Journal of Southeast Asian Education
The Official Journal of SEAMEO2019 Issue | Volume 1

Values Education and Global
Citizenship towards Achieving the
Sustainable Development Goals

2019 Issue | Volume 1

Values Education and Global
Citizenship towards Achieving the
Sustainable Development Goals

Journal of Southeast Asian Education
2019 Issue | Volume 1
132 pages
ISSN 1513-4601

The Journal of Southeast Asian Education is an official Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization(SEAMEO) publication produced twice a year.
The main purpose of this international journal is to provide information and analyses to assist in policy-making
and planning in the countries in the region. It promotes the interchange of ideas on educational issues andcomparative studies, both within the countries of the region and other parts of the world. Each article in thejournal was written to enable readers from outside each country to obtain an overview of how education iscarried out outside its borders.
The theme of this special issue is “Values Education and Global Citizenship towards Achieving the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) and Promoting Humanities.” It is a product of SEAMEO’s collaboration with
the University of Tsukuba. It features official contributions from four SEAMEO regional centres, namely, theSoutheast Asian Regional Open Learning Centre (SEAMOLEC), the Regional Centre for Quality Improvementof Teachers and Education Personnel (QITEP) in Mathematics (SEAQIM), the Regional Centre for QITEP in
Science (SEAQIS), the Regional Centre for Education in Science and Mathematics (RECSAM), the Regional
Centre for Lifelong Learning (CELLL), and the Regional Centre for History and Tradition (CHAT). Other
contributors also came from organisations such as the Centre for Research on International Cooperation in
Educational Development (CRICED) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization(UNESCO) Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Education for Peace and Sustainable Development (MGIEP). The
various articles in this journal present projects and programmes focusing on values education and global
citizenship in Southeast Asia.
The inaugural issue of the Journal of Southeast Asian Education was launched by the SEAMEO Secretariat
in July 2000.
Executive Editors:
Dr. Ethel Agnes P. Valenzuela (SEAMEO Secretariat)
			
Dr. Masami Isoda (University of Tsukuba)
Consulting Editor:
Ms. Bernadette Caraig (SEAMEO Fellow)
Editorial Office:		
Journal of Southeast Asian Education
			
SEAMEO Secretariat
			
920 Sukhumvit Road			
Bangkok 10110 Thailand
Phone:			
(+662) 3910144
Fax:			
(+662) 3812587
E-mail:			
secretariat@seameo.org
Website:		 www.seameo.org

Printed in Thailand© SEAMEO 2019

The designations employed and the presentation of the materials throughout the publication do not imply theexpression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of SEAMEO concerning the legal status of any country,
territory, city, or area, or of its authorities or frontiers or boundaries.

Contents

Foreword.................................................................................................................................... v
Introduction...............................................................................................................................vii
National Curriculum Reforms in Japan from 1998 to 2018: A
CDA on the Possibility of Sustainable Development
By: Dr. Hiroshi Sato, University of Tsukuba...................................................................................1
The Value of Studying Words and Deep Thinking Using Semantic
Maps in a Japanese Reading ClassBy: Dr. Hikaru Katsuta, Toyo University.......................................................................................11
Global Citizenship and Deliberative Democratic Education:
Focusing on the Controversy in Political Philosophy and thePhilosophy of Education
By: Dr. Yusuke Hirai, University of Tsukuba.................................................................................21
Issues and Expectations in Japan About Moral or Values Education
By: Dr. Takeo Yoshida, University of Tsukuba and Northeast Normal
University.................................................................................................................................31
Seeking the Value of Mathematics Education: The Caseof SEA-BES
By: Dr. Masami Isoda, CRICED and Ms. Teh Kim Hong and
Mr. Pedro Lucas Montecillo, Jr., SEAMEO RECSAM..................................................................39
Values Education and Global Citizenship in Social Studies
in Japan
By: Dr. Kiyoshi Karaki, University of Tsukuba..............................................................................51
SDG 4.7: Fostering Global Citizenship
By: Dr. Yoko Mochizuki, UNESCO MGIEP..................................................................................59
Values Education and Global Citizenship towards Achieving theSDGs and Promoting Humanities
By: Dr. Abi Sujak and Mrs. Cahya Kusuma Ratih, SEAMOLEC....................................................65

Fostering Global Citizenship in Statistics Education
By: Ms. Gusti Ayu Russasmita Sri Padmi, Ms. Ummy Salmah, and
Ms. Pasttita Ayu Laksmiwati, SEAQIM........................................................................................75
The Ability of High-School Students to STEM-Related Problems
By: Mr. Septian Karyana, Mr. Reza Setiawan, and Dr. Indrawati,
SEAQIS....................................................................................................................................87
Role of SEAMEO RECSAM in Inclusive and STEM Education
Development
By: Ms. Khor Sim Suan, SEAMEO RECSAM.............................................................................97
Lifelong Learning and GCED: The Perfect Combination for
Future Global Citizens
By: Mr. Mai Hong-Quan, SEAMEO CELLL...............................................................................107
How SEAMEO CHAT Adds Value to Education and Helps
Foster Global Citizenship
By: Dr. Khin Lay Soe, SEAMEO CHAT.....................................................................................115
Acknowledgements.................................................................................................................. xiii

Foreword

The articles on utilising values education and global citizenship to achieve the SDGs and promote
humanities featured in this journal highlight some of the highly effective initiatives undertaken byresearchers from the University of Tsukuba and four of the regional centres of SEAMEO to improve
lives across the region.
This journal, supported by the University of Tsukuba, presents good practices and examples ofpioneering programmes that seek to provide recommendations and solutions to issues andchallenges that address national, regional, and global educational concerns.
SEAMEO’s motto, “Leading through Learning,” reflects the organisation’s leadership and commitment
to promote quality education, science, and culture in Southeast Asia and beyond. Through theactivities and strategies undertaken by its 24 regional centres, SEAMEO is able to reach out todiverse communities in Southeast Asia to contribute to the development of human resources (HR)and address challenging issues such as alleviating poverty, creating a better quality of life, providing
educational equity and quality, enhancing agriculture and natural resources as well as health andnutrition, and promoting the dissemination and exchange of knowledge and learning of indigenous
cultures and traditions.
We hope this journal serves as a source of learning and reference for educational institutions acrossSoutheast Asia. We are also confident that it will help the general public better understand the natureof the work of SEAMEO, which will continually expand and grow as the organisation strides into a
new stage of growth in the 21st century, described in our 10-year strategic vision as “The Golden
SEAMEO.”The SEAMEO Secretariat would like to thank the ministers of education, senior officials, and centre
directors of SEAMEO Member Countries for their commitment and unfailing support over the years.
We also wish to recognise the excellent cooperation we have received from the University of Tsukuba,
SEAMEO regional centres, and other partner organisations. All of these efforts have, in one way or
another, contributed to the completion of this journal.

Dr. Ethel Agnes P. Valenzuela
SEAMEO Secretariat Director

Introduction

The world has increasingly become interconnected aided by advancements in technology. As such,it has become necessary for countries the world over to reform educational systems to keep up withthe wave of globalisation in the 21st century.
The SEAMEO Secretariat in collaboration with the University of Tsukuba has thus embarked on
various projects and programmes to contribute to efforts towards achieving globalisation via improving
values education throughout the Southeast Asian region.
Educational institutions worldwide have been teaching values education so they can produce future
workers and citizens that do not only care about their own interests, but also about issues that affectthe whole world. To get a glimpse of developments and progress in the field of values education inSoutheast Asia and Japan, this journal features the following articles:•

National Curriculum Reforms in Japan from 1998 to 2018: A CDA on the Possibility of Sustainable
Development: This article aims to prove that Yutori or relaxed education did not result in a decline
in Japanese students’ academic performance. It also hopes to defend the so-called “Yutori
generation” from the criticisms that they have been dealt with over the years.

•

The Value of Studying Words and Deep Thinking Using Semantic Maps in a Japanese Reading
Class: This article aims to examine the effects, specifically positive effects, of creating semantic
maps in small groups. It features instances of semantic map-making that positively affected
Japanese middle-school students who used to have difficulty with understanding literary texts.
It explains how students deepen their understanding of texts through the creation of semantic
maps.

•

Global Citizenship and Deliberative Democratic Education: Focusing on the Controversy in
Political Philosophy and the Philosophy of Education: This article aims to clarify features of theeducational-philosophical controversy on global citizenship and consider how students aretaught about global justice and the value of deliberative democracy. It hopes to explore the ideal
direction that citizenship education must take to respond to the call for globalisation primarily
based on political philosophy and the philosophy of education and focusing on global justice andcitizenship education. The featured study hopes to define global citizenship and identify ways tonurture it in students.

•Issues and Expectations in Japan About Moral or Values Education: This article tackles values
education, which has a diverse range of meanings, depending on one’s country, region, andperson. In it, however, values education is a generic term that covers moral, religious, political,
citizenship, character, and other kinds of education.

•

Seeking the Value of Mathematics Education: This article aims to share the value of the Southeast
Asian Basic Education Standards (SEA-BES): Common Core Regional Learning Standards(CCRLS) for Mathematics and Science in relation to mathematics education.

•

Values Education and Global Citizenship in Social Studies in Japan: This article discusses how
social studies classes integrated with values education can help develop a sense of global
citizenship in students.

•

SDG 4.7: Fostering Global Citizenship: This article discusses how SDG 4.7, which focuses on
education for sustainable development (ESD) and global citizenship, is critical in achieving not
only SDG 4 on education, but also achieving the other 16 SDGs.

•

Values Education and Global Citizenship towards Achieving the SDGs and Promoting Humanities:
This article presents a higher education capacity-building project funded by the Erasmus+
Programme of the European Union (EU)—Indoped. The featured project aims to modernise
higher education in Indonesia via the adaptation of tried-and-tested European pedagogicalapproaches. By introducing and sharing different learning methods used by European university
partners, the study hopes to add value to existing Indonesian pedagogical approaches to close
the gap between what is taught in universities and what is required by industries.

•

Fostering Global Citizenship in Statistics Education: This article discusses the development andimplementation of a cross-border lesson on statistics in the context of energy conservation thataims to promote global citizenship through improving data literacy. English-speaking students
from Indonesia and Thailand participated in the featured lesson via WebEx. Data analysis revealed
that the use of real-life data, meaningful context, and cross-border collaboration in statistics has
great potential to increase student engagement and nurture their sense of global citizenship.

•

The Ability of High-School Students to Solve STEM-Related Problems: This article investigates
students’ ability to solve science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) problems
through a quantitative study that provides detailed information on students’ problem-solving
ability. The students were tested on the four levels of cognitive dimension—understanding,applying, analysing, and evaluating. The study provided an overview of the students’ ability tosolve STEM problems and so is expected to serve as a reference for teachers when planningand designing their own lessons.

•Role of SEAMEO RECSAM in Inclusive and STEM Education Development: This article identifies
SEAMEO RECSAM’s role in developing science and mathematics education in Southeast
Asia. It discusses how the centre stays at the forefront of pursuing the knowledge, skills, andvalues needed to effectively respond to changing global contexts, particularly with regard to
the complexity of the Southeast Asian economic, sociocultural, and political environment, anddevelop teachers imbibed with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) ideals to live
in a harmonious community.

•Lifelong Learning and Global Citizenship Education (GCED): The Perfect Combination for Future
Global Citizens: This article aims to present an overview of GCED and lifelong learning and theirroles in today’s world and how they can be combined to make every person a truly global citizen.

•

GCED and Skills Development: This article discusses the changes that are affecting not just theSoutheast Asian countries and region, but also the whole world. As global and regional event
continue to disrupt the future, workers need to be imbibed with a broader range of skills tocompete in the labour market.

•

How SEAMEO CHAT Adds Value to Education and Helps Foster Global Citizenship: SEAMEO CHAT
strives to incorporate history into school curricula to ensure the well-rounded education of global
citizens. This article discusses how teaching history can add value to education and lead tofostering global citizenship in the so-called “digital generation.”

Despite some progress in values education, countries have yet to realise its full potential to meetchallenges such as increasing globalisation, bridging the 21st-century skills gap, resolving culturaland religious conflicts, eradicating inequality, and other issues. For initiatives to succeed, collaboratingwith the right partners and catering to the actual needs of the target beneficiaries must be met.
To learn more about the currently existing values education-related programmes and projects
throughout Southeast Asia, read the articles in this journal. They feature experiences and goodpractices that other countries who wish to follow in their suit can gain insights from. They also highlightchallenges that implementers may face and have to deal with. Be inspired by their endeavours andgo on your own journey towards using values education as a means to meeting the challenges ofthe 21st century head-on in your country.

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

National Curriculum Reforms inJapan from 1998 to 2018:
A CDA on the Possibility of
Sustainable Development
By:

Dr. Hiroshi Sato
Associate Professor
Faculty of Human Sciences
University of Tsukuba

Abstract
In Japan, there is a concept of Yutori (relaxed) education. Yutori education refers to education that
follows the national curriculum guidelines (or the Course of Study) revised in 1998. Although theguidelines in 1998 respected human nature, living together, and learning through problem solving,
they have been criticised because Yutori education results in low academic ability, as the contentsof the curriculum and number of lesson hours have decreased. In the mid-2000s, the term “Yutori
generation” was also used, referring to the generation who learned according to the guidelines
revised in 1998; this generation is regarded as selfish. However, this criticism is not accurate. Now,
the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) is concerned that thecriticisms from the Yutori education will once again arise. For that reason, the national curriculum
guidelines that were revised in 2008 and again in 2017 have increased the number of class hours
and do not fully emphasise learning through problem solving.

Introduction
The purpose of this study is to examine the validity of Japan’s curriculum reform from 1998 to 2018,
focusing on the concept of Yutori education, and to think about the possibility of the sustainable
development of curriculum policy in the future. In this report, I first explain the criticism of Yutori
education in Japan. Next, I point out that the criticisms about the Yutori education and the Yutori
generation were incorrect. Then, I examine how the criticism about the Yutori education affected therevisions of the national curriculum guidelines in 2008 and 2017. Critical discourse analysis (CDA),
which focuses on language and discourse created with a specific intention, is used in this study.
CDA “has become one of the most influential and visible branches of discourse analysis” (Blommaert
and Bulcaen, 2000:447) since the late 1980s. It is problematic that such language and discourse
form a specific image that influences people’s thinking, labels some people, and has a negative
influence on policy formation.

–1–

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

National Curriculum Guidelines
The national curriculum guidelines establish standards for schools to develop a curriculum underthe “School Education Act” to ensure a certain level of education nationwide. MEXT defines thenational curriculum guidelines as: “broad standards for all schools, from kindergarten through uppersecondary schools, to organise their programmes in order to ensure a fixed standard of education
throughout the country. In addition, the “Ordinance for Enforcement of the School Education Act”
specifies the standard number of school hours for subjects, amongst other things. Based on theseguidelines and the annual number of school hours and other requirements, each school develops acurriculum tailored for local and school conditions” (MEXT, “What Is the Course of Study?”).
Revision of the national curriculum guidelines is announced and implemented after a thoroughunderstanding of its objectives. The revision and implementation history of the national curriculum
guidelines for elementary, junior-high, and senior-high schools in the Heisei Era is shown below. The
year of revision here is described collectively for all school levels (based on the year for elementary
schools, etc.).
Table 1: Revision and Implementation History of the National Curriculum Guidelines in the Heisei Era
Year

Details

1989

Revised for elementary, junior-high, and senior-highschools• Elementary: Implemented in April 1992
• Junior high: Implemented in April 1993
• Senior high: Implemented in April 1994 (gradebased)

1998

Revised for elementary and junior-high schools• Elementary and junior high: Implemented in
April 2002
Revised in 1999 for senior-high schools• Senior high: Implemented in April 2003 (gradebased)

2008

Revised for elementary and junior-high schools• Elementary: Implemented in April 2011
• Junior high: Implemented in April 2012
Revised in 2009 for senior-high schools• Senior high: Implemented in April 2013 (gradebased)

2017

Revised for elementary and junior-high schools• Elementary: For implementation in April 2020
• Junior high: For implementation in April 2021
Revised in 2018 for senior-high schools• Senior high: For implementation in April 2022
(grade-based)–2–

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Meaning of “Yutori”“Yutori” is a common word, as in the expression “a comfortable (Yutori) lifestyle,” and it generally has
a positive meaning. It can be said to be a word reflecting an ability to afford something. For example,
when I am busy, I could say, “There is no time or space (Yutori).” “Yutori” is a keyword referring to“youth theory” and “education theory” in Japan, and it is commonly used in terms such as “Yutori
education” (relaxed or stress-free education) and “Yutori generation.” These words have been coined
through a combination of “Yutori + education” and “Yutori + generation,” but in Japan, they are
established as well-known phrases that hold a negative connotation. It is not uncommon to hearsuch statements as, “the Yutori education failed”; “the Yutori generation has low academic ability”;
and “the Yutori generation is selfish.” But are these true?

Definition and Criticisms of Yutori Education
Before answering this question, it is important to clarify the definition of Yutori education. Although
there are various opinions on the scope of Yutori education, it can be said that it is referring to theeducation based on the national curriculum guidelines for revision in 1998. The full implementationof the guidelines was in 2002. The guidelines emphasise learning through problem solving andexperiential learning. In addition, in accordance with the five-day weekly school system implemented
in 2000, class hours were reduced and the curricular content was carefully selected. Some critics
who responded negatively to this feature began criticising the national curriculum revised in 1998
by calling it “Yutori education,” starting around 2000. The MEXT, in order to address the criticism of
the Yutori education, increased the contents of education and class hours at the guidelines revisedin 2008 and 2017 (see Tables 1 and 2). The revised national curriculum guidelines for 2008 werepositioned as “reactionary” towards the revised guidelines from 1998. It cannot be denied that similar
criticisms continue with the 2017 revised edition.

–3–

1,461

2007

2018

–4–

350

385

1998

2008

405

1,011

358
358

207
207

Music

Science

Math

358

358

358

5,785

70

280

209

209

115

597

597
140

0

385

315
385

290
115

115
115

115
315

270
175

175

420

315

☆

105

105

3,045

190

★
105

2,940

105 155–280 210–335

105 105–210 350–630

3,150

5,645

70

280

209

209

115

0

5,367

0

430

0

209

540

209

115

5,785

0

0

314

209

0

627

140

385 315–350 140–175 140–175 315–350 210–245

Art

Source: National Institute for Educational Policy Research, Changes in Curriculum Improvement Policy, Subject-Based Goals, and Assessment Points, Etc.—School
Curriculum Council’s Reports, Courses of Study, and Guidance Records (1947‒2003), March 2005:26‒27. Central Council for Education’s Report, “Improvement of the
Course of Study, Etc. for Kindergartens, Elementary, Junior-High, and Senior-High Schools and Special-Needs Schools,” 17 January 2008. MEXT “On the Course of
Study,” A handout at the Working Group for Curriculum, Sub-Committee Meeting for Elementary and Secondary Education, Central Council for Education, 24th April 2017.

★
2017
385
350
385
385
115
115
315
175
420
105
105
190
3,045
Note: A time unit is 45 minutes for elementary schools and 50 minutes for junior high schools. Time for special activities will be allocated to homeroom activities. The
standard number of class hours for foreign language at junior high schools under the 1989 revision (☆) is 105–140 hours per grade as a selective subject. Selective
subjects in junior-high school could be covered at a school’s discretion and have not been eliminated under the 2008 revision (★). However, they might be difficult to coverin practice because of limited class hours.

350

295

455 350–385

405

1,011

358

207

Arts andCrafts418

HomeEconomics(HE)

Table 3: Changes Made to the Standard Junior-High School Class Hours for All Grades

345

869

Socioenvironmental
studies
418

Music

207

Physical
Education (PE)

Health and
PE

365

1989

Revision
Year

365

1,461

1998

Arithmetic

420

Foreign
LanguageTechnology
and HE
(THE)

345

1,377

Japanese
Language

Science

1,011

Moral
Education

Foreign
Language

420

SpecialActivities

Moral
Education

Japanese
Language

1,601

Integrated
Study Period

SpecialActivities

Social Studies

SocialStudies

1989

Foreign
Language
Activities
Integrated
Study
PeriodElective

RevisionYear

Total Numberof Class Hours
Total
Number ofClass Hours

Table 2: Changes Made to the Standard Elementary-School Class Hours for All Grades

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

What age group does the Yutori generation refer to? According to newspaper articles, this generation
is delineated based on whether a student took university entrance examinations using the revised
educational guidelines of 1998. Current first- and second-year undergraduates took an entrance
examination for university based on the revised educational guidelines for 2008 for all subjects.
Therefore, it can be said that the current first- and second-year university students are not in the
Yutori generation.

Is Criticism of the Yutori Education Correct?
At Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) of the International Association for
the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA), Japanese academic achievement levels have beenhigh, including during the time when the students from the Yutori generation participated. TIMSS isdesigned to assess to what extent students have retained what they learned at school. Japanese
students have taken the highest ranks in arithmetic, mathematics, and science, although there havebeen some fluctuations as the results of participating countries increase on each assessment.
At the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) by the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD), Japan students made up the top class in the 2012 survey.
Students who took the PISA in 2012 were from the generation learning using the 1998 revised
national curriculum guidelines, the so-called “Yutori education.” In other words, there was no dropin academic ability due to the Yutori education. As for the score of PISA reading literacy, since there
was fluctuation in the 2000s, the reason will be discussed below. I will consider the reason why thereading literacy scores were low in the 2003 and 2006 surveys, yet outstanding in the 2009 and2012 surveys.
First, why then have the results of PISA reading literacy been at around the average level in the 2000s,
particularly in 2003 and 2006? Or why did PISA mathematical literacy results seem lower even in
the higher group than TIMSS results? The answer is simple. Japanese children had not gotten used
to PISA-type questions. If they were asked to answer the problems that they had never learned,
they would have no other choice than to give wrong answers or no answer because they failed tounderstand the points of the questions. It is well-known that PISA measures key competencies,
which will enable them to participate fully and productively in adult life. This is a new view of academic
ability to Japanese students. Although a new view of academic ability has been presented, theabilities to use skills and knowledge in real-life situations have not been taught in Japan. That is
why Japanese children may have failed to fully understand the intention of the questions in the PISA
reading literacy test and consequently showed poorer-than-expected results.
Second, why then did Japanese reading results rise in the 2009 and 2012 tests? Because schools
started to give PISA-conscious lessons. After Japan received unfavourable results on the 2003
and 2006 PISA, schools started to give Type A questions (basic knowledge) and Type B questions(ability to think, judge, and express using knowledge) in the National Assessment of Academic
Ability (for 6th graders and 9th graders; Japanese language and arithmetic/mathematics (sciencefrom 2012) starting in 2007. Type B questions are PISA-type questions, and thus reportedly havegreatly affected the front line of education (Sato, 2016). Soon after that, lessons reflecting PISA-type
questions have spread widely in junior- and senior-high schools.

–5–

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The generation raised under the 1998 revision has been criticised as a Yutori generation whose
academic standards went down under Yutori education. However, a closer look at TIMSS and PISA
results finds such a logic unreasonable. Since their academic abilities have not declined, the negative
usage of “Yutori education” and “Yutori generation” turns out to be quite contrary to fact.

Is Criticism of the Yutori Generation Correct?
The Yutori generation has been widely criticised. Although it is difficult to explain the characteristicsof the young generation, Furuich (2011:73–75) has made the following points based on the “public
opinion survey on social consciousness” of the Cabinet Office:“Do you always want to be useful for society as a member of society? This
question has been consistently asked in the survey. According to the 2012
survey, 59.4% of young people in their twenties are hoping to serve society. In
the 1983 survey, only 32% answered that they wanted to serve society in their
twenties. That means that in less than 30 years, the number of young people
who really want to serve society has doubled. Contemporary young people are
not just ‘society-oriented,’ but also want to contribute to society.

”

From here, we can see the young generation’s interest in public contribution. This may be the resultof a variety of background factors, but if we focus on school education, it can be considered to be
the result of the 1998 national curriculum guidelines that strove to overcome competitive educationand emphasised human nature, living together, problem solving, and experiential learning. In otherwords, criticism of the Yutori education and the Yutori generation is not appropriate; instead, it canbe said that it is a factual misunderstanding.

How Did the Criticisms Lead to the 2008 Revision?
The negative impact of Yutori criticism in the development of curriculum policy still exists. Since
the MEXT is concerned about the re-occurrence of the criticism towards the Yutori education, its
only option is to increase class hours and educational content. In short, because of the discourse
surrounding the Yutori education, MEXT cannot freely develop curriculum policy. After the revisionof the curriculum guidelines in 2008, the quantity of homework assignments and learning drills
increased. Since the curriculum that was taught in the upper grades was moved to the lower grades,
unreasonable learning expectations that are incompatible with developmental stages were raised. At
the same time, various problems concerning children’s growth have arisen. For example, according to
the MEXT “Final Report on Support to School Refusing Students” (Study and Research Collaborators
Meeting on School Refusal, July 2016), the number of schools refusing pupils increased for the
first time in six years in 2013 (in academic year [AY] 2014, 0.39% of elementary-school children
and 2.76% of junior-high-school students do not attend school). The current National Curriculum
Guidelines have made educational content too difficult, and students are busy everyday. Should thenational curriculum guidelines be considered as one of the background factors of the high proportionof school refusal?

–6–

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

How Did the Criticisms Lead to the 2017 Revision?
The 2017 revision did not reduce study content. It maintained the number of class hours, and evenincreased class hours in elementary schools. The 2008 revision had created certain problems,
including an increased number of class hours, a focus on drill work, increased homework, the use ofunits unsuitable for the students’ developmental stages, and a “crowded curriculum.” The guidelinesthat were revised in 2017 did not solve any of these problems. Thus, the coursework might not all fit
into the allotted time. As a matter of fact, some boards of education have even proposed a “shorter
summer holiday.” The main reason behind these policies that focus on “total volume” and “increased
content and class hours” is that MEXT has gone on the defensive; they fear the revival of the criticism
of the Yutori education that the 1998 revision might have caused academic decline. However, thatcriticism was mistaken. The 1998 revision did not advocate for children being relaxed, but rather
should have been considered as promoting learning through problem solving and living together.

