A Case Study of “Othering” in Japanese Schools: Rhetoric and Reality
A dissertation presented to
the faculty of
the College of Education of Ohio University
In partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Mito Takeuchi
June 2009
© 2009 Mito Takeuchi
2
This dissertation titled
A Case Study of “Othering” in Japanese Schools: Rhetoric and Reality
by
MITO TAKEUCHI
has been approved for
the Department of Educational Studies
and the College of Education by
Francis E. Godwyll
Assistant Professor of Educational Studies
Renée A. Middleton
Dean, College of Education
3
ABSTRACT
TAKEUCHI, MITO, Ph.D., June 2009, Curriculum and Instruction, Cultural Studies
A Case Study of “Othering” in Japanese Schools: Rhetoric and Reality (305 pp.)
Director of Dissertation: Francis E. Godwyll
The goal of the dissertation was to examine various diversity-related challenges
domestic/indigenous minority and foreign students in Japanese junior high school
encounter and to explore how the school provided for these students. One major problem
in current Japanese schools is the gap between the homogeneous discourse embedded in
the curriculum and multicultural realities that schools and communities are beginning to
encounter with the increase in foreign residents.
This study used a case study approach. The sources of data consisted of document
analyses, classroom observations, and interviews. Two elementary schools and one JSL
(Japanese as a Second Language) curriculum seminar were also selected to triangulate the
data. Data were collected from mid-November, 2007, to early February, 2008. Content
analyses were done with school-related documents and relevant national curriculum,
teachers’ manuals, and textbooks.
The most relevant subjects relating to diversity, namely social studies, a foreign
language, and integrated studies, were selected as the focus. Classroom observations were
done for a total of 58 periods in six different subject areas. Interviews covered 18
informants, including the school principal, teachers, a language counselor, students, and
parents who provided personal stories related to multicultural experiences. All these data
were analyzed inductively through the framework of the literature review and hegemony
and social reproduction theories.
4
My findings among others revealed that the homogeneous policies and
provisions are hegemonic to “others,” including domestic /indigenous minority and
foreign students, as a result of placing their history and culture at the periphery. By
highlighting the distance between ethnic Japanese and “others,” the hegemony of ethnic
Japanese is reproduced. On the other hand, the study also showed that social interaction
can change ethnic Japanese students’ perception of “others” in a positive direction.
Another way of alienation was the exclusion of foreign residents, in Article 26 of
the Constitution of Japan. Teachers adopted double standards in managing truancy cases
among Japanese and foreign students depicting strong influences from Article 26. Double
standards also applied to school provisions for individualized instruction between specialneeds Japanese students and foreign students because of this article of the constitution.
Approved: _____________________________________________________________
Francis E. Godwyll
Assistant Professor of Educational Studies
5
DEDICATION
I wish to dedicate this work to my mother, Mrs. Koh Takeuchi, my father, Mr. Keitarō
Takeuchi, my two younger sisters, Ms. Asuka Tokiwa and Ms. Maho Takeuchi, and my
grandmother, Mrs. Kofumi Takeuchi.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
encounter
when, where
who and with whom
what kind of encounter they’ll have
how
will they meet
that’s what’s important, I think
(Aida Mitsuo, 2006)
In my two years of dissertation writing experience, my thoughts have been
strongly infused with intriguing dialogues I had with inspiring professors, and influential
student-colleagues, as well as wonderful friends and family. Although dissertation
writing needed lonely and isolating moments to condense my thoughts to writing, my
perspectives have grown with these people whom I admire, respect, and love. Engaging
dialogues always piqued my curiosity for learning. Therefore, I strongly believe that my
dissertation was a collective process of these enriching dialogues and this is my joy to
live with.
I would like to give my sincere gratitude to my current advisor, Dr. Francis E.
Godwyll who has constantly supported me in every step of this long process. I cannot
express how much his commitment to me with his extensive time and energy guided me
to believe in myself to do my best. His approach to students, and interaction with me, as
well as his academic advice and caring attitude which he showed is the basis of my
understanding of a caring relationship.
7
Special gratitude also goes to my former advisor, Dr. Rosalie Romano who has
given me various empowering and inspiring advice, both in academic and personal
matters, throughout my Ph.D. program in Cultural Studies since the fall quarter of 2004.
Her commitment to my education and strong belief in my potential are also my model of
a caring relationship.
I also wish to thank two of my committee members, Dr. Eugene Ammarell and Dr.
Ginger Weade, who have provided me with invaluable comments and feedback, as well
as support in writing the dissertation. Their feedback assisted me in sharpening the
literature review, my analyses and findings, and suggestions for policies.
I am deeply appreciative of all my research participants in the Sakura, Ran, and
Matsu schools, as well as a JSL curriculum seminar in Japan. Especially, I express my
genuine appreciation to my gatekeeper, Mr. Yamano, and the school principal, Mr.
Gotanda, who allowed me to do fieldwork in Sakura for the total of three months.
Without it, this dissertation would not have been produced. I am also thankful for all my
interview informants who shared their rich, lived experiences. Their passion for
educating students and work ethic inspired me in so many ways.
I also wish to thank my editor, Ms. Patricia Black, who has worked extensively
with me to polish and refine my writing. I am very thankful for her excellent professional
job, flexibility, and friendly attitude in working with me. Her advice for my revision
enhanced my knowledge of grammatical and structural patterns in academic writing in
English.
Special thanks go to the many student-colleagues in the Cultural Studies Program
of the Department of Educational Studies, as well as all close friends of mine who have
8
shared and survived various academic and social challenges together at Ohio University.
I am especially grateful to the extensive support and encouragement of Dr. Sumiko
Miyafusa, Dr. Collins Annin, Dr. Peter C. Ojiambo, Ms. Pittaya Paladroi-Shane, and Ms.
Aki Nagaoka. Their friendship is irreplaceable.
My deep gratitude also goes to my special friend, Mr. Kevin A. Williams who has
given me incredible amount and time of support, care, and dedication to the many ups
and downs of my life in the Ph.D. program, especially in my dissertation process. He
have also played a significant role in posing questions on a daily basis, which clarified
my multiple views and put these pieces together in writing. I cannot articulate how much
I am grateful for his effort and patience in listening carefully to me and helping
illuminate my views. Thanks to him, I was able to narrow down my research focus and
complete this dissertation.
Finally, I express my appreciation to all of my family: My mother, Mrs. Koh
Takeuchi, my father, Mr. Keitarō Takeuchi, my two younger sisters, Ms. Asuka Tokiwa
and Ms. Maho Takeuchi, and my grandmother, Mrs. Kofumi Takeuchi. They have
allowed me to pursue my dream of obtaining a Ph.D. degree on the opposite side of the
globe. I am very appreciative of all of their continuous support, encouragement, and love.
Especially, I am genuinely grateful to my mother who has showered me with educational
opportunities and experiences to make my dream come true.
9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ............................................................................................................................... 3
Dedication ........................................................................................................................... 5
Acknowledgments............................................................................................................... 6
List of Tables .................................................................................................................... 15
List of Figures ................................................................................................................... 16
List of Abbreviations ........................................................................................................ 17
Chapter 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................... 18
Background ........................................................................................................... 18
Statement of the Problem ...................................................................................... 22
Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................. 23
Research Questions ............................................................................................... 23
Significance of the Study ...................................................................................... 24
Delimitations of the Study .................................................................................... 25
Operational Definitions of Terms ......................................................................... 26
Organization of the Study ..................................................................................... 30
Chapter 2: Literature Review ............................................................................................ 32
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 32
Cultural Boundaries of “We” and “Others” .......................................................... 32
Emic and Etic Descriptions of Terms ....................................................... 37
Pedagogy of Relations: Bridging the Gap ................................................ 48
National Identity Formation through Nihonjinron................................................ 50
Overview of Nihonjinron .......................................................................... 50
10
Ideology of Nihonjinron ........................................................................... 51
Role of Agents of Socialization in Spreading the Nihonjinron Discourse 54
National Identity Formation through Education ................................................... 59
Transition of the Importance of Morality in the Post-War Era ................. 59
Main Actors to Educational Policies......................................................... 60
Government Guidelines for Teaching ....................................................... 62
Integrated Studies...................................................................................... 64
Major Perspectives of the MEXT ............................................................. 65
Patriotism in the Kokoro-no-nōto ............................................................. 68
Revised Fundamental Law of Education .................................................. 71
Contemporary Educational Issues in Japan .............................................. 76
Issues of Uncertain Words ........................................................................ 79
An Alternative for Homogeneous Policies: Multiculturalism .............................. 81
Background of the Increase in Newcomers .............................................. 81
Teachers’ Instruction for JSL Students in Schools ................................... 83
Concept of Multicultural Coexistence ...................................................... 86
Theoretical Framework ......................................................................................... 88
Hegemony ................................................................................................. 89
Social Reproduction Theory ..................................................................... 92
Summary ............................................................................................................... 99
Chapter 3: Research Methodology.................................................................................. 101
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 101
Research Design.................................................................................................. 101
11
Rationale for Selections of Participants .................................................. 102
Rationale for Selections of Research Sites ............................................. 103
Limitations of the Study.......................................................................... 105
Data Collection Procedures................................................................................. 105
Document Analyses ................................................................................ 115
Observation ............................................................................................. 117
Interviews ................................................................................................ 119
Researcher’s Role ................................................................................... 130
Data Analysis Procedures ................................................................................... 136
Transcriptions ......................................................................................... 136
Organization and Coding of Data ........................................................... 137
Data Analysis Methods for Each Question ............................................. 138
Summary ............................................................................................................. 140
Chapter 4: Analyses and Discussion ............................................................................... 142
Overview of the City ........................................................................................... 143
Sakura Junior High School ................................................................................. 144
Sakura’s Teachers ................................................................................... 146
Sakura’s Students .................................................................................... 147
Daily Timetable at Sakura ...................................................................... 148
Weekly Timetable at Sakura ................................................................... 149
Homeroom Environment at Sakura ........................................................ 151
Major Principles of the CCE and Government Guidelines for Teaching 152
Descriptions of Minority Groups in Teachers’ Manuals and Textbooks 153
12
Biographies of Teachers ......................................................................... 155
Biographies of Students .......................................................................... 159
Biography of Parents............................................................................... 160
Analyses of Research Questions ..................................................................................... 162
Research Question 1 ........................................................................................... 162
Theme 1: Teachers’ Opinions About Their Role As Teachers ............... 162
Theme 2: Institutional Barriers to a Returnee Student for Public High
School Exams.......................................................................................... 170
Theme 3: Provisions for Different/“Other” Students.............................. 174
Research Question 2 ........................................................................................... 196
Theme 1: Social Studies Classes............................................................. 196
Theme 2: Foreign Language Classes ...................................................... 205
Theme 3: Integrated Studies Classes ...................................................... 209
Theme 4: Extra Support of Teachers for Foreign Students .................... 215
Research Question 3 ........................................................................................... 222
Theme 1: Teachers’ Major Focus on Students with Poor Grades .......... 223
Theme 2: Teachers’ Fairness of Care Between Japanese Remedial
Students and JSL Students ...................................................................... 224
Theme 3: Teachers’ Double Standard Toward Absences ....................... 226
Theme 4: Teachers’ Perception of a Mono-Ethnic Culture in Japan ...... 230
Theme 5: Experiences of Foreign Teachers Outside of the School ........ 236
Research Question 4 ........................................................................................... 242
13
Theme 1: The Value of Socialization to Change Perceptions of “Others”
................................................................................................................. 242
Theme 2: A Language Barrier Between Teachers and JSL Students’
Parents ..................................................................................................... 247
Summary ............................................................................................................. 249
Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusion, and Policy Recommendations ................................. 254
Summary of the Study ........................................................................................ 254
Major Findings .................................................................................................... 260
Finding 1: Influence of Article 26 on Teachers’ Decisions for Foreign
Students ................................................................................................... 262
Finding 2: Caring Relationships Between Some Teachers and Foreign
Students ................................................................................................... 266
Finding 3: New Challenges in the School As Seen by the Language
Counselor ................................................................................................ 268
Finding 4: Socialization As a Major Way of Changing the Perception of
“Others” .................................................................................................. 269
Finding 5: Japanese Attitude Toward Foreigners Outside the School .... 271
Finding 6: Implication of Hegemony and Social Reproduction Theory. 272
Implications for Action ....................................................................................... 274
Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 278
Suggestions for Future Research ........................................................................ 280
References ....................................................................................................................... 281
Appendix A ..................................................................................................................... 297
14
Informed Consent to Participate in Research (Adult Subjects) .......................... 297
Appendix B ..................................................................................................................... 302
Subjects and Number of Observations from Each Teacher ................................ 302
Appendix C ..................................................................................................................... 304
Biographical Information of Interviewees and Dates of Interview .................... 304
15
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: The Number of Classes Required for Each Subject Per Academic Year………63
Table 2: A Chart Showing Amendments in the Fundamental Law of Education……….74
Table 3: A Ninth-Grade Homeroom’s Daily Timetable………………………...……...149
Table 4: A Ninth-Grade Homeroom’s Weekly Timetable………………………..……150
16
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: A Typical Homeroom Setting……………………..…………………………151
Figure 2: Research Question 1 and Emerging Themes…………………….….…....….162
Figure 3: The Flow Chart Showing the Hierarchical Organization of the Japanese School
System………………………………………………………..………………..163
Figure 4: Research Question 2 and Emerging Themes………………...……..……...…196
Figure 5: Research Question 3 and Emerging Themes……...………………..………...222
Figure 6: Research Question 4 and Emerging Themes……………………….....….…..242
Figure 7: Hierarchical Arrangement of Power Dynamics in Education………….….…261
Figure 8: Takeuchi’s Conceptual Model of Influences of Article 26……………..……263
17
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CCE
Central Council for Education
ERNC
Education Reform National Council
FLE
Fundamental Law of Education
JSL
Japanese as a Second Language
LDP
Liberal Democratic Party
MESC
Ministry of Education, Science and Culture
MEXT
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Background
I was born and raised in the small town of Heiwa, Japan. I am the product of
Japanese schooling. As a student, I learned proper behavior in a collective manner, such
as acting the same as other students, wearing the same school uniform, and maintaining
peace and social order. I always made a special effort to fit in all groups to which I
belonged. There was no doubt of my belonging in Japanese society. I tried so hard not to
be the nail in the Japanese saying, The nail that sticks up will be hammered down. Any
differences were considered negative; anyone who was different was viewed negatively.
In 2001, when I came to the United States for a degree in higher education, I
realized that my opinions and views needed to be expressed rather than be hidden. For the
first time in my life, I experienced various hardships associated with not belonging due to
my minority status as a female international student from Asia. This experience made me
wonder, “Do we, in Japan, have minority groups?” “Korean residents? Burakumin? I
learned about them in history classes, but do they exist in present-day Japan?” Then, I
realized that I had met indigenous Ainu and Chinese people during my school years.
However, unconsciously I did not regard them as real Japanese nationals (citizens) like
me. In other words, my school experiences did not enable me to be aware of people who
were not exactly like me even though they were in the society to which I belonged.
Since 2001, every time I have traveled back to Japan, I have been very surprised
by the increasing numbers of people whose physical characteristics show them to be nonethnic Japanese (as known as mainstream Japanese). In the past it was not common to
find them in such small towns as Heiwa. These are new immigrants (newcomers), mainly
19
from South America and Southeast Asia. Unlike the old-time Koreans and Chinese who
look like the ethnic Japanese, the newcomers’ physical appearance, such as hair color,
eye color, and skin color, was very different from the ethnic Japanese, as was their
behavior. These newcomers were needed to fill mainly blue-collar jobs. The shortage of a
Japanese labor force is due to the retirement of baby boomers after World War II and the
decline of the birth rate (Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, 2006, March).
To maintain the current Japanese economy, accepting more immigrant workers to Japan
is viewed as the only solution. As of 2007, the foreign resident population, both old and
new immigrants, was 2,152,973 (1.69%) out of the total population of 1,277,771,000.
The foreign residents’ population has increased 45.2% (670,266) from 1997 (Ministry of
Justice Immigration Bureau, 2008, June).
Despite the multicultural reality of the Japanese society today, the system of nonintegration between the ethnic Japanese and “others” (domestic/indigenous minority
groups and foreigners) is embedded in the ethnic Japanese psyche. Even the
domestic/indigenous minority groups who hold Japanese citizenship, including Ainu,
Burakumin, and Okinawans, are kept separate from the ethnic Japanese community.
Domestic groups who obtain Japanese citizenship from their birth include indigenous
Ainu and Okinawans, and the outcastes from feudal Japan, Burakumin.
Ainu, Okinawans, and Burakumin are considered the Japanese nationals (citizens),
despite being domestic/indigenous minority groups, due to their Japanese citizenship. In
contrast, people with foreign resident status, including Koreans and South Americans, are
seen as foreigners (meaning outsiders), who originally come from other nations and live
in Japan. While Koreans and Chinese who entered Japan either forcefully or voluntarily
20
during World War II are seen as old-timers, newcomers from the 1980s are refugees from
Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam, and South Americans who are first- to third- generation
Nikkeijin (Japanese-descendant South Americans), mainly Brazilians. The naturalization
process is the only way in which foreign residents become Japanese nationals.
In summary, citizens of Japan were simply categorized into three groups: Ethnic
Japanese as the majority, and domestic/indigenous minority groups (Ainu, Burakumin,
and Okinawans), as well as foreigners (including old-time Koreans, newcomer Southeast
Asians and Nikkeijin). However, domestic/indigenous minority groups are not paid much
attention by the government, or by ethnic Japanese citizens (for details, see Cultural
Boundaries of “We” and “Others” in Chapter 2). For instance, in 1986, Prime Minister
Nakasone Yasuhiro declared, “Japan has one ethnicity (minzoku), one state (kokka), and
one language (gengo)” (Terazawa, 1990, p. 64-65, cited in Lie, 2004). Nakasone stated
that “ethnic and cultural homogeneity contributed to Japan’s economic efflorescence
whereas multiethnicity—particularly the presence of poor ethnic minorities—accounted
for the decline of the United States” (Lie, 2004, p. 117). This statement indicates how
these domestic/indigenous minority groups are left out in public.
Based on the invisibility of domestic/indigenous minority groups, the government
uses the dichotomy of “Japanese nationals” and “foreign nationals.” In this category, as
described, domestic/indigenous minority groups are incorporated into the “Japanese
national” category as are ethnic Japanese. Naturalized Japanese (ex-foreign nationals) are
also included in this category. In contrast, foreigners who have not gone through the
naturalization process are all categorized as “foreign nationals.” This dichotomy is seen
21
in governmental documents, including educational policies of the MEXT (the Ministry of
Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology) and the board of education.
Based on the binary of the population census, ordinary Japanese citizens,
including the teachers and students in my research, use this dichotomy of Japanese and
foreigners in their daily conversations. This dichotomy between Japanese and foreigners
plays a critical role in categorizing everyone into one group or the other. Lie (2001)
provides his personal story to highlight the importance of this dichotomy. He states:
On several occasions in the course of daily conversation, Japanese were shocked
and even became angry when I revealed that I am not a Japanese national. A
woman who cut my hair said ‘Why didn’t you tell me?’ as if it were my
obligation to identify my citizenship status before every encounter with Japanese
people. (p. 48)
In regard to new immigrants, grassroots organizations and local communities
struggle to mediate serious tension between the ethnic Japanese and immigrants. Issues
related to the discomfiture of ethnic Japanese sensibilities brought about by foreign
residents’ communication styles, different levels of tolerance for noise levels and even
the most mundane issues, such as how trash is discarded, are confrontational matters.
Furthermore, in the ethnic Japanese mind, the purity of Japanese land, harmony, and
peace linked with ethnic Japanese shared blood (Befu, 2001) is polluted by immigrants’
settling on their land. Lie (2001) also provides a similar view when he talked with the
owner of a small shop in Japan. He states:
A small owner in his fifties expressed his worries about the [immigrant] workers
because he was uncertain whether they came from the mountain or the sea…In
effect, he expressed an essentially conservative vision that any change may upset
his world of peace and stability. (p. 49)
22
As a result, most ethnic Japanese are not familiar with the daily life of immigrants
simply because they are ignored as outsiders (Yamawaki, Kondō, & Kashiwazaki, 2001).
Statement of the Problem
The current Japanese society is intertwined with two opposite sociopolitical
forces: The state reinforcement of homogeneity of the nation based on ethnic Japanese
culture and the local responses toward multiculturalism influenced by new immigrants.
The governmental policies have shifted to reinforcing the ethnic Japanese as the
dominant majority, while not allowing non-ethnic Japanese, such as domestic/indigenous
minority groups and immigrants, to fully participate in economic and political activities.
Grassroots organizations and local communities are left to mediate the resulting tensions.
Public schools are caught in the middle between the government’s stance and local
communities. The national government teaching guidelines (the national curriculum)
reinforce patriotism in the official documents and discourse whereas classroom teaching
and learning respond heavily to the social and intellectual needs of children, parents, and
communities. For instance, teaching and learning about national culture and tradition are
stressed in various subjects, including history, a foreign language, and moral education.
The content of the revised Fundamental Law of Education (FLE) of 2006 replaced a
curriculum built on democratic ideas with a curriculum focused on patriotism and
morality.
As Japanese culture and society are becoming more multicultural, the emphasis
on the homogeneity does not fit the realities of the public sphere, such as schools,
particularly in towns and cities where there is a significant immigrant population. What
kinds of diversity issues are given attention in schools to decrease tension in
23
communities? What is the mentality of teachers and students in accepting “others” in
schools?
