山陽論叢 第第 2222 巻（2015）
巻 （2015）
山陽論叢

論文

Education or tool for social stratification?
Yukari Eto 1)
Key words: education, academic achievement, educational institutions (schools),
Japan’s educational policy,
I.

Introduction
I was born in 1970, the beginning of the second baby boom in Japan. When I

was a junior high school student, many of my friends were studying at cram schools orwhat we call “juku (塾)” in Japanese. Juku is a private after-school institution thathelps preparing for high school and university entrance exams. Attending cram schools
wasn’t normally children’s choice; rather, it was the decision of their mother. In
Japanese society, those mothers who coerce their children to study and place paramountimportance on the academic performance of their children in schools are called “kyoiku
mama (教育ママ).” It literally means “educational mother” in English. It arose inJapanese society, because mothers have such a critical responsibility in the raising ofchildren in Japan, and because education plays such an important role in determining
one’s income, and in furthering the quality of one’s life.
According to National Institute of Population and Social Security Research(2012, Second section, para. 4) in Japan, the second baby boom ended in 1974. But thephenomenon of “kyoiku mama” didn’t lose but rather gained the strength. In
contemporary Japan, mothers began to prepare their children to enter well known
private kindergartens which lead to the best elementary schools, junior high schools,
and high schools in their area, and finally to one of the prestigious universities. Whilethe competition happened at a higher educational level during the second baby boom,
now the competition begins at the age of four. If the Japanese educational system
offered the opportunity to all, would these “kyoiku mama(s)” be necessary? It seembizarre to still have the phenomenon of these educational mothers since the baby boom
ended approximately 40 years ago and the competition rate should also be lower by now.
Bowles and Gintis in Schooling in capitalist America (1976) discuss how the American
educational system reflects, reinforces, and reproduces their socioeconomic structure1) Department of Language and Culture at Sanyo Gakuen University

1- 41 -

Eto ： Education
tool social
for socialstratification?
stratification?
Educationor toolor forcalled capitalism. In this essay, I am going to focus on the Japanese educational systembeing that Japanese socioeconomic structure is similar to the one in the United States
after the Second World War. For this reason, I will try to address the question by
applying their theory using mainly Japanese statistics and citations, and try to explain
the concepts of success and failure which we see as a natural phenomenon, but in
actually is imposed and sustained by schools. In addition, I will like to share how I view
what our educational system should be in the future.
II. The development of Japan’s contemporary educational system and its relationshipwith the socioeconomic structure
The history of Japan’s contemporary educational system is rather short. It has
only 145 years of history. The first educational system was established in 1872 during
the Meiji period, but the educational attainment rate was only 39.88% in 1877 (Kaigo,1971). The low attainment rate was due to the levied tuition that people had to pay.
According to the document which was published by Japan’s Ministry of Education,
Science and Culture (1962/1972), people seemed to pay somewhere around 50 sen
monthly for attending primary schools while people’s average annual income was 21 yenat this time. Since 1 yen is count as 100 sen, you can see the tuition was rather
expensive and was a burden for many people.
The attainment rate went up to 81.48% when the amendment of theeducational system was issued and the tuition became free of charge in 1900 (Kaigo,1971). What I would like to emphasize is not only the free educational charge but also
its impact on educational policy. On October 30, 1890, Emperor Meiji of Japan signed
what we called “Kyōiku Chokugo (教育勅語)” or the Imperial Rescript on Education(Japan’s Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, 1972). It illustrated the national
moral principles that each citizen is to follow; in particular, it stressed the reverence
toward the emperor and patriotism. The Rescript was distributed to every school
throughout Japan along with a portrait of the Emperor and Empress, and students
were required to read aloud the text and eventually to memorize it. The number of years
in schooling was also unified into six years for primary schools. It seemed the policy
would be sustained but Japan entered wars.
After the defeat of Japan in World War II, the United States led the Allies in
the occupation and rehabilitation of the Japanese state between 1945 and 1952 throughwidespread military, political, economic, and social reforms including the educational
system. The first American Education Delegation arrived in Japan and issued its firstreform report in 1946 suggesting that Japan incorporate six-year compulsory primary2- 42 -