Conclusion
From an international perspective, the Japanese curriculum policy has problems. In order to realisea competency-based curriculum for a knowledge-based and global society, OECD suggests that
increasing the number of class hours is inappropriate; instead, deep learning is important (Taguma,2015). Mochizuki (2018) who is a Head of Programme, Curriculum, UNESCO MGIEP mentioned thathumanity should be respected rather than economic competition. Is the current curriculum of Japankeeping students busy, competing to exclude them from 21st-century learning? Internationally, isthere any possibility that the Japanese education will become obsolete? In order to maintain thepossibility of sustainable development in the curriculum, discourse such as the criticism of Yutori
education should be abolished. Constructive discussion over education is the first step in policy
formation that will lead to sustainability.
The ideas of Yutori education and Yutori generation, as discussed in this article, have no substanceand evidence; in addition, they have tarnished the image of many young people. The 2008 revisionof the national curriculum guidelines, developed as a reaction to these negative ideas, seems tohave forcibly moved some educational units from upper grades to lower grades. This can result insocial problems like insufficient understanding or bipolarisation of academic abilities. The groundlesscriticism against Yutori education and the Yutori generation had ripple effects on the 2008 revision
and, consequently, on children.
These ideas are groundless and empty and should no longer be used. As today’s values diversify, it
may be unreasonable to categorise all of those people born in the same period as one generation. A
one-sided remark such as “your generation is characterised by “xxx” easily spreads a collective imageof a generation with no respect for individuality. As a result, the stereotypical view of a generation
prevails throughout society, making those in the generation feel like “that’s not who I/we really am/are” or “it’s difficult to live like that.” These negative feelings are far from productive. Here, the author
wants to suggest the idea of being “generation-free.”–7–

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1“Generation-free” refers to being “free from a generation label and any words that spread its
stereotypical characteristics.” The idea of generation-free specifically aims to free the population fromgroundless and improper words and remarks about generations, as well as simplified conceptionsof those generations. This can liberate us from the pattern of seeing one single generation in acollective and fixed manner, and to instead pay attention to the intentions and needs of individuals
and different categories (e.g., groups with the same interests that transcend generations), thus
enabling us to generate new concepts, viewpoints, and ideas. This action will even lead to newmarket development, new places of belonging, and new business team formations, as well asintergenerational coexistence, ultimately leading to a renewed and revitalised society. Whether looking
at business, policy-making, academic research, or community activity, going beyond a generationalframework and instead exchanging ideas about particular themes is expected to improve the activity’squality.
Realising a generation-free society requires the ability to view generation-related remarks objectively
and properly disassemble them. What can be done to determine whether particular words are
improper? Answering the questions of who, what, where, when, and how is important (Ikemizu,
2007:134). In addition, the author wants to emphasise the critical importance of the “power ofknowledge,” specifically a breadth of vision, scholarly attainments, and the ability to research. Wheneach of us learns to make more proper judgments, we can look critically at any argument.
Francis Bacon, the English philosopher, listed human mistakes (fallacious ways of thinking,preconceptions, and prejudice) that he called “the four idols.” Idols of the tribe are mistakes basedon human sensory illusion. Idols of the cave are mistakes caused by personal experience, habits,
character, or living environment. Idols of the market are mistakes caused by improper words andexpressions that spread where people gather. Finally, idols of the theatre are mistakes caused whenpeople consider tradition, authoritative ideas, and doctrines to be absolutely correct. Based on thislogic, the mistakes of the Yutori education and the Yutori generation largely correspond to the idolsof the market and theatre. We need to be conscious of these perceptional mistakes that werehighlighted by Bacon, and squarely face them on a daily basis. Such accumulated efforts should
definitely get us closer to a generation-free society.
Note: This article is an English summary of “How Has Criticism of the Relaxed Generation Been
Made?” published in Japanese in 2014, which was co-authored with Tomochika Okamoto, thisarticle but summarises and revises Hiroshi Sato’s section. The book was introduced for discussion at
SEAMEO and this theme attracted attention at the International Conference in Tokyo on 11 February
2018. This article was written in English to discuss “criticisms of Yutori education” internationally,
especially with SEAMEO researchers, policy-makers and educators.

References
1. Jan Blommaert and Chris Bulcaen. (October 2000). “Critical Discourse Analysis.” Annual
Review Volume 29.
2. Madoka Ikemizu. (2007). “Media and Media Literacy Education: A Course of Media Literacy
Education.” Department of Philosophy, Graduate School of Humanities and Sociology andFaculty of Letters. University of Tokyo. Oyo Rinri and Tetsugaku Ronshu Volume 3.

–8–

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

3. MEXT. (July 2016). “Final Report on Support to School Refusing Students.” Study and Research
Collaborators Meeting on School Refusal.
4. MEXT. (n.d.). “What Is the Course of Study?” Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/
shotou/new-cs/idea/1304372.htm.
5. MEXT. (n.d.). “The Revisions of the Courses of Study for Elementary and Secondary Schools.”
Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/en/policy/education/elsec/title02/detail02/__icsFiles/
afieldfile/2011/03/28/1303755_001.pdf.
6. MEXT. (n.d.). “Chapter 2: Response to Current Issues in Education—Securing Educational
Opportunities and Improving the Quality of Education.” Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/html/hpab200901/detail/1305857.htm.
7. Yoko Mochizuki. (11 February 2018). “Sustainable Development Goal 4.7: Fostering Global
Citizenship.” SEAMEO International Conference, Tokyo Campus, University of Tsukuba, Japan.
Retrieved from http://www.criced.tsukuba.ac.jp/math/seameo/2018/presentations/Mochizuki_
keynote_11Feb2018_draft.pdf.
8. Noritoshi Furuichi. (March 2017). “The Happy Youth of a Desperate Country (Zetsubou no Kuni
no Koufuku na Wakamonotachi).” Tokyo: Koudansya.
9. Hiroshi Sato. (October 2016). “National Assessment of Academic Ability in Japan : A Comparison
with Australia.” Bulletin of Institute of Education, Division of Education, Faculty of Human
Sciences, University of Tsukuba Volume 41 Number 1. Retrieved from https://tsukuba.
repo.nii.ac.jp/index.php?action=pages_view_main&active_action=repository_action_common_
download&item_id=39884&item_no=1&attribute_id=17&file_no=1&page_id=13&block_id=83.
10. Hiroshi Sato and Tomochika Okamoto. (2014). “How Has Criticism of the Relaxed Generation
Been Made? (Yutori Hihan wa Doutsukuraretanoka).” Tokyo: Taro Jiro Editors.
11. Miho Taguma. (5 December 2015). “OECD Education 2030.” The University of Tokyo Symposium:
Construction of 21st-Century-Type Educational Model (Unpublished Paper).

–9–

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The Value of Studying Words andDeep Thinking Using Semantic
Maps in a Japanese Reading Class
By:

Dr. Hikaru Katsuta
Lecturer
Department of Education
Toyo University

Abstract
The main purpose of this study is to examine the effects, specifically positive effects, of creating
semantic maps in small groups. Included in this examination are the features of semantic mapmaking that enable positive effects on Japanese middle-school students who are having difficulties
in understanding Japanese literary texts. To address these issues, this article explains how students
deepen their understanding of the texts through the creation of semantic maps. According to theresearch, the students were able to receive different types of assistance from peers and teachers
through semantic map-making. As a result, students could read literary texts using all four levels of
thinking and learn word meanings beyond their dictionary definitions. Moreover, from the viewpointof values education, semantic map-making (along with other techniques) could function as a tool forunderstanding others with different opinions.

Introduction
The MEXT has set five goals for Japanese language instruction (Ukida, 2010:369):
1. To develop the ability to fully express one’s thoughts and to understand others’ thoughts inJapanese
2. To improve communication skills
3. To develop the ability to think and imagine
4. To improve a sense of language
5. To deepen interest in the Japanese language and nurture an attitude of respect for the Japanese
language– 11 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

This study is based on the first and third goal above. The reason to focus on goal 1 is that when
one is interpreting literary texts, there is no correct answer, just like with many problems in the realworld; thus, it is important to understand that there are multiple answers or opinions. Likewise, goal
3 should be focused on in order to develop student’s individualistic thinking and imagination whenreading literature by going beyond what’s written in a textbook. By doing so, they will have the ability
to cooperate with others and solve potential problems they may face in the future.
To achieve these goals, this study incorporated semantic map-making into a Japanese readingclass. Semantic maps are also called “webbing,” “concept maps,” or “mind maps.” The goal is tolet students visualise text information by connecting words with links (see Figure. 1). In other words,
students transform text information into graphical information.

Figure 1: Sample semantic map created by students

The reason for incorporating semantic map-making is that it changes a traditional Japanese class,which would be typically be taught by “mass teaching” (Yamaguchi, 2010:349). In Japan, school
education law requires Japanese classes to use textbooks approved by MEXT. For this reason,
most students in Japanese classes have few opportunities to participate in discussions with otherstudents. For example the following instruction, is a typical activity in a Japanese class (Katsuta andIida, 2014):
1. The teacher sets learning goals to improve the students’ literary reading skills. Students aretaught to integrate information from two different texts.
2. The students read literary texts in textbooks and supplementary materials such as authors’biographies.
3. Students write an essay about what they have read.
4. Students present what they have written to the whole class.

– 12 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

There is a problem with this type of lessons. If students can read literary texts by themselves andunderstand reading skills immediately after the teacher’s explanation, then this teaching style iseffective. However, some students cannot understand textbooks by themselves. Those students
will need more guidance or discussion with other students. However, traditional Japanese classes
tend to have limited interaction between teacher and students, and much less interaction amongst
the students.
There are hypothetically two advantages of semantic map-making. First, group semantic map-making
fosters discussion on the theme of the story, the setting, the plot, and the characters. Second,semantic map-making makes it easier for teachers to help students, because it allows the students
to create a record of their literary understanding.
The purpose of this article is to prove these hypotheses. In particular, I focused on one student who
is not good at reading and writing to describe how he gained a deeper understanding of literarytexts using semantic map-making. In addition, this article also describes how he had learned word
meanings beyond their dictionary definitions, as well as how his beliefs changed.

Research Methodology
Overview of the Japanese Lesson Used in the Study
The lesson for this study has 11 sessions (one session = 50 minutes). The students read two literarytexts. One is “My Old Home” (Xun, 1921 and 2009) in the textbook, which most Japanese students
read in junior-high school. This short story examines the narrator’s hope that Chinese society will
become better in the future. The other one is “Mr. Fujino” (Xun, 1926 and 1956), written by the sameauthor and covering a similar theme, but it is not in the textbook. Table 4 shows the main activitiesof this lesson.
Table 4: Main Lesson Activities“My Old Home”“Mr. Fujino”

1. Read the story.

6. Read the story.

2. Write an essay about it.

7. Write an essay about it.

3. Make a semantic map of the story individually.

8. Make a semantic map of the story individually.

4. Make a semantic map of the same story withpeers.

9. Make a semantic map of the same story withpeers.

5. Rewrite your essay using the information fromboth semantic maps.

10. Rewrite your essay for “My Old Home” toinclude “Mr. Fujino” using all of the semanticmaps.

– 13 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

A Focus on Group and Students
The lesson I observed focused on a small group, which included Koda, Hada, Saeki, Miyoshi, andSato (all students’ names are pseudonyms). Koda has strong reading, writing, and leadership skills,
and scored perfectly on his national standardised test. Students in Koda’s group usually consulted
him when they had difficulties in understanding tasks or lectures, and asked him to present theirsemantic maps to the whole class. Hada has average reading and writing skills. Saeki and Miyoshi
have the lowest reading and writing skills and rarely participated in group work. Therefore, they did
not contribute enough to group work. Although Sato’s reading and writing skills are also belowaverage, he participated actively in class; the number of Sato’s utterances was the highest in thesmall group. For this reason, this research will focus on Sato.

Research Data Collection and Analysis
Every student’s written response to the literary texts (essays and semantic maps), along with Sato’s
interactions with other students and the teacher were gathered for analysis. Students’ essays wereanalysed and grouped into four levels of thinking (see Table 5). The protocols of Sato’s interactions
with others were coded by two researchers to identify the types of assistance he received fromothers.
Table 5: Sato’s Performance in the Four Levels of Thinking
Level of Thinking

Definition

Factual level

Involved with memory and recall of information fromtext

Interpretative level

Involved with drawing inferences about andreorganising text

Applicative level

Involved with integrating text with prior knowledge

Transactive level

Involved with affectively responding to text

Source: Ruddell, 2009:125–126

Research Results and Findings
The results of the data analysis showed that Sato had a better understanding of the two literary texts
after using semantic map-making activities.

– 14 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Analysis of Sato’s Essays Before and After Semantic Map-Making
In the first essay, Sato did not understand any of content of “My Old Home.” He simply wrote, “thesentences are too long. I don’t understand the meaning of the texts.” After the teacher encouraged
him to elaborate, Sato added some text and showed that he understood the basic meaning of thestory such as the fact that it was set in China. However, Sato only used the factual level of thinking.
After Sato made a semantic map about “My Old Home” in his group (see Figure 2), his understandingof the story improved. For example, he mentioned a metaphor in his second essay on “My Old
Home”: “I think that the cold weather and the leaden sky represented the narrator’s depression.” Thatmeans he made inferences about the story’s meaning beyond the literal meaning of the text (theinterpretative level of thinking). In addition, he integrated the story’s theme into his prior knowledge: “I
think ‘hope’ is just like a path, so we have to make one for ourselves.” That is, he used the applicative
level of thinking after the semantic map-making activities.

Figure 2: Sato’s group’s semantic map of “My Old Home”

Furthermore, in the essay he wrote in the last session, he connected the story more directly to his
own life (the transactive level of thinking):“

Mr. Fujino hopes Lu Xun could bring modern medical science back to China
and develop it. Such an act will require a lot of effort. I think ‘hope’ is just likea path. We make one for ourselves and this requires effort. It takes effort to besmart so I’ll try my best. We can do anything if we try hard so I’ll try my best.

”

In other words, in the end, he used all four levels of thinking to understand “My Old Home” and “Mr.
Fujino.” Although his final essay was not as good as that of his peers, the progress Sato made wasbeyond everyone’s expectation.

Analysis of Sato’s Interactions with His Peers
and the Teacher During the Semantic Map-Making
Based on his essays, we saw that Sato deepened his understanding as the lessons proceeded.
The results of coding the protocols of Sato’s interactions with his teacher and other group members
showed that Sato received eleven different types of assistance in two categories—affective andcognitive (see Table 6).

– 15 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1
Table 6: Types of Assistance That Sato Received
Affective Assistance
I-A. Facilitating on-task behaviour
The teacher and his group mates encouraged
him to keep doing the tasks every time he got
distracted.

Cognitive Assistance
II-A. Teaching individual words
He asked the teacher and his group mates what
unfamiliar words meant.

I-B. Obtaining praise and rewards

II-B. Setting

The teacher and his group mates affirmed his
performance.

The teacher and his group mates told him where
and when the events in the story took place.
II-C. Characters
He discussed who the characters of both stories
were, including their relationships, feelings, andappearances, with the teacher and his group mates.
II-D. Plot
He discussed the plot of both stories, including
what happened to the characters and theirconversations with one another, with the teacher
and his group mates.
II-E. ThemeHe discussed the theme with his teacher andgroup mates, particularly what “hope” and “change”
represented in the stories.
II-F. How to create a semantic map
The teacher and his group mates told him how tocreate a semantic map, including advice such as
using different pen colours for emphasis, paying
attention to common words used in both stories,
and using wavy lines to distinguish his opinions from
actual story content.
II-G. How to write an essay
The teacher explained specific writing techniquessuch as how to properly cite quotations.
II-H. Rules for conducting small-group discussions
The teacher intervened to resolve potential issues
amongst the members of each small group. She
encouraged all members to state their opinions
during discussions.
II-I. Building the story’s image
The teacher and his group mates helped him
visualise the story’s world. For instance, they asked
him what his interpretation of the “leaden sky” was.

– 16 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Semantic map-making was the reason that Sato could receive various kinds of assistance. First,
the semantic map makes it easier for the teacher to help the students because it creates a visual of
the students’ problems. For example, Sato’s struggles clearly appeared on his semantic map whenconnecting the two short stories because he did not write anything on his map. When the teacher
saw this, she talked to Sato and elicited the similarities from both stories: “The characters in bothstories, especially Mrs. Yang from ‘My Old Home,’ were foolish.” After that, the interaction shown in
Table 4 occurred, and Sato decided on the centre word “change” as shown in Figure 3. This helped
Sato to analyse how other characters changed in both short stories. In other words, Sato, who has
difficulties understanding Japanese literary texts, gradually formed his understanding through making
semantic maps and interactions with others.

Figure 3: Record of Sato’s dialogue with his teacher

Figure 4: Sato’s semantic map on what connected the stories– 17 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Semantic map-making also fosters story discussion at a deeper thinking level. As mentioned above,
Sato decided the word “change” as a centre word but Sato’s group’s highest achievement student
Koda decided the word “hope” as the centre word. For this reason, there were long interactionin Sato’s group during 9th lesson to decide the centre word. This interactions was important for
Sato because he realised why “hope” could be the centre word, and it made Sato think about therelationship between “hope” and “change” and their meaning in the two stories as shown in Figure
5. As a result of these discussions, he used all levels of thinking in his essay about two stories as I
mentioned in the analysis of Sato’s essays.

Figure 5: Sato and Koda’s dialogue on the central theme of the two stories

Conclusion
This article described how a Japanese middle-schooler was able to deepen his understanding ofJapanese literary texts through the creation of semantic maps in his group. The main advantageof this type of lesson was that Sato received 11 types of assistance through both semantic mapmaking and essay writing. By doing so, Sato could learn to participate in all levels of thinking tounderstand literary texts and word meanings beyond their dictionary definitions. This advantage
is due to the main feature of semantic map-making—students write down their understanding of
the text on the map by linking words. Because of this feature, Sato’s level of understanding anddifficulties were clearly shown.
In addition, semantic map-making also fosters students’ discussion at deeper thinking levels byencouraging them to consider keywords in the story, such as when Sato and Koda had different
opinions about the story’s keyword. From the viewpoint of values education, this means that semantic
map-making, along with other activities could function as a tool to help students to understanddifferent opinions.

– 18 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

References
1. H. Katsuta and K. Iida. (2014). “Teachers’ Five Roles in Scaffolding Students’ Reader Response:
Analysis of Approaches to Studying Literature Using Dazai’s Short Story, ‘Hashire Merosu.’”
Retrieved from https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/kokugoka/76/0/76_KJ00009554699/_
article/-char/en.
2. Lu Xun. (1921 and 2009). “My Old Home.” The Real Story of Ah-Q and Other Tales ofChina: The Complete Fiction of Lu Xun. Penguin Classics.
3. Lu Xun. (1926 and 1956). “Mr. Fujino.” Selected Works of Lu Hsun Volume 1. Foreign
Languages Press.
4. M. Ukida. (2010). “Japanese Language.” Education in Contemporary Japan: System andContent. Toshindo.
5. M. Yamaguti. (2010). “Outline of Curricula and Teaching Methods.” Education in Contemporary
Japan: System and Content. Toshindo.
6. Robert B. Ruddell. (2009). How to Teach Reading to Elementary- and Middle-SchoolStudents: Practical Ideas from Highly Effective Teachers 1st Edition. Allyn and Bacon.

– 19 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Global Citizenship and Deliberative
Democratic Education:
Focusing on the Controversy
in Political Philosophy and thePhilosophy of Education
By:

Dr. Yusuke Hirai
Assistant Professor
Faculty of Human Sciences
University of Tsukuba

Abstract
Global citizenship is “a contested concept in scholarly discourse, and there are multiple interpretationsof what it means to be a global citizen” (UNESCO 2014:15). This article aims to clarify features of theeducational-philosophical controversy on global citizenship and consider how students are taught
about global justice and the value of deliberative democracy. That intends to articulate the challenges
that must be overcome in developing citizens who can live fully in the global world. For these aims,
John Rawls, Thomas Pogge, Onora O’Neill, Martha Nussbaum, Anthony Appiah, and Amy Gutmann
are mainly focused.
This article has four parts. The contents are as following: the trends of citizenship education in Japan;
the controversy on global justice in political philosophy; global (cosmopolitanism) citizenship andnational identity; and the needs for deliberative democratic education.

Introduction
The purposes of this article are to clarify features of the educational-philosophical controversy on
global citizenship and to consider how we teach students global justice and the values of deliberative
democracy.
Since 1998, when the course of study was revised, we have aimed to foster in students a zest for life
(ikiru chikara) in Japan. A zest for life is a comprehensive ability that consists of solidly acquired basic
and fundamental knowledge and skills, morality, and sound body. It is necessary for future citizens tolive a good life and to use acquired knowledge and skills to solve many problems in this complicatedand rapidly changing world. One such problem might relate to globalisation.

– 21 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

In parallel with these educational trends, citizenship education has been receiving considerable
attention in educational studies and practices. In response to the realisation of the voting rights for
18-year-olds accompanying the revision of the “Public Offices Election Law” in 2015, citizenshipeducation in schooling has been considered as a subject of ideal educational studies. However,there is a gap between these studies and educational practices. It seems that the study of citizenshipeducation in Japan is still in the developing stage.
Thus, this article aims to explore the ideal direction of citizenship education in response to globalisation,
based mainly on political philosophy and the philosophy of education on global justice and citizenshipeducation. Through this examination, I would like to answer the question: “What is global citizenshipand how do we nurture it in our students?”

The Trend of Citizenship Education in JapanThe next school curriculum guidelines at the high-school level was announced in March 2018.
During the planning process for the revision of the next school curriculum guidelines, contents of
the new subject, the public (civic education named “kokyo”) had been explored. As the summary
report indicates, in the next course of study at the high-school level, the purpose of civic education
is described as follows (MEXT, 2016:4):“

To cultivate the dispositions and abilities needed for a citizen who can bea significant creator of a peaceful and democratic nation and society, andsubjectively live in the global society.

”

The present guidelines of social studies, geography and history, and civics show the direction ofemphasising further development of students’ social views and thinking. The next guidelines clarify the
specific desired characteristics of social perspective and manner of thinking. “The social perspective
and manner of thinking refer to the viewpoints and methods that are needed in activities to pursue
social issues and solve social problems, to consider the meaning and significance of social eventsand their characteristics or mutual relationships, and to understand the problems seen in society andto conceive of solutions.” This social perspective and way of thinking are “indispensable to cultivate
thought and judgment skills for the realisation of deep learning, as well as to acquire effective working
knowledge.” To foster these talents in the new subject of the public, it is desirable that teachers
teach students through activities that help them gain an understanding of social issues, focusing on
diverse perspectives of multiple concepts or theories related to ethics, politics, law, and economy. In
addition, in order to deepen students’ awareness about the ideal of a better society and the role ofhuman beings within it, they will be required to teach students how to live and associate with ideas
and theories that contribute to judgment for problem solving (MEXT, 2016:3).

– 22 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The summary report also indicates the educational goals of the public. It is specified that teachers
need to nurture dispositions and abilities related to sovereignty in the global world as follows. First, tonurture an attitude for thinking about society, human beings, events, and tasks related to the students’
way of life, and to help them pursue ambitious tasks to discover the appropriate paths. Second, tonurture a willingness to form a better society through their activities for finding various problems thatexist in society and prevent the realisation of a better society, to actively consider and conceive
solutions to the problems in collaboration with others, and to participate in society by explaining
and discussing the problems based on logic and reasoning. And third, to cultivate an awarenessabout how to live in modern society or how to live as a human being, to foster an inclination to love
our own nation-state and to pursue its peace and prosperity, and to develop an awareness of theimportance that all nations mutually respect each other’s sovereignty and all citizens cooperate witheach other, through multi-faceted and multi-lateral considerations and a deep mutual understanding(MEXT, 2014:16). In this, it is suggested that students will be asked to think first about their nation in
the global era. Thus, our present tendency to educate global citizens might restrict the developmentof global thinking in students.
Asian countries, similarly to Japan, are promoting curriculum reform, introducing new viewson academic ability and new forms of teaching and learning, and are also promoting citizenshipeducation. However, as Yuto Kitamura insists, there is an implicit political intention that the state keep
the social order and educate citizens to submit to the state in Singapore and Hong Kong (and, it
follows, in Japan) (Kitamura, 2016:105). In this sense, our present intention to educate global citizens
might restrict the development of global thinking in students.
Facing the rapid progress of globalisation, we Japanese taught students about the way of life in
the global world under the name “education for international understanding (EIU)” until the 1990s.
Multicultural education has also been introduced in educational practices. Multicultural education is“an educational ideal aimed at the coexistence and mutual prosperity of diverse racial, ethnic, andcultural groups from the viewpoint of minorities and the standpoint of social justice, accompaniedby educational practice and the educational reform movement” (Matsuo, 2010:158). Ideally, what issought is that multicultural education will be developed in the context of social justice. Unfortunately,
this ideal has not yet been achieved. Here, I would like to consider social justice in the global society,that is, global justice.

The Controversy on Global Justice in Political Philosophy
In modern political philosophy, philosophers have argued about global justice over John Rawls’s
theory of justice. Rawls derived two principles of justice (principle 1: the liberty principle; 2-a: thedifferent principle; and 2-b: the fair equality of opportunity principle) for forming a fair or cooperativeand just society in A Theory of Justice (1976).
Rawls describes these principles as follows (1999a:226):
FIRST PRINCIPLE
Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of
equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all.

– 23 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

SECOND PRINCIPLE
Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both: (a)to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged, consistent with the just savings
principle and (b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditionsof fair equality of opportunity.
His claim for universal principles shrank in his later work as described in Political Liberalism (1993)
but he tried to expand liberal principles to global justice in The Law of Peoples (1999).
In The Law of Peoples, Rawls formulates eight principles that regulate the international interactionsof people as follows (1999b:37):
1. Peoples are free and independent and their freedom and independence are to be respected byother peoples.
2. Peoples are to observe treaties and undertakings.
3. Peoples are equal and are parties to the agreements that bind them.
4. Peoples are to observe a duty of non-intervention.
5. Peoples have the right of self-defense but no right to instigate war for reasons other than selfdefense.
6. Peoples are to honour human rights.
7. Peoples are to observe certain specified restrictions in the conduct of war.
8. Peoples have a duty to assist other people living under unfavourable conditions that prevent theirhaving a just or decent political and social regime.
Amongst these principles, the sixth is about respect for human rights and the eighth is about the duty
for assistance. Rawls referred to the duty for assistance in other parts as well saying (199b:106),“The long-term goal of (relatively) well-ordered societies should be to bring burdened societies, likeoutlaw states, into the society of well-ordered peoples. Well-ordered peoples have a duty to assist
burdened societies.” It can be said that Rawls assumes that the subjects of global society are wellordered, just governance and morally characterised people (Rawls 1999b: 25–27 and Kamishima,
2015:60).

