English Edition
No. 11

July 2014

Inaugural Address as Director of the CCTMidori Otake (Professor, Comprehensive Educational Science Division)

I am Midori Otake, appointed as Director of the CCT. I
hope for our continued success together. Because my
specialty is home economics education, I would like tointroduce the history of home economics in place of
my inaugural address today.
During the Edo period, terakoya (private elementary
schools) were developed to teach “reading, writing, andarithmetic”. Nevertheless, only boys studied there. Girls
learned reading, writing, and arithmetic throughlearning sewing under sewing mistresses.
In the Meiji era, the Education System Order waspromulgated, establishing an educational system for all
citizens. Nonetheless, because it was education
centered on reading, writing, and arithmetic, most girls
were still visiting sewing mistresses as before. The
attendance rate at girlsʼ schools was exceedingly low.
Therefore, the government introduced “handicrafts” toincrease the school attendance rate of girls. Girlsʼ highschools, many of which were established at the time,emphasized English language education, but textbooks
such as “Western sewing” and “Western handicraft”
were used there. In ordinary elementary schools, whichwere introduced into compulsory education by the
promulgation of the 1879 Education Order, theeducational contents were distinguished between
boys and girls by homemaking and sewing education,
which was the root of home economics. As salient
examples, “sewing” became compulsory for girls and“domestic economy” was taught to them instead of“economics”.
Under the new educational system created afterWorld War II, home economics came into existence toease the burden of household formation andmaintenance in a democratic society. Social studies
were taught to ease construction of that democraticsociety. In lower secondary schools, home economics
was started as an elective subject for technical andvocational courses. In upper secondary schools, it was
set up as domestic arts: one of ﬁve elective subjects forvocational courses (along with agriculture, industry,
commerce, and ﬁshery). However, because it waselective, the registration rate was low; home economics
teachers strongly urged that it be made compulsory forgirls to increase the number of students.
In 1957, under technological competition between
the United States and the Soviet Union, the Central

Council for Education came up with the “Measures for
Promotion of Science and Technology Education.”
Technical and vocational courses in lower secondary
schools (including domestic arts) were to be abolishedand industrial arts courses were to be newly established.
However, home economics teachers strongly urged thecontinuation of home economics. As a result, it was tobe started as “industrial arts and homemaking” (course
for girls and course for boys). Concurrently, in upper
secondary schools, importance started to be assigned
to mathematics, science, and vocational education, andhome economics, making them, in principle,
compulsory for girls.
In eﬀorts undertaken to construct a gender-equal
society since the International Womenʼs Year of 1975,
the United Nations proposed the “International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination” in 1980. Japan was in contravention of
the treaty in terms of the following three points:
nationality law, employment-related law, andcurriculum (gender distinction in studying home
economics). The government ratiﬁed the treaty afterrevising those terms and chose to make home
economics compulsory for both boys and girls in 1985.
In fact, this year marks the 20th year since 1994, the year
compulsory coeducation of home economics was
implemented.
As just described, it is not an exaggeration to say thathome economics education is the history of girlsʼ
education. It has therefore been a subject that has been
buﬀeted by government policies and social conditions. I
would like to take this opportunity of this appointment
as Director of the CCT to examine curricula again fromsuch a perspective.

Changes in “Science” Textbooks in England

Mariko Kaneko (Associate Professor, Curriculum Center for Teacher)

The 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake andnuclear disaster was more than enough to makeus realize that we were already living in a risksociety. In a society that cannot agree over thedeﬁnitions of risk, for individuals to avoid risk in ameaningful way, they have no choice but tocarefully study and judge for themselves diverse
pieces of “knowledge” from a variety of sources
and rely only on those whose scientiﬁcfoundations make sense to them. This does,
however, place a tremendous burden on people
living in such a society.
Because of this fact, the very reason for“learning” will come into question in contexts notseen in the past. In schools, it is necessary forteachers to pass on to students the foundations
for the knowledge that will enable them not only
to deal with future anxieties and uncertainties,
but with the realities of the present society. Once
we become aware of this potential inherent inschool “learning”, it becomes a question of whatknowledge we should generate, convey, andteach.
With the problem described above, toconsider the question of how education
contents are selected and transformed in society
in a comparative sociology perspective, I
analyzed recent changes in the curriculum inEngland by focusing on the Twenty First Century
Science (abbreviated below as “21CS”) course
suite textbook for the GCSE Science qualiﬁcation,a requirement for the ﬁnal two years (Key Stage4) of compulsory education in England. The ﬁrst
edition of Twenty First Century Science GCSE
Science Higher was published in 2006. This text
re-examines the purpose of science in secondary
education. One of its stated aims was to provide
a basis for “scientiﬁc literacy … for all young
people,” and it proved to be one of the mostchallenging science courses in the history ofeducation in England. However, if we look at thesecond edition of this text, which was publishedin 2011, we see that major changes have been
made regarding a number of issues. Among themany changes, the most striking diﬀerences forthis author was the deletion of two principles
repeatedly invoked in the ﬁrst edition, namely
the “precautionary principle (that is, take steps tominimize the risks associated with speciﬁchuman actions when no one knows how serious
they are)” and “ALARA”, or “as low as reasonably
achievable” (the concept of ALARA was ﬁrst
proposed in a recommendation by theInternational Commission on RadiologicalProtection (ICRP) in 1977 as a basic philosophy
for radiation protection. In accordance with thebasic principle that “All exposures shall be kept as
low as reasonably achievable, economic andsocial factors being taken into account,” it seeks
to limit exposure to radiation.) (Kaneko, M.
“Karikyuramu no syakaigaku josetsu: Ingurando
niokeru saiensu no kyokasho ni chumoku shite

