Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

Current Situation and Future Prospects for
Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba
Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary,
Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs
Education
YAJIMA Yoshiko, WATARI Tadashi, HIRAGA Kei,
NAGATA Yusuke and NAKAJIMA Yuko

1.

Background

The hosting of the Tokyo 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games（hereinafter the“Tokyo Games”） has led to the promotion of Olympic and Paralympic education（OPE）in Japan. In Tokyo, OPE has been introduced in all public schools since April
20161. Furthermore, by FY2017, 47, or 71.2%, of the 66 municipalities excluding Tokyo（46 prefectures and 20 ordinance-designated cities） had introduced OPE in their
public schools2.
However, although OPE has gained traction, the actual conditions surrounding it
have not been studied in depth. Thus, we attempt to shed light on the realities ofParalympic education from the teacher’s perspective, by conducting a questionnaire
survey dedicated to Paralympic education and analyzing the results thereof. We will
first consider how the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology（MEXT）positions OPE, and then provide an overview of some actual examples andprevious research.
The final report by the Olympic and Paralympic Education Expert Council（hereinafter the “OPE Expert Council”）, which was formed by MEXT in FY2015,highlighted the importance of Paralympic education, citing the International
Paralympic Committee（IPC）’s vision to “Make for an inclusive world through Para
sport” and the four Paralympic values, i. e., Courage, Determination, Inspiration, andEquality, and noting that learning such values can lead to social transformation3.
33

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

Regarding the details of OPE, especially as it pertains to the Paralympics, the reportlisted aspects such as the following: “knowledge about the Paralympics （history,
disciplines, athletes’ outstanding performance and efforts, significance of the
Paralympics, and characteristics of the Paralympics, such as the modification anddevelopment of equipment and class divisions）,” “realizing accessibility throughtaking down both physical and mental barriers,” and “creating an inclusive society inwhich people with diverse backgrounds can help and respect each other, for example,
through volunteering.”
It is against this backdrop that the Japan Sports Agency （JSA） launched the
Nationwide Olympic and Paralympic Movement Project （hereinafter the “OPE
Program”）in FY2016 in an effort to promote the Olympic and Paralympic movement
through utilization of OPE（Note 1）. The JSA describes the need for OPE as follows:“OPE is not just about raising interest in the Tokyo Games per se. Through OPE,
children can deepen their understanding of the values of sports, global andmulticultural perspectives, and an inclusive society, and can also develop a sense of
discipline. OPE has many educational values, and is thus very much needed as anintangible legacy of our nation.”4
Next, we will provide an overview of how the specific practices, themes, educational
effects, and issues related to Paralympic education have been discussed in casestudies and previous research（research material, research reports, articles）.
Let us first look at some OPE promotion schools that function as local centers of
the JSA’s OPE Program mentioned above. The program revolves around fivepractical themes that are designed to spread the educational values of Olympism and
the Paralympic values: “I. Studying the significance and history of sports, theOlympics, and Paralympics,” “II. Nurturing volunteers with a sense of politeness andhospitality,” “III. Creating an inclusive society through sports,” “IV. Developing an
understanding of Japanese traditions and local culture, as well as global culture, andcultivating respect for diversity,” and “V. Raising interest in sports and developing asports-friendly mindset.” According to case studies on the program in FY2019, 13
schools（7 elementary schools, 3 middle schools, 2 senior high schools, 1 special needs
school）engaged in “III. Creating an inclusive society through sports,” the theme withthe most relevance to Paralympic education among the five themes5. The specificactivities described in the case studies include the following: talks by Paralympians,
34Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

sports exchange with Paralympians, guide running, learning using Paralympic
education material（learning about the Paralympics and what an inclusive society
looks like）, and disability awareness education（Note 2）such as disability simulation,in periods for integrated studies （hereinafter “integrated studies”）, physicaleducation/health and physical education class, ethics class, and special activities class.
Next, we will look at case studies from Tokyo. The Tokyo Metropolitan Board of
Education （TMBE） raises the following five mindsets that need to be actively
developed through OPE: “volunteer spirit,” “understanding for people with
impairments,” “aspiration for sports,” “self-awareness and pride as a Japanese citizen,”and “rich international senses.6” The case studies compiled by the TMBE in FY2018
lists nine schools（six elementary schools and three middle schools）that engaged in
activities related to “understanding for people with disabilities.”7 The specific activities
described in the case studies were the same as those of the schools that engaged in
the JSA’s OPE Program, namely: talks by Paralympians, sports exchange with
Paralympians, learning about the Paralympics, and disability awareness education,
including disability simulation, lectures, and learning about an inclusive society, in
integrated studies, physical education/health and physical education class, ethics
class, and special activities class.
The foregoing outline of examples of OPE application by the JSA and TMBE showsthat there are two different styles in OPE: one where Paralympians, among otherlecturers, are dispatched or invited to teach visiting classes at schools, and one wherechildren learn about the Paralympics and engage in disability awareness education
within regular classes.
Second, let us consider some excerpts relating to Paralympic education fromresearch material and research reports on the current situation of OPE. Tomozoe etal.（2020）surveyed the OPE practices of 230 schools（124 elementary schools, 48
middle schools, 41 senior high schools, 17 special needs schools）located in 11 OPE
promotion areas（three cities and eight prefectures）that receive support from the
WASEDA Research Center for Olympic and Paralympic Education, from among theschools designated as OPE promotion schools by the JSA in FY2018, and compared
the survey results with those from previous years8. According to their research, thenumber of designated areas that the center is in charge of has increased to 3, 6, and11 each year since FY2016. The number of schools to which Paralympians were35

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

dispatched has also increased each year, from 6 in FY2016 to 13 in FY2017 and 39 in
FY2018. As for the types of schools to which Paralympians were dispatched from
FY2016 to FY2018, middle schools accounted for the largest portion at 41.0%, followedby special needs schools at 33.3%, senior high schools at 30.6%, and elementary
schools at 24.5%. Tomozoe et al. suggested that the increase in the number ofParalympians dispatched to schools may have led to an increase in the number ofactivities related to “III. Creating an inclusive society through sports,” one of the fivepractical themes set by the JSA, in FY2018.
TMBE（2020）conducted a questionnaire for 355 teachers working at elementary,junior high, senior high, and special needs schools on how they teach three of the fivemindsets that need to be actively developed through OPE, namely, “volunteer spirit,”“understanding for people with impairments,” and “rich international senses,” in theirclasses9. Only 15% of the teachers said they frequently teach “understanding forpeople with impairments” in classes, while the majority at 49% said they sometimes
teach it. As for the reason why they have not been able cover it in class, the majority,or 49%, of teachers said they do not know how to teach it, followed by 20% notingthat it is not part of the annual teaching plan and 17% noting the lack of class hours.
Let us finally look at previous studies that focus on the effects of OPE, especially of
Paralympic education. Sasaki（2018）discusses activities in middle schools that involvethe utilization of I’mPOSSIBLE（Japanese edition）, an education toolkit for Paralympic
education that is officially recognized by the IPC10. The study notes that the activities
led to greater interest in the Paralympics among students, the creation of new values,
expectations for increased openness to diversity, and student empowerment, in the
post-activity review. Since the questionnaire conducted one month later suggested
that the students had a positive view of Paralympic education, the study also notesthat OPE has sufficient value as an educational tool. The study argues that in order
to expand this kind of OPE even more, schools need to create teaching plans that link
OPE to a wide range of subjects, including physical education, ethics, special
activities, homeroom activities, and integrated studies, and engage accordingly.
The OPE-related case studies and other studies cited above give us insights into
the specific content and effects of Paralympic education. However, as they are mainly
based on the framework of OPE, it is difficult to grasp the specific conditions
surrounding Paralympic education. Therefore, in this study, we conducted a36

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Educationquestionnaire survey dedicated to Paralympic education in order to understand thespecific conditions surrounding Paralympic education from the teacher’s perspective.
（It should be noted that the schools covered are limited to elementary, junior high,and special needs schools located in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture, which both have
Paralympic Games venues and are considered to be actively implementing OPE.）As
the method for analyzing the questionnaire results, we classify the data by school
type, compare the data, and explore the identified differences. Furthermore, we use
the KJ Method with regard to teachers’ free comments on Paralympic education,categorizing the comments to identify overall trends. Finally, after examining theconditions surrounding Paralympic education, we will consider what is needed inorder for OPE to endure as an intangible legacy beyond the Tokyo Games and, more
importantly, for Paralympic education to remain a part of the curriculum as an aid tothe creation of an inclusive society, which are the goals of the OPE Program set by
the JSA.

2.
2-1.

Survey Overview
Survey respondents

In this study, we sent the questionnaire to 3,422 public and private elementary
schools, middle schools, and special needs schools located in Tokyo and Chiba
Prefecture and listed on the websites of the TMBE, Metropolitan Foundation forPrivate Schools, Chiba Prefectural Board of Education, and Chiba Prefectural
11，
12，
13，
14，
15
.
Government（Note 3）（Note 4）As the survey focuses on gaining insights about Paralympic education from actual
examples, we chose to limit our scope to Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture, which areconsidered to be actively implementing OPE. The reason for this is because Tokyo,
which is to host the Games, has been conducting OPE in all its public schools sinceApril 2016, ahead of other prefectures in Japan. As for Chiba, we chose it becausesome Paralympic events are to be held in parts of the prefecture, the Chiba
Prefectural Board of Education holds teacher workshops specializing in Paralympic
education16, and Chiba City has made Para sports（Note 5）a part of the physicaleducation/health and physical education curriculum at all its elementary and middle
schools17, making the prefecture a pioneer in Paralympic education.
37

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

The OPE goals set by the TMBE, Chiba Prefectural Board of Education, and Chiba
City Board of Education（an ordinance-designated city board of education）are basedon the proposal of the OPE Expert Council, making them similar in content. However,
the implementation policy of the Tokyo Metropolitan Government lays down specificclass hours: “An annual teaching plan should be created, and the whole school should
carry out OPE around 35 hours a year in an organized and planned manner.”18，19，20
It is worth noting that the budget allocation for OPE differs considerably between
Tokyo, Chiba Prefecture, and Chiba City. The Tokyo Metropolitan Government has
allocated approximately 13 billion yen in total to its OPE promotion program over theseven-year period from FY2014 to FY202021. Meanwhile, the Chiba Prefectural
Government began funding its OPE promotion program in FY2017, allocating 46.9
million yen in total from FY2017 to FY202022. In Chiba City, which is home to a
Paralympic stadium, budget allocation for the OPE promotion program began in
FY2017, with around 120 million yen in total allocated from FY2017 to FY202023.
（Note that the figures above only show budgets for the respective boards ofeducation）. This difference in budget scale makes the projects of Tokyo, Chiba
Prefecture, and Chiba City different content-wise, an aspect we will touch on in “3.
Survey Results.”
2-2.

Survey method

This survey was conducted by the Nippon Foundation Paralympic Support Centerand the Juntendo University Faculty of Health and Sports Science’s Tadashi WatariLab, in a questionnaire format from November 6 to December 10, 2019. The
questionnaire form was mailed to the 3,422 schools selected for the survey, and we
asked either the person in charge of OPE or any other person capable of responding
to respond. We collected the forms via post or fax. A total of 1,794 forms werecollected, of which 15 did not indicate the school type. Therefore, the number of valid
responses was 1,779（valid response rate: 52.0%）.
2-3.

Survey details

The questionnaire survey consists of 10 questions regarding the respondent andthe attributes of his or her school, 18 multiple choice questions regarding
implementation of Paralympic education, and a free comment section on Paralympic
38

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

education. The 19 multiple choice questions regarding implementation of Paralympic
education were set to gain information on the following aspects（1）to（9）:（1） Whether the school conducts Paralympic education, （2） Reason why theschool conducts Paralympic education, （3） Reason why the school does notconduct Paralympic education, （4） Details of Paralympic education-related
activities（subjects, extracurricular activities, when the program was launched,number of class hours, etc.）, （5） Preparation time, （6） Expectations for andeffects of Paralympic education, （7） Difficulties associated with conducting
Paralympic education,（8）Whether the schools intend to continue Paralympic
education,（9）Utilization of teaching materials for OPE

3.

Survey Results

3-1.

