Should Japan Introduce Gifted and Talented Education to its Educational
SystemIntroduction
In the year 2000, Sho Yano, an eight year old child who has aJapanese-American father and Korean-American mother, made headlines throughout theUnited States for being the youngest ever matriculate of Loyola University (CBS news,
2001). Although Sho’s case is an exceptional example, he is one of the many children
who are known as the gifted and talented. The so-called Marland Report, a well known
study on gifted and talented education, or GATE, defines gifted children as those "whohave outstanding abilities, are capable of high performance and who requiredifferentiated educational programs (beyond those normally provided by regular school
programs) in order to realize their contribution to self and society (Marland, 1972)".
While many developed countries have already established educational facilities thatspecialize in the education of gifted and talented children, our country is far behind in
this field of education. Gifted education is in need worldwide because according to
Hollingworth, “based on a three-year measurement, we know that a child of 140 IQ can
1master all the mental work of provided in elementary school in half the time allowed,
and a child of 170 IQ can do so in one fourth the time and attain top marks(Hollingworth, 1936)”. This implies that these gifted children can use at least half theirschool time for doing other activities. Containing them in regular curriculums has apossibility of depriving them of the chance to use the leftover time effectively.
The aim of this thesis is to examine the present situation, the results, and the
problems of gifted education in countries which have already introduced such systems,in order to plan an effective way of introducing a government-led educational system
for the gifted and talented to Japan Because gifted education has already been
introduced in many developed countries, it would be difficult to examine the systems ofevery single country in only one essay. Therefore, as a case study, I would like to look at
the gifted education systems of the United States and Korea. I have chosen the UnitedStates, because it is considered that the United States is one of the most advanced
countries in the area of gifted education, and Korea, because according to Kitamura andKuramoto of Tohoku University, Korea has a similar educational climate to Japan(Kitamura & Kuramoto, 2005). I would like to analyze each case by examining thehistory of GATE in each country, the specific structure, and the problems of each system.
In addition to this, I would like to adopt Ishikawa’s method of analyzing the extent,2method, target, and institution of enforcement (Ishikawa, 2005). Also I would like toclassify if the special education offered places its importance in enrichment or
acceleration.
Upon writing this report, I would like to distinguish the definitions of the terms“talented” and “gifted”. Although this is a more of an idiomatic definition, the term
“talent” is used to describe how a person exceeds in various areas, for example, music,
academics, and art. On the other hand, the word “gifted” is used to express a talent in
one particular area (Muramatsu, 2003). Therefore in this thesis I would like todistinguish the terms, “gifted and talented education”, and “gifted education”, because
this type of gifted and talented education often specializes in expanding a child’s ability
in a specific field of study.

3

Gifted Education in Japan
Before examining each case, there is a need to deepen our understanding
towards Japan’s systems of gifted education. Needless to say our country is far behind
occidental countries in this area of education, but this does not mean that our country
has not tried and applied any such systems at all. Although the extent of enforcement isfairly limited, some institutions allow early admission and graduation in universities,
and recently, symbolized by the newly established Science Frontier High School in
Kanagawa, some high schools are designated as Super English High Schools or Super
Science High Schools, which are some examples of enrichment programs. Howeverthese programs only apply to High Schools or above, and cannot be applied tocompulsory education. In Japan, special education has not been introduced tocompulsory education from the belief that special treatment should not be allowed,
because every child should receive equal education. This can be implied from thegovernment guidelines for teaching (Government Guidelines for Teaching, 1998).
However I would like to note that this belief, on the other hand, deprives talented
children from an “equal opportunity” of education. Winstanley (Winstanley, 2004),
states the importance of “having the opportunity to challenge”. Gifted children in
normal schools are deprived of the opportunity to challenge in more advanced content.
4

The root of the problem lies in the people’s critical belief that since compulsory
education is administered based on tax income, it is inappropriate to spend a large
amount of money on a handful of gifted children. This comes from the thought thatspecial education might recur the feudal social standings of the Edo era (Japan’sModern Educational System, 2009). However as stated later in this essay, there is little
criticism of such systems in other countries. I feel that there is a need to change thepublic opinion towards special education in Japan for a new system to be accepted. Also,
academic studies in this area have virtually halted since the 1970’s (Muramatsu, etc,2004), and most new reports on gifted and talented education consists of case studies of
institutions in the United States. In the white paper issued by the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology, although the importance of science andtechnology is acknowledged, the white paper mainly focuses on the enrichment of
university-level research facilities and does not say a single word about gifted education
for children in earlier stages of education (The Educational, Scientific, andTechnological White Paper, 2008). The status quo is as follows; accelerative educationis allowed to a limited number of university applicants and undergraduates, andalthough enrichment education has started a regional spread, both are only limited tohigh schools and above. Factors such as public opinion make it difficult for gifted and5talented education to be introduced in compulsory education.

