名古屋高等教育研究第４号（2004）

Higher Education and Teacher Preparationin Japan and Hong KongDavid L. Grossman＜Abstract＞
This paper compares the development and placement of teacher
education within the tertiary sectors of Japan and Hong Kong.
Historically both places initiated formal teacher education separate
from university training as part of binary systems, and later moved
teacher training to the university sector. Here Hong Kong lags behindJapan, having only recently moved towards creating an all-graduate,
all-trained teaching force. Both places retain mono-technical teacher
training institutions along side teacher training within comprehensive
universities. Both societies are involved in major educational and curriculum reforms in order to respond to both the economic challenges
of globalization, and social ills attributed in part to the failure of theireducational systems. These reforms are closely linked to the quality(knowledge, skills and attitudes) of teachers. In this regard both Japanand Hong Kong have instituted teacher education reforms. At thesame time, demographic realities have significantly lowered thedemand for teachers. This has led both governments to try to reduce
the size of publicly supported teacher education programs, primarily
through pressure for consolidation of existing programs. Research on
mergers indicates that these processes are more costly than usually
expected, and may not result in the economy and efficiency that often
drives the process to begin with. This paper concludes that it isimportant to initiate merger processes with care, and not to sacrificeother important goals (such as innovative approaches to the production of high quality teachers) in the course of consolidation.

Dean (Professor), School of Foundations in Education,
The Hong Kong Institute of Education

105

Worldwide there is little debate over the need for a high quality teaching force. Darling-Hammond and Cobb (1995) report that within APEC,
members see the professional preparation and development of “quality
teachers” as a major aim for teacher education. These quality teachers
are seen as having some combination of the following attributes: pedagogical content; subject area knowledge; skills and attitudes for effective
teaching; understanding of human growth and child development; effective communication skills; a strong sense of ethics; and a capacity for lifelong learning (Darling-Hammond & Cobb, 1995, p. 4). Herein lies the significance of a trained teaching profession. Abundant research is now
available to confirm what anecdotal evidence has suggested was true allalong, namely that good teaching is the single most important element indetermining student achievement (Grosso de Leon, 2001). A comprehensive review of research in the U.S. indicates that teachers’ knowledge,
skills, and preparation matter for student achievement (DarlingHammond, 2000). It would thus seem to go without saying that teachers
should be among the most knowledgeable and skilled in a society, andthat they should have more education (in most cases a first degree atminimum) than is the mode within their society. The National Council
for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) in the U.S. suggests that four dimensions go into the training of competent teachers:
1)

general studies – the study of subjects and ideas to be of value
to all persons;2)content studies – the study of the content in the academic area
in which one plans to teach and how to teach that content;

3)

professional/pedagogical studies – the study of what teachers
should know about teaching and learning; and4)integrative studies – the clinical dimension of study, putting
together what one has learned in the real world of the classroom on and off campus. (Cruickshank, 1996, p. 4)

Based on this list, it would also seem apparent that teaching is a profession that requires types of knowledge and skills that cannot be totallyacquired on the job, and that the lack of pre-service education and train106

Higher Education and Teacher Preparation in Japan and Hong Konging can put students at risk.
While acknowledging the continued existence of some recalcitrant critics of the professional training teachers, the goal of a fully trained professional teaching force is now almost universally embraced. At thesame time there has been and continues to be considerable debate about
how a trained profession should best be achieved. In a recent summaryof teacher education practices in APEC countries (Cobb, 1999), three general approaches were identified:1)

Sub-degree certificate or diploma programs in normal colleges,
normal schools, and colleges of education established for the
purpose of training teachers. These programs are usually forelementary teachers and emphasize pedagogical preparation
more than subject area preparation in programs that are generally 2-4 years in length.

2)

Bachelor’s degree programs, usually 3-4 years in length, housed
at general, multipurpose universities, with greater emphasis on
subject matter preparation, and relatively less on pedagogy.

3)

Master’s degree and/or 5th year programs of one or two years’
duration designed for graduates with a bachelor’s degree who
receive a master’s degree or postgraduate diploma.

