The OECD-Tohoku School project(A case of educational change and innovation in Japan)
by Gábor Halász(http://halaszg.ofi.hu)

3rd draft (2014.02.13)
Content
Executive	
  summary	
  __________________________________________________________	  1	
  Introduction	
  ________________________________________________________________	
  5	
  
The	
  context	
   ________________________________________________________________	
  7	
  
The	
  broader	
  economic	
  political,	
  social	
  and	
  cultural	
  context	
  ________________________________	
  7	
  
The	
  specific	
  educational	
  context	
  ____________________________________________________	
  10	
  
The	
  project	
  ________________________________________________________________	
  14	
  History	
   ________________________________________________________________________	
  14	
  
Main	
  features	
  ___________________________________________________________________	
  15	
  Situating	
  the	  OTS	
  approach	
  against	
  existing	
  models/practices	
   ____________________________	
  17	
  Impact	  and	
  change	
  potential	
  _________________________________________________	
  21	
  Observed	
  and	
  potential	
  impact	
  _____________________________________________________	
  21	
  Impact	
  on	
  schools	
  _____________________________________________________________________	
  22	
  Impact	  on	
  teachers	
  and	
  teaching	
  practices	
  _________________________________________________	
  23	
  Impact	  on	
  students	
  ____________________________________________________________________	
  26	
  Dilemmas	
  related	
  with	  the	
  change	
  potential	
  of	
  the	  OTS	
  project	
   ___________________________	
  28	
  
The	
  ‘Tohoku	
  change	
  model’	
  __________________________________________________	
  30	
  Conclusions	  and	
  options	
  for	  the	
  future	
   _________________________________________	  33	
  References	
  ________________________________________________________________	  39	
  Annex	
  ____________________________________________________________________	  41	
  Questionnaire	
  survey:	
  basic	
  distributions	  of	
  answers	
  to	
  selected	
  questions	
   __________________	  41	
  Program:	
  people	
  met	
  and	  organisations	
  visited	
  ________________________________________	  47	
  August	  2013	
   _________________________________________________________________________	  47	
  February	
  2014	
  ________________________________________________________________________	
  48	
  

Executive	
  summary	  The OECD-Tohoku School (OTS) project was launched following the triple catastrophe(earthquake, tsunami and nuclear disaster) hitting the Tohoku region of Japan in March 2011
as the follow up of a visit of the General Secretary of OECD in the country. Local educational
authorities, schools and community leaders were contacted in the three prefectures of theaffected region and they were invited to select pupils and local adult leaders to participate in a
1	
  
	
  

project with the goal of demonstrating the attractiveness of the Tohoku region and show the
progress of the recovery process during a major event in 2014 in Paris. An idea behind theinitiative was that by participating in this ambitious program, based on collaborative,
project-­‐based pedagogy pupils will acquire advanced leadership skills and their engagement
to promote recovery in the region will be strengthened.
Approximately one hundred students from junior and senior high schools operating in theprefectures of Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima have been selected for participation. They met
the first time in March 2012 in a four-day workshop where they took decisions on the themes
to be presented at the 2014 Paris event and on the working methods to progress towards thisgoal. Nine local teams have been formed in the participating localities working as “local
schools” organising meetings typically on weekends and working collectively on the
preparation of the program elements assigned to them. Parallel to this, four teams withspecific organisational tasks (thematic teams) have been established, with responsibilities for
preparing the Paris event, for external and internal communication, for documenting thewhole process and for fundraising and relations with business and community actors.
This study aims at analysing the outcomes of the OTS project as an emerging model of
educational innovation born in an extraordinary context and to show its potential to both theinternational and the Japanese educational development and research community. The study
presents the OTS project as an interesting case of public sector innovation implemented in in
the education sector in Japan. Its intention is to show that the OTS project is not only a new,original model of educational innovation but it is also a remarkable experiment to generatechange processes in educational systems which are often characterised as immobile,
overregulated and resisting to change, and where the majority of key institutional actors
seems to be characterized by high level risk aversion and strong attachment to the stability ofexisting structures. It argues that the OTS initiative, which is still in an open process ofevolution, might lead to a new pattern of effective change management in centralised andrelatively inflexible educational systems and might, therefore, attract the attention of those
who wish to improve the performance of such systems in any country.
The study has been effectuated on the invitation of Fukushima University (FU), the official
national coordinator of the OTS project on the basis of a detailed research plan adopted by FU
in May 2013 and on the basis of a two-week long field visit in August 2013 in Japan. The key
hypothesis behind the study was that although the OTS project has aimed at contributing to
the solution of specific problems in a particular region it has a broader relevance in othercontexts both in Japan and elsewhere, and, although it has been operating with a limited
number of participant actors and in only a few locations it has an significant up-scaling
potential. A further hypothesis was that although the OTS project has not been aiming at the
improvement teaching and learning in regular schools within the formal education system it
has a significant potential to have a positive impact on the quality of teaching and learning
also in the formal institutional sector. These hypotheses have been confirmed by the study.
The OTS project has been described as a unique combination of a number of key features
leading to the emergence of not only a new and original way of organising student learning
but also to an interesting educational change model (the “Tohoku change model”).
The study describes the specific features of the OTS project and argues that the unique
combination of these features have turned this project into an original, unique innovation
model. It shows the roots of these features in the existing pedagogical approaches in Japan,
situating the new model in the context of the current Japanese educational reality. Using the
2	
  
	
  

outcomes of a questionnaire based survey, effectuated among teachers participating and notparticipating in the project, it explores the actual and the potential impact of the project onschools where pupils participating in the project learn.
Although the OTS project originally did not have the explicit intention to have a direct impact
on regular schools and particularly not on classroom level teaching practices it became soon
clear that if it achieves its explicit, direct goals (preparing and organising the 2014 Paris event
through the active involvement of students) this will raise the question of the relevance of its
pedagogical approach also for regular schools and classrooms. One of the key dilemmas ofthose leading the project has, therefore, been whether to encourage this type of broader andmore ambitious “use” of the project or to remain restricted to the original project goals. In
other words: the dilemma has been whether to think about the OTS project as the origin of an
emerging “new education model” which might be relevant for the entire educational system inJapan or even beyond Japan or to continue to think about it as an specific initiative with thelimited goals of supporting post-catastrophe recovery.
The key features of the change model represented by the OTS project are openness and“conceptual eclecticism” that have allowed the creation of a specific innovation framework or
innovation platform. The goal of such platforms is not the application or the implementationof specific solutions but the creation of an open space where those facing common challenges
and interested in finding solutions can bring in their ideas about possible solutions, they canconfront their views, they can combine the partial solutions they have already found and they
can try to apply them together.
A key aspect of the Tohoku change model is connecting learning with the external world, thatis, the world outside schools, which is often more supportive of changes in pedagogy thanschools where not only institutional traditions and routines play a stronger role in shaping
pedagogical practices but also the burden of adaptation is more directly felt by teachers. The
Tohoku case seems to show that the trade-off of bringing pedagogical innovations outside theschool and bringing them back later, when they have already demonstrated their potential, canbe made positive. The study formulates the following specific conclusions drawn from theimplementation of the OTS project:
•

•

•

•

an open “innovation framework” characterised by (1) the absence of a unique,coherent and well-focussed pedagogical concept, (2) dispersed leadership, (3) the
encouragement of the internal diversity of local approaches and (4) the acceptance of acertain level of “strategic ambiguity” might significantly enhance change processes in
education systems that are less open to changes but the inherent risks of this approach
must be well understood by those leading the changechanges applying a gradual approach, based on bottom-up processes, voluntary
experimentation and strengthening the feeling of ownership among those who
implement them might have more chance to survive than mandatory changes
introduced frontally in a top-down manner in the entire education systemchanges targeting the peripheries of school practice (such as extracurricular activities)
instead of targeting core activities (such as subject teaching in regular classroom
practice) generate less resistance and they might have more chance to survive
if changes are initiated at the periphery of school education and they are only loosely
connected to the core activity of classroom level teaching and learning the risk ofisolation form regular school life has to be compensated by a stronger involvement of
key internal actors, especially school leaders
3	
  

	
  

•

•

•

•

•

•

changes involving external partners (such as community and business representatives
and international partners) and encouraging the cooperation of teachers with them, as
well as changes based on cross-sectoral cooperation have better chances to survive
targeted financial support, the creation of flexible regulatory frameworks that allow
trials with experimental solutions and explicit symbolic support are particularly
effective ways for central authorities to foster innovations
local innovations should be accompanied by continuous monitoring and evaluation
which, on the one hand, provide feedback to those implementing the innovation and,on the other hand, allow the identification and dissemination of successful practices
and outcomes1
most educational changes, especially the use of advanced methods of organisinglearning – which is necessary for the development of complex 21st century skills –require an intensive development of the teaching skills of teachers
the effective development of advanced teaching skills requires the creation of
appropriate learning environments for teachers that allow intensive knowledge sharing,
including knowledge embedded into practice; as a consequence a key component ofinnovation processes is the creation of networks fostering knowledge sharing,horizontal learning and the emergence of professional learning communities2
the successful management of changes requires the continuous building ofprofessional knowledge on implementation and change management, especially in thefields of curriculum innovation and curriculum implementation; this knowledge has tobe continuously channelled into the professional development of school leaders andeducational administrators

	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
1

This element seems to be one of the weaknesses of the OTS project. The project would need more intelligent
monitoring and evaluative reflection.
2
The OTS project can be interpreted as the creation of a network that already operates as a professional learning
community. The adult leaders (local leaders) and most active student leaders already constitute a strong
community of practice and a community of common learning.

4	
  
	
  

Introduction	
  The OECD-Tohoku School project (OTS project) is an emerging new model of educationalinnovation born in an extraordinary context and still being in a process of development. It is
important that both the international educational development and research community and
the Japanese educational policy community understand the nature of this unique innovation
for several reasons. First there seems to be a growing consensus that innovation has become
one of the most important, if not the most important source of improving quality and a major
instrument to achieve key policy goals and solve problems in public services, including
education (Koch et al., 2003; OECD, 2010). Second, improving public services, including
education, is a particularly challenging task given the well-known difficulties of introducing
and implementing changes or reforms in the public sector (Würzburg, 2010). This creates anurgent need to understand better the nature of change and innovation in this sector and toinvent new forms of initiating, implementing and managing change processes that can reduce
the risks of reform failures and can create a balance between the contradictory needs foradaptation and change, on the one hand, and security and stability, on the other.
The OTS project is not only a new, original model of educational innovation but it is also a
remarkable experiment to generate change processes in an educational system which has often
been described as immobile, overregulated and resisting to change, and where the majority of
key institutional actors seems to be characterized by high level risk aversion and strong
attachment to the stability of existing structures (Schoppa, 1991; Sugimoto; 2010).3 Thisinitiative, still in an open process of evolution, might lead to a new pattern of effective change
management in centralised and relatively inflexible educational systems and might, therefore,
attract the attention of those who wish to improve the performance of such systems in any
country.
This paper is the outcome of a two-week long study in Japan in August 2013 on the invitationof Fukushima University, the official national coordinator of the OTS project.4 The aim andthe methodology of the study were presented in a detailed research plan5 in May 2013. In
accordance with this, the aim of this paper is to explore the specificities of the OTS project asa major public sector innovation in the field of pedagogy, curriculum, school organization andcommunity engagement, and to analyze it from the perspectives of possible scaling-up anddissemination but also to support the recognition of the outcomes of this original innovation
both within Japan and internationally. The key hypotheses behind the research on which thispaper is based have been the following: the OTS project,• although it has aimed at contributing to the solution of specific problems in aparticular region it has a broader relevance in other contexts both in Japan andelsewhere,
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
3

The recognition of these characteristics of the Japanese education system triggered a number of decentralisationand deregulation efforts during the last decade (Muta, 2006).
4
The longer first field visit of August 2013 was completed by a shorter second visit in February 2014 on theinvitation of the Japanese national ministry of education (MEXT). This has been used to meet regional
government officers in the three Tohoku regions and also to present the outcomes of this study to a larger
audience of Japanese educational experts and stakeholders.
5
See „Education innovation in Japan. Curriculum innovation, school development and community involvementin education in Japan: exploring the potential of the OECD-Tohoku School Project”. A research plan submitted
to the Fukushima University (2013.05.25). This plan has been elaborated in close consultation with Mrs. Miho
Taguma, former OECD coordinator of the OTS project.

5	
  
	
  

• although it has been operating with a very limited to number of participant actors andin only a few locations it has a significant up-scaling potential,• although it has not been aiming at the improvement teaching and learning in regularschools of the formal education system it has a significant potential to have a positive
impact on the quality of teaching and learning also in the formal institutional sector.
The main focus of this research has been to understand better the nature of this innovation andto explore its potential to support educational changes in Japan and possibly elsewhere. The
methods used have been based on three major activities:• intensive reading about the broader economic, political, social and cultural context,
and the specific national educational policy context particularly relevant for the OTS
project• a two-week field visit to Japan6 consisting ofo active participation at the four-day intensive workshop (“Summer School”) of
the OTS project which allowed, among others
§
§
§

the direct observation of project activities, student-teacher interactions, andinteractions with external community and business partners,
formal interviews and informal conversations with students and teachers
involved in the project, interviews with government officers and external
supporters (“empowerment partners”),
the observation of the reactions of high level decision makers to theprogression of the project and the assessment of the level of political support
the project enjoys,o active participation in a one-day seminar (entitled “Making changes happen ineducation – Tohoku experience in comparison with other countries”) analysing
the policy environment of the project and its policy implications, making it
possible also to give feedback to the key participants and to the leaders of the
project from an international perspective,o a five-day long travel to the three prefectures of the Tohoku region (Iwate,
Miyagi and Fukushima), including visits in schools and local communities andmeetings with local participants,7o a series of interviews with key stakeholders (students and adult leaders of the
project, local education board members, school principals, participating
community and business partners),8• A questionnaire survey in the participating schools on a small sample of teachers, both
directly involved and not involved, in order to see the existing and potential impact ofthe project on participating schools.9
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
6

During the two-week long field visit the author of this report was accompanied and supported by Mr. Gaby
Hostens, the leader of the OECD-Tohoku School “international research team”. In February 2014 the original
two-week long field visit was completed by a second, one-week long stay in Japan. This made it possible
additional data collection through, among others, interviews with educational officers of prefectural governments.
7
This has been complemented by a four-day long travel to the same prefectures and visits to the prefectural
educational offices and visits to two towns (Onagawa and Ooduchi) in February 20148
For the list of persons interviewed and institutions visited see the “Program: people met and organisations
visited” in Annex. The program has been set up by the staff of Fukushima University on the basis ofconsultations with the author of this report. We have to express our highest appreciation for the professional
preparation of the field visit by the Fukushima University team, particularly by Mrs. Tamaki Ota. Similarappreciation has to be expressed for the preparation of the second visit to the staff of the international relations
department of the Japanese ministry of education (MEXT), especially Ms. Kana Moriwaki.
9
The survey, based on a questionnaire compiled by the author of this report, has been implemented by the staffof Fukushima University, including the Japanese translation of the questionnaire, the collection of data among

6	
  
	
  

OECD東
書式変更
OECD東

削除: ProvisitedIt is important to stress that this is not an evaluation of the OTS project. The aim of this report
is not evaluating its progression and its outcomes but, as already stressed, exploring its
potential to support educational innovation in Japan and elsewhere. The report has two major
target audiences. First, it is addressed to the community of education policy makers andeducation development specialists in Japan. Second, it addresses the international education
development community with a potential interest in this original educational innovation andchange model.10
In the first chapter following this introduction we present the most important contextual
factors which have shaped the OTS project and which may determine its future potential
impact. Following this we present the key features of the project, identifying those elementsthat might help the understanding of its nature with the aim of exploring its impact potential.
In the next section we present the observed and potential impacts of the OTS project onschools, teachers and pupils and also some dilemmas related with its change potential. In thefollowing section we provide a short analysis of the specific “change model” emerging fromthe OTS project. In the final section we explore some options for the future. The report is
closed by an annex containing a selection of data from the questionnaire survey and also thelist of persons met and institutions visited during the field visit.