– 24 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Though Rawls’s The Law of Peoples has been both supported and criticised, Thomas Pogge,
who is a critical successor of Rawls, developed a theory of global justice from a stand of resourcism.
Pogge criticises that Rawls thinks international injustice is attributable to different levels of culturalpolitics in each state rather than to differences in the amount of resources held. His awareness ofglobal injustice is based on a global economic system that unjustly creates persistent global poverty.
Pogge (2008:177) claims an institutional concept of moral cosmopolitanism and the justification of“the duty towards every other not to cooperate in imposing an unjust institutional order.” Opposing thenotion that a shared responsibility for the justice of social institution cannot extend beyond national
institutional order, Pogge (2008:178–179) clearly stated:“

The existing global institutional order is neither natural nor God-given, butshaped and upheld by the more powerful governments and by other actors they
control (such as the EU, North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO], the United
Nations [UN], the World Trade Organization [WTO], OECD, the World Bank
[WB], and the International Monetary Fund [IMF]). At least the more privileged
and influential citizens of the more powerful and approximately democratic
countries then bear a collective responsibility for their governments’ role indesigning and imposing this global order, and for their governments’ failure toreform it towards greater human rights fulfillment.

”

Onora O’Neill also criticises Rawls, claiming that his “account of global justice remains an accountof ‘international’ justice, in which the supposed legitimacy of assigning control of bounded territories
to ‘peoples’ is presupposed, and limits and perhaps undermine his arguments for justice beyond
borders.” For O’Neill (2016:164–165), Rawlsian global justice is insufficient because the primaryagents of justice are assumed to be the states. She claims that there are “many bad states, many
weak states, and many states too weak to prevent or regulate the activities of supposedly externalbodies within their borders” (2016:162); it is not enough to view states as primary agents of justice.
Thus, she supposes that a non-state institution and non-state actors (e.g., trans-national corporations[TNCs] and non-government organisations [NGOs]) are agents of justice.
Through examination of the political-philosophical controversy on global justice, recent philosophicaltrends might reflect that when we consider the essence of global justice, it is necessary to think
about relativising the states, and to position individuals as agents of global justice. We can also saythat global justice aspires to override the global issues that stem from states, depending on theindividual power or forming fair institutions, and that global citizenship is the ideal goal for a citizen
who can think about global justice without being held back by their own state’s interests.

Global (Cosmopolitan) Citizenship and National Identity
Within the philosophy of education, philosophers discussed global citizenship in the late 1990s. This
discussion consisted of Martha Nussbaum’s claim of cosmopolitan education as well as its critiques.

– 25 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Nussbaum, who is famous as a cosmopolitan philosopher, questioned (Nussbaum 1996:6), “Mostimportant, should they (students) be taught that they are, above all, citizens of the U.S., or should they
instead be taught that they are, above all, citizens of a world of human beings, and that, while they
happen to be situated in the U.S., they have to share this world with the citizens of other countries?”
She supports the latter, “cosmopolitan education” as she called it, and indicates four reasons for her
support. Through cosmopolitan education, (1) we learn more about ourselves; (2) we make headway
solving problems that require international cooperation; (3) we recognise moral obligations to the restof the world that are real and that otherwise would go unrecognised; and (4) we make a consistentand coherent argument based on distinctions we are prepared to defend (Nussbaum, 1996:11–15).
Nussbaum does not reject nationalism in education because she thinks its proponents make aweak concession to cosmopolitanism. For example, Nussabum (1996:5–6) says they argue that“a commitment to basic human rights should be part of any national education system and thiscommitment will, in a sense, hold many nations together.” However, she claims that that is notenough.
As a critic of Nussbaum’s cosmopolitan thought, Anthony Appiah (1996) claims the notion ofcosmopolitan patriot. Appiah considers citizens of the world (cosmopolitan citizens) to face a dangerof unification of cultural differences and supports cosmopolitan patriots from the standpoint that
global thinking is possible while respecting differences.
From a different standpoint, Amy Gutmann (1996:68) criticises Nussbaum’s claim that our “allegianceis to the worldwide community of human beings,” saying:“

We have duties to respect the rights of individual human beings the world
over, and schools the world over should teach children (not indoctrinate them)
to appreciate these duties. But it does not follow that we are ‘citizens of theworld’ or that our ‘fundamental allegiance’ is to the community of humanbeings in the entire world. This cosmopolitan position might be attractive, were
our only alternative to give our primary allegiance to the U.S.A. or to someother politically sovereign community. But we have another alternative, which
Nussbaum neglects (and does not recognise as the position defended bydemocratic humanism)—to reject the idea that our primary allegiance is to any
actual community, and to recognise the moral importance of being empowered
as free and equal citizens of a genuinely democratic polity.

”

The reason Gutmann claims we should teach children “to recognise the moral importance of being
empowered as free and equal citizens of a genuinely democratic polity” is that there is not a worldpolity. She believes a world polity could only exist in tyrannical form. For Gutmann, instead of tyranny,a truly democratic political regime is right for justice reasons, and therefore it does not need to begiven priority in order to cultivate loyalty to a particular community.
As Appiah’s and Gutmann’s critics imply, global justice in the context of education are inevitably
considered alongside states because, in actuality, a fair global system has not been affirmed, andideal educational theory has to be constructed starting with that assumption. Here we can seethat the types of thinking in political philosophy and in philosophy of education have some minor
deviations from each other.

– 26 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The Need for Deliberative Democratic Education
Why does Gutmann adhere to democracy? Gutmann (1996:69) indicates that:“

A philosophy of democratic education rejects the idea that national boundaries
are morally salient. If they are politically salient, however, then public education
ought to cultivate in all students the skills and virtues of democratic citizenship,including the capacity to deliberate about the demands of justice for all
individuals, not only for present-day citizens of the U.S. Deliberating about
the demands of justice is a central virtue of democratic citizenship because itis primarily (not exclusively) through our empowerment as democratic citizens
that we can further the cause of justice around the world.

”

In Democratic Education, Gutmann claimed that the ideal educational goal is conscious social
reproduction, and that education is limited by the principles of non-repression and non-discrimination(Gutmann 1999:44–45). The former principle “prevents the state, and any group within it, fromusing education to restrict rational deliberation of competing conceptions of the good life and thegood society,” and the latter “prevents the state, and all groups within it, from denying anyone an
educational good on grounds irrelevant to the legitimate social purpose of that good.”
Her theory of democratic education was complimented by the concept of deliberative democracy
in 2000s. There are two reasons for extending her theory in this way. First, because preferenceaggregated democracy runs the risk of not being just (e.g., majority members do not take the voicesof those in the minority group seriously in their decision making) and, second, because there is apossibility that the participants will change their own beliefs through deliberation (Hirai, 2017).
Gutmann emphasise the second aspect as the principle of the economy of moral disagreement(Gutmann and Thompson, 2004:7), saying:“

In giving reasons for their decisions, citizens and their representatives should
try to find justifications that minimise their differences with their opponents. …
Practicing the economy of moral disagreement promotes the value of mutual
respect (which is at the core of deliberative democracy). By economisingon their disagreements, citizens and their representatives can continue towork together to find common ground, if not on the policies that produced
the disagreement, then on related policies about which they stand a greater
chance of finding agreement.

”

Such an assertion can be applied to the method of nurturing citizens who can pursue justice acrossnational boundaries while recognising the nation-states. It is essential to develop the ability to relate
the interests of others and think comprehensively while limiting their interests through deliberative orinteractive education.

– 27 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Conclusion: Towards a Fair Global WorldUNESCO (2014:15) describes GCED as education that “aims to empower learners to engage andassume active roles, both locally and globally, to face and resolve global challenges, and ultimately to
become proactive contributors to a more just, peaceful, tolerant, inclusive, secure, and sustainable
world.” UNESCO (2014:16) also indicates, in particular, that GCED aims to “encourage learners toanalyse real-life issues critically and to identify possible solutions creatively and innovatively; support
learners to revisit assumptions, world views, and power relations in mainstream discourses andconsider people or groups that are systematically under-represented or marginalised; focus on
engagement in individual and collective action to bring about desired changes; and involve multiple
stakeholders, including those outside the learning environment, in the community and in wider
society.” These aims are appropriate to this global era as an ideal. However, it is more necessary toconsider the related challenges that include, for example, “the question of how to simultaneously
promote global solidarity and individual competitiveness” or the method of “the reconciliation of
local and global identities and interests” (UNESCO 2016:19). Moreover, UNESCO (2015:65 and
81–82) indicates that the role of the state in the definition and formation of citizenship is increasingly
challenged by the emergence of trans-national forms of citizenship (e.g., trans-national social andpolitical communities, civil society, and activism) and that it is necessary to strengthen the role ofintergovernmental agencies in the regulation of global common goods. In this article, I explore issues
related to these challenges.
Educational goals have two general aspects—to develop the individual and to develop the social
responsibility (sociality) within the individual. As long as education is governed by nation-states, its
national contents inevitably take priority to those of the global world. But this educational thinking,counter-posed by political philosophy, must now be questioned and reconsidered. What shouldbe emphasised in the global society is not to educate citizens who participate in the global society
but primarily contribute to their own state, but to educate citizens who can relativise their state,sometimes be critical of it, and pursue global justice. To fully meet that end, the right disposition andthe ability to overcome the desire to give priority to self-interests are necessary; this is consistent with
the ideal pursued by deliberative democracy. As UNESCO (2014:21) indicates that transformative
pedagogy leads to educative and social innovations that bring about change for the better, it isthought that deliberative democratic education has the same features as transformative pedagogy.
In the motion towards a just global world, it is hoped that deliberative ideals are broadly accepted,
and deliberation on controversial issues is adopted as a method used in GCED.

References
1. Amy Gutmann. (1996). “Democratic Citizenship.” Joshua Cohen, Ed. For Love of Country?
Beacon Press.
2. Amy Gutmann. (1999). Democratic Education (New Edition). Princeton University Press.

– 28 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

3. Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson. (2004). Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton
University Press.
4. John Rawls. (1999a). A Theory of Justice (Revised Edition). Oxford University Press.
5. John Rawls. (1999b). The Law of Peoples. Harvard University Press.
6. K. Anthony Appiah. (1996). “Cosmopolitan Patriot.” For Love of Country? Beacon Press.
7. Martha. C. Nussbaum. (1996). “Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism.” For Love of Country?
Beacon Press.
8. MEXT. (2016). “Summary Report of Deliberations in the Working Group About Social Studies,
Geography and History, and Civics.” Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/.
9. Onora O’Neill. (2016). Justice Across Boundaries. Cambridge University Press.
10. Thomas Pogge. (2008). World Poverty and Human Rights Second Edition. Polity Press.
11. Tomoaki Matsuo. (2010). “Multicultural Education.” Handbook of Modern American
Education. Toshindo Publishers.
12. UNESCO. (2014). “Global Citizenship Education: Preparing Learners for the Challenges of the
21st Century.” Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002277/227729E.pdf.
13. UNESCO. (2015). “Rethinking Education: Towards a Global Common Good?” Retrieved fromhttp://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002325/232555e.pdf.
14. Yuko Kamishima. (2015). Rawls and His Critics in a Globalising World. Minerva Publishing.
15. Yusuke Hirai. (2017). The Educational Theory of Amy Gutmann. Seorishobo Publishers.
16. Yuto Kitamura. (2016). “Education for Global Citizen in Multiple Asia.” Citizenship Education in
Global Era. Iwanami Publication.

– 29 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Issues and Expectations in Japan
About Moral or Values Education
By:

Dr. Takeo Yoshida
ProvostSchool of Human Sciences
University of Tsukuba
Honorary Professor
Northeast Normal University
People’s Republic of China (PRC)

Abstract
This article tackles values education, which has a diverse range of meanings, depending on one’s
country, region, and person. In this article, however, it as a generic term that covers moral, religious,
political, citizenship, character, and other kinds of education. In Japan, the law requires neutrality
with regard to religion and political affiliation so values education is more often taken to mean moral
education.

Introduction
Today, we live in a global society that requires us to respect a diverse range of value systems andcoexist with different cultural groups. This necessitates major changes in the world of education,
particularly moral education.
Compared with other countries, however, Japan has not seen any major change in the way moral
education is taught. The Japanese government and MEXT, of course, have strong ambitions forreform. In fact, moral education reforms were made to the course of study for the first time in about
10 years last year. The most significant change has been the transformation of moral time, a learningarea, into the subject morality. Despite this, however, almost no progress has been made in termsof classroom practice.
This article will identify problems in Japan, along with a future outlook that puts forth best approaches
to values education not just in the country, but also in other Asian countries.

– 31 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Changes to Moral Education in JapanThe modern school system in Japan was established by law in September 1872. Two months before
that, the then-Ministry of Education, Science, and Culture established a normal school for teacher
education as the country’s first public school. That normal school is the forerunner of the Universityof Tsukuba. The school adopted European and American instructional methods and disseminatedthese throughout Japan.
Around 1879, however, apprehensions about the Westernisation of education in Japan arose, alongwith hopes of giving the Emperor a central role in the system. The movement asserted Chinese
Confucianism. Before long, the movement gained power and in 1890 the “Imperial Rescript on
Education” was announced as the Emperor’s declaration regarding education:“

Know ye, our subjects; our Imperial Ancestors have founded Our Empire on
a basis broad and everlasting and have deeply and firmly implanted virtue;
our subjects ever united in loyalty and filial piety have from generation to
generation illustrated the beauty thereof. This is the glory of the fundamental
character of Our Empire, and herein also lies the source of our education.
Ye, our subjects, to be filial to your parents, affectionate to your brothers andsisters; as husbands and wives be harmonious, as friends true; bear yourselvesin modesty and moderation; extend your benevolence to all; pursue learningand cultivate arts, and thereby develop intellectual faculties and perfect moral
powers; furthermore advance public good and promote common interests;
always respect the Constitution and observe the law; should emergency arise
offer yourselves courageously to the State; and thus guard and maintain theprosperity of Our Imperial Throne coeval with heaven and earth. So shall ye not
only be our good and faithful subjects, but render illustrious the best traditionsof your forefathers.
The Way here set forth is indeed the teaching bequeathed by Our Imperial
Ancestors, to be observed alike by their descendants and the subjects,
infallible for all ages and true in all places. It is our wish to lay it to heart in all
reverence, in common with you, our subjects, that we may all thus attain to thesame virtue.
The 30th day of the 10th month of the 23rd year of
Meiji, (Imperial Sign Manual, Imperial Seal)”

Note: Then-Minister of Education Nobuaki Makino asked Dairoku Kikuchi and others to prepare thisEnglish translation in 1906.

– 32 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

In the declaration, the ideal state of the citizenry or their values as human beings are clearly indicatedbased on a view of the state centered on the Emperor. This way of thinking was taken as guidefor school education and gave the direction for moral education. Until the end of World War II, that
direction was not just a matter of theory, but carried out in actual practice in schools. Governmentdesignated textbooks on moral education were prepared in accordance with this policy and the moral
values that needed to be imparted were taught through the characters in featured stories (i.e., valuesoriented moral education). The moral values or virtues that were given special emphasis included
loyalty, filial piety, friendship, mercy, devotion, reverence, courage, and modesty. At worst, this led tomilitaristic thinking. For example, the death of the soldier Kohei Kikuchi in the Sino-Japanese War of
1894–1895 was described in a government-designated textbook for first-grade students publishedin 1918 as: “Kohei Kikuchi was struck by an enemy bullet, but even in death the bugle never left his
lips.”
After Japan’s defeat in World War II in 1945, American-style education oriented towards learning fromlife experiences had a strong impact. Moral education was provided through educational activitiesin school, primarily social studies classes. The government began to think more strongly that moral
education based on such methods was inadequate. As such, in 1958, although the basic policy
for providing instruction throughout the entire curriculum did not change, giving students moral timeonce a week in place of social studies in elementary and middle schools was introduced. At thattime, moral time was a learning or schedule area and not a subject. Students learned about moral
values such as honesty, friendship, moderation, kindness, gratitude, fairness, and diligence (valuesoriented moral education) at this time.
Although the wording of the objectives of moral education has been revised and moral time has been
turned into the subject morality, the approach to moral education has not changed for more than 50
years now. Various techniques were devised as instructional methods. In particular, American-stylemethods to teach moral education and psychology were incorporated into the subject. Techniquessuch as value clarification and moral discussion were used. Teachers no longer inculcated values instudents but instead emphasised “self-determination” in an effort to be values-neutral. This method,
however, had the disadvantage of falling into value relativism. The teachers no longer taught importantvalues. And so additional instructional materials were written, which were strongly influenced by thepsychological approach of turning moral problems into problems of individual psychology.
The most notable material was “Notebook of the Heart,” a teaching aid for moral education for thirdand fourth-grade students issued in 2002 by MEXT (psychology-oriented moral education). This
teaching aid did not inculcate values in a top-down fashion; it was very crude. It had, for instance, a
topic titled “Let’s treat mistakes as valuable things.” This was accompanied by a picture of a boy who
destroyed an older man’s flowerpot with a soccer ball and words such as “Mistakes can be valuable
things for improving oneself in the future.” It turned a problem that anyone can experience in daily life
into a personal issue. It taught students to treat mistakes as valuable things but did not advise them
to apologise, which could cause extreme distortions in their morality. If we break someone else’s
property, should we really prioritise thinking of the event as a valuable lesson? If that was the case,would we not make it a habit to commit mistakes so we learn more? Does this not cause people to
be extremely egotistic?

– 33 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The responses to the questions become clearer when the text was compared with the content
of a prewar government-issued textbook for first-year students published in 1918, which taught
students not to hide their mistakes. In one story, a boy apologised for damaging a shoji screen (paper
sliding screen) on his neighbour’s house while playing with a ball. It taught students to apologise for
mistakes unlike in a similar story in “Notebook of the Heart.” Too much emphasis on psychologyoriented morality then may not be the proper way to go. “Notebook of the Heart” was later revised
and republished as “Our Morality.” This new book added reading materials to the previous book.
A few years ago, a call within the government for a qualitative change in moral education was madeto solve bullying problems amongst children. MEXT then reviewed how moral education was taught.
In March 2017, a general revision to the course of study was made. Moral time was turned into thesubject morality, which was not only values-oriented, but also psychology-oriented.

The Current State of Moral Education in Japan
Beginning April 2018, MEXT-certified textbooks were used in morality classes in elementary schools.
The same will be used in middle schools starting April 2019. Handling morality classes integrating
evaluation with instruction became an important issue. And so MEXT formed an expert council todetermine how best to evaluate student performance in moral education. The council’s report wasissued in July 2016. The report included a concise and easy-to-understand description of current
problems and future issues in moral education.
The report proposed to achieve qualitative changes in morality by removing biases towards simple
discussions of the feelings of the characters in featured reading materials. Instead, teachers need
to use a diverse range of instructional methods such as learning based on problem solving to tackle
issues. They need to take a basic approach towards evaluation such as using the plan, do, check,and act (PDCA) cycle:•

Teachers need to provide written evaluations and not just grade students’ work.

•

Evaluation must be based on a broad range of categories.

•

Teachers must perform intra-individual evaluations that encourage students.

•

Evaluation must emphasise student development with regard to maintaining multi-faceted andmulti-perspective viewpoints. Students must deepen their understanding of moral values inrelation to their own selves.

•

Teachers must observe and address specific learning needs of individual students over time.

The report also called for observation over a long period of time, for example, one year. It called
for inspection of essays on thoughts and impressions formed over the course of a year. Students
should be encouraged to apply their learnings in their daily lives. Teachers should evaluate students
based on growth.

– 34 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

On-the-spot instruction should avoid understanding how story characters felt but should focus on
self-involvement (putting themselves in the given situation). The report also discouraged discussionsof simple life experiences. Teachers should instead incorporate experiential and problem-solving
techniques in morality classes. Moral education should be founded on values-oriented moral
education. Improving evaluation methods should be treated as an opportunity to promote diverse
instructional methods through instruction integration.

Conclusion
Recent reforms in moral education in Japan did not start from the academe or the front lines of
education, but rather from government leaders. Making morality a school subject was a result for
public clamour to respond to bullying. As such, on 16 February 2013, the Education Rebuilding
Implementation Council under the supervision of Prime Minister Abe, mandated schools to teachmorality. The subject, however, lacked academic research support. It was nothing more than areplacement to the learning area, moral time. The classes still used similar textbooks such as“Notebook of the Heart.” Instruction continued to focus on exploring the psychology of the main story
characters. Students were still not asked to put themselves in the characters’ shoes and engage
in moral discussions and problem-solving activities. The country is thus still a long way off from thequalitative change that MEXT seeks. To make a radical change, moral education in Japan needs toimprove.
Educational leaders need to shake themselves free from adhering to conventional values (rely onunquestionable beliefs they have been taught) and psychology-oriented learning (instead of solving
problems in real life, they are satisfied to resolve issues as individuals).
Major results are unlikely to be achieved if we solely focus on reforming instructional methods related
to moral behaviour. We can not only rely on experiential, problem-solving, and discussion-basedlearning, we need to do more. We should not only focus on what matter at present and improving
content. We should integrate instruction and evaluation. We should keep in mind that in today’s
globalised society, we must know what morals are also taught in other countries and regions.
Unfortunately, Japan has been focusing more on improving instruction rather than actual content.
Times have change and so should the content taught. Over the years, the list of values has justexpanded to include autonomy, good faith, moderation, growth in individuality, courage, pursuitof truth, kindness, gratitude, courtesy, friendship, tolerance, respect for rules, fairness, diligence,familial love, group life, respect for tradition and culture, international understanding, respect for life,
protecting nature, reverence, and joy in living. More than 80 concepts are taught from the first grade
to middle school. Teachers cannot possibly remember them all. And moral education specialists
involved in creating course outlines do not even attempt to prioritise what students should be taught
more.

– 35 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The “Imperial Rescript on Education” advocates 12 morals—be filial to your parents, help your siblings,
be harmonious as husbands and wives, and so on. Not all people will be able to remember them.
Even ancient Greece only advocated four virtues—courage, prudence, temperance, and justice.
These are the same virtues taught in the medieval West, along with three additions—faith, charity,and hope. Buddhism teaches eight virtues in the “Noble Eightfold Path”—right view, right resolve,
right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration. Islam
has “five pillars”—faith, prayer, charity, fasting, and pilgrimage to Mecca.
Japan should consider the moral values taught in the global society as well. Students need to learn
to respect diverse value systems and coexist with members of different cultural groups while valuing
their own culture and traditions. The U.S. emphasises justice, human rights, and freedom. Perhaps,
Japan should come up with a shorter list as well. An example would be respect for wa (harmony),
abiding by the providence of nature, and feeling gratitude towards humanity and all things (captured
in the word “arigato” or “thank you”). The Japanese people should pool their great wisdom andproduce a list of at most 10 virtues that they consider particularly important. Doing that first is themost pressing issue for moral education. If fundamentally important content can be identified andappropriately taught in accordance with children’s growth, perhaps moral education will show rapid
progress. The current exclusive focus on improving instruction needs a fundamental change.
In addition, Japan can work with the ASEAN to come up with moral values and content that would
suit all countries in an effort to crate shared or common values that transcend differences in culture,
history, and religion. This could lead to the creation of an “ASEAN Values Education Charter” thatcan be implemented in schools, which can in turn lead to a peaceful society of symbiosis andcoexistence. Unlike other regions, ASEAN has a diverse mix of religions and cultures. That is why
the creation of a single set of universal values is important if Southeast Asia aims to be a conflict-freesociety. This hope can be achieved with improvements to values education.

References
1. Masahiko Nishimura, Akio Yuki, Takeo Yoshida, Kazuo Murakami, and Masatoshi Doi. (2015).
“Examining the Foundations of Moral Education: Learning from the Providence of Nature.”
Gakubunsha.
2. MEXT. (2017). “Course of Study for Elementary Schools.” Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/
component/a_menu/education/micro_detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2017/05/12/1384661_4_2.
pdf.
3. MEXT. (2017). “Explanation of the Course of Study for Elementary Schools, Special Subjects,
Section on Morality.” Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education/
micro_detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2017/11/29/1387017_12_3.pdf.
4. MEXT. (n.d.). “Japan UNESCO National Committee.” Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/
unesco/004/1339970.htm.
5. Takeo Yoshida. (2008). “Steiner’s Theory of Character Formation: Searching for a Change inMoral Education.” Gakubunsha.

– 36 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

6. Takeo Yoshida. (2013). “Moving Away from Education of the Mind and Moral Education: From theMind to Relationships, and Then to Spirit.” Gakubunsha.

– 37 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Seeking the Value ofMathematics Education:
The Case of SEA-BES
By:

Dr. Masami Isoda
Professor
Faculty of Human Sciences
CRICED
Ms. Teh Kim Hong
Mr Pedro Lucas Montecillo, Jr.
Specialists in Mathematics Education
Training Programme Division
SEAMEO RECSAM

Abstract
The aim of this article is to share what values are described in the SEA-BES: CCRLS for Mathematics
and Science (SEAMEO RECSAM, 2017) in relation to mathematics education. In the SEA-BES:
CCRLS (2017) document, there are four meanings of values being discussed. The first one is thenecessity of SEA-BES to provide the basis of specifying the style of descriptions, contents, andaims of SEA-BES. The second one is to describe the significance of mathematics, which provides
the necessity of mathematics education. The third one elaborates the nature of mathematics which
explains the framework for the objective of mathematics education. The fourth one explains the valueof mathematics, which should be learned in mathematics classroom. This article explains those four
meanings in SEA-BES: CCRLS and elaborates the fourth one for illustrating how students’ values will
be developed through the teaching and learning of mathematics in the classroom.

– 39 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Introduction
The “SEAMEO Education Action Agenda (2016–2020)” puts forward seven priority areas to provide
opportunities for the development of quality education to meet the needs of all ASEAN children.
Agenda 7—adopting a 21st-century curriculum—states to pursue a radical reform through systematic
analysis of knowledge, skills, and values needed to effectively respond to changing global contexts,
particularly to the ever-increasing complexity of the Southeast Asian economic, sociocultural, andpolitical environment, developing teacher imbued with ASEAN ideals in building ASEAN community
within 20 years (2015–2035). SEA-BES: CCRLS (2017) is the document developed for one of the
projects in the action agenda #7 spearheaded by SEAMEO RECSAM. These issues concur thenecessity for the development of a harmonious society in this competitive era. In these context, theSEA-BES the learning standards for mathematics and science are established under the following
principles:
1. The standards are the common ground to develop the fullest potential and capabilities to acquirecompetency in the 21st century.
2. The standards are presumed for overcoming competitive society in this globalisation era andunderstanding others to create the ASEAN harmonious society under global citizenship.
3. The standards function as tools for analysing curriculum for the purpose of the project as statedin a to f:a. To be used as an analytical tool to support future development of a regional integrated
curriculum necessary for ASEAN integration with emphasis on 21st-century skills
b. To strengthen ASEAN collaboration on curriculum standards and learning assessment
across different educational systems to respond effectively in the changing global context
and complexity of ASEAN
c. To promote in every member country the establishment of best practices to overcome
differences in curriculumd. To produce systematic discussion process for the establishment of the regional integrated
curriculum and assessmente. To be used as a platform for curriculum development and professional development for
all stakeholders for developing teachers imbued with ASEAN ideals in building ASEAN
communityf.