The 2006 edition (left) and the 2011 edition (right)of Twenty First Century Science GCSE Science(Introduction to Sociology of Curriculum: A
Sociological Exploration of a GCSE Science
Textbook in England ”). The Journal of Child
Study, Vol. 19 (2013), pp.145-159. Harvest-sha.) (inJapanese).
Why were the precautionary principle and
ALARA deleted? Why did the changes in the
textbooks occur? Why did the same society that
produced 21CS, an unprecedented course suite,
allow a move that can be considered to have“set back” 21CS? These questions remainunanswered. This is all the more reason to treat
the task that lies ahead as falling under the scopeof the sociology of curricula. By “the task,” I mean
gathering and using data to shed light on theprocesses by which, amidst webs of social
interactions, these texts came about, were
accepted, criticized, and subjected to change,
and the micro-politics operating in the
background. Such investigations will help toidentify and characterize modes of knowledgetransmission in modern society and bring to lightthe politics that control them.
To clarify the answers to these questions, theauthor took research leave from September 2012and visited Kingʼs College London to conduct aninterview research of more than 20 people,
including the producers and authors of the
textbooks, people involved in science education,school teachers, and guardians. They accepted arequest for the interview research from a stranger.
One interviewee even introduced the next
interviewee saying, “You would be better oﬀ
asking this question to that person.” Thanks tothem, I was able to conduct the research in asnowball manner. I express my appreciation forhaving been given the time to devote myself toresearch in London. In addition, when recallingeach face of the people who cooperated, I
strengthened my determination that I must
dispatch the research results in both Japan andEngland.

Considering What is Needed for Teacher Education

Etsuroh Tetsuya, Member of the CCT Steering Committee (Professor, Arts and Sports Science Division)

In the “Construction of a Support System to Advance
Teacher Education through Cooperation between
Universities: Teacher Education Renaissance/ HATO
Project”, the author has been involved in the “Project toSupport Educational Environments” and the “Project on
Education in Remote Area and Small-scale Schools” since
2012.
The Project to Support Educational Environments isaimed at “constructing a support model integratingkindergartens, nurseries, elementary schools, and juniorhigh schools in regions with educational diﬃculties byrealizing learning with a comprehensive educational
approach”. I am working with university teachers in ﬁelds I
have never encountered. The viewpoints of teachers who
explore the same problems from diﬀerent approaches are
all new to me. To be more speciﬁc, we established the
School Support Oﬃce in Sumida Ward Sakuratsutsumi
Junior High School and appointed a researcher, Hiroshi
Kashihara, as a key person to conduct surveys of actual
conditions, progress support for class teaching,after-school activity “Oﬀ School”, and research support forteachers. We also asked about 20 students to be involvedin progress support for class teaching and learning
support. I heard a student who attended the elementaryteacher education program and who is participating in thechallenge saying with a sound of awareness, “It will
become an awkward situation if we do not teach properly(such as disciplines of learning) during elementary school.”
It exceeded our expectations that a student attending theelementary teacher education program was realized at asite of a junior high school with problems. Althoughpractical training of the elementary school teacher
education takes place in elementary schools, I feel that
actual experience in schools of the next level of educationis also needed.
In the Project on Education in Remote Area andSmall-scale Schools, I learned that about 40% of schools in
Hokkaido are either located in remote areas or are small inscale. In September 2013, I visited Shimohororo
Terminology of Teacher Education 14