The	
  context	  The OTS project, its implications and its potential cannot be properly understood without
understanding the context in which it was born and it has been developing. It is, naturally, notpossible to present here a detailed analysis of the broader economic, political, social andcultural and the specific educational Japanese context: only a few references are made tothose features that seem to be the most relevant for our analysis.11

The	
  broader	
  economic	
  political,	
  social	
  and	
  cultural	
  context	
  	
  As well known, the Japanese economy has been stagnating since the beginning of the nineties
and this – often described as the “lost decades” – has been accompanied by major changes in
the Japanese society leading to a situation perceived by most analysers as a deep social,
cultural and institutional crisis and social anomy. The Japanese society is one of the most
rapidly aging societies of the World. According to the current middle term education strategyof the government the “population is expected by 2060 to decline by 30% compared with2010 to about 90 million, of whom 40% will be over the age of 65” and, as a consequence,“society as a whole will lose vigour” (MEXT, 2013). Besides the immediate implications ofageing the following crisis factors are the most frequently mentioned: growing feelings ofinsecurity (due, among others, to the dismantlement of the lifetime job system), deteriorationof the social capital, the apparition of various social conflicts, violence and poverty and a
growing perception of low level effectiveness of governments to solve problems, together
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
teachers and the creation of the data sheet for analysis. We have to express our highest appreciation also for the
professional quality of this work.
10
For a more detailed description of the goals of the research and the targeted audience see the research proposal
mentioned in footnote 5.
11
We have been using as key sources to understand the context a wide range of literature. From this, for thebroader economic, political, social and cultural context, see particularly Sugimoto (2010), Kingston (2013) and
Pilling (2014). For the specific educational context, see particularly, Yoneyama (1999), Hood (2001), Jones(2011) and OECD (2012) as well as various internet resources such as the website of MEXT and also private
web sources such as the website devoted to Japanese education edited by an American teacher, Jeff Hays, living
and working in Japan (http://factsanddetails.com/japan.php?catid=23&blogid=3&subcatid=150).

7	
  
	
  

with scandals of corruption and loss of confidence in public institutions (Kingston, 2013,
Pilling, 2014). But this is also complemented by such emerging new phenomena as thestrengthening of civil society, the growing activism of NGOs or greater transparency due tointensive media coverage of government activities. All these negative and positive features
have often been referred to in our interviews with various participants of the OTS project.
Perhaps two further elements should be added, which seem to be particularly relevant for the
OTS project and for our analysis. The first is related to leadership and vision. Reports on the
post-catastrophe period have often mentioned the lack of appropriate leadership as a cause ofdifficulties of solving problems related with evacuation, distribution of aid or other urgent
recovery tasks. Analyses of the causes of economic stagnation also often refer to the lack ofquality leadership skills both at corporate and political level, blaming, among others the lackof appropriate leadership education. This might be connected with the similarly often
mentioned weaknesses in skills related with entrepreneurship and innovation or such cultural
factors as attitudes of risk-aversion or learning impeded by low level tolerance of failures andalternative options. But these blocking factors are counterbalanced by efforts to create driversof change, such as, for example, policy experimentation through the creation of so called
special regulatory zones which opens possibilities to try out new solutions also in the
education sector (Takashi, 2009).
The other element worth being mentioned is related with the specific context of the natural
disaster. As an article published a few days following the Tohoku disaster noted “Japanhistorians often note that major earthquakes in 1855, 1923, and 1995 coincided with, andperhaps caused, significant national turning points. This is the hope of those who think thatJapan must set itself on a new trajectory to compete in the 21st century, and that disaster might
be transformative.”12 In this perspective the disaster context of the OTS project has a double
face. One the one hand, this is the most terrible natural catastrophe leading to unprecedented
damages and destruction. But, on the other hand, it also appears an opportunity and a possible
source of new energies and dynamizing forces (Pilling, 2014). As another article, criticallyanalysing the recovery process one year later noted, “It’s long been said that only a huge crisis
would nudge Japan onto a more productive course.”13 The triple catastrophe of Tohoku has
been, in fact, seen by many as an “opportunity window” or “catalyser” that could break thelong cycle of non-action of the “lost decades” and trigger genuine changes.
This second aspect made its appearance very soon – as illustrated, among others, by the focusof the event where the idea of the OTS project was first publicly announced (see the next
section on the history of the project). From the very beginning recovery efforts have beencharacterised by an approach stressing not only the importance of learning from theexperience of catastrophe but also the need to use the extraordinary distress situation as anopportunity for change and renewal for the whole country (see box below). This has been
expressed in the often used notion of “creative recovery” meaning that that recovery process
should lead to a new type of economic growth and a new model of society and not merely therebuilding of the afflicted areas to their original state.
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
12

See the article entitled „Japan’s Cataclysm Can Also Be an Opportunity” by William Pesek on March 17, 2011
in Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-16/black-swan-earthquake-catches-geithner-nakedcommentary-by-william-pesek.html)
13
See the article entitled „ Earthquake Disaster Brings Dysfunction Not Change in Japan” by William Pesek on
March 2, 2011 in Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-02/earthquake-disaster-bringsdysfunction-not-change-in-japan.html)

8	
  
	
  

Seven principles of reconstruction► to record the disaster for eternity, have the disaster scientifically analysed to draw
lessons to be shared with the world► to make community-focused reconstruction the foundation of efforts toward
recovery► to strive to develop Tohoku region’s socioeconomic potential to lead Japan in the
future► to construct disaster resilient safe and secure communities and natural energypowered region► to simultaneously pursue reconstruction of the afflicted areas and revitalization of
the nation► to devote closer attention to support and recovery efforts for the areas affected by
the nuclear accidents► to pursue reconstruction with a spirit of solidarity and mutual understanding thatpermeates the entire nation
Source: “Towards Reconstruction-Hope beyond the Disaster” by the Reconstruction Design Council.
Quoted by Suzuki – Kaneko (2013; 85)

The social-political climate caused by the “lost decades” and the sense of crisis have beenaccompanied, especially since the late nineties, with an intensive search for ways leading outof the crisis. This has sometimes been described as efforts to “reinvent Japan”. The natural
catastrophe, in this context, has, in fact, become a catalyser. But the nature of changes orreforms is somehow “going into the unknown” and this is an extremely complex and difficult
process because of what we referred to earlier as “lack of leadership” and what has beencharacterised by the often mentioned lack of clear common vision for the future. In this social,political and cultural context one cannot expect reforms and changes to follow a clear-cut,
linear way. This is well illustrated by the words of one author, providing a deep analysis of
the conditions of contemporary Japan, who described the possible future form of change inthe following way: “In a messy, incremental, and fitful manner Japan will somehow manage
to muddle through, cobbling together policies and adjustments on an ad hoc basis, and in sodoing avert some of the worst case, doom-and-gloom scenarios that abound in contemporary
Japan. Muddling through remains the most likely scenario and, given prevailingcircumstances, not such a bad one” (Kingston, 2013; 263). This seems to reflect not only the
specificities of the current political and social context but also the deeply rooted cultural
traditions and concepts of legal and political action or power and authority in Japan.14
The picture of the broader economic political, social and cultural context would be too
incomplete if no reference was made to the specificities of the region where the OTS project
has emerged. The Tohoku region as a whole has been seen as one of the “less developed”
territories of Japan, well reflected in its economic output in terms of per capita GDP (seeFigure 1). While the mean yearly per capita GDP between 2001 and 2010 was 3046 thousand
yen in Japan, the corresponding data for the region Hokkaido/Tohoku was only 2545
thousand yen (83%). Historically the north-eastern regions of japan, like Tohoku, were thebases of military (samurai) regimes, while the south-western regions were the centres ofcommercial activities and have been seen as more open to the “modern” (western) world. The
weight of traditional agricultural activities is still stronger in the north-eastern part of the
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
14

See the chapter entitled „Civil Society and Friendly Authoritarianism” in Sugimoto (2010)

9	
  
	
  

OECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体
OECD東

削除: Figu

country. The differences are reflected also in the cultural character of the Tohoku region. Oneof the typical features of this culture is the strength of the idea, shared among Tohoku
intellectuals, that education plays a key role in “catching up” and in modernisation. Given therelative backwardness of the region the emergence of the idea that simply rebuilding what
existed before the triple catastrophe would not be enough, but the situation should be used toaccelerate development and to “jump” at a higher level was logical.
Figure 1.
Per capita GDP in Japan, in the Tohoku/Hokaido region and in the three Tohoku prefectures
where the OTS project has been implemented (2001-2010; 1000 Yen)
3	
  400
3	
  200
3	
  000
2	
  800
2	
  600
2	
  400
2	
  200
2	
  000
2001

2002

2003

M ean Japan

2004

2005

Hokkaido/Tohoku

2006
Iwate

2007
M iyagi

2008

2009

2010

Fukushima

Source: Cabinet Office, Government of JapanThe	
  specific	
  educational	
  context	
  	
  The specific educational context also seems to have two opposing faces. On the one hand, theJapanese education system has long been admired for its high performance, as shownparticularly by the results of international student achievement measurements. In the recent
adult literacy skills survey of the OECD (PIAAC), for example, Japan appeared as the country
showing the highest level of literacy proficiency among the 16-65 year-old population (OECD,2013). The fact that Japanese adults show an outstanding level of literacy skills is probably
the best existing indicator of the actual high performance of the Japanese educational system.
But, on the other hand, there are also some negative characteristics of Japanese education
often described by features such as “overregulation”, “rote learning”, “examination hell”,
detachment of learning in schools from real life, overstressing simple memorisation against
developing complex problem-solving skills, teachers using one way methods of informationtransmission, the lack of individualised learning and the frequent suppression of creativity,
and the negative attitudes of students towards schools or school refusals (“tokokyohi”), andthe frequency of school violence or bullying (Yoneyama, 1999; Willis et al., 2008; Sugimoto,2010; OECD, 2012a). It is important to stress, however, that all these “negative” features arereferred to typically in connection with secondary, especially upper secondary education.
Japan is one of those countries where the divide between primary and secondary education, as
far as the pedagogical culture of schools is concerned, seems to be particularly strong.
10	
  
	
  

Since the OTS project involves upper secondary level students these features are particularly
relevant when examining the special educational context of this project. In fact, these andsimilar features were mentioned very often, sometimes in a very critical way, also by thosestudents, teachers and social partners we interviewed during our field research in august 2013
in Japan and they were also reflected strongly in the group discussion organised in theframework of the seminar entitled “Making changes happen in education – Tohoku
experience in comparison with other countries”.15
One of the remarkable strengths of the Japanese education system is a strong commitment to“educate children for life”, or, as often expressed: “education for zest for living” (ikiru
chikara). This has been described in a report of the Central Council for Education in the
middle of the nineties the following way: “what our children will need in future, regardless of
the way in which society changes, are the qualities and the ability to identify problem areas
for themselves, to learn, think, make judgments and act independently and to be more adept at
problem-solving. We also felt that they need to be imbued with a rich sense of humanity in thesense that while exercising self-control, they must be able to cooperate with others, haveconsideration for their needs and have a spirit that feels emotion. It also goes without sayingthat if they are to lead vigorous lives, a healthy body is an indispensable requirement. We
decided to use the term zest for living to describe the qualities and abilities needed to live in aperiod of turbulent change and felt it is important to encourage the right balance between theseparate factors underlying this term" (MEXT, 1996). This commitment, which seems to beunchanged since it was first expressed, is a particularly important contextual feature from theperspective of the OTS project. The strong socialisation impact of “education for zest forliving” could be directly observed during the 2011 catastrophe and this has had a major
impact later on on the successful deployment of the OTS project.
The system feature that has been mentioned the most often in our interviews – which seems tohave a determining influence on what happens in Japanese high schools and apparently is themain cause of the perseverance of educational practices impeding the effective developmentof “21st century skills” or skills needed in real life – was the pressure to prepare students forentrance examinations to higher educational levels. School activities are concentrated on
supporting students to become successful in entrance examination typically based on multichoice tests, emphasising “memorising and accumulating facts, and mastering procedures,
rather than analytical thinking, creativity or the capacity for innovation” (OECD, 2012a; 200).
With some exaggeration we could describe the Japanese education system as producing
particularly effectively those 19th or 20th century skills that are not seen any more needed in
the 21st century. This is sometimes been referred to as a “trap” (created paradoxically by theparticularly high level effectiveness of the system) or a “vicious circle” (the more energy isused to compete for higher achievement at university entrance examination tests the stronger
the need for this energy becomes).
According to some analyses one of the bottlenecks of improving economic competitiveness inJapan is related with skills formation. There is an apparent contradiction between the highperformance of the Japanese education system in terms of student achievement measured byinternational tests and the observed dissatisfaction of employers with the actual skills of thelabour force. According to data published in the 2012 skills strategy of the OECD the
proportion of employers reporting recruitment difficulties was the highest (80%) in Japan
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
15

The participants of the seminar were invited partly form among the adult participants of the OTS projects(“local leaders” and “empowerment partners”) partly from outside (ministry officers, NGO representatives,
business partners, international experts etc.).