山陽論叢 第第 22
22 巻（2015）
巻 （2015）
山陽論叢

education schooling both for boys and girls, and three-year compulsory junior highschool education preferably for both boys and girls with free tuition (Sato, 1991). As aresult, the new Japanese government reflects the suggestion and the Fundamental Law
of Education was issued in 1947. Since then, our compulsory education schoolingbecame 9 years for the age of 6 to 15 years: 6 years for primary schools and 3 years forjunior high schools with free tuition at public schools. And the practice of Imperial
Rescript on Education in schoolings was abolished by the Diet of Japan in 1948.
In another words, children can’t go through without attending the nine-year
compulsory schools in Japan since the Fundamental Law of Education was issued after
the World War II; except the case of students with special needs. Although students
with disabilities now had a right to study, Vocational Education or Special Education
wouldn’t be established until 1979, 32 years later than those who were non disability
students (Kuraishi, 2102). The Japanese government has complete control over thematerial that students acquire in compulsory education schoolings. The government
does not stress the reverence of the emperor, but schools became the place to initiate theselected materials and information which the government chose. Students were now
required to memorize all the information in their texts. The ability of memorizing school
materials is considered as academic ability, and it is called “gakuryoku (学力)” inJapanese. It literary translated as “ability to learn.”
The ability of memorizing or one’s academic achievements would be determinedby tests in schools. High schools use the entrance exam test scores as criteria foradmissions. The students who acquired the most knowledge can score better and canenter the better or more prestigious high school. There is intense competition within
students. This Japanese educational system; therefore, is not designed to help all
succeed, nor does it have this objective in mind. George and Louise Spindler (1989) in“There are no dropouts among the Arunta and Hutterites” point out that school
dropouts are a cultural creation by providing ethnographical data on the traditional
Arunta of the Australian central desert. There is no competition and no one is better
than anyone else in Arunta culture. Everyone successfully graduates from theirinitiation ceremonies which is equivalent to Western formal education.
McDermott (1989) also observes that the American institutional role of schools
is to provide candidates for failure and success. Japanese social and economic structure
which reenacts the American model became capitalistic after the Wars and it createdcompetition in the society. In a capitalist market economy, the people with ability
provide economic strength for companies. The competitions and testing help sort out
students in the educational system: failures and successes. And once students get
3- 43 -

Eto ： Education
tool social
for socialstratification?
stratification?
Educationor toolor for

tracked into a lower level in schooling, they usually remain at the same level. Whentheir track has been determined, it is hard to change from one track to another.
Low-ability students who are labeled as “slow learners” or with having learning“disabilities” develop a negative self-image leading to low self-esteem, and eventually
dropout from schools (Donelan, 1994). As a result, people began to pursue getting on the“right truck,” to better education, and in that way education became a business. Manycram schools were opened up to sell secure seats for the “right truck.” Thissocioeconomic structure is the source of “kyoiku mama.” Many advocates of capitalismemphasize that this socioeconomic system would give consumers greater selection of
institutions and better education. However, we can’t ignore the fact that there arepeople who don’t pick better education or there are people who can’t pick better
education due to their economic situation (Ushiogi, 1975), or there are ethnic groups
like the permanent Korean or Chinese residents of Japan1 who decided to send theirchildren to their ethnic schools where they can teach their ethnic culture and language(Kuraishi, 2012), they will be trucked in a non-stream line.
According to his research on public primary schools and public junior highschools in Osaka on 1989 and 2001, Koukichi Shimizu (2005) observes that there is aclear relationship with students’ socioeconomic background and their academic
performance. Those students who are categorized as successful are economically wellbeings and they have a stable family life. And those who are categorized as unsuccessful
are most likely those people who are indigent and have an unstable family life.
Moreover, he claims that the recent criticism of Japanese lower achievement oninternational assessments, especially on PISA (Programme for International Student
Assessment) is due to bipolarization of students: successful and unsuccessful. And thenumber of unsuccessfuls or low ability students is growing remarkably in each
assessment.
The argument that I bring to the discussion of education in Japan is that thesuccesses, failures, and conditions in Japanese education cannot be understood without
an analysis that includes the social order in which we occur. The inequalities andconditions of the society at large are mirrored and reproduced by the educational system.
It is not too obvious in Japan compared to the case of the United States where there is aclear inequality based on skin color (race) and or their historical background as slaveand slave owners or conquered and conquerors. However, actual research suggests that
the Japanese educational system is not providing a better education as pro capitalists
insist.
The Japanese government projects an image of compulsory public education as4- 44 -