To serve as a platform for assessment such as the Southeast Asia Primary Learning Metrics(SEA-PLM)– 40 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The document developed consideration of the current status of the region as well as issues for
curriculum reforms in the world. In keeping abreast with the global development, 21st-century skills
has been emphasised in accordance to the term of competency defined by OECD (2005). The
competency being defined encompasses the standards for successful living and maintenance forwell-functioning societies. These goals are a continuously challenge to success and welfare in theeconomically competitive and dynamic society under globalisation. UNESCO (2015) sets the SDGs
as the necessity for the development of every society and the sustainability of its social welfare.
Mathematics and science count as necessary forms of literacy in any field, including new unknown
industries, which are expected by the STEM innovation, as well as general life well-being. Mathematics
and science curriculum are tools for overcoming the challenges of diversities in Southeast Asia throughdeveloping competency for competitiveness and understanding others for creating a harmonious
society. In these perspectives, the SEA-BES: CCRLS for Mathematics consider and describe threemajor components as for aims of education. First, for cultivating basic human characters throughmathematical values, attitudes, and habits of mind. Second, for developing creative human capitalwhere process skills are needed to be developed. Third, for cultivating well-qualified citizens throughknowledge of mathematics. In the past mathematics education, third aim usually recognised ascontent of teaching by teachers. However first and second aims have been recognised in theseveral curriculum documents for mathematics more than several decades. For clarifying how thesethree components function within the mathematics framework, the nature of mathematics is initiallydiscussed and to support how the aims of SEA-BES in mathematics are deduced. Subsequently,
the format of the SEA-BES: CCRLS for Mathematics is described before the elaboration of every
learning standard.

Excerpts of Descriptions for Values in
SEA-BES: CCRLS for Mathematics
The following are excerpts for discussions of values to deduce the aims of mathematics educationfor SEA-BES: CCRLS for Mathematics.

Necessity to Learn Mathematics
Mathematics has been recognised as a necessary literacy for citizenship and not only for living
economically, but also to establish a society with fluency of fruitful arguments and creations for better
living. It has been taught as a basic language for all academic subjects using visual and logicalsymbolic representations. Currently, mathematics also provides the necessary bases for STEM
education. Beyond the limitation of STEM education, mathematics has been increasing its role for
future prediction and designing with big data that produces innovation not only for technologicalproduct, but also for various business models. Mathematics is also an essential field of knowledge
to establish common reasoning for sustainable development of society through viable argument inunderstanding each other and develop critical reasoning as the habits of mind.

– 41 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Nature of Mathematics to Propose the
SEA-BES: CCRLS for Mathematics Framework
For clarifying the framework in SEA-BES: CCRLS for Mathematics and by knowing the role ofmathematics education, the humanistic and philosophical natures of mathematics are confirmed
as follows. Humanistic nature of mathematics is explained by the attitudes of competitiveness andunderstanding of others. This is illustrated by mathematicians such as Blaise Pascal, Rene Descartes,
Isaac Newton, and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. For example, if you read the letter from Pascal to Pierrede Fermat, you will recognise the competitive attitude of Blaise Pascal to Fermat’s intelligence andseeking the way to understand his excellent finding on his (Pascal) Triangles. By reading Pascal’s
The Pensées, you would recognise how Pascal denied Descartes’s geometry using algebra fromthe perspective of ancient Greece geometry. On the other hand, Descartes tried to overcome thedifficulties of ancient geometry by algebra. If you read the letter from Descartes to Elizabeth, you
would recognise how Descartes felt happy and appreciated the Royal Highness Elizabeth used his
ideas of algebra in geometry. Despite being a princess, Elizabeth had been continuously learning
mathematics in her life.
There were discussions on who developed calculus, whether it was Britain or Continent. On that
context, Johann Bernoulli, a Continental mathematician, posed a question on the journal about
the Brachistochrone problem, regarding locus of the point on circumference of the circle when it
rotates on the line. No one replied and Bernoulli extended the deadline of the answer and asked
Newton to reply. Newton answered it within a day. Finally, six contributions of the appropriate answer,
including Newton and other Continental mathematicians, were accepted. All those stories show thatmathematics embraces the humanistic nature of proficiency for competitiveness and to understandothers in order to share ideas.
Philosophical nature of mathematics can be explained based on ontological and epistemologicalperspectives. On the ontological perspective, mathematics can be seen as a subject for universal
understanding and common scientific language. The views of Plato and Aristotle are usually comparedon this perspective. Plato believes that the existence of the world of “idea” and mathematics existed
in the world of idea on Platonism. On this context, mathematical creation is usually explained by
the word “discover,” which means taking out the “cover” from which it has already existed. At the
moment of discovery, reasonableness, harmony, and beautifulness of mathematical system is usually
felt. Aristotle tried to explain about reaching idea from the material to the form. This explains that
abstract mathematics can be understood with concrete materials using terms such as “modelling,”“instruments,” “embodiment,” “metaphor,” and “change representation.” From both the ontologicalperspectives, mathematics can be understood and acquirable by everyone and, if acquired, it
serves as a common scientific language which, is used to express in any subjects. Once the ideas
are represented using the shared common language, it is possible that the world perceives the sameview autonomously.

– 42 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

On the epistemological perspective, mathematics can be developed through processes, which arenecessary to acquire mathematical values and ways of thinking. From this perspective, idealism
and materialism are compared. On the context of Hegel, a member of German idealism, Imre
Lakatos explained the development of mathematics through proof and refutation. On this context,
mathematics is not fixed but an expandable system that can be restructured through a processof dialectic in constructing viable arguments. Plato also used dialectic for reaching ideas with theexamples of mathematics. The origin of dialectic is known as the origin of indirect proof. In education
today, dialectic is a part of critical thinking for creation. Parallel perspectives for mathematicaldevelopments are given by George Polya and Hans Freudenthal. For the discovery of mathematics,
Polya explained mathematical problem solving processes with mathematical ideas and mathematicalways of thinking in general. Freudenthal enhanced the activity to reorganise mathematics by the term
“mathematisation.”
Genetic epistemologist Jean Piaget established his theory of operations based on various theories,
including the discussion of Freudenthal, and explained the mathematical development of operations
by the term “reflective abstraction.” Reflection is also a necessary activity for mathematisation by
Freudenthal. On materialism, under Vygotskyian perspective, intermediate tools such as language
become the basis for reasoning in the mind. Under his theory, the high-quality mathematicalthinking can be developed, depending on the high-quality communication in mathematics
classrooms. A dialectical-critical discussion should be enhanced in the mathematics class. From
both the epistemological perspectives, mathematics can be developed through the processes ofcommunication, problem solving, and mathematisation, which include reorganisation of mathematics.
Those processes are necessary to acquire mathematical values and ways of thinking throughreflection.

Aims of Mathematics Education in SEA-BES: CCRLS
The aims of mathematics in SEA-BES: CCRLS for developing basic human characters, creative
human capital, and well-qualified citizens in Southeast Asia for a harmonious society are as follows:•

Develop mathematical values, attitudes, and habits of mind for human character•

Develop mathematical thinking and able to engage in appropriate processes•

Acquire proficiency in mathematics contents and apply mathematics in appropriate situations

Framework for SEA-BES: CCRLS for Mathematics as shown in Figure 6 is developed based on thethree components with discussions of the humanistic and philosophical nature of mathematics. This
framework also depicts the concrete ideas of mathematics learning of the above aims.

– 43 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Figure 6: SEA-BES: CCRLS framework for mathematics education

At every given context on the curriculum, those three components are mutually related and explainsvarious objectives for education. Those components under this framework are functioning to interpretthe objective of every learning standard in the SEA-BES: CCRLS.

Mathematical Values, Attitudes, and Habits of the Mind
For cultivating basic human characters, values, attitudes, and habits of mind are essentials to be
developed through mathematics. Values are the basis for setting objectives and making decisions
for future directions. Attitudes are mind-sets for attempting to pursue undertakings. Habits of mind
are necessary for soft skills that contribute to living harmoniously in the society.

– 44 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Mathematical values, mathematical attitudes, and mathematical habits of mind are simultaneously
developed and inculcated through the learning of the content. Essential examples of values, attitudes,
and habits of mind are given in Figure 6. On seeking values in mathematics, characteristics such as
generalisable and expandable ideas are usually recognised as strong ideas. In explaining why sucha particular proving is necessary in mathematics is usually related to seeking for reasonableness.
Harmony and beautifulness can also be thought as mathematical values that are not only describedin relation to mathematical arts, but also in the science of patterns and mathematical systems.
Usefulness and simplicity are used in selection of mathematical ideas and procedures.
SEA-BES: CCRLS is written by four content strands and one process-humanity strand and in every
strand, standards are described by using verb and adjective to embed the process and value into
content of teaching.

Teaching of Thinking, Process, Value,and Attitude in Mathematics Classroom
In traditional manner of teaching mathematics, drills and exercises are used for teaching thecontents. However the ways to teach thinking, processes, values, and attitudes in mathematics
are not clearly stated like the teaching of mathematics content. SEA-BES: CCRLS (2017) illustrates
that mathematical thinking, process, value, and attitude can be learned by students when teachers
provide appropriate contexts in relation to specific content of teaching. Isoda (2012) illustrated thatappropriate contexts are given by the task sequence in curriculum and student learning are usually
distinguished by the terminologies such as acquisition of contents, reflection of processes, andappreciation of values.

Figure 7: Learning mathematics in the appropriate context– 45 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

How to Develop Thinking, Skills, Values,and Attitudes in Classrooms
Isoda (2012 and 2016) illustrated the task sequence from task 1 (37 x 3) to task 2 (15,873 x 7) for
explaining how to develop mathematical thinking on Figure 6 framework (see the lecture video series
by SEAMEO QITEM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= oCp2HijnVSk).

Figure 21: Illustration from task 1 to task 2
Source: M. Isoda and S. Katagiri (2016)– 46 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

It begins from 37 x 3 = 111 (here, it is called “tentatively doggy number” because of Japanesesounds for barking) and through only questioning, “What do you want to do next?,” the activity
continues by learners’ replies to this simple open question. If learners recognised 37 x 6 = 222,
which is referred as “love numbers” (Japanese sounds for kissing to kids), then it is assumed thatlearners are able to find repeated digit patterns; firstly, finding the alternative natural number pattern,
secondly, integrating different patterns and finally as one pattern. In the process, learners also findthe conditions when every pattern can work and write the propositions by if-then format. These are
the outcomes of mathematics and can be categorised as “content” in Figure 6.
Acquisitions of these content are enhanced by the exercise in task 2 as 15,873 x 7. The sequence
from task 1 to task 2 is an application of learning. Although, the activity in task 1 is led by the teacher,
students are able to challenge task 2 as long as the students could follow the explanation in task
1, which is written in the box of Figure 8. Content knowledge can be acquired by doing exercises.
However, thinking, processes, values, and attitudes are difficult to be learned if teachers do notprovide enough time for students to think by themselves on task 1.
In the activity elaborated above, the teacher only gave the question, “What do you want to donext?,” subsequently providing the time to think and communicate and listening to students’ ideas
and any answers for that open question. Students are able to think whatever they can imagine, set
their directions and representation for thinking, finding and sharing every pattern by themselves.
Their reasoning can be expressed by the terminologies in Figure 6 such as “set” on mathematicalideas, “inductive, deductive and analogical thinking,” “extension and integration,” and “generalisationand specialisation” on mathematical thinking; “generality and expandability,” “reasonableness andharmony,” and “beautifulness” on mathematical values; and “pose question and develop explanation”
and “change representation for meaningful explanation” on mathematical attitude. In the process oftask 1, the question, “What do you want to do next?,” is used to direct the thinking and reasoningof students whom, by themselves, would not be aware of using these terminologies on Figure 6 inthe process. However, at the moment when they find 111,111 in task 2, they are able to reflect on
and appreciate the whole process in the box of Figure 8 and recognise the various activities, efforts,
and challenges done during the process of task 1 as the set of sequential activity for task 2. At the
moment, if students felt that task 1 and task 2 might be the same activity, it meant that they are able
to reflect and appreciate the process of task 1. At this juncture, the task sequence from task 1 totask 2 can be seen as a context on Figure 7 and the teacher is able to teach various terminologies
in Figure 6 on this context.
Japanese textbooks well-embedded these type of task sequences for Figure 6 under Japanesecurriculum on the name of “problem-solving approach.” Some of SEAMEO countries alreadypublished in their editions or in process (Maitree and Isoda, 2010).

– 47 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Conclusion
The SEA-BES: CCRLS for Mathematics curriculum has been developed based on the fundamentalsof the nature of mathematics. With that concrete grounding, the values of mathematics prevailin the framework. This would ultimately enable the attainment of the aims of SEA-BES: CCRLS,
particularly in promoting mathematical thinking and values in teaching and learning of mathematics
in the classroom. The reference for SEA-BES: CCRLS itself was written in Managao, Ahmad, andIsoda (2017). The development process of SEA-BES: CCRLS was written in Montecillo, Teh, andIsoda (2018), which illustrated the curriculum development process as the elaborative and dialectic
process of educational values.
Note: Authors of this article would like to deeply acknowledge all specialists and contributors in
SEAMEO countries for their drafting and editorial works for SEA-BES: CCRLS. Especially, we would
like to deeply acknowledge the contribution of Dr. Mohd Sazali bin Hj Khalid for the early stage of thedrafting who passed away after his retirement of SEAMEO RECSAM.

References
1. Dominador Dizon Managao, Nur Jahan Ahmad, and Masami Isoda. (2017). “SEAMEO Basic
Education Standards (SEA-BES): Common Core Regional Learning Standards (CCRLS) in
Mathematics and Science.” Penang, Malaysia: SEAMEO RECSAM. Retrieved from http://www.
recsam.edu.my/sub_SEA-BES/images/docs/CCRLSReport.pdf.
2. Masami Isoda. (2012). “Introductory Chapter: Problem-Solving Approach to Develop MathematicalThinking.” Mathematical Thinking: How to Develop It in Classrooms. Singapore: World
Scientific. Retrieved from http://www.criced.tsukuba.ac.jp/math/apec/ICME12/Lesson_
Study_set/MATHEMATICAL%20THINKING%20(c)World%20Scientific/MathematicalThinking_chap01(c)WorldScientific.pdf.
3. Masami Isoda and Raimundo Olfos. (2009). “El Enfoque de Resolucion de Problemas.”
Valparaiso, Chile: University of Valparaiso. Retrieved from http://math-info.criced.tsukuba.ac.jp/
upload/ProblemSolvingIsodaOlfos.pdf.
4. Masami Isoda and Shigeo Katagiri (2016). Pensamiento Matemático: Cómo Desarrollarloen la Sala de Clases 2nd Edition. Santiago, Chile: CIAE, University of Chile.
5. Maitree Inprashitha and Masami Isoda (2010). เรียนกับเพื่อน: คณิตศาสตร์สำ�หรับโรงเรียนประถม
ศึกษา. Khon Kaen: Thailand.
6. Masami Isoda (2005). Study with Your Friends: Mathematics.
7. Masami Isoda and David Tall. (2019). Junior-High School Mathematics Volumes 1–3. Tokyo,
Japan: Gakko Tosyo.

– 48 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

8. Masami Isoda, Aki Murata, and Aida Istino-Yap. (2015). Study with Your Friends: Mathematics.
Tokyo, Japan: Gakko Tosyo.
9. Montecillo, Teh, and Isoda. (2018). “Challenges in the Development of Regional Mathematics
Curriculum Standards in the Case of Southeast Asia Ministers of Education Organization.”
School Mathematics Curriculum Reforms: Challenges, Changes, and Opportunities.
Proceedings of ICMI Study 24. Tsukuba, Japan: University of Tsukuba and International
Commission of Mathematical Instruction.

– 49 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Values Education and Global
Citizenship in Social Studies
in Japan
By:

Dr. Kiyoshi Karaki
Professor
Faculty of Human Sciences
University of Tsukuba

Abstract
Values education means education for the purpose of the teaching and learning of values used for
decision guidelines and decision-making standards. It is desirable to distinguish values educationfrom moral education that has been treasured in Japanese school education. Moral education deal
with virtue, on the other hand, values education deal with values. In values education, students
think about problematic and controversial problems that exist in modern society from a certain value
criterion and collaboratively consider the solutions. Through this process, students acquire global
citizenship. In addition, it is a subject of social studies that is set for purpose to play a core role inelementary and junior-high school. For example, in elementary-school social studies, students think
about renovation of a river. Depending on which of the two values of conservation and protection
is important, the ways of renovation, which students think are difference. Also, in junior-high schoolsocial studies, students think about the support of Niger in Africa. Amongst numerous solutions,considering the concept of “potential ability” by Amartya Sen, students consider which solutions
should be given priority. The solutions differ for each student. Such efforts related to values education
are variously practiced in today’s school education in Japan. Practice of value education aiming at
nurturing the global citizenship in Japan must be greatly developed utilising several efforts related to
SDGs and characteristics of Japanese school education.

– 51 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Introduction
Values, Education, and Development of Global Citizenship in Japan
School education in Japan places a strong focus on Moral Education. This is clear from the fact that
this is a special subject in elementary and middle schools. Moral education in schools is conducted
through all educational activities. That is to say, moral education takes place through learning insuch subjects and courses as Japanese, social studies, and special activities. In social studies, forexample, students learn that everyone needs to cooperate to get rid of trash. Also, one of the goalsof special activities is to develop the awareness that one is a member of a group through cleaning
as a team. In Japan, it is thought that morals are essential for people to live in society, and that thesecan be developed through school education.
However, such moral education in Japan differs from the general concept of values education. Values
education means education for the purpose of teaching and learning of values used for decision
guidelines and decision-making standards. Here, I would like to consider separately the virtues inmoral education and the values in values education. Some who promote moral education think that
virtues can be taught. It is, however, extremely difficult to teach the values in values education. In
values education classes, students are required to think autonomously with certain values for decision
criteria while engaged in cooperative discussions with other students. This type of education aims
to develop intellectual autonomy.
In modern society, there are many problems that are difficult to resolve. Issues concerning suchmatters as poverty, peace, energy, and inequality, which are the focus of the SDGs, need urgent
resolution to build a sustainable society. Values education in Japan uses these issues as teachingmaterial and requires students to consider measures to resolve them. In particular, social studies
aims to develop global citizenship in discussion-focused classes.
Based on the above and with having a goal to understand of Japanese values education, this article
addresses social studies classes related to values education to make clear of the principles behinddevelopment of global citizenship.

Positioning of Social Studies in the Curriculum
Japan has a national curriculum called the “Course of Study.” Both public and private schools develop
curricula based on this. In actuality, these vary by school since they are developed in accordancewith student and local conditions. Even in such cases, however, educational goals and content aswell as number of hours for subjects in the Course of Study are not strictly observed.
In Japan, the Course of Study is revised once nearly every 10 years. The most recent revision
took place in 2017 of elementary and middle schools and in 2018 for high schools. Based on thisrevision, new curricula will start from 2020 in elementary schools, 2021 in middle schools and 2022
in high schools. Here, I will focus on an explanation of elementary and middle schools since the new
Course of Study for high schools will be presented in March 2018.

– 52 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

In the new Course of Study, elementary schools, for example, will have 11 subjects (Japanese,social studies, mathematics, science, living environment studies, music, drawing and crafts, HE,PE, foreign language, and moral education) and three extra subjects or activities (foreign language
activities, integrated studies, and special activities). Middle schools will have 10 subjects (Japanese,social studies, mathematics, science, music, art, physical and health education, technical courseand HE, foreign language, and moral education) and two extra subjects or activities (integrated
studies and special activities). All of these are required courses.
Educational goals, content, and number of hours are stipulated in detail for each of these courses.
The number of hours for social studies in elementary school, for example, is as follows: 70 for thethird year, 90 for the fourth year, 100 for the fifth year, and 105 hours for the sixth year. In middle
school, the number of hours for the same course is 105 for the first and second years and 140
hours for the third year. The amount of time for one credit is 45 minutes in elementary school and 50
minutes in middle school.
The goals of social studies in elementary and middle schools are mostly the same. In middle
school, the goal is “to develop as follows a foundation for the disposition and abilities required for a
citizen to form a peaceful and democratic nation and society existing independently in a globalisinginternational society from a broad perspective through activities to inquire into and resolve issues
using social views and thinking.” The difference between elementary- and middle-school goals is thatthe “broad perspective” for middle school is not used for elementary schools. Behind this differenceis that middle-school social studies consists of geography, history, and civics and therefore has moreadvanced course material than elementary school. In addition to the above, both levels of school
have three concrete goals. These three goals concern the areas of knowledge and skills, the abilitiesof thinking, judgement, and expression as well as the motivation to learn and humanity. The viewpointof these three goals is shared across all courses.
From the social studies goals, we can understand that the disposition and ability that this course
aims for is global citizenship. Also, since the goal concerning the abilities of thinking, judgement,
and expression touches upon the ability to understand social issues and choose and decide how
to become involved in society to resolve them and the goal concerning the motivation to learn andhumanity covers the attitude to conceive of a better society and independently solve problems, we
see that social studies plays an important role in promoting values education in schools.

Classes Concerning Values Education in Social Studies
Principle of Developing Global Citizenship Based on Values Education
The term “values education” is not frequently used in social studies in Japan. Accordingly, classes
introduced here are those thought to be connected to such education. Classes selected meet the
below three requirements.

– 53 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The first is that they use social issues as teaching material. Even in a social studies class that aims
to develop global citizenship, social issues addressed do not need to be global in nature. Importantsocial issues that are difficult to resolve, whether they be foreign or domestic, are raised. The second
is students thinking autonomously while referencing values standards. Social issues are difficult
to resolve because multiple values are in opposition regarding the issue. Values-education-basedsocial studies classes compel students to confront this conflict and make autonomous decisions
using what they have learned as well as their own life experience. The third requirement is valuingclass discussions. In recent years, many have pointed out the importance of active learning inschools in Japan. In our globalised society, there is a need to cooperatively consider and implement
resolutions to problems. Social studies continuously works to link classroom learning with learningin society.
With the above, I propose the below three points as principles in developing values-educationbased global citizenship:•

Development Principle 1: Using social issues as teaching materials.

•

Development Principle 2: Autonomous student thinking based on decision-making standards.

•

Development Principle 3: Emphasis on discussion as cooperative class learning.

Now, I will introduce elementary- and middle-school social studies classes that meet these threeprinciples.

Social Studies Classroom Practices in Elementary Schools
Here, I will discuss learning in social studies classes for fifth-graders in elementary school.
Social studies for the fifth grade in elementary school addresses the five areas of (1) the territory ofJapan and the lives of its people; (2) agricultural and fishery food production in Japan; (3) Japaneseindustrial production; (4) the relation between industry and information in Japan; and (5) the relation
between the country’s natural environment and the lives of its people. Of these, study concerning
item 5—the environment—is further divided into the three areas of natural disasters, forests, andpollution.
Upon the conclusion of the unit on natural disasters, students who learned such matters as typesof these disasters, the locations and timing of their occurrence, as well as disaster measures on thenational and prefectural level considered issues faced by their own region. These issues concern
how to improve rivers, which cause great damage to the region through repeated flooding.
Two different positions concerning river improvement are presented to the students—conservationand preservation.

– 54 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The conservation position is based on the idea of “protection of nature for humans” and students arepresented with the following view of a conservation advocate.

“

The river that flows through our town floods nearly every 10 years. You probably
still remember the flood last year that killed many people and destroyed homes.
We propose covering the riverbed with concrete to prevent flooding. Even if we
do this, the fish in the river will remain there. Also, we will build a water park
around the river so that the river will be popular amongst town residents.

”

On the other hand, the preservation position is based on the idea of “protection of nature for nature.”
The following view of a preservation advocate was presented to students.

“

The floods are so damaging because our natural disaster preparedness islacking. Even if we are sufficiently prepared though, we cannot completely
avoid damage. Floods are unavoidable. If we cover the riverbed with concrete,
it will have a great impact on the surrounding environment. The fish and thebeautiful nearby vegetation that are there now will be gone. Protecting nature
is more important than anything else.

”

To start, students summarise the pluses and minuses of each position in a table to accurately
understand them. They then choose a position and discuss with students who selected the otherposition. The discussion, however, is not to seek an answer. The point is to clarify the decision
criteria for conservation and preservation for students to have a basis for sharing their views withothers and to work together to derive solutions. Considering problems without answers allows us tofind the meaning of classroom practice based on values education.

Social Studies Classroom Practices in Middle Schools
Here, we will examine the study of international support in the civic area in middle school social
studies classes.
This takes place in the third and final year of middle school. Classes consist of the following fourareas: (1) contemporary society and us; (2) the economy and us; (3) politics and us; and (4) problems
in international society and us.
In item 4 problems in international society and us, students who studied the role of internationalorganisations, including the UN, the role of Japan in international society as well as Japanese security,
self-defense, and international contributions come to see economic and technical cooperation as
crucial in resolving problems such as the global environment, resources, and energy issues. Theseissues are the same as those addressed by the SDGs.

– 55 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

In their study of international support, students considered support for the Republic of Niger inAfrica. On the southern edge of the Sahara Desert in West Africa, the Republic of Niger is one of theworld’s poorest countries due to repeated military coup d’états and a harsh natural environment. It isalways at the bottom of the Human Development Index. Since it has the world’s third-largest provenreserves of uranium, a key mining commodity, this country has deep trade ties with Japan. But theselinks have become tenuous with nuclear power plants in Japan suspending operations due to the
explosion of the Number 2 Reactor at Fukushima in the Great East Japan Earthquake. The Republicof Niger is now a forgotten country.
Class teaching materials were prepared with the cooperation of Comment Niger, a Japanese nonprofit organisation (NPO) that supports this country. To start, the following five current international
support projects were presented to students—food donations, vaccinations against infectious
diseases, provision of agricultural technology, construction of elementary schools, and donation ofsolar lanterns and the students considered which projects to prioritise. Then, international supportconditions and the Amartya Sen capability approach was explained to the class, and the students
again considered which of the five projects should receive priority.
In the first round, most students gave first priority to either food donations or vaccinations because
they felt that human life was of the greatest importance. In the second round of decision making, thenumber of students assigning first priority to provision of agricultural technology or construction ofelementary schools increased. This is a result of sustainability being added to human life as decision
criteria for the students. Students considered not temporary support, but support of a long-term
nature, and began to think about what kind of assistance would increase the potential of the peopleof the Republic of Niger.

Conclusion
In values-education-based classes, students are made to understand the conflict of values behind
the resolution of problems and are reminded of their own important values through discussion.

Progress in Values Education and Development of Global Citizenship
In Japan, there is increasing consideration of developing global citizenship and with the adoptionof the “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” at the 2015 UN Summit resulting in the SDGs
becoming widely known globally, there is increasing focus on such development.
The national government as well is working to support realisation of the SDGs by structuring animplementation system and guidelines and cooperating with stakeholders, and its role is likely toincrease in importance. School-based education also plays an important role in developing global
citizenship, and such a foundation will serve these children when they become adults and leadersof society.