6

Gifted Education in the United States
Without doubt, the United States leads the world in gifted education, in its
substantial systems of GATE. The United States started introducing gifted and talented
education to its educational system after the Second World War. Prior to the war, there
had been states and local-governments that had their own unique systems of gifted andtalented education, such as grade-skipping. However this can also be said to pre-war
Japan, and therefore I feel that this is not of any significance. What triggered thedevelopment of gifted and talented education was the Sputnik Shock of 1957
(Muramatsu, 2003). When the Soviet Union succeeded in the launch of the Sputnik, theworld’s first ever satellite, the United States, being engaged in the cold war, became
keenly aware of their insufficiency of scientists and technicians. Therefore it could besaid that the first programs of gifted education were established for homeland security
related reasons (Tannerbaum, n.d.). After this incident it has been a repetition of costcurtailment and cost enrichment of program budgets. In the mid 80’s the diminishinglevels of normal education were pointed out, and more funding was poured in to theenrichment of normal education, for example the “No Child Left Behind Act of 2001” isone scheme. Currently, it is still considered by many experts that the money used forgifted education is far below the ideal budget (U.S. dept. of Ed., OERI, 1993).
7

The current systems of gifted education are highly diverse in the United States,
because the enforcement of gifted education is mainly entrusted to States, therefore
ingenerating a difference of systems amongst them (Gross, 2004). However it can stillbe said that the United States has one of the most sophisticated systems in the world,
especially in its acceleration education (Muramatsu, 2003). Acceleration strategies
mainly consist of replacing gifted children in higher grades, or grouping gifted children
and offering them education at a faster speed. Acceleration strategies that are currently
in play are grade-skipping, telescoping, early entrance to school, early entrance tocollege, and early college (Southern, Jones, & Stanley, N.D.). Telescoping is the methodof putting highly talented individuals in one class and moving through the curriculum
faster than normal schools, therefore shortening the time they spend in secondary
education. Early college is a school in which children that have already graduated highschool by the 11th grade. The Simon’s Rock College in Colombia University is one of
the most famous early colleges, being a four-year college of liberal arts. Enrichment
programs are less common in the United States, because grade-skipping has alreadyprovided an easy way of engaging in higher leveled education. There has been a longdebate of acceleration against enrichment, and many have favored acceleration becauseof its low costs (Southern, et.al., n.d.). Examples of enrichment programs in the United
8States are contests, summer schools, Saturday schools, and other special programs.
Because acceleration strategies are so common in the United States, thepsychological difficulties that gifted children experience when they are promoted tohigher grades have been deeply inspected. The main problems that children have as aresult of acceleration strategies are social and emotional issues and underachievement. It
has been a concern for long whether or not a gifted child can fit in to their new class.
However, studies by Erdwins et.al., show that contrary to popular belief, most giftedchildren prove to be more socially mature than their classmates (Erdwins, et.al, 1981).
In most cases they feel more comfortable in their new classes because the children of
higher grades, being mentally mature, fit the mental age of the gifted better (Erdwins,et.al, 1981). However a few studies on the sociality of gifted students, like such ofCornell, have proved that gifted children that differ in family social status, social selfconcept, and academic self-esteem, tend to be unpopular in class and need to be cared of(Cornell, 1990). This kind of unpopularity amongst peers lead to loneliness, which canfurther lead to mental disruption such as feeling rejected, alienated, excluded, andsocially deprived. Being in such state will lead to behavior such as being violent anddepressive. According to studies, nearly one in eight children was reported to have beenin significant loneliness, depression and anger (Berndt & Kaiser, 1985).
9What is most important in mitigating this problem is counseling. This isbecause there is a need to “comprehend the complex inner lives of the gifted as well as
their difficulties living in a world in which they feel alien (Silverman, n.d.)” Davis andRimm states an ideal system of counseling as follows; “A gifted and talented programfor students of any age should include a counseling component. There are three
traditional counseling areas; students’ personal concerns and adjustments, plus theinterrelated components of educational and career counseling.” Although various
counseling programs have been examined by scholars, there is still no correct answer on
how gifted children and their parents should be counseled (Feldhusen, et.al., 1997). A
study by Moon, Kelly, and Feldhusen examines the importance of a university-based
counseling center to offer gifted youth and their families the necessary counseling.
According to their survey, what was highest in need was counseling for the parents ofgifted children. Many replied that they would receive moderately strong benefits fromconsultation with professionals that are trained to give counseling in peer relationships,
emotional adjustment, social adjustment, and stress management, which were the fourareas in which the greatest need was expressed. However it appears that there is still ashortage of counseling personnel that have been trained to work with the gifted andtalented (Feldhusen, et.al., 1997). Even in the United States, being considered as one of10the most advanced countries in gifted and talented education, there is still a shortage ofprofessional personnel, and an effective method of counseling is yet to be established.