Purpose of the Study
The goal of the research was to examine various diversity-related challenges
domestic/indigenous minority and foreign students in the selected Japanese junior high
school encounter and to explore how the school provided for their students. First, I
looked at structures and provisions of the selected junior high school to learn if these
structures and provisions accommodate diversity. Second, I studied the pedagogical
strategies teachers used to address issues of diversity. The other purpose was to examine
the perceptions of teachers when they manage issues of students who were different. The
last purpose was to understand the nature of interactions between Japanese
teachers/students and minority students.
Research Questions
To explore diversity-related challenges for domestic/indigenous minority and
foreign students in the selected junior high school, I posed the following four research
questions:
Research Question (R.Q.) 1: What are the structures and provisions available to
accommodate diversity in the selected junior high school?
R.Q. 2: What pedagogical strategies do teachers use in teaching diversity in the selected
junior high school?
R.Q. 3: What are the attitudes of teachers toward students who are different in the
selected junior high school?
24
R.Q. 4: What is the nature of the interactions between Japanese teachers/students and
minority students in the selected junior high school?
Significance of the Study
The significance of this study is threefold. First, targeting issues of
domestic/indigenous minority and foreign students in a local Japanese school will address
new perspectives in considering educational opportunities for a diverse student
population. Most articles discussing domestic/indigenous minority and foreign students in
schools tend to focus on prefectures with large populations, such as Tōkyō and Ōsaka,
and large cities, including Kawasaki and Yokohama. These prefectures and cities have
already developed various services for students’ needs in schools and communities from
their experiences with the so-called “old-timers,” including Koreans. In contrast, this
research examines issues of diversity in a local school within the local context, where a
basic infrastructure of accepting foreign students might not be established. Therefore, my
findings would be useful for policy recommendations, such as policies found in the
MEXT and the board of education, from the perspective of a local junior high school.
Second, my more than 20 years of personal experiences growing up in a town
near Midori provided me with a critical view of socio-cultural and economic changes that
occurred there, in the surrounding towns and cities, including Midori. Moreover, my
interest in education as a means to raise awareness of diversity issues among students is
rooted in my own lack of understanding of these issues when I was a junior high school
student. Therefore, my familiarity with the city and my lack of experience with diversity
guided me to explore in one school new features for learning these themes associated
with socio-cultural and economic changes. There was no intention of comparing or
25
contrasting my findings with my own junior high school experiences; however, my
experience must be one of the bases for interpreting and analyzing the phenomena I
observed during the fieldwork.
In addition to contributing to the scholarly work, I believe my findings will
benefit teachers and school administrators in other local cities and towns trying to deal
with issues related to increasing numbers of immigrants in their schools or cities. By
illustrating experiences of one local junior high school on how they deal with diversity
within the local context, other teachers and school administrators would be able to learn
some aspects of it under the mono-ethnic view of the government teaching guidelines.
My findings may enhance the outlook of the MEXT for questions of multiculturalism in
schools. I also hope that my study becomes an incentive for the MEXT to reexamine how
the myth of homogeneity influences their policies which affect children’s learning
opportunity. However, I have no intention of generalizing my study to fit other cases but
the findings could be informative for other settings.
Delimitations of the Study
This study took place in Sakura Junior High School in Midori City of the Tokai
Area of Japan. The goal of the research was to explore stories of the junior high school to
examine various diversity-related challenges and see how they provided for
domestic/indigenous minority and foreign students in the school. The duration of this
study was about three months from the mid-November, 2007 to early February, 2008.
This study used ethnographic methods, including document analysis, observation, and
interviews.
26
In addition to Sakura Junior High School, I visited two elementary schools. I
visited the Ran school for one day with a Brazilian language counselor to learn more
about her job as a counselor for foreign students. In another, the Matsu school, located in
the same Sakura district, I spent five days conducting participant observation in the
Japanese as a Second Language (JSL) classroom and class observation of each grade.
Besides the two elementary school visits, I attended a JSL workshop held by one of the
schools appointed by MEXT to practice the JSL curriculum. All data collected during the
three-month period were analyzed qualitatively using inductive analysis. The inductive
analysis is used to “discover patterns, themes, and categories in one’s data” (Patton,
2002, p. 453). By a researcher working with data, findings emerge and develop out of the
data (Patton, 2002).
Operational Definitions of Terms
A caring relationship
According to Noddings (1982, cited in 1992), this is a shared feeling of the two
parties between a caregiver and a care-receiver.
Cultural Nationalism
According to Yoshino (1992), “cultural nationalism is concerned with the
distinctiveness of the cultural community as the essence of a nation” (p. 1).
Diversity
The state of being diverse, which means showing a great deal of variety; very
different (Oxford dictionary, 2003, incorporated in an electronic dictionary). In my study,
cultural diversity in Japan means non-ethnic Japanese culture, history, customs, holidays
and festivals, and ways of life.
27
Foreign languages
Foreign languages is the appellation applied to all non-Japanese languages. In this
research, a foreign language is a synonym for the English language because English is the
only foreign language taught in my case. Because, government guidelines for teaching
(the national curriculum) used the words, “foreign language” as the official subject name
(to indicate that all foreign language education follows this curriculum), foreign language
is used to indicate the subject name. However, no foreign languages other than English
were taught in the Sakura school.
Foreign students
Foreign students are called gaikokujin (foreigners or outsiders) seito (students).
Described in Background in Chapter 1, students are categorized into two groups:
Japanese or foreigners. Foreigners are all those who are non-Japanese nationals (Nihon
kokuseki), as being indicated in etic and emic meanings of foreigners (in Chapter 2). In
my study, foreign students are categorized as two groups: Japanese as a Second Language
(JSL) students who need JSL instruction and those who do not because of their fluency in
Japanese. I indicate the former group as JSL students, while the latter groups as foreign
students in a general term.
All foreign students in my study are newcomer immigrant students, mainly from
Brazil. Newcomers are regarded as those outsiders who have entered Japan since the
1980s. Because the Japanese teachers and students considered these immigrant students
to be foreign, I use the term “foreign students” to indicate immigrant students.
28
Government guidelines for teaching
The national curriculum that is provided by the Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) to all public schools in Japan.
Hegemony
A theory proposed by Gramsci (1971, cited in Langman, 1998) that explains the
process of how the ruling class ideology is internalized into the minds of subordinate
groups. This theory also discuses domination of a ruling class over subordinate groups.
Homeroom
Homeroom is the space in which a teacher and almost 40 students spend school
life together for one academic year from April to March. A homeroom also functions as
the organizational unit where a homeroom teacher supervises those students in certain
activities as a unit, including student guidance, lunch and cleaning time, as well as
academic and extracurricular activities. Moreover, subject teachers go to a homeroom to
teach a subject and then leave after class, while the same homeroom unit of students stays
there for almost all academic classes.
Japanese national
The term, nationals (kokumin) means the people of the country. As the concept of
nationality shows in Emic and Etic Descriptions of Terms in Chapter 2, people are more
familiar with the concept of nationals than citizenship. Japanese nationals include not
only ethnic Japanese, but also domestic/indigenous minority groups and naturalized
Japanese (ex-foreigners). An antonym is foreign nationals, meaning foreign residents.
29
Japanese students
Following the definition of Japanese national, Japanese students include ethnic
Japanese, domestic/indigenous minority groups, and naturalized Japanese (ex-foreigners).
Students are categorized into two groups written in the government teaching guidelines
and school documents: Japanese and foreign students. This categorization is used among
teachers and students in schools, including my research sites.
Junior high school
Junior high schools in Japan are equivalent to middle schools in the State of Ohio.
Junior high school education begins after the completion of six years of elementary
school education. Both elementary and junior high school education are compulsory.
The Kokoro-no-nōto
A moral education workbook/textbook published by MEXT. The title translates as
Notebook for the Heart. Although the MEXT calls it “sub-reading material,” this book is
used practically as a workbook in moral education classes at school. Because of how it is
used, I call it a workbook/textbook.
Minority groups
Minority groups include all groups other than the majority ethnic Japanese.
Minority groups are categorized into domestic and foreign groups. Domestic groups who
obtain Japanese nationality (kokuseki) from their birth include the indigenous groups,
Ainu and Okinawans, and the outcastes from feudal Japan, Burakumin. Foreign groups
are originally from other nations and live in Japan as gaikokujin/gaijin (foreigners or
outsiders) (for details, see Emic and Etic Descriptions of Terms in Chapter 2).
30
Among foreign groups, Koreans and Chinese who entered Japan either forcefully
or voluntarily during World War II are seen as old-timers, whereas newcomers from the
1980s are refugees from Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam, and South Americans who are
first- to third- generation Nikkeijin (Japanese-descendant South Americans), mainly
Brazilians. The naturalization process is the only way in which foreign nationals become
Japanese nationals.
Nihonjinron
The theory of “Japaneseness” is a variety of literature focusing on Japanese
culture, people, society, history, and national interests. This literature is used to
emphasize the uniqueness of ethnic Japanese. It also provides the basis of the Japanese
cultural model in which political ideology is incorporated.
Nikkeijin
Japanese-descendant South Americans, mainly Brazilians (for details, see Emic
and Etic Descriptions of Terms in Chapter 2).
Social reproduction
A theory, proposed by such authors as Gramsci (1971), Giddens (1984), and
Bourdieu (1977), that illustrates the process where by subordinate groups consider
inequality of power as the reality of daily life and maintain daily values and behaviors as
subordinate groups.
Organization of the Study
Chapter 1 provides the background, the statement of the problem, the purpose of
the study, research questions, the significance of the study, and delimitations of the study,
as well as operational definitions of terms.
31
Chapter 2 reviews and organizes available literature based on the focus of my
study. The organization of the literature is: Cultural boundaries of “we” and “others”;
national identity formation through Nihonjinron; national identity formation through
education; an alternative for homogeneous policies: Multiculturalism. Hegemony and
social reproduction theories are reviewed as the theoretical frameworks.
Chapter 3 provides my research methodology, including research design,
rationales for the selection of participants and research sites, limitations of the study, data
collection procedures, document analyses, observations, interviews, researcher’s role, as
well as data analysis procedures including transcriptions, organization and coding of data,
and data analysis methods for each question.
Chapter 4 addresses and analyzes the data using the literature reviewed and the
theoretical framework where necessary. After the contextual and background information
of the participants, each research question is analyzed separately under its emerging
themes.
Chapter 5 provides the summary, major findings, policy recommendations,
conclusion, and suggestions for further research.
32
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to review and organize available literature that
bears on the focus of my study. I present various cultural and educational issues related to
the imagined homogeneity of Japanese culture. In the first part, I look into the complexity
of national culture. This part also illustrates why the binary of “we” and “others” does not
fit the realities of multicultural/ethnic Japan. In the second part, I will explain the political
ideology of Nihonjinron in detail. The explanation of the diffusion process reveals how
the ideology was produced and disseminated to the masses. The third part combines
various educational issues related to Japaneseness. This part includes perspectives of the
main actors for educational policies, the Kokoro-no-nōto, the content analysis of the
revised FLE, and other relevant educational issues. In the last part, I apply theories of
hegemony and social reproduction as analytic tools to understand how the state
perpetuates hegemonic power through the diffusion of Nihonjinron and the control of the
school curriculum.
Cultural Boundaries of “We” and “Others”
Capitalism and global politics influence national culture. Japan is no exception.
Seyla Benhabib (2002) defines cultures in the following: “Cultures themselves, as well as
societies, are not holistic but polyvocal, multilayered, decentered, and fractured systems
of action and signification” (pp. 25-26) and cultures are dynamic systems created by
human interaction and negotiation across time and space. Her notion of “polyvocal” and
“multilayered” is expanded by Douglas Kellner’s (2000, cited in Morrow & Torres,
2000) argument of culture: “[c]ulture is an especially complex and contested terrain today
33
as global cultures permeate local ones and new configurations emerge that synthesize
both poles providing… global homogenization and local hybrid forms and identities”
(emphasis in the original, cited in Morrow & Torres, 2000, p. 39).
Arjun Appadurai claims that globalization is not necessarily “Westernization,
Americanization, commodification, and homogenization” on a global scale (cited in
Lingard, 2000, p. 81). Appadurai introduces the term “vernacular globalization” in the
following:
Vernacular globalization…carries resonances with the idea of ‘glocalization’: the
way local, national, and global interrelationships are being reconstituted, but
mediated by the history of the local and the national and by politics, as well as by
hybridization, an important resulting cultural feature of the multidirectional flows
of cultural globalization and the tension between homogenization and
heterogenization. (Appadurai, cited in Lingard, 2000, p. 81)
According to those authors, national culture has become complex because of the
sociocultural interface between the local values and identity of people and the global
political and economic forces intensified by globalization. Under various tensions
between the local and the global economic activities, nation itself has been forced to
redefine its existence.
As a consequence of the influence of global force on national culture, nationalism
has grown. Benedict Anderson (1992) claims that the nation is defined as an imagined
political community:
[The nation] is an imagined political community—and imagined as both
inherently limited and sovereign….[The nation] is imagined [italics in original]
because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their
fellow-members…yet in the minds of each lives the image of their communion.
(Anderson, 1992, p. 6)
34
Applying Anderson’s definition (1992), the Japanese society is the imaginary of
disseminating the ethnic Japanese culture as the national culture. In the minds of ethnic
Japanese, Japanese culture does not necessarily include non-ethnic Japanese culture and
traditions. The expression “we” is a means of emphasizing the unity of Japan based on
ethnic Japanese culture and tradition. Politicians, business elites, intellectuals, and
educators frequently utilize this expression, as the example of government documents
using “we, Japanese…” reveals.
According to Anderson (1992), the expression of “we” in written documents
creates the “imagined community” among readers. He used the example of the book in
1924, Three Early Indonesian Stories (translated by Paul Tickell) by communistnationalist, Mas Marco Kartodikromo. The expression of an unknown hero referred to as
“our young man” (p. 32), many times in his book does not create any doubts about his
reference. “Our young man” portrays the image of the collective body of readers.
Anderson (1992) analyzes the effect of “our” that “the clumsiness and literary naivety of
the text confirm the unselfconscious ‘sincerity’ of this pronominal adjective” (p. 32).
What is important here is that the use in government documents of the collective
“we” necessarily results in a “not-we,” category, known as “others.” This includes
diverse groups of people starting from old-timers such as Koreans and Chinese,
newcomers such as the Brazilians, Filipinos, Peruvians, and Americans, as well as
domestic/indigenous minority groups, such as Ainu, Burakumin, and Okinawans. Despite
ethnic and cultural diversity within the country, the population census only distinguishes
the population by the dichotomy of Japanese national (citizenship) and foreign national.
This means that domestic/indigenous minority groups, such as Ainu, Burakumin, and
35
Okinawans, are included in the “Japanese national” category consisting of 99% of the
total population. Thus, Japan is, in fact, a more multiethnic/multicultural society than
what the population census portrays in public.
There are certain social practices within the in-group. Although it is not certain
how much the governmental expression “we” induces ordinary citizens to internalize the
collective concept, they know they are in the “we, ethnic Japanese” category. More
importantly, as the governmental expression has created the binary of “we” and “others,”
the Japanese citizens’ expression of “we” automatically draws a line with the opposite,
“they, foreigners.” As a result, those in the “we” category fail to realize their systematic
discrimination against foreigners living in Japan (Kunihiro, 2003).
For instance, most ethnic Japanese take it for granted that they are the ethnic
Japanese and their families are also the ethnic Japanese. This is based on the fact that it is
very natural for them to be born of ethnic Japanese parents and to be raised in Japan, to
marry an ethnic Japanese husband or wife, and to have children with him or her in Japan.
It was too natural to be aware of their ethnic Japanese origin (Okuda, 2003, cited in
Kunihiro, 2003). Consequently, people do not realize that there is, in fact, systematic
legal discrimination against individuals because of the dichotomy of being considered
either ethnic Japanese or not (Miyajima, 2003, cited in Kunihiro, 2003).
Social practices of the in-group toward “others” are another area of concern. In
addition to the illustration of the perspective of the mainstream ethnic Japanese of their
membership in the society, it is also critical to illustrate the others’ point of view of the
binary. In the eyes of the ethnic Japanese dominant majority, non-ethnic Japanese include
domestic/indigenous minority groups, such as Burakumin, Ainu, Okinawans; old-timers
36
such as Koreans and Chinese; and newcomers such as the Southeast Asians and South
Americans.
In the process of accepting more newcomers than ever in recent history, Japan
has encountered increased and often new diversity issues. In the more
multiethnic/cultural cities, such as Tōkyō, Ōsaka, and Aichi Prefecture, grassroots
organizations and local communities attempt to mediate between the ethnic Japanese and
domestic/indigenous minorities and foreigners (immigrants). Issues related to
discomfiture of ethnic Japanese sensibilities brought about by foreign residents’
communication styles, different levels of noise tolerance and even the most mundane
issues of how trash is discarded must be dealt with. However, these issues run deep and
profoundly affect the society. In the mind of the ethnic Japanese, the purity of Japanese
land, harmony, and peace linked with Japanese shared blood (Befu, 2001) is polluted by
foreigners’ settlement on their land.
For instance, mass media promote the idea that foreigners bring crime to the
country and disturb the peace without considering individual differences such as legal
and social status, as well as occupation. Mass media’s reports on “the rise of crimes by
foreigners” and “foreigners’ crimes” lead to the misunderstanding that there is a direct
linkage between the increase of foreign populations and the disruption of the social order.
This kind of reporting only fosters the ethnic Japanese negative sentiment toward
foreigners’ presence in society. Most ethnic Japanese are unaware of how disadvantaged
and marginalized the foreigners are in daily life simply because they are considered
outsiders (Yamawaki, Kondō, & Kashiwazaki, 2001).
37
Society’s treatment of foreign residents and ethnic minorities is an example of
“othering.” “Others” are people excluded and marginalized from the mainstream or
particular groups due to projected differences in appearance such as skin color, hair color,
and physical features (Johnson et al., 2004). This is the process of othering “which serves
to mark and name those thought to be different from oneself” (Weis, 1995, p. 17).
The ethnic Japanese community that attempts to keep foreign residents and
domestic/indigenous minorities separate goes beyond projected differences. The system
of non-integration is institutionalized. For those who stick with collective behaviors, as I
did in school, any kind of difference has already implied negativity. The socio-political
attempt to emphasize foreigners’ differences through agents, including media, arouses the
ethnocentric sensibilities of ethnic Japanese and causes conflict and misunderstanding
between the groups. Moreover, while othering them, the ethnic Japanese “construct their
own identities in reference to others” (Johnson, et al., 2004, p. 2). Due to the context of
power relations between the ethnic Japanese and foreign residents, “[o]thering practices
can, albeit sometimes unintentionally, serve to reinforce and reproduce positions of
domination and subordination” (Fine, 1994, cited in Johnson et al., 2004, p. 2).
Emic and Etic Descriptions of Terms
Emic and etic perspectives are used in ethnography to report different
perspectives of the observed. The emic perspective is the view of insiders to capture the
view of those observed people themselves. The view of insiders is captured through the
language and categories that the insiders use. In contrast, the etic perspective is the
viewpoint of an outsider researcher to detachment of conceptual analysis and abstraction.
38
Categories are created by researchers based on their conceptual analysis and abstraction
of cultural distinctions (Patton, 2002; Pike, 1954, cited in Patton, 2002).
Important concepts and groups of people are described from emic and etic
perspectives with historical contexts and backgrounds. The words include: Ainu,
Burakumin, country, ethnicity, foreigner, Japanese, Koreans residents, minority, nation,
national, nationality, Nikkeijin, and Okinawans.
Ainu
In the emic meaning, people in Ainu language call themselves Ainu (human
beings) as opposed to kamui (gods). Ainu is the ethnic appellation. Between the 17th
Century and the 19th Century, Ainu settled in Ainu mosir (the ground human beings live
on) in such areas as Hokkaidō, Sakhalin, and Kurile islands. Ainu research has proved
that Ainu language origins of city and town names have been distributed in wider
geographical areas beyond the area of their inhabitants. The Ainu Association of
Hokkaidō states: “[M]any historical materials and records have not been examined from
the perspective of their relevance to Ainu history. The role Ainu history plays in the larger
history of Japan remains particularly uncertain” (The Ainu Association of Hokkaidō,
n.d.).
Ainu’s land, Ezochi, was a foreign territory and was incorporated as a Japanese
territory by the Meiji government in 1873 (Tamura, 1992, cited in Lie 2001). The Meiji
government called Ainu people dojin (aborigines) and enacted the 1899 Hokkaidō Former
Aborigine Protection Act (Hokkaidō Kyūdojin hogohō) (Ogawa & Yamada, 1998, cited
in Lie, 2001). The appellation of kyūdojin (former aborigines) created the image of Ainu
backwardness among the ethnic Japanese. Rather than being a protection act for Ainu,
39
this legislation destroyed the Ainu lifestyle (Shin’ya, 1977, cited in Lie, 2001). In 1911,
the Ainu were regarded as “aborigines or natives” in the same way as the Aleuts and
Indians were in the fur-seal protection international convention among the United States,
the Soviet Union, Canada (then a British territory), and Japan. Due to bans on fishing,
cutting trees, and speaking the Ainu language, the Ainu needed to become day laborers
and farmers (Uemura, 1990, cited in Lie, 2001). Moreover, according to the Ainu
Association of Hokkaidō, the national school textbooks available in public education
until 1945 described them as aborigines and recognized as an indigenous group (the Ainu
Association of Hokkaidō website, n.d.).