– 56 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Since Japan has a Course of Study as a national curriculum, it is possible to efficiently develop
global citizenship and promote values education. Also, 20,000 elementary schools, 10,000 middle
schools, 5,000 high schools, and 1,000 special support schools are capable of developing theirown curricula based on the Course of Study through emphasis on the principles of curricula open
to society and curriculum management. It is also now known globally that individual teachers canenhance class lessons through repeated lesson study. School education in Japan has a great dealof potential.
The values education classroom practice in elementary and middle schools examined here, however,is not necessarily the norm. The adverse effects of the teaching for exams that is common in East
Asian nations and the reduction in opportunities for lesson study due to teachers being busy are
obstacles to conducting values education classes. Also, the greatest issue is that the theory andmethods for this type of education are under development. It is my hope that the three development
principles covered here will contribute to such development.

References
1. MEXT. (2018). “Improvement of Academic Abilities (Courses of Study).” Retrieved from http://
www.mext.go.jp/en/policy/education/elsec/title02/detail02/1373859.htm.
2. UNESCO. (2015). “Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.”
Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld.

– 57 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

SDG 4.7:
Fostering Global CitizenshipBy:

Dr. Yoko Mochizuki
Programme Specialist ESD
Head of Policy TeamUNESCO MGIEP

Abstract
Education for all (EFA) is an essential prerequisite of sustainable development. In addition to literacy
and numeracy, education for today and tomorrow should equip learners with higher-order thinking
skills (HOTS) such as critical-thinking and social and emotional skills to engage constructively withthe uncertain and rapidly changing world. It is not sufficient for education to merely adapt to changing
societal needs. It needs to be transformative. Values-based and action-oriented education, including
education for sustainable development (ESD), GCED, and other related areas, are now encapsulated
in SDG 4.7. This article discusses how SDG 4.7 is critical in achieving not only SDG 4 on education,
but also achieving the other 16 SDGs.

Introduction
The interconnected environmental, economic, social, and political challenges facing humanity
call for education that cultivates a sense of belonging to common humanity and responsibility totake action to address these challenges. The “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” is anintergovernmental commitment and “a plan of action for people, planet, and prosperity” comprising
17 SDGs (UN, 2015). Education is articulated as a stand-alone goal (SDG 4: Ensure inclusive andequitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all) with seven outcome
targets and three means of implementation (see Tables 7 and 8).
Table 12: SDG 4 Targets
TargetDetail

4.1 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys complete free, equitable, and quality primary andsecondary education leading to relevant and effective learning outcomes.
4.2 By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development
care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education.
4.3 By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable and quality technical,
vocational, and tertiary education, including university.

– 59 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1
Table 12: SDG 4 Targets
TargetDetail

4.4 By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who have relevant skills,
including technical and vocational skills, for employment, decent jobs, and entrepreneurship.
4.5 By 2030, eliminate gender disparities in education and ensure equal access to all levels of
education and vocational training for the vulnerable, including persons with disabilities (PWDs),
indigenous peoples, and children in vulnerable situations.
4.6 By 2030, ensure that all youth and a substantial proportion of adults, both men and women,
achieve literacy and numeracy.
4.7 By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promotesustainable development, including, amongst others, through ESD and sustainable lifestyles,
human rights, gender equality, promotion of a culture of peace and non-violence, global
citizenship, and appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable
development.

Table 13: SDG 4 Implementation Means
Implementation
Means

Detail

4.A

Build and upgrade educational facilities that are child-, disability-, and gendersensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive, and effective learning environments
for all.

4.B

By 2020, substantially expand globally the number of scholarships available todeveloping countries, in particular least-developed countries, small island developing
states, and African countries, for enrollment in higher education, including vocational
training and information and communication technology (ICT), technical, engineering,and scientific programmes, in developed countries and other developing countries.

4.C

By 2030, substantially increase the supply of qualified teachers, including throughinternational cooperation for teacher training in developing countries, especially leastdeveloped countries and small island developing states.

EFA: A Prerequisite to Sustainable Development
The principles underlying SDG 4 are deeply rooted in the intrinsic—as opposed to instrumental—
value of education and a humanistic vision of education, which UNESCO has championed since
its inception. First of all, education is a fundamental human right. The state bears a duty to ensure
universal access to inclusive and equitable quality education. Secondly, education is a public good
and a shared societal endeavour (UNESCO, 2015). Not only the governments, but also civil society,teachers and educators, the private sector, communities, families, youth, and children all haveimportant roles in realising the right to quality education.

– 60 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

EFA is an essential prerequisite for sustainable development. On one hand, SDG 4 is about continuingwith the unfinished business of EFA. Targets 4.1 through 4.6 focus largely on expanding access to
education and equipping learners with skills for employability. On the other hand, while these are
no doubt important goals, they do not raise critical questions regarding the fundamental purposesof education. In other words, they aim at enabling learners to adapt to and succeed in society as
it exists today—rather than “transforming our world” as being called for by the “2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development” (UN, 2015).

SDG 4.7: Education for Sustainable Development
and Global CitizenshipIn addition to literacy and numeracy, education for today and tomorrow should equip learners with
HOTS (such as critical-thinking skills) and social and emotional skills to engage constructively
with the uncertain and rapidly changing world. It is not sufficient if education is merely adaptive
to the changing societal needs; education needs to be transformative (UNESCO, 2015). Valuesbased and action-oriented education—including ESD, GCED, peace and human rights education,
environmental education, development education, global learning, inter-cultural education, EIU, andothers—is now encapsulated in SDG 4 Target 7 (SDG 4.7).
Promoting peace and sustainable development through education is one of UNESCO’s core missions
and is now enshrined in SDG 4.7 as one of the goals, which nations around the globe aspire toachieve. There is a need to ensure education systems help build peaceful and sustainable societies.
This includes ensuring that education systems help develop knowledge and skills necessary tofoster mutual understanding, respect, and care amongst all people and for the planet we share andto engage responsibly and creatively with the changing world. This is critical not only to achieve
SDG 4.7, but also to support the implementation of all 17 SDGs. Education in the “2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development” (UN, 2015) is not restricted to SDG 4. Education is specifically mentioned
in targets of the five goals listed below, but also linked to virtually all of the other SDGs in one way
or another:•

Target 3.7: Health and well-being: By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive
healthcare services, including for family planning, information and education, and the integrationof reproductive health in national strategies and programmes.

•

Target 5.6: Gender equality: The number of countries with laws and regulations that guarantee
women aged 15–49 have access to sexual and reproductive healthcare, information, andeducation.

•

Target 8.6: Decent work and economic growth: By 2020, substantially reduce the proportion ofyouth not in employment, education, or training.

•

Target 12.8: Responsible consumption and production: By 2030, ensure that people everywhere
have the relevant information and awareness for sustainable development and lifestyles inharmony with nature.

– 61 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1•

Target 13.3: Climate change mitigation: Improve education, awareness raising, and humanand institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction, and early
warning.

Conclusion
Ways Forward
Awareness and knowledge about sustainable development is not sufficient to foster competencies
required for shaping more peaceful and sustainable societies. There is an increasing consensus on
the critical importance of social and emotional skills (sometimes referred to as “soft skills”), in addition
to “cognitive” skills (including both the foundational skills of literacy and numeracy and HOTS such as
critical thinking). Today’s education for the uncertain future should cultivate intelligence that integrates
reason and emotion.
It is vital to give a central place to strengthening education’s contribution to the fulfillment of humanrights, peace, and responsible citizenship from local to global levels. One of the pathways to foster theknowledge, skills, values, and attitudes required by citizens to lead productive lives, make informed
decisions, and assume active roles locally and globally in facing and resolving global challenges is
to integrate the principles and values of sustainable development at the heart of the curriculum of
core subjects, rather than inserting new thematic content into the already-overburdened curriculum(UNESCO MGIEP, 2017a and 2017b).
MGIEP is an integral part of UNESCO and its specialist institute on education for peace, sustainable
development, and global citizenship. It calls for a fundamental rethinking of schooling (UNESCOMGIEP, 2017a) and proposes a strategy to integrate SDG 4.7 in core subjects such as mathematics,
science, and languages to reorient education towards sustainability (UNESCO MGIEP, 2017b).
While often treated as mere add-ons to gear schools for the 21st century, the notions of “sustainable
development” and “global citizenship” fundamentally challenge the dominant discourses andpractices of education today. To achieve the SDGs, we would need a culture of collaboration, care,and peaceful coexistence, not that of competition and pursuing individual and nationalistic gains.
SDG 4.7 is about learning to live together on a planet under pressure—the planet we all share.
To this end, policy-makers are encouraged to start embracing education not primarily as a tool forallowing people to participate in the global economy, but as a holistic experience of positive personaland cultural transformation.
Disclaimer: The ideas and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author; they are notnecessarily those of UNESCO or UNESCO MGIEP and do not commit the organisation.

References
1. UN. (2015). “Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” Retrieved
from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld.

– 62 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

2. UNESCO. (2015). “Rethinking Education: Towards a Common Global Good?” Retrieved fromhttp://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002325/232555e.pdf.
3. UNESCO. (2017). “Unpacking SDG 4: Education 2030: Guide.” Retrieved from http://unesdoc.
unesco.org/images/0024/002463/246300E.pdf.
4. UNESCO MGIEP. (2017a). “Rethinking Schooling for the 21st Century: The State of Education
for Peace, Sustainable Development, and Global Citizenship.” Retrieved from http://unesdoc.
unesco.org/images/0026/002605/260568e.pdf.
5. UNESCO MGIEP. (2017b). “Textbooks for Sustainable Development: A Guide to Embedding.”
Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0025/002599/259932e.pdf.

– 63 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Values Education and Global
Citizenship Towards Achieving theSDGs and Promoting Humanities
By:

Dr. Abi Sujak
Centre Director
Mrs. Cahya Kusuma Ratih
Research and Development Division Manager
SEAMOLEC

Abstract
This article presents a higher education capacity-building project funded by the Erasmus+ Programmeof the EU, Indoped. The featured 2016–2018 project aims to modernise higher education in Indonesia
via the adaptation of tried-and-tested European pedagogical approaches. These approaches put
students at the centre of learning by primarily using multi-disciplinary techniques to prepare themfor future professional challenges. By introducing and sharing different learning methods used by
European university partners, we hope to add value to existing Indonesian pedagogical approaches
to bridge the gap between what is taught in universities and what is required by industries. The
pedagogical practices have been successfully piloted in SEAMEO university partners in Indonesia
and had a positive impact on both students’ and teachers’ innovation competencies.

Introduction
The EU implemented the “Europe 2020 Strategy” to face new challenges and promote future
growth towards becoming a sustainable social market economy (European Commission, n.d.).
This strategy has led to the creation of the “Innovation Union,” which mutually reinforced research,development, and innovation (RDI) to improve the region’s competitiveness, create jobs, enhance its
HR’s employability, reduce poverty, and support effective energy use. To ensure that innovative ideas
turn into products and/or services of future professionals, a new generation of workers that can use
and transform their existing knowledge and skills into innovative products and/or services is needed.
Higher education institutions (HEIs) that produce the said professionals thus have an important roleto play in developing the innovativeness of their students.

– 65 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

An example of such effort was the establishment of the Turku University of Applied Sciences (TUAS)
10 years ago, with which Finland introduced the innovation pedagogy as a learning approach thatenhances students’ innovativeness. The innovation pedagogy is a new pedagogical approach that
relies on assimilation, production, and knowledge utilisation to produce innovative products and/or
services. The lecturers’ and businesses’ active use of the innovation pedagogy hopes to enhance
the students’ innovativeness in relation to their chosen field of study. The innovation pedagogy
is characterised by active learning and teaching methods, work-life orientation, RDI integration
and application in one’s chosen field of study and professional activities, flexible curricula, multidisciplinary approaches, internationalisation, entrepreneurship, versatility, and development-oriented
assessment (Kairisto-Mertanen, Räsänen, Lehtonen, and Lappalainen, 2012).
Innovation competence refers to the ability to integrate knowledge, skills, and attitudes as a learning
outcome of the innovation pedagogy. The “Framework for Innovation Competencies Development
and Assessment” (FINCODA) Project, an EU-financed initiative, introduced a model of innovationcompetence. The model has three categories and five dimensions of innovation competence.
The five dimensions—critical thinking, creativity, initiative, teamwork, and networking—are grouped
into three categories—individual, interpersonal, and networking competence (Marin-Garcia, et al.,2016). Critical thinking is the ability to analyse, evaluate, estimate, or even foresee the outcomes ofcertain issues. Creativity, meanwhile, is the ability to think beyond boundaries and generate variedalternatives to ideas, designs, products, or services. Initiative, on the other hand, is the ability tomake decisions and/or carry out actions for the further implementation of ideas, which can result in
the development of an individual’s innovation competence. To optimise organisational performance,
individuals cannot stand alone, they need to effectively work with a group (teamwork) and external
stakeholders (networking).

Figure 9: FINCODA innovation competence dimensions
Source: https://www.fincoda.eu/fincoda-blog/2017/10/16/the-fincoda-barometer-tool-explained– 66 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

With an area of more than 1.9 million square kilometres comprising approximately 17,000 islands,
Indonesia is the largest country in Southeast Asia and the largest archipelagic country in the world.
Indonesia is the fourth most-populous country as well with more than 250 million inhabitants. As an
archipelago, Indonesia has various ethnic groups who speak over 250 different languages and/or
dialects. This geographical condition is reflected in the country’s motto—“Unity in Diversity.” Despite
a population of more than 200 million Muslims, Indonesia is also home to Catholics, Protestants,
Hindus, Buddhists, and Confucianists.
Tertiary education in Indonesia is characterised by a growing government budget allocation,
institutional development, and increasing enrollment rate. The country’s gross enrollment rate is,in fact, expected to grow from 21.3% in 2008–2009 to 30% in 2014 (OECD, 2010). Even though
the rate remains lower than those of Malaysia, Thailand, and Singapore, Indonesia will continue toenhance the competitiveness of its professionals to support workforce mobility in Southeast Asia.
Indonesian HEIs come in six forms—universities, institutes, colleges, polytechnics, academies, andcommunity academies (OECD, 2010). At present, the country has 4,645 HEIs with 286,637 lecturers
and 5,725,010 students.1 Higher-education students can obtain bachelor’s, master’s, doctorate,
and professional degrees or diploma and specialisation certificates from these HEIs.
Indonesian HEIs adhere to the “Three Principles,” also known as the “Tri Dharma Perguruan Tinggi”—
education, research, and community services. When it comes to improving the quality of education,enhancing teaching and learning processes is important. According to Indonesian law, each HEI
develops its own curriculum based on the National Higher Education Standards. This means thatevery institution needs to focus not only on improving contents, but also pedagogies.
Despite growing awareness of the importance of and progress in implementing student-centeredlearning and inquiry-based methods, most teachers continue to primarily impart knowledge throughlectures. Transitioning teachers from acting as lecturers into becoming facilitators remains a challenge.
Turning students into autonomous learners is also difficult due to cultural barriers such as the belief that
total obedience is the measure of good conduct or the Manut-lan-miturut philosophy (Dardjowidjojo,
2001). Believers in this philosophy can be likened to yes men in the Western perspective. Students
are expected to follow their teachers’ instructions without question. This, however, is not applicablein the 21st century and so must be reduced by first modifying the teachers’ mind-set to match thatof their Western counterparts.

1

Retrieved from https://forlap.ristekdikti.go.id/ on 22 July 2018.

– 67 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Current Teaching and Learning Situation in Indonesian HEIs
According to the Education Sector Analytical and Capacity Development Partnership (ACDP) 2013
report, universities and industries—the main agents of innovation development and economy
growth—continue to be independent of each other. The fundamental challenges include lack ofmutual understanding and trust between the sectors. Many universities develop their strategies
without considering industries’ future needs and so produce irrelevant graduates. On the other hand,industries see the academe as bureaucratic; they adhere to too many procedures and so attaining
mutual understanding with them takes too long. Both sectors need to exert effort to work with eachother. Structured encounters via governing boards and joint programmes may be required to drive
innovation and, consequentially, economic growth.
Unlike well-developed countries such as the PRC, Korea, Japan, and Singapore, Indonesia
also lacks industry support for driving innovation. Indonesian HEIs still need to become strategic
institutions founded on a culture of innovation to produce quality graduates that can meet the future
requirements of the job market.

Indoped Project, 2016–2018
EU, through the Erasmus+ Programme, funds various activities in the field of education, training, youth
development, and sports. These funds can be used to provide incentives for project participants from
European institutions and their partners outside the region. In line with the “Europe 2020 Strategy,”
the Indoped Project promotes cooperation to achieve innovation and the exchange of good practices
in higher education to mitigate future unemployment and boost economic growth. Country partners
for the project are chosen based on their potential to support external collaboration (Kettunen, 2017).
The Indoped Project aims to add value to the Indonesian higher-education system by updating HEIs’
pedagogical approaches and bridging the gap between HEI outputs and industry requirements.
TUAS acts as the project’s coordinator, aided by other European HEIs, including the Inholland
University of Applied Sciences in the Netherlands, the Business Academy Aarhus in Denmark, theUniversity of Gdańsk in Poland, and the University of Seville in Spain. These institutions partneredwith five Indonesian universities—Bina Nusantara International University, Syarif Hidayatullah State
Islamic University, Syiah Kuala University, Widya Mandala Catholic University, and Yogyakarta State
University—and SEAMOLEC for the project.
Each partner has its own strengths. All of the European HEIs are well-known and have had richexperience in implementing pedagogical methods that match industry requirements. As such, they
can share much on good pedagogical practices and HEI-industry partnerships. They are also locatedin different parts of the region and so can bring a much-broader perspective on cultures and values,
not just pedagogical approaches. The Indonesian partners also varied (secular, Protestant, Catholic,or Islamic) to represent the diversity of the country’s culture and beliefs. They are a mix of public andprivate HEIs as well. Though they are mainly located in Java, their formal and informal networks cover
34 provinces. SEAMOLEC, meanwhile, was tapped to share the good practices obtained from
implementing the project throughout Southeast Asia.

– 68 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Indonesian HEI Needs Analysis
Before the tried-and-tested European pedagogical approaches were piloted in Indonesian HEIs, thelatter needed to go through a self-assessment first. This identified a baseline for adapting relevant
practices in each Indonesian HEI. Their needs and readiness were determined based on theassessment results.
The Indonesian HEIs were assessed based on four criteria. First, they must have an urgent needto enhance teaching and learning processes (transitioning to student-centered learning, improving
student engagement, and sharpening students’ innovation competence). Second, their lecturers
expressed lack of confidence in implementing student-centered learning. They need intensive
training and mentoring. Third, the gap between their outputs and industry needs was huge andneeds to be reduced in the near future. Finally, they need to expand their networks as part of theirinternationalisation efforts (Hutagaol, et al., 2016).

European Active Learning Practices Pilot Implementations
Good European pedagogical practices, including Project Hatchery, Project Module, Learning by
Teaching, Market Research, Rubrics, Gamification, Innovation Camp, Learning through Storytelling,
Learning by Case, and Learning to Learn, were piloted in Indonesian HEIs. The European partners
conducted teacher training, provided teaching materials and manuals, and planned for andsupervised implementations. Between mid-2016 and 2017, more than 100 lectures have been
conducted for almost 3,000 participants. A major result of this can be the integration of some
programmes’ concepts in Indonesian HEIs’ curricula. Table 9 provides more information on the pilot
implementations.
Table 9: List of European Pedagogical Approaches Piloted in Indonesian HEIs
Pedagogical Approach
Project Hatchery

European University Partner
TUAS, Finland

Pilot Implementer•••

Gamification

University of Gdańsk, Poland••

Innovation Camp

Bina Nusantara International
University
Syiah Kuala University
Yogyakarta State University
Syarif Hidayatullah State
Islamic University
Widya Mandala Catholic
University

Business Academy Aarhus,
Denmark••

Bina Nusantara International
University
Yogyakarta State University

Learning through Storytelling

University of Seville, Spain•

Yogyakarta State University

Market Research

Inholland University of Applied
Sciences, Netherlands•

Syarif Hidayatullah State
Islamic University
Syiah Kuala University

TUAS, Finland•

Learning by Teaching•••– 69 –

Bina Nusantara International
University
Syiah Kuala University
Widya Mandala Catholic
University

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1
Table 9: List of European Pedagogical Approaches Piloted in Indonesian HEIs
Pedagogical Approach

European University Partner

Pilot Implementer

Project Module

TUAS, Finland•

Bina Nusantara International
University

Learning to Learn

University of Seville, Spain•

Widya Mandala Catholic
University

Learning by Case

University of Seville, Spain•

Syarif Hidayatullah State
Islamic University
Widya Mandala Catholic
University•
Rubrics

Inholland University of Applied
Sciences, Netherlands•

Bina Nusantara International
University

Project HatcheryInnovation in the Faculty of Technology, Environment, and Business in TUAS is being manifested
through hatchery since 2008. This project familiarises students with exploratory work and learning
through immersion in a multi-disciplinary team so they can develop their project-development skills.
Hatcheries or student teams are expected to identify real-world problems from various perspectives
and generate innovative solutions that they will then communicate to stakeholders. The hatcheries
students are assigned to depend on their expertise. First-year students are required to take Junior
Project Hatchery, which earns them three credits. In this course, they learn various ways to go about
their studies and work. It provides them the basic competencies that they will need for their future
careers. Content mastery is, however, a secondary requirement of the course, as they are expected
to better apply their learnings. After completing the course, the students may choose to join a
research or advanced project hatchery of their choice (Kairisto-Mertanen, Räsänen, Lehtonen, andLappalainen, 2012).
Project Hatchery was piloted in Syiah Kuala University’s electronic course under the AgriculturalEngineering Department and Dr. Agus Arief Munnawar’s supervision. A total of 64 students weregrouped into eight hatcheries, which worked with local company, Soccolatte—a manufacturer ofcocoa-based products. Students were asked to identify some of the company’s problems related
to electronics application and suggest possible solutions to these. At the end of the course, thestudents developed a tool that allowed the manufacturer to rapidly and non-destructively determine
the quality of cocoa beans and their predicted fermentation level. In sum, the project helped thestudents enhance their problem-solving and communication skills and foster teamwork.

– 70 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Gamification
Gamification sought to integrate game mechanics and dynamics in teaching and learning processes
to improve student engagement. It is being implemented in the Faculty of Biology in Universityof Gdańsk in Poland under the supervision of Drs. Joanna Mytnik and Wojciech Glac. It fosteredstudent-centered learning, which made learners responsible for their own learning. To do that, thestudents engaged in various activities to master course content. Gamification is also in line withthe constructivism paradigm where teachers are considered designers of learning environments
while the students hone their own knowledge and skills with the former’s assistance. Teachers act
as game masters and so use typical gaming concepts such as badges, points, missions, leader
boards, challenges, hazards, and others in teaching and learning. Because each game (or lesson)
takes time to complete, teachers are encouraged to use several meetings or sessions per activity.
Gamification was piloted in Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University’s Macroeconomics course
under the supervision of Mr. Zuhairan Yunmi Yunan. As a theoretical course, it is always challenging
to engage students in lessons. They are, after all, expected not just to understand course content,
but also perform simple analyses of national and international economic phenomena. As such,
gamification may be a suitable method to improve the students’ knowledge by engaging them in
activities that help sharpen their critical-thinking skills.
As game master, Mr. Yunan came up with rules that the students needed to follow throughout thecourse. In one lesson, he used “Malin Kundang”—a well-known folktale from West Sumatra—asbackground for the motivation exercise. In the story, a mother turned her ungrateful son into stone
as punishment. After telling the students the rules of the game, they were asked to perform several
course-related tasks so they could turn the son back into human form. Students were awarded
points for completing each task. They kept track of their progress through a leader board.
Because the students wanted to win the game, they were more eager to participate in the discussion,
asked questions, and shared their thoughts. They learned more. As a result, their mid-term grades
were high. None of the students strayed too far above or below the average. In sum, the students
successfully engaged in active learning and gained the required knowledge through gamification.
Innovation Camp
Innovation Camp was first introduced in the Business Academy Aarhus in Denmark as aninterdisciplinary, dynamic, and practice-oriented course in collaboration with relevant industry
partners. It relies on intensive, time-pressured group work that aims to generate and concretise ideas.
Real-world challenges based on the experiences of companies, public authorities, and communities
were discussed in the camp. Students from various disciplines worked together to understand thestakeholders’ situation or context, identify challenges, generate possible solutions, validate theirideas, develop prototypes, and present their findings to their peers. Teachers, meanwhile, acted as
facilitators and coaches.

– 71 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Innovation Camp was piloted by the Faculty of Language and Arts in Yogyakarta State University. It
was held for three days in the Wisata Kembang Arum Village. A total of 70 students from 11 different
study programmes participated in the camp. They were challenged to come up with non-monetary
incentives to encourage the residents of Depok, Sleman in Yogyakarta to reduce, reuse, and recycle
solid wastes. The Bremen Overseas Research and Development Association (BORDA), an NGO
that focuses on environmental issues within Depok, Sleman, was the camp’s main stakeholder. The
students were grouped into 12 teams and tasked to discuss and find innovative solutions to solve
the problem they identified. The camp helped the students enhance their communication skills andfoster teamwork. It also widened their views because they worked with peers from varying disciplines.

Student and Teacher Evaluation of the Pilot Implementations
The pilot implementations were evaluated by both teachers and students. They were asked to complete
structured questionnaires before and after the implementations. A total of 627 students from the fiveIndonesian HEIs completed the questionnaires. A comparison of the pre- and post-implementation
results revealed improvements in the students’ ability to work systematically, engagement levels, andconfidence to lead classroom discussions. The students also showed greater autonomy to explore
and obtain information and knowledge from various sources, better collaborated with their teachersand peers to solve problems, and worked well under pressure. They did not only enhance theirindividual, but also their interpersonal and networking, competencies. After the pilot implementations,in fact, the teachers observed that the students transitioned from being busy individuals into cheerfuland friendly partners.
Most of the teachers were satisfied with the pilot implementation results as well. They citedimprovements in their professional capacities. They also felt more enthusiastic about using moreinnovative teaching and learning processes in the future. They also gained more confidence to takeinitiative and drive others to work together. Overall, the pilot implementations helped them become
agents of change in their own HEIs and, hopefully, an inspiration to future Indonesian professionals.

