English Edition
No. 10December 2013

Warm Learning Place to Promote
Undergraduate Teachers to Improve

Masami Kuroha, Director of Center for Cooperative Research and Development on School
Education, Faculty of Education, Gunma University

Is it only this author who cannot escape the somewhat
top-down and cold impression about FD of general
universities to evaluate teachersʼ educational activities
and completely improve their educational methods andclasses?
In contrast, this universityʼs FD center aims to be a warm
learning place for undergraduate teachers and ouraﬃliated schools to work in collaboration to support
newly appointed undergraduate teachers by resolving
their questions and concerns so that they can be devoted
to fulﬁlling their education and research activities. In otherwords, this center is set up within the aﬃliated school,
aiming to enhance the qualiﬁcations and capabilities ofundergraduate teachers and improve the organization byaction learning consisting of three steps: ﬁeldwork,
reﬂection, and sharing. The main actions include brieﬁng
sessions for systematical teaching practice programs,
open class workshops, educational salons, all teacher
participatory teaching practice, educational activity
observation workshops, and proposed class workshops.
Here, because of space constraints, I would like todescribe only some of the educational activities
observation workshops and educational salons.
First, the educational activity observation workshop
held in September was a place in which student teacherAʼs educational activities, teaching practice activities, andtraining for producing study guidance plans after school
were observed and opinions for them were exchanged at
the aﬃliated elementary and secondary schools duringAʼs teaching practice duration of ﬁve weeks. Throughactual opinion exchanges, participants were able tobroaden their recognition: “teachers need teaching skills
appropriate to childrenʼs developmental stages and it isimportant for them to promote themselves to improve,” “I
had never known that we had student teachers instructedin such a careful way until this time.” Next, the educationalsalon is a place where the aﬃliated teachers and theuniversity teachers have a table together to discuss
comprehensively how the university teachersʼ specialty isapplicable to student guidance with tough lovecompared with the aﬃliated teachersʼ views ofeducational materials and guidance mainly in teacher
training. At the educational salon held last January,
cross-disciplinary teachers including newly appointed
teachers used their reﬂection sheets “After visiting thepractice school to see their students do teacher training,”briskly exchanging their opinions related to researchclasses, information exchange with managers, andresearch conferences, associated with their own specialty.
Newly appointed teachers and undergraduate teachers
were able to make a warm learning place, particularly
addressing “colleague awareness that is necessary to
improve and grow together” such that “observation andexchanges further approaching the reality of school
operation such as scenes of a teacher instructing a student
teacher, preparation for experiments, teacher meetings,
cleaning, and lunch time are necessary to develop
teachersʼ abilities.”
Finally, for conclusion, Iʼd like to introduce the episodeof Mr. M, an undergraduate teacher, who participated in
the FD program. Mr. M came to this department three
years ago after he had worked for a private universityʼs
medical department for 22 years. Attending the openclass workshop held in June (an art class “to give a
proverb a shape”) honestly said “I had never known thatteachers gave lessons based on a “so-called study
guidance plan” until this time.” He added, “I was surprised
to know that the plan only for a 50 min lesson included
detailed information of each student as well as thesystematics of this lesson and relation with lessons ofJapanese language.” Regarding his feelings when he had
observed a student teacher teaching and stated his
opinion, he said with feeling and in breathy voice, “I was
astonished.” At the educational salon after teachingpractice, he added, “it is very diﬃcult for a university tohave future teachers acquire all the power of educational
execution, so they can only learn it through practice.
However, the training to improve readiness, originality
and ingenuity, and ability to think required for teachers
facing various challenges should be done at a university.”
I think Mr. Mʼs story holds the key to solving the problemsof FD in teacher training universities. In other words, Mr.
M has richness of self-awareness to feel “his own
powerlessness and immaturity” as a person on theposition of bringing up teachers, such as “what he knows
or does not in the ﬁeld of education” and “what he can doand cannot” as a subject special teacher. Through suchself-awareness, our attitude to work faithfully in our ﬁeldof specialization might have educational eﬀects on ourown students, and might also deepen our recognition of
our own advantages and disadvantages and thenencourage us to strive to improve and reform themconsciously.

