in the process of finishing their un-finished goods.
Finally, the paper suggests that all of these will become seriously problematic in the country like Japan where the levels of equal opportunity, efficiency of schooling and parents' concerns of school ranking are high.

抄録全体を表示

It has been viewed as natural that the nation-state or government assumes important responsibilities for the content of education, the maintenance and supervision of schools, and the reshuffling of teachers in the school education system. In Japan too, however, educational reforms, which have decentralization and deregulation as their keywords, have been implemented from the latter half of the 1990's. For example, a new system in which the school district system was relaxed and parents can choose for themselves the school that their children might enter, began in 2000 in Shinagawa Ward, Tokyo. Moreover, research into the Charter-School movement in America has been done rapidly in Japan recently. The government authorities, in part, have also prepared for an amendment to the laws in order to establish a Charter-School in Japan within two or three years. Under the "Nation-State's Responsibility for School Education," the theme of the subject of our research in the Japan Educational Administration Society, we did an historical analysis in the first year (1999), followed by comparative research of some countries in the second year (2000). This year (2001), as a conclusion for these three years of research, we attempted to analyze the meanings and problems of some of the policies regarding School-Choice. First, Shigeo Kodama (Ochanomizu University) introduced the theories of Bowles and Gintis, Brighous, Fraser, and Abowitz, in respect to public service in education. Next, Yoshio Ogiwara (Johetsu University of Education) stated that the Ministry of Education drastically switched its policy concerning the School-Choice System in December 1996, but that in practice the form after that continued to be a conventional one of direction and notification from the central government to the local government. Finally, Isao Kurosaki (Tokyo Metropolitan University) stated that it is important for people (the nation and residents) to respect various senses of values in order to form such school schemes in the present-day multicultural society and then carry out a School-Choice System. There were also many questions to the reporters on these arguments after the three presentations, but to our regret the discussion was on different planes throughout. Because we could not consider at what point the theories about this chiefly America-centered School-Choice System (School-Choice, Charter-School, Voucher system) would or could actually connect with the situation in Japan or not. Issues of educational deregulation and changes in public education will likely be opposed in the Japanese nation or amongst those with political power, to say nothing of academic societies. It is important to foresee clearly what will become of the relationship between the school and students/parents and how the community will change, by the reforms of deregulation such as was discussed here.

抄録全体を表示

映像視聴能力をはかる道具として開発されたイメージマップテスト法が、自己学習力を高める手だてとして、また、メタ認知能力を育てる手だてとして活用できる可能性について、認知科学の地検をもとに検討してみた。

抄録全体を表示

戦後日本の教育学は、公教育と市場との内的な連関を十分認識してこなかった。本稿ではまず、近代の公教育と市場との福祉国家を媒介とした内的な関係に注目し、次に、そうした福祉国家の転換を概観すると共に、福祉国家の解体に伴う公教育と市場とのオールタナティヴな関係について検討する。市場は、自らの再生産を保証することができない。したがって、人間のサブシステンスを再生産するための装置の導入を必要とする。アルチュセールが定式化したように、それらの装置の主なものは、福祉国家に支えられた近代家族と近代公教育である。これらの再生産システムはまた、ハンナ・アレントによって「社会的なるもの」と呼ばれている。1970年代以降、そうした福祉国家に支えられた再生産システムは、危機に直面していく。そうした情況の中で、二つのアプローチが、理論的、政治的な表舞台に浮上する。一つは、共同体主義のアプローチである。これは、福祉国家によって支えられた近代家族と近代学校が担ってきた人間のサブシステンスの再生産を、共同体のなかへ埋め戻していこうとするものである。もう一つは市場主義的なアプローチ、あるいは、リバタリアン(自由尊重主義)的なアプローチである。これは、福祉国家への依存を批判し、諸個人の自己決定を復権させようとするものである。だが、これら二つのアプローチはいずれも、福祉国家によって表現されていた古い公共性に代わる、新しい公共性を視野に入れることができていない。そうした新しい公共性を追求しようとする論者に、ボウルズ=ギンタスがいる。ボウルズ=ギンタスは、1996年に、「市場、国家、共同体のための新しいルール」を提案した。この提案において彼らは、平等主義的な戦略はこれまで大げさに強調されてきた税を通じての市場からの産出の蹂躙を棄却しなければならず、また、集中化した所有という結果を弱める方向に政策を転換しなければならないと、主張する。このような議論を通じて、彼らは、新しい公教育のシステムとして学校選択を導入する。ボウルズ=ギンタスによって導入された学校選択のシステムは、公教育の私事化とは考えられていない。むしろ、新しい公共的なシステムとして考えられている。この視点は、日本における戦後の民主主義と公教育を再構築するためにも、重要な視点である。

