Summary of the “Report on a Study of Teacher Training Programs Implemented throughCollaboration between the Boards of Education and Universities”

1. Purpose and summary of the research(1) Purpose of the research
The continued learning of teachers, as well as researchers and policy makers, is essential for
nurturing children who possess the competency to continue their learning in the years to come. The
purpose of this research is to examine teacher training programs, whose goal is to create teachers whoare able to continuously improve their lessons, and to present a clear model program and a trainingsystem (structure) to support the program, with the aim of achieving a comprehensive and holistic
reform of pre-service training/employment/in-service training in order to develop “teachers whocontinue learning”.
(2) Outline of the research
The research studies examined the collaborative efforts of the boards of education and universities,
which had been developing and implementing training programs in response to the current issues ineducation, such as by implementing active and collaborative learning, and also studied the contents ofthe programs, including the overall system, as well as the learning outcomes of the participants. Inorder to be able to study the programs in detail, the subjects of the study focused on the training
programs of seven prefectures collaborating with the University of Tokyo (Consortium for Renovating
Education of the Future). The study adopted a case study method which integrated research on various
documents, a literature review and analysis of the essays given by the participants of the training
programs, observation of training and lessons, and focused interviews with the institutions
implementing the programs.
[Study period: FY 2015-2016, Research Project Leader: Akihide Osugi (Director of the Department
for Elementary and Secondary Education Research)]

1. Summary of the research outcomes(1) Research on teacher training in the learning sciences: Design-Based Implementation
Research
Based on a review of research conducted in the learning sciences relating to teacher education, thisstudy was able to confirm that not only is it important to improve the quality of the teacher training
programs, but also to conduct “Design-Based Implementation Research” which looks at the entire
system encompassing the program. This study therefore focuses on the creativity of partnerships
between educational policy makers and researchers who design the programs as well as the system that
supports those programs. In addition to raise the quality of program itself, the study hypothesized thatthe partnerships should strive to raise the quality of supports for the course as below:- Durability: If the same attendee has the opportunity to use what they learned and to re-learn it afters/he has finished the program, s/he will learn deeper and longer than without such opportunities.
- Multi-layer-ness: If the same attendee is surrounded by principals and veterans who understand well
the same content as the attendee has learned, s/he will be more active in implementing their learning
into practice in her or his school than but for those supports.
- Expand-ability: If the same attendee has the chance to go beyond her or his classroom, subject, school
and district to have conversation on their practices with various partners across these sections evenafter the program finished, s/he will become life-long learners than except for those chances.

(2) Teachers’ standards and training programs of prefectures and ordinance-designated cities
throughout the country
The results of research on the teachers’ standards (image of a model teacher) and training programsof the prefectures and ordinance-designated cities gained from websites and various documents
showed that 70.1% of the total number of institutions conducted follow-up training after the training
for newly qualified teachers, such as training in the second or third year of teaching, indicating anawareness of the importance of durability. However, although almost all of the institutions had
established the image of a model teacher, there were very few institutions which had connected it withthe annual training programs or which had set target goals.

(3) Teacher training programs implemented through collaboration between the boards ofeducation and universities: Saitama prefecture and Tottori prefecture
The study selected Saitama prefecture and Tottori prefecture, which had very similar teacher
training programs, and compared their training programs for upper secondary school teachers. The
content of the training programs of the two prefectures were very similar in that they included thecomponents of “lectures on learning theory”, “classroom experiences”, “teaching using past teachingmaterials”, “detailed examination of the outcomes of the teaching”, “development of self-made lessonplans”, “teaching of the lesson”, “looking back on the teaching experience”, “reflections on beliefs
about learning”, and “a cycle of learning to continuously improve the lessons and the building ofnetworks”. The training of both prefectures centered on a form of collaborative learning employing alesson style referred to as the “knowledge-constructive jigsaw method”. However, there were somedifferences between Saitama prefecture and Tottori one. The Saitama prefecture has the greater numberof re-iterations of the cycle of teaching in the affiliated schools based on what had been learnt in thetraining and then reflecting upon the outcomes of the teaching, and greater number of interactions withpeople with different levels of experience.
Based on Tottori prefecture’s analysis of the results shown in the “reflection sheets” filled in by
the participants after the training as shown in the models of Figure 1, taking a look at one year oftraining, development was seen from Phase 1 going on to Phase 2 as shown in Figure 2, butdevelopment was difficult to attain in Phase 3. By contrast in Saitama prefecture, the descriptions ofthe key points in lesson planning given by the participants on the last day of training, the rate ofparticipation in the core programs in the following year or later years, and the quality of the “open”

classes suggest that the learning outcomes were utilized by way of being brought into the teachingpractices of participants.

Figure 1: Learning process in training programs

Phase 1
Phase 2Phase 33530

Number of participants

2520151050
1st. time

2nd. time

3rd. time

4th. time

5th. time

Figure 2: Analysis of the descriptions in the “reflection sheets” after the training (*Phase 3: nil)An examination of the training systems in the two prefectures showed that Saitama prefecture,
as shown in Figure 3, tends to take a multi-layer approach with the newly qualified teacher training
being developed in tandem with other core programs as well as the administrator training andsupervisor training (white rectangles in Figure 3), whereas Tottori prefecture maintains a structure
where the training does not easily connect to other training (Figure 4).

Figure 3: Network of projects and OJTs
implemented by the education board ofFigure 4: Network of projects and OJTsimplemented by the education board of

Saitama prefecture

Tottori prefecture

The above suggests that having “durability” and “multi-layer-ness” in the system engenders thewilling “expansion” of the participants, and encourages teachers at different stages in their career torely on each other as a learning resource and to continue consistently with their learning. By theinteractions among a number of institutions including those in the two prefectures, Tottori prefecture
has been producing and examining various plans for improvement such as creating multiple layers byfostering past participants as mentors. The creation of a “community for continued learning” such as
collaborations between the boards of education and the universities is an issue to be dealt with in thefuture.