山陽論叢 第第 22
22 巻（2015）
巻 （2015）
山陽論叢

equal. However, it has been focused on the indoctrination of acquired information which
was assessed by examinations, and academic achievements were measured only by testscores. Thus, it creates inequality rather than equality. Fortunately or unfortunately,
my mother wasn’t obsessed with sending me to cram schools. I, therefore, spent most of
my time outside of my house instead of staring at books. In primary school, I was moreinterested in competing on how far I could jump off from a swing, finding out how many
red swamp crawfish I could catch a day, or creating a trap to catch wild animals. My
importance on school academics was low. As a result, I scored highly only subjects that I
was interested in; physical education, music, and natural science. The other subjects on
which people normally place more importance such as mathematics and English2 I
scored poorly. At this point, I couldn’t find the need for mastering square root. I simply
thought that I could live normally if I could sum, subtract, multiple and divide. Same in
English, I was struggling to conquer Kanji, adopted logographic Chinese character that
we use in our Japanese writing. Why should I learn the foreign language? I wondered.
At the junior high school, our grade was placed in the order of academic performance.
As you might guess, my grade was low. I was a “failure” according to the Japanese
educational system. Who would have guessed that I could study and would finish a
Master’s degree from one of the prestigious universities? I don’t think any of my juniorhigh school teachers or my classmates even considered a modicum of possibility since it
is almost impossible to move from a low-ability to high-ability truck. I think my casecould raise the question of Japanese educational policy whether tests are the best
measure of academic achievement.
In his “Mieru gakuryoku, Mienai gakuryoku (見える学力 見えない学力),”
Hiroshi Kishimoto (1996), an ex-primary school teacher, states that academic abilities
are like an iceberg which consists of two portions: above water (easily recognizedabilities) and under water (blind/ unseen abilities). The Japanese education has been
mainly focused on the portion above surface of an iceberg. It is the acquired knowledge
in schools by memorizing information and one’s academic abilities are judged easily by
test score. However, the surface is typically only one-eighth of the real volume and ahuge underwater portion hasn’t seen or counted. Unseen abilities, for example, accountfor one’s family environments, grownup environments, childhood experiences,
existences of influential teachers and/or friends. This under water portion is the base forthe surface and Kishimoto insists that we need to pay more attention to this underwater portion. His experiences as a teacher and working with students in his real life
lead his “iceberg” theory on one’s ability and his pedagogy, and I find this moreconvincing.
5- 45 -

Eto ： Education
tool social
for socialstratification?
stratification?
Educationor toolor for