Dissemination of Pilot Implementation Results and Findings
To disseminate the results and findings of the pilot implementations in Indonesian HEIs to other
Southeast Asian educators, SEAMOLEC conducted two webinars. The first was conducted in
February 2017 after the first phase of the pilot implementations while the second was conducted
in November 2017. All of the partners actively contributed to the webinars, which had more than
700 online participants not just from Indonesia, but also from various parts of Southeast Asia. The
webinar participants commented that they were inspired by the results of the pilot implementations
and hoped to emulate them to improve their own teaching.
The Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education (MoRTHE) of Indonesia also provided
positive feedback on the Indoped Project. In fact, MoRTHE has become an additional partner. It
not only supports the project, but also uses its results and findings in its own programmes. It has,in fact, supported two major Indoped projects to date—the “International Discussion Forum on the
Innovation Pedagogy” held in Jakarta in September 2017 (attended by 100 lecturers from various
Indonesian HEIs) and the “Indoped International Conference” held in Yogyakarta in March 2018(attended by more than 240 educators). It also participated in several dissemination activities for local
partners since then.

– 72 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Conclusion
HEIs have a huge role to play in preparing future professionals for challenges. They need to equip
students not only with the right knowledge and skills, but also the ability to use, assimilate, produce,and transform their learnings into innovative products or services. They need to help students
sharpen their innovativeness by enhancing their critical-thinking skills and creativity, encouraging
them to take more initiative, fostering teamwork, and expanding their networks. In the Indonesian
HEIs’ case, teachers and students need to overcome cultural constraints, create an environment that
fosters student autonomy, and involve industries in their RDI activities. The Indoped Project motivatedEuropean and Indonesian HEIs to work together to adapt good European pedagogical approaches
to improve the quality of the Indonesian higher-education system. Several research efforts and otheractivities are currently ongoing to further extend the project’s benefits in Indonesia.
Note: The authors would like to thank the participants in the various Indoped Project programmes
without whose valuable inputs the writing of this article would not be possible. We will continue tomonitor and report further findings in the future since the project is still ongoing.

References
1. ACDP. (October 2013). “Developing Strategies for University, Industry, and Government Partnershipin Indonesia.” Retrieved from https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/176593/inostrategies-uig-partnership.pdf.
2. European Commission. (n.d.). “Europe 2020 Strategy.” Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/info/
business-economy-euro/economic-and-fiscal-policy-coordination/eu-economic-governancemonitoring-prevention-correction/european-semester/framework/europe-2020-strategy_en.
3. Juan A. Marin-Garcia, Ma. Angeles Andreu Andres, Lorena Atares-Huerta, Lourdes E AznarMas, Amparo Garcia-Carbonell, Fernando González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, Begoña Montero
Fleta, M. Jose Perez-Peñalver, and Frances Watts. (31 August 2016). “Proposal of a Framework
for Innovation Competencies Development.” Retrieved from https://polipapers.upv.es/index.
php/WPOM/article/download/6472/6616.
4. Kairisto-Mertanen, L., Räsänen, M., Lehtonen, J., and Lappalainen, H. (28 March 2012).
“Innovation Pedagogy—Learning through Active Multi-Disciplinary Approaches.” Revista deDocencia Universitaria, 10 (1):67–86.
5. Kettunen, J. (2017). “Promoting Innovation Pedagogy in a Capacity-Building Project in Indonesia.”
World Academy of Science, Engineering, and Technology International Journal of Social,
Behavioural, Educational, Economic, Business, and Industrial Engineering. 11 (1).
6. Soenjono Dardjowidjojo. (2001). “Cultural Constraints in the Implementation of Learner Autonomy:
The Case in Indonesia.” Journal of Southeast Asian Education, 2 (2):309–322.

– 73 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

7. Yanthi R. Hutagaol, Tatum S. Adiningrum, Tri A. Budiono, Handrich Kongdro, Ahmad S.
Ramadhan, Sukma Putra, and Adsina Fibra. (15 March 2016). “Self-Assessment: Data Analysis
Report—WP1-Indoped Project.” Retrieved from http://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/b4b8f4_
aa321ac695bc428bb3cddbc53f57158c.pdf.
8. OECD. (2010). “OECD Economic Surveys: Indonesia.” Retrieved from http://www.socialprotection.org/gimi/RessourceDownload.action?ressource.ressourceId=23385.

– 74 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Fostering Global Citizenship in
Statistics Education
By:

Ms. Gusti Ayu Russasmita Sri Padmi
Ms. Ummy Salmah
Ms. Pasttita Ayu Laksmiwati
Research and Development, Capacity Building,and Training Specialists
SEAQIM

Abstract
GCED has been a primary theme of educational goals and policies for the past few years. In a society
where data has become pervasive, data literacy has become crucial to support global citizenship. Yetvery little effort has been exerted to incorporate global citizenship into statistics education. Statistics
education often does not go beyond memorising formulas and procedures and so fails to promote
global citizenship. This article reports on the development and implementation of a cross-borderlesson on statistics in the context of energy conservation that aims to promote global citizenshipthrough data literacy. Thirty-two English-speaking eighth-grade students each from Indonesia andThailand participated in the lesson via the WebEx video-conferencing platform. Data was collectedbased on video recordings and students’ written work. Data analysis revealed that the use of real-life
data, meaningful context, and cross-border collaboration in statistics has great potential to increase
student engagement and nurture their sense of global citizenship.

Introduction
In the 21st century, data has become inseparable from daily activities. Statistics lessons in school
offer ample potential to help students become data-literate citizens. However, such lessons often do
not transcend the confinement of classrooms and textbooks, at least in Indonesia. Bakker (2007)
told an interesting story about a student citing statistics as “mean-median-mode,” clearly thinkingof it as only being about formulas to apply to a bunch of numbers, completely void of purpose andmeaning.

– 75 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Amidst an increasingly globalised and interconnected world, it is important for people to not only see
themselves as part of their own tribe, but also as global citizens. Global citizenship has been widely
discussed with regard to educational goals and policies in the past few years.
GCED refers to a framework that aims to develop students’ sense of global citizenship. It can takeeither a curricular or an extracurricular approach. The curricular approach often offers global citizenshipas a stand-alone subject or embeds related concepts in subjects such as ethics, civics, or religion(UNESCO, 2014). Very few studies have reported attempts to embed GCED into mathematics,
especially statistics.
Statistics has a lot of potential to help students develop a sense of global citizenship. To become
a global citizen, one needs to be aware of issues from around the world and communicate andcooperate with others to resolve them. Because numerical data largely comprises information thesedays, data literacy has become increasingly important. Strong data literacy can thus enhance GCED
but efforts to improve data literacy need to start by innovating statistics lessons.
This article describes the development and implementation of a statistics lesson that aims to foster
global citizenship through data literacy. Students were tasked to analyse and critically think about
given data then use it in an argument. To engage the students, tasks need to be made exciting,meaningful, and worth doing. We attempted to achieve this by incorporating genuine, real-life data,
meaningful contexts, and cross-border collaboration into the lesson.

Literature Review
Data Literacy to Support Global Citizenship
Data literacy is defined as the ability to derive meaningful information from numbers, including
accessing, assessing, manipulating, summarising, and presenting information (Schield, 2004). In thefield of statistics education, data literacy may not be as well-known as statistical literacy—the ability tocritically digest statistical information in daily life and use it as evidence in arguments (Schield, 1999).
People often interchange data literacy with statistical literacy, which is understandable because
the two are interrelated. Analysing data, especially big data, can be quite complex and requires astrong foundation in mathematics and statistics. Note though that statistics summarises data andso demands sufficient ability to work with numerical information. Seeing that most information today
uses data and statistics, data literacy has become inseparable from statistical literacy (Schield, 2004
and Prado and Marzal, 2013).
To improve data literacy, classroom activities need to be inclusive, use data that is relevant to learners,
and offer many possibilities for unexpected outputs (Bhargava and D’Ignazio, 2015). They need to let
students use their ability to explore complex issues and construct their own understanding.

– 76 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

GCED, meanwhile, hopes to give students a better sense of belonging to a broader community
and a common humanity (UNESCO, 2013). As opposed to the administrative nature people often
associate with citizenship, global citizenship refers more to a holistic perspective on what it means
to be a global individual. This notion is increasingly gaining relevance as the world increasingly
becomes globalised, interdependent, and interconnected.
GCED requires practices that nurture the said perspectives in students. It comprises three core
conceptual dimensions—cognitive, socio-emotional, and behavioural (UNESCO, 2015).
Table 10: Core Conceptual Dimensions of GCED
Cognitive

Socio-Emotional

Behavioural

To gain knowledge andunderstanding of and criticallythink about global, regional,
national, and local issues, alongwith the interconnectedness
and interdependency of different
countries and populations

To foster a sense of belonging
to a common humanity, sharing
values and responsibilities,
empathy, solidarity, and respectfor differences and diversity

To act effectively and responsiblyat the local, national, and global
levels for a more peaceful andsustainable world

GCED aims to encourage learners to critically analyse real-life global issues and identify possible
creative and innovative solutions for them while empowering them to develop sense of agency andtake an active role in solving global challenges on a local or global scale (UNESCO, 2013). It can takea curricular or an extracurricular approach. In the curricular approach, it takes the form of a standalone subject or is embedded in an existing subject (UNESCO, 2013).
GCED is part of the SDGs (UNESCO, 2017), a set of 17 goals formulated by UN hailed as necessary
for collective humanity to achieve by 2030. The goals encompass social and economic issues that
affect humanity on a global scale. Amongst these is partnership, which is necessary if we are tosolve global issues and reach global goals.
GCED strongly emphasises engaging students in real-life global issues. They need to be aware ofand understand important issues that affect the world and communicate and cooperate with people
from different cultures to solve problems. As data comprises most information today, the ability tohandle and communicate said data has become crucial for students to fully understand global
issues. As such, students need to develop strong data literacy if they are to truly and successfully
become global citizens.
Previous research in mathematics education reported attempts to enhance awareness of anddevelop a sense of agency about significant and noteworthy real-life issues. Gutstein and Chicago(2003) reported how math lessons helped students in an urban Latino school build their knowledge
and understanding of social justice. Lesser (2007), meanwhile, described the potential of statistics
to incorporate issues related to social justice.

– 77 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Real-Life Data Sets in Meaningful Contexts
Real-life data is acquired from real-life situations. This includes archival data, data collected fromresearch, and classroom-generated data (Neumann, Hood, and Neumann, 2013). Consequently,
real-life data is often messy, unfriendly, and comprises big numbers, which can be intimidating
and difficult for students to manipulate. Teachers often avoid using real-life data in lessons and opt
instead for artificial data. As opposed to real-life data, artificial data is collected through simulations
or generated by teachers based on hypothetical situations. Teachers can design this kind of data to
be easily decipherable for students.
To make statistics more meaningful, classroom instruction needs to be made as similar to realworld situations as possible. One way to do this is to put real-life data sets in the learners’ context(Bidgood, 2010). This will make learning richer and more challenging and motivating for students
who may already be struggling with statistical techniques (Libam, 2010). The numbers used shouldbe easy to manipulate so working with data is no longer procedural, but instead requires criticalthinking and reasoning.
Data essentially refers to numbers with context as opposed to artificial data, which requires teachers
to create contexts for. Though real-life data already has context, teachers still need to ensure student
engagement. As such, complex problems that contradict the students’ prior beliefs (Ben-zvi, Gil,and Apel, 2007), along with contexts that combine perspectives from different disciplines, should
be avoided.
Many studies have reported positive results on using real-life data in statistics. The “Guidelines forAssessment and Instruction in Statistics Education” (GAISE) (Franklin, et al., 2007) states that using
real-life data can contribute to more successful statistics lessons. Hourigan and Leavy (2015) also
reported that fifth-grade students were better engaged in describing and comparing likelihoods inactivities that used real-life data. Libam (2010) and Neumann, et al. (2013) found the same thing.
Students can even collect real-life data on their own using different methods. If this is, however,
too time-consuming, various reliable online databases are available at no cost. Many international
institutions such as UN, OECD, and WB provide such kind data for free online.

Cross-Border Collaboration
Technological developments offer endless possibilities to mathematics classrooms. Software,apps, and animation are just some of the latest technologies that can help teachers deliver more
attractive, engaging, and livelier math lessons. In our research, we used synchronous communication
technology.
Synchronous communication technology enables real-time communication. It includes text
messaging, chat rooms, audio and/or video conferencing, and shared white boards (Chiu, Yang,
Liang, and Chen, 2008). These have become pervasive in distance education. Software such as
Adobe Connect, Blackboard Collaborate, and WebEx are some of the most widely used in education.

– 78 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The rationale behind incorporating synchronous technology use in teaching stems from putting
global issues in a local context. Global issues do not concern only one country or community; theytranscend cultural and geopolitical boundaries. As such, students should discuss them with people
from different countries, which supports the goal of GCED, especially with regard to the socioemotional and behavioural domains.
International communication through synchronous technology use is also known as cross-bordercollaboration. This allows students from different countries, cultures, and time zones to participate in
the same math lesson via a video-conferencing technology, for instance.

ResearchResearch SettingThis project is part of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Lesson Study Project initiated by
the University of Tsukuba and Khon Kaen University in 2006, which aims to develop more innovative
teaching practices in mathematics.
The “Cross-Border Lesson Study” began in 2016 and continued on until 2017. In it, members weregrouped in pairs to design and conduct cross-border lessons. Indonesia was paired with Thailand. A
team of academics from SEAQIM in Indonesia and Khon Kaen University in Thailand worked together
to design a statistical task that was implemented as a cross-border lesson.
Some 32 English-speaking eighth-grade students each from Indonesia and Thailand participated in
the lesson. One math teacher from each country acted as model teachers. The lesson was taught
in two meetings, the first of which was run separately in Indonesia and Thailand. A week after, thesecond meeting, which used WebEx, was conducted with all of the participants from both countries.

The Lesson Taught
The lesson featured data from the APEC energy database, which contained information on theenergy production and consumption of member countries and economies, available at no cost fromhttp://www.egeda.ewg.apec.org/.
The context given was that energy use had to do with electricity consumption and carbon-dioxide
emission. Though the students would easily relate to using electricity, the same cannot be said aboutcarbon-dioxide emission. As such the concept of carbon footprint was discussed.
Energy conservation is a global issue that transcends geopolitical borders and cultural boundaries,
making it a suitable topic for promoting global citizenship. The task involved using data from several
countries—Indonesia, Thailand, the U.S., and the PRC. Adding the U.S. and the PRC, which were
extreme cases, to the list made it easier for students to see patterns and relationships.

– 79 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The lesson aimed to teach students to represent energy-related data in chart form, interpret data inthe context of energy conservation, and explain the correlation between energy consumption andcarbon-dioxide emission.
During the first meeting, the students worked on electricity consumption data from Indonesia andThailand. They were asked to present the data in chart form then describe and explain trends shownin the graph. The numbers were left in kiloton of oil equivalent (KTOE), a unit representing the energy
generated by burning 1,000 tons of crude oil. They referred to country-level consumption rates andso the students had to work with large numbers, something they did not normally do in statistics
lessons.
After creating charts, the students were asked to discuss their work in groups. They were, however,limited to form a group with peers from the same country as theirs. They were asked to determine thecorrelation between electricity consumption and population. They produced charts similar to Figure
10 below.

Figure 10: Comparison of the population of Indonesia and Thailand

During the second meeting, the students from Indonesia and Thailand were asked to communicate
with one another using synchronous communication technology, specifically via a WebEx videoconference.
They were first shown two line charts (see Figure 11)—one comparing the electricity consumptionof Indonesia and Thailand while the other showed their carbon-dioxide emission levels. At a glance,
the charts looked to share the same trend, which implied a direct correlation between energy
consumption and carbon-dioxide emission.

– 80 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Figure 11: (Right) Comparison of the electricity consumption in Indonesia and Thailand;(left) comparison of the carbon-dioxide emission levels in the same countries

The teacher then challenged the students’ initial assumption. To explore possible relationships
between the two variables, the students were asked to look at four more charts (see Figure 12)
showing Indonesia, Thailand, the U.S., and the PRC’s total electricity consumption, sources ofelectrical energy, coal consumption, and carbon-dioxide emission levels.

Figure 12: Additional charts comparing Indonesia, Thailand, the U.S., and the PRC

The students were asked to analyse the charts visually then discuss their thoughts with peers. They
were then asked to present their findings to the whole class and even share their learnings withfriends from other countries.

– 81 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Research Results and Findings
The first lesson started by showing the students an image depicting the pollution on earth represented
by lights (taken from http://blue-marble.de/nightlights/2012), zooming in to Indonesia and Thailand.
It showed that Thailand was significantly brighter than Indonesia, except Sumatra and Java. It should
be noted though that Indonesia covered a bigger area than Thailand. They were then asked whichcountry consumed more electricity and what factors affected their electricity consumption.
Answers were then discussed. The students exchanged views with their peers. Most thoughtIndonesia consumed more electricity because Sumatra and Java were brighter than Thailand. Theyequated the number of lights to population. In general, they believed that a country’s population was
directly proportional to its electricity consumption.
The teacher reminded them that no matter how sound their arguments were, their answers weremerely assumptions and need to be backed up by data. Afterwards, the teacher gave the students
a worksheet that showed how much electricity Indonesia and Thailand actually consumed from1990 to 2014 (see Figure 13). The students were then asked to plot a line chart using the data theyreceived then answer the same questions they were asked earlier.

Figure 13: Comparison of electricity consumption in Indonesia and Thailand

The chart showed that Thailand and Indonesia consumed roughly the same amount of electricity. As
the students struggled to match the new information with their initial assumption, the teacher showed
them the chart comparing the countries’ population (see Figure 10). It showed that Indonesia’s
population far exceeded that of Thailand. Again, this did not match their initial assumption—electricity
consumption was not directly proportional to population. A heated discussion of unseen factors thenensued. They worked together to find out why the facts did not meet their expectations.

– 82 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

At the end of the lesson, the students concluded that electricity consumption was not proportional
to population because not every individual consumed the same amount of electricity. Developing
countries with more successful industries and better access to technology will consume more
electricity even if they had a tiny population.
The second meeting started with a review of the events that transpired during the first one. Since
the students from both countries worked on the same data, it was more interesting to note how theyshared their thoughts and communicated with others.
They were then asked if electricity consumption was related to carbon-dioxide emission. Most
students did not think so. This could be due to prior knowledge from their science classes. Somewere, however, unsure because the related charts in Figure 12 seemed to show some level ofcorrelation.
The teacher asked the students if they foresee any unexposed variables before asking them to look
more closely at the charts in Figure 12. The students mainly performed exploratory data analysis, thatis, looked at data to identify trends and form hypotheses.
The students found that the electricity consumption of the U.S. and the PRC followed a similar trend
just like data from Indonesia and Thailand showed likenesses. A notable dip in the U.S.’s carbondioxide emission level was seen near 2014, which may have something to do with the increase in
its coal consumption. To confirm, they looked at the country’s source of electrical energy, whichindicated a shift towards clean energy (hydro and nuclear). This prompted the students to conclude
that the volume of electricity consumed by a country did not affect its carbon-dioxide emission, whatmattered more was where they obtained the energy to create electricity.
Apart from the charts, the students were also given a worksheet to complete so they can form
their own conclusions about the correlation between electricity consumption and carbon dioxide
emission. The students concluded that the PRC used more coal than the U.S. and so it had a higher
carbon-dioxide-emission level. Additional data (from the U.S. and the PRC) and guidance helped thestudents better notice trends and relationships between countries and the factors they were scoredon.
In sum, the lesson helped the teacher better explain how important data literacy was in understanding
the world around us while building strong and sound arguments. Most of the students appreciatedthe fact that the problem they were given in class was an important global issue because they wereable to share their thoughts with people from a different country in hopes that they can work together
to resolve the issue.

Conclusion
Data literacy is crucial to support GCED. Yet very little effort has been exerted to incorporate GCED
into statistics education. Statistics education mostly focuses on memorising formulas and learning
the procedural way of handling data. To develop students’ data literacy and, in turn, foster global
citizenship, statistics needs to be enhanced by using real-life data set in meaningful contexts andusing cross-border collaboration.

– 83 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Data literacy is the ability to derive meaningful insights from data, including accessing, assessing,manipulating, summarising, and presenting information (Schield, 2004). Students need to be able
to relate to given data if they are to derive meaningful insights off it. Using real-life data in lessons not
only challenges students, but also makes them care more about solving the problem. They are moreinvested in working on a data-driven problem that can affect their lives.
Applying the right context to data is also important. In the sample lesson, energy conservation was theglobal issue used because it goes beyond geographical and jurisdictional borders. Through crossborder collaboration, the students became aware that energy issues affected everyone worldwide
and as global citizens, they can become agents of change to solve the problem.
Teachers can explore other core dimensions of global citizenship and use other global issues for theirlessons. They are also encouraged to explore other data sources and methods to conduct statisticalinvestigations. Cross-border collaboration in school can also open more opportunities for teachersand students alike to work with their peers in other countries.
The findings presented in this article were limited to conducting one lesson. We did not have theluxury of time to test our thesis in other topics or subjects. Challenges due to a language barrier werealso encountered but successfully managed.
Note: The authors would like to express their deepest gratitude to the teachers, students, andschools who participated in this endeavour.

References
1. Arthur Bakker. (16 April 2007). “Diagrammatic Reasoning and Hypostatic Abstraction in Statistics
Education.” Retrieved from https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/semi.2007.2007.issue-164/
sem.2007.017/sem.2007.017.xml.
2. C. H. Chiu, H. Y. Yang, T. H. Liang, and H. P. Chen. (24 July 2008). “Elementary Students’Participation Style in Synchronous Online Communication and Collaboration.” Retrieved fromhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01449291003686195.
3. David L. Neumann, Michelle Hood, and Michelle M. Neumann. (November 2013). “Using Real-Life
Data When Teaching Statistics: Student Perceptions of This Strategy in an Introductory Statistics
Course.” Retrieved from https://iase-web.org/documents/SERJ/SERJ12(2)_Neumann.pdf.
4. D. Ben-zvi, E. Gil, and N. Apel. (2007). “What Is Hidden Beyond the Data 1? Young Students
Reason and Argue About Some Wider Universe 2 Working Version.”
5. Eric Gutstein. (January 2003). “Teaching and Learning Mathematics for Social Justice in an
Urban, Latino School.” Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/30034699?seq=1#page_
scan_tab_contents.

– 84 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

6. Javier Calzada Prado and Dr. Miguel Ángel Marzal. (31 May 2013). “Incorporating Data Literacy
into Information Literacy Programmes: Core Competencies and Contents.” Retrieved from https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/libr.2013.63.issue-2/libri-2013-0010/libri-2013-0010.xml.
7. Lawrence M. Lesser. (7 August 2007). “Critical Values and Transforming Data: Teaching Statistics
with Social Justice.” Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10691898.2
007.11889454.
8. Mairéad Hourigan and Aisling Leavy. (24 July 2015). “What Do the Stats Tell Us? Engaging
Elementary Children in Probabilistic Reasoning Based on Data Analysis.” Retrieved from https://
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/test.12084.
9. Milo Schield. (1999). “Statistical Literacy: Thinking Critically About Statistics.” Retrieved fromhttp://web.augsburg.edu/~schield/MiloPapers/984StatisticalLiteracy6.pdf.
10. Milo Schield. (2004). “Information Literacy, Statistical Literacy, and Data Literacy.” Retrieved fromhttp://www.iassistdata.org/sites/default/files/iqvol282_3shields.pdf.
11. Penelope Bidgood. (25 March 2010). “Relating Assessment to the Real World.” Retrieved fromhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9780470710470.ch12.
12. R. Bhargava and C. D’Ignazio. (April 2015). “Designing Tools and Activities for Data Literacy
Learners.” Retrieved from https://www.media.mit.edu/publications/designing-tools-andactivities-for-data-literacy-learners/.
13. UNESCO. (2 December 2013). “Global Citizenship Education: Preparing Learners
for the Challenges of the 21st Century.” Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0022/002277/227729e.pdf.
14. UNESCO. (2015). “Global Citizenship Education: Topics and Learning Objectives.” Retrieved
from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002329/232993e.pdf.
15. UNESCO. (2017). “Education for SDGs: Learning Objectives.” Retrieved from http://unesdoc.
unesco.org/images/0024/002474/247444e.pdf.
16. Zipora Libman. (March–June 2010). “Alternative Assessment in Higher Education: An Experiencein Descriptive Statistics.” Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S0191491X10000039?via%3Dihub.

– 85 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The Ability of High-SchoolStudents to Solve
STEM-Related Problems
By:

Mr. Septian Karyana
Training Officer
Mr. Reza Setiawan
Head of the Programme and Training Division
Dr. Indrawati
Centre Director
SEAQIS

Abstract
STEM education has become an important issue for Southeast Asia in the 21st century. This article
investigates high-school students’ ability to solve STEM problems through a quantitative study. We
asked students to answer 10 STEM questions. Their responses were then reviewed, validated,and statistically analysed using the Rasch model by experts from a college. Some 301 11th-gradestudents from five elementary schools in West Java participated in the study. The questions tested
four levels of student cognitive dimension—understanding, applying, analysing, and evaluating. Our
statistical analysis showed that the STEM questions used were reliable with a reliability score of 0.93
and so they were fit or acceptable compared with the normal standard. The construct’s validity was
analysed using the infit and outfit mean square (MNSQ) values. With that, we determined that the
instrument was valid. The statistical analysis showed that the students had a low ability to solve STEM
problems, particularly when it came to the cognitive dimension. The study provided an overview ofthe students’ ability to solve STEM problems and so is expected to serve as a reference for teachers
when planning and designing their own lessons.