Introduction of a Guest Professor of 2013 Fiscal Year
The Teacher Training Curriculum Development Research Center has the privilege of hosting
Professor Li Guang from Northeast Normal University as a Guest Professor of 2013 ﬁscal year
since December. He will be studying the curriculums of teacher education mainly at our center
until next May.
I have been learning and studying in the ﬁeld ofteacher education and curriculum development
since I entered Yongji Normal School in Jilin, China,
in September 1985. In July 1993, I received a
Bachelor of Education, majoring in psychology at
the School of Education, Northeast Normal
University. Additionally, I received a Master of
Education and Doctor of Education at School of
Educational Science, Northeast Normal University
in July 2001 and July 2008, respectively. During thattime, I have learned as a foreign student at theCenter for Clinic in Education, Miyagi University of
Education from October 1999 to October 2000.
Furthermore, I have continued to study as a Visiting
Researcher at that same institution from October2005 to August 2007. Now I am a Professor at the
Department of Education, Northeast Normal
University. At the same time, I serve as an oﬃce
director in charge of Northeast Teacher Education
Reform Experimental District.
I have been tackling China‒Japan teacher
education comparative research, diﬀerent culturecomparative
research
about
China‒Japanelementary school national language programs,
and studies related to building of the Northeast
experimental district for teacher education reformand producing the “U-G-S” teacher education
model. As my typical research results, I can refer tothe following: my doctoral dissertation, “Diﬀerent
Culture Comparative Research about Value Trend
in China‒Japan National Language Program”(2008); the book, Harmony and Wrong: Polar
Opposites of Japanese Culture; papers such as“Diﬀerent Culture comparative Research about
China‒Japan Elementary School Childrenʼs
Reading Response” (Educational Method with
Course Educational Materials, 2013 January),“Diﬀerent Culture comparative Research about
China‒Japan Elementary School Childrenʼs
Themes” (Global Educational Vision, 2013
February) and “Research about Making Teacher
Training Model called U-G-S: Practice and Thoughtof building Northeast Experimental District for
Teacher Training” (Teacher Education Study, 2013
January).
The projects that I have been addressing theseyears are as follows: research about evaluation ofelementary schoolchildrenʼs national language
sophistication as a 2011 ordinary item for “the 12thFive-Year Plan” science research program ofChineseNational
Language
Commission,intercultural comparative research related toChina‒Japan elementary national language
textbooks as a 2011 emphasis support theme for“the 12th Five-Year Plan” educational science
program of Jilin, China, the diﬀerent culturecomparative research about the value trend of
China‒Japan elementary school national language
courses as a 2011 ordinary item for Social Sciencesand Humanities Study, Ministry of Education of thePeople's Republic of China, and research about acooperative teacher education model of “normal

universities through local governments tosecondary and elementary schools” as a 2011
ordinary item for sociological funds in Jilin, China.
From October 2013 to March 2014, I, as a Guest
Professor of this center, will be deep in study withthe staﬀ about the themes below.
First, the provision of information about trends ofthe latest teacher training and teacher education
policies in China (particularly addressing the policy
trend of teacher training and teacher educational
systemic reforms).
Second, the provision of information aboutteacher training programs of Northeast Normal
University in China (particularly addressing
curriculum design and research and developmentof teacher training courses).
Third, the research and introduction of theteacher training model called U-G-S in Northeast
Normal University and construction of theNortheast experimental district for teacher trainingreforms.
Fourth, the provision of basic information related
to school teachers in China (particularly addressing
data of quantitative and qualitative changes ofschool teachers).
Fifth, analysis and suggestions about the teacher
training curriculum of this university.
Sixth, comparative research about a survey ofknowledge of China‒Japan secondary andelementary school teachers.
Finally, Tokyo Gakugei University is a prestigious
university known around the world. Above all, its
accomplishments in the teacher education ﬁeld are
known worldwide. It is the highest honor to me that
I have been invited to this center as a Guest
Professor. I would like to make eﬀorts to promoteexchange and cooperation of teacher education
between China and Japan further. Iʼll be grateful forany help I can receive here. Furthermore, Iʼmlooking forward to having good experiences at
Tokyo Gakugei University.
Li Guang
Department
UniversityofEducation,

Northeast

NormalTo Construct a “Japanese Way of Accreditation”: The Project on Quality Assurance for Teacher Education Institutes
Tokyo Gakugei University has been tackling the “Project
on Quality Assurance for Teacher Education,” which was
granted four-year special expenditures since FY 2010.
Bringing the whole of teacher training accredited
universities (about 600 BA level universities withapproximately 1,400 faculties) into a cross-cutting view, it
is aimed at producing a system to accredit teacher
education institutes above a certain level based on
self-governing peer review (Japanese Way of
Accreditation). The “Project on Quality Assurance for
Teacher Education” consisting of members of about 40
specialists (of whom some are selected from the public)
inside and outside this university, presided over by thisuniversityʼs Vice President of Education, has four divisions:a professional standards division, an accreditation
organization division, an accreditation standards division,and an on-campus specialty division. Three members of
the center, the Director of the Curriculum Center, Dr.
Takeshi, Prof. Iwata, and Dr. Uesugi (from the second
division) are participating in the project.
Against the backdrop of this project is awareness thatthe conventional, policy-induced measures formaintaining the level of teacher education institutes have
limitations with respect to qualitative improvement.
Because accreditation administration is likely to maintaina minimum standard of teacher education institutes
based on external indications, enforcing its operations
cannot give rise to qualitative improvement (in otherwords, all are certiﬁed not as superior teacher education
institutes). This recognition is shared among
academicians in charge of teacher education in Japan aswell as oﬃcials of the Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology, (MEXT) (Higher
Education Bureau and Elementary and Secondary
Education Bureau).
However, this system has no similar example in Japan.
Whereas the accreditation has the limitation describedabove, conventional college evaluation (certiﬁcation
evaluation and ﬁeld-speciﬁc evaluation) is not appropriate
Terminology of Teacher Education 13