１．The Present Study
This paper reports some of the findings from a comparative study ofthe development and placement of teacher education within Hong Kongand Japan. Despite the obvious difference of size between Hong Kongand Japan (a population of 7 million versus a population of 127 million),
there are interesting similarities. Of course, both Hong Kong and Japan
share similar influences derived from Chinese, and in particular,
Confucian historical traditions. These influences include placing a highvalue on education and educational achievement. They also share somesignificant contemporary trends. First, both places are experiencing
107

demographic changes, characterized by low fertility rates and an ageing
population, that directly affect the demand for teachers. Current estimates indicate that Hong Kong now has the lowest birthrate in theworld (<1.0), while Japan’s is among the lowest at about 1.4. Second, both
places are experiencing economic difficulties characterized by the bursting of economic bubbles, reduced property values, deflation, and record
unemployment rates (>5% in Japan and >7% in Hong Kong.). This economic situation has, in turn, led to increasing fiscal deficits as the government revenues are far below government expenditures. Third, inrecent years both Hong and Japan have launched major educational
reforms designed to respond to the perceived failures of their educational systems and to make highly rigid and competitive educational systems more open, flexible, adaptable, and “humanized.” These reforms
include significant changes both to school curricula and to the systems ofpreparing teachers.

２．Teacher Education in Hong Kong and Japan: A Brief Review
The development of higher education and the incorporation of teacher
education into a university system came rather late in Hong Kong. For
most of the British colonial period (1841-1997), higher education in Hong
Kong is best described as small and elitist, perhaps consistent with thelimited educational goals of a colonial regime. From the establishment ofHong Kong University by the British colonial authorities in 1910 until
1963 there was only one university, and only two until 1988. In the runup of the return of Hong Kong to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, this number was expanded to eight. Prior to the 1980s places were provided for
only about 2% of the age cohort to attend university, while today it is18%. It is also conservatively estimated that another 10% of the agegroup goes overseas for higher education.
As was the case in the development of higher education, the field ofteacher education in Hong Kong got a rather late start. This parallels acomparatively slow expansion of elementary and secondary education
108

Higher Education and Teacher Preparation in Japan and Hong Kong

until Hong Kong had begun a period of rapid and dramatic economic
growth in the 1960s and 1970s. Hong Kong implemented six-year compulsory primary education only in 1971 and nine-year compulsory education in 1978. Although due credit must be given to the government forsuccessfully meeting the challenge of expanding the infrastructure of
education to implement these policies, the expansion was not matchedby concerns for quality. For too long the curriculum, based on outdated
UK models combined with some local elements, was designed for a highly select and elite student body consistent with a much smaller andselective system.
Despite these shortcomings the government did dramatically increase
access to schooling in the 1980s. Expansion of the compulsory educational system in turn created a need for more teachers. In order to meet thisincreased demand for teachers, over the last 30 years Hong Kong has
been involved in a struggle first to expand and more recently to
upgrade teacher preparation. Cooke (2000) has provided us with a comprehensive review of this often painfully slow process. In 1939 Hong
Kong got its first teacher training college, but it was not degree granting. This provision gradually expanded to five sub-degree teachers colleges that produced most of Hong Kong’s primary teachers and about
one-third of all secondary teachers in two or three year courses. In 1994
these five teacher training colleges were combined into a single tertiary
institution, the Hong Kong Institute of Education (HKIEd), with the purpose of upgrading teacher education. Currently, the Institute is a monotechnical institution devoted to teacher training. Its closest equivalent inJapan would be a national university of education. In addition, over timethe Hong Kong University, Chinese University and what later became
Baptist University and Open University developed faculties of educationthat provide a variety of teacher training programs at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels.
In 1997 in his first official speech, Mr. Tung Chee Hwa, the incoming
Chief Executive of the newly installed post-colonial Special Administrative Region government, stated that one of his goals was the eventual109creation of an all-graduate and all-trained teaching profession. Six years
later the SAR government has not achieved this goal, and at times
seems to have drifted away from this policy by allowing schools to hire
untrained graduates. According to government figures, currently 9.2% ofprimary teachers and 13.4% of secondary teachers are still untrained.
Moreover, while the number of graduate teachers has risen in recent
years because of the provision of part-time degree courses for in-service
teachers, in 2001 only 47% of primary teachers had bachelor’s degrees,
while the comparable figure for secondary teachers was 88%.
In 2003 Hong Kong’s Advisory Committee on Teacher Education andQualifications (ACTEQ), provided a set of more specific targets for government policy on teacher training. The chairman reported that his committee and the government have arrived at a consensus to set up the following professional standards for entering the teacher profession in five
years:a.

New teachers to be both graduate and trained (except in somesubjects like English where this is difficult to achieve).

b.

One-two years of internship before being registered as ateacher and,c.

Continuing professional development for all teachers (“Fiveyears from now,” 2003).