11	
  
	
  

(OECD, 2012b; 23). According to the data of Hays Global Skills Index Japan's talentmismatch is “one of the highest for any country”, therefore “Japan needs to recruit skilled
staff from the international market who can operate on the global stage” 16
There have been many attempts in Japan to reform education and the country seems to be oneof those where there is a “reform pendulum” swinging between the “progressive” and the“conservative” sides. Some authors describe the situation of education reform in Japan as acase of “immobilism” or “paralysis” (Schoppa, 1991) while others stress the slow andincremental character of educational change in the country (Hood, 2001). Given the focus of
our analysis of the OTS project the particular Japanese educational change model deserves a
special attention. It seems to be clear that in the particular policy context of Japan, so vividly
described by the quotation from Kingston above, the chance of reforms following a linear way(that is starting with a clear strategy concept adopted on the basis of a wide social consensus
and implemented effectively by an administration being both strongly and unanimously
committed to the clear reform goals and possessing all the necessary implementation skills
and instruments) is rather low.
The governance model of the Japanese education system has often been described as acentralised one. For example a comparative analysis of the Japanese and the US education
systems published at the beginning of the nineties still described the situation with thesewords: “Japanese schools operate in a centralized, nationally controlled school system;
teachers throughout Japan must plan their instructional activities within the structure andguidelines prescribed by the Japanese Ministry of Education” (Sato – McLaughlin, 1992). A
recent OECD publication noted, however, that “Japan has already seen a significant shift fromone of the more centralised to one of the more decentralised education systems” (OECD,
2012a). In fact, as confirmed also by interviews conducted in the framework of this study withministerial and regional/local level administrators the Japanese education system is governedin a much less centralized way than most external observers would think, with local
administrators having quite large discretion to use specific solutions to specific local
problems.17
What we described in the previous section as the specificities of the broader economic,
political, social and cultural context is well reflected in the current education policy strategyof the Japanese government. This strategy (as it appears in the document entitled "The Second
Basic Plan for the Promotion of Education") has been proposed by the Central Council for
Education and it was formally adopted by the government on the 14th of June, 2013, a few
weeks before our field study mission (MEXT, 2013). It provides an analysis of the current
economic and social context and it defines four basic priorities (see the box below) with eightspecific “success targets” and thirty concrete actions.
Four policy directions to avoid crisis in Japan
Second Basic Plan for the Promotion of Education
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
16

Hays is a leading global consultancy producing, among others, a global analysis of skills needs and publishing
estimates about the skills needs of countries (see the Global Skills Index website here: http://hays.com/mediacentre/hays-global-skills-index-2013/index.htm and the source of the quotation in the text here:
http://www.hays.co.jp/en/press-releases/HAYS_080009 )17This has also been confirmed by interviews conducted in the framework of this study with ministerial andregional/local level administrators.

12	
  
	
  

1. Developing social competencies for survival – individual autonomy andcollaboration in a diversified and rapidly changing society- Promote policies aimed at nurturing top-class level in academics and normative consciousness(continual implementation of surveys on national academic levels and study conditions, review toinclude moral education in Courses of Study, promotion to increase weekend Saturday classes, review
of Japan’s 6-3-3-4 education system)- Promote university reform to increase student’s overall study hours.
- Examine the fundamental reform of university entrance standards including the practical use of
curriculum achievement tests in high school.
- Promote policies to increase adult entrance into universities and or other educational institutions.

2. Developing human resources for a brighter future – fostering individuals who createchange and new values, and who lead in each field of society- Consider the inclusion of English in Courses of Study from elementary school.
- Establish “super global high schools” to nurture students who are internationally well-grounded.
- Establish a new structure involving collaboration between government and private sectors to increase
the number of Japanese studying overseas.

3. Establishing learning safety nets –a wide range of learning opportunities accessible
to everyone- Promote measures to eliminate paid early childhood education.
- Review measures to reduce high school education costs, and consider scholarship benefits for lowincome families.
- Complete building earthquake resistant structures for all national and public school facilities by
FY2015.

4. Establishing vibrant communities based on strong bonds society which encourages
nurturing people who then build society in a virtuous cycle- Strengthen coordination and collaboration between schools and the community for all school districts.
- Expand the number of “community schools” up to 10% of all public elementary and junior highschools.
Source: MEXT (2013)

The education policy strategy of the government not only makes explicit references to thecrisis situation described in the previous section and specifically to the Tohoku disaster but it
presents these as the most important factors determining the goals and implementation lines.
The priorities are determined by the goal of “avoiding crisis in Japan” and the lessons learnt
from the catastrophe are directly used in the definition of the goals. The latter can beillustrated, for example, by references to goals and tasks related with specific new skills suchas
• “think and act independently based on accurate assessment of circumstances and do
not give up”,
• “restore future-oriented innovation and engage in society building”• “environment conductive to secure learning of needed skills”• “importance of links between people, communities and countries and of coexistence
between humans and nature”.18
The analysis of this new government education policy statement shows that the strategy of thegovernment in the education sector is fully aligned with the goals of the OTS project. This
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
18

Quotations from the English hardcopy version of the strategy.

13	
  
	
  

means that the policy environment in which the project is being conducted seems to befavourable to the project if there is an intention to exploit its potential for supporting
educational renewal. The two major goals of the OTS project, that is (as we shall see in thenext section), the development of new skills relevant for social and economic reconstruction
and the development of social capital through intensive school-community cooperation seemto be in harmony with the goals of the government education sector strategy which implies
that the project, in principle, has a high potential to support education reforms in Japan. In
other words there seems to be a potential to use the new pedagogical approaches, practices
and ideas produced by the project as key inputs for the current reform process. Furthermore,
and this is what we think has to be underlined with the strongest emphasis, the change model
it represents fits particularly well into the specific context of educational change in Japan.

The	
  OTS	
  project	  In this section we give a short presentation of the OTS project and we try to provide ananalysis of its nature from an educational innovation and change perspective. The aim of thischapter is less providing descriptive presentation than supporting analysis.19

History	  The launching of the OTS project was a common initiative of the OECD and the Japanese
Ministry of Education (MEXT), after the 2011 March earthquake, tsunami and nuclear
disaster in the Tohoku region of Japan, following a visit of the general secretary of OECD in
the country.20 The idea of the project was publicly presented in Japan in November 2011 at aseminar organised by the National Institute for Educational Policy Research entitled “TheGreat East Japan Earthquake and Schools - Innovations in School Administration and
Educational Instruction”. 21 Local educational authorities, schools and community leaders
were contacted in the three prefectures of the affected region and they were invited to selectpupils and local adult leaders to participate in a project with the direct goal of preparing a“Tohoku Festival” in Paris in 2014 in order to demonstrate the attractiveness of the Tohoku
region and to show the progress of the recovery process. . Although the direct project goal has
been the organisation of this specific event those who initiated the project had much broader
goals in mind, such as educating future leaders who might play, in the future, a key role in thelong and complex process of regional recovery. The idea was that by participating in thisambitious program, based on collaborative, project-­‐based pedagogy they will acquire
advanced leadership skills and their engagement to promote recovery in the region will bestrengthened.
Approximately one hundred students from junior and senior high schools operating in theprefectures of Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima, most of them in a formal role of student leader,have been selected typically by those teachers who accepted to be adult leaders in the project.
The students met the first time in March 2012 in a four-day workshop where they took
decisions on the themes to be presented at the 2014 Paris event and on the working methods
to progress towards this goal. Nine local teams have been formed in the participating
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
19

For basic information and factual presentation see the official website of the OTS project((http://www.oecd.org/education/school/oecd-tohokuschool.htm)
20
For more detailed information see also the earlier report entitled “OECD Tohoku School. Overcoming the
Earthquake Disaster - Toward Creation of New Education” written by Gaby Hostens (manuscript, 2013)21
See the presentation by Mrs. Miho Taguma (Senior Policy Analyst of OECD) at
http://www.nier.go.jp/06_jigyou/kyouiku_sympo_h23/21_siryou.pdf

14	
  
	
  

localities22 which work as “local schools” organising meetings typically on weekends andworking collectively on the preparation of the program elements assigned to them. Parallel tothis, four teams with management tasks (thematic teams) have been established, withresponsibilities for (1) preparing the Paris event, (2) external and internal communication, (3)documenting the whole process and (4) fundraising and relations with business andcommunity actors. The two parallel structures have been operating as a small “matrixorganisation” with the leading participants having a role in both of them. The project has been
supported by an increasing number of “empowerment partners” representing business andlocal communities, schools outside the distress area, government organisations and theacademic word.
From the very beginning it has been clear that beyond the immediate project goal of preparing
and realising the 2014 Paris event, there have been longer term and more ambitious goals.
These have been expressed explicitly and frequently by almost everybody we interviewed:
pupils, teachers, local community leaders, principals of participating schools and therepresentatives of the national ministry. As one of the leading participants expressed: “in thisproject the essence is not the event at the end but the process itself”. As another said: “In 2030 years many of these students will be in leadership positions, not only in Japan but also in
the World”. And another key figure of the project added: “We are nurturing human, spiritual‘power ability’ (ningen-ryoku) in this project”:Main	
  features	  It is not easy for an external observer to understand the unique nature of the OTS project. Thisis an original educational innovation which differs from most other known forms ofinnovative educational environments.23 Some of its key features (see the box below) may
naturally appear in other innovations but their unique combination has made it a new, originalmodel. As we stressed above, it also seems to be an original form of initiating, sustaining andmanaging change in a systemic environment that has often been described as immobile,
overregulated and resisting to change.
The main features of the OTS project24► An extraordinary post-catastrophic context: The project has been launched in an
extraordinary context following the great East-Japanese Earthquake, Tsunami and
Nuclear Disaster.
►The dominance of external (non-school related) goals: The main original goals of
the project are not related to improving the quality of teaching and learning or otheraspects of school life but to support recovery and to enhance the education of ageneration of potential future leaders for recovery in the region hit by the catastrophe.
►Focus on out-of-school activities: Most of the activities in the project are out-ofschool activities outside the remit of the formal education system. The project is not
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
22

These are Adachi, Date, Iwaki, Kesennuma, Okuma,Onagawa, Otsuchi, Soma, Togura
For an inventory of innovative learning environments in OECD countries see the website entitled “Innovative
Learning Environments: The Innovative Cases Strand” of the Centre for Educational Research and Innovation of
the OECD (http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/innovativecases.htm). Unfortunately no Japanese case is can be foundhere.
24
It is important to stress that the features listed in the box are not necessarily those intended and some of thefeatures originally intended might not appear in this list if they have not been realised as key features..
23

15	
  
	
  

related to regular school activities, especially to the formal curriculum and classroom
teaching and learning.
► A model based on regional cooperation: The project is based on the cooperationof a regional network of local teams of students lead by adults whose majority areteachers► Strong involvement of external stakeholders: The involvement of external
stakeholders (local community leaders, business community) is a particularly
important feature of the project. Another key feature of the project is that the financial
resources needed for the achievement of its goals are to be provided by enterprises► Limited involvement of and impact on participating schools: Schools are notformally engaged in the project, their participation has been limited, and the immediate
project goals do not aim at influencing the internal work and life of the participating
schools.
►Student control: Participating students have a particularly strong influence on thecourse of the project. Only a very limited number of teachers are actively involved,
they act as “adults” and not in their formal role of teachers►The presence of a number of well identifiable key actors: (1) OECD, (2) the
adult leaders of local teams, (3) student leaders of student teams, (4) a supporting
university (Fukushima University) and (5) the national ministry of education). The
professional coordination of the project is provided by a regional university(Fukushima University) and the presence of the OECD and the immediate project goal(the “Paris Event”) give an international dimension to the project► Strong international component: The project has extremely strong international
components as reflected both in the main immediate goal of student activities (toprepare an event in Paris) and the involvement of OECD and international experts.
► A bottom-up innovation model: The project, though supported by the Japanesenational education authorities, has been launched as a bottom-up initiative withvoluntary local participants, both its goals and forms of activities being determined bythese voluntary participants.
► Moderately supportive education policy context: The project has been realised ina national education policy context characterised (1) by relatively modest systemic
support for school level innovations and strong commitment to safeguard common
national standards by educational authorities, and (2) by the strong activity of reformoriented professional and social groups, dissatisfied with the operation of the education
system.
► Cross-sectoral dimension: The division responsible for the implementation of the
project in the Japanese ministry of education is not the directorate responsible forprimary and secondary education but another department responsible for lifelong
learning and overall policy strategy. This not only disconnects the project from thedaily routine operation of school education and makes it immune to the pressuresrelated with this, but also connects it to issues that do not belong to the habitual worldof schools (e.g. those related with reconstruction, local communities, economic
restructuring or regional revitalisation).
► Conceptual eclecticism: Unlike most innovative educational initiatives the project
has not been based on a coherent, explicit and well elaborated professional
educational/pedagogical concept formulated by well identifiable professional groups.
Its networked, decentralised and bottom-up character made it possible the co-existenceof different parallel approaches and also their evolution in time. The OTS project has
had a rather eclectic conceptual background which has not been described in asystematic way to help external observers to understand its nature.
16	
  
	
  

► Internal diversity: The eclectic conceptual framework has been encouraging the
emergence of parallel, alternative implementation patterns alongside various
dimensions, such as, for example, the strength of connection with regular schools or
the locus of leadership. In some cases the most influential leading actor has been thelocal educational authority, in other cases the school from which participating pupils
have been recruited, and there is a case where the representatives of a strong informal
local community have been the leading actors.
► Dispersed leadership: The project does not have a well identifiable leader orleaders: leadership functions are dispersed among the five participating actors
mentioned above and it may informally shift from one actor to another.25► Networked institutional structure: The project has been operating as a network ofloosely connected thematic and local teams, pursuing one common goal (realising the“Paris Event”) but enjoying very high level autonomy. The parallel presence ofthematic and local dimensions has created a kind of matrix structure.
The combination of these 16 specific features has created a specific innovation pattern thatmakes the OTS project not only different from any other innovation but also very difficult to
describe and to present it as a coherent model. This pattern is not only original but also very
complex which will make any attempt to replicate it quite difficult. This aspect has to beconsidered when thinking about possible follow-up scenarios (see the last chapter on“Conclusions and options for the future”) and also when thinking about the potential impactof the project on regular educational practices in the formal education system (see the chapter
on “Impact and change potential”. Further below, in the section entitled “The ‘Tohoku change
model’” we shall come back to the question of the nature of the OTS project as a particularinnovation or change model but before doing so it is important to clarify the linkages of thispedagogical model to existing, well known educational approaches and practices in Japan.
This is particularly important in the case of an innovation model that shows high level
uniqueness and originality.