抄録全体を表示

宗教は現代では戦争を引き起こす大きな要因である。ある宗教集団が、他の宗教集団と共存可能であるということは、共存する二つの集団が、それぞれ他の集団への寛容を持つということである。西欧型寛容論の典型を示すピエール・ベール(1686-87)は「宗教を吹き込む唯一正当な方法は、明らかに、神に関する一定の判断と一定の意志の動きを心の中に生じさせることである」と述べて、宗教は内面的な真理であり、軍事力・法的強制力・世俗的な影響力などの外面的な強制は、宗教の本質に一致しないと主張した。この寛容概念は聖俗二元論に依拠している。その二元論を否定するのがイスラム教の特色である。「イスラームは、存在の全体をそっくりそのまま宗教的世界と見る。イスラームの見る世界は、聖なるものによって一切が浸透された、あるいは浸透されなければならぬ世界として描写される。」(井筒俊彦)現在、対立しあっている宗教は、一見するとまったく共通の原理を持たないように見える。しかし、それぞれの教義の原典そのものが、排他的であるかどうかは、別問題である。われわれは、教義の原典の核心をつかみ、すべての宗教の外皮を剥がして、その根源の教義が相互に両立不可能であるかどうか、吟味しなければならない。

抄録全体を表示

 本稿では学習における個と集団のとらえ方について学習の評価と方法に焦点をあてた分析を行い、これまでの学習において、個と集団は「一般的なものから個別的なものへ」という方向性で抽象的に把握され、人間形成の問題として強く受動性が助長されることを明らかにした。それを踏まえて、能動性を抑制せず過度に受動性を助長しない、人間形成に資する学習における個と集団のとらえ方と個別的で「具体的な経験」の重要性について考察した。

抄録全体を表示

Theory on 'Free to educate' is the most remarkable issue in the discussion of the Ad Hoc Council on Education. But this idea is not clear so much, because it is explained with the realistic level. In this paper, we try to recognize 'Freedom of schooling' with the idealistic level, and make clear this idea in the relation to the whole structure of the rights to education through the study on the voucher plans and the alternative schools. In our country, the theories on the rights to education, not only the nations' right to educate but also the peoples' right to learn, are based on the fiction of the 'trust' of the parents' right to educate. We can find some clues in the theory on 'Feedom of schooling' to cut off the fiction and give a fair status to the 'parents' right to educate' which lies most closely to the 'childrens' right to learn. The 'parents' right to educate' is restricted to their own children. And it will be exercised as the 'right to choose', the 'right to claim' and the 'right to refuse'. Especialy, the 'right to choose' has a significant value, because it decides when and to which school they send their own children. It is not the number of the schools, but the number of the minischools prepared within a school that guarantees the 'right to choose the school' practically. The 'right to choose the teacher' will be solved by the reform of the school organization as team teaching, open school and others. Milton Freedman brought up at first the 'right to choose the school' as a practical problem. Freedmans' proposal, 'unrestricted voucher plan', is criticized in some respects, but we can find many suggestions from his proposal. If we have the 'right to choose the school' in theory, we can not exercise this right without any schools to be choosen. Then, the importance of 'alternative' is closed up. Types of the alternative schools are various, and Alum Rock Plan, a famous practice of the voucher plan, had ten types of the minischools. To have various alternative schools, we must establish the independence of the school by drastic deregulation. 'Free to choose' may prove its true value when 'Freedom of schooling' precedes. Foundamentary, the roles of the state and local government are to secure the minimum standards for the equal educational opportunity and they are not allowed to enlarge this standards arbitralily. Schools also must listen to the pupils' and parents' voices and make more efforts for the school improvement.

抄録全体を表示