At the same time as these policy directives for teacher education arebeing considered and/or implemented, the government has launched awide-ranging and ambitious set of reforms to improve the quality ofschooling with the rationale of improving the future competitiveness ofHong Kong (Education Commission, 2000). In very brief terms, these curriculum reforms include a major effort to weaken the boundaries of traditional school subjects and to reorganize the curriculum around eight
Key Learning Areas (KLAs) consisting of overarching themes, issues,
ideas and values. According to Elliott and Morris (2001), for successful
implementation these reforms will require parallel reconstruction of110

Higher Education and Teacher Preparation in Japan and Hong Kongteacher education. Yet, the issues of how and where these teachers willbe trained are still matters of some debate. I will return to this issue
later, but let us take a brief look at teacher education in Japan.
With a long established international reputation for producing excellent teachers, Japan is often looked to as a model of educational practice.
With reference to trained and degree graduate teachers, the situation in
Japan is more advanced than that in Hong Kong. Nearly all teachers inJapan are trained, though exceptions are allowed in certain special cases.
Though graduates of junior colleges can still receive teacher qualifications, 90% of Japanese teachers now have bachelor’s degrees (compared
to 19% in 1956). The development and upgrading of teacher education in
Japan after World War II was initially shaped by the educational visionof the occupation government. Prior to World War II, in Japan teacher
education was separate from the comprehensive universities, i.e., part ofa binary system of normal schools that was for the most part derived
from French and German models. An 1872 Meiji decree established asystem of teacher training, and from this time on a normal school wasprovided for elementary teacher training in each prefecture. In certain
districts, Higher Normal Schools were also established; these focused
mainly on the training of middle school teachers (Okuya, 1989).
Early in the Occupation period the U.S. Educational Mission recommended that the teacher training curriculum should be composed ofthree areas: general education, professional education, and specialist education. It also recommended that normal schools should be reconstituted
as four-year universities of teacher training, and that teacher training
should also be provided at comprehensive universities (Report of theUnited States Education Mission to Japan, 1946). In addition, in large partto rectify abuses that occurred in the prewar system, the U.S. occupation
government introduced an open system of teacher education that put
heavy emphasis on liberal arts education to support Japan’s re-emerging
democratic system.

111

Under the open system policy, Japan created multiple types of teacher
training institutions. By 1989, 84% of all national, public and private universities were approved to provide teacher training (Okuya, 1989).
Alongside universities and colleges with teacher education programs
housed either in faculties of education or within subject departments,
Japan retains certain university-level mono-technical institutions forteacher training (universities of education). As mentioned above some
two-year colleges and some technical institutions still provide teacher
training, but 90% of teachers are degree holders. This percentage is
expected to increase in Japan’s competitive job market for teachers.
The open system helped Japan to meet the demand for teachers, createdin large part by the expansion of secondary education. Enrollment of
middle school graduates in high school increased from 57.7% in 1960 to
94% in 1979, while high school graduates’ entry rates into college rosefrom 10.3 to 37.4% in the same period (Shimahara, 2002, p.40).
The rapid expansion of teacher education opportunities in Japan, notsurprisingly, produced its own problems and critics. There was a perceived lowering of certification standards, and a noticeable trend on thepart of students to acquire, as a formality, the minimum number of credits required for a teaching qualification, simply as an option for facing
the labor market. At the same time many providers of teacher training
set only the minimum standards required by the government, including
a very short period of teaching practice (2-4 weeks) and professional
preparation that was training in name only.
By the 1980s criticism of teacher education was exacerbated by a seriesof social conditions connected to young people and schools that shocked
and continue to hold the Japanese public’s attention (Shimahara, 2002).
These include student suicide, bullying and school violence, extended
truancy and school absenteeism (sometimes referred to as school refusal
or school phobia), and gakyu hokai, a popular journalistic term for classroom chaos or rebellion. Against this background the government underPrime Minister Nakasone undertook a major restructuring initiative inthe middle of 1980s, which included the establishment of the National
112

Higher Education and Teacher Preparation in Japan and Hong Kong

Council on Educational Reform (NCER). Reformers pointed to teachers asa major part of the problem, and what the Japanese call shishitsu, thequality of teachers, became a central issue in the reform campaign. This
led to several waves of teacher education reforms in the 1980s and 1990s
that have been well documented elsewhere (see e.g., Shimahara, 2002;
Sato and Asunama, 2000; Takakura & Ono, 2002; Moriyoshi, 1999;
Kobayashi, Hawley, & Hawley, 1993). These reforms can be divided into
four basic areas: enhanced course requirements, a hierarchical certificate
system, strengthening of practical competence, and expansion of in-service training programs (Sato & Asanuma, 2000).
Unfortunately perhaps, the implementation of teaching trainingreforms coincided with a dramatic drop in opportunities for entry into
the teaching profession that began about one decade ago. In the mid1990s roughly 25% of teacher education graduates came from universities of education, 55% from general universities, 15% from junior colleges,
and 5% from graduate schools (Lopez Tinajero, 1998, p. 335). Graduates
who obtain teaching qualifications at universities or colleges apply
through their institutions or individually to prefectural boards of education for the issuance of teaching certificates, which are valid nationwide
and for life. But these teaching certificates are no guarantee of employment as teachers. Graduates who are certified and want to becometeachers must take the prefectural recruitment examinations. The
results of the examination are only honored in one prefecture (not transferable), and are valid for one year.
Whatever training course teacher education candidates now pursue,
the stark reality is that not many get teaching jobs in Japan. The number of new teaching posts declined from 33,615 in 1989 to 14,178 in 1998.
This represented an overall decline of 57% in the demand for teachers,
and as much as 67% in the case of elementary teachers. In 1998, forexample, there were 154,716 candidates who took the exams for teachingjobs. Of these candidates, only 18,529 were successful (11.9%) in passing
the examination, and 14,178 (9.1%) eventually obtained teaching posts.
113