After WWII, the view of the government changed from seeing Ainu as aborigines
to seeing them as Japanese nationals holding Japanese nationality. Due to recognition of
them only as nationals, the government did not consider their ethnic attributes (the Ainu
Association of Hokkaidō, n.d.). Although the government recognized the distinct culture
of Ainu in 1950, the government changed their view between 1953 and 1987 and did not
consider them as an ethnic group. Because of the lack of public attention to Ainu during
that period, the ethnic Japanese become blind to Ainu history and culture (Uemura, 1987,
cited in Lie 2001) and Ainu became invisible in society. In 1986, as described in
Background in Chapter 1, former Prime Minister Nakasone commented that Japan was a
“mono-ethnic nation,” which created protests and criticism (the Ainu Association of
Hokkaidō, n.d.).
However, Ainu exploitation remained after WWII and they were targeted for
discrimination. In fact, because of the discrimination associated with the word Ainu, the
Ainu Association of Hokkaidō, established in 1946, changed its name to Hokkaidō Utari
40
(brethren or compatriot) Association. The organization explained the shift from Ainu to
Utari as follows: The reason for re-naming the organization was to “reduce psychological
resistance of people when members recruit new people and let them join the
organization” (the Ainu Association of Hokkaidō, n.d.).
At the opening ceremony of the 1992 United Nations General Assembly’s
“International Year of Indigenous People,” an executive director of the Ainu Association
of Hokkaidō made a speech as a representative of indigenous people. In 1997, the Law
for the Promotion of Ainu Culture was enacted in Japan and the Hokkaidō Former
Aborigines Protection Act was simultaneously repealed. At present, Ainu are used to
promote tourism in Hokkaidō. Some Ainu activists began to engage in political and
cultural activities influenced by Burakumin activism and the struggles of indigenous
peoples the world over (Uemura, 1992; Siddle, 1996; 1997, all cited in Lie, 2001).
Burakumin
Burakumin literally means a part of a village (Buraku) and people (min). In Kōjien
(the Japanese dictionary, 1998 & 2004), Buraku has two meanings. The first definition is
“the regional community constituting relatively small households; a part of a village.”
The second definition is:
The area where people who were socially and occupationally discriminated
against [as outcastes]. [This division of class] was formed in the Edo period
(about 1600 through 1867). Although these residents in the area were
emancipated to [become citizens] legally, social discrimination against them has
not been completely eradicated until present; the un-emancipated community; the
discriminated community. (Kōjien, 1998 &2004, incorporated in an electronic
dictionary)
As the second definition indicates, the historical root of the Burakumin began with their
outcaste status in the Edo period, when they were called eta (literary meaning “full of
41
filth”) and hinin (literary meaning “non-human”) (Lee, 2006). There are various debates
about the origins of eta and hinin, such as their common attributes to be considered
outcastes in Edo (Lie, 2001).
The headquarters of Buraku Liberation League (1998 in Japanese, last updated
2009, May 2) holds that the second dictionary meaning was formed when the Meiji
government began to use “Tokushu Buraku” (special hamlet) in reference to former
outcaste communities. As a result, the ethnic Japanese see these “Tokushu Buraku” as
different from them (Lie, 2001).
Differentiation between Burakumin and non-Burakumin was also highlighted in
the family registration by the Meiji government (1968-1912) (Lie, 2001). Burakumin
became new commoners by the 1871 Emancipation Decree (Kobayashi, 1979, pp. 69-75,
cited in Lie, 2001). This law guaranteed occupational mobility, residential freedom, the
right to surnames, and other rights as citizens, which traditional commoners held.
However, social discrimination and cultural stigma against these new commoners
remained because the family registry system marked them as new commoners, distinct
from traditional commoners. This public record showed that they were ex-outcastes (Lie,
2001).
Furthermore, despite giving Burakumin equal rights as traditional commoners, the
Meiji government did not provide any protective measures for certain occupations for
them. The Burakumin got the worst jobs and housing. Due to these circumstances, Lie
(2001) summarizes that “[l]egal discrimination was replaced by economic competition
and class reproduction” (p. 86). Through these societal discriminatory actions against
them, Burakumin identity has been created after the Meiji Era (Lie, 2001).
42
Various anti-discrimination movements, such as Suiheisya (Leveling Society) and
the yūwa (assimilation and harmony) policy were conducted by the Burakumin leaders.
These movements consolidated the identity of the Burakumin. However, residential and
economic segregation has remained since WWII. Though welfare dependency and
discrimination still play a significant role in the lives of many Burakumin, educational
attainment and employment opportunities have improved (Shimahara, 1991, cited in Lie,
2001).
It is controversial to define Burakumin as a distinct ethnic group because there is
no distinction between ethnicity and race in Japan. Japanese and Burakumin are regarded
as the same race because of no sources of phenotypical distinction. Thus, “most Japanese,
including the Burakumin themselves, insist on their Japaneseness,” (Yoshino &
Murakoshi, 1977, p. 130, cited in Lie, 2001, p. 85). The headquarters of the Buraku
Liberation League also defined Burakumin as “not a racial or a national minority, but a
caste-like minority among the ethnic Japanese” (1998 in English, last updated 2005,
December 15).
Country
In the linguistic analysis of the history textbook, Nitani (1996, September 20)
discusses the ambiguous Japanese word for country, kuni:
Country in Japanese language is ambiguous and fuzzy…the ambiguous Japan, the
Japanese, the Japanese historical ideology are all fixed…The ambiguity of the
multiple meanings of the nation is translated into English as land (natural
land=the national land), country (the life community from the hometown through
the country), state (the governance of national authority), and government (the
government). [Based on contexts], the word, nation can be used differently. (p. 2)
43
Nitani (1996, September 20) also explains that, in the history textbook, the multiple
meaning of kuni (country) can be switched to the word, Nihon (Japan) as a synonym. In
this connection between country and Japan, Lie (2001) also claims that there are no clear
boundaries of categories among “nation,” “race,” and “ethnicity” in Japanese. In
summary, kuni (country) involves the meanings of Japan, ethnicity, race, country, land,
state, and government.
Ethnicity
By the same token as “country,” Lie (2001) claims that there are no clear-cut
distinctions among the words ethnicity, nation, and race in the Japanese concept. As
Nitani (1996, September 20) states, the word, “nation” is incorporated into kuni (country)
with such words as land, nation, state, and government. Moreover, kuni (country) is equal
to Nihon (Japan). By combining these claims, it can be concluded that ethnicity is a
concept similar to Japan, nation, race, country, land, state, and government.
Foreigner
Lie (2001) observed that Japanese people categorize people into two groups:
Japanese (Nihonjin) and non-Japanese (gaikokujin/gaijin). Gaikokujin/gaijin means
foreigners and outsiders.
Japanese
According to Lie (2001), most Japanese do not differentiate the category
boundaries of nation, ethnicity, and race. Thus, most Japanese call their fellow Japanese
Nihonjin (Nihon, Japan, plus jin, people). He explains as follows: “the most common way
to refer to a group of people is to add the suffix jin (literary people)….everyone belongs
to a homologous category of peoplehood; everyone is some sort of jin. (p. 145).
44
Ethnicity of Japanese people, Yamato minzoku, was stressed by the militarists in
the 1930s to differentiate the Japanese from the rest of the Asian racial groups. In the
colonial context, Koreans and Chinese residents were seen as the same Asian racial group
as Japanese compared with the West. To emphasize the superiority of the Japanese over
Asians and enhance ethnic pride as Japanese, the militarists used the belief of the purity
of Japanese blood to shift the nation into a militarized mode (Weiner, 1997, cited in Lee,
2006). This claim of the purity of Japanese blood is widely used in the present-day when
someone defines who the “Japanese are” (Lee, 2006).
Korean residents
According to Kōjien (the Japanese dictionary, 1998 & 2004), Koreans residents
were defined as:
Koreans (and their children and grandchildren) who entered or were forced to
come to Japan as labor during WWII and who needed to remain in Japan because
of the split of North and South Korea after the [Korean] War and the limited
fortune they were allowed to take back home. When combining both North
Korean nationality and South Korean nationality together, they were called
resident South/North Koreans. (Kōjien, incorporated in an electronic dictionary)
Lie (2001) explains that Koreans who have come to Japan since the 1920s filled the labor
force. The crucial historical moment for Korean residents in Japan was the massacre of
thousands of Koreans during the 1923 Kantō earthquake because of the rumor that
Koreans had poisoned the wells. In the earthquake confusion, not only Koreans, but also
Okinawans and Chinese were killed (Kang, 1975, cited in Lie, 2001). Moreover, Korean
migrant workers were illiterate in Japanese and ill-prepared for urban employment and
thus, did manual work along with Burakumin and Okinawans (Weiner, 1994, cited in Lie,
2001). Because of poverty and discrimination, Koreans created their own ethnic ghettoes
(Weiner, 1994, cited in Lie, 2001).
45
Two-thirds of the Koreans who were brought to Japan because of the labor
shortage in prewar Japan returned to the Korean peninsula after 1945. The Korean War
and poverty in South and North Korea made some Koreans decide to stay in Japan to
raise their families in the booming Japanese economy in the 1960s. Although Koreans
were regarded as Japanese nationals under colonial rule, their citizenship status were
removed de facto after 1945 (Yun, 1994, cited in Lie, 2001). The nationality law in 1952
decreed that Koreans register de jure as foreigners and be placed under surveillance.
Moreover, they faced all kinds of discrimination because of their foreign resident status
(Lie, 2001; Wethetall, 2006).
Lie (2001) points out the names of some popular actresses of Korean descent
were changed to hide their Korean identity to be successful in Japanese society. If their
Korean backgrounds are revealed in public, their careers would be ruined. The pressure
of pretending to be Japanese shows “how Korean is a taboo and how celebrities in Japan
have to be ‘Japanese’ in the eyes of Japanese people” (Lee, 2006, p. 106). In fact, the
ethnic Japanese regard Koreans as different from Japanese because Korea is a nationstate which has its own language and culture (Lie, 2001).
Minority
The minority refers to a minority race (shōsū minzoku) and indigenous people
(senjūmin).
Nation
As mentioned under the meaning of country and ethnicity, the concept of nation is
incorporated into the word kuni (country) as other concepts of land, country, state, and
government (Nitani, 1996, September 20). In addition, Lie (2001) claims that there are no
46
clear-cut distinctions among the categories of nation, race, and ethnicity. Furthermore,
Nitani (1996, September 20) claimed that the country is synonymous with Japan. To sum
up, nation is incorporated in various concepts, including country, land, state, government,
Japan, ethnicity, and race.
National
Lie (2001) also explains the etic description of nationals among Japanese. He
claims that there are no distinct categories of nation, ethnicity, and race in Japanese and
in ordinary conversation.
Nationality
Lie (2001) explains the etic description of nationality among Japanese as such:
[S]himinken (citizenship) [is] a relatively foreign concept, whereas kokuseki
(nationality) appears to be an extension of koseki ([family] registry), and hence a
native or natural concept. In this view nationality is an extension of the family;
one belongs, organically as it were, to a nation as one does to a family. Whereas
nationality is a matter of fate, citizenship, in contrast, strikes many Japanese
people as superficial because people can choose and change it. (p. 144)
Nikkeijin
According to Murphy-Shigematsu (2006), the foreigners most welcomed by the
Japanese people are 300,000 Nikkeijin who migrated to South America in the beginning
of the 20th Century for better opportunities. They are the most advantaged foreigners in
terms of their legal status to live and work in Japan. Since the implementation of the 1990
immigration law, any Nikkeijin with a Japanese parent or grandparent has been allowed to
enter Japan to work as cheap labor. On the other hand, cultural similarities related with a
common ethnic (racial) background have become a challenge for Nikkeijin in terms of
their identity clash between their Japanese background and the Latin socialization they
have grown up with (Murphy-Shigematsu, 2006).
47
Okinawans
Okinawans call themselves uchinānchu (Okinawa jin in Japanese, meaning
Okinawans). They call the people (ethnic Japanese) on the main Japanese islands
yamatōnchū (yamato jin/minzoku in Japanese, meaning ethnic Japanese). Despite having
the ethnic dialect, Japanese on the main island (the ethnic Japanese) and Okinawans used
the same term. In fact, many linguists consider Ryūkyūan (Okinawan language) a
Japanese dialect, while the Ainu language is quite distinct from Japanese language
(Shibatani, 1990, cited in Lie, 2001).
As with Ainu, Ryūkyū (current Okinawa Prefecture) was an independent country
during the Edo period. However, most ethnic Japanese regard Okinawans (people in
Okinawa prefecture) as purely ethnic Japanese, while they regard Ainu as a distinct ethnic
group (Lie, 2001). Ryūkyū was integrated into the Japanese territory in the late 19th
Century by the Meiji government. In an historical context, both Ainu and the Okinawans
were considered ethnic groups in Japan because they were colonized in the 19th Century.
In the early 20th Century Okinawa became a colonial economy whose major
products were sugar (Mukai, 1992, cited in Lie, 2001) and coal (Miki, 1992, cited in Lie,
2001). Because of the limited economic opportunities on Okinawa islands, many
Okinawans emigrated to foreign countries or migrated to Honshū (the largest island of
Japan) (Tomiyama, 1992, cited in Lie, 2001). Despite ethnic discrimination in the early
20th Century, cultural integration of Okinawans was encouraged in policies, including
teaching standard Japanese in schools, prohibition of ethnic clothes and hair style, and
giving Japanese surnames in the family registry system (Kano, 1993, cited in Lie, 2001).
48
After it became a major battlefield in WWII, Okinawa was administered by the
United States until 1972. Until the 1970s, assimilation into the ethnic Japanese society
and the assumption of inferiority dominated the minds of Okinawans (Ōta, 1976, cited in
Lie, 2001). In the 1990s, Okinawans had the double consciousness of being Okinawans
and Japanese even in governor’s speeches (Arakawa, 1995, cited in Lie, 2001).
Pedagogy of Relations: Bridging the Gap
Pedagogy of relations focuses on the importance of social interaction in order to
facilitate dialogues and build trust between teachers and students. It is one major way that
many teachers and students use to solve problems and build a caring environment. This
would also aid in changing the perception of “others.”
Sidorkin (2002) proposes the pedagogy of relations which places human
relationships at the center of education in order to encourage motivations for teaching and
learning. He uses the economic anthropology of schooling to illustrate the importance of
relational pedagogy to learning motivation.
Noddings (1992) defines a caring relationship as “a connection or encounter
between two human beings―a career and a recipient of care, or cared-for” (p. 15). She
explains that caring is only established when both parties complete their role either as a
caregiver or a cared-for. If the care recipient does not receive caring from the caregiver,
caring is not completed, but it is simply a relationship between the two. The caring
relationship, thus, is a mutual process of sharing the sense of caring between the two
parties.
Thayer-Bacon (1998) proposes a relational epistemology that “views knowledge
as something that is socially constructed by embedded, embodied people who are in
49
relation with each other” (p. 60). Based on the relational epistemology and a relational
ontology, Thayer-Bacon (2000) further proposes constructive thinking theory.
Constructive thinking theory views knowledge as socially constructed among human
beings in interaction between the self and the object, the knower and the known, and
subjectivity and objectivity. This theory differs from critical thinking which detaches
experiences from reasoning and meaning to maintain neutrality and objectiveness.
Noddings (1984, cited in 1992) illuminates moral education as including four
major components from the perspective of an ethic of care: Modeling, dialogue, practice,
and confirmation. First, modeling means that the caregiver should demonstrate how to
care within the relationship with the cared-for. Moreover, those who have experiences of
being the cared-for can also be the caregiver.
The second component, dialogues in Noddings’ notion are similar to Paulo
Freire’s (2003) dialogue of an open-ended form of conversation. Dialogues guide the two
parties to reach well-informed decisions through sharing knowledge each party has. In
this process, dialogues also foster caring relationships because a caregiver shares his or
her knowledge with friendly attitudes and a cared-for responds to the care-giver in a
manner which pleases the care-giver.
Third, practice in caring is critical because the preparation for a caring
relationship needs skills and experiences of caregiving. Last, confirmation from an ethic
of care perspective means that confirmation from a person motivates others to develop
the self. Confirmation is an act of a person to let others realize that this person is
committed to watch actions others take to develop the self. Thus, confirmation creates a
relation of trust between these two parties.
50
In conclusion, the mainstream Japanese notion of “we” and “others” in a
traditional culture is a political ideology to maintain the superiority of ethnic Japanese.
This assumes that the ethnic Japanese belong to only one community based on their
ethnicity, while considering the non-ethnic Japanese as “others.” The dynamic cultural
influences, related closely to the mixture of global homogenization, Westernization,
Americanization, and vernacular globalization, change individual identities.
Moreover, the emic and etic perspectives demonstrated both insiders’ and
outsiders’ perspectives of important concepts and groups of people with historical
contexts and backgrounds. Pedagogy of relations provides the relational approach to
bridging the gap between the ethnic Japanese and “others” through learning and social
interactions.
National Identity Formation through Nihonjinron
Overview of Nihonjinron
Nihonjinron is a variety of literature focusing on ethnic Japanese culture, people,
society, history, and national interests. “Japaneseness” is analyzed through various
academic fields, including sociology, anthropology, civics, archaeology, history,
linguistics, and psychology. This genre of literature, including books, magazines, and
daily newspapers, emphasizes the uniqueness of the ethnic Japanese and differentiates
Japan from the rest of the world.
More specifically, the focal point of comparison and contrast is the Western world
which has strong political and economic relationships with Japan. Moreover, since
Japanese society has transformed into an increasingly Westernized version over the last
150 years, Nihonjinron has played a vital role in confirming the self-identity of ethnic
51
Japanese. By propagating Japaneseness to each reader, Nihonjinron serves as a major
source of information in maintaining a national and ethnic cultural identity during the
post-war era (Befu, 1992, 2001).
The theory of Japaneseness is a typical English translation of Nihonjinron, but the
theory is not based on research and is full of ambiguous explanations about culture and
tradition understood only by those who have grown up in the culture and have insider or
cultural knowledge. Authors of these books are mainly business people, elites, and
journalists who are famous or have become famous by writing distinct views of how the
ethnic Japanese practice their culture in collective manners. The purpose of the literature
is to entertain the general public, so the job of a Nihonjinron writer is to provide readers
with light reading and a quick understanding of their identities.
Nihonjinron literature embraces group orientation, hierarchy (verticalstratification, intra-company solidarity), harmony, amae (affectionate dependency), and
interpersonalism as the distinctiveness of the Japanese people (Befu, 2001; Yoshino,
1992, 1999b). These themes would be illustrated with various examples of what the
Japanese people consciously or unconsciously tend to do in their daily lives (Befu, 2001).
Major Nihonjinron books include Watsuji Tetsuro’s Fudo (1931), Ruth Benedict’s The
Chrysanthemum and the Sword (1948), and Nakane Chie’s Personal Relations in a
Vertical Society: A Theory of Homogeneous Society (1967).
Ideology of Nihonjinron
Harumi Befu (2001) argues that the contents of Nihonjinron are not only the
basis of the cultural model, but also a political ideology with official sponsorship:
…what is at issue [in the Japanese mind] is the invincible belief in [italics in
original] that uniqueness and the claiming of uniqueness in the Nihonjinron
52
discourse.…Comprehension of these unique features supposedly requires not
rational or logical understanding, but an intuitive insight into Japanese culture that
only natives can achieve. Thus, foreigners are defined as incapable of
understanding the essence of Japanese culture. This belief gives comfort to the
Japanese: here is one essential “sociocultural territory” they can protect as their
own. [In contrast,] [t]he notion that foreigners could fully comprehend Japanese
culture and therefore act and behave like any Japanese threatens their ethnic and
national integrity [italics added]. (p. 67)
As mentioned in the introduction, Nihonjinron connects Japanese “pure-blooded”
citizens with the land of Japan, race, culture, language, and religion to protect the unity of
Japan along the lines of the homogeneity of ethnicity (Befu, 2001). This political
ideology is beneficial to the ruling class. Whereas other countries struggle for unity
having different groups of people based on ethnicity, class, language, religion, and
regional differences, Japan is believed not to encounter this issue.
The first reason that Japanese society does not need to struggle for unity lies in
the lack of beliefs in these differences, with the exception of regional variations. People
notice regional differences in culture and tradition, but this does not cause any trouble in
the homogenous discourse. In addition to the lack of identifying socioeconomic and
cultural differences among the majority ethnic Japanese, there are no plausible
threatening minority groups who might challenge the dominant ethnic Japanese group
identity. Even the larger groups of minorities, Korean and Chinese residents, are
assimilated into the mainstream ethnic Japanese society (Stronach, 1995). For instance,
Korean celebrities on television hide their ethnic background and pretend to be ethnic
Japanese in order to maintain their popularity and careers in media (see Korean residents
in Emic and Etic Descriptions of Terms in Chapter 2). Thus, Yoshino (1999b) states that
“Nihonjinron constitutes a cultural nationalist ideology which elites have created to
53
manipulate the masses in the direction of nationalism” (Yoshino 1999a, p. 17). This also
empowers ethnic Japanese.
Nihonjinron is very selective in order to simplify the complexity of life. The
selection is based on Nihonjinron writers’ careful purpose to promote certain cultural
values as if they were shared by all ethnic Japanese. What then, would be their intention?