Basic characteristics

The basic characteristics of the respondents and their schools are shown below（ES =Elementary School, MS = Middle School, SNES = Special Needs Education School）.
Table 1: Number of valid responses: schools by location, type of establishment（public/private）and type of school
Inside the parentheses, no. of questionnaires sent
Type of School
Tokyo/
Chiba

Tokyo

Chiba

Public/PrivateElementary
School（ES）

Middle School（MS）

Special Needs
Education
School（SNES）

Public526（1,271）

284（610）33（62）

Private21（54）

69（186）3（4）Public＊527（780）271（376）

31（45）

Private3（10）11（24）

0（0）1,077（2,115）

635（1,196）

67（111）

Total

Total

936（2,187）

843（1,235）
1,779（3,422）＊ We used the Education Handbook 2018 published by the Chiba Prefectural Board of
Education for selecting the schools to be surveyed. As the handbook listed one elementary
school, one middle school, and two special needs schools that are affiliated to national
universities, we decided to include them in the survey.

39

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16
3XEOLF

3ULYDWH(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬

(6

06

61(6









06‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬Type of school（n=1,779）<HV

1R(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬06‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬

Fig. 2Public/Private
7RN\R







(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬







1RW6WDWHG







61(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬

Fig. 1



&KLED





06‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬





61(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬







Fig. 3 C l ass for sp ecial need schildren in the school（elementary and middle school）

Fig. 4

LocatonThe ratio of the school types to which we sent the questionnaire form（elementary
schools: 61.8%, middle schools: 35.0%, special needs schools: 3.2%）was almost identicalto the ratio of the school types from which we were able to collect responses（Fig. 1）,
the discrepancy being below 1.5% for each school type. While 63.9% of the 3,422
schools covered in the survey were located in Tokyo and 36.1% in Chiba Prefecture,
Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture accounted for 52.6% and 47.4% of the collected responses,
respectively. Furthermore, we can see that the valid response rate for Tokyo wasunder half, at 42.8%, whereas for Chiba Prefecture it was 68.3%, or close to 70%.
0DOH

)HPDOH

2WKHU'RQ W:DQWWR$VZHU

1RW6WDWHG
(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬







06‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬61(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬

Fig. 5








'RQ W:DQWWR$QVZHU06‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬















Fig. 6
40



Age

(6‫ق‬Q ‫ ك‬

9LFH3ULQFLSDO

7HDFKHU

2WKHU











06‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬









1RW6WDWHG





61(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬Gender3ULQFLSDO

1RW6WDWHG









(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬








61(6‫ق‬Q ‫ ك‬Fig. 7

Position

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

The overwhelming majority of the respondents were male, accounting for morethan 70% （Fig. 5） across all school types. In terms of age, around 30% of the
respondents from elementary schools and special needs schools were in their 30s,
while the majority（46.1%）of the respondents from middle schools were in their 50s（Fig. 6）
. In all school types, over half of the respondents were teachers, with anextremely high rate of 82.1% in special needs schools（Fig. 7）.
<HV(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬06‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬61(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬

1R







1RW6WDWHG











Fig. 8 Position in charge of Olympic
and Paralympic education in theschool
<HV

1R

<HV

1RW6WDWHG

1R

1RW6WDWHG(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬







(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬







06‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬







06‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬







61(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬





Fig. 9 Olympic and Paralympic
education promoting school in
FY201961(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬





Fig. 10 Olympic and Paralympic
education promoting school
before FY2019

The survey showed that only about half of elementary schools and special needs
schools and 40.6% of middle schools had teachers assigned to OPE（Fig. 8）（Note 6）.
3-2.

Grand totals of survey items related to Paralympic education

The grand totals of the survey items related to Paralympic education are shown
below. Note that the total may not always be 100%. This is because the percentages
in the graphs showing the results of single responses are rounded down to the firstdecimal place.

41

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

3-2-1.

Whether the school conducts Paralympic education

1RQ3DUDO\PSLF
HGXFDWLRQVFKRROV

3DUDO\PSLFHGXFDWLRQVFKRROV

Fig. 11 Paralympic education schools/ Non-Paralympic education schools（n=1,779）
Overall, 80.8% of the schools conducted Paralympic education, and 19.2% did not（Fig. 11）, showing that the number of schools that conduct Paralympic education is
overwhelmingly higher.


KDYHFRQGXFWHGERWK2O\PSLFDQG
3DUDO\PSLFHGXFDWLRQ
KDYHFRQGXFWHGRQO\3DUDO\PSLF(GXFDWLRQ

KDYHQHYHUFRQGXFWHG2O\PSLFRU



3DUDO\PSLFHGXFDWLRQEXWSODQWRGRVRLQ
WKHIXWXUH
KDYHQHYHUFRQGXFWHG2O\PSLFRU




3DUDO\PSLFHGXFDWLRQDQGKDYHQRSODQVWRGRVRLQWKHIXWXUH
KDYHFRQGXFWHGRQO\2O\PSLFHGXFDWLRQ
1RW6WDWHG

Fig. 12 Paralympic education schools/ Non-Paralympic education schools（details）（n=1,779）
Next is a breakdown of the schools that conduct Paralympic education（hereinafter“Paralympic education schools”） and schools that do not conduct Paralympic
education （hereinafter “non-Paralympic education schools”）（Fig. 12）. Of the
Paralympic education schools, 64.1% responded that they have conducted both
Olympic and Paralympic education, and 12.8% responded that they have conducted
only Paralympic Education. As for the non-Paralympic education schools, around 7%
responded that they have never conducted Olympic or Paralympic education but
plan to do so in the future, another 7% or so responded that they have never42Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

conducted Olympic or Paralympic education and have no plans to do so in the future,and 3.9% responded that they have conducted only Olympic Education. With regards
to the 81 schools（4.6%）that fell under “No Response/Unknown” in Question 1, wewere able to confirm whether they conducted Paralympic education and their school
type in other the questions. Therefore, those responses are considered valid responses
in the subsequent analysis. The breakdown was 3.9%（69 schools）for Paralympic
education schools and 0.7%（12 schools）for non-Paralympic education schools.
3DUDO\PSLFHGXFDWLRQVFKRROV(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬06‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬61(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬

1RQ3DUDO\PSLFHGXFDWLRQVFKRROV













Fig. 13 Paralympic education schools/ Non-Paralympic education schools by typeof school（n=1,779）
As shown in Fig. 13, Paralympic education schools made up over 70% of the schools
across all types, showing that Paralympic education was conducted at a high rate at
all types of schools. The rate was extremely high among special needs schools at
95.5%. Middle schools had the largest percentage of non-Paralympic education schools
at 24.3%.

43

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

3-2-2.

Reason why the school conducts Paralympic education









(QFRXUDJHPHQW,ZDVLQFKDUJH

7KH7RN\R

7KH3DUDO\PSLFVE\WKHORFDO:HZHUH

3DUDO\PSLFVLVDQHíHFWLYH

JRYHUQPHQW

LQWHUHVWHGLQWKH

FRPLQJOHVVRQWKHPH

ERDUGRI

3DUDO\PSLFV(6 Q 











06 Q 













61(6 Q 













HGXFDWLRQHWF

RI2O\PSLFDQG
3DUDO\PSLF

2WKHU

HGXFDWLRQFig. 14 Reason why the school conducts Paralympic education （MA）（MA =Multiple answers allowed）
We asked the Paralympic education schools to select one or more reasons why
they conduct Paralympic education from six choices（Fig. 14）. “Because of the coming
Tokyo Paralympics” was the most popular reason across all school types, at 61.4% in
elementary schools, 49.9% in middle schools, and 64.1% in special needs schools. In
addition, around 40% of the schools across all types chose “Because of encouragement by
the local government, board of education, etc.” This suggests that external factors playeda significant role in the introduction of Paralympic education by schools. However, as
about 30 to 50% of the schools across all types chose “Because the Paralympics is aneffective lesson theme” and “Because we were interested in the Paralympics,” we cansee that not only external factors but also internal motives played a part in theschools’ decisions. It is especially notable that over 50% of special needs schools chose“Because the Paralympics is an effective lesson theme,” which suggests that special needs
schools tend to have a more positive view of the effects of Paralympic education.

44

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

3-2-3.

Reason why the school does not conduct Paralympic education
















7HDFKHUVGRGLGQRW
KDYHWLPH

2XUVFKRRO:HKDYHKDG)HZRIRXU

LVZDVQRW

QRWHDFKHUV,WLVZDVVWXGHQWVDFWLYHO\FDSDEOHRI

GLîFXOWR

DUHZHUH

HQJDJHGLQ

WHDFKLQJWKH

VHFXUHD

LQWHUHVWHGLQ

3DUDO\PSLF

UHOHYDQW

EXGJHW

HGXFDWLRQ

FRQWHQW

WKH
3DUDO\PSLFV:HGRGLG:HKDYH

QRWEHOLHYH

QHYHUKHDUG

WKDWRIWKHWHUP

3DUDO\PSLF

3DUDO\PSLF

HGXFDWLRQLV

HGXFDWLRQ

2WKHU

YHU\
HíHFWLYH(6 Q 















06‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬

















61(6‫ق‬Q ‫ك‬

















Fig. 15



Reason why the school does not conduct Paralympic education（MA）

We asked the non-Paralympic education schools to select one or more reasons why
they do not conduct Paralympic education from eight choices（Fig. 15）. More than
60% of elementary schools and middle schools chose “Teachers do/did not have time,”making this the largest category, followed by around 29.7 to 36.4% that chose “Ourschool is/was not actively engaged in Paralympic education” or “We have/had noteachers capable of teaching the relevant content.” Meanwhile, less than 6% of theschools chose “Few of our students are/were interested in the Paralympics” and “Wehave never heard of the term Paralympic education.” This suggests that in the caseof elementary schools and middle schools, the introduction of Paralympic education is
not being prevented because teachers have a negative view of Paralympic education.
Rather, it is because of compounding factors, including the lack of time, lack of active
engagement by the school as a whole, and lack of knowledge and funding.
Of the three non-Paralympic education special needs schools from which we got
responses, two chose “We do/did not believe that Paralympic education is very45

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

effective,” and one chose “Few of our students are/were interested in the
Paralympics.” The “Other” category includes the following comment: “It is difficult for
students with severe intellectual impairment to participate.” The absolute scarcity ofsamples makes it difficult to draw a big picture of non-Paralympic education special
needs schools solely on the basis of these responses. We therefore need to do a followup study.
The responses related to aspects 3-2-4. to 3-2-8. below are those of Paralympic
education schools.
3-2-4. Details of Paralympic education-related activities （subjects, extracurricular
activities, when the program was launched, number of class hours, etc.）
3-2-4-1.

Activities carried out in Paralympic education











6SRUWVH[FKDQJHZLWK
3DUDO\PSLDQV

5HJXODU

5HJXODU

7DONVE\

FODVVHVFODVVHV

3DUDVSRUWV3DUDO\PSLDQVFODVVURRPKDQGVRQ

VSHFWDWLQJ

OHDUQLQJ

OHDUQLQJ

6SRUWVH[FKDQJHZLWK

2WKHU

61(6

(6 Q 















06 Q 















61(6 Q 















Fig. 16

Activities carried out in Paralympic education（MA）

We asked the schools to select one or more activities that they carry out in Paralympic
education from seven choices（Fig. 16）. Elementary schools chose the four activities of“Sports exchange with Paralympians,” “Talks by Paralympians,” “Regular classes（classroom learning）,” and “Regular classes（hands-on learning）” at roughly the samerate at around 50%. As for middle schools, 48.0% chose “Exchange with Paralympians”
and 55.5% chose “Talks by Paralympians.” These numbers for visiting classes are higher
46

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

than those for “Classroom learning” and “Hands-on learning” at 41.6% and 32.4%,
respectively. Turning to special needs schools, a very large number（81.3%）of themchose “Hands-on learning” in comparison to elementary schools and middle schools. In
contrast, however, only 31.3% of special needs schools chose “Talks by Paralympians.”
The “Other” category（21.9%）under special needs schools mainly includes activities suchas Para sports events and seminars by people other than Paralympians （e. g.,
Deaflympics athletes, people with experience in Para sports, visiting lecturers）.
The results above show that elementary schools have a good balance between visitingclasses and regular classes, while middle schools tend to be more focused on visitingclasses. Special needs schools prefer activities in which students can actively participate,such as “Sports exchange with Paralympians” and “Hands-on learning,” over morepassive forms of learning, such as “Talks by Paralympians” and “Classroom learning.”
The survey also shows that the percentage of visiting classes is equal to or higher
than regular classes across all school types. One possible factor behind this is thelecturer dispatch programs provided by local governments and private entities. In
Tokyo, the TMBE launched the “Challenge Myself” Programme in FY2015 as part of
the Dream and Future Project for promoting OPE. The program aims to raisechildren’s interest in Para sports and develop disability awareness through seminars,
Para sports classes, and other events. Under the program, Paralympians and coaches
have been dispatched to 365 elementary schools, 85 middle schools, and 29 special
needs schools in Tokyo between FY2015 and FY202024，25，26，27，28，29. Meanwhile, in Chiba
Prefecture, the Prefectural Board of Education launched the Heart Barrier Free
Project as a Paralympic education-related initiative that involves “activities aimed at
the formation of an inclusive society and cultivation of an attitude of understandingfor others.” Specific examples include researching and learning about barrier-free anduniversal design, gaining knowledge and awareness about Paralympic disciplines andpeople with disabilities through Para sports, and learning about the lifestyles ofParalympians in ethics class, and the activities do not necessarily require lecturers to
be dispatched to schools30. As for Chiba City, it is stated in the city website that the
Olympic and Paralympic Promotion Division, General Policy Bureau, has organized“talks by athletes with disabilities and sports events in the city’s elementary andmiddle schools” since FY2016 as part of its Para sports promotion program31. The
website does not indicate how many schools athletes have visited so far, but the47