The ratio of successful candidates to teaching job seekers went from 1:4
in 1990 to nearly 1:11 in 1998. (For educational statistics, see Ministry of
Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology website, http://
www.mext.go.jp/english/statist/index.htm). Even the 48 national faculties of education (excluding private universities) placed only 12% of theirgraduates in full-time teaching, while 22% obtained part-time posts. It
should be also noted that the competition for teaching jobs varies considerably depending on the level of school and the subject, and on geographical location. In 1998 the overall ratio of successful candidates toapplicants ranged from 1:4.8 in Kawasaki City and Ehime, to 1:17.6 in
Oita (http:book.jiji.com). In any case, the overall situation of the low ratioof employment to training in Japan has led the government to propose adramatic reduction in the number of publicly supported teacher training
programs, a policy that will be discussed in the next section.

３．Teacher Education in Hong Kong and Japan: The Demographic
Imperative
Despite the obvious differences in history and scope between Hong
Kong and Japan, the above review does indicate some commonalities inthe development of teacher education. Both systems have undergone
tremendous expansion in periods of economic growth and high demand
for teachers, and then struggled to match expansion with improved quality and appropriate training. The public in both societies are involved in
unprecedented criticism of the education systems and teachers, andtheir perceived failures often receive sensational treatment in the press.
While both societies still hold teachers in relatively high esteem compared to their counterparts in other parts of the world, the general raising of educational levels among the general population has closed the
distance in educational achievement between teachers and parents.
Thus, it appears that the community is less willing to attribute to teachers the power and authority they once had. At the same time becauseof the reduced opportunities for social mobility due to economic slowdowns, education systems in both places are being called to task for pro114

Higher Education and Teacher Preparation in Japan and Hong Kong

ducing non-performing graduates (though by international standards levels of achievement are still quite high in fields like math and science).
The education systems and teachers are blamed for not adequately coping with the growing social problems of youth, such as youth suicide. In
both places reforms have been put in place both to reform elementaryand secondary education and to upgrade the training of teachers.
However, these reforms are at risk in both Hong Kong and Japan. The
underlying reality affecting both systems of education is demographic,i.e., that in both Hong Kong and Japan, there will be fewer kindergarten,
primary and secondary students for the foreseeable future. Without achange in the teaching hours or reduced class size, the demand forteachers will decrease. In Japan lower student numbers has resulted insome dramatic reductions in class size, as much as half in some cases
from the normal classes of 35-40 students in junior and senior highschools. Even with these adjustments the supply greatly outstrips thedemand for teachers. As we have seen this situation has alreadyoccurred in Japan, and is beginning to happen in Hong Kong.
Another commonality is that in both places, despite the increasing difficulty of getting a teaching job, the relatively secure and high pay ofteaching continue to attract applicants in larger numbers than the systems can absorb. In Japan since 1974 teachers have received a salary 25
percent higher than those of civil servants. While not comparable to thissituation, the initial teaching salaries of Hong Kong teachers are considerably more than, and in some cases almost double, the salary that the
average new university graduate in the social sciences can expect. Also,a relatively high proportion of new teacher education graduates in Hong
Kong are still being employed as teachers. A Hong Kong Institute of
Education (HKIEd) survey of its Bachelors of Education graduates in2001 indicated that 91.8% had secured full-time jobs; in 2002 this figure
appears to be about the same. As enviable as these employment figures
might be to Japan, it is anticipated that they cannot be maintained.
Though the situation of over-supply is not expected to reach the severe
115