Befu (1992, 2001) claims that Nihonjinron is “a convenient substitute” for the pre-war
national symbols and identity, including the imperial institution, the national flag,
anthem, emblem, monuments, and rituals:
[i]t is in the absence of major symbols which can serve to define cultural identity,
express national unity and demonstrate national pride that Nihonjinron comes in
as a convenient substitute. Nihonjinron is not suggested here as a 100 per cent
[sic] functional substitute, since Nihonjinron, as a discourse, lacks the strong
emotional content which the national flag and other physical symbols have. (Befu,
1992, p. 42)
Therefore, with Nihonjinron themes and discussions being flexible from time to
time, some would stress that the Nihonjinron ideology differs from wartime nationalism,
but this argument would be rationalized because both wartime nationalism and post-war
Nihonjinron “rely heavily on primordial sentiments inherent in the presumed ‘ethnic
essence’ of the Japanese―blood, purity of race, language, mystique―which are the basic
‘stuff’ of Nihonjinron, pre- and post-war. For example, the idea of the Japanese people
being homogeneous and Japanese culture being pure and unique was the very basis of the
wartime nationalistic ideology, and is repeated in the post-war Nihonjinron” (Befu, 1992,
p. 44).
54
Role of Agents of Socialization in Spreading the Nihonjinron Discourse
Nihonjinron is a cultural discourse written in various forms and for various
occasions, including books, magazines, public lectures, roundtable discussions, television
and radio programs, and college courses. According to a survey conducted in the city of
Nishinomiya in 1987 by Befu and Kazufumi (1989, 1991, 1998, cited in Befu, 2001),
many respondents said they would refer to daily newspapers and television for
information about Nihonjinron due to its easy access. In most cases, discussions about
Nihonjinron on television and radio programs, in daily newspapers, and in magazines
would be combined and published in book form by the same people who presented the
discussions.
To clarify the agents of socialization, I will use Yoshino’s (1992) categories of
“producers” and “consumers.” I include people who present their view of Nihonjinron via
media or public lectures in the category of Nihonjinron writers under “producers”
because their discussions tend to be published later. In Yoshino’s view, Nihonjinron
ideologies are produced by “thinking elites” of various occupations, such as intellectuals,
critics and journalists, diplomats, and business elites. Some of them would use deliberate
ideological manipulation, but Nihonjinron writers do not show the whole picture of why
the ideology has spread to the general public, rather than just to interest groups. Thus,
Yoshino (1992) stresses the importance of examining the diffusion process from the
consumer side, including readers and redistributors of Nihonjinron discourse, as well.
Major producers of Nihonjinron are the government, politicians, and Nihonjinron
writers. The involvement of Nihonjinron writers in policy implementation is clear in
governmental documents. In 1980, in the first episode of their collaboration, a committee
55
of Nihonjinron advocates sent a report, Bunka no Jidai (The Age of Culture: Reports of
the Policy Group of Prime Minister Ohira—Number One), to Prime Minister Masayoshi
Ohira. The chair of the committee was Shichihei Maeda, also known as Isaiah BenDasan,
the author of the three-million-copy bestseller, Nihonjin to Yudayajin (The Japanese and
the Jews). Other committee members included Tōkyō University professor Shumpei
Kumon, one of the co-authors of an erudite Nihonjinron treatise, and Sakyo Komatsu,
Nihonjinron writer best-known as an author of science fiction and mystery. The report
embraced the harmonious and collective human relations of the Japanese as compared
with Western individualism. According to Kawamura (1982), this report was the first in
which Nihonjinron officially influenced policy formation (cited in Befu, 2001).
In reflecting on the collaborative work of Nihonjinron writers, the government,
and politicians, the Department of Comprehensive Policy Studies of Chūō University
focused on Nihonjinron as a major approach to analyze the formation of national policy.
The department had a two-year graduate program investigating Nihonjinron with 25
faculty members. Their report was published in 2000 (Befu, 2001).
In addition to governmental policies, politicians’ speeches and comments are
closely associated with Japanese homogeneity as expressed in Nihonjinron literature. For
example, Japan ratified the International Covenants on Human Rights (ICHR) in 1979. In
its first report for ICHR, the government officially stated that there were no ethnic
minority groups in Japan (Lee, 2006).
While the Nihonjinron producers, such as politicians and Nihonjinron authors,
transformed ideas into policies, Nihonjinron consumers, i.e., readers, bought into the
uniqueness of the Japanese. The primary readers included business elites, educators, and
56
students. In Yoshino’s findings from Nihonjinron readers, the specific interests among
educators and business people for reading these books are cross-cultural and
organizational/occupational concerns. Nihonjinron helps readers develop their personal
identities and solve their occupational matters through reading Nihonjinron themes,
including group orientation, hierarchy (vertical-stratification, intra-company solidarity),
harmony, amae (affectionate dependency), and interpersonalism (Yoshino, 1992, 1999b).
From his qualitative interviews, Yoshino (1992, 1992b) revealed that the more
educators and business elites are exposed to Nihonjinron, the more convinced they are
about Japanese uniqueness. This means that their view of Japanese culture is strongly
influenced by Nihonjinron literature, and they buy into the writers’ arguments (Yoshino,
1992, 1999b). The level of exposure to Nihonjinron varied between educators and
business people. More business people showed interest in theories of Japanese society
because many writers themselves are business elites who summarize their views of
Japanese and non-Japanese through their business practices and experiences.
Those who had first-hand experiences in cross-cultural communication with
foreign people tended to become more aware of their ethnic Japanese origins, which
motivated them to read Nihonjinron. Elite people whose occupations involve managing
employees, such as school principals and executive-class elites, are more likely to read
Nihonjinron to learn strategies on how to deal with their employees and staff. By reading
about core values of Japanese culture, especially business culture, which most
Nihonjinron literature explains, they try to utilize these ideas to work cooperatively with
employees. Specifically, Nihonjinron helps executives connect what they have seen at
work with themes on Japanese behavioral characteristics, such as interpersonal
57
communication and group-oriented business practices. The theme of the books is not new
to them, but it provides “theoretical, conceptual and comparative perspectives on what
they already feel about their own society in one way or another” (Yoshino, 1992, p. 143).
In addition to the reader’s side, Yoshino (1992, 1999b) pays attention to the
“reproducer” and “distributor” (actually the same people) who play a role as
intermediaries between academic Nihonjinron theories and ordinary people. He points
out that “cross-cultural manuals,” also known as handbooks, English language-learning
materials, or glossaries, are often written by the staff of major Japanese companies which
have business partnerships with companies overseas.
Yoshino uses the example of the Nippon Steel Corporation’s Nippon: The Land
and Its People. The themes of this manual include Japanese society, culture, and national
characteristics. The manual is in accordance with Nihonjinron themes and is made for
practical communication use in international business settings. There is a conversation
manual for talking in English with foreign people. By encountering foreign people in
business, Japanese employees are required to explain Japanese culture and cultural
differences to non-Japanese customers. In these scenes, Nihonjinron books are the key
references in creating these manuals and help business people communicate well with
non-Japanese partners.
However, there is a major disadvantage in applying Nihonjinron themes to
develop cross-cultural communication manuals. As mentioned above, Nihonjinron
literature highlights peculiar patterns of Japanese behavior with the assumption that only
the Japanese would understand the peculiarity of their culture, including its extraordinary
ethno-nationalism. Those who use these manuals to master intercultural communication
58
with foreigners end up emphasizing Japanese cultural nationalism and delineating
boundaries between “us” and “them” (Yoshino, 1998). Cultural nationalism is defined by
Yoshino (1992) as:
Cultural nationalism aims to regenerate the national community by creating,
preserving or strengthening a people’s cultural identity when it is felt to be
lacking, inadequate or threatened. The cultural nationalist regards the nation as
the product of its unique history and culture and as a collective solidarity
endowed with unique attributes. In short, cultural nationalism is concerned with
the distinctiveness of the cultural community as the essence of a nation. (p. 2)
Therefore, it can be concluded that many producers of Nihonjinron end up
advancing the agenda of Nihonjinron. Nakamura (2005b) also points out that the
emphasis on the peculiarity of the Japanese based on a homogeneous culture would work
to develop mutual understanding among the Japanese, but would fail to embrace mutual
understanding of individuals beyond the country, such as international business partners.
The failure of mutual understanding at the individual level in the international field lies in
the fact that no country or group exists based on a homogeneous culture. Without a view
of multiculturalism based on common cultures beyond the concept of the nation-state, the
concept of humanitarian love does not grow in conversations that stress the peculiar
cultures of a particular nation.
To summarize, close examination of Nihonjinron writers, readers, and redistributors in the diffusion process reveals how the ideology is produced and
disseminated to the masses. The conclusion is: “Intellectuals write Nihonjinron as
prescription for behavior. The government turns it into a hegemonic ideology and the
corporate establishment puts it into practice” (Befu, 2001, p. 81).
59
National Identity Formation through Education
Transition of the Importance of Morality in the Post-War Era
Several authors claim that various educational policies since 1945 have slightly
moved back to the pre-war nationalistic focus of education (Parmenter, 1999). The postwar educational policies were created in battles between the Teachers’ Union and the
Ministry of Education in terms of how to use education to construct a national identity
(Horio, 1988, cited in Parmenter, 1999). The slight return to pre-war moral education
includes: Reintroduction of moral education in 1958 (Kobayashi, 1986); the influence of
the publication “The Image of the Desired Japanese” (See Spring 1998, p. 57-59 for
analysis of the content) on revised government teaching guidelines in 1968-69 (Hanai,
1996, cited in Parmenter, 1999); strengthening the desirability of using the national flag
and anthem in 1968, 1977, 1989 subsequently (Kanda, 1991, cited in Parmenter, 1999);
and the enactment of the Law Concerning the National Flag and Anthem of 1999.
Nakamara (2005b) also argues that the Ad Hoc Council on Education report of
1987 on The Japanese People in the World has been the fundamental guideline for
educational policies. This report raised one of the conditions for the Japanese in the world
as “those Japanese who claim the identity of Japanese culture in a wider international
perspective” (n.d.). Following this condition, the report released by the National
Commission on Educational Reform in 2000 stated:
For the purpose of maintaining the awareness and the identity as the Japanese
and of contributing to human beings, it is needed to respect and develop things
that must be taken over by the next generation of the Japanese, such as the
tradition and culture of our nation. (cited in Nakamura, 2005b, p. 153)
60
The 2003 report by the Central Council for Education (CCE) also stated:
It is important to cultivate the basis of education as human beings, the
awareness of being Japanese, and the heart to love and be proud of their
own region and country by deepening the understanding of
traditions/cultures of their own country and regions. (cited in Nakamura,
2005b, p. 153)
Main Actors to Educational Policies
According to Schoppa (1991, cited in Motani, 2005), historically, educational
policies, including the revision of the Fundamental Law of Education (FLE), were
influenced by the Conservatives. These included many bureaucrats of the Ministry of
Education and the most dominant ruling political party of post-war Japan, politicians in
the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), and the Progressives, such as the Teachers’ Union.
While the Conservatives advocate the inclusion of Japanese traditional values by revising
the FLE (and the Constitution), the Progressives tried to maintain the democratic
educational system, including the 1947 FLE.
However, in the 1980s, the special business interest group Zaikai started
influencing educational reforms, such as deregulation, privatization, and decentralization.
Prime Minister Nakasone from the LDP added the business sector’s interests to
educational reform agendas with buzz words like, “internationalization” and
“individualization.” The call for “internationalization” and “individualization” meant that
Nakasone wanted to use education as an instrument to help cultivate a creative
atmosphere with qualified people to further economic development. He, therefore,
pushed deregulation and the privatization of education to compete in the global market,
61
while Conservatives retained traditional Japanese culture as a response to globalization.
In sum, there was no contradiction in building the structure of both emphasizing
traditional values for “internationalization” and fostering privatization of education
(Motani, 2005).
Business elites are usually categorized as neoconservatives or neoliberals.
Neoconservatives support deregulation and the improvement of education in order to
respond to socioeconomic changes of globalization and computerization. They tend to
favor introducing the market competition mechanism for efficiency in education in place
of state-monopoly of education. This is on the grounds that the business model will
“stimulate creative endeavors, raise incentives to learn, and thus improve education”
(Fujita, 2000, p. 47).
On the other hand, the neoliberals want to maintain freedom and choice in
education, thus, opposing direct state control of education. They believe providing choice
of schools to students will release them from excessive standardized examinations
(Fujita, 2000).
In the 1990s, voices of progressive educators, whose power for educational
policies had been weakened in the 1980s were heard. Progressive educators connected to
active citizens to take initiatives of public issues. Due to socioeconomic change in the
1990s, the concept of citizens grew among some people, although it was a more foreign
concept than that of nationality (kokumin) among people. Those active citizens were
involved in civic activities, including nongovernmental organizations and volunteer
events. They supported deregulation and decentralization in order to take the initiative in
62
public issues. Although the reason for supporting deregulation and decentralization was
different than that of the business sector, their interests were in accord.
In summary, it turned out that the civil society, including the progressive
educators, supported the business elites’ neoliberal/neoconservative ideology.
Consequently, by the end of the 1990s, the educational ideology of Conservatives,
neoliberals, neoconservatives, and Progressives was met: Restoration of Japanese
traditional culture and the privatization and deregulation for economic globalization
(Motani, 2005).
Government Guidelines for Teaching
The government guidelines for teaching provide nationwide standards for
education courses in all public elementary, junior high, and high schools and various
kinds of special schools. Academic content and its details are based on the School
Education Law established in 1947. Current government teaching guidelines for junior
high schools, first seen in 1998, were implemented in 2002. The junior high schools’
guidelines for teaching are found in Chapter One (comprehensive rules), Chapter Two
(teaching fields), Chapter Three (moral education), and Chapter Four (special activities).
Teaching fields include nine required subjects: Japanese, social studies, mathematics,
science, music, art, health/gym class, workshop/home economics, foreign language, and
non-required subjects/activities, such as moral education, integrated studies, homeroom
activities, and electives (MEXT, 2002b).
English is the predominant language taught in “foreign language education” in
junior high schools, though the government guidelines do not specify it as the only one to
be offered. Moreover, foreign language has been one of the compulsory subjects since the
63
1998 guideline for teaching. Due to the change to requirement status, government
guidelines for teaching state that “English language is the subject to be studied as a
general rule” (MEXT, 2006, p. 3). Based on this rule, teaching guidelines display the
learning contents of English language in practice and states that “contents of other
foreign languages follow English language” (MEXT, 2006, p. 3).
As Table 1 shows, each grade has a total of 980 periods per school year. The total
periods of each subject indicate the priority of learning subjects. The highest priority in
required subjects is Japanese (350 periods), followed by math and foreign language (each
315 periods), followed by social studies (295 periods), and science (290 periods).
Integrated studies cover 210-335 periods and moral education 105.
Table 1: The Number of Classes Required for Each Subject Per Academic Year (Periods,
1 period = 50 minutes)
Grade Required subjects
Not-required
Total
JL
SS
Ma
Sc
FL
Mu
Ar
PE
HE
ME
IS
Ot
7th
140
105
105
105
105
45
45
90
70
35
70100
3565
980
8th
105
105
105
105
105
35
35
90
70
35
70105
85120
980
9th
105
85
105
80
105
35
35
90
35
35
70130
140200
980
Total
350
195
315
290
315 115
115
270
175
105
210335
260- 2940
385
Note. Ar = Art, F L = Foreign Language, HE = Home Economics, I S = Integrated studies, J L =
Japanese Language, Ma =Math, M E = Moral Education, Mu = Music, Ot = Others including
Homeroom Activities and Electives, P E = Physical Education, Sc = Science, and S S = Social Studies.
Created by Takeuchi (2009) with reference to the government general teaching guidelines. The
original chart provided by the government general teaching guidelines has Homeroom Activities and
Electives in separate columns, but I combined the two as Others.
64
Teachers’ manuals and textbooks are created and revised by private textbook
companies based on the content of the government guidelines for teaching. The Textbook
Authorization Council under the MEXT verifies and reviews all textbooks for their
appropriateness for use in schools. Once MEXT authorization is completed, the board of
education of each local school will choose one authorized textbook for each teaching
subject. Therefore, although the MEXT does not create its own textbook, the Ministry’s
perspectives are reflected in authorized textbooks through the textbook authorization
process (MEXT, July, 2007).
Integrated Studies
Integrated studies is a new subject area implemented in 2002 as a part of the
revision of the current government guidelines for teaching. According to the MEXT, the
goal of this study is to cultivate the “zest for living,” one of the main themes of the
current teaching guidelines. The objective of this study time is to meet needs of schools,
local communities, and students, by conducting creative educational activities across each
subject area. Suggested interdisciplinary fields are: International understanding,
information technology, environmental issues, and social welfare/health. Through
integrated studies, the MEXT seeks to guide students to cultivate the ability to combine
various aspects of a theme from what they learn in each subject into a comprehensive
knowledge base. Consequently, the MEXT expects students to develop a “zest for living”
(MEXT, n.d. b).
65
Major Perspectives of the MEXT
Parmenter (1999) analyzed the 1989 government junior high school guidelines
for teaching in terms of the promotion of nationalism. Her analysis provides important
insights into the perspectives of the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (MESC)1.
Yamawaki et al. (2001) pointed out that there are no major differences between the old
and the current guidelines for teaching in terms the MEXT view about national identity.
One of the predominant factors in the gap between educational policies and
realities in schools was evident in the Ministry’s assumption of national homogeneity
(Parmenter, 1999). The government guidelines for teaching of moral education states:
“The students were born and have been brought up in Japan. Thinking in that way, in
order for them to know themselves, it is necessary first for them to know about their own
country and their own country’s course of history.”2 This assumption about students in
Japanese schools did not capture realities, including the existence of foreign students,
“half-foreign” (one parent Japanese and the other foreign), and returnees from overseas
(Shimizu, 1998, cited in Parmenter, 1999).
Based on that assumption, however, the MESC emphasizes “the role of education
in developing students’ self-awareness as Japanese [national] and emotional attachment
to the nation” (Parmenter, 1999, p. 456). In addition, respect and love are the major
themes. For instance, one of the goals for Japanese language education is “to foster an
1
The Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (MESC) was restructured in 2001 as a part of
Central Government Reform. This Ministry was combined with the Science and Technology Agency
and was renamed the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). I use
both names, based on policies implemented prior to or after 2001. The Ministry of Education, Science
and Culture is used for policies prior to 2001, whereas the MEXT is used for policies after 2001.
2
The MESC Junior High School Guidelines: Moral Education, 1989, p. 41, cited in Parmenter, 1999.
66
attitude of respect for the national language”3; the recommendation for the history
guidelines is to respect national history and historical figures.4 These subject-specific
goals follow the Ministry’s policies, stating that “Japanese schools should ‘[a]ttach great
importance to the fostering of an attitude of respect for our country’s culture and
traditions.’”5
The use of respect is in accordance with the use of love for the nation.6 For
example, in social studies, one goal for civic education is “[t]o make [students] aware that
it is important to love their own country, to aim for its peace and prosperity, and to
heighten its culture.”7 Parmenter (1999) argues that the stress of love and respect in the
1989 government guidelines for teaching illustrates how reinforcement of the use of the
flag and anthem in schools is made in the context. Namely, the flag and anthem are the
tools to cultivate love and respect for the nation.
By the same token as Japanese language education, the Ministry of Education
puts a strong emphasis on national literature, music, art, history, government, and the
Constitution. Moreover, the Ministry promotes “the teaching of national culture and
traditions, and the Japanese way of life. The cultural (including linguistic) aspects of the
Japanese national group are those emphasized most frequently and most strongly by the
Ministry of Education” (Parmenter, 1999, p. 457). Thus, Parmenter (1999) concluded that
“national identity becomes inextricable from cultural identity” (p. 457).
3
The MESC Junior High School Guidelines: Moral Education, 1989, p. 12, & Junior High School
Teaching Guidelines, 1998, p. 1, cited in Parmenter, 1999.
4
The MESC Junior High School Guidelines: Social Studies, 1989, p. 29, cited in Parmenter, 1999.
5
The MESC Junior High School Guidelines: Moral Education, 1989, cited in Parmenter, 1999.
6
Junior High School Teaching Guidelines, 1998, cited in Parmenter, 1999.
7
The MESC Junior High School Guidelines: Social Studies, 1989, p. 37; Junior High School Teaching
Guidelines, 1998, p. 29, cited in Parmenter, 1999.
67
Similar perspectives about the importance of cultivating traditional cultures
among the Japanese in education were shared by Nakamura (2005a). He states:
In our recent educational theory, it is rare to be explicitly stated that our nation is
mono-ethnic. However, as the basis of developing the awareness as [ethnic]
Japanese, Japanese traditional culture is pointed out as being natural. It is
considered that the Japanese nation has a fixed traditional culture and the
Japanese national (citizens) must acquire all the same traditional cultural traits. It
is not considered that Japanese traditional culture has many different kinds.
Tacitly, I must claim that it is assumed that our country is a mono-ethnic country.
Or, it might be assumed to become a mono-ethnic nation. (Nakamura, 2005a, p.
103)
Nakamura’s statement clarifies the contradiction of educational policies which Parmenter
(1999) examined with the case of the 1989 government teaching guidelines. It is not
explicitly stated except in some politicians’ speeches about homogeneity; yet, what is
assumed in the description of these teaching guidelines shows nationalistic and patriotic
directions of education.