11

Gifted Education in Korea
The start of gifted education in Korea dates back 20 years to the late 1980’s,
but the direct catalyst of its development can be clearly identified as the IMF shock in
1997. Until then, although gifted education had started in the 1980’s and the need todevelop legal systems had been suggested, because of Korea’s strong egalitarianism,
there had been no significant progress (Ishikawa, 2005). Prior to the crisis, the Korean
government had been promoting an education equity act for secondary education,
meaning middle and high schools. However after the IMF shock, the economic crisis
triggered by the devaluation of Asian currencies (IMF, 2009), completely changed thepeoples’ consciousness towards gifted education. Ishikawa (2005) quoted the Sekai
Nippou, a Korean newspaper, for saying that “gifted children are our most importantnational treasures”. It has been about 12 years since the IMF shock, and in these years,
Korea has established a fairly sufficient gifted education system.
The gifted education system in Korea consists of three types of institutions.
They are; the special schools at senior high school levels, enrichment programs during
after-school hours in elementary and junior high schools, and government funded
institutions of university levels (Cho & Wu, n.d.).

The most significant of these three

are the special school at senior high school levels. These schools are operated by states12

or provinces, and therefore are able administer entrance tests that are unique to eachschool (Ishikawa, et.al., 2004). Also, because it is not government run, it does not incur
any effects from national institutions, making it relatively free from political intentions(Kitamura & Kuramoto, 2005). Requirements for entering are: (1) to be in the top one
percent in academic achievement for the last two years; (2) to perform well in speciallyset entrance exams which highly emphasize math and science (50%); and (3) to be ingood physical condition. In quantity, less than ten percent of the children who wereenrolled in junior-high gifted education are allowed entrance (Cho & Wu, n.d.). From
this you can imply how academically prestigious these institutions are. These schools
also show good advancement rates to government funded universities such as Seoul
University and KAIST (Korea Advanced Institution of Science and Technology)(Kitamura & Kuramoto, 2005).
However it is these high advancement rates that are posing to be problems.
Because of the high interest in the entrance exam situation, these special high schools
are starting to be used as gateways for prestigious universities. This has caused a
problem that was beyond expectations. More students are entering these schools bystudying in cram schools. Some of these students are not as motivated as students that
selected these school because of a desire to learn more. These not-so motivated students
13

have caused an increase of underachievement and drop-outs (Ishikawa, 2005). Goodadvancement rates have also caused a rapid increase in the number of applicants.
Although varying from year to year, the number of applicants was approximately 13
times the capacity in 2004 (Kitamura & Kuramoto, 2005) and the number of applicants
are increasing every year. Because of this phenomenon, it can be said that these special
high school have lost its original objective: a gifted education institution for enrichment
education. They have turned into mere prestigious public high school, attaining highadvancement rates to prestigious universities.

14

Conclusion
Through this thesis, I have roughly examined the GATE systems in the UnitedStated and Korea. Both systems had different characteristics; the United States being
advanced in acceleration strategies and Korea being advanced in enrichment strategies.
Both systems were far from perfect, as they both face a few serious problems. Upon
introducing full-scale gifted education programs to Japan, there are three points thatneed to be considered.
First, from the examination of the United States’ and Korea’s history of giftededucation, it became clear that both countries had experienced a national crisis; theUnited Stated having experienced the Sputnik shock, and Korea having experienced the
IMF crisis in 1997. These incidents were the cues for a climate change in people’s
consciousness towards gifted education. For Japan, peaceful and prospering, toconvince its people to believe in the importance of gifted education, a considerable
degree of effort will be needed. It is clear that the understanding of the public isessential to the development of sophisticated gifted education systems.
Second, through the investigation of the United States’ systems of acceleration
strategies, I have revealed the importance of mental care for the gifted and talented.
Acceleration is most likely to be selected as a primary method of introducing gifted15

education in our country because of its low costs. However unless Japan in able toestablish a sufficient system of counseling, introducing acceleration should bereconsidered. Considering the fact that the United States is yet to establish a counselingsystem that works, this will also require a considerable degree of effort.
Third and last, by examining Korea’s enrichment strategy, the special highschools, I revealed a serious flaw in its system that Korea is yet to solve. Because of thehigh advancement rates that these special schools hold, they are turning into mere
prestigious high schools. If Japan is to establish similar institutions, there will be a needto make sure that this does not happen in our country. However this might provedifficult because as said, Japan has a similar educational system and educational climate
with Korea.
Whatever the setbacks, my initial stance does not change; Japan should
introduce GATE to its educational system, however hard this may be. Our country willneed to start with changing the egalitarianism and conservative public opinion of the
public, before considering any concrete and effective educational systems.