proportion as in Japan, more students than in the past will find it difficult to find a teaching post. In sum, as the number of students in primary and secondary education decline, the issue then becomes how does
one best accomplish a reduction in the number of places for the trainingof teachers either through downsizing and/or reallocation of program
numbers to areas of continuing need.
Here Hong Kong and Japan appear to diverge. Because the government fixes the number of university places for students in Hong Kong,the numbers can be realigned by the University Grants Committee by
reallocation of first year first degree and postgraduate admissions in linewith anticipated needs of teachers in the planning for the future. The
government has already initiated a process of moving the number ofteacher education students away from areas and subjects where there isan oversupply to subjects where this is still high demand, such as
English. It is anticipated that there will be a gradual overall reduction of
the numbers being trained as teachers. In Japan’s “open system,”because there are so many private providers of teacher education, thereduction in numbers cannot be done with such directness, and thedivergence between demand and supply is much greater.
In Japan logic suggests the need for a dramatic reduction in and/or
consolidation of teacher training programs, and government policy makers have recognized and encouraged this approach. Of 48 national universities of education 32 have teacher training programs for 200 students or less. In 2001 the government announced that it was officiallyending the policy of one teacher training provider in each prefecture,
and a Ministry of Education panel stated that the overall number of public teacher education should be cut to less than half the current number(“Too many teacher training colleges,” 2001). However, to date there has
been little action to implement this policy. For one thing the history ofJapan’s tertiary institutions, including universities and faculties of education, is much longer and more geographically based than would be thecomparable case in Hong Kong. The policy of training teachers for each116

Higher Education and Teacher Preparation in Japan and Hong Kong

prefecture for local schools is deeply rooted, and there is strong resistance to closing such institutions. Some private universities and two-yearcolleges have dropped their teacher training programs, but as we haveseen, programs continue to produce significantly more potential teachers
than the available teaching posts.
Despite resistance from teacher education providers, the handwriting
is on the wall. Undoubtedly there will be some reduction in the numberof places in teacher training programs in both Hong Kong and Japan. In
Japan the Ministry of Education has proposed a reduction in teacher
education places through institutional consolidation or mergers. It seems
that the number of teacher education providers will decline, though thetime frame is unclear. So far the Ministry of Education has encouraged
and recommended reduction through consolidation or merger of existing
programs without forcing it. As the government’s fiscal difficulties
mount, however, the pressure for reduction in and consolidation ofteacher training programs is likely to grow. Though the problem of low
demand for teachers has been in existence for more than ten years, thegovernment’s inability to effectuate change seems to mirror its ineffectiveness in resolving Japan’s banking crisis, but unfortunately, like thebanking crisis, it won’t simply go away. In Hong Kong, where there ismore direct leverage over university admissions, a reduction in teacher
education graduates will most probably be accomplished by reducing
student admissions in areas where over-supply of teachers is predicted,
while shifting some numbers (though not as many) to areas of need (e.g.,
English teachers). However, even in Hong Kong there is pressure for
institutional consolidation, and in the following section I discuss the proposed patterns for implementing institutional consolidation in each place.

４．The Growing Movement for Consolidation of Teacher
Education Programs
Turning first to the Japan case, I would like to cite five different
examples of proposed patterns of consolidation of teacher education pro117

grams involving national universities of education and faculties of education. Here I draw primarily on face-to-face interviews with or written
submissions from university administrators and professors. In the firstexample, and a well-publicized one, three neighboring prefectural levelinstitutions in areas of low population density with small student bodies
have been urged to merge by the Ministry of Education, but so far local
resistance has prevented this from happening. The resistance, I was told,
was for at least two reasons. First, there is a strong preference to have
local institutions train teachers from the local area to teach in their communities. Secondly, if any of the institutions were to in fact close, it could
have major economic repercussions in their host communities. In a second example, a national university of education with declining enrolment
proposed a merger with four other teacher education providers in geographic proximity. The other institutions did not regard this initiative
favorably, fearing loss of autonomy. So to date no merger agreement has
been reached. However, one university president reported that there has
been a temporary respite in government pressure for mergers. Since thegovernment launched its plan to turn national universities into independent administrative institutions (incorporation) in the next two years,
Ministry attention has been drawn away from the merger issue, andseems to be on hold at least until 2004.
In the third case, it was reported that another national university ofeducation in a major urban center was urged to consider consolidation
with a number of professional schools outside the field of education thatwere geographically proximate. (Japan has other mono-technical professional training institutions besides teacher education in areas like law,economics, and engineering.) This is still under discussion, but I was toldthat it appears unlikely. In a fourth case, a prefectural level university ofeducation approached the nearby and prestigious national university
about a merger. I was told two conflicting versions of the outcome ofthis initiative. Initially, I was told that the offer had been rebuffed by theprestigious university, but a later informant, highly placed in the national
university, told me it was still under discussion. Upon reflection both118

