In recent years, efforts of youth education in Kominkan have declined, while measures to support youth independence centering on welfare and public health fields are expanding. Amid these current circumstances, vigorous activities are continuing at Kunitachi City Kominkan (Tokyo) in the “Coffee House” of youths who have been working with disabled people since the 1980s. This paper is a practical report aimed at considering the meaning of learning by youths based on the descriptions of the youths themselves; the author has been involved as a staff member in this program.

In order to clarify the background of the practice of the current “Coffee House” Chapter 2 reviews the history of this practice. It is confirmed that the youth room and coffee corner in the Kominkan became the “place of residence” of the youths who were learning alongside the disabled people, and have influenced the community-making symbiosis.

While providing an overview of the participation of youths of the present “Coffee House,” chapter 3 includes a concrete description of the diverse background of the youths, their process of learning, and the transformation of their cognition. At that time, referring to the recent “Practice Record Magazine” issued by Kunitachi City Kominkan, we discuss the words that the youths have used to describe and consider the meaning of that learning.

Participating youths are caught up in the practice of “Coffee House” by some chance, gradually making relationships with others. Through this, the values of the “Coffee House” are internalized, and some youths draw on how they became involved in the operation of the course.

The future task is to reexamine “independence” from the practices of the youths reported in this paper, and to reexamine the existing value of Kominkan practices and the social education staff.

Article 23 of the Social Education Act prohibits Kominkan from undertaking profit-making activities and from supporting specific political parties and religions.

Some Kominkan chief coordinators and social education staff apply Article 23 to citizens’ learning activities. In many of these cases, it does not appear that they understand the legislative spirit of the article when they make these decisions. The subject of this study is to clarify how they come to these judgments. The paper examines how Article 23 is discussed in social education textbooks.　

Three interpretations of Article 23 in textbooks are considered:

Type 1: Article 23 is applied to Article 22, “Kominkan Activities,” with an emphasis on the penalties that can be levied when these are violated.

Type 2: The same application of Article 23 is seen, but without the emphasis on penalties.

Type 3: The application of Article 23 is limited to Kominkan-sponsored programs, with no emphasis on penalties.

If Kominkan chief coordinators or social education staff have doubts as to whether or not Article 23 is applicable, consultations with the Kominkan Advisory Committee should be taken up in combination with considerations of these cases by Kominkan and social education groups. Enhancing the functions of this Committee is a subject for further Kominkan study and research.