The 1989 government guidelines for teaching followed the role of public school
systems to support the nation-state. Spring (2004) states:
Public school systems serve the nation-state by creating a shared experience as
students; developing a sense of nationhood and a common culture through
teaching a national history and literature; instilling emotional loyalty to the
nation-state through patriotic exercises, flag salutes, and nationalistic rhetoric
and song; and educating a citizenry that accepts the legitimacy of the
government and their own political role within the system….In summary, the
nation-state uses education to prepare a disciplined citizen and worker. (p. 3)
As Spring (2004) describes above, what the 1989 government guidelines for teaching
stress is an essential element of developing loyal citizens for the nation-state.
Although the importance of national tradition and culture is emphasized
throughout the guidelines, what are these national traditions and cultures? Nakamura
68
(2005a), who referred to various examples of literature on the selection of particular
national tradition and culture, claims that so-called “national traditions and cultures” were
picked, chosen, or re-discovered from the variety of cultures that existed in different
regions and people in history. These were remodeled and nominated as national cultures.
Currently nominated national cultures in policies and guidelines had been created after
the Meiji Era (1868-1912). The selection process of particular events and arts had also
been a process of “weakening diverse traditional cultures conveyed in various regions of
the nation and oppressing cultures of each minority group who consisted of the nation.”
(p. 102).
Patriotism in the Kokoro-no-nōto
For the purposes of the state, moral education is a major way of spreading
patriotic ideas to students because people resist state imposition of nationalistic symbols,
including the national flag and singing of the national anthem at schools. Values of
“harmony,” “cooperation,” and “Japaneseness” are taught in moral education. The
Kokoro-no-nōto exemplifies the imposition of patriotism in narrations (Takeuchi, 2006)
and in 2002 was distributed by the MEXT to all elementary and junior high schools. The
material has three versions for elementary schools (for first and second graders, for third
and fourth graders, and for fifth and sixth graders). There is also one version for junior
high schools.
Unlike official textbooks, this book is called “sub-reading material” by the MEXT,
which does not require any citizen verification of appropriateness to use in schools.
Despite the Kokoro-no-nōto being sent to each school as a printed text, the MEXT
requested a report on how frequently a school used it in summer, 2002. Thus, Miyake
69
(2003) argues that this book is a de-facto national textbook published by the MEXT
without authors’ names. It can also be interpreted that the goal of the state, namely
creating ideal Japanese citizens, is imposed on schools (Itsumi, 2003). Moreover,
according to discussions in Parliament and the MEXT Report, the purpose of this book is
to diffuse national canons through children and to parents, families, and communities.
The Kokoro-no-nōto book consists of four topics: 1) about oneself, 2) relation
with others, 3) relation with nature and life, and 4) relation with groups and society.
These topics are in accordance with government guidelines for teaching moral education
and are aimed clearly at being used as moral education teaching material (Itsumi, 2003).
A controversial section is the Love for Japan and Hope for Its Progress section
of the book for junior high school students. The section begins:
In our nation, there are four distinct seasons (spring, summer, autumn, and
winter) and a beautiful climate. In each season, there are impressive scenes,
sounds, colors, and winds which touch our hearts. When we expand our love of
our homeland, our love connects to the love of Japan. It is natural to hope for
further progress. But, how much do we know about our country? Now, we are
going to learn about Japan steadily and re-recognize our great tradition and
culture. (The MEXT, 2002a, p. 114)
Takahashi (2003, in Takahashi & Miyake, 2003) warns that these sentences describe the
presence of the nation and patriotism as natural, although they are socially created. There
is a gap between a hometown we can see and a nation we cannot see; however, these are
linked as if they are naturally connected (Miyake, 2003, in Takahashi & Miyake, 2003).
Moreover, by emphasizing “great tradition and culture,” the narration intentionally
excludes other things, including the history of wars, conflicts, and oppression of minority
groups (Miyake, 2003, in Takahashi & Miyake, 2003).
70
Furthermore, the question of who is included in “we” in the narration is critical. If
“we” includes those who possess Japanese ethnicity, the narrations need to explain the
diversity among Japanese citizens due to the existence of minority groups, including
Ainu, Burakumin, Okinawans, Korean residents, and so on. However, the narration fails
to let readers imagine cultural diversity within Japan. It is expressed as if each reader
shares the same traditions, culture, background, and hope for the nation. In sum, the
identity as Japanese people has already been taught in these narrations before a child tries
to identify who he or she is in the process of writing his or her reflections in the textbook
(Miyake, 2003, in Takahashi & Miyake, 2003).
Then, the narration continues as follows:
When we see the greatness of this country, and try to continue its greatness,
loving Japan should not exclusively praise our nation [because we are] a member
of the international society and are global citizens. Love for this country
connects with love for the world. (MEXT, 2002a, p. 114)
In these sentences, the combination of the love of hometown and patriotism is similar to
the tendency of wartime education whose model was Nazi Germany’s educational policy.
As with the Nazis, the strategy of nurturing love from hometown to nation was actually
used during World War II in Japan. However, the phrase “loving Japan should not
exclusively praise our nation [because we are] a member of the international society and
are global citizens” is emphasized. Since this is a de-facto moral education
workbook/textbook (Miyake, 2003, in Takahashi & Miyake, 2003), its content impacts
the teaching and learning of moral education themes in classrooms.
Homeroom teachers create lesson plans for moral education classes based on the
government guidelines for teaching moral education, teachers’ manuals, and the Kokoro-
71
no-nōto which are all distributed by the MEXT. Government guidelines for teaching
consist of objectives, contents, and details based on the School Education Law
established in 1947. The government guidelines for teaching in elementary schools,
partially revised in 2002, state that the goal of moral education is “the cultivation of
moralities, such as moral heart, sense, eagerness for practices, and attitude, through
overall educational activities at schools” (MEXT, 2002b).
Moral education classes are divided by lower-graders (first and second), middlegraders (third and fourth), upper-graders (fifth and sixth), and junior high school (seventh
to ninth). In addition to this division of grades, the moral education content constitutes
four themes: 1) oneself, 2) about relation with others, 3) relation with nature and
something divine, and 4) relation with groups and society. As the students’ grade level
increases, more complexities and specifics are included in each of the themes.
Revised Fundamental Law of Education
The Fundamental Law of Education (FLE), created in 1947, was revised in
December, 2006. The major changes and reasons for the revision of the FLE were
described in a comment from the former minister of the MEXT, Ibuki. He specified that
the current issues in education necessitated the revision of FLE:
Under the previous FLE constituted in 1947, education of our country had been
fully developed. Education had played an important role in achieving many
things, such as a driving force in accomplishing an affluent economic society
and a stable life. However, once over a half century had passed since 1947, the
environment of our country changed dramatically and many issues have
occurred, including the advancement of scientific and information technology,
internationalization, falling birthrates, and the collapse of family life. Therefore,
in this revised FLE, while we have maintained its universal philosophies, we
have ruled the educational philosophies which we now seek, such as the spirit
for the public which is also ‘a commitment to a public norm’ which the Japanese
previously possessed. We proposed that the law embrace the importance of
‘consciousness for norm’ and respect for the tradition and culture which
72
produced the norm as it was believed to be especially important to current
educational goals. (MEXT, n.d. a)
The original 1947 FLE claimed that receiving an education was a basic right for
the people linked with the spirit of the Constitution (Mainichi shinbun, 9 September,
1999, cited in Okada, 2002). However, since the establishment of the law, the LDP, the
dominant ruling political party of post-war Japan, has criticized it for highlighting
American democratic ideas of post-war schooling, not traditional Japanese values.
The Education Reform National Council (ERNC) was established in March, 2000,
to create an educational reform agenda proposed by former Prime Minister Obuchi. The
council members consisted of representative business elites, the MEXT bureaucracy,
Obuchi’s own intellectuals, and some progressive educators. The chairman was a Nobel
Prize winner Leona Ezaki. The chairman stressed the involvement of business sectors in
the formal state education (Okada, 2002). Ezaki’s stance clearly illustrates the shared
interests of Conservatives, the neoliberals/neoconservatives, and Progressives.
Furthermore, ERNC members could be categorized either as Conservatives, including
Obuchi’s own intellectuals and the bureaucrats, or Progressives, such as progressive
educators.
The discussion of revision of the FLE by the LDP politicians began with criticism
of the American-style democratic education. Advocacy for the amendment of the law
proposed by LDP stemmed from five educational concerns. The LDP argued that the
original law was:
(1) not created by the autonomous will of the Japanese people but ‘imposed’ by
American officials; (2) modeled on foreign thoughts based on a different
historical and cultural tradition; (3) doing considerable damage to Japanese
traditional values as a result of too much emphasis being placed on
73
‘individuality,’ or kosei; (4) too liberal to suit the conservative image of what
Japanese education should be; and (5) lacking in assertion of the importance of
Japanese ‘traditional’ morality and values such as pledging people’s loyalty to the
State, filial piety, family obligation, etc. (Kyoiku no sengoshi henshu iinkai 1986,
pp. 198-257; Okada, 1998, cited in Okada, 2002, pp. 428-429).
The view of the LDP towards the previous FLE was that the provisions were foreign to
Japanese cultural values.
Table 2 highlights amendments in the FLE between the original in 1947 on the
left side and the revised version on the right side.
74
Table 2. A Chart Showing Amendments in the Fundamental Law of Education (continued on page 75)
The Original Fundamental Law of Education in 1947
The Revised Fundamental Law of Education in 2006
Original Statement
Elements
Revised Statement
Added Elements
Eliminated from
the Original
Statement
- respect the spirit of
-education aimed
Premise
Premise
the public, and
… We shall esteem individual dignity and at the creation of
…In order to accomplish this ideal, we
possess humanity and
culture, general
endeavor to bring up the people who love
shall esteem individual dignity and
creativity
and rich in
endeavor to bring up the people who love
truth and peace, while education aimed at
individuality
the creation of culture, general and rich in
truth and justice, respect the spirit of the
- [education aimed at]
individuality, shall be spread far and wide.
public, and possess humanity and
the inheritance of
creativity, while education aimed at the
inheritance of tradition and the creation of tradition
culture shall be spread far and wide.
Article 1: Aim of Education
Education shall aim at the full development
of personality, striving for the rearing of
the people, sound in mind and body, who
shall love truth and justice, esteem
individual value, respect labor and have a
deep sense of responsibility, and be
imbued with the independent spirit, as
builders of a peaceful state and society.
Article 2: Educational Principle
-love truth and
justice,
- esteem
individual value
- independent
spirit
Article 2: Objectives of Education
The aim of education is to achieve the
purpose [mentioned in Article 1], thus,
education shall be conducted to achieve
the following goals.
- Gain broader
knowledge and
sophistication
- an aesthetic
1. Gain broader knowledge and
sophistication, cultivate the attitude to seek sentiment and
morality, and grow a
an aesthetic sentiment and morality, and
healthy body
grow a healthy body.
2. Respect individual values, help grow its
ability and creativity, cultivate
independence and the spirit of autonomy,
- [help grow] its
ability and creativity
- [cultivate] the spirit
75
The aim of education shall [be] realized on
all occasions and in all places. In order to
achieve the aim, we shall endeavor to
contribute to the creation and development
of culture by mutual esteem and
cooperation, respecting academic freedom,
having a regard to actual life and
cultivating a spontaneous spirit.
- a spontaneous
spirit
and develop the attitude to link occupation
and life and to work hard.
of autonomy
- [develop the attitude
to link] occupation
3. Respect justice and responsibility, the
equal rights of men and women, and their
love and cooperation, while cultivating the
attitude to participate in and contribute to
the formation of the society voluntarily.
- the equal rights of
men and women
- cultivating the
attitude to participate
in and contribute to
the formation of the
society voluntarily
4. Develop the attitude to respect life and
nature, and to contribute to the
environmental security.
-Develop the attitude
to respect life and
nature, and to
contribute to the
environmental
security
5. Develop the attitude to respect tradition
and culture, love our nation and homeland
which developed traditions and culture,
while developing the attitude to respect
other countries and to contribute to the
peace and advancement of international
society.
Note. All shaded portions are the elements eliminated or added.
abc Blue eliminated
abc Yellow added
76
There are some concerns about the revised FLE. Okada (2002) claims that it has
shifted from a post-war democratic educational policy to the pre-war Imperial Rescript
system. Features of the pre-war Imperial Rescript system lie in ultra-nationalism or
militarism. Under militarism, the school curriculum focused on moral training to cultivate
imperial subjects of the emperor (Marshall, 1994; Schoppa, 1991; MEXT, 2001, all cited
in Okada, 2002).
Contemporary Educational Issues in Japan
One of the contemporary educational issues in schools is the educationexamination system focusing mainly on test-taking skills which help students enter
academic high schools or prestigious universities (McVeigh, 2004). However, in reality,
meritocracy is a rationalization of the state to facilitate state-guided economic
nationalism. Yoneyama (1999) explains the Japanese education system as follows:
“[w]hat in fact is referred to as meritocracy in Japan is the highly developed examination
system which involves all students. The system is admitted even officially to be the
equivalent of the Japanese education system itself (p. 45, cited in McVeigh, 2004, p.
128). Due to examination-obsession, most students become anti-learning by the time they
enter universities.
McVeigh (2004) illustrates a kind of “dual education” within the educationexamination system: elite and mass education. There is no explicit elite or mass
education; however, the way meritocracy works through standardized tests differentiates
elites from the masses. Elite education provides the necessary skills to work in well-
77
known companies or civil service, whereas mass education creates citizens who work in
factories and private companies. In other words, education-examinationcorporate linkages are tightly connected and are perpetuated by formal education
associated with the state power. Steven (1983) states: [w]hat people do at work and what
they receive in return seem to be shaped by what they are or have made themselves
through their education. Upper-class life has been made to look like a reward for
educational success and working-class life a punishment for laziness and a lack of ability
(p. 291, cited in McVeigh, 2004, p. 17). The division of elite or mass education is
obvious in three types of high schools: [a]cademic schools (73.2% of students),
vocational schools (25%), and “integrated curriculum” combined academic and
vocational training (1.7%) (MTY, 2001, cited in McVeigh, 2004).
In this process of stratification in education, the socioeconomic status of parents
strongly influences students’ test scores for high schools and higher education. Affluent
families use supplemental instruction at private institutions, including home tutors, cram
schools, and preparatory schools, in addition to regular schooling. Therefore, higher
socioeconomic status of class plays an important role in providing elite education to help
enter prestigious universities and then to be hired at well-known companies four years
later.
Despite the stratification of education through the education-examination system,
ordinary citizens believe in meritocracy in education and a classless society of Japan. The
myth of meritocracy and a “classless” society is closely linked with moral education
classes. The linkage of schooling-testing-industry-state contains moral components, such
as hierarchy, in-group/out-group, and role-acquisition (Khan, 1997, cited in McVeigh,
78
2004). Similar to the core values of Nihonjinron, moral education materials encourage
students to learn “Japaneseness”—“Japanese should act a certain way—study hard, take
tests, act and think collectively, etc.—because they were born Japanese” (McVeigh,
2000b, cited in McVeigh, 2004, p. 17). In other words, the ideological domination is
maintained by moral components of schooling.
Consequently, “the hidden curriculum of ‘Japaneseness’ and values of ‘harmony’
and ‘cooperation’ help hide class divisions (Takeuchi, 1995, pp. 233-237; Kariya, 1995,
p. 141, cited in McVeigh, 2004, p. 134). McVeigh (2004) concludes that “notions such as
‘egalitarian’ and ‘meritocracy’—propagated by Japan’s education-examination system—
go a long way in legitimating the status quo” (p. 134).
Another concern is that the diversification of education, such as the six-year state
secondary system, and “freedom of choice” in neoliberal/neoconservative ideology,
might widen the gap between the ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’ of a higher quality of
education. Thus, the quality of education relies heavily on the economic and social class
of students’ parents (Okada, 2002). In fact, the diversification of education is another way
of dividing elite and mass education. McVeigh (2004) argues that, although people
believe in an egalitarian society, the Japanese education system reproduces
socioeconomic classes by “differences in family socialization processes, stratification in
high school culture, and macroscopic patterns of social mobility” (Sugimoto, 1997, pp.
117-120, cited in McVeigh, 2004, p. 133). Therefore, it is a false rationalization to claim
that the purpose of standardized examination is to provide equal opportunity to every
child (McVeigh, 2004).
79
For the last ten years, criticisms of “examination hell” have spread in public,
mainly through mass media. Some provisions to reduce the intensity of nationwide
examinations were the reduction of school days to five days per week, and decreasing the
amount of curriculum content proclaimed in the 1999 reform of government guidelines
for teaching. The reform was applied only to the public schools. The private school
curriculum did not need to be changed because of this national curriculum reform. Thus,
some scholars, such as Fujita (1999) and Satō (1999), urged that school choices and
diversification of education intensify competitions among private schools ruled by
consumer choice (both cited in Cave, 2001).
Issues of Uncertain Words
In contrast to specific issues and concerns surrounding patriotism, moral
education, and diversification of education, Cave (2001) insists on the danger of
educational ideology in the government, the MEXT, and business sectors, as well as
progressive educators and critics behind slogans in reforms, such as the 1999 government
guidelines for teaching reform. In this reform, the Progressives were in favor of increased
freedom in curriculum and a five-day school week, whereas neoliberals, Conservatives,
and the business sector supported the relaxation of school catchment areas (district).
Other reforms related to six-year secondary schools, high school diversification, and
grade-skipping are under debate supported by neoliberals, Conservatives, and the
business sector (Cave, 2001).
In general, buzz words, such as “privatization,” “choice,” and “decentralization,”
are influences of neoliberalism and economic globalization in educational policies. These
words are used in policy formations in order to rationalize policies and reforms (Burbules
80
& Torres, 2000). In the case of Japan, the ambiguous buzz words are
“internationalization” (Lincicome, 1993) and “individuality” (Cave, 2001). Cave (2001)
explains the danger of the ambiguous meaning of “individuality” as follows:
The term, ‘individuality,’ whose protean nature makes its public appeal very
broad, particularly within the context of a general public perception that Japanese
education is too rigid and uniform. The term’s uncertain meaning also means that
it can be used as an all-embracing slogan, covering a variety of reforms which
have different implications and which appeal to different sectors of the public. (p.
184)
He argues that these buzz words in fact help the government proceed with its
educational reform due to uncertain meanings which could turn out to have multiple
interpretations. Cave (2001) states:
The government has thus been able to construct a reform program … with
relatively broad appeal, despite the inevitable criticisms it has faced, and has also
been able to keep its policy option open for the future, since a number of its most
controversial reforms are only in their initial stages and are being introduced
very gradually. The price of ambiguity, on the other hand, has been to maintain
uncertainty about the government’s real long-term intentions. (p. 184)
As Burbules and Torres (2000) stress, these buzz words are used to justify the
governmental agenda. In conclusion, revised FLE, patriotism, moral education,
educational disparities through privatization, and the progress of other reform policies
and measurements are somewhat interrelated. The governmental ideology through
education will definitely impact the education of current and future students. These shifts
toward pre-war imperialistic education and intensification of educational disparities are
the influence of globalization on Japanese education.
To sum up, national identity is formed through educational policies and
provisions, including government guidelines for teaching, the Kokoro-no-nōto, and the
81
revised FLE. These involve nationalistic features in common that policymakers and the
MEXT incorporate into the national curriculum. These policies are taught in moral
education classes and create the hidden curriculum of ‘Japaneseness’ and value of
‘harmony’ and ‘cooperation.’
In contrast, the hidden curriculum works to cloud the existence of “dual
education” that sorts students into elite and mass education, as well as the influence of
socioeconomic class. Other major trends in education include the influence of
neoliberal/neoconservative policies, such as the six-year state secondary system and
choices of public schools.
An Alternative for Homogeneous Policies: Multiculturalism
Background of the Increase in Newcomers
My observation of the growing numbers of newcomers in my region is in
accordance with the latest population census. The rapid increase of foreign residents
between 1996 and 2006 resulted from the settlement of immigrants from the 1980s. The
mobilization of people across national borders resulting from economic globalization
influenced Japanese immigration policies. In the 1980s, the Japanese government started
accepting Indochinese refugees and Japanese returnees from China as permanent
residents.
In 1990, the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act was revised,
allowing first- to third-generation South Americans to settle legally in Japan. As a result,
large numbers of Brazilians began to work in factories in prefectures including Aichi,
Shizuoka, and Gunma. In addition, Japan invited agricultural and technological trainees,
82
mainly from Asia, to learn skills and technologies in Japan (Ministry of Internal Affairs
and Communications, 2006, March).
The number of newcomers is expected to grow more in the near future (Ministry
of Justice Immigration Bureau, 2008, June). It is estimated that the Japanese labor force
will decrease in the near future because of the declining birth rate. Moreover, the large
population of baby boomers after World War II will retire. Because of these phenomena,
Japan will encounter an aging society (Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications,
2006, March).
Therefore, the government has negotiated with other countries regarding
acceptance of more immigrants through the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA). An
aspect of EPA related to the growth of the immigrant population is the relaxation of work
permit conditions for professionals and skilled laborers, as well as the promotion of short
visits, specifically geared toward business people, to promote interaction of people across
borders.
As of June, 2007, the government had signed agreements with several countries.
The agreement with the Philippines included Japan’s acceptance of nurses and health care
workers. The agreement with Thailand included instructors for Thai culture, such as
dance, music, and food (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Economic Department, 2007,
June). As this shows, more immigrants would further change the demography of the
Japanese population.