Has education always been a tool for stratifying people? The origin of the word“education” comes from the verb, “educate.” According to the Oxford Dictionary ofEnglish Etymology (1966), “educate” came from past participle stem of Latin, ēducāre,which means “to rear” in English. “Educate” related to ēducerē. In English, ē means“out” and ducerē means “lead.” Together it means “to lead out.” However, this became
obsolete; thus, it has come to mean “to develop from a latent condition,” and recently itmeans “to provide schooling or tuition for” (p. 301). Interestingly, the Latin word,ēducāre (childrearing), has almost the same meaning with “iku (育),” which is the latterpart of the word education, “kyouiku (教育)” in Japanese. Each Kanji character isconsidered to have its own meaning. According to an etymologist, Yoshimitsu Kanou(2014), the origin of “iku (育)” 3 expresses a baby is passing a parturient canal. If you
look carefully, the baby draws his/her head down just like when a baby is born in a real
life. Therefore, it has come to mean “growing” with regards to a neonate and it means“rearing” with regard to parents (p. 29). The former part of adopted logographic Chinesecharacter in education is “kyou (教).” The interpretation of this original character split
into two. The character has an image of a child also, but he/she is no longer appears to
be a head down.4 In this character, he/she is standing. The right side of the childsymbolizes a doyen or a master. And above the child, there are two cross marks. The
different interpretations of these crosses are the fork in the road.
Groups like Shizuka Shirakawa (2012), state that the crosses symbolize abuilding, which in this case is a school building. Therefore, Shirakawa asserts that“kyou” indicates a doyen urging a pupil in a school building, and is signified by“teaching” (p. 140). Kanou (2014) also indicates that “kyou” means “teaching” but histranslation of crosses is different. As a result, the connotation of “teaching” differs
significantly from Shirakawa. Kanou claims the cross shows an interaction between amaster and a pupil, so his case of teaching is not one way like Shirakawa but rather
contains “teaching and learning” definition (p. 278). I am not going to argue about
whose interpretation is more accurate, but I would like to note even in the case of Latin
origin or Chinese origin, “education” signifies at one point to lead a child in the processof becoming a member of society. At this point there were neither failures nor successes.
But since the socioeconomic structure has been changed, “education” implies structured
teaching like the case of Shirakawa, and it has come to mean to provide schooling, andstratification followed. This process suggests that education is a part of society and thatthe conditions under which education function are determined by society. So, how is
education impacted by the socioeconomic structure within which it functions? The firstlaw of capitalism is “to make a profit off the labor of others or go out of business”
6- 46 -

山陽論叢 第第 22
22 巻（2015）
巻 （2015）
山陽論叢(Parenti, 1989, p. 7). As Michael Parenti points out, in the case of the United Sates,
almost 86% of American wealth is owned by the top 10% of American population. A
capitalistic society can best be described as a pyramid. A small number of people at the
tip of the pyramid have economic control while the majority is at the bottom with the
low paying jobs. Schools produce failures not because of individual deficiencies, butrather because they serve as screening devices or filters for the labor market byproviding candidates for future cheap labor in a quest for profit, under a mantle oflegitimacy. If educational institutions were there to help everyone to succeed like thetraditional Arunta of the Australia, who would want to work as hard cheap labors,
especially if the labor isn’t compensated adequately?
If our government would provide equal opportunity for all, the educational
system would be tuition-free until graduation as is the case in Cuba and Finland. Our
media focuses much on the Finnish educational system because Finland scored firstplace on PISA for numerous years. On the other hand, Cuba is a socialist country whichis the opposite of most capitalist countries, especially in the case of the United States;
the media will not spotlight Cuba. And also this socialist country hasn’t participated in
PISA because the assessments were held by the Organization for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD) that is originated as the Organization for
European Economic Co-operation (OEEC) which was provided by American financial
aid after World War II. However, documents provided by the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and Gasperini (2000)
show Cuba’s prominent academic achievements and educational system.
After the Cuban Revolution in 1959, the Castro administration restructured its
educational policy, with improvement of the literacy rate throughout Cuba as a toppriority. The government operates its educational institutions, and its educational policy,
with education provided free and equally for all children both rural and urban, bothmale and female even impoverished areas (Gasperini, 2000). Cuba recorded extremely
outstanding achievements on the results of both the First Regional Comparative andExplanatory Study (PERCE) during the 1995-1997 period and the Second Regional
Comparative and Explanatory Study (SERCE) during the 2005-2006 period in Latin
America and the Caribbean countries which were led by UNESCO. According to“Executive Summary” of SERCE (Valdes, 2008), sixteen countries5 and the State of
Nuevo Leon in Mexico took a part in the study while the PERCE were participated only
thirteen countries6. Here, I use results of SERCE since there were more participants
and more subjects were involved. At SERCE, third and sixth grades of primary students
were evaluated in Mathematics, Reading and Science. In all three sections, Cuba
7