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

program budget for FY2020 was approx. 6.8 million yen32.
In the private sector, the Nippon Foundation Paralympic Support Center has
carried out the Challenge For Tomorrow program since 2016. This nationwide
program involves dispatching Paralympians and other athletes to elementary, juniorhigh, and senior high schools to take part in Para sports demonstrations, hands-on
activities, and talks. As of October 2020, athletes had visited 1,000 schools acrossJapan, including 240 in Tokyo and 52 in Chiba Prefecture33.
As described above, the programs organized by the governments of Tokyo, Chiba
Prefecture, and Chiba City differ in content and scale. We will examine whether thesedifferences have an impact on the actual activities related to Paralympic education inTokyo and Chiba Prefecture. Below are the results of a comparison between Tokyo
and Chiba Prefecture in terms of the ratio of visiting classes（“Sports exchange with
Paralympians” and “Talks by Paralympians”） and regular classes （“Classroom
learning” and “Hands-on learning”）.
9LVLWLQJFODVVHV9LVLWLQJFODVVHV6SRUWVH[FKDQJHZLWK3DUDO\PSLDQV

7DONE\3DUDO\PSLDQV









7RN\R

&KLED

7RN\R

&KLED

7RN\R

&KLED

Q 

Q 

Q 

Q 

Q 

(6

06

61(6

&KLED
Q ‫ك‬(6&KLED
Q ‫ك‬

7RN\R

&KLED

7RN\R

Q 

Q 

Q 

(6

06

+DQGVRQOHDUQLQJ
5HJXODUFODVVHV








&KLED
Q 
61(6

5HJXODUFODVVHV



7RN\R

7RN\R
Q 



&ODVVURRPOHDUQLQJ



Q 





Q 

















&KLED






7RN\R

&KLED

7RN\R

&KLED

Q 

Q 

Q 

Q 

06

61(6

7RN\R

&KLED

Q 

Q ‫ك‬
(6

7RN\R

&KLED

7RN\R

Q 

Q 

Q 

06

Q 
61(6

Fig. 17 Comparison between Tokyo and Chiba in terms of activities related toParalympic education
The figure shows that the percentage of visiting classes held in Tokyo is higher
than in Chiba Prefecture across all school types, the difference being 1.6 to 3.8 times.
One likely reason for this is the huge difference in the budget allocated to the boardsof education in Tokyo on the one hand and Chiba Prefecture and Chiba City on the48

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

other, as we noted in “2-1. Survey respondents,” leading to an increase in the numberof visiting classes held in Tokyo. Paralympic education in regular classes, with the
exception of “Classroom learning” in special needs schools, was more common in
Chiba Prefecture than in Tokyo across all school types. However, the range ofdifference was relatively small at 1.0 to 1.9 times, which is smaller than the differencein visiting classes. As for “Hands-on learning,” all public elementary and middle
schools in Chiba City have incorporated goalball （elementary schools） and sittingvolleyball（elementary and middle schools）, Paralympic sports that are scheduled to
be played in Makuhari Messe （Mihama-ku, Chiba） during the Tokyo Games, into
physical education/health and physical education classes34. Chiba City’s public
elementary and middle schools make up around 14% of all public elementary andmiddle schools in Chiba Prefecture, and may thus be boosting the percentage of“Hands-on learning” in Chiba Prefecture. The foregoing analysis suggests that local
government initiatives may be impacting Paralympic education activities at schools.
3-2-4-2. Specialist subject of teachers in charge of the Paralympic education activities（middle school）










+HDOWKDQG
3K\VLFDO(GXFDWLRQ
06 Q 

7HFKQLFDO
6RFLDO0DWKH

)RUHLJQ-DSDQHVH

6WXGLHVPDWLFV/DQJXDJHV/DQJXDJH

6FLHQFH

0XVLFDQG$UW&RXUVHDQG
+RPH

2WKHU

(FRQRPLFV
















Fig. 18 Subject of teachers in charge of the Paralympic education activities（Middle
School）（MA）
We asked middle schools to select one or more subjects that the teachers engaged
in Paralympic education specialize in, from nine choices （Fig. 18）. Since most49

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

elementary school and special needs school teachers teach all subjects, we only show
the results for middle schools.
The overwhelming majority were health and physical education teachers at 80.7%.
This is assumed to be because the Paralympics is a sports event, and also because
Paralympic education-related guidelines include references to hands-on learning suchas Paralympic sports activities, as we previously saw in the JSA’s OPE Program andthe TMBE’s case studies.
3-2-4-3.

Subject and extracurricular activities





















3K\VLFDO,QWHJUDWHG
VWXGLHV+HDOWKDQG

7HFKQLFDO(OHPHQWHGXFDWLRQ(WKLFVSK\VLFDO)RUHLJQ

6RFLDO-DSDQHVH

0XVLFDQG

DU\0DWKHODQJXDJHVVWXGLHVODQJXDJH$UWPDWLFV0DW

6FLHQFH+RPH(FRQRPLFVKHPDWLFVHGXFDWLRQ&RXUVHDQG(6 Q 





















06 Q 





















61(6 Q 





















Fig. 19

Subjects in which Paralympic education was conducted（MA）

We asked the schools to select one or more subjects and outside class activities inwhich they conduct Paralympic education from 16 choices（Figs. 19 and 20）. Fig. 19
shows the results for the subjects.
The percentage of “Integrated studies” in elementary schools and middle schools
was the highest at 68.7% and 58.0%, respectively, followed by 56.6% and 50.5%,
respectively, for “Physical education/Health and physical education.” As for special
needs schools, the percentage of “Physical education/Health and physical education”
50Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

was the highest at 78.1%, followed by 32.8% for “Integrated studies”（Note 7）. “Ethics”
came in at third in elementary schools and middle schools at 18.8% and 12.3%,
respectively, while “Music/Drawing and Crafts/Art” came in at third in special needs
schools at 18.8%. The OPE implementation policy formulated by the TMBE statesthat “since the Olympics and Paralympics are a rich source of teaching themes, OPE
should be conducted across all educational activities without a bias toward specificsubjects.35” However, the results of our survey show that Paralympic education is infact conducted in specific subjects. It should be noted, though, that the percentages of“Music/Drawing and Crafts/Art,” “Social studies,” and “Foreign languages,” among
other subjects, were higher in special needs schools than in elementary schools andmiddle schools.














$OOVFKRRO
6FKRROHYHQWV

PHHWLQJV*UDGH&ODVVDFWLYLWLHV

PHHWLQJV2XWVLGHFODVVDFWLYLWLHV

%UHDN

2WKHU


(6 Q 











06 Q 













61(6 Q 













Fig. 20 Extracurricular activities in which Paralympic education was conducted（MS）
Fig. 20 shows the results for outside class activities. The percentage of “School
events” was the highest in elementary schools and middle schools at 20.6% and 27.5%,
respectively, and especially high in special needs schools at 50.0%. This was followed51

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

by “Class activities” in elementary schools at 20.6%, and “All-school meetings/Grademeetings” in middle schools and special needs schools at 14.8% and 29.7%,
respectively. We can thus observe that special needs schools tend to conduct
Paralympic education in outside class activities more than do elementary schools andmiddle schools. In addition, as shown in Fig. 19, special needs schools conduct
Paralympic education across a variety of subjects, suggesting that they have a morediversified approach to Paralympic education.
3-2-4-4.

When the Paralympic education program was launched%HIRUH)<)<

)<

)<

(6 Q 









06 Q 













61(6 Q 

Fig. 21)<

)<

1RW6WDWHG

















 

When the program was launched（SA）（SA = Single Answer）

We asked the schools when they launched their Paralympic education program（Fig. 21）. The majority of elementary schools and middle schools launched theirprogram between FY2017 and FY2018, the two years constituting over 40% of thetotal. Even though slightly more special needs schools launched their program
between FY2016 and FY2017 than between FY2017 and FY2018, both periods were
almost the same at approx. 40%. The Tokyo Metropolitan Government introduced
OPE in FY2016, while the governments of Chiba Prefecture and Chiba City did thesame in FY2017, which seems to be reflected in the figures. The number of
elementary schools and middle schools that launched their program grew from
FY2015 to FY2017, but then started decreasing in FY2018 and FY2019, suggestingthat many elementary schools and middle schools had launched their program by
FY2018. Meanwhile, special needs schools were significantly different in that morethan 20% of them launched their program before FY2014.
52

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

3-2-4-5.

Grades














WK

WK

























 VW

 QG

U G

WK

WK

(6 Q 

WK

WK

06 Q Fig. 22 Grades that participate in Paralympic education-related activities（Elementary and Middle School）
（MS）

































(6
VW

61(6 Q 



QG

UG

WK

WK

WK











06
WK


WK

WK





+LJK
6FKRRO

Fig. 23 Grades that participate in Paralympic education-related activities（Special
Needs Education School）（MS）
53

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

We asked the schools which grades participate in Paralympic education-related
activities（Figs. 22 and 23）, through which we learned that all grades participatedacross all school types. Regarding elementary schools and middle schools as a whole,
the rates of participation tended to increase in the order of 1st to 2nd graders, 3rd to
4th graders, 5th to 6th graders, and 7th to 9th graders. Although the rates weredifferent in special needs schools, the overall trend was similar to that in elementary
schools and middle schools.
The reason why more 5th to 9th graders participate in Paralympic educationrelated activities than 1st to 2nd graders is assumed to be because some of the topics
covered in Paralympic education, such as those relating to an inclusive society,require advanced comprehension skills. Furthermore, as we noted above, althoughfewer middle schools selected “Sports exchange with Paralympians” and “Classroom
learning” and “Hands-on learning” in regular classes as compared to elementary
schools, the percentage of “Talks by Paralympians” was 6.1 points higher than that inelementary schools, suggesting that middle schools hold more talks that are attended
by all students. This may be because unlike in elementary schools where thedifference in child development between grades is large, it is easier for middle schools
to carry out activities that involve all grades.
3-2-4-6.

Number of class hours（per lesson and annual）/HVVWKDQRQHSHULRG(6 Q  2QHSHULRG



7ZRSHULRGV

7KUHHSHULRGV)RXUSHULRGV

1RW6WDWHG






06 Q 












61(6 Q  

Fig. 24









Number of class hours

We asked the schools how many periods are allocated to each Paralympic
education-related activity（Fig. 24）, the results of which were as follows: two periods
in around half of elementary schools and middle schools at 46.2% and 53.6%,
54

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

respectively, while the majority of special needs schools at 40.6% said they allocate
one period.
We next asked the schools how many periods per year are allocated to Paralympic
education-related activities. The averages with outlier values excluded（Note 8）were
11.7 hours in elementary schools（n=797）, 6.9 hours in middle schools（n=431）, and20.8 hours in special needs schools（n=52）. This means that special needs schools
allocate the most periods to Paralympic education-related activities each year.
3-2-5.

Preparation time(6 Q 06 Q /HVVWKDQPLQXWHVPLQXWHVWROHVVWKDQKRXUKRXUWROHVVWKDQKRXUVKRXUVWROHVVWKDQKRXUV

0RUHWKDQKRXUV

1RW6WDWHG





61(6 Q  Fig. 25



















 





 Preparation time for Paralympic education-related activities

We asked the schools about the time they have for preparing for Paralympic
education-related activities（Fig. 25）. The responses “30 minutes to less than 1 hour”
and “1 hour to less than 2 hours” combined accounted for more than 60% across all
school types. According to MEXT （2018）, the average class preparation time on
weekdays was 77 minutes for elementary school teachers and 86 minutes for middle
school teachers in FY2016. In light of this data, the fact that more than 60% ofteachers need between 30 minutes to 2 hours to prepare for Paralympic educationsuggests that it may be a considerable burden to them36. We will touch on the extent
to which teachers feel that class preparation is a burden in Fig. 29 “Difficulties
associated with conducting Paralympic education” below.