– 87 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Introduction
The 21st century is characterised by ICT taking a central role in all aspects of people’s lives.
Technology connects everyone around the world, transcending geographical barriers and creatinga borderless community. Technological developments have improved the quality of products andservices and, as a result, life as we know it. This, however, requires a better and more competentworkforce. The 21st century is marked by scattered information and ever-evolving technologies.
Today, the world of science has become increasingly interconnected, resulting in better synergy.
Various efforts to improve the quality of education are constantly being exerted, including redesigning
curricula, developing new teaching and learning approaches, structuring content, and determining
the competencies required to fit current situations and conditions.
Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan (BSNP) or the National Education Standards Agency states thatthe primary educational goal for the 21st century is to embody the goals of the nation—producing
blissful and prosperous citizens that are respected and can compete with those from other countries.
As such, BSNP hopes to produce qualified HR who are self-reliant and willing to and capable ofturning the ideals of the country into reality (Mukminan, 2014 and Daryanto and Karim, 2017).
The Ministry of Education and Culture (MoEC) kept this goal in mind when it developed curricula
for elementary, junior- and senior-high, and vocational schools. It also strives to incorporate 21stcentury skills, scientific approaches, and learning and authentic assessment in curricula (Daryanto
and Karim, 2017). Developing 21st-century skills leads to enhancing other growth-oriented learning
skills, including to think, act, and live in the real world. According to Trilling and Fadel (2009), students
must possess life and career, self-learning and innovation, and media information and technology
skills in the 21st century.
A number of developed countries have been instigating reforms and innovations to make education
more responsive to the need for 21st-century skills. And these reforms and innovations include
promoting STEM education (Kuenzi, 2008). STEM education was first introduced by the U.S.
National Science Foundation (NSF). Since then, it has been promoted in other countries. Indonesia
has just recently introduced STEM education. In STEM education, science deals with the studyof natural phenomena using observation and measurement to objectively explain environmental
changes. Science, in this case, includes physics, biology, chemistry, and earth and space sciences.
Technology, on the other hand, deals with human innovations that can be used to modify nature tohelp humans address their needs and improve their lives. Engineering, meanwhile, should address
the need to acquire and apply science, social, economic, and practical knowledge to design andconstruct machines, tools, systems, materials, and processes that will benefit human beings. Finally,mathematics should provide people with knowledge of patterns and relationships and a means tounderstand the language of technology, science, and engineering (Firman, 2017).
Science in STEM education usually refers to natural sciences, but it can also be extended to include
social sciences. STEM education actually aims to attract students to STEM-related careers thatwill characterise the 21st century. Focus on STEM education arises from the fact that learning
mathematical and scientific concepts is no longer enough to become modern citizens who needto relate knowledge of these to technology and engineering (Chesky and Wolfmeyer, 2015). STEM
education hopes to develop learners’ problem-solving skills to deal with STEM-related challenges
that can arise in their daily lives (Bybee, 2013).

– 88 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

STEM education will, however, become meaningless if the fields are separately reinforced. Hence,developing an educational approach that addresses all four components of STEM education toteach citizens to address real-life problems is necessary. For primary- and secondary-level students,
this means improving their STEM literacy (Bybee, 2013). They should:•

Acquire the necessary knowledge, attitudes, and skills to identify problems, explain natural
phenomena, and draw conclusions based on objective evidence•

Understand how imbibing the STEM discipline can enhance human knowledge and investigationand design skills•

Enhance awareness of how STEM can enhance the material, intellectual, and cultural environments•

Increase their willingness to participate in solving related issues such as energy conservation,
environmental quality, and natural resource constraints as constructive, caring, and reflective
citizens who rely on STEM-based ideas

STEM education requires teachers not only to equip students with scientific knowledge, but also
develop their soft and critical-thinking skills or ability to analyse, assess, and improve their thinking(Paul, 2008). Following the STEM education approach can respond to a wide range of daily problems
and challenges, including those related to population, economic, social, and political issues(Pattanapichet and Wichadee, 2015 and Forawi, 2016). In addition to addressing workforce issues,
STEM education will also benefit the general public with a collective of citizens that have the skills
and knowledge to live better lives by making the right personal decisions (Urban and Falvo, 2016).
Several studies on using technology to improve STEM education have been published. More indepth research, however, is still needed to deepen our understanding of STEM education andenrich teaching and learning approaches to benefit the future workforce. This includes finding out if
today’s students have the four abilities mentioned earlier. The ability to solve STEM problems reflects
students’ critical-thinking skills because the act requires them to analyse and assess factors toresolve issues. Teachers can use the study’s results to design a learning process that integrates allof the necessary STEM components.
This article features our preliminary research on STEM education in high school. We asked thestudents from West Java STEM questions to test how prepared they are for 21st-century careers.
We analysed the results using the Rasch model via the Winstep software (Khotimah and Sri, 2014).
Compared with other validation methods such as the classical test theory, the Rasch model can
predict missing data based on a systematic response pattern. This will produce a more accurate
statistical analysis of test results despite missing data.

– 89 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Research Methodology
Some 301 11th-grade students from five elementary schools in West Java participated in the study.
Students were asked to participate in a STEM learning activity then answer an online questionnaire
prepared by teachers who underwent SEAQIS training on STEM education. The questions tested
students’ understanding, applying, analysing, and evaluating cognitive skills.
In this study, a Rasch measurement model software—Winstep version 3.73—was used for
dichotomous responses (items with only two potential responses—true or false). The Rasch modeltransforms raw item difficulties and raw person scores to equal interval measures of logits on a line ina “metre stick.” This helps determine how much attention should be given to each item, depending
on its position relative to those of others. Chan, et al. (2014) cited seven advantages of using the
Rasch model, including:•

It can evaluate if the items used are appropriate and if biases can be identified.

•

Item calibration is not affected by a person’s ability.

•

The calibration standard error can be exploited to examine the accuracy of each item.

•

The model can predict how difficult an item is and make it less so using a standard scale.

•

Respondents’ abilities can be compared with one another even if they do not answer the same
items by using a common scale for ability estimation.

•

The Chi-square of person fit can be used to assess the quality of measurement.

•

The model can improve the construction and design of a test so assessment can be easilyadjusted.

In the study, an instrument was deemed good if it had high validity and reliability scores. In the Raschmodel, the indicators that should be observed to determine reliability are referred to as the Cronbach
Alpha, which measure a person’s and an item’s reliability (Saad, et al., 2011). Table 11 shows theranges of reliability measurements in the model. The indicators that should be observed to determine
validity, meanwhile, are values of point measure correlation and MNSQ values (Mohamad, et al.,2015). The reliability scale used in the study was based on a rating scale instrument developed by
Fisher (2007).

– 90 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1
Table 11: Person and Item Measurement Reliability
Reliability Measurement

Range

Poor

< 0.67

Fair

0.67–0.80

Good

0.81–0.90

Very Good

0.91–0.94

Excellent> 0.94

Research Results and Findings
All of the data collected was analysed using the Rasch measurement model software, Winsteps
version 3.37. Statistics was used to measure the test’s reliability by analysing the consistency
between items. A higher value indicates a strong relationship between items in the test whereas asmall value indicates a weak relationship.

Figure 14: Output data from the instrument’s analysis– 91 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Figure 14 shows the output data from the analysis of the instrument used in the study. The person’s
reliability score was 0.22 while the item’s was 0.93. The person separation index was 0.54 while theitem separation index was 3.60. Using the rating scale in Table 11, the person’s reliability was poor.
And based on Fisher’s scale (2007), the person separation index value was also poor. The results
reflect the instrument’s low sensitivity to distinguish between high and low performers. This could be
due to its low quality or the small number of test items (Rashidi, et al., 2014 and Abell and DeBoer,2015). To increase a person’s reliability, the students’ ability ranges need to increase and more items
should also be added to the test (Chen, et al., 2014).
Unlike the person reliability score, the item reliability and item separation index scores were good.
This shows that the instrument worked well in terms of performing further analysis. The instrument
can, however, categorise the items based on difficulty—lower, moderate, and upper—to become
more reliable with regard to measuring given constructs.
The test items in the study were considered a reliable measuring instrument based on initial analysis.
They were validated by experts from a university to see if they match the scientific concepts the study
hopes to use. They were also analysed for accuracy. An item was considered valid if it corresponded
to a scientific concept taught in class or is compatible with one in the science curriculum (Firman,
2000). Validation was a vital component of the study because it ensured the test’s ability to evaluate
students’ ability to solve STEM problems. The validity test assessed the instrument in relation to set
criteria, content, and construct (Swerdlik, 2009). The instrument should match the subject’s content.
Experts from a college were asked to evaluate the content validity of the questions. Construct validity
allowed the users to determine if the scores of the instrument were significant, meaningful, useful,and purposive. Three misfit patterns were considered in assessing the construct validity of an item
using point measure correlation and MNSQ.

Figure 15: Item-specific statistics

Point measure correlation statistics was then used to check if all of the items in the test worked
towards achieving the same goal. Figure 15 shows that all of the test items had positive values,
which indicated their acceptability (Bond and Fox, 2007). These indicated the measured items’
parallelism with the test’s construction. The MNSQ scores of all items were between 0.82 and 1.39.
None of them needed to be modified or removed.

– 92 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Figure 16: Variable map

In Figure 16, the number signs and periods on the left represented the students. Each number sign
represented three students while each period stood for 1–2 students. The variable map, also known
as the “Wright Map,” correlates students’ ability (person) with the level of difficulty of each given
problem (item). Students were scored based on their ability. The less able they were, the lower they
were on the scale. The items on the right were also arranged from easiest (lowest portion) to hardest(topmost portion). The more difficult a problem (item) was, the higher it was on the scale.

– 93 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Zero referred to average student ability (left) and test difficulty (right). As shown, the average for student
ability was lower than that for test difficulty, indicating that the tests were, on average, relatively difficult
for the students. Most of the students (86.71%), were in fact, below average. The logit values that
their ability to solve STEM problems was low because they were not able to correctly answer thequestions.

Figure 17: Measure order

The variable map showed that the students had the greatest difficulty in solving item S8. This question
was related to dengue fever. It provided experimental data on how the pH level of water is related
to mosquito volume. The students’ failure to incorrectly answer the question indicates their lack ofknowledge on or even interest in solving the dengue problem. The students, meanwhile, founditem S10 easy to answer. They were asked to interpret a chart and make a prediction based on theinformation it showed. This indicated that most students can interpret data shown in a chart. Items
S2 and S5 had the same level of difficulty. One of them need to be eliminated or improved to better
gauge the students’ ability.
The students were ranked according to their ability, from the most to least able. Based on the data,
only one student (+2.32) had a high STEM problem-solving ability while 29 students did not. The
STEM problems used were contextual in nature, which means they affected the students’ daily lives.
The test results showed that the students still lacked the ability to apply what they learn in real life.
They lacked HOTS.

– 94 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Conclusion
The study revealed that the students still lacked the ability to solve STEM problems. The Raschmodel was used to analyse the students’ answers to 10 multiple-choice questions related to STEM
education. The resulting variable map showed that most of the students had very poor STEM
problem-solving ability. This could be due to their unfamiliarity with STEM-related concepts and soteachers would do well to educate them on such.

References
1. Bambang Sumintono and Wahyu Widhiarso. (November 2014). “Aplikasi Model Rasch Untuk
Penelitian Ilmu-Ilmu Sosial (Edisi Revisi).” Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/268688933_Aplikasi_Model_Rasch_untuk_Penelitian_Ilmu-Ilmu_Sosial_edisi_revisi.
2. Bambang Sumintono and Wahyu Widhiarso. (September 2015). “Aplikasi Pemodelan Rasch pada
Assessment Pendidikan.” Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282673464_
Aplikasi_Pemodelan_Rasch_pada_Assessment_Pendidikan.
3. Benjamin Wright and Mark Stone. (1999). “Measurement Essentials (Second Edition).” Retrieved
from https://www.rasch.org/measess/me-all.pdf.
4. Cari F. Herrmann-Abell and George E. DeBoer. (April 2015). “Using Rasch Modelling to Explore
Students’ Understanding of Elementary-School Ideas About Energy.” Retrieved from https://files.
eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED560007.pdf.
5. Daryanto and M. T. Syaiful Karim. (2017). “Pembelajaran Abad 21.” Gava Media.
6. Harry Firman. (2000). “Penelitian Hasil Belajar Dalam Pengajaran Kimia.” Jurusan Pendidikan
Kimia FPMIPA UPI.
7. Harry Firman. (2017). “Pendidikan STEM Untuk Pembelajaran Kimia Abad Ke 21.” Paper
presented during the “Training Course on Subject Knowledge Enrichment in Chemistry” at
SEAQIS, Bandung, Indonesia.
8. Jeffrey J. Kuenzi. (21 March 2008). “STEM Education: Background, Federal Policy, and Legislative
Action.” Retrieved from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33434.pdf.
9. Khotimah Marjiastuti dan Sri Wahyuni. (2014). “Analisis Kemampuan Peserta Didik Dengan Model
Rasch.” Retrieved from https://conf.unnes.ac.id/index.php/snep/II/paper/viewFile/175/67.
10. Mark Wolfmeyer and Nataly Z. Chesky. (2015). “Philosophy of STEM Education: A Critical
Investigation.” Palgrave Macmillan.

– 95 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

11. Michael J. Urban and David A. Falvo. (2016). “Improving K–12 STEM Education Outcomesthrough Technological Integration.” Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?redir=http%3a%2f%2fdx.
doi.org%2f10.4018%2f978-1-4666-9616-7.
12. Mimi Mohaffyza Mohamad Nor, Lisa Sulaiman Lai, Chee Sern Kahirol, and Mohd Salleh. (24August 2015). “Measuring the Validity and Reliability of Research Instruments.” Retrieved fromhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042815047771.
13. Mohd Nor Rashidi, Rawshan Ara Begum, Mazlin Bin Mokhtar, and Joy Jacqueline Pereira. (2014).
“The Applications of Rasch Measurement Model for Calibrating a Survey Instrument to Analyse
Criteria for Sustainable Construction.” Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.12944/CWE.9.3.14.
14. Mukminan. (24 April 2014). “Strategi Menyiasati Pendidikan Abad 21.” Retrieved from http://
staffnew.uny.ac.id/upload/130682770/penelitian/ba-22semnas-upiupistr-menyiasati-pddkabad-xxi.pdf.
15. Richard Paul and Linda Elder. (2006). “The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts andTools.” Retrieved from https://www.criticalthinking.org/files/Concepts_Tools.pdf.
16. Rodger W. Bybee. (2013). “The Case for STEM Education: Challenges and Opportunities.”
NSTA Press.
17. Rohaizah Saad, Rushami Zein Yusuff, Zakaria Abas, Azrilah Abd Aziz, and Mohd Saidfudin Masodi.
(2011). “Validating the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9000 Construct of
Measurement Instrument through the Application of the Rasch Model.” Retrieved from http://
journal.sbm.itb.ac.id/index.php/ajtm/article/download/160/147.
18. Ronald Jay Cohen and Mark E. Swerdlik. (2009). “Psychological Testing and Assessment(Seventh Edition).” McGraw-Hill.
19. Shiau Wei Chana, Zaleha Ismail, and Bambang Sumintono. (September 2013). “A Rasch Model
Analysis on Secondary Students’ Statistical Reasoning Ability in Descriptive Statistics.” Retrieved
from https://umexpert.um.edu.my/file/publication/00013268_112483.pdf.
20. Trevor G. Bond and Christine M. Fox. (2007). “Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental
Measurement in Human Sciences (Second Edition).” Retrieved from https://researchonline.jcu.
edu.au/9907/2/9907_Bond_%26_Fox_front_pages.pdf.
21. William P. Fisher, Jr. (2007). “Rasch Measurement: Transactions of the Rasch Measurement
SIG American Educational Research Association.” Retrieved from https://www.rasch.org/rmt/
rmt211.pdf.
22. Fasawang Pattanapichet and Saovapa Wichadee. (October 2015). “Using Space in Social Mediato Promote Undergraduate Students’ Critical-Thinking Skills.” Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.
tr/download/article-file/156696.

– 96 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Role of SEAMEO RECSAM in
Inclusive and STEM
Education Development
By:

Ms. Khor Sim Suan
Deputy Director
Training Programme Division
SEAMEO RECSAM

Abstract
SEAMEO RECSAM is committed to developing science and mathematics education in the ASEAN
community. The centre constantly monitors the latest developments in STEM education andconducts 21st-century learning skills training workshops. This helps the centre stay in the front line topursue the knowledge, skills, and values needed to effectively respond to changing global contexts,
particularly with regard to the complexity of the Southeast Asian economic, sociocultural, andpolitical environment, and develop teachers imbibed with the ASEAN ideals to live in a harmonious
community. To meet the challenges of the future, much of the centre’s training programmes focus
on improving humans’ basic character, developing creative human capital with critical-thinking andproblem-solving skills, and enriching the ASEAN community’s science and mathematics knowledge.
Its latest endeavour emphasises STEM education to bring about awareness and enhance theworkforce to further economic sustainability and improve the well-being of the society at large. The
centre has embarked on various initiatives to develop teachers’ and students’ skills and interest in
STEM. The centre also conducts training, research and development (R&D) efforts, international
conferences, seminars, and congresses while serving as an information centre that disseminates
state-of the art practices in inclusive education.

Introduction
Since its inception in 1967, SEAMEO RECSAM has been assisting ASEAN countries in major
development efforts to improve educational manpower for the advancement of science andmathematics education in the primary- and secondary-school levels. As such, the centre has been
continuously offering full scholarships to teachers and educators in the region to improve their skills
and help them better adapt to the changing educational environment.

– 97 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

The centre contributes to improving science and mathematics education through various programmes
and activities, including training, R&D efforts, international conferences, seminars, and congresses.
It also serve as an information centre and clearinghouse to the whole Southeast Asian region. To
ensure the relevance of its activities, the centre’s programmes are formulated in consultation withsenior education representatives from SEAMEO member countries and experts from associate andaffiliate countries. SEAMEO RECSAM has made significant strides to date and is now in the processof completing its “10th Five-Year Plan for 2015–2020.”
SEAMEO RECSAM envisions to be the leading centre for quality science and mathematics education.
It fulfills its mission by:•

Designing and implementing high-quality professional development programmes•

Conducting R&D activities to inform stakeholders about pedagogies and policies•

Convening international conferences, seminars, and workshops to pool experts in science andmathematics education•

Serving as a clearinghouse for information on science and mathematics education in the region

The centre also maintains alignment with current trends in science and mathematics education asshown in the following time line:•

1990s: Action research, cooperative learning, problem solving, inquiry-based learning, higherorder thinking, abacus, misconceptions in mathematics•

2000s: Lesson study, ICT, smart school, performance assessment, distance learning•

2010s: Lesson study, assessment related to TIMSS and PISA outcomes, HOTS, entrepreneurship,project-based learning, problem-based learning, inquiry-based learning•

Current engagement: 21st-century skills, STEM education, HOTS, PISA, TIMSS, teachingmathematics through problem solving, lesson study, inquiry-based learning

Role of SEAMEO RECSAM in Supporting andContributing to the Southeast Asian Community
The ASEAN Community in 2015 was characterised as a political-security, an economic, and asociocultural community. It was formed to improve the lives of the people in the region, reflectedby economic and cultural development, social progress, peace and security, collaboration, mutual
assistance in training and research, improved living standards, the promotion of Southeast Asianstudies, and cooperation. SEAMEO RECSAM, as a regional centre, can indirectly help by turningteachers and educators into human capital with the following attributes:•

Resilient in facing future challenges– 98 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1•

Well-equipped with 21st-century skills and competencies (OECD, 2009)•

Can cultivate sustainability-related values and attitudes•

Competent and well-versed in languages and ICT tools to convey ideas and thoughts•

Act autonomously based on rational decisions•

Have the ability to interact well with others in the community•

Can acquire knowledge, skills, and jobs while staying competitive•

Responsible and contribute to the society

Hence, the centre’s course of actions has been focusing on two significant areas—promoting
inclusive education to the community and promoting STEM education to stay abreast of the current
trends in and needs of the society.

Promoting Inclusive Education in Communities
SEAMEO RECSAM conducts the following programmes to promote inclusive education within the
ASEAN community.

Professional Development Programmes
These programmes cater to in-service teachers from ASEAN countries. They aim to:•Emphasise ideas and practices that support teachers who include students with diverse needsin the classroom•

Apply appropriate teaching and learning strategies to develop individual strengths with high andappropriate expectations for each child•

Support students through good inclusive practices such as collaboration, teamwork, innovative
instructional practices, peer strategies, and others•

Encourage collaboration and communication to deliver and share ideas for better understanding
and improvement•

Value diverse communities in most ASEAN societies (Community-building starts in school where
all students learn to live alongside peers. They learn together, play together, and grow and are
nurtured together.)– 99 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1•

Design mathematics and science courses to raise awareness of the role of ASEAN educators indeveloping the future generation so they are well-equipped with the necessary knowledge, skills,
and values to help build the ASEAN community

SEA-BES Project
The SEA-BES Project is a regional curriculum initiative that aims to develop common, shared, andagreed-upon standards for what every ASEAN learner should know, be able to do, and value inscience and mathematics. The centre believes that the CCRLS in Science and Mathematics canbe used to improve the quality of SEAMEO member countries’ national curricula by creating equity
in provision and increasing learning expectations for all students so they can productively contributeto their individual countries and the region. The CCRLS in Science and Mathematics aims to provide
world-class learning standards in science and mathematics, including 21st-century skills, that canbe used as benchmark in SEAMEO member countries to ensure that all students have access tofundamental knowledge, skills, and values to become socially responsible, globally competitive, andsustainable.
The project is made possible by the active participation and involvement of experts and educators
across Southeast Asia and beyond. CRICED of the University of Tsukuba has taken a lead rolein linking and extending collaborations with others to produce SEA-BES. CRICED has also been
continuing its support for producing a mathematics learning standards guidebook based on the
CCRLS in Science and Mathematics. We hope to emphasise development in three components—
inculcating values, attitudes, and other positive human characteristics; promoting mathematicalthinking and scientific processes; and acquiring fluency in the subject matter. These components
are interconnected and competence in them can be developed in classroom activities based on
appropriate contexts.

Promoting STEM Education through STEM- and SDGs-Related Projects
The centre has embarked on the following programmes to promote STEM education through STEM
and SDGs-related projects.
SSYS
The Search for SEAMEO Young Scientists (SSYS) is a regional platform where young scientists
from Southeast Asia and beyond gather to share and disseminate information on their scientific andmathematical research projects. Since its inception in 1997, SSYS has been held once every two
years with a specific theme where students are encouraged to apply their scientific and mathematicalknowledge to solve technological problems in order to address sustainability. The theme of thebiennial project has always focused on sustainable development as shown in Table 12.
Table 12: SSYS Themes
Year

Theme

2018

Youth Creativity for Harmonising the SDGs

2016

Youth Innovation for Sustainability– 100 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1
Table 12: SSYS Themes
Year

Theme

2014

Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) for Sustainable
Development

2012

Beyond 2012: Greening the Environment for a
Sustainable Future

2010

Sustainable Solutions for the Local Community

The three basic elements of sustainable development are ecological, economic, and sociocultural
sustainability as outlined in the “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” These three aspects
must be well-blended to promote ecological balance and improve the quality of human life. These
concerns imply a change in learning. SSYS aims to raise the awareness of the youth about theirrole and responsibility towards attaining sustainable development for their local community. The
knowledge and skills they will acquire and develop will give them confidence to pursue endeavours
related to sustainable development.
CoSMEdThe International Conference on Science and Mathematics Education (CoSMEd) is a platform thatbrings educators and researchers together to discuss and address issues in 21st-century scienceand mathematics education. For instance, the themes and strands of the Sixth and Seventh
CoSMEds shown in Table 13 were mostly related to improving awareness of STEM education tocontribute to achieving the SDGs.
Table 13: Information on the Sixth and Seventh CoSMEds
Details

Sixth CoSMED 2015

Seventh CoSMED 2017Date

16–19 November 2015

13–17 November 2017

Theme

Revitalising Science andMathematics Teaching and
Learning Culture towards
Sustainable Living

Humanising STEM Education to
Achieve the SDGs in the 21stCentury

Strands

•

•

•
•
•
•
•

Teaching and Learning
Practices
Pedagogical Innovations
Teachers’ Professional
Development
Assessment and Evaluation
STEM Education AcrossContexts
Equity and Equality– 101 –••••

21st-Century Teaching and
Learning Innovations
Continuous Professional
Development
Curriculum and Assessment
Humanising STEM Education
and Career Development
Science and Mathematics
Education for Special-Needs
Students

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

STEM Education Initiatives
SEAMEO RECSAM plays a significant role in promoting STEM education through research projects
and training teachers and educators from SEAMEO member countries. From our perspective, STEM
education is an approach to teaching and learning that integrates the content and skills related to
STEM. Students are actively engaged in inquiry, exploration, problem solving, creative and criticalthinking, logical reasoning, collaboration, and investigation and creating models; artifacts; and relevant,authentic, meaningful, and useful projects. In view of this, the centre undertakes various initiatives as
STEM education holds particular importance and relevance in forging sustainable development. As
UNESCO Director-General Koïchiro Matsuura stated, “Education—in all its forms and at all levels—is
not only an end, but is also one of the most powerful instruments we have for bringing about thechanges required to achieve sustainable development” (UNESCO, 2005).
To date, the centre has spearheaded the following initiatives:•

Workshop on Enhancing Science and Mathematics Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knowledge
on STEM Education (20–22 January 2015) by Associate Professor Tairo Nomura, Saitama
University, Japan, in collaboration with the SEAMEO Secretariat and MEXT, Japan•

Workshop on Differentiated Instruction and STEM: Enhancing Mathematical Thinking (9–10
March 2015) by Professor Beverly Ferrucci, Keene State College, U.S.

•

Workshop on Early STEM (19–20 September 2015) by Mr. Hideo Nakano, SEAMEO RECSAM
Specialist for Educators of the Institute of Childhood Education Studies and Community Education(CECE), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia•

Promoting STEM Education through Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Programmes (14 May
2016) by a SEAMEO RECSAM specialist in the local community•

SEAMEO RECSAM also partnered and collaborated with the Ministry of Education (MoE) in
Malaysia and local universities for the following:~~ Research on STEM education that aims to test teachers’ self-perceived readiness to integrate
STEM into their teaching and learning practices and determine the demographic factors that
influence their self-perceived readiness to integrate STEM in teaching and learning~~ Implementation of STEM education through seminars such as “STEM Education for 21stCentury Skills: Brightening Awareness of STEM Education as Part of the National Agenda”(14–15 May 2015) by Professor Dr. Lynn D. Dierking, Oregon State University, U.S. andprimary and secondary education experts from Malaysia and “Enhancing STEM Thinking to
Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century, Including TIMSS and PISA” (20 May 2015) for the
principals of secondary schools in the Gombak District in Selangor, Malaysia

STEM Education Developments
SEAMEO RECSAM also embarked on the following to promote STEM education in the region:– 102 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1•

Malaysia-UNESCO International Bureau of Education (IBE) Needs Assessment Workshop (18–20
January 2016) for Strengthening STEM Curricula for Girls in Africa and Asia and the Pacific(Phase 1) under the Malaysia-UNESCO Cooperation Programme (MUCP): This initiative intends tostrengthen STEM curricula for girls focusing on educational content, methods, and structures tofoster sustainable development.

•

Capacity Development Workshop (26–30 September 2016) for Strengthening STEM Curricula for
Girls in Africa and Asia and the Pacific (Phase 2) under MUCP: This project seeks to strengthen
STEM policies, curricula, and pedagogies in four beneficiary countries from Africa—Nigeria and
Kenya—and Asia and the Pacific—Cambodia and Indonesia—mainly through sharing Malaysian
expertise and experiences with regard to the inclusion of women in STEM fields.

•

Workshop on enhancing STEM learning in secondary-level mathematics and science classrooms
for 500 Malaysian teachers (five batches with 100 teachers per batch in 2017) organised by
the Teacher Education Division of MoE, Malaysia and conducted by specialists from SEAMEORECSAM: This primarily aims to provide teachers with the necessary knowledge and skills in
conducting STEM classes.

