E-Journal of Philosophy of Education:
International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 1, 2016

Considering the Philosophy of Education from the Front Lineof Teacher Training

Takanobu WATANABE
Kobe University
Abstract
This paper discusses roles and tasks of the philosophy of education based on concrete studies of theinvolvement of researchers of the discipline in practical teacher training, by referring to the author’s
own experiences at the front line of teacher training at Hyogo University of Teacher Education andKobe University, which take contrasting approaches to teacher training. The philosophy of education
takes the following two roles: (1) education in the discipline; and (2) the designing of teacher training.
Of the two, the latter has more importance than the former. In the design of teacher training, aconsiderable amount of “play” should be secured to compensate for today’s rational and goal-oriented
teacher training.
Keywords
teacher training, philosophy of education, Hyogo University of Teacher Education, Kobe University

1. Introduction
This paper discusses the philosophy of education from the perspective of teacher
training rather than vice versa. In other words, rather than exploring ideal states of teacher
training and the significance of the philosophy of education based on abstract concepts,
its roles and tasks are clarified through concrete studies of the involvement of researchers
in the discipline in practical teacher training.
In this discussion, the paper also refers to the author’s own experiences at the frontline of teacher training at Hyogo University of Teacher Education and Kobe University,
which take contrasting approaches to teacher training. To illustrate the purport of this72

T. WATANABE

paper, I would first like to introduce an outcome of previous studies of teacher training in
the field of the philosophy of education.
2. An outcome of previous studies of teacher training and the philosophy ofeducation
As one outcome of previous studies of teacher training in the field of the philosophyof education, I would like to introduce a book titled, “Kyouin Yousei wo Tetsugaku suru:
Kyouiku Tetsugaku ni nani ga dekiruka” (A Philosophical Study of Teacher Training:
Roles of the Philosophy of Education, Hayashi et al., 2014). This book discusses the roles
and significance of the philosophy of education from diverse viewpoints, in light of thesituation where teacher training and school activities have begun to increasingly prioritize
the development of practical teaching abilities. The book was written driven by a strong
sense of crisis concerning the current reform of teacher training in Japan, which reinforces“jissen shiko” (practical approaches) in the trend toward “genri teki na kosatsu no so wousukusuru” (thinning the layer of studies of principles). (P. 100) This sense of crisis,
which is shared by many researchers of the philosophy of education, characterizes theentire book.
However, the co-authors of the book are not unified in their views and viewpoints.
It seems to me that their views concerning the significance of the philosophy of education
can be roughly classified into three categories.
Proponents of the first category suggest that the philosophy of education should betreated as an established, independent discipline, and that its role is to provide educational
sciences and related technologies with integrated views, and to critically review andreorient present educational practices from a broad perspective. To use Matsuura’s
terminology, this category can be termed mohan-gata or a model type. The second
category comprises what Matsuura calls senryaku-gata or a strategic type. Rather thanregarding the philosophy of education as an established discipline, proponents of this typeof view stress the importance of addressing respective educational problems as eachsituation demands. At the same time, they believe that “the roles of the philosophy ofeducation should be determined along with methods to develop its potential through joint
efforts with researchers of other educational sciences” (P. 242). Finally, proponents of thethird category focus on and critically review the theory-practice schema, which represents
how a theory can contribute to practice (through appropriate policies).
From the viewpoints of these three categories, the book convincingly emphasizes
the significance and usefulness of the philosophy of education in teacher training andThematic Research: Higher Education as a Field of Philosophy of Education: Frontiers of Philosophy of Education

Considering the Philosophy of Education from the Front Line of Teacher Training

73

school activities. Since the book has sufficiently demonstrated the significance of thediscipline, based on this recognition, researchers of the philosophy of education may ask
themselves what is left for them to explore. I would suggest that there are two important
study themes for researchers to deal with. Firstly, the role and significance of thephilosophy of education should be clarified and included in the curriculums of teacher
training at universities. Secondly, the philosophy of education should be included inholistic teacher training systems, including advanced training programs for in-service
teachers. In this paper, I would like to focus my discussion on the first theme. I will
discuss the various roles of the philosophy of education in teacher training by referring to
my own experiences of serving at Hyogo University of Teacher Education (academic
years 1997 to 2013) and the Faculty of Human Development of Kobe University(academic years 2014 to present day), where I am engaged in the education of elementary
school teachers.
3. Teacher training at Hyogo University of Teacher Education and Kobe University(1) Hyogo University of Teacher Education
Hyogo University of Teacher Education was established in October 1978 with theaim of providing in-service teachers with advanced training. Since its establishment, theuniversity has been serving at the front line of teacher training reforms in Japan. The
prospectus of the university states: “In response to social demands to improve the abilities
of in-service teachers and foster more teachers for elementary schools, the university shallestablish a graduate school designed to provide in-service teachers with opportunities forresearch and advanced training, along with a faculty that fosters teachers for elementary
schools. With the focus on the education of the graduate school, the university shallpromote practical education and research into school education.” (Hyogo University ofTeacher Education, 1988)
The university has a single faculty to foster teachers of elementary education. The
faculty admits up to 200 students, with 160 students currently enrolled. The faculty is
dedicated to the development of kindergarten and elementary school teachers. Whereas
conventional educational universities focus their efforts on the linkage between
elementary and secondary education in terms of both curriculums and educationalorganizations, Hyogo University of Teacher Education concentrates its efforts on thecontinuation of kindergarten and elementary school education.
According to Nobuhiro Miyoshi, the principles of teacher training can be classified
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 1, 2016

