As for the origin of our academic field, KYOIKU KEIEI, we hit two organizations. One is the Association for the Study of Educational Administration organized in 1958, and the other is the Society of the Study of Educational Administration beginning in 1960. The latter positively taking the theory of business administration into itself as the core science, the former kept a careful attitude towardit. No caring about our image given by its name, the Association for the Study of Educational Administration took the stance as a "social science", but for a member of administration as the business theory. The term, KYOIKU KEIEI was unwillingly chosen, because there was no suitable general idea besides it, when they wanted to explain an idea across educational administration and school organization. But, the trust in management theory as a science suffered damage after the controversy between Seiya Munakata and Kazue Ito. Munakata's theory of the organization, which could be said as anti-management theory, influenced many practitioners. Instead, KYOIKU KEIEI sought out a fresh image taking part of the bottom-up oraganizing of public education in welfare states administration. And therefore, there were no difference between KYOIKU KEIEI and KYOIKU GYOSEI. Our field, KYOIKU KEIEI, couldn't get its identity, after all. When we turn back the history of the identity of KYOIKU KEIEI, we discovered there were no fixed definitions for this term. But it's no problem. We can learn the possibility and the limit in our field from it. You should say that it is the quality control of the knowledge that a negative self-reference can be done.

抄録全体を表示