Situating	
  the	  OTS	
  approach	
  against	
  existing	
  models/practices	  The understanding of the nature of the OTS approach might be facilitated by contrasting itwith existing educational models or practices. In our conversations we invited practitioners
and researchers to find similarities between the OTS project and other, better known andexisting educational approaches in Japan and to reveal possible similarities. On the basis of
this we could identify six well known educational practices which show some common
features with the specific approach of the OTS model. These existing practices are notindependent from each other: some of them naturally partly overlap with others but they can
all be described as existing patterns of organising education differently from the way it isorganised in regular schools.
• School based extra-curricular activities (tokubetsu katsudou, bukatsu). These schoolbased activities play a fundamental role in the socialisation of Japanese youth (Cave,
2004; Sugimoto, 2010), and participating in some of them is compulsory. Although
they are extra-curricular, educational authorities regularly provide guidelines on how
to organise them and they are seen as an integrated part of the regulated world of
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
25

We make a deliberate distinction here between “dispersed leadership” and what the OECD thematic review onschool leadership described as “distributed leadership” (OECD, 2008). Leadership functions are less visible, lessexplicit and they are more difficult to grasp when these functions are “dispersed” than when they are“distributed”. When leadership is “dispersed” there is a higher risk of weakening of leadership functions leading
to operational difficulties.

17	
  
	
  

OECD東

削除: Con

OECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体
OECD東

削除: ImpOECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体
OECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体
OECD東

削除: Theschool life. They have various forms, such as student self-government, home-room
activities, clubs, guidance and various "school events" such as festivals or schoolbased sport events. In these frameworks students play a much more active role indetermining the content of activities than in regular classrooms.
• Community schools. The notion of community school refers to an educational model
which stresses the importance of close connections between schools and local
communities as well as the opening of schools towards the external world. This model
has existed in several parallel forms in Japan and, similarly to many other countries,
has often been promoted by community developers and adult educators (Hayashizaki,2008). The idea of community schools has been supported by MEXT as part of its
strategy of promoting the building of social capital (Okumoto, 2003).
• Education in youth movements. The educational practices of youth organisations,aiming typically at developing citizenship and leadership skills among young people,
show many similarities with what happens in the OTS project. Although youth
associations might be supported by the ministry of education, they are civilorganisations operating outside the formal school system (often under the control ofvarious political parties and civil movements). During the past decades they played an
important role in the socialisation of the political leaders of the country.
• Integrated studies (sogotekina gakushu; sogo-gakushu). Integrated studies (IS) was
introduced as a new subject in Japanese schools in 2002 (see box below). This has
been a major innovation, although its implementation raised many challenges and it
has been uneven, with more success in lower than in higher school levels (Bjork,2009).26 Many of those whom we asked about the possibilities to use the experiences
accumulated in the OTS project in regular school practice mentioned IS as the logicalplace where such opportunities are given. As one of the school leaders interviewed has
formulated: what students do in the framework of the OTS project can be conceived asan „extended version of ’sogo-gakushu’. The practice of IS could make it for every
student to gain experiences similar to what students participating in the OTS can gain.
What happens to students in IS lessons is exactly what happens in this project.”27
Integrated studies (IS)„For students in grades 3 through 12, MEXT created a class period called “Integrated
Studies” (sogotekina gakushu), which embodied its reconfigured approach toeducation. The Integrated Studies (IS) period, which was introduced in all elementaryand junior high schools in 2002, was designed to augment local educators’ influence
over curricula and to encourage experimentation with instructional methodologies.
(…) Schools were given great flexibility to determine the length of IS lessons, thearrangement them to collect and develop original materials to support the uniqueinvestigations conducted by their students. They were also encouraged to incorporate
technology into learning activities.
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
26

Following the change of government in 2012 the time devoted to IS was reduced but IS remained part of theofficial curriculum.
27
It is important to stress that supporting the implementation of IS in the affected schools does not figure in thegoals of the OTS project, even if some schools and teachers have decided to use the OTS project for this purpose.

18	
  
	
  

„In general, teachers using the IS approach select themes (e.g., community studies,international understanding, or the environment) from which students come up withindividual IS projects. These projects involve going out into the community to gather
information through interviews, observations, and the use of technology and otherresources in the students’ neighbourhoods. The culmination of such studies is often aseries of oral presentations in which students summarize what they have discovered.”(Bjork, 2005; 621)
• Active, cooperative teaching methods. These are progressive methods of organisingteaching and learning in regular classrooms, such as learning in cooperative peergroups, project based teaching or inquiry learning. In principle these methods can beused in every subject in regular classroom settings but their use in Japan outside IS
seems to be rather rare due to the highly regulated nature of the official curriculum andthe pressure on pupils and teachers to concentrate on preparation for examinations. In
the framework of this research it has not been possible to gather information on theuse of these methods in subject teaching in regular schools but it is quite probable thatin some institutions, especially those that belong to the category of experimental
schools supported by MEXT28 there are cases of using cooperative and project basedlearning methods in regular subject teaching. The frequency of using non regularclassroom teaching methods in our small sample of teachers from schools participatingin the OTS project (see figure 2) seems also to show that these are not as exceptionalas most observers assume.
• Alternative education. The number of “alternative schools”, such as free schools,
homeschooling, church schools, schools applying well established alternative
pedagogies (such as Waldorf or Montessori schools) and those public institutions that
operate under the regulation on special regulatory zones and acquire the legal
possibility to apply pedagogical approaches that do not belong to the mainstream29 islow, although apparently increasing in Japan (Nelson, n.d). This research does notallow the exploration of existing pedagogical practices in this sector but it is quite
probable that some of them use co-operative, project-based learning not only in the
periods of integrated studies (IS) but also in subject teaching.
Figure 2.
The number of teachers using various teaching methods in the schools participating in the
OTS project (N=26)

	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
28

On experimental schools see the webpage entitled „Improvement of experimental schools system” of MEXT
(http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/html/hpac200201/hpac200201_2_018.html)
29
See the website entitled „The independent, democratic, free schools in Japan and the history of the freeschool movement” of the digital community „Education in Japan” (http://educationinjapan.wordpress.com/thescoop-on-schools/the-independent-democratic-free-schools-in-japan-and-the-history-of-the-free-schoolmovement/)

19	
  
	
  

OECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体
チェック
OECD東
削除: 2

I	
  work	  with	  i ndividual	
  s tudents
Students	
  e valuate	
  a nd	  reflect	
  upon	
  their	
  own
work
Students	
  work	  i n	
  s mall	
  groups	
  to	
  come	  up	
  with	  ajoint	
  s olution	
  to	
  a 	
  problem	
  or	
  task.
I	
  a sk	  my	
  s tudents	
  to	
  s uggest	
  or	
  to	
  help	  planclassroom	
  a ctivities	
  or	
  topics
Students	
  work	  on	
  projects	
  that	  require	  a t	
  l eastone	
  week	  to	
  complete
Students	
  a re	  e valuating	
  the	
  work	  of	
  e ach	  other
Students	  hold	
  a 	
  debate	
  a nd	  a rgue	
  for	  a 	  particularpoint	  of	
  view	
  which	
  may	  not	  be	
  their	
  own
Students	
  make	  a 	
  product	
  that	  will	  be	
  used	  bysomeone	  e lseNever/rarely

Frequently

0

5

10

15

20

25

Question: “Please indicate how often you are using the following methods in your daily teachingpractice!” (questions taken from the TALIS teacher questionnaire).

These existing practices listed above differ from each other in several dimensions. Some ofthem are, for example, closer to the regular classroom practice of schools, others are at moredistance from it. Some are more under the control of regular schools, others are fully or
almost fully independent from them. There might be great differences in the skills they intend
to develop or in the respective roles adults and students play in them. Some of them operate ata very small scale while others are present and are visible in every school and locality. Someof them have explicit intentions to have an influence on how education and classroom
teaching in regular public schools is organized; others do not have such intentions. And, in
addition, most of them can be divided into several modalities which all might be different
from each other in one or several of the dimensions mentioned here.
In addition to these existing models and approaches that have been listed above a further,more recent development has to be mentioned. Following the disaster the need to connect
school life and classroom learning better to the specific post-catastrophe context has emergedin all the three affected regions (Fukushima, Miyagi, Iwate). With the support of the national
ministry of education and with the coordination of the prefectural education offices regional
curriculum development activities have been started. Local universities and many school
teachers have participated in this development process which resulted in new curriculum
materials (books of guidance, task books, teacher manuals etc.) and triggered also relevantteacher professional development programs. The new regional curricula have been
implemented in schools in a time slot – typically 20-30 hours a year – taken from various
existing national curriculum areas, such as social studies, moral education or integrated
studies. In most cases these new curricula brought in not only new content elements (such as
knowledge about local community traditions or related with nuclear radiation) but they also
encouraged the use of new, innovative teaching methods (such as project-based learning or
drama pedagogy).30
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
30

The information in this paragraph is based on interviews with prefectural board officers in the three affected
regions during the second field visit in February 2014.

20	
  
	
  

The OTS project has, unavoidably, been using the experiences of the existing models andthese models have necessarily been influencing the emerging OTS model. The latter could
also be described as a unique combination of the various traits of these existing models with,naturally, new traits added (for example by the fact that it has originated from an
extraordinary situation of natural catastrophe and reconstruction efforts or by the fact that it isstrongly connected with a global intergovernmental organization, the OECD). In fact, one of
the key features of the emerging OTS innovation model is its deliberately eclectic character,strongly connected to what we described as “conceptual eclecticism” in the previous section.
In fact, this is one of those factors that seem to make the OTS project an original “change
model”, that is, a new pattern of initiating and implementing innovation in school systems thatare not or are only modestly open to changes.

Impact	  and	
  change	
  potential	  	
  The central question of this research is how much the OTS project influences regular school
practice and, particularly, what its potential is to have such an influence. As we have seen the
OTS project is rather isolated from the regular practice of schools: this is basically an out-ofschool activity which involves directly only a few students and typically only one teacher
from participating schools. Even using the notion of “participating school” is questionable inthis context because schools are not formally connected with the project and the engagementof their pupils and teachers is often seen as their “private affair”. The answer of participating
students to the question whether what they do in the OTS project is known in their school was
almost always negative. According to student responses school principals would perhaps
know that some students in their schools are taking part in the OTS project but they would not
be able to name them. Only homeroom teachers would know by name those students fromtheir classes who are participating. The words of a local education board leader showed that
there might even be a deliberate intention to isolate the project from the regular activity ofschools.
In our interviews with students and teachers directly participating in the project, as well as in
our interviews with the principals of three schools involved in the project we tried to explore
how much the OTS project, operating in a relative isolation from the regular life of schools,
has a potential to influence regular teaching and learning practices. This was also the main
focus of our data collection on the small sample of teachers involved and not involved in the
project. This question of observable and potential impact is important because this determines
strongly the value of the OTS project as a specific innovation model. This is what determines
whether the OTS project has a real potential to become a “change agent” in the Japanese
education system.

Observed	
  and	
  potential	
  impact	  Our impression, on the basis of our visits in three schools involved in the project, is that
although the project operates in a relative isolation from schools it has had an impact on them.
The principals of all the three visited schools supported the idea of participating students andteachers presenting the experiences they have gained in the project to their peers who have notbeen involved. “I want our students [who participate in the project] to share theirexperiences with other students and to have an opportunity to show what they do in the
project. I can see their personal development and I want this to have an impact on the way we
educate pupils in this school” – said one of the principals. Another principal, talking about thestudents of his school participating in the project said: “I am proud of them. They have gained
21	
  
	
  

extraordinary experiences and their image about the future is different from what the others
have (…). I hope they will have an opportunity to present what they do to other students inthis school.” And he added, answering the question about what he would recommend if such apresentation was taking place: “Talk about what you think and what you want to do in the
future. This project has a goal and talk about how you would like to achieve this goal. Talk
about the details: show how you work to achieve the goal.” The third principal expressed asimilar opinion: “I hope the students participating in the OTS project will share theirexperiences in this school. (…) I would recommend that they explain why they work on thetheme they have chosen, that they share their emotions and try to transfer what motivates
them, the reasons why this is interesting for them…”.

Impact	
  on	
  schools	  What the principals said seems to confirm that the OTS project has a real potential to have an
impact on the schools attended by the participating students and where participating teachers
are doing their regular work. However, the existing or observable impact still seems to berather modest and we have also heard about difficulties and conflicts that might reduce theimpact potential. From among the teachers who answered our questionnaire only a very small
number reported on “significant impact” (see Figure 3 and question No. 11 in annex) and we
did not find significant differences between teachers involved and not involved. One of theexternal “empowerment partners” even expressed the opinion that the project “did not have
any impact on schools”.

OECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体
OECD東

削除: Figu

Figure 3.
The distribution of teachers in function of their views about the impact of the OTS project(N=26)
14

No significant impact

12

A small impact

108Significant impact

6Completely changed theway the school works
Do not know/NA

420

Question: “How do you see the impact of the Tohoku School Project on your own school (i.e. theschool where you are currently working)?”

Some participant teachers reported about conflicts with their non-participating colleagues. In
one school a non-participating teacher expressed explicitly that she was not supporting theparticipation of students in the OTS project because she thought this would be detrimental totheir preparation for university entrance examinations. When teachers were asked about
whether some of their colleagues had reserves towards the pedagogical approach of the OTS
project the majority of them answered affirmatively (see Figure 4 and question No. 13 inannex) and only one of them agreed with the statement “All teachers in our school support theparticipation of this school in the Tohoku School Project” both among involved and noninvolved teachers (see question No. 13 in annex).

22	
  
	
  

OECD東

削除: Figu

OECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体

Figure 4.
Opinions about the support of the OTS project by teachers (N=26)
10
8
6
4
2
0

I	
  do	
  not	
  agree
at	
  all

I	
  rather	
  donot	
  agreeI	
  rather	
  agree I	  fully	
  agree

I	
  do	
  not
know/NA

Question: “Please indicate the degree of your agreement with the following statement:” “There are someteachers in this school who seem to have reserves towards the pedagogical approach of the Tohoku
School Project”

Although we heard much about explicit reserves and aversions by teachers who are not
involved in the OTS project our visits to schools and our interviews with principals gave us
the impression that in several schools there is a very receptive and supportive climate. One ofthe principals described the negative attitudes of some teachers towards the OTS project in thefollowing way: “Those who think that the participation of students in this project is wastingtime have a short sighted thinking and they do not see the real interests of pupils. Even if they
fail at the examination the experiences they have gained in this project will have atremendous impact on their future. Our task is not simply sending our children to theuniversity. We have to think about life on the long term. I would be pleased if all our students
could have similar experiences.”
When we asked teachers and principals about whether the experiences accumulated in the
OTS project could be applied in regular classroom practice we were typically receiving theanswer that this was possible in integrated studies (IS) lessons. As mentioned above, one ofthe principals described the project as “an „extended version” of integrated studies. The
general director of MEXT responsible for primary and secondary education also mentioned IS
as the part of formal curriculum which develops similar skills that are being developed in the
OTS project. We heard similar answers also from students. One of them, for example,
described a three-year long project realised in the framework of IS on the theme of sustainable
development which included contacts with external partners (e.g. in “recycling industry”) andthe presentation of solutions elaborated by students that could be applied in their home city.
We also found an example where an external partner participating in the OTS project has been
involved in the realisation of an IS project. But it has also been stressed that the frameworkprovided by IS was much less optimal than the OTS project framework because of time
limitations in the former. As one principal expressed: in IS “we cannot allow students toreally control their own learning because of time pressure”.