- 47 -

Eto ： Education
tool social
for socialstratification?
stratification?
Educationor toolor for

exhibited the highest performance. For example, Cuba ranked the highest average insixth grade Mathematics, 637 points out of 850 points, which is 50 points above thesecond highest (Valdes, 2008, pp. 31-32). It is more remarkable in the case of sixth
grade Science. Cuba won first place in the test. Its average score is a little bit over 650
points while Uruguay, the second highest, barely reached 550 points. The difference inthese countries is over 100 points (Valdes, p.41). What makes Cuba’s educational
system perform so outstandingly even while under the severe economic restrictions
imposed by the United States?
Gasperini (2000) observes and notes several points, but I would like to focus on
two points. Firstly, Cuba’s high commitment to education as government policy.
Gasperini notes that “Cuba devotes about 10 percent to 11 percent of its GDP to
education, a very high percentage compared with the rest of the region or with the 6
percent recommended as adequate by UNESCO” (p. 7). In order to compare Cuba withJapan, I examined a database of UNESCO (2016), “Education: Expenditure on
education as % of GDP (from government sources).” Somehow, Cuba cited only 6.76% on
education spending in 1999, the closest year compared with Gasperini’s figures7. Still,
Cuba’s expenditure on education (6.76%) was slightly higher than 4.85% of the UnitedStates, and double compared with 3.54% of Japan. From the same resource, if we look at
the data in 2005, it shows that Cuba spent 10.56% of GDP while the United States
spent 5.07% and Japan only spent 3.48%. Secondly, Gasperini mentions that students
do not compete with classmates in Cuba:
A form of competition permeates all classrooms as well as the school
atmosphere and is promoted among groups in the same class, different classes,
and the school and other schools. However, competition in Cuba is called"emulation" because it is not considered an end in itself, but a method for
self-improvement, developed through solidarity and collaboration among peers.
(p. 12)The idea of “emulation not competition” reminds me of Shimizu’s remarks on how
students in a classroom resemble woods in a forest. “Woods in a forest grow up in an
assemblage. They are stronger than wood growing alone, especially when they facenatural disaster like a typhoon or inundation” (Shimizu, 2005, p. 43). Shimizu believes
that it is natural for children to be raised in a group, like woods in a forest, and so areacademic abilities. Providing an environment that encourages equity with companions
in a classroom will augment their academic abilities substantially. This is the necessary
8- 48 -

山陽論叢 第第 22
22 巻（2015）
巻 （2015）
山陽論叢

condition for fostering children’s academic abilities. I would state, therefore, thatcountries like Cuba and Finland that have high education expenditures that makepossible a tuition-free higher education that includes all school expenditures, offer an
example of the ideal conditions that promote a school environment of emulation insteadof competition.
Certainly, the academic environment is vital, but at the same time, it becomesapparent that designing and implementing an educational system whose success ismeasured by its capacity to serve the needs of the problems posed by the difference in
the interests and priorities of the social classes involved, but, perhaps moresignificantly the imbalance in our socioeconomic system. Education originally meant tolead a child to become a productive member of society. Children were considered as apotential social resource. When I was working as a member of “Secretaría de Educación
Pública” (SEP or Secretariat of Public Education in English) in Mexico, I encounteredwhat noted as a Chinese proverb that beautifully illustrated the point. The translation
in English would be: “If you are planning for a year, sow rice; if you are planning for a
decade, plant trees; if you are planning for a lifetime, educate children.”8
III. Conclusion
The capitalistic socioeconomic system derives great benefits from inequality. It
is an essential lubricant for the socioeconomic system. And unfortunately, theeducational system mirrors and reproduces inequality. Economic dependency is at thecenter of the problems created by education under the capitalist system. The
monopolistic and despotic control of economic life by ruling class is what engenders the
economic dependence that compromises the sovereignty of all social institutions
including schools, which participate in its reproduction. In Japanese society, the image
that we have equal opportunity and free tuition under our compulsory educational
system is widely held. However, if we look behind the illusion, “free” education is fromprimary until junior high school. People have to pay after junior high schools. Yet,higher education is what determines the major factor in the earning capacity of anindividual. The ruling class has easy access to higher education, but common people
struggle greatly in pursuing higher education since it involves cost. The successes andfailures which we consider as natural and a result of individual deficiencies are actuallycreated by schools, or more accurately they are imposed and sustained by Japan’s
educational system.
The Japanese educational system has mainly been promoting what Kishimoto(1996) calls “mieru gakuryoku,” easily recognized acquired knowledge. Kishimoto uses
9

