Analyzing Lessons in Chinese Primary Schools based on Japanese Teachers’ Viewpoints-A Case Study of Nurturing Higher Order ThinkingKikuko Miyake
Graduate school of Kansai University, Japan
miyake25@kansai-u.ac.jp

Makiko KISHI
Meiji University, Japanm_kishi@meiji.ac.jp

Kenichi Kubota
Kansai University, Japankubota@res.kutc.kansai-u.ac.jp

Li Ke DongSouth China Normal University, China
likedong@gmail.com

Abstract: The purpose of this study is to clarify the characteristics of the class that are practiced
in primary education in Guangzhou, China which encourage higher-order thinking skills.
Research method is to have elementary school teachers in Japan watch the lesson practice videoof China, and interpret the lessons that focus on thinking power development in China. Theinterviews with teachers in Japan are all written and analyzed qualitatively. As a result of theanalysis, the characteristics of the classes in China has become clear from the perspective of five"flow of the class," "The aim of the class," "teaching method", "mutual learning of pupils" and"the skills of the pupils".
Keywords: Primary Education, China, Japan, Higher Order Thinking, Collaborative ResearchRESERCH BACKGROUNDS
Education by packing knowledge centered in memorizing was carried out over the years in China.
Meanwhile education that took local circumstances and developmental stage of pupils into account has not been
carried out. This was due to overheated examination competitions. From reflection to education that lay
overemphasis on these examination-oriented education, the Chinese government promulgated "guidelines on thedevelopment and reform of China's education," (State Council 1993), proposed quality education for the first time.
Quality education is an education reflecting conventional examination-oriented education, which fully extends thevarious qualities of pupils, such as creativity and practical ability. This has become a way of thinking that directs thereform of primary and secondary education. At the same time, a cross curricular learning, “Integrated PracticalStudy,” was introduced in 1998. Development of classes where pupils think and learn independently is expected.
On the other hand, as PISA type academic ability is attracting attention in Japan and the importance ofthinking being included in the new course of study, improvement of classes for thinking development of pupils isbeing addressed. From these movements of China and Japan, it can be said that both countries are focusing on classdesigns that pupils think and learn independently.
However, as concrete teaching strategies are left to schools on both countries, it is true that there aredifferences in practice research for research and development by schools and regions.
Therefore a joint research on class design aimed for thinking development was carried out between Japanand China, and work on developing a class design for thinking development in primary education. Though both are
Asian countries, culture has been built on its own while affecting each other. Taking context of thinking andculture-dependent into consideration, Japan’s class design for thinking development will be introduced to China, andwhile discussing the feasibility of class we will reveal the possibilities and challenges of the class design.
Table 1: Research processstage

1st stage
2nd stage
3rd stage
4th stage

content
Introduce Japan’s class that addresses advanced thinking development toChinese teachers through courses
Both countries select experimental schools and conduct classes based on
thinking development class design
Compare and consider “flow of the class," "support of the teacher,""evaluation" , "learning situation of pupils" of the classes recorded in thevideo
Organize the requirements of thinking development class design andmodel.

In stage 1, we searched the possibilities of carrying out the class design the writers have practiced.
Specifically, we conducted workshop courses for Chinese teachers to learn the class design focused on thinking
development experientially, and later conducted a survey of Chinese teachers and analyzed it (Miyake 2012). In
stage 2, china and Japan each selected 4 experimental schools and carried out classes developing higher order
thinking cooperating with schools, and observed classes.
The idea of this research is that the Japanese and Chinese teachers can utilize their own classes as aframework to look back objectively by giving feedback to teachers the knowledge obtained in this study.

RESERCH OBJECTIVESThis paper reports the study findings corresponding to stage 3 of the research process shown in Table 1.
The purpose of this study is to clarify the characteristics of the class which promote higher order thinking skills
practiced in primary schools in Guangzhou, China. In this research, we will make clear the characteristics of thinking
development in china from the perspective of a different cultural group, in other words Japanese teachers.

RESERCH METHDSIn this study, we investigated using qualitative research methods. First, we videotaped Chinese classes andbased on the video, reveal the characteristics of classes in china focused on thinking development. To reveal from acultural perspective, we had a group of people from different cultural backgrounds (in this study Japanese teachers).

The details of each stage are presented in the following.

Creating the video
We put Japanese captions in the video that taped from the beginning to end the classes of 2 Chinese
schools the writers observed. Classes are comprehensive testing activities. In particular, we put captions on scenes
such as "teachers explaining to pupils", "dialogue of pupils and teachers," and dialogue among pupils". In order forJapanese teachers to grasp the entire image clearly and pull out the language easily, we decided that it would bebetter to put in captions partially in the entire video than to edit parts into few clips.
We had 3 teachers doing practical study on thinking development class design in Kansai University
Elementary in Osaka watch the video. (Table 2)

KIS

Table2 teachers surveyed
Teaching experience
Subject in charge
15 years
Mathematics
25 yearsSocial Studies
36 years
Languages

Survey procedure
We had the teachers say what they had noticed while watching the videos of the 2 classes individually.
The survey was conducted from May 17 to May 13, 2013. We had them watch the overall flow of the classconducted in china for 50 minutes and have them explain what was memorable throughout the video. The survey
time was approximately 1 hour and 30 minutes. Before watching, we told the teachers these 4 points. 1) It is a
primary school in Guangzhou city of China. 2) Both schools are experimental schools for thinking development. 3) It
is a learning activity which falls into integrated study of Japan. 4) It is a class using thinking tools.

