同志社大学大学院社会学研究科
2024 年度 春期実施
課程：前期
専攻：教育文化学

試験科目

大学院外国人留学生入学試験問題（注）□ 問題用紙に直接解答すること。

№１

■

英

受験番号語

氏名

別紙の解答用紙 １枚に解答すること。

※［Ⅰ］以下の英文を読解した上で、次の問いにそれぞれ回答しなさい。
（１）ここでの「this」の意味を明示しながら、下線部の英文を日本語に訳しなさい。
（２）第３段落の内容を日本語で要約しなさい。
（字数任意）
In many places around the world the modern school is under a relentless pressure to perform andthe standards for such performance are increasingly being set by the global education measurement
industry. (...) The question this raises is whether it is time to give up on the modern schools and its
promise and hand it over to Pearson, Google and other educational capitalists, or whether we should try
again and, if so, where we might go. (...)
The foregoing observations about quality show that the real question is not how we can makeeducation more effective or efficient, how we can ensure that the customers of education remain happy,or how we can achieve high scores on quality indicators. All this remains vacuous as long as we do not(re)turn to the question what education is for. I wish to suggest that there are three ‘layers’ to thisquestion: one having to do with the aims of education; a second having to do with the wider purpose ofeducation; and a third having to do with ‘doing what needs to be done’ (which I will explain below).

（著作権の都合上、問題文を掲載しておりません）

In the current ‘age of learning’ it often seems as if the sole purpose of education is learning. While it
could be argued that learning is important in education—although it is definitely not the be all and end
all of education (see Biesta 2013, 2015b)—the real question for education to the extent to which it isconcerned with learning, is about what the learning is for. Rather than suggesting that educational
learning should only focus on the acquisition of knowledge and skills—which is a popular focus in many
discussions in education—I have suggested that there are three aims that come into play in education.
The first is that of qualification, which is indeed about the presentation and acquisition of knowledge,
skills and understanding that allow students to ‘do’ something (in the narrow sense of vocational
qualification, for example, but also in the broad sense of navigating complex modern societies). In
addition to this, educational learning also has to do with socialisation, that is, with providing students
with a sense of orientation in the many traditions and practices that make up modern societies andmodern life. (2) Thirdly, educational learning should also have a concern for the student as individual
or, more specifically, for the student as subject of their own actions, rather than as object of teachers’interventions. This concern for ‘subjectification’ is not just important for their own sanity; a democraticsociety actually needs citizens who can make up their own mind, rather than simply follow orders.

＊出典：Biesta, G. (2019). “What Kind of Society Does the School Need? Redefining the Democratic Work of Education in Impatient Times,” Studiesin Philosophy and Education, 38, pp. 657–668.

同志社大学大学院社会学研究科
2024 年度 春期実施

試験科目

大学院外国人留学生入学試験問題

課程：前期
専攻：教育文化学（注）□ 問題用紙に直接解答すること。

№ 2■

英受験番号語

氏名

別紙の解答用紙 １ 枚に解答すること。

［II］Read the following essay and answer both [II.1] and [II.2].
[II.1] Summarize the author’s primary argument. (Answer in Japanese.)※[II.2] The author writes that it is not clear “where to draw red lines” in the use of ChatGBT. Why is there debate and confusion
over the use of ChatGBT? Explain from the perspective of “education and culture.” (Answer in English)

Almost immediately after OpenAI released ChatGPT in late November, people began wondering what it would mean forteaching and learning. A widely read piece in The Atlantic that provided one of the first looks at the tool’s ability to put together
high-quality writing concluded that it would kill the student essay. Since then, academics everywhere have done their own
experimenting with the technology — and weighed in on what to do about it. Some have banned students from using it, whileothers have offered tips on how to create essay assignments that are AI-proof. Many have suggested that we embrace the technology
and incorporate it into the classroom.
While we’ve been busy worrying about what ChatGPT could mean for students, we haven’t devoted nearly as much attention
to what it could mean for academics themselves. And it could mean a lot. Critically, academics disagree on exactly how AI can andshould be used. And with the rapidly improving technology at our doorstep, we have little time to deliberate.
Among only the small sample of my work colleagues, I’ve learned that it is being used for such daily tasks as: translatingcode from one programming language to another, potentially saving hours spent searching web forums for a solution; generating（著作権の都合上、問題文を掲載しておりません）

plain-language summaries of published research, or identifying key arguments on a particular topic; and creating bullet points topull into a presentation or lecture.
Even this limited use is complicated. But it’s in the realm of academic writing and research where ethical debates abouttransparency and fairness really come into play.
Recently, several leading academic journals and publishers updated their submission guidelines to explicitly ban researchers
from listing ChatGPT as a co-author, or using text copied from a ChatGPT response. Some professors have criticized these bans as
shortsightedly resistant to an inevitable technological change. We shouldn’t be surprised at the disagreement. This is a new ethicalspace that only roughly follows the outlines of our existing agreements on plagiarism, authorship criteria, and fraud. Precisely
where to draw red lines is not clear. ……
……Our academic systems rely on trust. As a peer reviewer for grants and journal articles, I’ve never used a plagiarism
checker or directly questioned the accuracy of an author-contribution statement. Compare this to my students’ essays, which areautomatically passed through plagiarism-checking software upon submission. Academics enjoy an environment where we mightchallenge claims and critique the novelty of ideas, but we rarely question the originality of each other’s written work.
For this system of trust to hold in academe, we must firmly and rapidly commit to transparency around the use of AI. Only
then can we hope to have informed and reasoned discussions about what norms and rules should govern academic writing in thefuture.

Ben Chrisinger. “It’s Not Just Our Students — ChatGPT Is Coming for Faculty Writing.” The Chronicle of Higher Education.
February 22, 2023

(Ben Chrisinger is an associate professor at the University of Oxford)同志社大学大学院社会学研究科
2024 年度 春期実施
課程：前期
専攻：教育文化学№１

試験科目

大学院外国人留学生入学試験問題（注）■ 問題用紙に直接解答すること。
□別紙の解答用紙

受験番号

専門に関する論文
氏名枚に解答すること。

※［Ⅰ］世界の多くの国において「教育格差」は解決すべき課題として認識されている。

あなたが教育格差はどのようなものであるか、具体的事例を挙げたうえで、教育格差の改善に向けて教育機関の果たす役割について論じなさい。

同志社大学大学院社会学研究科
2024 年度 春期実施

試験科目

大学院外国人留学生入学試験問題

課程：前期
専攻：教育文化学（注）□ 問題用紙に直接解答すること。

№２

■

受験番号

専門に関する論文
氏名別紙の解答用紙１ 枚に解答すること。

※［Ⅱ］

以下の10の用語の中から３つを選択し、その内容について、各200 字以内で説明しなさい。
なお、選択した用語の番号を必ず解答欄の最初に記入すること。

1. STEAM 教育
2. 生成 AI
3. 構築主義
4. アクション・リサーチ
5. アリストテレスの教育論
6. モニトリアル・システム
7. 模倣
8. こども基本法
9. 問題解決学習
10. PISA（Programme for International Student Assessment)