- 49 -

Eto ： Education
tool social
for socialstratification?
stratification?
Educationor toolor for

the iceberg as a metaphor to explain that there are two different types in education. The
above water portion of the iceberg is the knowledge which is acquired in schools andeasily recognized by test score. “Mienai gakuryoku,” the underwater portion of theiceberg is as significant as above water portion, yet it is unseen or not recognized.
Childhood experiences such as playing in nature probably can help to develop ability
such as creativity and observation skill which most likely cannot be acquired by sending
children to a cram school. Children in cram schools are perhaps capable of explaining
characteristics of crayfish. However, are they capable of drawing them? People normallyaren’t required to draw crayfish, but what I would like to reveal is that inquisitivenessis key to apprenticeship. These unrecognized abilities are hard to acquire in the neither
current educational system nor cram schools. Besides, just accumulating theinformation is no substitute for critical inquiry, but it apparently will be replaced bycomputers and robots in the future.
“Mieru Gakuryoku” is a significant factor in the earning capacity of theindividual. Therefore, “kyoiku mama” places paramount importance on the academic
performance of their children in schools, and as a result, they send children into cramschools to better their positions. If we plan to put more weight in “mienai gakuryoku,”
any meaningful educational reform would require a restructuring of society under adifferent set of principles and values oriented more toward people than money. Bowles
and Gintis have very strong and clearly delineated ideas on social reform and state how
it will eliminate the inequality in the educational system and overall society. But I
believe what will bring a new social order is the emergence of a sufficient number ofpeople demanding change. The demand for equity in education will eventually requireestablishing a new social order. Not vice versa. Children are our most important social
resources. Education not be a tool for stratification.

Notes
1.

They are referred to “Zainichi (在日)” in Japanese. Zainichi means a foreign citizen "staying inJapan" normally, but in this case, they are the long-term Korean or Chinese residents of Japan
who trace their roots to Korea or China under Japanese rule.

2.

English was obligatory subjects only at junior high schools in 1970s. However it became obligatoryfor 5th and 6th grads of Japanese public primary schools in 2011.

3.

加納

喜光 (2014).

漢字語源語義辞典 東京堂出版 p.30 (Kanou, Yoshimitsu.)

10- 50 -

山陽論叢 第第 22
22 巻（2015）
巻 （2015）
山陽論叢

4.

加納

喜光 (2014).

漢字語源語義辞典 東京堂出版 p.278 (Kanou, Yoshimitsu.)

5. (an Alphabetical order) Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Columbia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic,
Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay.
6. (an Alphabetical order) Argentina, Bolivia, Brasil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Honduras,
Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Dominican Republic and Venezuela.
7.

Gasperini’s study was published in 2000, but she uses the First Regional Comparative andExplanatory Study (PERCE) in Latin America and the Caribbean countries during the 1995-1997
period.

8.

According to Tetsuo Endo (遠藤哲夫) in his book, 新釈漢文大系 ４２ 官子 上 , which was

published by Meiji Shoin（明治書院）in 1989, the saying was in the Guanzi. And it says “educate
people” instead of “educate children” in Chinese (pp. 49-50). The Guanzi is the ancient Chinese
philosophical text that was written by Guan Zhong who was a chancellor of the State of Qi during
early Spring and Autumn Period which is approximately the 7th century BCE.