New courses

Since the late 1980s, ʻnew coursesʼ have been introduced
to universities and faculties for teacher training in which
students are not required to obtain a teacherʼs license forgraduation. Initially, they were designated as “zero-license
courses.” Thereafter, however, as an increasing number ofuniversities have been certiﬁed to oﬀer optional teacher
training programme, they have come to be called “newcourses.”
These new courses were established for the following
reason: they anticipated a shrinking birth rate andtherefore decreased the ﬁxed number of teachers intraining courses (that required students to obtain ateacherʼs license for graduation) while responding to thesecond baby boomersʼ entrance of universities. Using theresultant academic resources, they increased new courses
without a direct purpose of teacher training. They are
generally divided into two categories to cultivate humanresources for education-related ﬁelds such asadult/community education and for area studies andinterdisciplinary educational research such as that related
to environment and information.
However, these “new courses” were ambivalentbecause they did not aim directly for teacher training
despite belonging to the faculties for teacher training.
That ambivalence created an identity crisis. Now, in the“redeﬁnition of mission” of national universities, they are
considering that they will be abolished in principle within
the third medium-term target duration (2016‒2022).

(Yasuyuki Iwata)

for ascertaining the actual conditions of teacher training
education conducted at Japanese universities in across-sectional manner. Consequently, using (1) theoverseas trend of evaluation of teacher education (in the
U.S., the U.K., Germany, China, Korea, Russia, and HongKong) and (2) the national awareness survey of the people
engaged in teacher training (such as the dean of an
approved faculty) to design a draft proposal for
accreditation, this project has conducted trial evaluations
on three universities including Tokyo Gakugei university, as
well as Tamagawa University, and Okayama University.
Moreover, based on the trial evaluation report, an open
workshop was held on November 17. At the same time, toorganize a new system to assume accreditation after the
next ﬁnancial year, we have started a dialogue with relatedbodies such as the Institute for the Evaluation of Teacher
Education, Japan University Accreditation Association(JUAA), Japan Association of University of Education(JAUE), and The Japan Association of Private Universities
for Teacher Education.
The criteria of accreditation that have been underdevelopment speciﬁcally stipulate “independent-minded
and consensus-based initiatives for teacher training,” with“recruiting of suitable personnel engaged in education”
and “career support for teaching professions” (fromentrance to graduate for students) on the vertical axis andwith “operation of teacher training curriculum as part ofuniversity education” and “relationship between issues ofchildrenʼs education and university education” (meaningthat teacher training institutions should combine thenature of “university” and the nature of “teacher training”)
on the horizontal axis, which has been favored by aconsiderable number of people of vision in charge ofteacher training at many national, municipal, and private
universities. The project will have been completed in next
March and will be prepared for the next step of actual
operation of accreditation.
(Yasuyuki Iwata)

Overview of TGU-NENU Joint
Research Visit
Under brisk and splendid fall weather, we visited
Changchun City for the ﬁrst time in a year in late
September, 2013. We held a joint research meeting with
Northeast Normal University following the EighthInternational Symposium for Universities of Education in
East Asia, which had been held until the prior day. Threepresenters of each university read their papers under thetheme of “The Systems, Contents and Methods of Teacher
Training in Intellectual Societies.” At that meeting, I
explained the outline of practice teaching in Tokyo
Gakugei University, introducing actual cases of basic
practical training, which our students in the mathdepartment experienced in the aﬃliated junior highschool, high school, and combined junior high and highschool. To me, the most impressive of the questions after
my presentation was “How are the teachers who instruct
the students taking part in practice teaching instructed
and trained?” In Japan, even if student teachers are
generally presumed to be guided in the stages of“observation, participation, and practice,” concrete
instructions are left to real-world teachers. Actually, nocollege oﬀers careful instruction and training. On thisoccasion, I became aware of this viewpoint, which is
crucially important for training more practical teachers,
again.
(Center for the Research and Support of Education
Practice, Akio Yajima)

Sites Where Teachers
Are Nurtured No. 13

Sumio Sano

Principal, Koganei Minami Junior High School, Tokyo(Member of the Advisory Boardfor the Curriculum Center for Teachers)