Impact	  on	
  teachers	
  and	
  teaching	
  practices	  One of the most frequently stressed features of the pedagogical approach of the OTS project isthe balanced, two-way communication between teachers and students. Almost all students andteachers we interviewed mentioned the symmetric pedagogical relationship characterising the
OTS project which allowed not only pupils learning from teachers but also “teachers learningfrom pupils”. Students often stressed that this was in sharp contrast with the dominant
pedagogical approach of regular schools where teachers typically do not tolerate symmetric
23	
  
	
  

pedagogical relationships and students are often even not allowed to ask questions. At theplenary session of the Tokyo workshop, where students met the OECD ambassador of Japan
one of them made the following amazing intervention: “What impressed me the most in thisproject has been that here adults also learn and they learn also from students. This isimportant because if adults are not capable to learn from us they will not be capable to teachus.”
Many observers would think that the pedagogical approach of the OTS project, characterisedby making pupils work with teachers as equals, is so distant from the pedagogical universe ofregular Japanese schools that this in itself would radically limit the potential impact of thisproject on the pedagogical practice of regular schools. Although every student we weretalking to seemed to confirm this assumption, a much more positive picture emerged from ourinterviews with the principals of participating schools. We asked all of them about what they
were thinking about the student intervention quoted above and their answers gave us theimpression that the pedagogical gap between the OTS project and the practice of regularschools is not as deep as we thought. One of the principals reacted to this story in thefollowing way: “We teachers do not know, do not understand everything. If our students gain
special experiences we can learn from their presentations and this is useful for us, teachers.
Although we are teachers, we learn from our students. Those who do not understand this have‘small heart’. Teachers are learning from, pupils even in the elementary school”.
Participating in the project seems to have had a remarkable impact not only on students but
also on several teachers. One of them told us that before he joined the project he could not
imagine that teachers and students “can be at the same level and can solve problems together”.
He reported on his understanding that he can be “partner of students” and his “way ofteaching being completely transformed”. Before this, he “did not encourage students to ask
questions” but now he sees “their activity as necessary“, and he thinks, “students have tothink in different perspectives”. Another teacher reported on his way of “learning gradually
the most difficult thing: keeping a balance between directivity and passivity” and to “find out
until when students can be left in uncertainty”. This shows a deeper understanding of thenature of student learning, that is, understanding that giving too quick answers might hamper
deep learning. A third teacher mentioned that since he joined the project he has been“accepting more parallel interpretations” and he knows that his own interpretation is “onlyone of the possible interpretations” which makes him encouraging more discussions in theclassroom. While in the past he was “patronizing students”, now he feels “more respect for
their opinion” and gives “more room for them to express themselves”. As he said: “I could
accept that students have their own opinion even before the project but now I feel respect forit.” The pedagogical approach of the project and its impact on the attitudes of participatingteachers has also been presented in a lecture by a participating teacher at the seminar on thepotential of the OTS project, organised as part of the 2013 August Tokyo “Summer School”(see the box below ).
Teacher learning in the OTS project“Adults have knowledge, experience and wisdom but at the same time theseexperiences tell us to avoid taking risks and deprived us of our curiosity at times. So,
by working together with the students we have re-learnt or re-gained curiosity andcourage to take risks. Students, the opposite way, do not have experiences as they are
24	
  
	
  

young but they have not lost the natural traits of curiosity. Also, when adults were notcoming to a conclusion with the arguments beating about the bush, it was the students
who reminded us of how to use our time effectively. The childishness in adults has
elicited the maturity in children. The students have said at one of the workshops thatthey want to become adults who can take responsibilities ‘unlike the adults I often see’(…) We have about 10 ideas, born out of the minds of the students, to implement for
the event in Paris. One example is to show the real height of Tsunami which hit our
regions with the height of a giant balloon; it is being planned to be placed at theChamps de Mars. In refining these ideas, we have set out an activity called ‘critique’.
Students evaluated other teams’ ideas constructively. The activity revealed that thesestudents have never done an activity like ‘critique’. Also, there still seems to be acultural barrier, that is, the difficulty in criticising others’ work, in particular, those offriends. Therefore, students learnt the methods to do so. The experience has led us tobelieve that we can learn.”
Source: teacher presentation at the seminar entitled “Making changes happen in education – Tohoku
experience in comparison with other countries”, Tokyo, 2013.08.07

The challenge teachers participating in the OTS project had to face originated not only fromthe difference between the pedagogical approach of the project and pedagogical culture
characterizing the typical Japanese high school, but also from the fact that the former was notdefined in detail in advance. The teacher quoted above, who spoke about the “balance
between directivity and passivity”, also noted that when they started the project they did not
get any specific guidelines about how to manage the project but they had to invent practicallyeverything together with the students. They had to learn, at the same time, new skills to teachor organise learning, and to manage an original, unknown pedagogical environment which ischaracterized by openness and high level uncertainty. As another teacher presenter of the2013 August Tokyo seminar described it: “the biggest challenge was that I did not have ananswer myself to the issue we set out to investigate. This being said, if I set out an issue withthe students for which I felt comfortable, within my knowledge, my students would not havemade such a success, i.e. producing the jelly31. As I have gone out of my comfort zone myself, I
was able to learn many things myself. There is surely difference between well-established,framed project learning and the approach we took to project-based learning.”
The opinion of the teachers of our small sample about the impact of the OTS project onteaching practices in the participating schools, however, seems to be divergent. While 11 from26 teachers answered that they see “a significant impact on the way teachers think aboutteaching and learning in the schools participating the project”, 9 of them did not see a“significant impact” (see Figure 5). But in this respect the opinion of those involved and those
not involved was very different: while only 3 of the 12 teachers not involved saw a significant
impact, from the 14 involved teachers 8 thought that there was a significant impact (seequestion No. 17.3 in the annex).

OECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体
OECD東

削除: Figu

Figure 5.
Opinions about the support of the OTS project by teachers (N=26)

	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
31

This is a reference to one of the objects to be presented at the 2014 Paris event.

25	
  
	
  

8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

Do	
  not	
  agree Rather	
  do	
  not
at	
  all
agree

Rather	  agree

Fully	
  agreeDo	
  notknow/NA

Question: “Please indicate the degree of your agreement with the following statement:” “The Tohoku
School Project has had a significant impact on the way teachers think about teaching and learning in theschools participating in the Project”

The results of the small survey among teachers involved and not involved in the OTS project
seem to confirm that the impact of the project on teaching practices and teacher behaviour inthe participating schools has remained limited and it has made its way almost exclusively
through those individual teachers who have been directly involved in the project as local
leaders. The members of this latter group have sometimes reported, however, about
spectacular changes both in their thinking about teaching and learning, and in their practicalteaching skills. The logical implication of this could be summarized this way: while theobserved impact of the OTS project on teaching practices in regular schools is still modest, it
certainly has a major impact potential.

Impact	  on	
  students	
  Although this analysis does not intend to look at the impact of the OTS project on students, it
is important to see this aspect as well. Practically everybody we met reported on a very strong
impact of the OTS project on the behaviour, skills and attitudes of participating pupils. The
most frequently mentioned impact was the spectacular development of the capacity ofstudents to cope with situations characterized by openness and uncertainty and to findsolutions creatively in such situations. Another often mentioned new capacity was relatedwith increased self-confidence and self-expression. As one of the participating teachers
formulated: “There has been an improvement in their capacity to succeed in open situations,
to find new, autonomous solutions, to express firmly their opinion and their wishes and to
make presentations in front of a larger audience.” A repeated self-assessment in the first andthe second year of the project among participating students showed a significant improvement
in a number of skills related with communication or using knowledge and tools interactively(see Figure 6).32
Figure 6.
The improvement of certain competencies among students participating in the OTS project
during the first year of the program (increase of self-evaluation test scores, %)

	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
32

These are the so called OECD key competences as defined earlier by the OECD DeSeCo program.

26	
  
	
  

OECD東

削除: Figu

Defend and assert rights, interests,
limits and needs (N=90)
Use language, symbols and texts
interactively (N=90)
Manage and resolve conflicts (N=88)
Act within the big picture (N=89)
Form and conduct life plans andpersonal projects (N=90)
Use technology interactively (N=91)
Use knowledge and informationinteractively (N=91)
Relate well to others (N=91)

0

20

40

60

Co-operate, work in teams (N=90)

Calculated on the basis of data based on self-evaluation tests by Taguma (2013).

Teachers who were asked about the differences between students participating and notparticipating in the OTS project reported on significant differences in several aspects, such as
understanding the difficulties faced in this post-catastrophe reconstruction period, maturity inthinking, level of motivation, creativity, activity in lessons, involvement in the life of the local
community, entrepreneurship and openness to business life (see Figure 7 and question No. 18
in Annex).
Figure 7.
Opinions about the differences between students participating and not participating in the
OTS project (N=26)
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Participating
Participating
Participating
pupils	  s eem	
  to pupils	
  s eem	
  to pupils	
  s eem	
  to
have	
  a 	
  better be	
  more	  maturebe	
  moreunderstanding in	
  their	
  thinking
motivatedof	
  thedifficulties	
  we
face	
  i n	
  thispost-­‐
catastrophereconstruction

Participating
pupils	  s eem	
  tobe	
  morecreative	  Participating
Participating
Participating
pupils	  s eem	
  to pupils	
  s eem	
  to pupils	
  s eem	
  tobe	
  more	  a ctivebe	
  betterbe	
  moreduring	
  l essons involved	
  i n	  the entrepreneurial
life	
  of	
  the	
  l ocal and	
  more	  opencommunity	
   to	
  business	
  l ifedo	
  not	
  agree

There	
  a re	  nosignificant
differences
betweenparticipatingand	
  non-­‐
participating
pupilsagree

Question: “How do you see the difference between pupils who are directly involved in the Tohoku
School Project and those who are not involved?”

Unlike teacher competences, the development of specific student competences has beenamong the original explicit goals of the OTS project. As the background document of the
27	
  
	
  

OECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体
OECD東

削除: Figu

project published in 2011 on the official website of the OECD formulated: “during theprocess of organising the event, students will learn to develop such competencies and skills as
leadership, critical thinking, negotiation and co-operation, creativity and internationalawareness. These are aligned with the OECD framework of key competencies required for21st century.”33 It is important to stress, however, that it is not possible to draw a sharp
distinctive line between student competences and teacher competences. The development ofstudent competences listed in the original project document quoted above makes it necessary
the use of specific pedagogical tools that requires also specific teacher competences. This has
been made explicit in the original project document when it specified “project-basedlearning” as the method to be used. As the document formulated: “project-based learning isused to best engage students. To accomplish the assigned mission, students will encounter
real-life tasks, which will encourage them to take initiatives and oblige them to collaborate
and work in team.”34

Dilemmas	
  related	
  with	  the	
  change	
  potential	
  of	
  the	  OTS	
  project	  	
  All people we interviewed when asked about the future of the OTS project expressed theirconviction that the project should not have an end with the Paris event in August 2014 but itshould have some kind of follow up. The majority of our small sample of teachers involved
and not involved in the project also agreed with the opinion that “The Tohoku School Project
should be sustained in some form after it formally ends in 2014” (see Figure 8 and question
No. 13 in annex). All those who did not agree with this belonged to the group of the not
involved. An even higher proportion of teachers agreed with the statement about the need to
exploit or disseminate the results of the project: “The results of the Tohoku School Project
should be spread all over the country”.
Figure 8.
Opinions about the follow-up and the exploitation of the OTS project (N=26)

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
The Tohoku School Project should besustained in some form after it formallyends in 2014

The results of the Tohoku School Project
should be spread all over the country

Do not agree at all
Fully agree

Rather agree

Rather do not agree
Do not know/NA

Question: “Please indicate the degree of your agreement with the following statements”

One of the students, when asked about the future of the OTS project said “It would be ashame if only we could have the opportunity to experience the impact of this project. When we
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
33

See the document entitled „Background(http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/49878090.pdf)
34
i.e.

and

28	
  
	
  

context

fortheOECD-Tohoku

School”

OECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体
OECD東

削除: Figu

shall be older we shall speak about this project to the others and about what we have learnt
here. There is a need for many projects like this, in which students are taking decisions andexperience the responsibility that we have experienced, and not only here but everywhere in
the county (…) Perhaps a new movement should be started.” One of the teachers, who has
been seen by many participants as one of the most influential informal leaders of the project
said the every Japanese school should be involved in projects similar to the OTS project.
Many students and teachers expressed explicitly that they would actively participate in afollow-up activity that would aim at involving further schools and students beyond the
Tohoku area and at disseminating the results of the project to those who have not been
involved. There seemed to be a general agreement that students participating in the OTS
project could become mentors or facilitators in similar projects in the future and several ofthem expressed explicitly that they would be happy to do this. Even the idea of creating a newschool in the future has been mentioned by some participating students. We shall come backto this later in the section “Conclusions and options for the future”.
As we have seen the OTS project originally did not have the explicit intention to have a direct
impact on regular schools and particularly not on classroom level teaching practices. Is has
been clear, however, since the very beginning, that if the project achieves its explicit, direct
goals (preparing and organising the 2014 Paris event through active involvement of students)
this will raise the question of the relevance of its pedagogical approach also for regularschools and classrooms. If, in the project environment, students prove to be capable toorganise their own learning and to develop effectively “21st century skills” and if theirteachers are capable to work with them in a collaborative way as the facilitators of theirlearning why similar processes could not be realised in regular school settings?
The OTS project, even if this has not been its explicit goal, has become a major pedagogicalexperiment in Japan. The question of its potential impact on regular teaching practices inregular Japanese classrooms will inevitably be raised and those who wish to modernize theseteaching practices might see the OTS project as a potential “change agent”. One of the key
dilemmas of those leading the project is, therefore, whether to encourage this type of broader
and more ambitious “use” of the project or to remain stuck to the original restricted project
goals. In other words: the dilemma is whether to think about the OTS project as the origin ofan emerging “new education model”35 which might be relevant for the entire educational
system in Japan or even beyond Japan or to continue to think about it as a specific initiativewith the limited goals of supporting post-catastrophe recovery in the region hit by the Great
East-Japanese Earthquake.
This dilemma is strongly connected with another one: is it worth investing significant
intellectual energies into making the implicit pedagogical principles of the OTS project
explicit, to systematize the pedagogical experiences accumulated in the framework of the
project and to present them in a standardized way so that others could learn from it or apply it
in other contexts? This is partly a dissemination or up-scaling dilemma but it is also connected
to an internal innovation management dilemma: should the project have a stronger conceptual
leadership or should it be let, as it is now, develop in a rather open and spontaneous way,
directed by the very concrete direct project goal (realising the 2014 Paris event) and not by
more abstract pedagogical considerations? Again, in other words: is there an emerging“Tohoku pedagogy”? If yes, does it have relevance beyond the Tohoku region? If yes, is the
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
35