Higher Education and Teacher Preparation in Japan and Hong Kongmight be true in a Japanese context. Though not enthusiastic about sucha merger, it might be politic for the national university not to break off
discussions, and certainly not to state so publicly.
The fifth Japan example is not strictly a case of merger or consolidation, but rather one of redefinition or refocusing of the institutional mission to accommodate the changing environment. In this case, a national
university of education already consisted of five campuses and felt nomerger pressure. The university president said that his challenge wasrather to seek consolidated and efficient governance among campusesthat prior to 1966 had been separate. For example, each campus still
maintained its own admissions system. Perhaps of more interest here is
the fact that in order to maintain its enrollment in the face of the declining need for teachers, this university of education now offers five education degrees not specifically linked to teacher certification: lifelong education, art and culture (i.e., liberal arts), global education, regional and environmental education, and information and social education. I found a similar list at another national university of education, with one additional
program, human welfare education.
This expansion of these universities’ mission to areas of education
beyond traditional teacher education to an expanded vision of education
provision very closely mirrors the type of “university of education” that
Hayhoe advocates as a vehicle both to upgrade teacher education and tomeet the needs of the knowledge society in new ways. In her vision, (auniversity of education)
provides an environment supportive to teacher formation as a
primary goal, and makes it possible to guarantee a supply ofteachers. It also makes possible the development of fields suchas adult education, the training of trainers, lifelong learning, andprofession-specific education (Hayhoe, 2002, p. 17).
Hayhoe, in fact, argues that this type of “university of education” would
be the most culturally relevant and preferred path of development for119the existing Hong Kong Institute of Education. In other words, theInstitute would redefine its mission into a broader notion of educational
provision beyond teacher training to meet the changing educational
needs of the society in many sectors. However desirable, this preferred
scenario seems to now be unlikely in the Hong Kong context. In Hong
Kong the same trend of declining numbers of young children enteringschool has led not only to a push for reduction of teacher training places,
but even to a questioning of the place of teacher education with the university system. The debate has been whether teacher education is better placed in terms of quality within a comprehensive university rather
than in a mono-technical tertiary institution like the Institute of
Education. Because the comprehensive universities within Hong Kong
have a stronger “brand name” than the eight-year old Institute of
Education, it is not even so much a matter of debate but rather ofreliance on strongly held perceptions of institutional power and prestige
that predate the existence of the Institute.
In contrast, in my interviews and documentary research in Japan, theissue of consolidation or merger was never linked to the quality issue,
but only to the issue of declining student numbers. There was no mention of doing away with the universities of education as mono-technicalinstitutions, though I have mentioned that in Japan some universities of
education have successfully expanded their scope beyond teacher training. Nor was there mention in Japan of doing away with the open system in which there are multiple tracks to teacher preparation that candraw on different strengths and meet different needs. The role of theuniversities of education as one track to teacher preparation seemedunchallenged, perhaps due to their long history with roots going back to
the Meiji period. Though the government may want fewer providers ofteacher education, it continues to publicly support an open and mixed
system of teacher education providers, including both universities of
education and faculties of education within comprehensive universities.
Such is not the case in Hong Kong, where the Hong Kong Institute of120

Higher Education and Teacher Preparation in Japan and Hong Kong

Education, a mono-technical degree level and postgraduate diploma
teacher training institution, was created out of a consolidation of fivesub-degree teachers’ colleges just eight years ago, and its state of theart campus opened only six years ago. As the major provider of training
for early childhood, primary, and some secondary subject teachers inHong Kong within a single institution, it has some 8,500 full and parttime students in all, or about 5,200 full-time equivalent students. Thus,
from a Japanese perspective, Hong Kong has achieved a remarkableeconomy of scale in teacher training (though it has distinct advantages
in this regard related to its smaller size and concentration of population).
Still, in the face of large and growing deficits and the changing demographics, the Hong Kong government is seeking ways to cut the costs ofhigher education. Based on emerging government policy, the very existence of the Institute as an independent institution is at risk, and sometime in the next few years, it is likely to be merged with a comprehensive university. Recently with pressure from the new Secretary of
Education and Manpower, the pressure for the Institute to merge withanother university has increased. The government policy appears to be
to downsize the number of universities overall, as all universities havebeen asked to consider finding “partners.”
Various rationales have been provided for such mergers, including thevision of creating one or more world-class mega-universities by combining smaller institutions. Yet, there has also been a not so subtle sub-text
that the quality of teacher training is better achieved at a comprehensive university than at a mono-technical institution like the Institute of
Education. This is based more on common perceptions (or misperceptions) than any data because the Institute has actually had little chance
to prove the worth of its degree graduates who have only recently
begun to enter the teaching force in significant but increasing numbers.
In any case, as a very new institution, the Institute’s prestige is quite
low compared to the older and more established universities that havelarge and more vocal alumni. This makes it more vulnerable to the121merger pressure than other tertiary institutions in Hong Kong. Despite
the rhetoric of quality, the real impetus behind the merger movement inHong Kong is more about lowering costs and reducing government
deficits than about improving teacher education.