This school has been promoting class improvement andorganizational reform. Additionally, it has beenaddressing the challenges of enforcing and improving
combination among schools, families, and communities.
However, against the backdrop of baby boomersʼ massretirement, this school has received many newly
appointed teachers in recent years. Consequently, an
important matter for promoting reform is to let themunderstand the characteristics of this school andmaintain the quality of education throughout theschool. For that purpose, they have participated in“training appropriate to careers” and “skill-building
training” to improve their own abilities.
However, using only moderate development basedon conventional education, it has become more diﬃcult
for school education to respond to a changing society
and to meet parentsʼ and studentsʼ needs. Consequently,
the leading challenges to reconstruct schools by being
aware of risk management consciousness andconducting school-wide class improvement andorganization reform might be the following: “to changeteachersʼ
consciousness,”
“to
share
training
achievements within a school,” and “to promote families
and communities to participate in school education.”(1) Teachers who are unmotivated for reform
Teachersʼ motivated activities boost the eﬀects of school
education. Most teachers understand the continuity andmoderate development of conventional educational
activities and are willing to make an eﬀort for them.
However, some teachers do not understand the changeof thinking and introduction of new methods. That
decreases the pro-reform power of the entire
organization. For teachers to play a willing andsubjective role in schools, they must fully understandsituations that surround school education and thenecessity for reform. When they understand theoperation policy and become willing to work for it, Iʼm2013 Fiscal Year Event Calendar
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
Open Workshop
by Guest Professor Li Guang
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
Open Symposiumfor Japan‒U.S. teacher training reform
Staﬀ of Curriculum Center for Teachers
Director

TAKESHI, Kensho(Professor, Music Education)
Center Reseachers[Division of Curriculum Reseach and Development]
MITSUISHI, Hatsuo (Professor, Curriculum Studies)
KANEKO Mariko(Associate Professor, Educational Sociology)[Division of Teacher Preparation Research and Development]
IWATA, Yasuyuki(Professor, Historical Studies of Teacher Education)
UESUGI, Yoshimi(Associate Professor,Media Education)[Division of Research and Development for In-service Teachers]
MAEHARA, Kenji(Associate Professor, Educational Administration)

sure that what has been at a standstill so far will moveahead and that school education will also change
dramatically.
(2) The results of training have not been reﬂected inclass improvements
Parents have a high expectation for “straightforward
classes” and “guidance that is appropriate for individuals”
and are very interested in studentsʼ academic abilities. To
meet that expectation, we have tackled class reform bymaking class reform promotion plans and in-school
workshops. Furthermore, we have prompted teachers toattend “training by selected challenges” by the Tokyo
Metropolitan Government. They have contributed theirenergy to improve classes. However, compared with theenergy contributed to the training, no system to reﬂect
the results of training in the entire school has been
established. Many teachers are wholly focused on
knowledge-injection classes. We must make eﬀorts suchthat the results of each teacherʼs training can be thetreasure of the entire school and be reﬂected in dailyclasses to improve the school.
(3) It is not easy for families and communities ingeneral to participate in school education
First, it is important that the PTA understand, and besupportive of, school education and also thatneighborhood associations in school districts be willingto do something for it. The problem is that some people
on the PTA committee bear excessively heavy burdens.
Even if most parents are gentle and potentiallycooperative, I truly feel that families with increased
awareness of their rights and decreased educational
ability have been rising year after year. Under suchcircumstances, if crimes and accidents, which are likely tocause parents to lose their trust, occur in schools, most ofthem might develop a sense of distrust and the schools
might therefore become isolated. By encouraging many
silent parents to participate in school education throughenhanced combination between schools andcommunities, we must construct mutually supportive
relations to win the understanding of parents for school
education and to support family education.
In an ever-changing society, I would like to motivate
teachers and create “a school in which students lighten
up every class” and “a school that cooperates withfamilies and communities based on a relationship ofmutual trust.”

Editorʼs Notes
We asked Professor Kuroha of the Gunma
University to write some thoughts related toconcrete practices of FD for university
teaching staﬀ in charge of teacher training
education for this newsletter. Faculty development for teacher educators will be
increasingly important.
(Kenji Maehara)

The CCT is produced by the Curriculum Center for Teachers,
Tokyo Gakugei University.
Editor: Yoshimi Uesugi
Designer: Tsukasa Aoyama and Emi Oura
(Aoyama Lab., Calligraphy and Arts, Tokyo Gakugei University)
Curriculum Center for Terachers, Tokyo Gakugei University
4-1-1 Nukui-kitamachi Koganei, Tokyo 184-8501 Japan
Tel: 81-42-329-7776 Fax; 81-42-329-7786
Email: currict@u-gakugei.ac.jp
Website: http://www.u-gakugei.ac.j/~currict/english/index.html