The term „Fukushima Education Modell” has appeared, for example, in the PowerPoint presentation quoted
earlier („OECD Tohoku School „Educational Project for Creative Recovery - through the OECD Key
Competencies and the Project-based Learning”)

29	
  
	
  

OECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体
OECD東

削除: Contime already ripe to describe and to present this pedagogy in a systematic way or is it still too
early to do this?
One of the risks to present the specific education model that seems to emerge from the OTS
project in a structured and explicit way is that a too early structuring might cause harm to thefurther development of the model. In this respect the fact that the OTS project has not beenlaunched as a pedagogical innovation (assumed to lead to a new model of organising teachingand student learning) but rather as a support program (targeted at recovery in the region hit by
the catastrophe) seems to be an advantage. This leads us to the most important conclusion ofthis report: the OTS project has not only been producing a particular – rather eclectic –educational model or pedagogy but it has also produced an “educational change model” thatmerits being studied as such independently from its pedagogical content. This “change
model” has been using a unique “opportunity window”, created by the natural catastrophe,
and perhaps the most important feature that characterizes it is its indirect nature. This is what
we try to analyse in the following section.

The	
  ‘Tohoku	
  change	
  model’	
  In the previous sections we described the OTS project as a unique combination of a number ofkey features which all, separately, might be found in various other cases of educationalinnovation but they were put together here so that they have led to the emergence of a newpattern. We also stressed that this is not only a new and original way of organising student
learning but also an interesting change model. The OTS project has, in fact, created a new andoriginal way of initiating and implementing educational change that we shall call “Tohoku
change model”.
As stressed in the section about the context, the OTS project has been launched in an
educational system which can be characterised by two key features: (1) high level
effectiveness (in producing what we often describe as “19th or 20th century skills” as opposed
to “21st century skills”), (2) relatively high level resistance to change. These two features arenaturally not independent from each other: when key social actors perceive a system as being
effective they naturally do not feel pressures for change. Systems like this can be described as
being in a state of equilibrium where initiating and implementing changes is extremely
difficult. The context and the dynamics of change in such systems is similar to what we canobserve in regions or countries described by the recent OECD skills strategy as being in astate of “low skills equilibrium” (OECD, 2012b). These are regions or countries where people
do not feel the need to produce higher level economic output and, as a consequence, they aresatisfied with the low level skills needed to produce the given output. Such systems mightneed to be pushed out of the bad equilibrium.
The OTS project was launched in an extraordinary, post-catastrophic context and it has beentargeting not the “core activity” of schools (strongly determined by examination relatedpressures) but other aspects of school life (related with the specific needs of recovery). The
project has been focusing on out-of-school activities and on the active involvement of external
stakeholders and it has involved only a limited number of students per schools. The
implication of this is that, in principle, it made it possible for participating schools not tochange anything in their daily practice. Thus, the project has had a “seducing” but not a“pressing" potential. Through establishing a regional network the project has also created aneffective platform of mutual learning and “cross-fertilisation” and created favourable
conditions for what David Hargreaves” described as “Education Epidemic” (Hargreaves,
30	
  
	
  

2003). The ambitious specific project goal (the 2014 “Paris Event”) has created a hugepressure on the participants to sustain a strong activity in the network which could
counterbalance the tremendous pressures to redirect energies towards daily routine school
activities (preparing for examinations). Further factors, such as strong student control and thepresence of international actors also helped in resisting the temptations to turn back to daily
routines.
The loose conceptual framework or conceptual eclecticism, and the internal diversity ofemerging implementation patterns are key features of the Tohoku change model. This implies
a specific trade off. On the one side, it is difficult to create strong leadership and maintain thecoherence of action which makes the change process fragile and vulnerable. But, on the other
hand, this not only allows the maintenance of high level adaptive capacity and flexibility
during the whole change process but it also makes it difficult for those being opposed to thechange to block it. This change model is based implicitly on the principle of “moving targets”
which, while making it difficult for those who are involved to see clearly what target they
have to follow, for the opponents it makes it difficult to “shoot” on the target. What we
described as “dispersed leadership” has a similar effect. The fact that there is no wellidentifiable leader makes participants complain about the “lack of leadership” but it also gives
them a special feeling of security because the change process cannot be mutilated by the
opponents through dismissing leaders. In addition no one can appropriate or monopolise therole of the leader and to subordinate the change process to his/her own interests. There aremany people in this change model who can take a leadership role, and the matrix structure of
the temporary project organisation makes it necessary to create parallel leadership roles which
are not subordinated to each other.
The conceptual eclecticism or openness of the Tohoku change model is strongly connectedwith what one of its leaders described as an “innovation framework”. We shall be elaboratingon the meaning and the implications of this notion below but before doing this it is important
to make a short reference to a cultural feature of Japanese society which might have relevancefor understanding the specific Tohoku change model. The conceptual eclecticism of thismodel seems to have some commonalities with what Sugimoto (2010) describes as “doublecode” in his analysis of Japanese society.36 In the circumstances we characterized by thenotion of “bad equilibrium” explicit, straightforward, linear strategies of change, which
propose the achievement of a clear goal and define in detail all the steps leading to this goal
simply do not work. In such situations leaders often use what the strategic management
literature sometimes describe as “strategic ambiguity”. Although this might raise some ethicalor psychological concerns this is an effective way of working when people with very
divergent views have to cooperate with each other or when the high complexity of the context
does not allow the rapid clarification of organisational goals (Paul - Strbiak, 1997). The
education policy context of the OTS project is definitely such a context. The conceptual andmethodological eclecticism of the project and, particularly, the fact that the question ofwhether this is only a single occasion emergency program (or, on the other extremity, it is the
prototype of a new pedagogical model that can be scaled up and widely disseminated in the
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
36

„…dominant subcultural groups rely heavily on an ideology which discourages transparent and forthrightinteractions between individuals. While indirectness, vagueness and ambiguity are facets of human behavior inany society, the Japanese norm explicitly encourages such orientations in a wide range of situations. Double
codes are legitimized in many spheres of Japanese life, thereby creating a world behind the surface. The
Japanese language has several concept pairs which distinguish between sanitized official appearance and hidden
reality. The distinction is frequently invoked between the facade, which is normatively proper and correct, andthe actuality, which may be publicly unacceptable but adopted privately or among insiders” (Sugimoto, 2010;
32)

31	
  
	
  

country) has not been raised can easily be described as “strategic ambiguity”. This seems to
be fully functional in the specific macro and micro level educational context which might
have certainly become a “high-risk environment” for the project if it had been exposing
explicit, ambitious goals for educational change in Japan.
As mentioned above the Tohoku change model can be described by the notion of “innovation
framework” used by one of the leaders of the OTS project. This is not far from what theinnovation literature and also the innovation strategy of the OECD describes as “innovation
platform” (OECD, 2010). The goal of such “innovation frameworks” or “innovation
platforms” is not the application or the implementation one specific solution but the creationof an open space where those facing common challenges and interested in finding solutions
can bring in their ideas about possible solutions, they can confront their views, they can
combine the partial solutions they have already found and they can try to apply them together.
Interestingly this is also very close to what one of our interview partners described as “deepdiscussion” or “deliberative dialogue” (“jukugi”) which is a form of bottom-up searching forsolutions in democratic communities.37 Perhaps the most important feature of the Tohoku
change model is the creation of an institutional framework that operates, at the same time, as
an “innovation platform” (enhancing the emergence of new, innovative technical solutions)and as a “deliberative space” or “jukugi” (enhancing the solution of institutional problems thatare always accompanying the implementation of innovations). This is a particularlyinteresting combination because the acceptance and the implementation of innovative
solutions is a process that is never purely technical. Such processes are necessarily generating“micro-political” conflicts in organisations which often “kill” the innovation. In the Tohoku
change model the invention of new solutions is typically accompanied with open, democratic
and constructive discussions about questions with “micro-political” relevance such as taking
risks, allocating responsibilities or distributing resources or work-burden.
An important aspect of the Tohoku change model is connecting learning with the external
world, that is, the world outside schools. The external world is typically more supportive ofchanges in pedagogy than schools where not only institutional traditions and routines play astronger role in shaping pedagogical practices but also the burden of adaptation isimmediately felt by teachers and their leaders. Disconnecting pedagogical innovation fromwhat happens in classrooms, that is, from the core activity of schools is always a risky
solution because this works like a double edged sword: it may facilitate the application ofsolutions that are quite far from daily routine of classroom practice but it may also make themless relevant for this practice. This disconnection exists both at micro and macro level in the
Tohoku change model. At micro level is appears in the relatively low involvement ofparticipating schools and the low level knowledge about and weak recognition of the OTS
project in them. At macro level it is illustrated by the fact that the main coordination
responsibility for the OST project at national level lies not with the ministerial directorate
responsible for primary and secondary education but with the department responsible forlifelong learning. The Tohoku case seems to show that the trade-off of bringing pedagogical
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
37

MEXT has a specific website on „jukugi” which defines this in the following way: „Jukugi is a process ofresolving problems and formulating policies through deliberation and repeated discussions among the many
concerned parties. In concrete terms, the process involves the following: (1) the parties concerned (…) get
together, (2) to study, deliberate and discuss the issues, (3) to better understand one another’s positions and theroles which each is responsible for, (4) so that understanding can be reached and (5) everybody becomes able toappreciate and carry out his/her role.” (see the website entitled “Jukugi – Aiming for virtuous cycle between
resolutionofproblems
on
site
and
formulationofeducational
policy”
http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/html/hpab201001/detail/1326863.htm )

32	
  
	
  

innovations outside the school and bringing them back later, when they have alreadydemonstrated their potential, might be positive.
The creation of stronger linkages between the internal world of schools and formal curricula,on the one hand, and the external environment that surrounds these schools, on the other, iscertainly facilitated significantly in regions being hit by a catastrophe such as the Tohoku
triple disaster. In places where the homes of thousands of people disappeared in a few
moments and hundreds have lost their life, where whole cities have been evacuated and where
the increased radioactive radiation will be part of life for decades it is not possible to maintainthe traditional isolation of learning in schools from real life. This is well illustrated by theprefecture of Fukushima where education officers started talking about “nuclear education”
and they have started promoting the elaboration of special curricula for this new curricularfield or in the city of Ooduchi where an original local curriculum has been is elaborated for a
subject matter called „Hometown studies” (furusato), including what the local superintendent
calls „preventive disaster education” and aiming also at educating a generation that would
rebuild the devastated city.38
Although in this specific context the OTS project can be described as much as generating than
generated by actual processes most of what we could see form it during our two missions inJapan seem to confirm that it is not only part of a new, original pattern of educationalinnovation but it is also a remarkable experiment to generate change processes in an
educational system that is rather immobile, overregulated and resisting to change, with the
majority of key institutional actors showing high level risk aversion and strong attachment toexisting structures. It seems to be possible that from this initiative a new, original pattern ofeffective change management will emerge which can be used in all centralised and relatively
inflexible educational systems and might, therefore, call the attention of those who wish to
improve the performance of such systems through innovation. It is important to stress,
however, that the OTS project is still in its process of evolution and understanding it natureand its potential needs further research and exploration.

Conclusions	  and	
  options	
  for	  the	
  future	  In this section we try to formulate some possible options for the future in connection with the
OTS project. One of the most important conclusions of our mission is that since (1) the
project has been producing valuable outcomes, (2) these outcomes seem to be relevant for thewhole system of education in Japan, and (3) the project has the potential to produce a new,innovative model of learning that might have relevance also beyond Japan it is necessary tothink about what will happen after the formal closure of the project in 2014 and about how it
can be exploited for educational development in Japan and elsewhere. When we asked ourinterlocutors about the possible forms of follow-up, as already mentioned, they all responded
affirmatively, stressing the importance of having some kind of continuation and also making
concrete proposals for this. From our conversations the following five different follow-up
options have emerged:
1. Full repetition. This would mean a simple repetition of the OTS project with similar
project goals (realising a major event in a big city abroad and educating a second
generation of future regional leaders in the Tohoku region). The second project would
remain closely connected with recovery in Tohoku. In this case the most active
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
38

These two illustrative examples have been found during the second field visit to the Tohoku region in
February 2014.