５．Lessons from Mergers
While mergers or program consolidation may thus appeal to governments as a solution to economic and fiscal woes and declining enrollments, there are considerable obstacles involved. Often seen as a costsaving measure, institutional mergers in places like the UK andAustralia have shown little cost-saving, and in the short-run often resultin initially higher costs connected to the process of unifying systems andcompensating staff made redundant. According to Fielder and Markham(1997), experience in the merger of 30 institutions in the UK indicatesthat the rationale behind any merger should be strategic and academic
and not predicated on the prospect of cost savings. They further recommend three principles for the merger process○

Allow enough time for the merger process. Time is necessary
for both thorough evaluations of the situation and to build trustand good relationships between the institutions○

Do not underestimate the costs and time involved in such areas
as integration of administrative systems and procedures andtheir associated technology○

Prepare for the massive demands that will be made on management before, during and after the merger.

In a Norwegian case study, Skodvin and Stensaker (1998) reiteratethat merging costs more money and time than is usually planned for
because of the development costs associated with establishing new
forms of collaboration. More importantly they also argue that in the current economic climate the search for economy and efficiency overshadows the often stated policy objectives of increased collaboration andinnovation through mergers. In particular, the opportunity to innovate
122

Higher Education and Teacher Preparation in Japan and Hong Kong

through merger is missed. In this regard Lang (2002) cites evidence thatthe most successful cross-sectoral mergers occur when the process is“transformative,” that is, that all parties in the merger, including thedominant partner, see the benefit of a merger as an opportunity to bringabout internal change and to pursue new opportunities previously
unavailable. The governments of Hong Kong and Japan would do well toconsider these findings in their movement towards mergers.

６．Concluding Remarks
Despite obvious differences of scale between the two societies, Japanand Hong Kong share certain trends in teacher education. However,Hong Kong has lagged behind Japan in upgrading teacher preparation,
having only recently moved towards creating an all-graduate, all-trainedteaching force. Historically both places initiated formal teacher education separate from university training as part of a binary system. Whileboth places have now relocated teacher training within the university
sector, both also retain mono-technical teacher training institutions
alongside teacher training within comprehensive universities. Japan
maintains a separate system of universities of education, and Hong Kong
has an Institute of Education. Both societies are involved in major educational and curriculum reforms in order to respond to both the economic
challenges of globalization, and social ills attributed in part to the failureof their educational systems. These reforms are closely linked to thequality (knowledge, skills and attitudes) of the teaching force, and in thisregard both Japan and Hong Kong have both attempted major reforms
in teacher preparation. At the same time, demographic realities in both
places now suggest that there will be significantly lower demand forteachers than in the past. This has led both governments to consider
reduction of the number of places for teacher training in publicly supported universities, primarily through pressure for the merger or consolidation of existing institutions. The research on mergers indicate thatthese processes are more costly than usually expected, and may not
result in the economy and efficiency that often drives the process to123begin with. In this regard, it is important to initiate merger processes
with care, and not to sacrifice other important goals (such as innovative
approaches to the production of high quality teachers) in the course of
consolidation.

References
Cobb, V. (1999). An international comparison of teacher education. (ERIC Digest
1999-2) Washington, D.C.: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher
Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED0436486.)
Cooke, B. (2000). Hong Kong. In Morris, P. & Williamson, J. (Eds.), Teacher education in the Asia-Pacific region: A comparative study. (pp. 33-74). New York:
Falmer Press.
Cruickshank, D. (1996). Preparing America’s teachers. Bloomington, Indiana:
Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
Darling-Hammond, L. & Cobb, V. (1995). (Eds.). Teacher preparation and professional development in APEC members: A comparative study. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED383683.)
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000, January). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives,
8(1). Retrieved November 19, 2002, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n1/
Education Commission. (2000, September). Learning for life, learning throughlife. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
Elliott, J. & Morris, P. (2001). Challenges of contemporary education reforms toteacher education: The case of Hong Kong. In Cheng, Y., Chow, K., & Tsui,K. (Eds.), New teacher education for the future: International perspectives(pp. 147-166). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of Education.
Fielden, J. & Markham, L. (1997). Learning lessons from mergers in higher edu-

cation. Commonwealth Higher Education Management Service (CHEMS)
Paper No. 17. Retrieved December 1, 2002 from http://www.acu.ac.uk/
chems/onlinepublications/930917268.pdf
Five years from now, new teachers will have to go through 3 gates for alicense: a degree, teacher training and assessment. (2003, January 8). Ming