83
Teachers’ Instruction for JSL Students in Schools
According to the MEXT, the number of foreign pupils and students needed for
JSL instruction8 in public schools increases every year. The latest data from the MEXT
(2008a August, 2008b August), show 25,411 students needed Japanese instruction, an
increase of 13.4% from the 2006 data of 22,413 students. Among the 25,411 students,
elementary schools have the largest number (18,142), followed by junior high schools
(5,978), high schools (1,182), and others (109). From classification by native language,
Portuguese is the dominant native language of these pupils and students (10,206, 38.5%
of the total), followed by Chinese (5,051, 19.9%), and Spanish (3,484, 14.6%).
The MEXT data (2008b August) also states that JSL instruction is required not
only for children with foreign resident status, but also for some children holding Japanese
nationalities. The number of Japanese nationals needing JSL instruction also increased,
by 13.3% (4,383 students), in 2007 from the 2006 data of 3,868 students. Moreover, the
actual number of students who take JSL instruction in schools is 21,206 out of 25,411
students who are recognized as needing JSL instruction, equivalent to 83.5% availability
of JSL instruction in schools.
One reason why old-time Koreans did not capture media attention would be that
they did not need JSL instruction, which made them invisible in schools (Matsunami,
2004, p. 182, cited in Okano, 2006). In sum, the myth that all children in Japanese
schools are ethnic Japanese has been created under the pressure of silencing the ethnic
heritages and backgrounds of domestic/indigenous minority groups in schools.
8
In the survey, “foreign pupils and students needed for Japanese as a second language (JSL)
instruction” is defined as “pupils and students who require Japanese language instructions. They are
not only pupils and students with skills insufficient for daily communications, but also those who have
sufficient communication skills, but lack language for their own grade level and cause obstacles for
participation in learning activities.” (the MEXT, 2008a, August)
84
In addition to the myth of homogeneity of schools, an educational philosophy of
egalitarianism that “all children are treated the same” prevails in the schools (Tsuneyoshi,
2003, cited in Gordon, 2006). Egalitarianism in schools works to provide the same
materials, teach at the same pace, and often no additional support for particular students
(Gordon, 2006). In other words, students need to share a high level of commonalities,
such as a common language, a shared belief system and behavioral norms, family
stability, and a sense of belonging (Tsuneyoshi, 2001, cited in Gordon, 2006). Shimizu et
al. (1999, cited in Gordon, 2006) also mention that the belief of egalitarianism makes it
difficult for teachers to recognize the unique qualities and needs of each student.
Shimizu (2000) illustrates how the traditional view of education among teachers
influences their judgment of students. The traditional view includes de-contextualization,
homogenization, and individualization. De-contextualization means that teachers try to
exclude differences, such as their family backgrounds and cultures that students bring to
classrooms, rather than utilizing them. Based on the exclusion of different contexts,
teachers try to treat all students as members of a homogeneous group, using expressions
of “my class” or “our school,” examples of homogenization.
In addition to de-contextualization and homogenization, teachers consider each
student’s problem to stem from the student himself or herself (individualization).
Therefore, teachers urge students to seek their own solutions through further efforts and
enthusiasm. Singleton (1989, cited in Gordon, 2006) also observes that the teachers
believe that the ethic of hard work will bring success regardless of the children’s
backgrounds. Shimizu (2000) warns that these features contain risks of trying to make
children fit the ideal model of students and of evaluating them without considering
85
differences and personalities among students. From another angle, teachers would
evaluate students’ efforts of performing better under the same instruction for everybody.
It also means that they would not find reasons in familial backgrounds and sociocultural
contexts for those students who perform poorly.
Kojima (2002) claims that teachers manage the differences of new immigrant
students in two ways: The unification and the fixed. The unification of the management
of differences means that any kinds of differences immigrant students have are managed
in the same ways as for Japanese students. The unification of differences is a strategy to
take in any differences in the school culture for forced assimilation. If immigrant students
show outcomes different from those of Japanese students in response to the same
management by teachers, such as low motivations for learning, the outcomes are seen as
the result of individual personalities and efforts as mentioned above.
Kojima’s (2002) second point of the fixed management in teachers’ dealing with
new immigrant students’ differences takes place when immigrant students’ actions go
beyond the school framework of adaptation to the school culture. When teachers failed to
take in their differences, immigrant students no longer tried to conform like other
students in general. Their actions were seen as peculiar behavior and were allowed in the
name of cultural differences. They were rather excluded from the framework of school
culture. Their differences from Japanese culture were fixed and emphasized as teachers’
justification for exclusion.
Teachers’ management of difference is used as a means to rationalize guidance
for the Japanese students. A successful outcome for immigrant students is a secondary
matter for teachers (Kojima, 2002).
86
Concept of Multicultural Coexistence
The Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications was reluctant to respond to
local communities’ requests to change various governmental institutions to address issues
of accepting foreign residents as citizens. However, in March of 2006, the Ministry, in
the report, The Research Committee Report Regarding the Promotion of Multicultural
Coexistence: Toward Promoting Multicultural Coexistence in Communities (Ministry of
International Affairs and Communications, March, 2006), announced policies and
programs to facilitate a society with multicultural coexistence. According to this report,
“multicultural coexistence” occurs in a society where “people with any differences,
including nationality and ethnicity, are able to live together as citizens of local societies
through trying to accept cultural differences and establish equal relations among people”
(Ministry of International Affairs and Communications, March, 2006, p. 5).
Keizō Yamawaki, the chairperson of this research committee, and Chikako
Kashiwazaki, a committee member, along with Atsushi Kondō, argued in the article
Immigrant Nation, Japan’s Conditions (2000) that Japan needs to embrace a new national
identity based on civil rights and public culture. Yamawaki et al. (2000) claim:
civil rights and public culture become the origin of common consciousness
among people, such as equal rights and responsibility as citizens, nation’s
fundamental principle including democracy, and shared values such as
respecting multiculturalism. If people are able to participate in society equally
regardless of ethnic background, and realize that their cultural identity is
assured, cultivating solidarity as participants of the same political community
is possible. Moreover, such solidarity can be strengthened by togetherness
based on popular culture or economic activities. (pp. 4-5)
According to Yamawaki et al. (2000), the exclusion of nonethnic Japanese from
participating in economic and political activities is not a realistic solution when
87
predicting further growth of immigrants for the future. The conventional national identity
regards ethnic Japanese customs and traditions as the national culture. From my
viewpoint, this national stance was maintained through emphasizing the majority
consensus and silencing the voices of subordinate groups. However, when the numbers of
subordinate groups increase with new immigrants, the power relationship between the
majority and minority will alter. As a result, current policies and customs maintained by
the majority consensus would not provide sufficient protection to keep a safe living
environment without large-scale conflicts between groups.
In order to deal with this multiethnic reality for the future, Yamawaki et al. (2000)
propose a new framework of civil rights and public culture beyond the binary of the
ethnic Japanese and the foreigners mentioned above. Building a new framework begins
with educating the ethnic Japanese to raise awareness of diversity among people. This
sort of education would foster connectedness in a larger and inclusive framework beyond
ethnicity. It is also important to eliminate examination of issues from the conventional
dichotomy of the Japanese and the foreign residents.
Nakamura (2005b) claims that there is a difference between the former national
education in the framework of the nation-state and public education in the international
era in terms of what students need to learn. As discussed earlier, national education in
Japan has paid special attention to uniting citizens based on the sameness of culture by
educating them about traditions and disseminating the ethononational identity as Japanese.
In contrast, according to Nakamura (2005b), public education in the international era
should focus on cultivating a spirit of mutual understanding and cooperation beyond
differences of culture at the individual level, regardless of nationality. This kind of
88
education must teach cultures that embrace universal values for human beings. This claim
is based on the presumption that each nation is a multicultural society. Thus, education
must teach cultures everybody accepts, as universally valuable cultures.
To sum up, multicultural realities with the increasing needs for foreign labor for
the future show that the enrollment of foreign students will continue to grow. It also
indicates that JSL classes and other school provisions are required to accommodate these
foreign students. Because of the changing demography of schools authors such as
Yamawaki et al. (2000) and Nakamura (2005b) argue the importance of shifting the
traditional public school education based on the nation-state concept to an education to
embrace the concept of citizenship beyond the dichotomy of the Japanese and foreigners.
Theoretical Framework
As shown by my own school experience, described at the beginning of this
chapter, the main role of public schools is to disseminate cultural transmission and to
maintain social order. A functional analysis might assess the extent to which schools
transmit appropriate behavior, values, attitudes, and norms for students through
education. In my experience, proper behavior included following collective values and
hierarchical rules as a student within the social order. The appropriate cultural behavior
and values are centered on a consensus of older generations in order to diffuse their core
values to new generations through schooling. By the rule of consensus, schools reinforce
the existing socio-political order and equilibrium, such as the maintenance of hierarchy
among school administrators, teachers, and students.
In conflict theory, maintenance of class structure can be explained by three
models: Economic, cultural, and hegemonic state reproduction. Economic reproduction
89
illustrates that stratification among students occurs in tracking and test-taking processes.
Students learn their positions and particular roles in the occupational hierarchy.
Contemporary Educational Issues in Japan illustrated how formal education perpetuates
the status quo through the direct linkage of education, examinations, and occupations. In
the cultural reproduction model, curricular content transmits upper-class values to all
students regardless of their social class. Such content includes the “political nature of
curriculum content as well as in cultural and linguistic practices embedded in the formal
curriculum” (deMarrais & LeCompte, 1999, p. 14). Government guidelines for teaching,
and the main theme of this dissertation research, are examples of cultural reproduction
through public education.
Hegemonic state reproduction explains how governmental involvement in the
educational system is powerful in enforcing policies and reproducing education itself.
Giroux (1983a, 1983b, cited in deMarrais & LeCompte, 1999) argues that the hegemonic
power of the state in schooling is reflected both in formal curriculum and in school
routines and social relationships (deMarrais & LeCompte, 1999). This research focuses
mainly on the state’s hegemonic power in teaching and learning of diversity issues in a
public school.
Hegemony
The term “hegemony,” coined by Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci (1971, cited
in Langman, 1998), means the ideological control of culture that organized general
understanding to elicit ‘willing assent’ [italics in original] to elite power and acceptance
of inequality as ‘normal’ (Langman, 1998, p. 186). Hegemony is “dominance and
subordination in the field of relations structured by power” (Hall, 1985, cited in Lull,
90
2003, p. 61). But hegemony is “more than social power itself; it is a method for gaining
and maintaining power” (Lull, 2003, p. 61).
According to Gramsci (1971), a superstructure, consisting of the domination of
the ruling class over others, is maintained by two types of institutions: those which are
overtly coercive and those which are not. The coercive institutions are mostly public
institutions, including the government, police, armed forces, and the legal system. The
noncoercive ones, whose form of control is based on consent (Morrow & Torres, 1995),
are generally considered as civil society, such as churches, schools, trade unions, political
parties, cultural associations, clubs, and the family.
Gramsci (1971) insists that schools function in both forms of control: coercion
and consent. The public feature of education, such as compulsory education, a national
curriculum, national standards, and qualifications, are coercive; others, including hidden
curricula, are categorized as noncoercive (Burke, 1999 & 2005). The coercive institutions
maintain political power, while the civil society holds ideological domination because of
a close linkage with the economy and private institutions (Morrow & Torres, 1995). In
the case of Japanese education, the education-examination system, moral education, and
patriotism are all categorized as coercive control, while the noncoercive force would be
“Japaneseness” included in hidden curricula.
As elite and mass education, the Kokoro-no-nōto, and patriotism in the revised
FLE show, the subtle but pervasive forms of ideological control spread and are
reproduced “throughout society of an entire system of values, attitudes, beliefs and
morality that has the effect of supporting the status quo in power relations. Hegemony in
this sense might be defined as an organi[z]ing principle that is diffused by the process of
91
sociali[z]ation into every area of daily life” (Burke, 1999 & 2005, p. 3). This is how the
value systems of the ruling class are internalized as “common sense” by the subordinate
groups (Boggs, 1976, p. 39, cited in Burke, 1999 & 2005, p. 3). Because of these
everyday realities of modern societies, “Gramsci’s theory of hegemony … connects
ideological representation to culture” (Lull, 2003, p. 62).
Here, I apply the concept of hegemony for cultural nationalism in Japanese
society, including formal education and Nihonjinron. Befu (2001) concluded from the
diffusion of Nihonjinron that “intellectuals write Nihonjinron as a prescription for
behavior. The government turns it into a hegemonic ideology, and the corporate
establishment puts it into practice” (Befu, 2001, p. 81). Moral education contents are
similar to some aspects of Nihonjinron, since cultural policies are constructed by the
collaboration of the state and Nihonjinron writers. The same authors publish their books
to popularize “Japaneseness” to readers, mainly business elites, educators, and students.
Some readers reproduce Nihonjinron contents by articulating distinct Japanese behavior
in their daily life and spreading this information to a broader public. In other words,
cultural nationalism is disseminated to students through moral education and to adults
through informal Nihonjinron literature (Yoshino, 2002). Since Nihonjinron literature is
full of ambiguous explanations and is selective in eliminating complex realities of
culture, it cannot be concluded that Nihonjinron is exactly in accordance with the
contents of the moral education workbook/textbook. However, core values as “the
Japanese” are similarly mentioned in the moral education workbook/textbook and
Nihonjinron.
92
The wide-spread cultural nationalistic idea of “Japaneseness” through formal
education and adult socialization is convenient for the state, since citizens resist state
imposition of nationalistic symbols, including the national flag and singing of the
national anthem at schools. In order to secure the diffusion of cultural nationalism in
formal education, the government requested a report from schools on the usage of the
Kokoro-no-nōto. In addition, the revised FLE explicitly introduced the importance of
moral education and the respect for traditional Japanese culture and values. From this
perspective, this entire system of diffusion of cultural nationalism itself is a major
example of hegemonic power of the state to control citizens.
Social Reproduction Theory
Gramsci (1971), Giddens (1984), and Bourdieu (1977) show that social
reproduction occurs when subordinate groups of people consider inequality of power as a
reality of daily life and maintain daily values and behaviors as subordinate groups. The
reality of inequality is constructed by ideologies of the ruling class so as to secure their
own benefits. Langman (1998) explains Gramsci’s argument in the following:
Ruling class intellectuals articulated and disseminated world views in which
ruling class truths defined reality, provided meanings and standards of morality
so that their interests were mystified as normal, logical and ‘the general good.’
Elite interests were embedded in speech, the semiotics of meaning, and
understandings that framed the perceptions of reality while their normative
positions regulated behavior. Their authority claims were rendered ‘common
sense’ so arbitrary social arrangements were ‘naturalized’ and unquestioned. The
everyday life experiences and understandings of the masses gave rise to
perceptions, values, judgments, and behaviors that continually reproduced
structural arrangements. (p. 186)
Giddens’ (1984) theory of “structuration” indicates that social structures, which
provide individuals with opportunity and constraint, keep “fostering the enactment of a
93
variety of everyday routines (1984, p. 91). These enactments of these routines continually
reconstituted the social structure and thus reproduces the social system. These routines
were motivated and initiated through one’s ‘self identity,’ a product of earl[y]
socialization and current realities” (1991, cited in Langman, 1998, p. 221).
“Bourdieu (1977a, 1977b) has similarly argued that that habitus can be seen as the
realm of lived experience that has been structured by the typical routines and
understandings of a society. This habitus provides strategies for coping with everyday
life as well as various exigencies. These strategies thus serve to guide behavior in various
social fields. But for the most part this serves to reproduce the social order. For example,
education is said to provide not only actual skills and training, but social and cultural
graces that constitute ‘cultural capital’” (Bourdieu, 1984, cited in Langman, 1998, p.
221). All three authors describe how social reproduction occurs by a gradual penetration
of the ruling class ideology into subordinate groups. The process of penetration spreads
as the subordinate groups consciously or unconsciously accept the ruling class ideology
and interest as their daily realities. Buying into hidden messages and necessary behaviors
as the subordinating class keeps inequality of power in society.
I argue that Nihonjinron discussions are reproduced by the masses in two ways
arising from discussions of Nihonjinron. First, the Japanese believe in the uniqueness of
their culture without any critical thinking. Second, the Japanese are not aware of
differences in areas, such as ethnicity, class, language, and religion. These two reasons
explain why many Japanese people subscribe to ambiguous arguments of distinctiveness
of the Japanese portrayed in Nihonjinron. Yoshino (1992, 1999b) revealed that the more
readers are exposed to Nihonjinron, the more abstract they are about Japanese
94
uniqueness. This means that readers’ view of Japanese culture is strongly influenced by
Nihonjinron literature and they buy into the writers’ arguments. In fact, what readers
believe is political ideology is intentionally constructed by the ruling class, including the
state and intellectuals. Since the masses, including readers, believe the portrayal of the
homogeneity of the Japanese is true in their daily life, the ruling class political ideology is
perpetuated in society.
In addition to the subjective view of the uniqueness of Japanese among the
masses, the process of diffusion of Nihonjinron also illustrates how the literature is
reproduced. First of all, Nihonjinron producers are also Nihonjinron writers, such as
intellectuals, business people, elites, journalists, and the national government. With the
collaboration of authors and the government, Japan’s cultural policies are created.
Furthermore, Nihonjinron writers describe the uniqueness of the Japanese in their books
to provide emotional satisfaction for readers. Consequently, the masses unconsciously
accept political ideologies and hidden messages from governmental policy and
Nihonjinron literature as their realities.
Second, the reproduction of a Japanese identity is also done by “reproductive
intellectuals” (Shils, 1972, p. 22, cited in Yoshino, 1998 & 1999b) or “cultural
intermediaries” (Bourdieu, 1992, p. 371, cited in Yoshino, 1998). They are readers of
Nihonjinron literature who diffuse writers’ ideas to a broader public as intermediators
between academic Nihonjinron theories and ordinary people. Yoshino states,
[reproductive intellectuals or cultural intermediaries] “rephrased academics’ theories of
Japanese society and culture to suit more practical concerns and reproduced them in a
form that could be consumed by ordinary people. This was an important channel through
95
which academics’ Nihonjinron were disseminated to a wider readership” (Yoshino, 1998,
pp. 25-26).
One example of the reproduction of intellectuals’ work is “cross-cultural
manuals.” These manuals are often written by the staffs of major Japanese companies
whose business partnerships include international companies. When encountering more
foreign people in business, the Japanese employees are required to explain Japanese
culture and cultural differences to international customers. Thus, Nihonjinron is used as
manuals to help business people communicate with their international business partners.
As Nihonjinron producers provide emotional satisfaction for “being Japanese,”
for ethnic Japanese readers, the Japanese identity naturalizes the division of “us” (ethnic
Japanese) versus “them” (minority groups and foreign residents). From the others’
perspective, this classification is a hegemonic power to exclude and alienate them.
In conclusion, the analysis of diffusion of Nihonjinron from the government to the
masses, writers to readers, readers (intermediators) to a broader public, and the ethnic
Japanese to non-ethnic Japanese all show that Nihonjinron provides a satisfactory
explanation of what it means to be Japanese for the masses in a collective sense.
Although Nihonjinron producers’ direct messages might not be exactly distributed to the
masses partly because of the involvement of various actors, including intermediators, the
core belief of homogeneity is still widely believed in public. Therefore, Nihonjinron
plays a vital role in reproducing and naturalizing Nihonjinron contents, including group
orientation, hierarchy (vertical-stratification, intra-company solidarity), harmony, amae
(affectionate dependency), and interpersonalism as routines of the masses.
96
Although hegemonic power stays in a society, there are counter-hegemonic
strategies to change the dominant power. Lull (2003) claims that “[h]egemony fails when
dominant ideology is weaker than social resistance (p. 65).” In order to grow social
resistance, intellectuals play an important role as catalysts in constructing a revolutionary
consensus among subordinate groups (deMarrais, & LeCompte, 1999). Intellectuals’ role
is to make subordinate groups aware of their ideological, as well as class, struggles
(Burke, 1999 & 2005). Once a revolutionary consensus emerges, alternative institutions
can be created by these groups, which then influence the hegemony of the dominant
group (deMarrais, & LeCompte, 1999).
An example of a counter-hegemonic strategy would be seen in the news of
teachers in Tōkyō described in Senki (2006) as follows:
In Tōkyō, the board of education required the implementation of the national
flag and singing of the national anthem at entrance and graduation ceremonies to
high schools and special schools in October of 2003. The notice stated that those
who did not follow it would be punished by the school principal. In order to
monitor teachers’ implementation of the notice, the Tōkyō Board of Education
sent staff to school ceremonies. Consequently, 345 teachers who did not follow
the notice were punished by such measures as suspension or salary reduction.
Due to this emergency, 401 teachers sued the Tōkyō Board of Education in
2004.
The Tōkyō regional court concluded on September 21, 2006, that the
action of the Tōkyō Board of Education was illegal. Chief Justice Nanba pointed
out that the national anthem and flag ‘were used as the spiritual core of
Imperialism and Militarism until World War II and up until now they have not
been recognized as politically and religiously value neutral among citizens.