33	
  
	
  

students of the OTS project could play the role of mentors or facilitators together withsome of the teachers acting as local leaders in the OTS project. This would require
strong private funding and the support of regional education authorities and would
probably allow a stronger involvement of participating schools in the Tohoku region.
2. Smaller scale realisations all over Japan. This would mean the realisation of smallerscale projects in different regions of Japan based on the pedagogical model of the OTS
project. This also would allow the most active students and adult leaders of the OTS
project to become mentors or facilitators. It would make it necessary a systematic
analysis of the pedagogical model of the OTS project and its coherent presentation sothat this model could guide the various local realisations and dissemination. This
would allow the creation of a new professional network which would foster
pedagogical innovation in Japanese schools. The funding of this could be assured fromresources devoted to educational innovation in Japan.
3. Creating a movement or an NGO. This could be the possible scenario in the case of
no formal follow-up being officially supported by national or regional authorities. In
this case the most active students and teachers would create a voluntary social network,
institutionalised as an association or as an NGO which would take care of the“heritage” of the OTS project and would promote its spirit and its ideas. Such an
association or NGO could have as an aim to realise, on the longer, term one of twoother scenarios presented above or the next scenario presented below.
4. Establishing a new experimental school. We heard about plans to create a new,experimental school in Fukushima prefecture which would offer a new, attractive formof schooling for those evacuated from the region hit by severe nuclear radiation. This
would be a regular school, but operating under a special authorization by MEXT
(either under a special clause of the law on education that gives an opportunity to
MEXT to authorize special local solutions or under the regulation on special
regulatory zones mentioned in the section of “The broader economic political, socialand cultural context”). This would create a unique opportunity to apply thepedagogical approaches elaborated in the OTS project in real classroom settings. This
would require a strong cooperation between at least four partners.
a. The national authorities
b. The local/regional authoritiesc. One or two local universities who would play the role of innovation partners
and who would be responsible to monitor the practice of experimental
pedagogy and to systematically analyse and present the emerging new
educational model.
d. The “inheritors” of the OTS project, that is, those students and teachers who“invented” the OTS pedagogical model and who first applied it in the context
of the current OTS project
5. Mainstreaming. This would be introducing various components of what we call here
“Tohoku pedagogy” into regular, mainstream education. This could take two different
forms: one is making these components part of the regular, compulsory curriculum,
the other is to allow schools to use these components without making this compulsory.
In fact, as we have seen, with the introduction of IS (integrated studies - sogotekina
gakushu) as a specific subject this has already been done, in principle, more than one
decade ago. The implementation problems accompanying this progressive curriculum
34	
  
	
  

OECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体
OECD東

削除: Thecultural coinnovation – practicing project-based teaching, experiential learning, inquiry-basedlearning and using the world outside the school as a learning environment – illustratewell the limits of this approach. The effective implementation of IS requires the use ofa sophisticated technologies of organising learning which requires specific, advanced
teaching skills, the learning of which is a highly complex process. Such technologies
normally cannot be mandated through formal regulations: they can spread only
gradually in function of the learning of the relevant complex teaching skills byteachers. Mainstreaming advanced teaching-learning technologies that require
sophisticated teaching skills is always a risky process: while it gives the illusion of
rapid and massive dissemination very often it “kills” the very core of the innovation.
This is illustrated well by the frequent practice of using the time allocated to IS
inappropriately for preparation for university entrance examinations (Bjork, 2009).39
Given the cyclical nature of the dominant pattern of curriculum reform in Japan40 – that is, thechange model described by Margaret Archer (1979) as “stop-go”, characterising centralised
systems as opposed to “incremental”, which is the feature of decentralised systems – thetypical way for an innovation such as the OTS project to influence regular classroom practiceis to “wait” for the next curriculum reform when the experiences accumulated in it can beused by those devising the new official curriculum. However, in the last decade the space forincremental curriculum changes between two cycles of reform has been widened throughincreased support to experimental schools called “research and development schools” which“do not necessarily conform to the current standards and conduct practical research on new
curricula and teaching methods”41 and also through other innovation support measures by thevarious departments of MEXT. In the Tohoku region the special needs of the people hit by the
triple catastrophe has made the national regulation of curriculum more flexible than elsewhere
and made it possible – as mentioned earlier – the development of innovative regional
curricula. But the increasingly popular practice of curriculum experimentation has notchallenged the dominant thinking about curriculum reform.
The dominant idea behind curriculum experimentation is that experiences and evidences
accumulated in the process of experimentation will feed into the next major wave of
curriculum reform, that is, the room for horizontal and gradual spreading remains limited.
This environment is not very favourable for complex and sophisticated educational practices
requiring advanced teaching skills and fundamental behavioural changes (such as projectbased learning implemented partially outside the classroom). In such an environment the“mainstreaming” solution seems to be particularly risky for the exploitation of the OTS
project for regular classroom practice.
We would like to stress particularly the importance of conducting a systematic analysis of theexperiences of the OTS project in order to maximize learning from this unique initiative. This
is in accordance with the principles of reconstruction presented in the section on “The broader
economic political, social and cultural	
  context”) in the first part of this paper which stress theimportance of learning from the experiences. Each of the possible follow-up scenarios should
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
39

We also witnessed this during out visits in high schools.
40
The official curriculum (“course of study”) is revised once in every decade (see the webpage entitled„Research
andDevelopment
Schoolsof
MEXT
http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/kenkyu/htm/01_doc/0101.htm). As we were told by a researcher involvedin curriculum reform, the next reform cycle is due in five years.
41
See the webpage entitled „Improvement of experimental schools system” of MEXT (seehttp://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/html/hpac200201/hpac200201_2_018.html)

35	
  
	
  

OECD東
書式変更
12 pt, 斜体
OECD東

削除: Thecultural	  co

be supported by such an analysis and each of them could directly feed into this analysis. Oneof the implications of what we said above about the nature of the OTS project is that thisanalysis should cover two parallel, but strongly interconnected themes: one is what we
described as “Tohoku pedagogy” the other what we labelled the “Tohoku change model”. The
first requires mainly pedagogical knowledge, and the second requires knowledge on change
and implementation processes in educational systems.
The OTS project seems to offer an exceptional opportunity for Japan to develop a better
understanding of the nature of educational changes in a highly regulated administrativeenvironment. The “Tohoku change model”, as it has emerged from the OTS project, can be
described as a sophisticated form of initiating and implementing change in a highly regulated,centralised education system which might lead to a number of strategic conclusions (see thebox below for a preliminary list of conclusions).
Understanding change processes(conclusions drawn from the implementation of the OTS project)► an open “innovation framework” characterised by (1) the absence of a unique,coherent and well-focussed pedagogical concept, (2) dispersed leadership, (3) the
encouragement of the internal diversity of local approaches and (4) the acceptance of acertain level of “strategic ambiguity” might significantly enhance change process ineducation systems that are less open to changes but the inherent risks of this approach
must be well understood by those leading the change► changes applying a gradual approach, based on bottom-up processes, voluntary
experimentation and strengthening the feeling of ownership among those who
implement them might have more chance to survive than mandatory changes
introduced frontally in a top-down manner in the entire education system► changes targeting the peripheries of schools practice (such as extracurricular
activities) instead of targeting core activities (such as subject teaching in regularclassroom practice) generate less resistance and they might have more chance tosurvive► if changes are initiated at the periphery of school education and they are only
loosely connected to the core activity of classroom level teaching and learning the riskof isolation form regular school life has to be compensated by a stronger involvementof key internal actors, especially school leaders► changes involving external partners (such as community and business
representatives and international partners) and encouraging the cooperation of teacherswith them, as well as changes based on cross-sectoral cooperation and conceived in alifelong learning perspective have better chances to survive► targeted financial support, the creation of flexible regulatory frameworks that allow
trials with experimental solutions and explicit symbolic support are particularly
effective ways for central authorities to foster innovations► local innovations should be accompanied by continuous monitoring and evaluation
which, on the one hand, provide feedback to those implementing the innovation and,

36	
  
	
  

on the other hand, allow the identification and dissemination of successful practices
and outcomes42► most educational changes, especially the use of advanced methods of organisinglearning – which is necessary for the development of complex 21st century skills –require an intensive development of the teaching skills of teachers► the effective development of advanced teaching skills requires the creation of
appropriate learning environments for teachers that allow intensive knowledge sharing,
including knowledge embedded into practice; as a consequence a key component ofinnovation processes is the creation of networks fostering knowledge sharing,horizontal learning and the emergence of professional learning communities43► the successful management of changes requires the continuous building ofprofessional knowledge on implementation and change management, especially in thefields of curriculum innovation and curriculum implementation; this knowledge has tobe continuously channelled into the professional development of school leaders andeducational administrators.
We would like to put a special emphasis on the last conclusion in the box above. One of theimpressions we gained during the two-week long field visit was that although there is aparticularly high level reflection in Japan on the logic of social or institutional change
processes in general, this reflection seems not to be effectively used in the particular domainof education which might be due to the overregulated and centralised character of theJapanese education system. Introducing changes and implementing policies in such systems
often appear as a simple linear process, starting with policy decisions and ending with bylocal actors executing the decisions. This administrative environment is typically notfavourable for the development of sophisticated thinking about the nature of changes andimplementation processes in complex, multi-actor and multi-level education systems.
However, as research on implementation processes in the education sector and also in the
broader sphere of public sector has shown, these processes are extremely complex and they
are never linear (see, for example McLaughlin, 1990, Thomas, 1994; Fullan & Pomfret, 1997;
Altrichter, 2005; Hill & Hupe, 2009; Twist at al., 2011).44 One of the valuable outcomes of the
OTS project is that – as stressed several times above– it has produced not only an originalmodel of organising teaching and learning but also a change model which can be used as asource of learning for those whose intention is to introduce changes in educational systems
that are only moderately open to change.
The main conclusion of this report is that the OTS project has a remarkable potential toenhance innovation in the Japanese educational system. This project, in various forms offollow-up, can be used as a “change agent” or “change engine” to support innovation for
better quality also in the formal education system, including the improvement of regularclassroom level practices. The experiences gained in this project can also be used to
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  
42

This element seems to be one of the weaknesses of the OTS project. The project would need more intelligent
monitoring and evaluative reflection.
43
The OTS project can be interpreted as the creation of a network that already operates as a professional learning
community. The adult leaders (local leaders) and most active student leaders already constitute a strong
community of practice and a community of common learning.
44
It is worth being mentioned that in the framework of the project “Innovative Learning Environments” of theCentre for Educational Research and Innovation” there is an on-going activity to build knowledge about change
and implementation. See the webpage entitled ““Innovative Learning Environments: The Implementation andChangeStrand”(http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/ceriinnovativelearningenvironmentstheimplementationandchangestrand.htm)

37	
  
	
  

understand better and to manage more effectively change processes in the Japanese education
system and also in other education systems.

38	
  
	
  

References	
  Altrichter, Herbert (2005): Curriculum implementation – limiting and facilitating factors.
Johannes Kepler University, Linz
Archer, M. (1979). The Social Origins of Education Systems. Sage Publications. London and
Beverly Hills
Bjork, Christopher (2005): Education Reform in Japan: Competing Visions for the Future. Phi
Delta Kappan. April. pp. 619-624
Bjork, Christopher (2009): Local implementation of Japan’s Integrated Studies reform: apreliminary analysis of efforts to decentralise the curriculum. Comparative Education. Vol.
45, No. 1, pp. 23–44
Cave, Peter (2004): "Bukatsudō": The Educational Role of Japanese School Clubs. Journal ofJapanese Studies, Vol. 30, No. 2. pp. 383-415
Fullan, Michael – Pomfret, Alan (1997): Research on Curriculum and Instruction
Implementation. Review of Educational Research, Vol. 47, No. 2. pp. 335–397
Hargreaves, David H. (2003): Education Epidemic: Transforming secondary schools throughinnovation networks. Demos. London
Hayashizaki, Kazuhiko (2008): Community Schools and Educational Policy in Japan (online:(http://www.ncl.ac.uk/cflat/news/documents/KazuhikoHayashizakiCommunitySchoolsinJapan.pdf )Hill, Michael – Hupe, Peter (2009): Implementing public policy. Sage. London)
Hood, Christopher P. (2001): Japanese Education Reform: Nakasone's Legacy. Routledge(2001)
Jones, Randall S. (2011): Education Reform in Japan. OECD Economics Department.
Working Papers No. 888. Paris
Kingston, Jeff (2013):Contemporary Japan : history, politics, and social change since the1980s. John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Koch, Per – Cunningham, Paul – Schwabsky, Nitza – Hauknes, Johan (2006): Innovation in
the Public Sector. Summary and Policy Recommendations. Publin Report No. D24. NIFUSTEP and the Publin consortium. Oslo
McLaughlin, Milbrey W. (1990): The Rand Change Agent Study Revisited: Macro
Perspectives and Micro Realities. Educational Researcher. 19:11 pp. 11–16
MEXT (1996): Japanese government policies in education, science, sports and culture 1996
(see: http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/html/hpae199601/hpae199601_2_042.html)
MEXT (2013): General Statement [on] Four Basic Policy Directions to Avoid Crisis in Japan.
Second Basic Plan for the Promotion of Education. Tokyo (for a concise presentation see
http://www.mext.go.jp/english/topics/1338141.htm)
Muta, Hiromitsu (2006): Trends and Issues in Deregulation and Decentralization of
Educational Administration in Japan. in: Bjork, Christopher (ed.): Educational
Decentralization. Asian Experiences and Conceptual Contributions. Springer. pp. 97-113.
Nelson, Heather (n.d): Alternative Education in Japan. Dissertation. (online:
http://educationinjapan.wordpress.com/education-system-in-japan-general/alternativeeducation-in-japan-introduction/)
OECD (2008): Improving School Leadership. Volume 1-2. Paris
OECD (2010): The OECD Innovation Strategy. Getting a head start on tomorrow. Paris
OECD (2012a): Lessons from PISA for Japan. Japan

39	
  
	
  

OECD (2012b): Better Skills, Better Jobs, Better Lives. A Strategic Approach to Skills
Policies. Paris
OECD (2013): OECD Skills Outlook 2013. First Results from the Survey of Adult Skills.
Paris
Okumoto, Kaori (2003): The Lifelong Learning Policies in England and Japan. Means of
Building Social Capital. Conference Paper. Kyoto University Research Information
Repository (online: http://repository.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dspace/handle/2433/43661)
Paul, Jim – Strbiak, Christy A. (1997): The Ethics of Strategic Ambiguity. The Journal ofBusiness Communication, Volume 3, Number 2, April. pp 149-159
Pilling, David (2014): Bending Adversity. Japan and the Art of Survival. Allen Lane. NewYork
Sato, Nancy – McLaughlin, Milbrey W. (1992): Context Matters: Teaching in Japan and in
the United States. Phi Delta Kappan, Volume 73, Number 5. pp. 359-366
Schoppa L (1991): Education Reform in Japan: A Case of Immoblist Politics. Routledge
Sugimoto, Yoshio (2010): An Introduction to Japanese Society. Cambridge University Press.
Cambridge
Suzuki, Itoko - Kaneko, Yuko (2013): Japan’s Disaster Governance: How was the 3.11 Crisis
Managed?. Springer.
Taguma, Miho (2013): OECD Tohoku School Student Pre and Post Self-Evaluation Summary.
Manuscript. 15.11. 2013
Takashi, Koji (2009): Flexible education. Highlighting Japan. Online Magazine. (online:
http://www.gov-online.go.jp/eng/publicity/book/hlj/arti20090301.html)
Thomas, Robert Murray (1994): Implementation of Educational Reforms. In: Husén, T. et al.
(Eds.): The Complete Encyclopaedia of Education. Oxford: Elsevier Science
Twist, Mark van – Steen, Martijn van der – Kleiboer, Marieke (2011), “Coping With Very
Weak Primary Schools: Towards ‘Smart Intervention’ in Dutch Education Policy”,
Netherlands School of Public Administration (NSOB), Paper presented at the Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) conference: “Effective Governance
From the Centre”. First GCES Thematic Conference, The Hague, Netherlands, 21-22
November 2011
Willis, David Blake – Yamamura, Satoshi – Rappleye, Jeremy (2008): Frontiers of education:
Japan as ‘‘global model’’ or ‘‘nation at risk’’?. International Review of Education. No. 54.
pp. 493–515
Würzburg, G. (2010): Making reform happen in education. In: Making reform happen ineducation. OECD. Paris. pp. 159–181
Yoneyama, Shoko (1999): The Japanese High School Silence and Resistance. Routledge.
London and New York