74

T. WATANABE

into those based on what he calls “liberalism” and those based on “professionalism”(Miyoshi, 1972). Similarly, Noboru Yamada classified teachers into “academics”(specialists in a specific subject) and “educationalists” (specialists in education) (Yamada,1970). The views based on “liberalism” in training and teachers as “academics” havebecome the mainstream in secondary education. Proponents of this notion believe thatanyone who has mastered a specific discipline can be a teacher of that subject. On theother hand, the notions of “professionalism” and “educationalists” have gained greater
support in elementary education. Proponents of these views suggest that teachers need abackground in pedagogy and experience in practice teaching.
In terms of these classifications, Hyogo University of Teacher Education can be
categorized into the group of professionalism-oriented institutes. However, the university
also maintains an academically-oriented system under which courses on specific subjects
are provided. This system, commonly known as the “peak system,” requires students tostudy a specific subject deeply, while at the same time to engage in the comprehensive
study of a range of subjects.
The university offers a four-year practice teaching program, which starts shortly
after students’ enrollment and ends in the fourth year. This unique and unconventional
program has presented a model for other universities. As a front-runner in teacher training,
the university continues to take on various challenges, including the founding of Japan’slargest professional graduate school for teacher training (admitting up to 100 students)
and the development of teacher education standards under the Good Practice (GP)program of Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology(MEXT).
(2) Kobe University
Kobe University comprises 11 faculties (and 15 graduate schools). Of thesefaculties, the Faculty of Human Development plays a leading role in teacher training
under the “open system,” whereby students of other faculties can also obtain teacher’slicenses under certain conditions. The predecessor of the university was Hyogo Normal
School, which was founded in 1877. Its Faculty of Education was established in 1949,
following the end of World War II, and was reorganized into the Faculty of Human
Development in 1992. Concurrently with this reorganization, the faculty adopted theopen system. After a quarter of a century, however, fostering educational specialists iscurrently regarded as having less importance, as is evident from the fact that successorsof educational programs of specific subjects have become selected by faculties of theThematic Research: Higher Education as a Field of Philosophy of Education: Frontiers of Philosophy of Education

Considering the Philosophy of Education from the Front Line of Teacher Training

75

respective disciplines. In this environment, the Faculty of Human Development has been
striving to maintain the function of fostering elementary school teachers, producing asmall number of teachers at the Elementary Education Division (admitting up to 30
students) of the Department of Human Development and Education. Instead of the “peaksystem,” under which students are encouraged to study specific subjects, the divisionseeks to foster all-round “professional” educationalists.
Kobe University is currently promoting structural reforms to reinforce university
functions. As a part of this initiative, in academic year 2017 the university plans to
combine the Faculty of Human Development and the Faculty of Intercultural Studies andestablish a Faculty of Global Human Sciences. The university plans to create four
departments under this new faculty, including a Department of Child Education, which
will continue elementary teacher training. At present, the university is preparing for theestablishment of a university founding committee and a teacher education curriculum
committee.
4. Involvement of a researcher of the philosophy of education
To date, I have been engaged in teacher training at Hyogo University of Teacher
Education and Kobe University. Although I am a specialist in new education in Germany,
I have been committed to research into teacher training, which entails tremendous efforts
and much time, because I believe that fostering excellent teachers is indispensable foreducation. Needless to say, education plays a key role in fostering children and in thedevelopment of society. To improve the quality of education, it is therefore essential tocontinue to enhance the quality of our teaching staff. With this view in mind, I would liketo review my own experiences of teacher training at the two universities from the three
viewpoints described below.
(1) Teaching of the philosophy of education
Firstly, I have long been involved in teaching the philosophy of education. Duringlectures and seminars at the universities, I have imparted my knowledge concerning thephilosophy of education to my students. At the same time, together with students, I have
explored solutions to various educational problems by taking a philosophical approach.
Specific subjects that I taught at Hyogo University of Teacher Education include
the history of education, the history of thoughts on school education, and educational
anthropology; while those I now teach at Kobe University include the philosophy of
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 1, 2016