Pao.
French, N. (1999). The reform of higher education in Hong Kong. In D. Teather

124

Higher Education and Teacher Preparation in Japan and Hong Kong

(Ed.), Higher education in a post-binary era (pp. 158-180). London: Jessica
Kingsley.
Goodlad, J., Soder R., & Sirotnik, K. (Eds.). (1990) Places where teachers aretaught. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Grosso de Leon, A. (2001). Higher education’s challenge: New teacher education
models for a new century . New York: Carnegie Corporation. Retrieved
October 1, 2002, from http://www.carnegie.org/pdf/teached.pdf
Hall, J. (2000, January). Initial teacher education: Specialists and generalists – A

review of the literature . Scottish Council for Research in Education.
Retrieved December 16, 2002, from http://www.scre.ac.uk/scot-research/
hallinitial/index.html
Hayhoe, R. (2002). Teacher education and the university: a comparative analysis with implications for Hong Kong. Teaching Education, 13(1), 5-23.
Kobayashi, T., Hawley, C. & Hawley, W. (Eds.). (1993). Japanese teacher education. [Special Two Volume Issue]. Peabody Journal of Education, 68(3 ,4).
Lang, D. (2002). There are mergers, and there are mergers: The forms of Interinstitutional cooperation. Higher Education Management and Policy, 14 (1),11-50.
Lopez Tinajero, M. (2001). Rationalizing the Japanese in-service teacher training: A case of effective strategy formulation and implementation. In Cheng,
Y., Chow, K., & Tsui, K. (Eds.), New teacher education for the future:
International perspectives. (pp. 333-357.) Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of
Education.
Moriyoshi, N. (1999). Teacher preparation and teachers’ lives in Japan. In
Stevenson, H., Lee. S.Y., & Nerison-Low, R. (Eds.), Contemporary research in
the United States, German, and Japan on five educational issues. (pp. 410438). U.S. Department of Education: National Center for Educational
Statistics. Retrieved January 9, 2003, from http://www.ed.gov/PDFDocs/
research5.pdf
Morris, P. & Williamson, J. (Eds.). (2000). Teacher education in the Asia-Pacificregion: A comparative study. New York: Falmer.
National Commission on Educational Reform (NCER). (2000, December). 17 proposals for changing education. Retrieved January 9, 2003, from http://www.
kantei.go.jp/foreign/education/report/report.html
National Institute for Educational Research (NIER). (1997). Teachers, teacher
education and development: Report on an APEID Regional Meeting of
Educational Research and Development Institutes in the Asia and the Pacific125Region. Tokyo: NIER Section on International Cooperation.
National Institute on Student Achievement, Curriculum, and Assessment(NISACA). The education system in Japan: Case study findings. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Education. (DOE Publication No. SAI 98-3008).
Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI). (1998, June). The educational system in Japan: Case study findings. U.S. Department of Education.
Retrieved January 9, 2003, from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/JapanCaseStudy/
title.html
Okuya, T. (1989). Teacher training in Japan. Tokyo: National Institute for
Educational Research (Occasional Paper).

Report of the United States Education Mission to Japan . (1946). Tokyo:
Government Printer.
Sato, M. & Asanuma, S. (2000). Japan. In Morris, P. & Williamson, J. (Eds.),
Teacher education in the Asia-Pacific region: A comparative study. (pp. 107132). New York: Falmer Press.
Shimahara, N. (1998). The Japanese model of professional development:
Teaching as a craft. Teaching and Teacher Education. 14(5), 451-462.
Shimahara, N. (2002). Teaching in Japan: A cultural perspective. New York:
RoutledgeFalmer.
Shimizu, K. (1998). Kyoiku dataland: A databook of educational statistics 19981999. Japan: Jiji Tsushinsha.
Skodvin, O. & Stensaker, B. (1998). Innovation through merging? Higher
Education Management, 10 (3), 73-86.
Stoel, C. & Thant, T.S. (2002). Teachers’ professional lives – A view from nine
industrialized countries. Washington, D.C.: Council for Basic Education..
Sutherland, S. (2002). Higher education in Hong Kong: Report of the University
Grants Committee. Hong Kong: Government Printer.
Takakura, S. & Ono, Y. (2002). Recent development of teacher education policy
and reform of teacher education system in Japan. Paper presented at JapanUS Teacher Education Consortium (JUSTEC) Annual Meeting, Naruto,
Japan.
Too many teacher training colleges (2001, November 23). Kyodo News .
Retrieved January 13, 2003, from http://www.japantoday.com/gidx/
news168388.html

126