55

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

3-2-6.

Expectations for and effects of Paralympic education











































































([SHFWDWLRQV(íHFWV*DLQLQJNQRZOHGJH
DERXWWKH
3DUDO\PSLFV
1RWVXUH





([SHFWDWLRQV(íHFWV

5DLVLQJLQWHUHVWLQ
WKH3DUDO\PSLFV




([SHFWDWLRQV(íHFWV

5DLVLQJHQWKXVLDVP
IRUVSRUWV




([SHFWDWLRQV(íHFWV

3URPRWLQJGLVDELOLW\DZDUHQHVV




([SHFWDWLRQV(íHFWV*DLQLQJDGHHSHUXQGHUVWDQGLQJRIDQ
LQFOXVLYHVRFLHW\




'HrQLWHO\QRW



















1RWUHDOO\





















<HVDQGQR





















<HVWRDQH[WHQW





















'HrQLWHO\\HV























Fig. 26 Difference between expectations and effects of Paralympic education
activities（n=892）（Elementary School）









































([SHFWDWLRQV





(íHFWV*DLQLQJNQRZOHGJH
DERXWWKH
3DUDO\PSLFV








([SHFWDWLRQV(íHFWV

5DLVLQJLQWHUHVWLQ
WKH3DUDO\PSLFV([SHFWDWLRQV














(íHFWV

5DLVLQJHQWKXVLDVP
IRUVSRUWV([SHFWDWLRQV(íHFWV

3URPRWLQJGLVDELOLW\DZDUHQHVV([SHFWDWLRQV(íHFWV*DLQLQJDGHHSHUXQGHUVWDQGLQJRIDQ
LQFOXVLYHVRFLHW\

1RWVXUH



















'HrQLWHO\QRW



















1RWUHDOO\





















<HVDQGQR





















<HVWRDQH[WHQW





















'HrQLWHO\\HV
























Fig. 27 Difference between expectations and effects of Paralympic education
activities（n=481）（Middle School）

56

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education





















(íHFW

([SHFWDWLRQ([SHFWDWLRQ(íHFW*DLQLQJNQRZOHGJH
DERXWWKH
3DUDO\PSLFV









([SHFWDWLRQ(íHFW([SHFWDWLRQ

5DLVLQJLQWHUHVWLQ

5DLVLQJHQWKXVLDVP

WKH3DUDO\PSLFVIRUVSRUWV






























(íHFW

3URPRWLQJGLVDELOLW\DZDUHQHVV




([SHFWDWLRQ(íHFW*DLQLQJDGHHSHUXQGHUVWDQGLQJRIDQ
LQFOXVLYHVRFLHW\

1RWVXUH



















'HrQLWHO\QRW



















1RWUHDOO\





















<HVDQGQR





















<HVWRDQH[WHQW





















'HrQLWHO\\HV
























Fig. 28 Difference between expectations and effects of Paralympic education
activities（n=64）（Special Needs Education School）
We asked the teachers about the expectations they had for and effects theyobserved from Paralympic education, giving them the following response choices foreach aspect: “Definitely yes,” “Yes to an extent,” “Yes and no,” “Not really,” “Definitely
not,” and “Not sure”（Figs. 26, 27, 28）.
Overall, in terms of the difference between the expectations and effects in thegroup combining “Definitely yes” and “Yes to an extent,” the expectations werehigher than the effects across all school types. The items in which there was a 10 ormore point difference were “Gaining a deeper understanding of an inclusive society”（19.4 points）, “Raising enthusiasm for sports”（15.8 points）, and “Promoting disability
awareness”（10.4 points）in elementary schools; “Raising enthusiasm for sports”（18.1
points）and “Gaining a deeper understanding of an inclusive society”（17.0 points）inmiddle schools; and “Promoting disability awareness”（31.3 points）, “Gaining a deeper
understanding of an inclusive society” （31.3 points）, and “Raising enthusiasm for
sports” （14.1 points） in special needs schools, making it the school type with thelargest difference.
According to the final report of the OPE Expert Council we mentioned in the
beginning of this study, OPE is divided into two major parts: （1）“Learning about the
Olympics and Paralympics” and （“ 2） Learning through the Olympics andParalympics”37. Even though the numbers for effects were slightly lower than thosefor expectations regarding “Gaining knowledge about the Paralympics” and “Raisinginterest in the Paralympics,” which pertain to （1） above, they were both high.
However, in many cases the numbers for expectations were significantly lower than57

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

those for effects regarding “Promoting disability awareness” and “Gaining a deeper
understanding of an inclusive society,” which pertain to（2）above. As shown in Fig.
16 “Activities carried out in Paralympic education”, a large number of schools carriedout “Sports exchange with Paralympians” and Para sports in physical education/
health and physical education class. This is likely the reason why it was easier toobserve the effects of （1）“Learning about the （Olympics and） Paralympics.” In
contrast, we can see that simply engaging in Para sports does not necessarily lead totangible effects in terms of （2）“Learning through the（Olympics and）Paralympics.”
The numbers for expectations and effects regarding “Raising enthusiasm for
sports” were higher in special needs schools than in elementary schools and middle
schools. This may be because special needs schools have less opportunities to engage
in sports on a daily basis.（According to the survey in MEXT（2014）, only 9.4% of
special needs school elementary divisions have sports clubs, the number being 37.2%
38.
in middle divisions）

3-2-7.

Difficulties associated with conducting Paralympic education





















'LîFXOWWRHQVXUH
WLPHIRUOHDUQLQJ&ODVVSUH 1RWDOOWKH
SDUDWLRQVWXGHQWV

ZDVD

FRXOG

ODUJH

SDUWLFL:HKDG
EXGJHWFRQVWUDLQWV'LîFXOWWR
JDWKHUWKH
QHFHVVDU\HTXLS
PHQW'LîFXOWWR
VHWWKH
DLPVRIWKH
VWXG\'LîFXOWWR
XQGHUVWDQGWKH
UXOHVRIWKH
SDUDVSRUWV'LîFXOWVHOHFWLQJ
WKHWDUJHW
JUDGH'LîFXOWWR
JHWWKHFR,GLGQRWRSHUDWLRQ NQRZZKDWRIRWKHU

2WKHU

WRGR

WHDFKHUVEXUGHQ

SDWH(6 Q 























06 Q 























61(6 Q 























Fig. 29
58

Difficulties associated with conducting Paralympic education（MA）

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

We asked the schools to select one or more difficulties they have faced in
conducting Paralympic education from 11 choices（Fig. 29）. “It was difficult to ensure
time for learning” was the most common response across all school types: 45.2% ofelementary schools, 47.4% of middle schools, and 31.3% of special needs schools noted
the lack of time. This was followed by “Class preparation was a large burden,” which
was selected by around 25% of the schools across all types. This ties in with theconsiderable amount of required preparation time shown in Fig. 25 “Preparation timefor Paralympic education-related activities”. In recent years, schools have seen an
increase in educational themes other than OPE, such as safety education, media
literacy education, and cancer education, which has made it more and more difficult
to secure time for learning. This may be one of the reasons why teachers are feelinga bigger burden. The percentage of “We did Para sports but not all the students
could participate” was 17.2% in special needs schools and approx. 24% in bothelementary and middle schools. This is assumed to be because of the difference inclass size between elementary and middle schools and special needs schools. Whereas
the average elementary school class in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture consists of 28.9
and 25.1 children, respectively, and the average middle school class in the same areas
consists of 31.1 and 28.8 children39, 40, respectively, a standard class of students with asingle disability in public special needs schools（elementary and middle divisions）
consists of six students41. The percentage of “We had budget constraints” was thehighest in elementary schools at 26.2%, followed by around 20% in both middle
schools and special needs schools. The percentage of “It was difficult to gather thenecessary equipment” was 25.7% in elementary schools and 31.3% in special needs
schools, which is higher than the 17.5% in middle schools. This is considered to bebecause elementary schools and special needs schools carry out more “Hands-on
learning” than middle schools, as shown in the responses to Fig. 16 “Activities carriedout in Paralympic education.” The issues of equipment and budget are directly linked;
Para sports equipment tends to be expensive and difficult to obtain. Although somelocal governments lend out Para sports equipment free of charge, such programs arestill limited to a handful of areas. The difficulties that elementary and middle schools
mentioned in the “Other” section include: selecting and finding available lecturers,
and making arrangements with lecturers and coordinating organizations. The
difficulties that special needs schools mentioned in the “Other” section include:59

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

developing ways for each student to participate （changing the teaching aids,
equipment, and rules）, that the students found it hard to understand the talks given
by external lecturers with disabilities, and that the response of the bureau
coordinating lecturer dispatch was slow.
3-2-8.

Whether the schools intend to continue Paralympic education<HV(6 Q 

1R

1RWVXUH

1RW6WDWHG





06 Q 





61(6 Q 





Fig. 30









Whether the schools intend to continue（SA）＊ The term “disabilities” used here means physical disabilities, intellectual disabilities, andmental and developmental disabilities.

We asked the schools whether they intended to continue engaging in Paralympic
education going forward（Fig. 30）. More than half of the schools across all types said
“Yes,” the highest percentage being special needs schools at 84.4%, followed byelementary schools at 74.0% and middle schools at 58.2%. Less than 2% of schools
across all types said “No,” while the remaining 38.7% of middle schools, 23.9% ofelementary schools, and 15.6% of special needs schools said “Not sure.”60Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education














7KH7RN\R

7KHVFKRRO V

2O\PSLFDQG,WSODFHVDODUJH

3DUDO\PSLF

EXUGHQRQ*DPHVZLOOHQG

WHDFKHUV%XGJHWFXWVSROLF\GLGQRWrW

7KHUHZDVOLWWOH

LQZLWKWKH

LQWHUHVWIURP

3DUDO\PSLF

VWXGHQWV2WKHU

HGXFDWLRQ

LQ
(6 Q 











06 Q 













61(6 Q 













Fig. 31

Reasons for not continuing the Paralympic education activities

We asked the schools that said “No” or “Not sure” in the previous question tochoose one or more reasons why they said “No” or “Not sure” from six choices（Fig.
31）. Excluding the “Other” section, 48.2% of elementary schools, 50.5% of middle
schools, and 40.0% of special needs schools chose “Because the Tokyo Olympic andParalympic Games will end in 2020,” making it the most common response. Thisshows that the main reason for conducting Paralympic education is the Tokyo Games.
The next most common response was “Because it places a large burden on teachers”
at 27.7% and 23.2% in elementary schools and middle schools, respectively, followedby “Because of budget cuts” at 16.5% and 12.4%, respectively. Meanwhile, 20.0% of
special needs schools chose “Because of budget cuts,” which is higher than “Because
it places a large burden on teachers” at 10.0%. One of the major reasons thatelementary and middle schools mentioned in the “Other” section was “Because wecannot ensure enough class hours,” which indicates a trend similar to that identified
in Fig. 29 “Difficulties associated with conducting Paralympic education.” Some special
needs schools noted that their school is scheduled to be closed, or that the decision tocontinue/discontinue Paralympic education is made by teachers depending on thestudents’ situation.
61

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

3-2-9.