Freedom of thought and conscience of teachers who object to the national
anthem and flag are protected under the Constitution, unless they are against the
general welfare of citizens, such as violating others’ rights.’ Moreover, the board
of education’s disciplinary action based on an illegal notice was ‘an abusive use
of the board of education’s discretion.’ Thus, the punishment from now on will
be prohibited. Furthermore, since teachers suffer from psychological hardships
by being forced to follow an order which conflicts with their ideas of freedom of
thought and conscience, the Chief Justice commanded the Tōkyō Board of
Education to pay 30,000 yen of compensation to each teacher. The court
97
prevented the current education system from moving further toward educational
nationalism. (Senki, 2006)
In this example, the board of education imposed its hegemonic power by
enforcing nationalistic rituals on teachers. Those teachers who resisted following the
hegemonic power organized a counter-hegemonic group and sued the board of education
in the Tōkyō regional court. The court ruled in favor of these teachers, the counterhegemonic group. Thus, the teachers’ action to devolve the judge on the court enabled
them to show the board of education’s hegemonic power to the public and to prove
teachers’ rights. Thus, an imaginary power of the board of education was considered
illegal. This is a success story of counter-hegemonic action.
James Scott (1990) explains the political conduct of subordinate groups dealing
with the dominant power with a metaphoric description of a stage performance that these
groups act “properly in the eyes of the authority” in the public transcript. The public
transcript shows the “open interaction between subordinates and those who dominate” (p.
2) and “is unlikely to tell the whole story about power relations and [rather] frequently in
the interest of both parties to tacitly conspire in misrepresentation” (p. 2). In contrast,
subordinate groups possess a hidden transcript which is “the discourse that takes place
‘off stage,’ beyond direct observation by powerholders” (p. 2). Thus, the hidden
transcript is “derivative in the sense that it consists of those offstage speeches, gestures,
and practices that confirm, contradict, or inflect what appears in the public transcript”
(pp. 2-3).
Scott (1990) illustrates the relationship between the public and hidden transcripts
in the following:
98
The hidden transcript represents discourse—gesture, speech, practices—that is
ordinarily excluded from the public transcript of subordinates by the exercise of
power. The practice of domination, then, creates [italics in original] the hidden
transcript. If the domination is particularly severe, it is likely to produce a hidden
transcript of corresponding richness. The hidden transcript of subordinate groups,
in turn, reacts back on the public transcript by engendering a subculture and by
opposing its own variant form of social domination against that of the dominant
elite. Both are realms of power and interests. (p. 27)
Scott (1990) further distinguishes the political conduct of subordinate groups into
four variations between the public and the hidden transcript. In his explanation, from the
dominant elites’ perspective, the public transcript is the self-portrait of their power that
compels performances from subordinates. In the most public form of their political
discourse, the subordinates flatter the elite’s self-image of their power in public. The
second category is the politics of disguise and anonymity which occurs in public, mainly
in the folk culture of subordinate groups, including rumors, gossip, folktales, songs, and
euphemisms. By concealing the identity of the actors, the subordinates declare the hidden
transcript in public. The third category is the nature of the hidden transcript itself in
which subordinate groups gather and deliver offstage speeches behind the back of the
authority. Last, the most risky sphere of politics is “the political cordon sanitaire between
the hidden and public transcript” (p. 19) such as public declaration of the hidden
transcript.
The example of Tōkyō’s teachers, described above as an example of a counterhegemonic action, can also be applied to the political cordon sanitaire. The teachers
experienced oppressive treatment, such as suspension or salary reduction from their
school principals or the board of education as a penalty of not following the Tōkyō Board
of Education’s notice. Behind the public transcript, they would have shared their anger
99
and discussed their reaction toward the board of education. Their political breakthrough
was that their offstage talk was heard in public, meaning the public declaration of their
hidden transcript. They requested an equitable judgment on this matter through the court
system.
Scott (1990) also claims that subordinates have the capacity to tacitly reverse
dominant ideology when no open forums of resistance are allowed. He uses Malay paddy
farmers as an example of silent defiance. These Malay farmers were angry about paying
the official Islamic tithe that was inequitably sent to the provincial capital, rather than to
the poor in the village. So, they silently and gradually tried to dismantle the system in
multiple ways, including “fraudulent declarations of the amount of land farmed, simple
failures to declare land, underpayment, and delivery of paddy spoiled by moisture or
contaminated with rocks and mud to increase its weight” (p. 89). Consequently, 15% of
what was formally due was actually paid without any tithe riots, protests, or
demonstrations. This silent resistance by the farmers to the official was not written in the
official’s public record. The delineation of the public transcript of the dominant and the
hidden offstage transcript of the weak shows various scenarios of counter-hegemonic
actions subordinates take as forms of resistance.
Summary
In this chapter, I have reviewed various cultural and educational issues related to
the myth of the homogeneity of Japanese culture. First, I revealed how this binary of
“we” and “others” does not fit the realities of multicultural/ethnic Japan. Benhabib’s
(2002) claim of shifting identities by interacting with more than one community gives a
more realistic picture of identity formation due to the dynamic influence of globalization.
100
Pedagogy of relationships provided a relational perspective of how to change the gap
between the Japanese and foreigners. In the second section, I explained the political
ideology of Nihonjinron in detail. The explanation of the diffusion process showed how
the ideology is produced and disseminated to the masses.
The third section combined various educational issues related to Japaneseness. I
described the process of how the educational ideology of Conservatives, neoliberals,
neoconservatives, and Progressives was met. Changes of the content in the revised FLE
provided a picture of the future direction of Japanese education. Revised FLE,
government guidelines for teaching, the Kokoro-no-nōto, educational disparities, and the
progress of other reform policies and measurements are somewhat interrelated with one
another. Fourth, I explained the concept of multiculturalism as an alternative to
homogeneous policies. I provided the rationale for its needs with multicultural realities in
the labor force and future Japanese schools. With those realities, JSL classes and other
school provisions are required to accommodate needs of these foreign students. In the last
section, I applied hegemony and social reproduction theory as the analytic tools to
understand how the state perpetuates hegemonic power through the diffusion of
Nihonjinron and the control of the school curriculum. This section also discussed
counter-hegemonic strategies, including the relationship between public and hidden
transcripts.
101
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
Research Design
I employed a case study methodology in order to understand the dynamics and
complexity of diversity issues in a Japanese local junior high school. In my view of the
world, reality is socially constructed by an interaction of people in a particular setting and
context. The qualitative study is the methodology which fits my view of the world in
terms of understanding complex realities of informants with intimate interaction between
researchers and informants. The qualitative method helps researchers understand
informants’ views of the world (Glesne, 2006).
Qualitative research design features naturalistic inquiry and emergent design
flexibility. Naturalistic inquiry means that qualitative designs capture real-life
experiences and contexts of informants with the use of open-ended questions without any
manipulation or control of natural settings. The emphasis on the natural settings stems
from the view that realities cannot be separated from their contexts (Guba & Lincoln,
1985). In order to understand the phenomena in their real-life context, researchers need to
be open to whatever emerges in the settings. Second, naturalistic inquiry presumes that
the research design will emerge, develop, and unfold in the field under certain
circumstances (Patton, 2002).
I chose the case study methodology in order to understand the complexity of a
unique case within a limited frame. Stake (1995) defines case study as “the study of the
particularity and complexity of a single case, coming to understand its activity within
important circumstances” (p. xi). In order to explore the case in-depth, the case needs to
102
be specific and complex (Stake, 1995). Case study is also useful when researchers are not
able to spend a lot of time in the field. Bassey (1999) states: “[a]n essential feature of
case study is that sufficient data are collected for researchers to be able to explore
significant features of the case and to put forward interpretations for what is observed.
Another essential feature is that the study is conducted mainly in its natural context” (p.
47).
In addition to the function of specifying the phenomenon, Yin (1994) claims that
case study will guide researchers to explore “a contemporary phenomenon within its reallife context especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not
clearly evident” (1994, p. 13). In other words, the case study enables researchers to
understand the potential linkage between contextual conditions and the phenomenon as it
emerges in the field.
Rationale for Selections of Participants
In this research, two sampling methods were used for selections of participants:
Purposeful and snowball sampling methods. On one hand, purposeful sampling allows
researchers to “[select] information-rich cases for study in depth [italics original].
Information-rich cases are those from which one can learn a great deal about issues of
central importance to the purpose of the inquiry” (Patton, 2002, p. 230). One major
purpose of my study was to select a junior high school located in the region where I had
grown up in order to find out the linkage between socioeconomic changes and local
school cultures. Based on this purpose of the study, I used the purposeful sampling
method.
103
My former math teacher and softball coach, Mr. Yamano was my gatekeeper, “the
person…who must give their consent before [a researcher] may enter a research setting,
and with whom [a researcher] must negotiate the conditions of access” (Glesne, 2006).
Mr. Yamano introduced me to Sakura Junior High School. The sample of participants
through the purposeful sampling method were school administrators, teachers, and
students (both Japanese and foreign) in Sakura.
On the other hand, the snowball sampling method was used to receive information
and contacts from well-situated people about “information-rich key informants or critical
cases” (Patton, 2002, p. 237). I asked Sakura informants, such as school administrators,
teachers, and students, about potential key informants or critical cases who would provide
rich information and context-related to issues of diversity. Through snowball sampling, I
selected the parents of a ninth-grade male student in Sakura, a visiting Brazilian language
counselor, and teachers and students in Ran and Matsu elementary schools. I also met
participants in the JSL curriculum workshop. All participants in the workshop, including
JSL teachers, school administrators, language counselors, city officers, and university
professors discussed various problems and issues in providing necessary assistance for
foreign students.
Rationale for Selections of Research Sites
Research sites for this study included one junior high school, two elementary
schools and one seminar regarding JSL curriculum. I conducted my fieldwork at Sakura
Junior High School in the city of Midori in the Tokai Area of Japan (for details, see
Chapter 4). This junior high school was the place where my former math teacher and
softball coach worked. The teacher, Mr. Yamano, was my gatekeeper. I have known him
104
for 18 years, since I entered junior high school in 1989, and belonged to the women’s
softball club of which Mr. Yamano was in charge.
This junior high school met the needs of my dissertation research in terms of
examining diversity-related challenges for domestic/indigenous minority and foreign
students in 2007 in the local school context. My interest in diversity issues is rooted in
my public school experiences in Heiwa between 1984 and 1996, time in which the
existence of minority groups in Japan was not discussed in school. Therefore, as a student,
I did not learn human rights education from the perspective of minority groups. Moreover,
there was no reason, in my community, for teachers to touch on sensitive issues regarding
minority groups because encounters with these groups in my hometown were rare.
However, 11 years later, my town’s region, including Midori, has a greater
immigrant population than before. The increase of immigrants is associated with various
other socio-cultural and economic changes, such as the construction of a new
international airport in the region and the development of infrastructure linked with the
airport, including transportation services, new restaurants, and department stores. In
Midori in 1996, when I graduated from high school, the foreign resident population
numbered 1,132 which constituted 1.08% of the total Midori population. In 2007, the
foreign population was 3,058 (2.56% of the total population). Because the total number
of foreign residents had increased almost three times in those 11 years, the Sakura school
provided me with an opportunity to explore new features of learning diversity issues
within their context.
Two elementary schools and the JSL curriculum workshop were additional sites
which enabled me to triangulate my findings in Sakura. This triangulation of sources
105
allowed me to confirm and validate my findings. First, I visited Ran Elementary School,
located in a city within the same region as Midori. I spent the day with a language
counselor to learn her job. Second, I did five days of fieldwork in Matsu Elementary
School, mainly in the JSL classrooms, in the same school district as Sakura.
Lastly, I participated in a JSL seminar held at one of the pilot project schools in the
region.
Limitations of the Study
This study explores how one junior high school handles issues of diversity related
to domestic/indigenous minority and foreign students. The data were collected through
engaging with school administrators, teachers, a language counselor, and parents at
Sakura, two elementary schools, and the JSL workshop. Because of the limited number of
informants in a particular setting, the results of my findings cannot be generalized to the
entire population. However, the purpose of my qualitative study is to understand complex
realities of informants and understand their view of the world through intimate interaction
between me, the researcher, and my informants (Glesne, 2006).
Another limitation was the time constraint. I was able to interact with my
informants mentioned above for a total of only three months. Therefore, I missed other
opportunities of engagement during other terms of the school year. The time constraint
impacted my perception, interpretation, and analysis of the phenomena occurring in the
observed classrooms.
Data Collection Procedures
All data were collected from mid-November, 2007 to early February, 2008. The
fieldwork in Sakura was about three months between mid-November, 2007, and early
106
February, 2008. During the three-month period, I also visited with a language counselor
at the Ran school to learn about her work in JSL classrooms. I attended a JSL seminar
held at one of the MEXT-appointed schools to learn more about challenges to schools in
accepting more foreign students in the region. After the end of fieldwork in Sakura, I did
five days of fieldwork at the Matsu school located in the same Sakura school district.
My role as a researcher began with preparation to gain entrée to Sakura Junior
High School. Mr. Yamano was a gatekeeper who helped me gain access to his school. As
Glesne (2006) illustrates, an insider in a research setting helps researchers approach that
setting since knowing whom to contact first might affect a relationship prior to
conducting fieldwork. In my case, I asked Mr. Yamano if his school principal would
accept my request to do a fieldwork at his school. In response to my advisor’s and my
formal letters of request about my fieldwork, the school principal decided to accept me.
Mr. Yamano notified me about the principal’s decision by phone.
In mid-November, I gained entrée to Sakura Junior High School to do a fieldwork
for three months. On the first day of school, my gatekeeper introduced me to the school
principal. I also introduced myself to all teachers and students in a school assembly and
told them of the granted consent. Due to my gatekeeper’s strong assistance, gaining
entrée went fairly well. Since Mr. Yamano was a school insider who knew individual
teachers and the politics involved in the school, he gave me a variety of advice about how
to interact with individual teachers.
In Sakura, a teacher of each subject area came to a homeroom to teach a subject
based on a homeroom’s timetable. The same group of students learned all subjects
together in a particular homeroom for the school year of April to March. The role of
107
homeroom teachers was to teach moral education and integrated studies, as well as to
organize the class environment and to discipline students. Each homeroom teacher also
taught one subject for the grade to which his or her homeroom students belonged. In each
grade, there was at least one teacher who taught one subject. For instance, Mr. Yamano
was one of the ninth-grade homeroom teachers and taught mathematics to ninth graders.
I visited Mr. Yamano’s homeroom of about 40 students during morning and
afternoon homeroom time, lunch, and cleaning every day. I learned about teacher-student
relationship, class management, and homeroom rules, such as school ceremonies, and
other activities. I was allocated space in the small storage room where ninth-grade
teaching materials were kept and used it, so that I did not need to be surrounded by
teachers in the teachers’ room. Except for an occasional teacher’s visit to pick up
classroom materials, I was able to use the whole room for reading, writing fieldnotes, and
doing transcriptions during my break time.
In my first week in the school, I submitted all my research materials to the school
principal for his approval. He reviewed, revised, gave me a feedback on, and then
approved my research materials.
Once the fieldwork started, I collected various school-related documents. These
documents included the weekly academic schedule of all homerooms from seventh- to
ninth-grade, the seating arrangement of teachers in the teacher’s room, weekly school
newsletters, and the sketch of the school buildings. I also collected the general rule of
government teaching guidelines, and specific guidelines for such subjects as social
studies, a foreign language, Japanese language, and moral education. Furthermore,
teachers’ manuals for social studies (geography, history, and civics), and textbooks in
108
such subjects as social studies (geography, history, and civics), the foreign language, the
Japanese language, the moral education textbook/workbook were also collected as well.
For classroom observations, six primary subjects were selected: The homeroom
teacher of moral education and integrated studies, and teachers in such fields as social
studies, a foreign language, Japanese language, and supplemental JSL instruction for JSL
students. Since I had already chosen to observe social studies, foreign language, Japanese
language classes, and supplemental JSL instruction for JSL students, I did not necessarily
need to observe their moral education and integrated studies classes as homeroom
teachers. Rather, I chose homeroom teachers with other subject areas of teaching to
observe their way of teaching moral education and integrated studies.
To make plans for class observation, I referred to the weekly academic schedule
of all homerooms from seventh to ninth grade with the names of teachers. I also asked
some teachers and students what classes they would recommend for observation related
to the targeted subjects and other diversity-related areas. With this academic schedule and
suggestions from teachers and students, I could make each day’s rough schedule and ask
permission from each teacher to observe the class a day before the class. I told each
teacher that I was interested in observing the class and asked which period or homeroom
would be good for me to observe. Some teachers told me a specific classroom, others let
me choose the period and the homeroom based on my observation schedule. In some
cases, teachers told me what each class would be learning and let me decide which class
fit my interest the most.
Once I got the permission, I showed up a few minutes ahead of class time to
greet the teacher. After class, I thanked the teacher and asked some questions or gave
109
comments on my observation. Informal conversation after the class provided some
insightful contexts about the focus of the study. Moreover, my class observations and
informal conversations guided me to find suitable teachers who were also interested in
being interviewees.
I began first with observing classes whose subjects were social studies, a foreign
language, Japanese language, supplemental JSL instruction for JSL students, moral
education, and integrated studies. Then, I heard that the ninth-grade teaching and learning
would be completed by the end of the second semester (the third week of December) and
there would be no more teaching and learning from January. Because of that schedule, I
focused mainly on observing ninth-grade classes until December and moved to seventhand eighth-grade class observations in January.
Moreover, I asked to repeatedly observe two ninth-grade social studies teachers’
classes when they taught the fourth chapter, Contemporary International Society:
International Society and Challenges for Human Beings. The theme of international
society has some linkages to diversity in terms of embracing the concept of international
society, but these textbooks did not mention the diversity of Japanese residents within
Japan.
In December, I asked Mr. Gotanda to recommend an elementary school in which
many foreign students were enrolled. He suggested Matsu Elementary School, located
within the Sakura District, which had an increasing number of foreign students. Since Mr.
Gotanda knew the principal of the Matsu school well, he could relay my request. Mr.
Gotanda also told me to prepare a letter of request to do my research in Matsu. Once the
letter was ready, Mr. Gotanda reviewed it and called the principal of Matsu to ask for
110
permission. After the Matsu principal approved my access to the school, I made an
appointment to discuss schedules with him.
A few days after the phone conversation, I went to meet the Matsu school
principal and turned in my letter of request. With this letter in hand, the principal and I
discussed the overall schedule of my stay for five days during the first week of February.
Unlike the Sakura school where I created my own schedule after discussion with teachers,
a Matsu teacher created a fixed five-day schedule based on my request to volunteer in
JSL classrooms and make class observations of each grade.
To prepare for semi-structured interviews, I spent almost a month building
rapport with teachers and students through daily interaction, informal conversations, and
classroom observations. In the rapport-making process, I finalized my selection of
particular teachers among the core subjects. My decisions were strongly influenced by
my impression of their teaching methods, their passion for teaching, and informal
conversations. After establishing rapport, I started interviews with the school principal
and teachers at the middle of December. I also met with a Brazilian counselor through a
Sakura teacher and did interviews with her twice. Some interviews with teachers and the
language counselor were conducted during the winter break between the end of
December and the beginning of January.
In January, 2008, I conducted semi-structured interviews with students and
parents, as well as with a few more teachers. I asked for permission from homeroom
teachers to interview their homeroom students. Mr. Yamano introduced me to parents of
one of his homeroom students.
111
Despite the original decision to observe both seventh- and eighth- grade classes, I
made an arrangement to focus only on the seventh-grade classrooms because of the
irrelevance of the eighth-grade classroom teaching. Eighth-grade students were
considered troublesome by teachers because many of them have not acquired the
fundamental attitudes to learn in class. In fact I observed that teachers spent much time
making students be quiet, sit down, or stop chatting to each other because of endless
interruptions. In the distractive atmosphere, I got the impression that the teacher tried to
move on with his or her lecture without paying much attention to disruptive students who
did not listen. As a result, my observation data in the eighth grade classes did not provide
any critical aspects of pedagogy linked with diversity.
Among classroom observations in the seventh-grade homeroom, I got permission
from Mr. Harada to repeatedly observe his geography and history classes in a particular
homeroom. The reason I requested Mr. Harada’s class was the participatory classroom
teaching and learning with students I observed in his ninth-grade teaching. I further
requested one class to which a Brazilian girl belonged in order to observe her reactions
and socializations during the class and breaks.
In addition to my fieldwork in Sakura, I went to Ran Elementary School for a day
with a visiting Brazilian language counselor to learn about her job. I observed JSL
classrooms and talked with JSL teachers and students, as well as the language counselor.
Moreover, I participated in a JSL curriculum seminar held at one of the pilot project
schools in the region. All participants, including JSL teachers, school administrators,
language counselors, city officers, and professors discussed various problems and issues
112
in providing necessary assistance for foreign students. My fieldwork in Sakura ended at
the end of January.
In the first week of February, I did five days of fieldwork in Matsu Elementary
School. One of the JSL teachers assisted me in adjusting to the school and in following
the schedule the school created for me based on my discussion with the Matsu principal. I
was mainly a participant-observer in the JSL classroom and also did class observation in
each grade for five days in the first week of February. I interacted mainly with JSL
teachers, volunteers, JSL students, the school principal, and other teachers.
To collect additional materials to support my data, in December, 2008, I collected
archival documents about the Sakura school district. Furthermore, in April, 2009, I
collected information about the government-built apartment complex (public housing)
located within the Sakura school district. I asked my mother to telephone the resident
director regarding information I needed. After she had contacted him, I called her and
wrote down all the information she was given by the director.
Some classroom observations I participated in were classes mainly for paired-up
activities, such as conversation partners in foreign language class, group-based
competitions for activities in social studies, or chatting with students during studentcentered integrated study times. In other cases, the teachers let me introduce myself to the
students in either Japanese or English.