(2949 words)

16

References
Berndt, D.J., & Kaiser, C.F. (1985). Predictors of loneliness in the gifted adolescent.
Gifted Children Quarterly. NAGC. Vol. 29. pgs 74-77.
CBS News. (2001, June 5). Boy genius. Retrieved October 20, 2009, fromhttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/12/05/60II/main254786.shtml
Cho, S.K., & Wu, W.T. (n.d.). Programs and practices for identifying and nurturing
giftedness and talent in Asia (outside the mainland of china). Korean Educational
Development Institute, Seoul, Korea.
Cornell, D.G. (1990). High ability students who are unpopular with their peers. GiftedChildren Quarterly. NAGC. Vol.34. pgs 155-160.
The Educational, Scientific, and Technological White Paper. (2008). Ministry of
Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. Retrieved October 23, 2009,
from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/html/hpab200801/index.htm
Erdwins, C.J., & Lehman, E.B. (1981). The social and emotional adjustment of young,intellectually gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly. NAGC. Vol. 25.
pgs134-137.
Feldhusen, J.F., Kelly, K.R., & Moon, S.M. (1997). Specialized counseling services for
gifted youth and their families: a needed assessment. Gifted Child Quarterly. Vol.
17

41. pgs 16-25.
Government Guidelines for Teaching. (1998). Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports,
Science and Technology. Retrieved October 23, 2009, fromhttp://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shuppan/sonota/990301.htm
Gross, Miraca U.M. (2004). Exceptionally gifted children, second edition. New York,NY. RoutledgeFalmer.
Hollingworth, L.S. (1936). The founding of public school 500. Teachers College Record.
Vol.38. pgs119-128
The IMF crisis. (2009). The hoover institution public policy inquiry, internationalmonetary fund. Retrieved November 2, 2009, fromhttp://www.imfsite.org/recentfin/crisis.html
International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent. (1993).
Tarrytown, N.Y. Pergamon Press Inc.
Ishikawa, H. (2005). Korea ni okeru sainou khyouiku seido no rinenn to kouzou; eisaikyouiku shinnkou hou igo wo chuushinn ni [Korea’s system and principles ofgifted and talented education; focused mainly on after the effectuation of theGifted Education Pomotion Act]. Kyoto University Educational Research Journal,
2005, No. 51. Pgs 114-127.
18

Ishikawa, H. (2007). Korea no eisai kyouikuin ni okeru sainou kyouiku no genjyou tojittai [The present situation and problems of GATE in Korean GATE institutions]
Kyoto University Educational Research Journal, 2007, No. 53, pgs 445-461.
Ishikawa, H, Ken, G., Sugimoto, H. (2004) Singapore to Korea nio okeru sainou
kyouiku no hikaku kennshou [A comparison of gifted and talented education in
Singapore and Korea]. Kyoto University Educational Research Journal, 2004, No.
50. Pgs64-86.
Japan’s Modern Educational System, (2009). Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports,
Science and Technology. Retrieved October 25, 2009, fromhttp://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/html/hpbz198103/index.html
Jones, E.D., Southern, W.T., & Stanley, J.C. (n.d.). Acceleration and Enrichment：The
Context and Development of Program Options. Bowling Green State Universite,
Ohio, USA.
Kitamura, K., Kuramoto, N. (2005). Korea ni okeru risuuka no sainou kyouiku [GATEin science and mathematics in Korea] Educational Information Research, 2005,
No. 3, pgs 135-144.
Marland, S.P., Jr. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented, Vol.1. Report to theCongress of the United States by the U.S. Commissioner of Education.
19

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Muramatsu, Y. (September 10, 2003). America no sainou kyouiku [Gifted and Talented
Education in the United States] Toshindo, Tokyo.
Silverman, L.K. (n.d.). Counceling needs and programs for the gifted. Gifted childdevelopment center. Denver, Colorado, USA.
Tannenbaum, A.J. (n.d.). History of Giftedness and “gifted education” in world
perspective. Teachers College, Colombia University, New York, USA.
United States Department of Education, Office of Educational Research andImprovement. (1993). National excellence; A case for developing America’s
talent. Washington, DC. US Government Printing Office.
Winstanley, C. (2004). Too clever by half. London, UK. Trentham Books Limited.

20