Utilization of teaching materials for OPE












7KH2O\PSLFDQG
3DUDO\PSLF,bP3266,%/(

7H[WERRN

7KH7RN\R
0DWKV7H[WERRN

7KH2O\PSLF9DOXHV 3DQDVRQLF2O\PSLF.DQDJDZD2O\PSLF(GXFDWLRQ3URJUDP

DQG3DUDO\PSLF

DQG3DUDO\PSLF‫ق‬29(3‫ك‬

HGXFDWLRQSURJUDP

HGXFDWLRQSURJUDP

2WKHU(6 Q 













06 Q 















61(6 Q 















Fig. 32



Utilization of teaching materials for OPE

We asked the Paralympic education schools and non-Paralympic education schools
to choose what kind of teaching material they use for OPE from seven choices（Fig.
32）. The six teaching materials were selected as choices because any school could
obtain them free of charge, through distribution by or contacting the publisher,
downloading online, etc. Of the six teaching materials, The Olympic and Paralympic
Textbook（hereinafter “The Textbook”）issued by the Tokyo Organising Committee of
the Olympic and Paralympic Games（TOCOG）was handed out to all 4th graders andabove enrolled in public and private schools in Tokyo42, and the Tokyo 2020 Maths
Textbook issued by the Tokyo 2020 Maths Textbook Executive Committee wasdistributed to all 6th graders in Tokyo’s public schools43. I’mPOSSIBLE （Japaneseedition）, an educational toolkit officially recognized by the IPC, was distributed to all
public and private elementary, junior high, and special needs schools nationwide44. It
should be noted that of the six teaching materials, only I’mPOSSIBLE is designed
specifically for Paralympic education; the others are specifically for Olympic educationor OPE.
The most used teaching materials by school type were as follows: I’mPOSSIBLE inelementary schools （43.0%）, The Textbook in middle schools （32.8%）, and I’
mPOSSIBLE and The Textbook at the same rate of 41.8% in special needs schools.
This shows that the main teaching materials used across all school types were I’
mPOSSIBLE and The Textbook. This is likely because the former was distributed toschools nationwide and the latter to schools in Tokyo, which made it possible for62

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Educationteachers to read and consider how to use them. In addition to the above, 22.8% ofelementary schools used the Tokyo 2020 Maths Textbook that was distributed to all
6th graders in Tokyo’s public schools（42.6% rate of use in elementary schools inTokyo）. Some middle schools（1.6%）said they use the Tokyo 2020 Maths Textbook,
but these responses are considered to be errors because the textbook is designed forelementary school level math.
Let us now compare The Textbook and I’mPOSSIBLE, the two most used teachingmaterials. As we noted earlier, The Textbook and I’mPOSSIBLE are significantly
different in that the former is for OPE, whereas the latter is for Paralympic education.
Therefore, although The Textbook does include sections dedicated to Paralympic
disciplines and history, the book is generally not based on a clear division between
Olympic education and Paralympic education. In terms of available versions, The
Textbook comes in three versions, each for elementary school, middle school, and highschool, while I’mPOSSIBLE comes in two versions, one for elementary school and one
for junior/senior high school. The Textbook takes the form of a regular textbook, one
for each version. I’mPOSSIBLE on the other hand does not include a textbook; itconsists of kamishibai（picture card story）-style class handouts, student worksheets,
and educational videos, among various other kinds of material. Content-wise, The
Textbook contains a lot of information about the history, disciplines, and other aspectsof the Olympics and Paralympics. It is therefore focused on “（1）Learning about the
Olympics and Paralympics.” IʼmPOSSIBLE includes basic information about theParalympics, but is designed to enable students to gain a deeper understanding of an
inclusive society through classroom learning and hands-on learning. Therefore, it ismore focused on “（2） Learning through the Olympics and Paralympics.” Theseobservations show that teachers need to understand the features of each teachingmaterial and choose which one to use depending on their educational objective.
We can identify elements of Paralympic education in existing elementary school
and middle school textbooks that are not specifically designed for Paralympic
education. Onishi （2020） analyzed 96 textbooks for ethics, a subject that wasestablished in elementary schools and middle schools in FY2018 and FY2019. The
study showed that nine Paralympians were covered in the textbooks. Of particular
notice was the Paralympic Triathlon athlete Mami Tani（maiden name Sato）, who
served as the presenter in Tokyo’s campaign to host the Games. She appeared in a63

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

total of 10 elementary school and middle school textbooks. Onishi notes that Tokyo’s
decision to host the Olympic and Paralympic Games led to a visible increase in
textbooks covering Paralympians’ stories45.








:HZHUHQRWDZDUHRIWKH
WHDFKLQJPDWHULDOV:HWKRXJKWFODVV,GRQ WNQRZ

SUHSDUDWLRQVKRZWRJHWWKH

ZRXOGWDNHWRRPDWHULDOV,W VKDUGWRXVH
LQFODVV:HWKLQNLWbVWRR
GLîFXOWIRURXU

2WKHU

VWXGHQWV

ORQJ(6 Q 













06 Q 













61(6 Q 













Fig. 33

Reasons for not using Olympic and Paralympic teaching materials

Next, we asked the schools that said they did not use any of the teaching materials
in the previous question the reason for this（Fig. 33）. Roughly the same number of
elementary schools selected “We were not aware of the teaching materials” and “Wethought class preparations would take too long,” both at around 31%. The numbers
were relatively high in middle schools too at 39.3% and 35.8%, respectively.
Meanwhile, more than half, or 59.3%, of special needs schools chose “Because we thinkit’s too difficult for our students” as the reason. Since the teaching materials for OPE
mentioned in the previous Question are designed for regular students, it isunderstandably difficult for teachers to use them as they are to teach special needs
school students, especially those with an intellectual disability. This issue may berelated to the fact that special needs schools prefer hands-on learning over classroom
learning, as we saw in Fig. 16 “Activities carried out in Paralympic education.”64

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

3-3.

Analysis of opinions（free comments）about Paralympic education

We were able to gather 238 free comments in the survey（Question: “Please shareyour thoughts on Paralympic education”）. We divided the comments into semanticalunits, generating 461 cards, and categorized them using the KJ Method. As a result,
we obtained the following five supercategories:［Impressions/Realizations］,［Obtained
effects］,［Issues］,［Conditions for continuation］,and［Teaching material］. These were
each further divided into the following middle categories: <Importance of education>,<Impressions about the Paralympics and Para sports>, and <Other> under［Impressions/Realizations］; <Awareness about disabilities and an inclusive society>,<Interest in and understanding of the Paralympics and Para sports>, and<Empowerment of teachers or students> under［Obtained effects］; <Environmental/
Organizational> and <Content-wise> under ［Issues］; <Continuation/
Discontinuation>, <Aspirations>, <Requests/Proposals>, and <Other> under［Conditions for continuation］; and <IʼmPOSSIBLE> and <Video material> under［Teaching material］. These middle categories were further divided into small
categories, and the overall results are shown in the table for each school type. The
supercategories, middle categories, and small categories are indicated by box brackets（［--］）, angle brackets（<-->）, and quotation marks（“--”）,respectively.
We obtained 147 responses from elementary schools, generating 284 cards（Table 2）.
Table 2: Free Comments on Paralympic education（elementary school）［Supercategories］〈Middle categories〉

Importance of education

Impressions about theParalympics and Para sports
Impressions/
Realizations“Small categories”

284

Paralympic education is very worthwhile

21

It’s a good opportunity to learn about an inclusive society
We realized the importance of promoting disability awareness128It’s an opportunity for children to grow
Understanding of others and human rights education can be deepened

3
2

33

It’s an opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of the Paralympics
It’s important to actually try out Para sports
We need to tell children about the efforts of Paralympians
It’s a sport that everyone can do together with a little ingenuity
We think exchange with Paralympians is a very special experience
The relationship between Para sports and schools is closer than it
was in Tokyo in 1964

10
8
7
4
3
1
4
3

13

It’s important to conduct both classroom learning and hands-on learning
It’s important to adjust to children’ developmental levels when
conducting disability awareness education
The content is easy to find interesting for welfare education
Integrated Studies class time is suitable for learning about
inclusive society
It’s necessary to learn about the Paralympics before going towatch the Games
Lessons should be conducted in conjunction with Olympic andParalympic education
I have doubts about Olympic and Paralympic education itself

46

92

Other

2
1
1
1
1

65

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16［Supercategories］〈Middle categories〉
Awareness about disabilities
and an inclusive society

Obtained effects

34

Interest in and understanding of
the Paralympics and Para sports
Empowerment of teachers or
students

Environmental/Organizational

Issues

8

13

80

5

Increased interest in the Paralympics
Better understanding of Para sports

44Children were encouraged by the talks given by Paralympians

8

Change in children’s awarenessChange in teachers’ awareness3
2

Positioning in the annual teaching plan and subject framework

16

There are too many educational aspects that teachers need to cover
Ensuring time for learning

15
11

Finding Paralympians

7

Budgetary constraints
Obtaining equipment

7
7
6
4

Lack of facilities for doing Para sports
Hot to use the budget
Placement in curriculum guideline221

Not enough information about visiting classes
Coordinating with school events

1
1

Difficult content to cover4

Stressful class preparation
Lack of interest due to lack of awareness among children
Lack of knowledge about the Paralympics among teachers

33
1

It’s not possible to verify effectiveness of Paralympic education

1

Paralympic education does not lead to a better understanding ofpeople with disabilities or a more inclusive society, and children’s
understanding does not seem to have increased

1

Possibility of contributing to prejudice that everyone with adisability is continuing to make an effort

1

We want to continue the program

11

Continuation is difficult
We hope it will endure as a legacy

55Increase understading of an inclusive society

7

We want to provide more opportunities for exchange with
Paralympians

4

We want to engage in Para sports
We want to gain a better understanding of Para sports

4
3

We want to gain a better understanding of people with disabilities
We want to interact with people with disabilities through Para
sports3
3

To increase interest in the Paralympics
Children can learn how to live positively

11

We want to continue, but focusing on certain grades
We want to enable children to learn independently

1
1

Need for external help in arranging the dispatch of Paralympians3

I want to know about Para sports equipment and how to makesubstitutes for it
Rules and tools for primary school children to become more available
Merchandise to make the Paralympics more exciting

1

1

Planning to go to the Para Games

1

I’mPOSSIBLE

7

IʼmPOSSIBLE was easy to use
I’mPOSSIBLE led to starting Paralympic education
Use of I’mPOSSIBLE
I’mPOSSIBLE does not match the actual situation

3
2
1
1

Video material

1

Effectiveness of video materials

1

94

Aspirations

14

21

28

56

Requests/Proposals

Other

8

8

Better understanding of an inclusive society

A heavy burden on the teacher in charge

Continuation/Discontinuation

Teaching material

13

284

I want to invite a Paralympian but I don’t know where to ask for advice

Content-wiseConditions forcontinuation“Small categories”
Disability awareness has increased

6

1
1

Most of the comments from elementary schools were classified into［Impressions/
Realizations（94）］and［Issues（92）］, the numbers being almost the same. This wasfollowed by［Conditions for continuation（56）］,［Obtained effects（34）］, and［Teaching66

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Educationmaterial（8）］.（The numbers in parentheses represent the numbers of cards.）
There were many comments on <Importance of education （46）> in the［Impressions/Realizations］ supercategory, including “Paralympic education is very
worthwhile（21）,” “It’s a good opportunity to learn about an inclusive society（12）,”and “We realized the importance of promoting disability awareness（8）,” among othercomments about how Paralympic education contributes to the promotion ofunderstanding for an inclusive society, people with disabilities, and others in general.
Many of the responses on <Impressions about the Paralympics and Para sports（33）>noted that “It’s an opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of the Paralympics（10）,”“It’s important to actually try out Para sports（8）,” and “We need to tell students
about the efforts of Paralympians（7）,” among other comments related to Para sports
and Paralympians. The <Other（13）> middle category included comments about how
to structure or carry out classes, such as “It’s important to conduct both classroom
learning and hands-on learning （4）” and “It’s important to adjust to students’developmental levels when conducting disability awareness education（3）.”As for ［Obtained effects］, there were many comments on <Awareness about
disabilities and an inclusive society （13）> and <Empowerment of teachers andstudents（13）>. More specifically, many comments noted that “Disability awarenesshas increased （8）” and “Students were encouraged by the talks given by
Paralympians（8）.”In terms of ［Issues］, there were many more comments related to the<Environmental/Organizational（80）> middle category than the <Content-wise（14）>middle category. The top three small categories in the <Environmental/
Organizational> middle category were “Positioning in the annual teaching plan andsubject framework（16）,” “There are too many educational aspects that teachers needto cover（15）,” and “Ensuring time for learning（11）,” suggesting that the introductionof new educational content places a significant burden on teachers. In addition, issues
such as “Finding Paralympians （7）,” “Budgetary constraints （7）,” and “Obtaining
equipment（7）” were raised. Comments in the <Content-wise> middle category weremainly about “Difficult content to cover（4）,” “Stressful class preparation（3）,” and“Lack of interest due to lack of awareness among students（3）,” etc.
The majority of the comments regarding ［Conditions for continuation］ wererelated to <Aspirations（28）>, followed by <Continuation/Discontinuation（21）> and67

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16<Requests/Proposals （6）>. The most common comments on <Aspirations （28）>were “We want to deepen students’ understanding of an inclusive society（7）,” “Wewant to provide more opportunities for exchange with Paralympians（4）,” and “Wewant to engage in Para sports （4）,” among others. In terms of <Continuation/
Discontinuation>, most comments were positive about continuing to engage in
Paralympic education, saying “We want to continue the program（11）” and “We hope
it will endure as a legacy（5）,” while only a small number gave a negative response,saying that “Continuation is difficult （5）.” In the <Requests/Proposals> middle
category, most comments pointed out the “Need for external help in arranging the
dispatch of Paralympians（3）.”Nearly all the comments on ［Teaching material］ were positive ones related to<IʼmPOSSIBLE（7）>, such as “IʼmPOSSIBLE was easy to use（3）.”Next, the results for middle schools are shown in Table 3. We obtained 81
responses from middle schools, generating 160 cards.
Table 3: Free Comments on Paralympic education（middle school）［Supercategories］〈Middle categories〉“Small categories”