References
Bowles, Samuel., & Gintis, Herbert. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America. New York:
Basic Books, Inc.
Donelan, Richard W. (1994). The Promise of Brown and the Reality of Academic
Grouping: the Tracks of My Tears. Journal of Negro Education, V63, n3,376-388.
遠藤

哲夫 (1989).

新釈漢文大系 42 官子 上 明治書院 (Endo, Tetsuo.)

Gasperini, Lavinia. (2000).

The Cuban Educational System: Lessons and Dilemmas.

Country Studies Education Reform and Management Publication Series, Vol. l.
No 5. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, LAC, Human Development
Department.
Japan’s Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (文部省). (1972). 学制百年史
Retrieved fromhttp://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/html/others/detail/1317581.htm. (1962). 日本の成長と教育：教育の展開と経済の発達. Retrieved fromhttp://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/html/hpad196201/hpad196201_2_011.
html
海後

宗忠 (監修) (1971).

加納

喜光 (2014).

日本近代教育史事典 平凡社 (Kaigo, Tokiomi.)

漢字語源語義辞典 東京堂出版 (Kanou, Yoshimitsu.)
11- 51 -

Eto ： Education
tool social
for socialstratification?
stratification?
Educationor toolor for岸本裕史 (1996).

見える学力、見えない学力 大月書店 (Kishimoto, Hiroshi.)

倉石一郎 (2012).

包摂/排除論からよみとく日本のマイノリティ教育：在日朝鮮人教育・

障害児教育・同和教育をめぐって

稲垣

恭子（編著） 教育における包摂と排除：もうひとつの若者論 明石書店 pp.101-136. (Kuraishi, Ichirou.)
Mc Dermott, Raymond P. (1989). Discussant’s Comments: Making Dropouts. In Henry T
Trueba, George Spindler, & Louise Spindler (Eds.), In What Do

Anthropologists Have to Say about Dropouts? New York: The Falmer Press.
National Institute of Population and Social Security Research in Japan (国立社会保障・人口問題研究所). (2012, March). 日本の将来推計人口

Retrieved fromhttp://www.ipss.go.jp/syoushika/tohkei/newest04/con2h.html
Onions, C.T., (Ed.). (1966). The Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology. London: Oxford
University Press.
Parenti, Michael. (1988). Democracy for the Few (Fifth Edition). New York: St. Martin’s
Press.
佐藤秀夫（代表）(1991).

米国対日教育使節団に関する総合的研究（戦後教育改革資料

10）国立教育研究所 (Sato, Hideo.)
清水宏吉 (2005). 学力を育てる白川静(2012).

岩波書店(Shimizu, Koukichi.)

常用字解 平凡社 (Shirakawa, Shizuka.)

Spindler, George and Louise. (1989). There Are No Dropouts among the Arunta andHutterites. In Henry T Trueba, George Spindler, & Louise Spindler (Eds.), In

What Do Anthropologists Have to Say about Dropouts? New York: The
Falmer Press.
UNESCO. Education: Expenditure on education as % of GDP (from government

sources). Retrieved January 5, 2016, fromhttp://data.uis.unesco.org/index.aspx?queryid=181. Primer Estudio Regional Comparativo y Explicativo, PERCE. Retrieved fromhttp://www.unesco.org/new/es/santiago/education/education-assessment-llece/p
erce-serce-databases/
潮木

守一(1975).

進路決定過程のパス解析：高校進学過程の要因分析

教育社会学科

研究 第 30 集 東洋館出版社 (Ushiogi, Morikazu.)
Valdes, Hector. (Coordinator). (2008). Executive Summary: Student achievement in

Latin America and the Caribbean, SERCE. (Ernesto Leigh, Trans.). Chile:
Regional Bureau for Education in Latin America Latina and the Caribbean
OREALC/UNESCO.

12- 52 -