76

T. WATANABE

education, the history of educational thoughts, and moral education theories. At Hyogo
University of Teacher Education, my main theme concerned research into various
thoughts on school education. On the other hand, at Kobe University, in addition to school
education, I deal with various types of education, including those provided at home andin communities for all generations ranging from babies to the elderly. Despite thisdifference, at both universities I have basically adopted the same approach, that is, tocritically review modern education in the historical and social contexts by regarding thephilosophy of education as a part of pedagogic education.
When I teach the philosophy of education, I take an approach of the first type(mohan-gata or model type) described earlier in this paper, which stresses thesignificance of the philosophy of education. In other words, during my classes I held
discussions with students, based on the understanding that the role of the philosophy ofeducation is to provide educational sciences and related technologies with integrated
views, and to critically review and reorient educational practices from a broad perspective.
(2) Holistic design of teacher training
Secondly, I have also been involved in the holistic design of teacher training. At
Hyogo University of Teacher Education, I took the initiative in the first full-fledged
revision of the faculty curriculums (in academic year 2008) since the founding of theuniversity, and the development of teacher training standards in the Good Practice (GP)program of Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology(academic years 2009–2011). At Kobe University, I am responsible for the certificationof new curriculums for the teacher-training course for the new faculty to be establishedin the 2017 academic year.
The two universities are different concerning the following items. At Hyogo
University of Teacher Education, elementary teacher training is stipulated in theprospectus for the establishment of the new faculty. Accordingly, the purpose of
establishing the new faculty has direct implications for its vision of teacher training. On
the other hand, the mission of the new faculty of Kobe University is stipulated as“developing cooperative human resources with global perspectives.” Accordingly, ourfirst challenge was to link this mission with the vision of elementary teacher training.
After thorough discussions with other faculty members, I developed the following vision
for the Department of Child Education: “With the ultimate aim of pursuing a harmonious
global community through the development of future generations, the Department ofChild Education will foster human resources to engage in elementary education, who will
Thematic Research: Higher Education as a Field of Philosophy of Education: Frontiers of Philosophy of Education

Considering the Philosophy of Education from the Front Line of Teacher Training77

adopt a broad perspective concerning the global community, and have the abilities
necessary to recognize—from diverse angles—the challenges facing both children andschools, and to find practical solutions to such challenges.
Throughout my service at both universities, I have been developing a holistic visionof teacher training from a wide perspective. When I engaged in the preparation of teacher
education standards at Hyogo University of Teacher Education, I selected 50 abilities andqualities required for teachers. Rather than simply listing these 50 items, I classified theminto several categories and arranged them in a structured form. At Kobe University, I havedeveloped a vision for fostering teachers as well as a vision for the teaching curriculums,
by seeking an optimal balance between the following three elements: [1] the expertiseand study outcomes accumulated in the Faculty of Human Development; [2] the vision
underlying the new faculty; and [3] the criteria for certifying teacher-training courses,
which have become increasingly rigorous. Through these personal experiences, I havedeveloped a strong conviction that the philosophy of education—developed thoughstudies of diverse visions about teachers based on a holistic view of society and humanbeings—can and should play a leading role in the search for the ideal qualities of teachers.
(3) Securing “play” in teacher training
In designing teacher training, I have been striving to include a considerable amountof “play” in teacher training programs. In this context, the term “play” refers to room forpotential learning and hands-on training that cannot be confined within the framework ofcurrent “rational” teacher training, which is most notably characterized by a means-ends
schema.
When I explained the practical use of the teacher education standards to otherfaculty members at Hyogo University of Teacher Education, I repeatedly stressed thefollowing characteristics of such teacher education standards. The standards do not cover
all abilities and qualities required for teachers. Even though teachers have diverse typesof abilities and personalities as an integral part of their presence, the standards can only
list measurable abilities and qualities. Moreover, the standards list the minimum numberof abilities and qualities essential for becoming teachers. Accordingly, it must be
remembered that there are certainly other important abilities and qualities for teachersthat are not specified within the standards.
In preparing and providing their classes, respective faculty members are expected
to work to develop students’ abilities and qualities as specified in the curriculum maps.
At the same time, they are expected not to restrict the desired abilities of teachers to those
E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 1, 2016