Teacher Employment Rate
The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science andTechnology releases two ﬁgures related to the teacher
employment rate of “Universities and Faculties for Teacher
Education” in Japan (see Issue No. 1). One is based on the “School
Basic Survey” conducted annually on May 1. This is the ratio of
those who were in regular employment as teachers and those
who became part-time lecturers under working conditions of 30
hours or more per week and a period of less than one year
among the previous yearʼs graduates. Another is the survey offaculties for teacher education which is conducted on
September 30 every year. This ratio includes regular employees
and all kind of part-time lecturers. Naturally the latter ratio
becomes higher. This is the ratio that many universities andfaculties for teacher education use as their numerical goals topresent to the outside world. In addition, the teacher
employment rates released by municipal and private universities
mutually diﬀer, some include not only teachers but also others as“education-related professionals”.
Many sincere teacher educators are reluctant to encourage
students to seek jobs as unstable, non-regular employees fromthe perspective of career support for students. However, mattershave gone beyond their control in recent trends by which
universities assign importance to the eﬃciency of their
management.
(Yasuyuki Iwata)

Elementary School, 40 min by car from Kushiro city center,to observe the educational guidance in a combined classof more than one grade. It was the ﬁrst time to see theteaching style that is peculiar to combined classes,
indirect instructions and direct instructions, where ateacher teaches children in two diﬀerent grades at a time.
I was impressed by the attitude of children who werelearning independently as if they covered things that
their teacher was unable to keep an eye on. At a study
meeting in March of the following year, I heard speciﬁcreports from eight students about actual practicaltraining in remote area schools for about a week, which
was conducted in the form of combination with thelecture “Actual Practical Training in Remote Area Schools
I” before the formal practical training (teaching practice)of third-year students. Students were apparently able toacquire a sense of mission that “I am going to be ateacher.”
The population will decrease in Japan. The diﬀerence inpopulation between urban and rural areas will continue
to expand. The closing and consolidation of schools inrural areas might have reached its limits. The term
“educational inequality” has become prevalent inJapanese society. “In a classroom, there are two
mountains, children with academic excellence and thosewith problems. A teacher inevitably gives lessons
appropriate to children who are in between. Bothchildren with academic excellence and those withproblems lose interest in the class. The environment
makes them feel like disturbing the class.” Such anarrative crosses my mind. I cannot help thinking that themethod of diﬀerent level instructions can be applied toschools with educational diﬃculties.
As described above, suggestions have been made in
the HATO Project on what is needed for future teacher
education. However, there are limitations that must be
acknowledged as well. When adding to what is needed,
we must cut something instead. It is diﬃcult to determine
what to cut.

Overview of the Ongoing
Research ProjectIn the third sector (tht division for Teacher Training
research), we have been working on a project entitled“University and Teacher Training: Present status,
problems, and prospects” in cooperation with four joint
researchers from within and outside our university since
the latter half of FY 2013.
Teacher training in Japan is provided by the appointing
authority of teachers. The teacher training programs are
considerably rich by international standards in terms ofboth quality and quantity. Several university teachers are
directly involved in teacher training. Moreover, theexpectations for universities as “resources” of teacher
training are great. However, to date, the involvement of
universities in public teacher training is often being
conducted on an “independent basis” that university
teachers are involved in as individuals. Based onawareness of the problem, this project was undertaken tolearn the concrete involvement of universities in teacher
training as organizations from advanced eﬀorts home
and abroad. To date, we have held a study meetingroughly once every two months. We also plan to have an
on-site study meeting in September, one purpose ofwhich is to make an inspection of the eﬀort for the school
improvement support mainly made by regional
academic societies. I am also working on a study of thereorganization trends of teacher training with emphasis
on universities in Germany as a research project by JSPS
Grant-in-Aid. Through these projects, I want to present
ideas for the improvement of in-service teacher training.
(Kenji Maehara)Sites Where Teachers
Are Nurtured No. 13