160

Paralympic education is very worthwhile8

We realized the importance of promoting disability awarenessLeads to inclusive education
It’s a good opportunity to learn about an inclusive society

722Moral understanding needs to be deepened1

Education that nurtures the soul is necessary
It’s an opportunity for students to grow1
1

It’s an opportunity to gain a deeper understating of the Paralympics

415

We need to tell students about the efforts of Paralympians
We think exchange with Paralympians is a very special experience
We think more people will want to participate in the Paralympics

3
3
3

It’s a sport that everyone can do togerther with a little ingenuity

2

Other

2

It’s important to conduct both classroom learning and hands-on learning
To achieve an inclusive society, we must change people’s awareness

1
1

Awareness about disabilities
and an inclusive society

10

Disability awareness has increased
Better understanding of an inclusive society

73Interest in and understanding of
the Paralympics and Para sports

9

Increased interest in the Paralympics
Increased interest in Para sports

63

Empowerment of teachers or
students

8

Students were encouraged by the talks given by Paralympians
Change in teachers’ attitudes

7
1

Other

1

It was also meaningful for academic and career guidance

137

Budgetary constraints
Positioning in the annual teaching plan and subject framework
Ensuring time for learning
There are too many educational aspects that teachers need to cover
A heavy burden on the teacher in charge
Lack of facilities for doing Para sports
Obtaining equipment
I want to invite a Paralympian but I don’t know where to ask for advice
Coordinating with school events
Difficult to adapt to the reality of the school

9
9
6
4
3
2
1
1
1
1

Importance of education

Impressions/
Realizations

39
Impressions about theParalympics and Para sports

Obtained effects

Issues

68

22

28

49

Environmental/Organizational

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education［Supercategories］
Issues〈Middle categories〉
49

Content-wiseContinuation/Discontinuation

Conditions forcontinuation

Aspirations

12

15

19

42

Requests/Proposals

Teaching material“Small categories”

2

8

160

Stressful class preparation
Lack of knowledge about the Paralympics among teachers

63Lack of interest due to lack of awareness among students

3

We want to continue the program
Continuation is difficult

52

We hope it will endure as a legacy

8

We want to raise interest in the Paralympics
We want to provide more opportunities for exchange with Paralympians

44

We want to engage in Para sports

3

We want to learn more about Para sports

3

Deepening understanding of an inclusive society
To place it in the annual teaching plan2
1

Fostering Japanese people with a sense of fairness and judgment

1

Special needs students aiming for the Paralympics

1

A system that facilitates exchange with Paralympians
We want more media coverage22

Cooperation among teachers
Creating implementation manuals
Lobbying the government2
1
1

I’mPOSSIBLE

1

Use of I’mPOSSIBLE

1

Video material1

In addition to interaction with Paralympians, lessons should begiven through video and other media

1

Many of the comments from middle schools were classified into ［Issues （49）］,
followed by ［Conditions for continuation （42）］, ［Impressions/Realizations （39）］,
［Obtained effects（28）］, and［Teaching material（2）］.
Similar to elementary schools, most comments regarding ［Impressions/
Realizations］were related to <Importance of education（22）>, including “Paralympic
education is very worthwhile （8）” and “We realized the importance of promoting
disability awareness（7）.” In the <Impressions about the Paralympics and Para sports（15）> middle category, the number of comments saying “It’s an opportunity to gain adeeper understating of the Paralympics（4）,” “We need to tell students about theefforts of Paralympians（3）,” “We think exchange with Paralympians is a very special
experience （3）,” and “We think more people will want to participate in the
Paralympics（3）” were almost the same.
In terms of ［Obtained effects］, <Awareness about disabilities and an inclusive
society（10）>, <Interest in and understanding of the Paralympics and Para sports（9）>and <Empowerment of teachers and students （8）> were all very close. Morespecifically, many comments noted that “Disability awareness has increased（7）” and“Students were encouraged by the talks given by Paralympians （7）,” similar toelementary schools.
A trend similar to that in elementary schools was observed with regard to［Issues］
as well, where there were more comments related to the <Environmental/
69

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

Organizational（37）> middle category than the <Content-wise（12）> middle category.
The top three small categories in the <Environmental/Organizational> middle
category were “Budgetary constraints（9）,” “Positioning in the annual teaching planand subject framework （9）,” and “Ensuring time for learning （6）.” Similar to the
responses from elementary schools, “Stressful class preparation（6）” was the mostcommon comment in the <Content-wise> middle category.
The majority of the comments regarding ［Conditions for continuation］ wererelated to <Aspirations （19）>, including “We want to raise interest for the
Paralympics （4）,” “We want to provide more opportunities for exchange with
Paralympians（4）,” “We want to engage in Para sports（3）,” and “We want to learn
more about Para sports （3）,” among other comments on the promotion of the
Paralympics and Para sports. This was followed by <Continuation/Discontinuation（15）>, in which there were more positive comments about continuing to engage in
Paralympic education, including “We want to continue the program（5）” and “Wehope it will endure as a legacy （8）,” than there were negative ones, such as“Continuation is difficult（2）.” As for <Requests/Proposals>, “A system that facilitatesexchange with Paralympians （2）,” “We want more media coverage （2）,” and“Cooperation among teachers（2）” were raised in equal numbers.
The comments on［Teaching material］included one on <IʼmPOSSIBLE（1）> andone on <Video material（1）>.
Finally, the results for special needs schools are given in Table 4. We obtained 10
responses from special needs schools, generating 17 cards.
Table 4: Free Comments on Paralympic education（special needs education school）［Supercategories］〈Middle categories〉
Importance of education

Impressions about theParalympics and Para sports
Impressions/
Realizations

70

1

Interest in and understanding of
the Paralympics and Para sports

17

Paralympic education is very worthwhile

1
2

7

It’s an opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of the
Paralympics
Played boccia and sitting volleyball in physical education classStudents can participate in boccia
The presence of Paralympians makes students more interested
Opportunity to raise awareness about parasports
Students enjoy sports activities on a regular basis

1
1

3

Paralympic education materials are easy to use in class
It was difficult to explain the concept of “having a disability” tochildren with intellectual disabilities
Olympic and Paralympic education should be conducted in
combination with each other
Students gained a better understanding of parasports

1

11

Other

Obtained effects“Small categories”
1

1

1
1
1
1
1

1

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education［Supercategories］
Issues〈Middle categories〉
1

Conditions forcontinuation

4“Small categories”

Content-wise

1

Continuation/Discontinuation

1

Requests/Proposals

317

We want students to first get used to physical activities rather

1than engage in Paralympic education
We hope it endures as a legacy

1

We would like to learn about Paralympic disciplines that 1st and1

2nd graders can enjoy
We want more media coverage
We would like the Deaflympics to be included1
1

The comments belonged to the supercategories of［Impressions/Realizations（11）］,［Conditions for continuation（4）］,［Obtained effects（1）］, and［Issues（1）］, with the
majority of them being <Impressions about the Paralympics and Para sports（7）>.
<Requests/Proposals（3）> for continuation included the following: “We would like tolearn about Paralympic disciplines that 1st and 2nd graders can enjoy（1）,” “We wantmore media coverage（1）,” and “We would like the Deaflympics to be included（1）.”
We can make some observations from the contents and numbers of the cards
above. The free comments from elementary schools and middle schools generally
show a similar trend. While there were many positive comments about theimportance and effects of Paralympic education and future continuation of the
program, there were also many comments about the issues. Most of the issues raised
were environmental or organizational, pertaining to aspects such as “Positioning in
the annual teaching plan and subject framework,” “There are too many educational
aspects that teachers need to cover,” and “Ensuring time for learning.” This suggeststhat introducing new programs into the existing curriculum poses many difficulties toteachers. Furthermore, the frequency of comments related to difficulties associatedwith “Budgetary constraints” and “Finding Paralympians” from both elementary andmiddle schools points to the possibility that there is a certain number of teachers who
do not consider Paralympic education as a part of regular classes, but as somethingthat requires inviting Paralympians to give hands-on classes. Although there werevery few issue-related comments from special needs schools as compared toelementary schools and middle schools, the scarcity of responses makes it difficult toderive a general trend in special needs schools on the basis of the survey results.

4.

Analysis

The purpose of this study is to consider what is needed in order for Paralympic
education to endure as an intangible legacy beyond the Tokyo Games and to remain
71

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

a part of the curriculum as an aid to the creation of an inclusive society, byunderstanding the current state of Paralympic education in elementary, junior high,and special needs schools in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture.
Our survey has shown that Paralympic education is already being conducted inmany elementary, junior high, and special needs schools in Tokyo and Chiba
Prefecture, and that a significant majority of teachers have felt the importance andeffects of Paralympic education. Meanwhile, the survey has also shown that there arevarious obstacles that make it difficult to continue conducting Paralympic education.
As for the difficulties of conducting Paralympic education, many issues were raised
in both the multiple-choice questions and free comments, including the difficulty ofensuring time for learning, large burden associated with class preparation, andexcessive number of educational tasks imposed on teachers. These responses showthat the lack of staff and time in schools is a headwind for Paralympic education. The
sheer number of issue-related comments points to the severity of the situation. Whatis more, the burden placed on teachers has undoubtedly increased since 2020 becauseof the COVID-19 pandemic.
The survey also suggests that some consider Paralympic education to be a one-off
initiative. This is suggested by the fact that many respondents noted that the reason
why they conduct Paralympic education is because of the coming Tokyo Games andencouragement from local governments and boards of education, and the fact that the
majority of respondents saying they do not intend to or are not sure whether they
will continue engaging in Paralympic education raised “Because the Tokyo Games
will end in 2020” as the reason, thus indicating that encouragement from boards ofeducation, etc. is a major factor behind the introduction of Paralympic education.
However, judging from the positive expectations for and effects of Paralympic
education and the free comments obtained through the survey, we can assume thatvery few respondents are negative about Paralympic education per se, and that
Paralympic education is generally considered positively as a tool to develop a deeper
awareness about people with disabilities and an inclusive society among students.
Despite the recognition of Paralympic education’s effects, the various factors
described above make continual implementation difficult. In order to remove such
obstacles and enable Paralympic education to endure as an intangible legacy inschools, we need to explore ways to integrate Paralympic education into the existing72Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

system while adjusting the program to meet school needs, rather than adopting a
top-down approach. To this end, the urgent task at hand is to raise awareness among
school teachers and staff that Paralympic education is not just a one-off initiative to
be used to create momentum for the Tokyo Games but can serve as a tool to promoteawareness about inclusiveness and diversity, which is a universal goal. Furthermore,in order to help create a favorable environment in which Paralympic education canbe integrated into the existing system, we need the organizations that arrange athletewith a disability dispatches to continue providing services beyond the Tokyo Games,
teaching materials to be updated with a focus on creating an inclusive society so thatteachers can give classes without the help of external lecturers, and teachingmaterials to be developed specifically for special needs schools. Moreover, in terms ofcreating an inclusive society, we believe that it is possible to coordinate with othereducation programs that have been promoted, such as learning about human rights
and disability awareness, and not be bound to the framework of the Paralympics.
Another hopeful possibility is that Paralympic education will be promoted alongside
initiatives related to the Sustainable Development Goals（SDGs）set by the United
Nations—goals toward the creation of a society that leaves no one behind—whichhave gained more traction in the educational sector in recent years, as such initiatives
are aimed at the creation of an inclusive and diverse society in the same vein as the
IPC’s core values46，47.

5.