78

T. WATANABE

specified in the curriculum maps. Instead, faculty members are encouraged to develop
the abilities that they believe their students should acquire.
At Kobe University, I am currently striving to prepare curriculums that conform to
the vision of the new department while also complying with the standards specified by
the Teacher’s License Act. Concerning hands-on training at the front line of schools,
students are encouraged to participate in long-term school internship programs, inaddition to the practice teaching, which has relatively well-established programs andfixed methods. Since the internship programs have greater flexibility, students are
expected to build personal relationships with schoolchildren and teachers and learn fromsuch relationships.
Recently, “functionalistic” teacher training is becoming increasingly influential.
This of course has positive impacts, but at the same time, it is also true that students should
learn beyond the framework of the teacher training provided by their universities so as tomeet the changing demands of society and schools. In this sense, it is essential to include
a considerable amount of “play” in the teacher training curriculums, as well as in our
vision of “ideal” teachers. In preparing this vision and the curriculums, the knowledge
accumulated in the philosophy of education should be fully utilized, as researchers of thediscipline have been exploring what is possible and what is impossible for education, thesignificance and limited capacity of rational and goal-oriented education, and theunlimited possibilities of developing diverse human resources.
5. Conclusion
I have discussed the roles and tasks of the philosophy of education in teacher
training. In summary, of the two roles of the philosophy of education, I believe that thedesigning of teacher training is more important than the teaching of the discipline. In thedesign of teacher training, a considerable amount of “play” should be secured tocompensate for today’s rational and goal-oriented teacher training in which a priority isplaced on achieving set goals.
Finally, researchers in the philosophy of education are expected to exert theirleadership in the front line of teacher training. At the same time, however, they are
expected to promote more aggressively the importance of the roles of the philosophy ofeducation in the front line of teacher training, as well as in preparation of policies
concerning teacher training.

Thematic Research: Higher Education as a Field of Philosophy of Education: Frontiers of Philosophy of Education

Considering the Philosophy of Education from the Front Line of Teacher Training

79

References
Ogata, Naoyuki, Murasawa, Masataka, Takahata, Hiroshi, Watanabe, Takanobu (2015)
Daigaku Kyouiku no Soshikiteki Jissen: Shougakkou Kyouin Yosei wo Jirei ni[Organized Practice of University Education: Analysis of Elementary School Teacher
Training], Hiroshima: Research Institute for Higher Education, Hiroshima University.
Nasukawa, Tomoko & Watanabe, Takanobu, Editors/Authors (2014) Kouin Yousei toKenshu no Koudoka: Kyoushi Kyouiku Moderu Karikyuramu no Kaihatsu ni mukete[The Advancement of Pre-service and In-service Teacher Education: For
Development of Teacher Educational Model Curriculum], Tokyo: Jiasu-KyouikuShinsha.
Hayashi, Yasunari, Yamana, Jun, Geshi, Akira & Furuya, Keita, Editors/Authors (2014)
Kyouin Yousei wo Tetsugaku suru: Kyouiku Tetsugaku ni nani ga dekiruka [APhilosophical Study of Teacher Training: Roles of the Philosophy of Education],
Tokyo: Toshindo.
Hyogo University of Teacher Education (1988): Hyogo Kyouiku Daigaku Jyunenshi [Tenannals of Hyogo University of Teacher Education].
Bessou, Junji & Watanabe, Takanobu, Editors/Authors (2012): Kyouin Yousei Sutandado
ni motozuku Kyouin no Shitsu Hosho: Gakusei no Jiko Seicho wo unagasu
Zengakuteki Gakushu Shien Taisei no Kouchiku [Quality Assurance of Teacher on theBasis of Standards for the Teacher Training: Building of the whole University
Learning Support System for Own Student’s Growth], Tokyo: Jiasu-Kyouiku-Shinsha.
Miyoshi, Nobuhiro (1972): Kyoushi Kyouiku no Seiritsu to Tenkai: Amerika Kyoushi
Kyouiku Seidoshi Ron [Formation and Development of Teacher Education: Historyof Teacher Education System in the United States], Tokyo: Toyokan-Shuppansha.
Noboru, Yamada (1970)“Kyouiku Sasshin Iinkai ni okeru Akademishanzu to
Edukeshonisuto [Academicians and Educationists in the Japanese Education Reform
Council(J.E.R.C.)]”, Wakayama Daigaku Kyouiku Gakubu Kiyo [Wakayama
University Department of Education Bulletin], No.20, pp.87-96.
Watanabe, Takanobu (2014) “Riron-Jissen Mondai to Kyoushoku no Senmonsei:<Kyouin Yousei no Shisoushi> ni Mukete [Theory-Practice Problem and Teacher
Professionalism: Toward <Historical Study of Thought about Teacher Training>] ”,
Kyouiku Shisoushi Gakkai [History of Educational Thought Society], Editor, Kindai
Kyouiku Foram [Forum on Modern Education], No.23, pp.163-176.

E-Journal of Philosophy of Education: International Yearbook of the Philosophy of Education Society of Japan, Vol. 1, 2016