Analyzing method
When analyzing, we focused on what kind of words were commonly used when Japanese teachers talked
about the class, and what were expressed by those words. We thought that words commonly used are those that aregeneralized in the classes of that country, and what is talked about using those words are the most typical class view.
Therefore, first we recorded the teachers’ interview after and while watching the video and analyzed it. At the stageof analyzing, we open coded the data written, and made a categorization. Based on the category, we will consider thecharacteristics of the classes in China aiming for thinking development. We made study observations with more than
one person while discussing with co-researchers.

RESULT and DISCUSSION
As a result of the analysis, 93 codes were made. The codes were classified into 5 categories which indicate
characteristics of Chinese classes (table 3). Table 3 shows that teaching method accounts for about half, and morethan half are of the differences of how to use thinking tools. We will explain the characteristics of Chinese classes
which were analyzed from the video by Japanese teachers, by each of the 5 categories while citing the recording of
the interview.
Table 3 Categories and percentage of discourse
Categories
Percentage
Class flow
16.1
Class aim
7.5
Teaching method
50.7
Mutual learning between 15.1
pupilsPupils’ skill
10.6

Lesson flow
Chinese classes unfold as follows, 【teacher presentation】-【group activity】-【teacher presentation】.
From how the group leader tried to ensure to follow the teacher’s instructions in group activities, we felt there was acharacteristic that teachers control learning activities. In Japan, though teachers make class plans in advance, inreality, classes unfold through interactions with pupils. For example, in many cases in group activities, the purpose isclear but the flow of the discussion is left to the pupils in some extent. Japanese teachers have ideas to create a classwith pupils.

Lesson objective Japanese teachers felt a difference in how Chinese teachers did not present the lesson objectives
to pupils. In Japan, the aim is written on the blackboard to have the pupils confirm it. In other words, classes unfold
while sharing the aim with pupils. It can be said that there is a difference in the demonstration of the aim.
Teaching method
Japanese teachers were talking about the differences and similarities in teaching methods from many
viewpoints such as, questioning, computer use, use of books, use of sticky notes, and way of desk patrol. Especially,half of the discourses on teaching methods were about the way of using thinking tools. From this, it can be seenthat they had considerable interest on how Chinese teachers used thinking tools. “For the convenience of presenting
what they have examined, they are using that thinking tool. I wonder if it is considered as a single slide in thepresentation.” From this remark of a Japanese teacher, it can be understood that it is used as a material for thepresentation. They were also sympathetic, “the pupil’s speech is educated and the teachers are also focusing on howto use thinking tools.” As can be seen from the remark,” thinking tools are after all tools for organizing thoughts”
thinking tools are used for organizing and analyzing thoughts in Japan. We felt a large difference in how Chineseteaching methods used it as tools for expressing.

Mutual learning between pupils
Japanese teachers felt a difference in class flow in terms of information sharing between pupils. Group
work is practiced primarily as a place for pupils to share information with each other in classes in china, and eachchild is evaluated on how they articulate their views. There is a difference to the relationship between pupils from thefact that in classes in Japan, pupils rebuild their thoughts many times after building up their opinions.

Pupils’ skill
This indicates the level of literacy and the ability to listen. From how pupils are listening focused evenwhen the speaker’s information is large, it was felt that they were focused on teaching the ability to learn on a routine
basis. Also, in the scene of video where the pupils are searching for book materials to gather materials, it can befound that they have the ability and also excel to search accurately and read and comprehend large amount ofinformation. Moreover, from looking at the information summarized in the thinking tools, how well it wassummarized was a surprise.

CONCLUSION and FUTURE DIRECTION
As the third stage of this study, the characteristics of the class that are practiced in primary education in
Guangzhou, China which encourage higher-order thinking skills have been revealed.
A Teacher-centered class design is a characteristic of classes in China. On the other hand, there are also
movements to study the class design which encourage the development of higher order thinking skills by introducing
new teaching methods such as thinking tools and group activities.
On the first stage of this study (Miyake 2012) when Japanese class practice which worked on advanced
thinking development was introduced to Chinese teachers through courses, while there was a positive response, threechallenges "fear of not being able to control," "way of teaching thinking tools" and "fit between the themes andthinking tools" was also cited as an issue. We believe there was a tacit awareness to control in classes for thinking
development.
To introduce thinking tools in class as a tool for thinking, theming is essential in practice. From the factthat the course carried out in china did not treat which classes can be expanded that makes you think of which theme
while relating with the curriculum, Chinese teachers investigated by themselves and worked on class practice. Here,the class view of Chinese teachers was strongly reflected.
It can also be seen that the ways of using thinking tools was introduced to classes, different from the intention
Japanese teachers instructed.
In the future, we will clarify how teachers in China analyze Japanese thinking development classes in primaryeducation. Then compare the characteristics of classes which encourage high order thinking skills between Japan andChina, and organize the requirements in class design for thinking development and model it.

References
The Council of Local Authorities for International Relations. (2012/9/30).Chinese compulsory education.
http://www.clair.or.jp/j/forum/c_report/pdf/325.pdf
Mitsuishi,H., & Ru,G.(2006). Standard curriculum for elementary schools and environmental education of Japan andChina.: The Teacher training curriculum development research center of Tokyo Gakugei University.
Miyake,K.,Kishi,M.,Kubota,K. & Li,K(2012). The implementation of teacher training of the class design forthinking development in China.
Miyake,K., & Shioya,K.(2012). The feature of the Muse study. The class design for thinking development by Kansai
University Elementary School style. Kansai University Elementary School（Ed.）. JP：Sakura-sha.,36-53.