Conclusion

Though limited in geographical scope, our survey provides a useful picture of thesituation surrounding the adoption of Paralympic education since FY2016. However,the survey has shed less light on aspects such as the effects of Paralympic educationrelated activities, student reactions, and specific details of classroom learning/handson learning in visiting classes and regular classes. Aiming to look into these aspects
in more depth, Watari conducted an interview survey involving 18 elementary, juniorhigh, and special needs schools that were chosen from among the questionnaire
survey respondents. See the article by Watari48 for the results of the interview survey.
It is worth noting that 95.5% of special needs schools conducted Paralympic
education, suggesting that they have a stronger affinity with Paralympic education as73

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

compared to elementary and middle schools. Furthermore, the responses from special
needs schools on many of the items in the questionnaire survey showed a different
trend from that in elementary and middle schools. As it is necessary to examine thechallenges associated with continuing Paralympic education in special needs schools
separately from elementary and middle schools, we will cover special needs schools ina separate study.
Since our study was conducted using the purposive sampling method, limiting thegeographical scope of the questionnaire survey, it is highly possible that the findings
are biased. Therefore, the conclusions of the study should only be generalized withcaution.
Notes（1） The JSA conducted the Olympic and Paralympic Movement Survey Project in
FY2015. The Nationwide Olympic and Paralympic Movement Project launched
in FY2016 was based on the FY2015 project. According to Board of Audit ofJapan（2019）, a total of approx. 859.47 million yen was spent for the project
between FY2015 and FY201849.
（2） Tokuda（2005）defines “disability awareness” as “a way of thinking centeredaround the idea of human rights, especially the idea of normalization, thatcovers all aspects related to people with disabilities”50. Sanagi（2003）defines“disability awareness education” as something that “provides the opportunity tolearn about how to interact with others as an individual, human dignity, and theindividual as a social existence, through exploring the relationship between
society and disability and by deriving guiding principles for connecting withsociety”51. We use the term “disability awareness” in the sense described above,
meaning not only the acquisition of knowledge about disabilities but also
understanding for others.
（3） As public special needs schools have kindergarten, elementary, junior high, andsenior high divisions, we initially intended to include only elementary divisions
and middle divisions in the survey. However, of the 64 Paralympic education
special needs schools that responded, there were 8 that only conducted
Paralympic education in their senior high divisions. We therefore decided toinclude these schools in the analysis.
74Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education（4） The reason why we did not include senior high schools in the survey was
because we knew that the rate of implementation in senior high schools is lower
than that in elementary and middle schools. This is based on the observations
made in the aforementioned OPE case studies and Tomozoe et al.（2020）, whichhave shown that the rate of implementation of Paralympic education is higher
in elementary and middle schools, as well as our own experience in conducting
Para sports events in schools. We included special needs schools in the survey
because we were able to confirm that the rate of implementation of Paralympic
education was high in special needs schools from the numbers reported in the
JSA’s OPE case studies, among other studies.
（5） We use the term “Para sports” according to the definition provided in theteacher’s handbook developed by the Japanese Para-Sports Association/
Japanese Paralympic Committee and the Nippon Foundation Paralympic
Support Center that is attached to IʼmPOSSIBLE （Japanese edition）, an
educational toolkit officially recognized by the IPC: “Para sports is a genericterm for sports for athletes with disabilities, regardless of whether such sports
are part of the Paralympic program.”52（6） The Tokyo Metropolitan Government launched an Olympic- and Paralympicrelated school designation system in FY2014, the details of which are shown in

Olympic and Paralympic
education promoting
school54

4

7

206

397 149

24

38

Special Needs Education School

High School

Middle School
60

6

9

Total

FY2015Olympic education
promoting school53

Main initiatives

Other

FY2014

School designation system
KindergartenTerm（1 year）

Elementary School

the table below.

0

Learning about the history, importance, and values of the
Olympics and Paralympics
Cultivating global understanding through studying the
300 histories and cultures of countries participating in the
Games, and exchange with local foreign residents
Supporting the organization of local sports competitions,
events, etc.

0Each school selects and implements two or more activities
from among 12 choices, including “Olympic and Paralympic
learning in regular subject classes, ethics class, integrated
600 study, and special activities classes” and “Cultivation of
global understanding through studying the histories andcultures of foreign countries and learning foreign
languages.”75

TotalMain initiatives

Other

Special Needs Education School

High School

Middle School

School designation system
KindergartenTerm（1 year）

Elementary School

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16

Select one of the five predetermined activities（“Cultivation of volunteering mindset,” “Promotion of
disability awareness,” “Spreading of sports-orientation,”
FY2016

Priority School for Olympic
and Paralympic Education55

0

53

38

5

4

0

100

“Cultivation of awareness and pride as Japanese citizens,”and “Development of broad global perspective”）and makeit a focus of engagement. Thirty-five schools have selected“Promotion of disability awareness” as their focus ofengagement.

FY2017FY2018FY2019Olympic and Paralympic
Education Awards
School56，57，58，59

FY2020

2

83

34

7

8

2

3

81

36

8

6

1

135

136 Schools that conducted excellent OPE in the previous year areawarded. The awarded schools each engage in one of the

5

93

28

8

11

3

148

“five qualities that need to be actively developed.” The numberof designated schools engaging in “disability awareness”

2

92

27

8

12

3

144

was 46 in 2017, 49 in 2018, 51 in 2019, and 55 in 2020.

Since 2017, the Chiba Prefectural Government has designated pioneering schoolsthat have engaged in OPE as Olympic and Paralympic Education Promotion Schools.

Term
School designation system（1 year）

Elementary School

Middle School

High School

Special Needs Education School

Total

The details are shown in the table below.

FY2017

14

11

3

2

30

27

25

10

3

65

29

23

10

3

65

30

22

10

3

65

FY2018FY2019FY2020Olympic and Paralympic
Education promoting
school60，61，62，63

In Chiba City, 171 public schools （111 elementary schools, 55 middle schools, 3
special needs schools, 2 senior high schools）were certified as Tokyo 2020 Olympic
and Paralympic Education Schools （Yoi, Don! Schools） by TOCOG in April 2017.
These schools have engaged in educational initiatives in accordance with the city’s
OPE implementation policy64.
（7） In special needs schools for intellectually disabled students, only junior andsenior high divisions are required to include integrated studies as part of thecurriculum. Elementary divisions do not have integrated studies65. Hence, mostof the special needs schools that said “Integrated studies” in the questionnaire76Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education

are assumed to be junior or senior high school divisions. Similarly, the subjectsof “Foreign languages,” “Social studies,” “Science,” and “Home economics” are notpart of the elementary division curriculum66.
（8） We set 70 hours or more per year as the outlier value on the basis of the tableof class hours in the “Status of Implementation of Olympic and Paralympic
67.
Education in FY2016” section in case studies of TMBE（2017）

References
1

Tokyo Metropolitan Board of Education（TMBE）, “Tokyo to Olympic Paralympic kyoiku
nenkan schedule（Olympic and Paralympic Education Annual Schedule in Tokyo）,” https://www.o.p.edu.metro.tokyo.jp/schedule,（25 January, 2021）.

2

Board of Audit of Japan, 2018, Tokyo Olympic Paralympic kyogi taikai ni muketa torikumi
jyokyo tou ni kansuru kaikeikensa no kekka ni tsuite no houkokusyo（ Youshi）Report on the
Results of the Audit on the Status of Efforts Towards the Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic
Games（summary）,19, https://www.jbaudit.go.jp/pr/kensa/result/30/pdf/301004_youshi_02.
pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

3

Olympic and Paralympic Education Expert Council, 2016, Olympic Paralympic kyoiku nosuishin ni mukete saisyuhoukoku （Final Report on Promoting Olympic and Paralympic
Education）, 3-4, https://www.mext.go.jp/sports/b_menu/shingi/004_index/toushin/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2016/07/29/1375094_01.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

4

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology （MEXT）, 2020, Olympic
Paralympic Movement zenkoku tenkai jigyo （Outline of the Nationwide Olympic andParalympic Movement Project）, 1, https://www.mext.go.jp/sports/content/20201112-spt_
oripara-300000904_01.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

5

Centre for Olympic Research and Education （CORE）, 2020, Reiwa gannen do Olympic
Paralympic Movement zenkoku tenkai jigyo jissen jirei shu（Outline of Nationwide Olympic
and Paralympic Movement Project Practical Examples in FY2019）, 27-58, https://www.mext.
go.jp/sports/b_menu/sports/mcatetop08/list/detail/pdf/1407907_7.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

6

TMBE, 2018, Tokyo to Olympic Paralympic kyoiku jisshi hoshin （gaiyouban）（Tokyo
Metropolitan Government Olympic and Paralympic Education Implementation Policy（Summary））, 5, https://www.o.p.edu.metro.tokyo.jp/opedu/static/page/open/permanent_
pdf/implementationpolicy.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

7

TMBE, 2018, Olympic Paralympic kyoiku jissen jitsurei shu heisei 30 nen 9 gatsu（Collection of Practical Examples of Olympic and Paralympic Education, September
FY2018）,18-37.

8Tomozoe, H., Fukami, E., Yoshinaga, T., Okada, Y., Tohkairin, S., Takemura, M., Nemoto, S.,
Ono, Y., Kaji, M., Aoki, A. and Yasuda, J., 2020, “A Report About the Practice of Olympic andParalympic Education in 2018: Focusing on the Area in Charge of WASEDA ResearchCenter for Olympic and Paralympic Education,” Sport Science Research, 17, 14-27.

9

TMBE, 2020, Heisei 31 nen do kyoiku kenkyuin kenkyu houkokusyo（Research Report by

10

SASAKI, H., 2018, “A Study on Practice of Olympic and Paralympic Education: Efforts in

Education Researchers in FY2019）, 3-5.
Middle School,” The Japanese Journal of Primary Education, 19, 42-58.
77

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16
11

TMBE, Reiwa gannen do Tokyo to koritsu gakko ichiran（List of Public Schools in Tokyo in
FY2019）, https://www.kyoiku.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/administration/statistics_and_research/list_
of_public_school/school_lists2019.html,（23 October, 2019）.

12

Tokyo to Shigaku Zaidan, Shiritsu gakko ichiran（List of Private Schools）, https://www.
shigaku-tokyo.or.jp/school/list.html,（23 October, 2019）.

13

Chiba Prefectural Board of Education, Heisei 30 nen ban kyoiku binran （Education
Factsheets, FY2018）, https://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kyouiku/seisaku/kouhou/kyouikubinran/h30.html,（23 October, 2019）.

14

Chiba Prefecture, Heisei 30 nen do → heisei 31 nen do koritsu gakko no henkou jyokyo（FY2018→ FY2019 Modification in List of Public Schools）, https://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/
kyouiku/seisaku/kouhou/gakkou-ichiran/documents/h31__gakkouichiran.pdf, （25 October2019）.

15

Chiba Prefecture, Shiritsu gakko meibo（Directory of Private Schools）, https://www.pref.
chiba.lg.jp/gakuji/shiritsutou/shiritsugakkou/index.html,（23 October 2019）.

16

Chiba Prefectural Board of Education, “Kyoshokuin no torikumi（Teachers’ Initiatives）,”
https://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kyouiku/seisaku/oly-para.html,（10 January, 2021）.

17

Chiba City, “Olympic Paralympic kyoiku no torikumi （ kobetsu jigyo）（Olympic andParalympic Education Initiatives（Individual projects））,” https://www.city.chiba.jp/kyoiku/
kyoikusomu/kikaku/oriparakobetujigyo.html,（10 January, 2021）.

18

TMBE, 2016, Tokyo to Olympic Paralympic kyoiku jissi hoshin（gaiyoban）（Overview ofTokyo Metropolitan Government Olympic and Paralympic Education Implementation
Policy）, https://www.o.p.edu.metro.tokyo.jp/opedu/static/page/admin-school/pdf/20q1e202.
pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

19

Chiba Prefectural Board of Education, 2017, Chiba ken Olympic Paralympic wo katsuyo
shita kyoiku no torikumi hoshin （Chiba Prefecture’s Policy on Olympic and Paralympic
Education）, https://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kyouiku/seisaku/documents/h29housinn.pdf, （10January, 2021）.

20

Chiba City Board of Education, 2019, Chiba shi Olympic Paralympic kyoiku jissi hoshin:2019 nen（ reiwa ganen）10 gatsu kaitei ban（Chiba City Olympic and Paralympic Education
Implementation Policy: October 2019 Revised version）, https://www.city.chiba.jp/kyoiku/
kyoikusomu/kikaku/documents/oriparakyouikujissihousin2019.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

21

TMBE, “Shuyo jimu jigyo no gaiyou（Outline of Main Administrative Activities）, ”https://www.kyoiku.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/administration/action_and_budget/action/action_and_budget/,（10 January, 2021）.

22

Chiba City Board of Education, “Kyoiku yosan iinkai no yosan （Budget of the Board of
Education）,” https://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kyouiku/zaimu/kyouiku-yosan/index.html, （10January, 2021）.

23

Chiba City, “Kyoiku youran mokuji（Contents of Education Factsheets）,” https://www.city.