Because I have been asked to introduce theDepartment of Professional Development of Teachers,
Graduate School of Education, University of Fukui, I would
like to give you a brief summary. First, in the paper(“Research into Educational Practice and the Reform of
Teacher Education at the University of Fukui: Historical
Steps Taken and Reﬂection on Reforms since the 1980s
and Establishment of Graduate School of Professional
Development of Teachers”. The Japanese Journal of
Educational Research, Vol. 80, No. 4, December 2013.) (inJapanese), the author described the history of theuniversity and graduate school reform from 1985, theyear the author arrived at University of Fukui, andintroduced the fact that the history leads “inevitably” tothe present Graduate School of Teacher Education.
Particularly, I think that the “Course of School-Reform”(Quota: eight students), which has been held at theexisting graduate school since 2001, was the start ofgraduate school reform based on schools. The trial anderror conducted there formed the basis for theestablishment of the Graduate School of Teacher
Education in 2008. At the time, it was a course based onaﬃliated schools and medical-related vocational schools.
I recall that we visited the schools, talked about classes,
and had passionate conversations about the actual
situation of children and students. In medical-related
vocational schools, the hours of clinical practice are
signiﬁcantly greater than those of teaching practice.
What kind of practical training should students receivewith students? How should the practical training place
importance on two-way communication? It wasrecognized that medical sites have problems similar to
those of schools.
The Graduate School of Teacher Education wasestablished in 2008 and expanded its quota to 30
students. As described, we believe that trial and error andthe basis of the “Course of School-Reform”, which we had
been working on by the time, have enabled thecontinuation, further development, and formation of the
Graduate School of Teacher Education. At present, wehave about 30 base and cooperative schools. The baseschools are fundamentally continuing, but thecooperative schools are often newly joined. That is true
because schools with an in-service graduate student who
is dispatched by Fukui Prefecture Education Board
become cooperative schools. Currently we have 30 staﬀ
members (including full-time, specially appointed, andpart-time). After organizing multiple teams, they go toschools in mutual collaboration. What we think isimportant here is that the visit is not only for one
graduate student. “Based on schools” represents the
feeling that we want to think together about aconnection to teachers of the entire school and problemsof the school (lesson study, student guidance, etc.) using
the one graduate student as a “connection”. We
university people are sometimes unwelcome when
visiting educational sites. That is true because they resist“instructions” oﬀered with a “condescending attitude”.
What we must always bear in mind is the relationship oflearning from each other and the relationship based onequality. The relationship between theory and practice isthe same. It is not the case that theory comes ﬁrst andpractice follows as its application. Theory is born from thevery practice and is reconstructed. We always wish to bea graduate school that thinks together about problems ofschools through the “school based method”, building a
relationship of trust based on which researchers andpractitioners continuously learn from each other.

2014 Fiscal Year Event Calendar

List of 2013 Publicationsof the Curriculum Center for Teachers< Importance of Research of Educational PracticeBased on Schools >Prof. Toru Mori,
Department of Professional Development of Teachers,
Graduate School of Education, University of Fukui◆Saturday, November 22, 2014

Workshop for Practicing Teacher Education◆Sunday, November 30, 2014
Open Symposium: The 15th Future
Curriculum of School and Teacher
Education: School after the Great East
Japan Earthquake

Staﬀ of Curriculum Center for Teachers
Director OTAKE, Midori(Professor, Home Economics Education)
Center Researchers[Division of Curriculum Research and Development]
KANEKO, Mariko(Associate professor, Educational Sociology)[Division of Teacher Preparation Research and Development]
IWATA, Yasuyuki(Professor, Historical Studies on Teacher Training)
UESUGI, Yoshimi(Associate Professor, Media Education)[Division of Research and Development for In-Service Teachers]
MAEHARA, Kenji(Professor, Educational Administration)◆Curriculum Center for Teachers Annual Research Report,
No. 13.
Thinking about Teacher Education in a Transitional Periodof Social and School Reform (Report on the 2013 OpenSymposium)◆Report of International Comparative Research Project on
the Connection of Teacher Education to Employment◆Teacher Education and Globalization (Report on the 2013
Workshop)Preparatory Project Report on the Development of a
Validation Tool for Eﬀectiveness of Teacher Training◆Collection of Materials Related to Teacher Employment in
China*Remaining copies of the publications are available. Pleasecontact the address below.
編集・発行
The CCT is produced by the Curriculum Center for Teachers,
東京学芸大学教員養成カリキュラム開発研究センター
Tokyo Gakugei University.
編集協力
Editor: Kenji Maehara
東京学芸大学／美術・書道講座／青山司研究室／青山司／大浦恵実

Designer: Tsukasa Aoyama and Emi Oura

＊ご不要の方はその旨を以下の連絡先にお知らせください。
(Aoyama Lab., Calligraphy and Arts, Tokyo Gakugei University)

Curriculum
Center for Terachers, Tokyo Gakugei University
184-8501 東京都小金井市貫井北町４−１−１
4-1-1
Nukui-kitamachi
Koganei, Tokyo 184-8501 Japan
東京学芸大学教員養成カリキュラム開発研究センター
Tel:
81-42-329-7776
Fax; 81-42-329-7786
Tel: 042-329-7776 Fax: 042-329-7786
Email:
currict@u-gakugei.ac.jp
E-mail: currict@u-gakugei.ac.jp
Website:http://www.u-gakugei.ac.j/~currict/english/index.html
Web: http://www.u-gakugei.ac.jp/~currict/index.html