40	
  
	
  

Annex	  Questionnaire	
  survey:	
  basic	
  distributions	  of	
  answers	
  to	
  selected	
  questions	  Q5: Please indicate your position in your school
Involved
Member of the top management team (e.g.
principals and deputy principals)
Member of middle level management (e.g.
head of division, team leader)
A teacher with some coordination
responsibility in certain domains
A teacher without any formal
management/coordination responsibility
No answer

Not involved

Together
0

1

2

3

5

1

6

6

9

15

1

1

Q7: How many of the students of your school are currently participating in the Tohoku School Project?
None
1-2
3-5
5-10
More than 10
I do not know/I cannot answer this question; No
answer

3
4
4
4
2
9

Q8: Please indicate the level of your personal involvement in the OECD Tohoku School project?
Role in the projectNot involved at all
Involved
I am slightly involved but I do not have any particular roleor responsibility
I have an active role a “local leader”
I have an active role in it as an “empowerment partner”
Other active role
No answer
Total

Number ofteachers
12
11
2
8
2
1
3
26

Q10: What do you think about the public recognition of the Tohoku School Project? What proportion of thepeople living in the region might have heard about it? What proportion of teachers working in the region might
have heard about it?
People living in the
Teachers
regionMore than 80%
0050-80%
01
20-50%
1
2
Less than 20%
19
18
I do not know/I cannot
6
5

41	
  
	
  

answer this question
26

20

Q11: How do you see the impact of the Tohoku School Project on your own school (i.e. the school where you
are currently working)?
Involved
Not involved
Total
There has not been
5
3
8
significant impact
There has been a small
7
714
impactThere has been a11significant impact
This has completely
11changed the way the2school works
I do not know/, NA
1
1
14
12
26
Q13: Please indicate the degree of your agreement with the following statements
I do
I
not
rathe
agree r doat all not
agree
1. The staff of this school has been informed in detail about the
6
14
Tohoku School Project
2. Teachers not directly involved in the Tohoku School Project show
7
13
a strong interest for the project in this school
3. All teachers in our school support the participation of this school in
6
11
the Tohoku School Project
4. There are some teachers in this school who seem to have reserves
2
3
towards the pedagogical approach of the Tohoku School Project
5. Local leaders of the Tohoku School Project (teachers in charge of2
11
coordination) receive strong support in this school
6. Teachers know well the work their students perform in the Tohoku
2
11
School Project and they appreciate it
7. I see the Tohoku School Project as an important pedagogical3
3
innovation
8. Participating in the Tohoku School Project has created some
58difficulties in this school
9. The results of the Tohoku School Project should be spread all over13
the country
10. The Tohoku School Project should be sustained in some form after
2
1
it formally ends in 2014
11. The quality of education is very high in this country
08
12. The quality of education in this country has been declining since46
the last decade
Q13: Please indicate the degree of your agreement with the following statements
Teachers
involved
do
not
agree

42	
  
	
  

agree

I
rathe
r
agree

I
fully
agree

I do
not
know
/NA

2

2

2

3

0

3

2

0

7

9

3

9

3

0

10

4

0

9

8

4

8

4

2

7

10

6

6

10

5

8

12

3

3

9

2

5

Teachers not
involved

All

do
not
agree

do
not
agre
e

agree

agre
e

1. The staff of this school has been informed in detail about the
Tohoku School Project
2. Teachers not directly involved in the Tohoku School Project show
a strong interest for the project in this school
3. All teachers in our school support the participation of this school in
the Tohoku School Project
4. There are some teachers in this school who seem to have reserves
towards the pedagogical approach of the Tohoku School Project
5. Local leaders of the Tohoku School Project (teachers in charge of
coordination) receive strong support in this school
6. Teachers know well the work their students perform in the Tohoku
School Project and they appreciate it
7. I see the Tohoku School Project as an important pedagogicalinnovation
8. Participating in the Tohoku School Project has created somedifficulties in this school
9. The results of the Tohoku School Project should be spread all overthe country
10. The Tohoku School Project should be sustained in some form after
it formally ends in 2014
11. The quality of education is very high in this country
12. The quality of education in this country has been declining since
the last decade

9

2

11

2

20

4

10

1

10

1

20

2

9

1

8

1

17

2

3

5

2

7

5

12

6

2

7

1

13

3

8

2

5

2

13

4

2

6

4

6

6

12

8

1

5

5

13

6

1

8

3

8

4

16

0

7

3

8

3

15

11

2

9

3

20

5

5

5

5

6

10

11

Q14: Please indicate how often you are using the following methods in your daily teaching practice (questions
taken from the TALIS teacher questionnaire)
Never
RatherRatherVery
N/A
rarelyfrequently often
1. Students work on projects that require at least
95
9
1
one week to complete
2. Students work in small groups to come up with
6
4
11
3
a joint solution to a problem or task.
3. I work with individual students
33
11
7
4. I ask my students to suggest or to help plan5982classroom activities or topics
5. Students evaluate and reflect upon their own
2
7
9
6
work
6. Students make a product that will be used by
14820
someone else
7. Students are evaluating the work of each other
6107
1
8. Students hold a debate and argue for aparticular point of view which may not be their
7
11
5
1
own
Q15: Now please look again at the same list and indicate whether there has been any change in the frequency of
their occurrence in your own daily pedagogical practice since your school has been participating in the Tohoku
School Project.
This happens There hasThis is not
more often
been norelevant inthan beforechange in the
my casefrequency(or “I do notthese ofknow” or nothingsanswer for
happening
any otherreason)1. Students work on projects that require at least one week1
6
2
to complete

43	
  
	
  

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

2. Students work in small groups to come up with a joint
solution to a problem or task.
3. I work with individual students
4. I ask my students to suggest or to help plan classroom
activities or topics
5. Students evaluate and reflect upon their own work
6. Students make a product that will be used by someoneelse
7. Students are evaluating the work of each other
8. Students hold a debate and argue for a particular point ofview which may not be their own
9. I ask pupils to prepare personal portfolios containing the
documents or results of their learning (individual
learning plans, reports, essays, personal reflections,photos etc.)

2

5

2

1

5

3

0

6

3

1

6

2

2

4

3

1

5

3

2

5

2

1

6

2

Q16: Would you say, in general, that your daily teaching practice or your pedagogical ideas have changed since
you have pupils who are participating in the Tohoku School Project in your class?
Not
Invol involAllved vedI have not experienced change
Yes, a perhaps little
Yes, significantly
I cannot answer this question/ no answer

0
4
1
9

2
1
3
6

Q17: Please indicate the degree of your agreement with the following statements.
I do not I rather
agree at do not
all
agree

1. Reconstruction in the Tohoku region will be a very long andpainful process
2. The great potential of the people living in the Tohoku
region can significantly accelerate the recovery process
3. The Tohoku School Project has had a significant impact on
the way teachers think about teaching and learning in theschools participating the Project
4. The Tohoku School Project has had a significant impact on
the way teachers think about teaching and learning in the
Tohoku region even in those schools which do notparticipate in the project
5. The Tohoku School Project provides a significant support to
the recovery process in this region
6. The Tohoku School Project opened the mind ofparticipating pupils to the importance of entrepreneurshipand business life in the recovery process
7. Schools participating in the Tohoku School Project seem tobe very different from those that are not participating

44	
  
	
  

2
5
4
15

I ratheragree

I fullyagree

I do not
know/
NA

0

0

7

17

2

1

2

15

4

4

3

8

8

1

6

6

11

1

0

8

3

3

9

2

9

0

3

13

1

9

2

3

9

1

11

8. Schools participating in the Tohoku School Project seem tocooperating more intensively with the local community thanother schools
9. Schools participating in the Tohoku School Project arecooperating more intensively with local business than otherschools
10. Pupils involved in the Tohoku School Project seem to besignificantly different from those who are not involved

0

6

8

1

11

1

8

4

1

12

1

2

13

3

7

Q17: Please indicate the degree of your agreement with the following statements.
Teachers
involved

1. Reconstruction in the Tohoku region will be a very long andpainful process
2. The great potential of the people living in the Tohoku region cansignificantly accelerate the recovery process
3. The Tohoku School Project has had a significant impact on theway teachers think about teaching and learning in the schools
participating the Project
4. The Tohoku School Project has had a significant impact on theway teachers think about teaching and learning in the Tohoku
region even in those schools which do not participate in the
project
5. The Tohoku School Project provides a significant support to therecovery process in this region
6. The Tohoku School Project opened the mind of participating
pupils to the importance of entrepreneurship and business life in
the recovery process
7. Schools participating in the Tohoku School Project seem to bevery different from those that are not participating
8. Schools participating in the Tohoku School Project seem tocooperating more intensively with the local community thanother schools
9. Schools participating in the Tohoku School Project arecooperating more intensively with local business than otherschools
10. Pupils involved in the Tohoku School Project seem to besignificantly different from those who are not involved

Teachers not
involved

All
do
not
agre
e

agre
e

7

17

3

19

11

9

17

1

6

11

3

14

5

10

6

9

9

5

3

16

do
not
agree

agree

do
not
agree

agree

7

5

0

12

2

11

1

8

3

6

8

3

9

0

8

1

3

5

3

6

2

6

1

8

1

4

4

6

2

5

4

4

4
2

2
7

5
1

3
9

Q18: How do you see the difference between pupils who are directly involved in the Tohoku School Project andthose who are not involved?
I do
II
I fully I do
No
Total
not
rather rather agree notanswe
agree do not agreeknow rat allagree
1. There are no significant differences between
3
12
4
0
6
1
26
participating and non participating pupils
2. Participating pupils seem to have a better
understanding of the difficulties we face in
0
1
14
3
7
1
26
this post-catastrophe reconstruction period

45	
  
	
  

3. Participating pupils seem to be more maturein their thinking
4. Participating pupils seem to be better
involved in the life of the local community
5. Participating pupils seem to be more
motivated
6. Participating pupils seem to be more active
during lessons
7. Participating pupils seem to be more creative
8. Participating pupils seem to be more
entrepreneurial and more open to business life

0

2

14

3

6

1

26

0

7

6

2

10

1

26

0

1

13

3

8

1

26

0

5

10

1

8

2

26

0

2

11

1

11

1

26

1

3

7

1

13

1

26

Q18: How do you see the difference between pupils who are directly involved in the Tohoku School Project andthose who are not involved?
Involved
Not involvedAll

1. There are no significant differences between
participating and non participating pupils
2. Participating pupils seem to have a better
understanding of the difficulties we face inthis post-catastrophe reconstruction period
3. Participating pupils seem to be more maturein their thinking
4. Participating pupils seem to be better
involved in the life of the local community
5. Participating pupils seem to be more
motivated
6. Participating pupils seem to be more active
during lessons
7. Participating pupils seem to be more creative
8. Participating pupils seem to be more
entrepreneurial and more open to business life

do not
agree

agree

do not
agree

agree

do not
agree

agree

7

2

8

2

15

4

1

6

0

11

1

17

1

8

1

9

2

17

5

2

2

6

7

8

0

9

1

7

1

16

3

6

2

5

5

11

1

5

1

7

2

12

3

1

1

7

4

8

46	
  
	
  

Program:	
  people	
  met	
  and	  organisations	
  visited	
  August	  2013	  Date01.aug03.aug04.aug05.aug06.aug07.aug08.aug13.aug14.aug15. aug

Event
Departure to Japan
Planning meeting in Tokyo
Meeting with self-documentary team empowerment partner (Mr.Nagi)
Observation of a preparation meeting of OTS students and teachers
Meeting with empowerment partner Todai Fuzoku School (Mr.Iguchi)
Meeting with empowerment partner (Mr.Katagai)
Meeting with students
DinnerWorkshop participation
Workshop participation
Lunch with local leaders of Kesennuma and Okuma (Sugawara and Hatanaka)
Dinner with local leaders of Onagawa and Ozuchi team (Kawai, Moroto)
Workshop participation
Meeting with TFA/Youth Empowerment Project staff
Meeting with Mr. Futada
Workshop participation
Seminar on education policy development in Japan
Meeting with head of Fukushima Museum (professor Norio Akasaka)
Meeting with professor Kiyomi Akita (Tokyo University)
Meeting with local leaders of Iwaki team (school teachers and educational
committee members)
Meeting with local community leader (Mr. Goto) and Togura local team
Meeting with local leader of Togura team (Mr. Taniyama) and team members
Data analysis and consultations
Meeting with former and a current school principals and local leader (Date)
Meeting with principal of Soma High School
Meeting with local leader of Soma team
Meeting with Fukushima University team
Dinner with Fukushima University staff
Meeting with principal of Adachi High School
Meeting with MEXT staff in Tokyo (Mr. Nango, Ms. Ichimura)
Meeting with Yahoo Japan, empowerment partner (Mr. Minowa)
Meeting with local leader of Adachi High School (Mr. Tsushima)
Lunch with MEXT staff (Mr Inoue)
Debriefing meeting
Departure to Europe

47	
  
	
  

February	  2014	
  
Date

Event

7-Feb

Arrival to Japan

8-Feb

Meeting with MEXT staff
Arrival to Sendai
Departure to Onagawa town by car
Site visits in Onagawa town
Meeting with Onagawa town Board of Education
Leave from Onagawa to Sendai
Meeting with OECD/Tohoku School teachers
Meeting with Futaba town committee for promoting reconstruction vision
Welcome dinner hosted by the president of Miyagi University of Education

9-Feb

OECD/Japan Seminar

10-Feb

Meeting with staff of division of upper secondary schools
Miyagi Prefecture Board of Education
Meeting with staff of Fukushima Prefecture Board of Education

11-FebTravel form Sendai to Ooduchi
Meeting with Ooduchi local leader (Ms. Kawai)
Visit to the Ooduchi OTS project local school
Meeting with Chief supervisor, School affairs
Ooduchi town Board of Education
Travel back to Morioka

12-Feb

Meeting the Special Director of Division in charge of recovery education
Iwate Prefecture Board of Education
Travel from Morioka to Tokyo
Meeting with MEXT staff (Mr. Ippei Nango)
Dinner with MEXT staff
Travel back to Europe

48