24

Tokyo Metropolitan Government, “Houdo happyo shiryo ‘Yume mirai’ project no jisshi nichiba.jp/kyoiku/kyoikusomu/kikaku/youranmokuji.html,（10 January, 2021）.
tsuite（Press Release: Dream and Future Project）,” https://www.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/tosei/
hodohappyo/press/2015/08/20p8r400.html,（10 January, 2021）.
25

TMBE, “Heisei 28 nendo ‘Yume mirai’ project jisshiko no kettei ni tsuite（Schools of theDream and Future Project in FY2016）,” https://www.o.p.edu.metro.tokyo.jp/opedu/static/
page/open/news_pdf/news_20160428_1.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.
78

Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education
26

TMBE, “Heisei 29 nendo ‘Yume mirai’ project jisshiko no kettei ni tsuite（Schools of theDream and Future Project in FY2017）,” https://www.o.p.edu.metro.tokyo.jp/opedu/static/
page/open/news_pdf/news_20170413d_1.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

27

TMBE, “Heisei 30 nendo ‘Yume mirai’ project jisshiko no kettei ni tsuite（Schools of theDream and Future Project in FY2018）,” https://www.o.p.edu.metro.tokyo.jp/opedu/static/
page/open/news_pdf/news_20180412_3.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

28

TMBE, “Heisei 31 nendo ‘Yume mirai’ project jisshiko no kettei ni tsuite（Schools of theDream and Future Project in FY2019）,” https://www.o.p.edu.metro.tokyo.jp/opedu/static/
page/open/news_pdf/news_20190411_3.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

29

TMBE, “Reiwa 2 nendo ‘Yume mirai’ project jisshiko no kettei ni tsuite （Schools of theDream and Future Project in FY2020）,” https://www.kyoiku.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/school/
designated_and_promotional_school/olympic/files/dreem_futhure/r2.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

30

Chiba Prefectural Board of Education, Chiba ken Olympic Paralympic wo katsuyo shitakyoiku no torikumi hoshin （Chiba Prefecture’s Policy on Olympic and Paralympic
Education）,5.

31

Chiba City, “Shogaishya athlete gakko houmon（Para-Athletes Visit Schools）,” https://www.
city.chiba.jp/sogoseisaku/opsuishin/opchosei/syougaisyasports-houmon.html, （10 January,2021）.

32

Chiba City, “Reiwa 2 nen do yosan: Olympic Paralympic kanren yosan（Budget FY2020:
Olympic and Paralympic Related Budget）,” https://www.city.chiba.jp/zaiseikyoku/zaisei/
zaisei/documents/r2tousyoyosann1-08oripara-antore.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

33

The Nippon Foundation Paralympic Support Center, “School Challenge For Tomorrow,”https://www.parasapo.tokyo/asuchalle/school/,（10 January, 2021）.

34

Chiba City, “Olympic Paralympic kyoiku no torikumi （ kobetsu jigyo）（Olympic andParalympic Education Initiatives（Individual projects））.”

35（Overview of Tokyo
TMBE, Tokyo to Olympic Paralympic kyoiku jisshi hoshin（gaiyoban）
Metropolitan Government Olympic and Paralympic Education Implementation Policy）
, 5.

36

MEXT, 2018, Kyoin kinm jittai chosa（ heisei 28 nen do）no bunseki kekka ni tsuite（Resultsof the Analysis of the Survey on Teachers’ Working Conditions（FY2008））, 5, https://www.
mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chukyo/chukyo3/siryo/__icsFiles/afieldfi
le/2018/11/21/1411291-5_1.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

37

Olympic and Paralympic Education Expert Council, Olympic Paralympic kyoiku no suishin
ni mukete saisyuhoukoku（Final Report on Promoting Olympic and Paralympic Education）
,
4-5.

38

MEXT, 2014, Chiiki ni okeru shogaisya no sport recreation katsudo ni kansuru chosakenkyu houkokusyo（Report on Research into Sports and Recreational Activities for People
with Disabilities in Communities（FY2013））, https://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/
sports/detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2014/05/20/1347286_5.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

39

TMBE, 2020, Reiwa 2 nen do kouritsu gakko toukei chosa houkokusyo（ gakko chosa hen）
（Report on Statistical Survey of Public Schools in FY2020（School Survey））, 4-5, https://www.kyoiku.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/administration/statistics_and_research/academic_report/
files/report2020/gaiyou-shouchuugimu.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

40

Chiba Prefecture, 2019, Reiwa gannen do kihon chosa kekka （Results of FY2019 Basic
School Survey）, 7-8, https://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/toukei/toukeidata/gakkou-kihon/r01kekka/documents/gaiyou2.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.
79

Journal of Paralympic Research Group vol.16
41

MEXT, 2019, Nihon no tokubetsu shien kyoiku no jyokyo ni tsuite（Current Situation about
Special Needs Education in Japan）, 4, https://www.mext.go.jp/kaigisiryo/2019/09/__
icsFiles/afieldfile/2019/09/24/1421554_3_1.pdf,（10 January, 2021）.

42

TMBE, “‘Olympic Paralympic gakushu dokuhon eizo kyozai’ to ‘Welcome to Tokyo’no haifu
ni tsuite（Distribution of ‘The Olympic and Paralympic Textbook and Video Materials’ and‘Welcome to Tokyo’）,” https://www.kyoiku.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/press/press_release/2016/
release20160324_02.html,（10 January, 2021）.

43

The Tokyo Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games, Kodomo tachi no
Manabi wo Tokyo 2020 taikai ga ouen! Tokyo 2020 sansu doriru 2019 nen do ban wo tonai
no zenkouritsu shogakko ni haifu（Tokyo 2020 Games support children’s learning ! Tokyo
2020 Maths Textbook FY2019 Edition Distributed to All Public Elementary Schools inTokyo）, https://tokyo2020.org/ja/news/news-20190117-01-ja,（10 January, 2021）.

44

IʼmPOSSIBLE Official website, https://www.parasapo.tokyo/iampossible/, （10 January,2021）.

45

Onishi, T., 2020, “Dotoku ni okeru Tokubetsu shien kyoiku no atsukai ni tsuite: Kentei
kyokasho no bunseki wo toshite（Special Needs Education in Moral Education: Through an
Analysis of Approved Textbooks）,” Kyoiku kyoushoku center tokubetsu shien kenkyu
nenpou（Annual Report of Research on Special Needs Education, Centre for Education andTeaching）, 12, 7.

46

MEXT, “Kyoiku genba ni okeru SDGs no tassei ni shisuru torikumi koujireishu（Educationthat Contributes to the Achievement of the SDGs: Good Practices）,” https://www.mext.
go.jp/unesco/sdgs_koujireisyu_education/index.htm,（10 January, 2021）.

47

Olympic and Paralympic Education Expert Council, Olympic Paralympic kyoiku no suishin
ni mukete saisyuhoukoku（Final Report on Promoting Olympic and Paralympic Education）
,
3.

48

Watari, T., 2021, “Current Situation and Issues of Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba
Prefecture: An Interview Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools forSpecial Needs Education,” Journal of Paralympic Research Group, 15, 51-89.

49

Board of Audit of Japan, 2019, Kaikeikensain hou dai 30 jyo no 3 no kitei ni motuzuku
houkokusho （Report pursuant to Article 30-3 of the Act of the Board of Audit）,
116-117,https://www.jbaudit.go.jp/pr/kensa/result/31/pdf/11204_zenbun_01.pdf, （25January, 2021）.

50

Tokuda, K., 2005, “Shogai rikai to kokoro no barrier-free（Understanding Disability and a
Barrier-free Mindset）,” Tokuda, K., and Mizuno, T.（eds.）, Understanding Disability: Theory
and Practice of a Barrier-Free Mindset）, Seishin Shobo, 2-10.

51

Sanagi, T., 2003, Shogai rikai kyoiku wo kangaeru （Thinking about Education for
Understanding Disability）,Bunrikaku.

52

IʼmPOSSIBLE Japan Office, 2020, “IʼmPOSSIBLE（Teacher’s Handbook）Fourth Edition,” 13.

53 TMBE, Tokyo to ni okeru Olympic Paralympic kyoiku no torikumi（Olympic and Paralympic
Education Initiatives in Tokyo）, 3, https://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chousa/
sports/024/shiryo/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2015/04/30/1356392_02.pdf,（25 January, 2021）.
54

Tokyo Metropolitan Government, Heisei 27 nen do Olympic Paralympic kyoiku suishin ko
ni tsuite（Olympic and Paralympic Education Promoting Schools in FY2015）, https://www.
metro.tokyo.lg.jp/tosei/hodohappyo/press/2015/03/20p35200.html,（25 January, 2021）.

55

Tokyo Metropolitan Government, “Heisei 28 nen do Olympic Paralympic kyoiku jyuten ko
80Current Situation and Future Prospects for Paralympic Education in Tokyo and Chiba Prefecture:
A Questionnaire Survey of Teachers in Elementary, Middle Schools and Schools for Special Needs Education
no shitei ni tsuite（Priority Schools for Olympic and Paralympic Education in FY2016）,”
https://www.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/INET/OSHIRASE/2016/04/20q4e100.htm,（25 January, 2021）.
56

TMBE, “Heisei 29 nen do Olympic Paralympic kyoiku award ko wo kettei shimashita（Olympic and Paralympic Education Award Schools for FY2017 Have Been Selected）,”
https://www.kyoiku.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/press/press_release/2017/release20170413_02.html,（25 January, 2021）.

57

TMBE, “Heisei 30 nen do Olympic Paralympic kyoiku award ko wo kettei shimashita（Olympic and Paralympic Education Award Schools for FY2018 Have Been Selected）,”
https://www.kyoiku.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/press/press_release/2018/release20180412_01.html,（25 January, 2021）.

58

TMBE, “Heisei 31 nen do Olympic Paralympic kyoiku award ko wo kettei shimashita（Olympic and Paralympic Education Award Schools for FY2019 Have Been Selected）,”
https://www.kyoiku.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/press/press_release/2019/release20190411_02.html,（25 January, 2021）.

59

TMBE, “Reiwa 2 nen do Olympic Paralympic kyoiku award ko wo kettei shimashita（Olympic and Paralympic Education Award Schools for FY2020 Have Been Selected）,”
https://www.kyoiku.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/school/designated_and_promotional_school/olympic/
award_2020.html,（25 January, 2021）.

60

Chiba Prefectural Board of Education, “Heisei 29 nendo Olympic Paralympic kyoiku
suishinkou （Olympic and Paralympic Education Promoting School in FY2017）,” https://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kyouiku/seisaku/oly-para/suisinnkou29.html,（25 January, 2021）.

61

Chiba Prefectural Board of Education, “Heisei 30 nendo Olympic Paralympic kyoiku
suishinkou （Olympic and Paralympic Education Promoting School in FY2018）,” https://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kyouiku/seisaku/oly-para/suisinnkou30.html,（25 January, 2021）.

62

Chiba Prefectural Board of Education, “Reiwa gan nendo Olympic Paralympic kyoiku
suishinkou （Olympic and Paralympic Education Promoting School in FY2019）,” https://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kyouiku/seisaku/oly-para/reiwa1.html,（25 January, 2021）.

63

Chiba Prefectural Board of Education, “Reiwa 2 nendo Olympic Paralympic kyoiku
suishinkou （Olympic and Paralympic Education Promoting School in FY2020）,” https://www.pref.chiba.lg.jp/kyouiku/seisaku/oly-para/reiwa2.html,（25 January, 2021）.

64

Chiba City, “Olympic Paralympic kyoiku （Olympic and Paralympic Education）,” https://www.city.chiba.jp/kyoiku/kyoikusomu/kikaku/oriparakyouiku.html,（25 January, 2021）.

65

National Institute of Special Needs Education, “Chiteki shogaiji kyouiku no shidokeikaku nosakusei to shido no kufu: Sogoteki na gakushu no jikan （Teaching Plans and Teaching
Ideas in Education for Children with Intellectual Disabilities: Integrated Studies Class）,”
http://forum.nise.go.jp/soudan-db/htdocs/index.php?key=muoyrr5jv-467,（25 January, 2021）.

66

MEXT, 2016, Chiteki shogai no aru jidoseito no tame no kaku kyoka ni tsuite（heisei 28 nen
do 2 gatsu 22 nichi kyoikukatei bukai tokubetsu shien kyoiku bukai（ dai 6 kai）shiryo 3（Subjects for Students with Intellectual Disabilities（Document 3, Special Needs Education
Subcommittee of Curriculum Committee（6th Meeting）February 22, 2016）, https://www.
mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chukyo/chukyo3/063/siryo/__icsFiles/afieldfi
le/2016/02/29/1367588_01.pdf,（25 January, 2021）.

67

TMBE, 2017, Olympic Paralympic kyoiku jissen jitsurei shu （Collection of Practical
Examples of Olympic and Paralympic Education）, 5, https://www.o.p.edu.metro.tokyo.jp/
opedu/static/page/open/pdf/teaching-materials/11_article_h29.pdf,（25 January, 2021）.
81