•

Workshop on STEM using low-cost materials for secondary-level science and mathematics
teachers and educators and lecturers of teacher education institutions (TEIs): This aims tointroduce participants to effective hands-on activities using low-cost educational materials formaking teaching aids to improve STEM teaching and learning.

•

Colloquium on Challenges and Opportunities for Implementing STEM Education: Perspectives
from the U.S. (28 October 2016): This was conducted at SEAMEO RECSAM by Dr. Margaret
Chmiel from the Smithsonian Science Education Centre.

•

Workshop on Fostering Imagination and Critical Thinking in the Engineering Design Process: A
Challenge to STEM Education (6–8 February 2018) by Dr. Tairo Nomura, Director, STEM Education
Research Centre and Associate Professor, Faculty of Education, Saitama University, Japan: Thiswas conducted in collaboration with MEXT, Japan and the SEAMEO Secretariat.

•

Promotion of STEM education through competitions such as the Penang Science Olympiad
2016 (27 August 2016) and the STEM Study Contest (23 September 2017), which aim to:~~ Develop confidence in using technology to enhance students’ problem-solving skills,
imagination, and critical thinking in STEM lessons~~ Develop skills required in the engineering design process and model and product development
through practical work and hands-on activities~~ Provide a platform for project- and problem-based learning using STEM approaches to solve
real-life issues~~ Promote collaborative learning using real-life problems that can be integrated with STEM
knowledge and skills– 103 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1~~ Raise awareness on the relevance of classroom learning in STEM fields and skills needed in
the job market~~ Serve as a learning forum for the exchange of new ideas, knowledge, and valuable
experiences amongst students and teachers

Why STEM Education?
In the 21st century, scientific and technological innovations have become increasingly important
as we face the challenges of both globalisation and becoming a knowledge-based economy. To
succeed in this new information-based and highly technological society, students need to develop
capabilities in STEM to levels much beyond those considered acceptable in the past (National
Academies of Science, et al., 2007). STEM is multidiscipline-based and so incorporates theintegration of other disciplinary knowledge into a new whole. STEM education refers to a process forteaching and learning that offers students opportunities to make sense of the world and take chargeof their learning or, in short, obtain meaningful learning. In a STEM environment, students engage
in real-world problems and experiences through context-, problem-, project-, and inquiry-basedlearning activities so they can develop HOTS. The role of STEM education cannot be underestimatedin preparing students for future challenges. Innovation is the key to economic growth and STEM
education is the key driver of innovation. STEM education provides the foundation for students toacquire further skills as they make their lifetime transitions into the labour market.

The Way Forward
At the core of meeting the needs of the ASEAN community is making sure that teachers andeducators stay abreast of educational developments around the world. The “SEAMEO Agenda”
calls for educational reforms to promote well-balanced regional development that augurs well withthe prominence of STEM education in the 21st century. As a training institution, SEAMEO RECSAM
needs to build its skills, capacities, and resources to participate in the delivery and achievement of
the 17 SDGs that aim to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure prosperity for all (UN, 2015).
Hence, well-designed projects and courses need to be developed and implemented to ensure
success. The centre also hopes to enhance the awareness of and develop responsible citizens toplay their respective roles in schools and institutions.

– 104 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Conclusion
SEAMEO RECSAM believes that education is essential in attain sustainability and so has beenpromoting comprehensive cooperation for inclusive development amongst the SEAMEO member
countries. It has been striving to improve the quality of science and mathematics education in theregion and beyond through its various programmes and activities. Keeping future challenges inmind, much of the centre’s training programmes focus on improving one’s basic human character,developing creative human capital with critical-thinking and problem-solving skills, and enriching
the science and mathematics knowledge of the community. As such, it has embarked on various
initiatives to develop teachers’ and students’ skills and interest in STEM teaching and learning, as
STEM education will play a vital role in bringing about a workforce that will affect the sustainability ofthe economic development and well-being of the society at large.

References
1. ASEAN. (2017). “Fact Sheet on the ASEAN Community 2017.” Retrieved from http://asean.org/
storage/2012/05/7a.-May-2017-Factsheet-on-ASEAN-Community.pdf.
2. Katerina Ananiadou and Magdalean Claro. (18 December 2009). “21st-Century Skills andCompetencies for New-Millennium Learners in OECD Countries.” Retrieved from http://www.oecd.
org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=edu/wkp(2009)20&doclanguage=en.
3. National Academy of Sciences; National Academy of Engineering; Institute of Medicine;Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy; and Committee on Prospering in the
Global Economy of the 21st Century: An Agenda for American Science and Technology. (2007).
“Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energising and Employing America for a Brighter Economic
Future.” National Academic Press.
4. UN. (2015). “SDGs.” Retrieved
sustainabledevelopmentgoals.

fromhttps://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/topics/

5. UNESCO. (2005). “UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (DESD), 2005–2014:
The DESD at a Glance.” Retrieved from https://www.gcedclearinghouse.org/resources/undecade-education-sustainable-development-2005-2014-desd-glance.

– 105 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Lifelong Learning and GCED:The Perfect Combination for
Future Global Citizens
By:

Mr. Mai Hong-Quan
Deputy Manager of Research and Training
SEAMEO CELLL

Abstract
In an era when the horizon has widened and country borders have blurred, global citizenship is amuch-mentioned phrase. However, becoming a global citizen requires not only great courage to
explore the world, but also a knowledge-rich mind and consummate skills, along with the willingness
to learn lifelong, as we all encounter new issues in the ever-changing world. In this regard, lifelong
learning will play an important role in equipping future international residents with the necessary skills
and knowledge. This article aims to present an overview of GCED and lifelong learning and their roles
in today’s world and how they can be combined to make every person a truly global citizen.

Introduction
Although the concept of global citizenship has been existent for several millennia, it has only now
increasingly been used in daily life despite contentions with regard to its definition. In fact, a widelyagreed-upon definition of global citizenship has yet to be developed. Some claim global citizenshiprefers to “citizenship beyond borders” or “citizenship beyond a nation-state.” Others noted that“cosmopolitanism” as a term may be broader in scope and thus more inclusive than global citizenship.
Still others opt to use “planetary citizenship,” which focuses on the global community’s responsibility
to preserve Earth. In all cases, however, global citizenship does not entail legal status. It refers
more to a sense of belonging to the global community and common humanity, with its memberspresumably expressing solidarity and having a collective identity and sense of responsibility at the
global level. Global citizenship can be seen as a metaphor rather than a formal membership. Asa psychosocial framework for collectiveness, global citizenship can and is expected to generateactions and engagement amongst, and for, its members through civic actions in the public domain
to promote a better world and future. And it is necessarily based on and respects the universal valuesof human rights, democracy, justice, non-discrimination, diversity, and sustainability, amongst others.

– 107 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Global citizenship is one of the most important consequences of today’s more open and borderlessworld. Dramatic advances in ICT allow people to connect and interact with one another from anywhere
and at any time. This has contributed to the intensified perception and reality of being interconnected
and living beyond local perimeters, even if it only happens virtually. People have also become
more interdependent. Participation in sub-regional, regional, and international governance bodies
and structures in all sectors, including private enterprises and social organisations, has created
new stakeholders that reach beyond national borders who are required to think and act globallyand locally at the same time. Moreover, increased trans-national migration is making communities
inevitably more heterogeneous or “globalised,” making the necessity of learning to live together moreacute. The expansion of democracy to a global level has led to the accompanying citizen demandfor civic and other rights at the national level.
On the other hand, this also entailed tensions and conflicts amongst populations that have resulted
from and result in effects beyond national boundaries. Challenges such as sustainable development,
including climate change, are demonstrating the need for cooperation and collaboration far beyond
national boundaries. Continuing global challenges call for collective action at the global and local
levels.
To effectively handle social, political, cultural, and global issues, global citizens must thus be equippedwith relevant values, attitudes, and communication skills to complement their cognitive knowledge
and skills so they can support peace, human rights, equity, acceptance of diversity, and sustainable
development, also known as the missions of GCED.

– 108 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Figure 18: Overview of GCED (adapted from UNESCO, 2015)– 109 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

GCED
GCED is recognised in many countries as a strategy to help children and the youth prosper intheir personal and professional lives and contribute to building a better world. It aims to empower
learners to engage and assume an active role, both locally and globally, in facing and resolving
global challenges so they can ultimately become proactive contributors to a more just, peaceful,tolerant, inclusive, secure, and sustainable world. GCED is transformative, as it provides learners theopportunity and competencies to realise their rights and obligations to promote a better world andfuture. It draws upon learning from other transformative education processes, including human rights
education, ESD, education for international or inter-cultural understanding, and education for peace.
GCED is playing an increasingly important role and has been recognised by the UN and mentioned
in various conventions. It has been included as one of the three priorities of the Global Education First
Initiative (GEFI), which was launched in 2012 by the UN Secretary-General.

“

The world faces global challenges, which require global solutions. These
interconnected global challenges call for far-reaching changes in how wethink and act for the dignity of fellow human beings… Education must betransformative and bring shared values to life. It must cultivate an active carefor the world and for those with whom we share it… Technological solutions,political regulations, or financial instruments alone cannot achieve sustainable
development. It requires transforming the way people think and act. Educationmust fully assume its central role in helping people to forge more just, peaceful,tolerant, and inclusive societies. It must give people the understanding, skills,
and values they need to cooperate in resolving the interconnected challengesof the 21st century.

”

In 2015, the role of GCED was specified in target 4.7 of the SDGs:“

By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed topromote sustainable development, including, amongst others, through ESD
and sustainable lifestyles, human rights, gender equality, the promotion ofa culture of peace and nonviolence, global citizenship, and appreciation ofcultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development.

Within UNESCO, the “Incheon Declaration for Education 2030” states that:“”

The knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes required by citizens to leadproductive lives, make informed decisions, and assume active roles locally andglobally in facing and resolving global challenges can be acquired through ESD
and GCED, which includes peace and human rights education as well as intercultural education and EIU.

”

In 2017, the Learning Metrics Task Force released “Measuring GCED: A Collection of Practices andTools” to specifically define what is required to turn young people into “citizens of the world,” including
competencies and learning objectives (see Figures 19–21).

– 110 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Figure 19: Cognitive GCED objectives (adapted from Centre for Universal Education at Brookings, 2017)

Figure 20: Socio-emotional GCED objectives (adapted from Centre for Universal Education at Brookings, 2017)– 111 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Figure 21: Behavioural GCED objectives (adapted from Centre for Universal Education at Brookings, 2017)

Lifelong Learning
Lifelong learning, in its simplest form, refers to learning lifelong or learning “from cradle to grave.” Thisputs emphasis on the duration and continuity of the learning process in an individual’s life as wellas the idea that learning can occur beyond the formal structure within an educational institution. As
defined by UNESCO in 1984, lifelong learning refers to “all learning activities undertaken throughout
life with the aim of improving knowledge, skills, and/or qualifications for personal, social, and/or
professional reasons.” Although this is quite simple and self-explanatory, lifelong learning is meant tohighlight the basic human right to education throughout life, regardless of one’s background, gender,or age. Furthermore, owing to the diverse living and educational backgrounds of people all over
the world, lifelong learning also underlines diversity in terms of approach, as learning can happen informal, informal, and non-formal settings.
The important role of lifelong learning is now being recognised in global education policies, mostobviously by SDG 4.7—“Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong
learning opportunities for all.” It was also reiterated by the “Incheon Declaration for Education 2030”
in 2015.
The reasons as to why lifelong learning is important stem from the benefits it provides to learners.
According to the Benefits of Lifelong Learning (BeLL) Project in 2013–2014, the benefits of lifelong
learning include:•

Expanding one’s social network•

Ensuring mental well-being•

Promoting self-efficacy– 112 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1•

Giving one a sense of purpose in life•

Changing one’s educational experiences•

Providing work-related benefits•

Improving skills and competencies•

Providing a locus of control•

Enriching trust•

Improving physical health or encouraging healthy behaviour•

Improving one’s tolerance•

Enhancing civic and social engagement or civic competence•

Providing family-related benefits

From the above, the essential role of GCED and lifelong learning in attaining SDG 4 can be obviously
understood. It is also apparent that the two concepts are good companions.

Conclusion
GCED is built on a lifelong learning perspective and lifelong learning is crucial for all forms of GCED.
Characterised as flexible and inclusive, lifelong learning can meet GCED’s holistic requirements of“formal and informal approaches, curricular and extracurricular interventions, and conventional andunconventional pathways to participation” (UNESCO, 2014).
As everyone in the world has a right to know, do, be, and live together, GCED is not only forchildren and the youth, but also for adults and elders. Besides, many pedagogical approaches andtechniques have been suggested and applied to support GCED such as dialogic, inquiry-based,
cooperative, and engaged learning to suit the diversity of learners’ interests and needs. Formally,
GCED can be delivered as an integral part of an existing subject (such as ethics or citizenshipeducation, social studies, environmental studies, geography, or culture) or an independent subject
that provides insights into the concept itself from an interdisciplinary approach. Informal and nonformal learning have a great potential to boost the practice of GCED as well. In these settings,
flexible and variable pedagogical approaches can be used to target populations outside the formal
system and those who are likely to use new ICT tools and social media. An integrated approach is an
important element that can provide opportunities for sustained engagement across the curriculum
as well.

– 113 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

In sum, GCED and lifelong learning are closely related and mutually complementary. Their successful
combination is expected to play a central role in building the capacity of modern humans to meet theneeds of a modern world—ones with a wide range of knowledge, great skills, and deep passion tonever stop using their abilities to strive for the betterment of the world.

References
1. Centre for Universal Education at Brookings. (April 2017). “Measuring GCED: A Collection of
Practices and Tools.” Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/
global_20170411_measuring-global-citizenship.pdf.
2. Marion Fleige, Bettina Thöne-Geyer, and Irena Sgie. (9–10 December 2013). “The BeLL Study:
Social and Civic Benefits of Lifelong Learning.” Retrieved from http://uil.unesco.org/fileadmin/
keydocuments/AdultEducation/en/TheBeLLStudy.SocialandCivicBenefitsofLifelongLearning.
pdf.
3. UN. (n.d.). “GEFI.” Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/gefi/about/.
4. UNESCO. (2013). “Outcome Document of the Technical Consultation on GCED: GCED: An Emerging
Perspective.” Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002241/224115E.pdf.
5. UNESCO (2014). “Global Citizenship Education: Preparing Learners for the Challenges of the
21st Century.” Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002277/227729e.pdf.
6. UNESCO. (2015). “Education 2030: Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action
for the Implementation of SDG 4.” Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/
images/0024/002456/245656e.pdf.
7. UNESCO. (2015). “Global Citizenship Education: Topics and Learning Objectives.” Retrieved
from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002329/232993e.pdf.
8. UNESCO (n.d.). “Sustainable Development Goal 4 and Its Targets.” Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/education2030-sdg4/targets.
9. UNEVOC. (n.d.). “TVETipedia Glossary: Lifelong Learning (LLL).” Retrieved from https://unevoc.
unesco.org/go.php?q=TVETipedia+Glossary+A-Z&id=317.

– 114 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

How SEAMEO CHAT Adds Value to
Education and Helps Foster
Global Citizenship
By:

Dr. Khin Lay Soe
Centre Director
SEAMEO CHAT

Abstract
SEAMEO CHAT is one of the 26 specialist centres of SEAMEO, established in 2000. As a regional
SEAMEO centre, it aims to promote cooperation in the study of history and tradition amongst member
countries and develop a better identity through research, HR development, education, and publicawareness programmes. These days, the centre finds ways to add value to education to help realise
global citizenship.
History is a branch of study that deals with human beings—their behaviour, growth and development,
relationships, resources, and the various institutions they require to function and carry on livingsmoothly. Families, schools, workplaces, governments, and recreational activities are aspects oflife are interrelated and interdependent. So, whether one wants to become a doctor or an engineer,
we all have to live in a common society, interact with individuals who have different cultural andsocioeconomic backgrounds, adapt to various situations and circumstances, and adhere to certain
societal norms to lead peaceful and productive lives.
History also helps students become aware of their environment and teach them about the various
civilisations, movements, and renaissances that have occurred over the years. This knowledge
enables them to understand how the world and different societies have evolved, the important
events that occurred in the past, and enduring ideas and eminent personalities that had an impact
and affected the lives of people both locally and globally. It also helps them understand how different
societies are structured, managed, and governed. This, in turn, helps them understand their placein the world. The centre thus strives to incorporate history into school curricula to ensure the wellrounded education of global citizens. This article discusses how teaching history can add value toeducation and lead to fostering global citizenship in the so-called “digital generation.”– 115 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Introduction
Education is defined as the process of facilitating learning or the acquisition of knowledge, skills,
values, beliefs, and habits. It refers to helping people to learn how to do things and encouraging themto think. It provides individuals an opportunity to improve their lives, become successful members of
their communities, and actively contribute to national socioeconomic development. It is traditionallyvalued as a key determinant of social mobility.

What Is Global Citizenship?
A global citizen is one who is aware of and understand the wider world and his or her place in it. Heor she takes an active role in the community and work with others to make our planet more equal,
fairer, and more sustainable. For SEAMEO CHAT, global citizenship is all about encouraging young
people to develop the knowledge, skills, and values they need to engage with the world. We believethat we can all make a difference.

What Is History?
History refers to a continuous, systematic narrative of past events as they relate to a particularpeople, country, period, or person, usually written as a chronological account. It simply represents
a basic sense or knowledge of the past. In earlier times, a sense of history encompassed both animaginative story of events and a narrative of chronological past events.
For historians, various modern systemisations and interpretations of this continuous and connected
process then become history in a new general and increasingly abstract sense. Moreover, in viewof the prevailing new stress on the workings of history as human self-development, history in manyof its wider uses shed its exclusive association with knowledge of the past and became directly
connected not only to the present, but also to the future (Nasson, n.d.).

Does History Add Value to Education andHelp Foster Global Citizenship?
History provides valuable information and perspectives embedded within a powerful analytical mode,
which can be especially useful in a rapidly changing world. It helps students become better-preparedcitizens of the society, capable of making informed choices about current issues and able to follow
events. Looking at today’s digital generation and history as a subject in a rapidly changing world, we
see lack of interest in history and other art-related subjects.

– 116 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Education for global citizenship should not be taught as an additional subject. Instead, it should betreated as a framework for learning, reaching beyond school to encompass the wider community.
It can be promoted in class through the existing curriculum or new initiatives and activities. Its
benefits should be felt in school and beyond. Global citizenship helps young people build theirown understanding of world events; think about their values and what is important to them; taketheir learning in the real world; challenge their ignorance and intolerance; get involved in the local,
international, and global communities; develop arguments and voice opinions; and see that they havethe power to act and influence the world around them. Global citizenship should inspire teachers andparents, too. The young generation should have a voice. The world may be changing fast, but they
can still make positive differences and help build a fairer, safer, and more secure world for everyone.
SEAMEO CHAT finds ways to help students become better global citizens and add value to education.
It has long ago realised that social science subjects such as history can help students become good
global citizens and that teaching the subject using a well-organised curriculum can add value toeducation. It believes that curricula need to be changed to achieve this, however, and so has been
supporting the governments of member countries as a curriculum planner.
Teaching political ideologies, constitutional laws, citizenship, rights and duties, morals and virtues,
and social codes of conduct enables students to become aware of their roles and responsibilities,
particularly in relation to social and civic affairs. By providing relevant information and knowledge,
skills, and attitudes, the study of history prepares students to grow into active, responsible, andeffective members of the society. It also teaches them to address societal and global concerns
using literature, technology, and other identifiable community resources. Furthermore, learning about
different religions, social and cultural beliefs, castes and creeds, nationalities and ethnicities, values,
languages, festivals, food and clothing, types of families, and so on increases their awarenessthat the society they live in is diverse and multicultural and yet is interdependent and interrelated.
History helps students recognise the benefits and challenges of living in a world with multiple culturesand ideologies. This awareness helps them understand the importance of democracy, rights andfreedoms, and the fact to live and coexist peacefully, each and everyone needs to respect, trust, andbalance the various opinions, values, and attitudes, lifestyles, cultures and practices, and ideologies
that exist in society.
In secondary school, students are taught a variety of subjects that are supposed to guide them intheir future careers and personal choices. History is one of these subjects. Tackling the curricula andteaching methods used will be of some kind of help in promoting history, that is not very interestingfor students.
Bearing this in mind, SEAMEO CHAT conducted a workshop on 15–16 December 2016. Tworesource persons led the workshop—one from the Philippines who has taken part in history
curriculum planning and providing guidance to secondary teachers on effective teaching and theother from Myanmar who has taken part in drawing guidelines for history teachers in the lowersecondary level. Some 24 participants—curriculum specialists and secondary-level history teachers
from Cambodia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic (PDR), the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, andMyanmar—attended the workshop. Eight of the participants were teacher-trainers from Southeast
Asian countries while 16 came from the Teacher Education and Curriculum Planning Departments
under MoE Myanmar. The outcome resulted in very effective ways of teaching history in lowersecondary schools in Southeast Asia. The centre submitted its report for MoE use afterwards.

– 117 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

IT tools and devices have become ubiquitous parts of our lives, especially for the young generation.
We can even say that today’s generation is the “digital generation.” In a rapidly changing world, thingschange fast. An event that happens today can be considered historical in a span of seconds. Thisis pushing SEAMEO CHAT to consider changing the approach to teaching history. Learning history
should be fascinating and exciting. It can, however, be dry and boring if not done the right way.
As history provides valuable information and perspectives embedded within a powerful analyticalmode, which can be especially useful in a rapidly changing world, SEAMEO CHAT believes that
history will also make students better-prepared citizens of the society, capable of making informed
choices about current issues and able to follow events. To address current needs, the centre
is currently planning to conduct a workshop with the theme, “History in the Eyes of the Digital
Generation,” in collaboration with other centres, specifically SEAMOLEC.
Because learning history is important though considered boring by the digital generation, there is aneed for more innovative and creative methods for teaching the subject. The workshop will pave theway for history teachers to apply digital technologies in research, writing, and teaching to encourage
and assist them to think critically about the way historical and other cultural knowledge is constructed;
develop ways to more efficiently find and evaluate information online while analysing and making
sense of such findings; offer practical advice to teachers on how to make best use of IT in teachinghistory and find new ways of thinking about pedagogy in digital humanities; and develop a common
concept of preparing history lessons so these are more attractive and better achieve desired end
results. The workshop has been set to occur two days in October 2019 at the SEAMEO CHAT office.
The workshop should enhance knowledge and practices on teaching and learning history using
information technology (IT) tools and devices. It will be aligned with Priority 5 of the “SEAMEO
Education Agenda.” It will also promote inter-centre cooperation as well in terms of sharing knowledge
and expertise. It can also contribute to the policy planning of the curriculum division of the education
ministries of member countries. SEAMEO CHAT plans to invite historians, IT specialists, curriculum
planners, and history teachers from SEAMEO member countries. It will also request that SEAMOLEC
send IT and pedagogy experts.
Tasked to promote the culture and traditions of the various countries in the region, SEAMEO CHAT
will also host an impromptu talk competition in commemoration of its 18th anniversary. This aims tostimulate students’ interest in history; make them realise the importance and value of learning history;
encourage them to learn history using digital technologies; and introduce history teaching using
digital technologies. It aims to generate renewed interested in history.
The competition will be split into two sessions—a preliminary competition and a final competition.
Competitors from different universities and institutions will be invited through newspaper ads and callsfor entry on the SEAMEO CHAT website. They will be tested in terms of English language proficiency
and historical facts in the preliminary round by officials from SEAMEO CHAT and the Departmentsof History and English of the Yangon University, the National Centre of English Language, and the
Yangon University of Foreign Languages. Those who will pass the preliminary screening will move on
to compete in the final round.

– 118 –

SEAMEO Journal • 2019 • Volume 1

Conclusion
The aforementioned activities of SEAMEO CHAT support, educate, and encourage the youth toincrease their awareness and understanding of the wider world while helping them develop theircritical-thinking abilities and comprehension, application, analysis, evaluation, and synthesis skills
and creativity to become global citizens.

References
1. Bill Nasson. (n.d.). “History: The Meaning and Role of History in Human Development.” Retrieved
from http://www.eolss.net/sample-chapters/c04/e6-22-00-00.pdf.
2. SEAMEO. (2017). “Action Agenda for the SEAMEO 7 Priority Areas.” Retrieved from http://www.
seameo.org/SEAMEOWeb2/images/stories/Publications/Centres_Pub/SEAMEO_Education_
agenda/Action%20Agenda%20for%20the%20SEAMEO%207%20Priority%20Areas_FINAL.pdf.

– 119 –

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the following individuals and organisations that contributed to thisreport:•Dr. Hiroshi Sato, Associate Professor, Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Tsukuba•

Dr. Hikaru Katsuta, Lecturer, Department of Education, Toyo University•

Dr. Yusuke Hirai, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Tsukuba•

Dr. Takeo Yoshida, Provost of the School of Human Sciences and Professor, Faculty of Human
Sciences, University of Tsukuba and Honorary Professor, Northeast Normal University, PRC•

Dr. Masami Isoda, Professor, Faculty of Human Sciences, and Director of CRICED, University ofTsukuba and Ms. Teh Kim Hong and Mr. Pedro Lucas Montecillo, Jr., Specialists in Mathematics
Education, Training Programme Division, SEAMEO RECSAM•

Dr. Kiyoshi Karaki, Professor, Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Tsukuba•

Dr. Yoko Mochizuki, Programme Specialist-ESD, Head of Policy Team, UNESCO MGIEP•

Dr. Abi Sujak, Centre Director, and Mrs. Cahya Kusuma Ratih, Research and Development
Division Manager, SEAMOLEC•

Ms. Gusti Ayu Russasmita Sri Padmi, Ms. Ummy Salmah, and Ms. Pasttita Ayu Laksmiwati,
Research and Development, Capacity-Building, and Training Specialists, SEAQIM•

Mr. Septian Karyana, Training Officer; Mr. Reza Setiawan, Head of the Programme and Training
Division; and Dr. Indrawati, Centre Director, SEAQIS•

Ms. Khor Sim Suan, Deputy Director, Training Programme Division, SEAMEO RECSAM•

Mr. Mai Hong-Quan, Deputy Manager of Research and Training, SEAMEO CELLL•

Dr. Khin Lay Soe, Centre Director, SEAMEO CHAT

Publishing this journal would not be possible without the leadership of the SEAMEO Secretariat
headed by Dr. Ethel Agnes P. Valenzuela. Special thanks to Ms. Bernadette Caraig for her technicalassistance in editing the articles from the various SEAMEO regional centres included in this report.

© 2019
SEAMEO Secretariat
Mom Luang Pin Malakul Centenary Building
920 Sukhumvit Road
Bangkok 10110
Thailand