Except for these occasions, I usually used the chair of a student who was absent
from school and the teachers paid me little attention. My fieldnotes included time,
numbers of students, atmosphere of each homeroom with posted items on the wall,
113
interactions between teachers and students, copying of things written on the blackboard,
additional comments, and questions to ask the teacher after class.
For interviews, I spent three 30-minute interviews with a school principal (a total
of one and a half hours). With teachers, the interviews lasted between 40 minutes and two
hours, depending on the stories of each teacher. Coincidently, none of the teachers I
interviewed had homeroom duties. I did follow-up interviews with one social studies
teacher and one Brazilian language counselor because we ran out of time during the first
interviews. Interviews with students took between 15 and 30 minutes either during the
lunch break or after class. The interview with the parents of the ninth-grade male student
were conducted at their house and lasted for two hours. The interview was done mainly
with the mother, though the father joined the conversation for the last 30 minutes, when
he came home from work. Therefore, I counted the interview as being with both parents.
The location of the interviews in the school varied based on suggestions by
informants. I let them choose the locations because they knew which rooms were
available and what processes they took to use the room. Many teachers selected either a
small gathering place or the computer room, both next to a large teachers’ room. During
the interviews, various other teachers stopped by to prepare for their classes. In some
cases, teachers chose locations where there would be no interruptions. When I look back,
I see I was able to receive more confidential or sensitive stories from teachers I
interviewed away from other teachers and students. In most cases, I tape-recorded the
interviews when informants agreed. Except for one teacher, all teachers agreed to be
recorded.
114
Interviews were not tape-recorded in conversation with the school principal, one
teacher, the visiting Brazilian language counselor, students, and parents of one student
because of various factors, including unexpectedly long conversations, noisy
environment, and risks of nervousness among informants during recording. Instead, I
jotted down key words and phrases in the course of interview. Then, I re-wrote my
fieldnotes right after the conversation to incorporate everything I had heard during the
interview. I also wrote my own reflection of interviews in terms of questions, flow of
conversations, and observations of informants.
I interviewed all informants in Japanese, except for the AET with whom I used
English. I sent the interview script to each teacher and a language counselor individually,
either fact-to-face or via emails, to confirm their stories and experiences, except for those
who told me it was not necessary. I also asked additional questions to some teachers to
clarify their stories.
Translation from Japanese into English applied to most of my documents as
well, including the government guidelines for teaching, relevant textbooks, and schoolrelated materials.
When I translated interviewees’ voices into English verbatim, I paid special
attention not to lose the contexts in translation. To validate my translation, I asked a
bilingual person to cross-check the accuracy of my English translation with the interview
script and documents. Then, I worked with an English-language editor to edit these
translated quotes, adding some words and phrases to provide specific contexts for
American readers. Following these steps, I confirmed and validated my data.
115
I used multiple data-collection methods for trustworthiness of data: Document
analyses, observations, and interviews. The combination of three methods, called
triangulation, enables researchers to crosscheck findings (Patton, 2002) and to eliminate
validity issues in each method (Berg, 1995, cited in Glesne, 2006). Weaknesses of one
method can be eliminated by the other two (Marshall & Rossman, 1989, pp. 79-111, cited
in Patton, 2002). As a result, the multiple sources would help me understand various
perspectives to interpret phenomena which I would observe.
Document Analyses
Documents provide historical and contextual dimensions for interview or
observation data. They help construct specific questions for those observations and
interviews. The strength of written documents is their description of “behind-the-scenes”
which is not observable. Written documents might assist interviewers in asking sensitive
questions by showing the documents during the course of interviews (Glesne, 2006).
On the contrary, one weakness of documents is inconsistency in quality and
completeness (Patton, 2002). Another limitation is that they are all socially created in a
specific context with some audience in mind. Thus, researchers need to read these
documents skeptically and try to understand the writers’ social context as well as their
passages (Delamont, 2002).
In the study, school-related documents included the weekly academic schedule of
all homerooms from seventh- to ninth-grade, the seating arrangement of teachers in the
teacher’s room, weekly school newsletters, the sketch of the school buildings, as well as
the Midori local history document in the city archive. I utilized these documents to
provide contexts to the study.
116
Another set of documents included the general rules of the government teaching
guidelines, and the teaching guidelines for four subjects, three teachers’ manuals for
social studies, and textbooks for four subjects. Here are the details:
z
The general rules of the government teaching guidelines.
z
Government guidelines for teaching of four subjects: Social studies, a
foreign language, Japanese, and moral education.
z
Three teachers’ manuals for social studies: One geography, one history,
and one civics.
z
Textbooks for four subjects: Social studies (one geography, one history,
one civics), the foreign language, the Japanese language, and a moral education
workbook/textbook, the Kokoro-no-nōto.
I analyzed all of these documents to see their relevance to my study. On one hand,
some relevant documents, including government teaching guidelines for social studies
and a foreign language, three teachers’ manuals for social studies, and geography and
history textbooks, were used to provide contexts to the study in such sections as Major
Principles of the CCE and Government Guidelines for Teaching and the Description of
Minority Groups in Teachers’ Manuals and Textbooks in Chapter 4.
On the other hand, documents most relevant to my data, such as the general rules
of the government teaching guidelines and the civics textbook, were used to confirm and
validate my data in the analyses section, as well as in contexts to the study. Details of all
documents I used for each research question are included in Data Analysis Methods for
Each Question in Chapter 3.
117
Observation
Observation is a qualitative method to capture a particular setting, such as
physical location, date, time, activities taking place in the setting, and people and their
gestures, for the sake of examining the setting. The researcher and his or her fieldnotes
are the instruments for gathering data, which are collected through the researcher’s sight,
hearing, sense of smell, taste, and touch (Glesne, 2006). I support Lofland’s statement of
the importance of fieldnotes: “Field[notes] are the most important determinant of later
bringing off a qualitative analysis. Field[notes] provide the observer’s raison ďêtre.
If…not doing them, [the researcher] might as well not be in the setting” (Lofland, 1971,
p. 102, cited in Patton, 2002, p. 302). Thus, the fieldnotes include my own feelings and
reactions to events in addition to observation.
Observation challenges the researcher’s own assumptions and perceptions
because the observer’s openness to familiar and unfamiliar things is a key to discovering
new phenomena. Through questioning common knowledge and accepted theories,
observation “make[s] the strange familiar and the familiar strange” (Erickson, 1973, cited
in Glesne, 2006, p. 53). Moreover, taking fieldnotes for every single observation the
researcher has is the major difference between observation in daily life and careful
observation for research purposes. The fieldnotes should be descriptive and analytic,
which can “visualize” (Glesne, 2006, p. 56) the scene later for readers, as well as the
researcher (Glesne, 2006; Patton, 2002).
There are several advantages to obtaining data from observation. First, the
observation of a setting is firsthand experience which allows researchers to explore the
setting from their perspectives gained from interactions with people. Second, the
118
observation can be used as a major follow-up of interviews that may have distorted
responses from interviewees. This is on the grounds that observation is to discover
external behaviors while interviews are limited to find out internal issues due to
interviews primarily focusing on the inner feelings and thoughts of people. Last, firsthand
experience with people will increase personal knowledge about the people observed,
which influences reflections and interpretations of the setting as a part of the
observational data (Patton, 2002).
There are a few limitations to observations as well. The first factor lies in that the
informants might be too conscious about being observed and do things in an atypical
manner. Second, observations are limited to the external behavior of the observed, not
including their inner feelings. Last is, how much a researcher can observe when time and
space for his or her research question is limited (Patton, 2002).
Participant observation is a variation of observation. It would allow me to
combine my fieldnotes with data received from informal conversation with teachers and
students (Pelto & Pelto, 1978, cited in Patton, 2002). The participation gave me “an
intense immersion in daily rhythms and ordinary concerns, increasing openness to others’
ways of life” (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995, p. 18). Observation and note making
produce a detailed delineation of people and events. Most ethnographers use both styles
based on contexts and relevance to research questions (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw, 1995).
During the fieldwork, I observed six subject areas: Social studies, a foreign
language, Japanese language, moral education, integrated studies, and JSL instruction. I
observed a total of 58 periods (one period is 50 minutes) from six subject areas. The total
periods from each subject are as follows:
119
z
Social Studies: A total observation of 24 periods of four teachers.
z
A foreign language: A total observation of ten periods of five teachers plus
Mr. Clark (a visiting assistant English teacher from Canada).
z
Japanese language: A total observation of 10.5 periods of eight teachers.
One observation was counted as 0.5 because I observed two classes in one period (0.5 for
Mr. K’s Japanese language, the other 0.5 is Mr. N’s integrated studies).
z
Moral education: A total observation of four periods of four teachers.
z
Integrated studies: A total observation of 7.5 periods of seven teachers.
z
JSL instruction: A total observation of two periods of two teachers. (see
Appendix B)
Despite observing six subject areas, I used only three subjects for pedagogical strategies:
Social studies, a foreign language, and integrated studies. The observation in moral
education, Japanese language, and JSL may be used to provide contexts and backgrounds
to my study. The details of all observation data I used for research questions are
described in Data Analysis Methods for Each Question in Chapter 3.
Interviews
Qualitative interviewing focuses on the feelings, thoughts, and wills of
interviewees in the past, present, and future tense on which observational data is limited
to gather perspectives. Moreover, interviewing aims at understanding the other person’s
inner perspectives because those perspectives are assumed to be valuable to the public
(Patton, 2002). In addition to questions in the past, present, and future tense, questions
have variations, such as common background, sequencing, and wording questions.
120
Therefore, interview inquiries combine time frames with different types of questions
(Patton, 2002).
Research interviews are the combination of daily life and a professional
conversation which constitutes a specific structure and purpose. Kvale (1996) states that
“[conversation] goes beyond the spontaneous exchange of views as in everyday
conversation, and becomes a careful questioning and listening approach with the purpose
of obtaining thoroughly tested knowledge” (p. 6). Informants’ rich, deep, thick, and vivid
stories are constructed via the human interaction of researchers and informants emerging
through a dialogue (Kvale, 1996). Fontana and Frey (2005) argue that the latest trends in
interviewing position researchers as active participants in interactions with interviewees,
compared with the past trend of their being “invisible neutral entities” (p. 716).
Furthermore, “interviews are seen as negotiated accomplishments of both interviewers
and respondents that are shaped by the contexts and situations in which they take place”
(p. 716).
This interpersonal communication through the collaboration of a researcher and
an informant is a major strength of understanding informants’ inner feelings which
observations cannot receive (Patton, 2002). Glesne (2006) states:
The opportunity to learn about what you cannot see and to explore alternative
explanations of what you do see is the special strength of interviewing in
qualitative inquiry. To this opportunity, add the serendipitous learnings that
emerge from the unexpected turns in discourse that your questions evoke. In the
process of listening to your respondents, you learn what questions to ask. (p. 81)
To the contrary, there is a possibility that the emotional state of informants during
the interview could affect the interview conversation. Thus, researchers need to observe
121
informants’ verbal and nonverbal responses, as well as conversation, during the interview
period.
I used the semi-structured interview due to the critical features. By using the
semi-structured interview, a sequence of themes allows an openness to change the
sequence of questions based on the context of conversation (Kvale, 1996). I could
prepare an outline of issues or topics that would be freely explored within those topics or
issues. The outline functions as a check-list to make sure relevant topics are discussed
with each informant in the course of the interview.
Reasons for choosing the semi-structured interview lie in its effective use of
interview time by focusing on themes to be explored and its flexibility beyond the checklist (Patton, 2002). Moreover, since I interviewed teachers, students, and school
administrators whom I had not met until my research began, it was risky to rely on the
flow of conversation, informants’ emotions, and particular contexts. These elements
require higher interpersonal communication between researchers and informants.
During the fieldwork, I interviewed a total of 18 informants: A school principal,
six teachers, one visiting Canadian AET, one visiting Brazilian language counselor, seven
students, and parents of a ninth-grade male student. I had the group of people I wanted to
interview for the purpose of my study as discussed earlier. However, my final decisions
for selecting particular teachers from among the core subjects were strongly influenced
by my impression of their teaching methods, their passion for teaching, and informal
conversations. In other words, my class observation and informal conversation guided me
to find suitable teachers who were also interested in being my informants.
Informants were:
122
z
A school principal at Sakura Junior High School.
z
Six teachers (three social studies, two foreign language, and one Japanese).
z
One visiting Canadian AET.
z
A visiting Brazilian language counselor sent from the prefecture-level
board of education.
z
Seven students (four Japanese students and three foreign students).
z
Parents of a ninth-grade male student. (for details, see Appendix C)
In addition to these informants, some informal conversations were incorporated
into my data. Moreover, the information provided from the residential director of the
government-built apartment complex was used for contexts to the study. Details of
specific interview and informal conversation data are described in Data Analysis Methods
for Each Question in Chapter 3.
In general, I followed a basic format of questions applied to each group of
informants. However, I re-arranged some questions based on informants. Rearrangements were made based on the subject taught and the job title, class observation,
informal conversation, or other information received from other students and teachers.
A rationale for these personalized questions was to make the most of a teacher’s
personal stories based on the subject of expertise and job titles. For instance, I put
questions about foreign students to Mr. Egawa who supervised student guidance. He
provided information about these students from the perspective of a social studies teacher
and also of a student guidance representative. I asked him about his experiences with
foreign students as I did the other teachers. However, he had specific ideas as the student
guidance representative which no other teachers could provide. Thus, by asking
123
personalized questions formulated from class observation and informal conversation, I
was able to get more insights from each informant.
Examples of Interview Questions
Teachers of Social studies, foreign language, and Japanese language
Questions about background information
1.
Name, age, and gender.
2.
Academic career in schools.
3.
How many years have you taught in junior high schools?
4.
How long have you taught in the Sakura school?
5.
What subject or subjects do you teach at Sakura?
6.
Are you a homeroom teacher?
6a.
If so, please tell me your homeroom.
7.
Do you supervise a club activity?
7a.
If so, please tell me what club.
8.
Please tell me something about the Sakura School.
Questions about foreign students
9.
Do you teach multicultural coexistence or multicultural education which
allows and accepts individual differences?
9a.
If yes, what kind of themes and at what grade level?
9b.
Do you have a chance to interact with foreign students in your class,
homeroom, or club activity?
9c.
If yes, tell me the name of the foreign students and their homerooms.
124
9d.
If yes, are you aware of differences of foreign students in communication,
values or cultural behavior?
9e.
If you are aware of differences of foreign students, what do you do?
9f.
Have you experienced being perplexed about how to deal with problems
of foreign students, when you interact with them?
9g.
Do you guide Japanese students to create comfortable spaces for foreign
students as well?
Questions about diversity
10.
What is your definition of diversity?
11.
Do you teach diversity issues?
11a. If yes, what materials or sources do you use to teach the class?
12.
What was the students’ reaction in your diversity class?
13.
What were the government guidelines for teaching and teachers’ manuals
which guide you to teach diversity?
Questions about school life in general
14.
In what ways do the government guidelines for teaching and teacher’s
manuals align with students’ academic and social needs?
15.
What is it like for your students to attend school in Japan?
16.
What challenges have your students met, if any?
17.
What would you want the school to do for your students?
Other personalized questions followed.
Japanese students
Questions about background information
125
1.
Name, grade level, means of contact.
2.
Favorite subjects.
3.
Favorite teachers and why?
4.
Club activity.
5.
Do you like coming to school and why?
Questions about multiculturalism in school
6.
What are the images of “multiculturalism” and “international exchange”?
7.
Did you learn anything related to diversity in core subjects?
7a.
What was the content of the class?
8.
Did you learn anything related to diversity in extracurricular activities?
About foreign students
9.
Do you talk with or hang out with foreign students?
10.
What do you think of the increasing numbers of foreigners in the school
and community?
Other questions
11. Do you know anything about the government guidelines for teaching?
A few personalized questions related to each student were added after Question 11.
Foreign students
Questions about background information
1.
Name, grade level, means of contact.
2.
Favorite subjects.
3.
Favorite teachers and why?
4.
Club activity.
126
5.
Do you like coming to school and why?
6.
When did you come to Japan?
Questions about JSL classes
7.
Do you like JSL classes?
7a.
If yes, what aspects do you like?
8.
Cross-checking JSL time schedule.
9.
Who are your best friends among foreign students?
10.
Do you want to attend more JSL classes?
Questions about relationships with classmates in the homeroom
11.
Do you get along with your classmates?
12.
Are there any problems doing things with your classmates?
13.
What is your favorite thing in your homeroom?
14.
What is your least favorite thing in your homeroom?
Questions about academic classes and homeroom activities in the homeroom
15.
Do you understand what you learn in core subjects?
16.
If you don’t understand, which teachers can help you?
17.
Does your homeroom teacher show concern about you?
17a. If yes, when?
18.
Is it hard to do homework by yourself?
19.
Do you want to go to high school?
Questions about the visiting Brazilian language counselor
20.
Do you like Ms. Noda?
21.
What do you learn from her?
127
22.
What are good memories of her?
Questions about family members
23.
With family members do you live in Japan?
24.
Do you speak your native language at home?
25.
Who speaks Japanese among your family members?
26.
Which do you like better, school or home? Why?
School principal
Questions about background information
1.
Name, age, and gender.
2.
Academic career in schools.
3.
How long have you served as the school principal?
4.
Please tell me about your duties as the school principal.
5.
Prior to becoming a principal, how long did you teach at the junior high
school level?
6.
How long have you taught in the Sakura school?
7.
What subjects have you taught in junior high schools?
8.
Tell me anything related to the Sakura school.
9.
Tell me about your experiences as the school principal.
Questions about diversity
10.
What do you think that teachers teach about multicultural coexistence or
multicultural education which acknowledges and accepts individual differences?
11.
How do you define diversity?
12.
Do you have any guidance for teachers when they teach diversity issues?
128
12a. If so, could you talk to me about it?
Questions about foreign students
13.
How many foreign students does this school have?
14.
Do you often talk with students?
15.
Do you have a chance to interact with foreign students?
16.
What are the challenges and impact of increasing numbers of foreign
students in your school?
17.
How do the government guidelines for teaching say new immigrant
students should be educated?
18.
How do you think the Sakura School will change in the near future?
Language counselor
Questions about background information
1.
Tell me about your background.
2.
Tell me about your job as a language counselor.
Questions about foreign students and JSL classrooms
3.
What do you think are the problems and issues of foreign students in
elementary and junior high schools?
4.
What do you think of provisions and actions of teachers in these schools?
5.
What do you think about the needs of foreign students and parents?
6.
What are the most memorable experiences of working with JSL students?
Questions about living in Japan as a foreign resident
7.
Were there any experiences when you were treated as Japanese?
8.
How did you feel when you were treated as Japanese?
129
9.
What kinds of changes do you think would be needed to make foreign
residents feel more comfortable about living in Japan?
10.
What do you think of provisions for multicultural coexistence?
Parents
Questions about background
1.
Name and means of contact.
2.
How many children do you have?
2a.
Do your children go to school?
3.
How long have you lived in the Sakura area?
4.
Please tell me about your current jobs (and your husband’s).
5.
Last schools graduated (options: Junior high school, high school,
university, or others).
Questions about ninth-grade male student
6.
Please tell me about his school life.
6a.
Do you hear from him about his school life? ( homeroom, club activity,
friends, or homeroom teachers).
7.
What do you think motivates him to go to the school everyday?
8.
Did you hear from your son about classes teaching about international
exchange or different cultures?
8a.
If yes, how did you feel about it?
9.
Do you know about foreign students who are enrolled in the Sakura
9a.
Does your son know anything related to foreign students?
school?
130
10.
The numbers of foreign residents have increased in recent years. What do
you think about that?
11.
What kind of expectations do you have of the school for your son’s
education?
Researcher’s Role
Researchers in qualitative inquiry are the data-gathering instruments who define
their own roles (Eriksen, 2000; Glesne, 2006; Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Patton, 2002). The
definition of roles depends heavily on the context of the research field, identities of
informants, and personal values of the researchers (Glesne, 2006). Researchers’
involvement with informants affects the data because “the quality of qualitative data
depends to a great extent on the methodological skill, sensitivity, and integrity of the
researcher” (Patton, 2002, p. 5).
In this research, I defined learning diversity as learning about non-ethnic Japanese
culture, history, customs, holidays and festivals, and ways of life. Despite the lack of
understanding of diversity issues, I still gained a lot of useful knowledge in my junior
high school, enabling me to become a responsible adult. In particular, my gatekeeper, Mr.
Yamano, was my mentor who guided me to learn something more than softball practice
and winning games in tournaments. Lessons I learned from him 18 years ago still stayed
in my heart.
I believed that current junior high school students should have similar kinds of
strong learning experiences from teachers, school administrators, and classmates in their
school life. In their interaction with people, some students might be concerned about
issues of bullying based on projected and emphasized physical differences, or others
131
might find it difficult to get along with members in their own group. These themes can be
seen as a part of diversity issues in terms of how to acknowledge and accept differences.
My role as a researcher was to let school administrators, teachers, and students
define their meaning of diversity and to capture these voices. To facilitate their talking
openly, I first spent extensive time building rapport with them through conversations and
interactions because I was aware that personal and professional characteristics of a
researcher, such as race, gender, class, and professional status, played a vital role in
building rapport with informants (Feldman, Bell, & Berger, 2003). According to Spradley,
“rapport refers to a harmonious relationship between [researchers] and informants. It
means that a basic sense of trust has developed that allows for the free flow of
information” (cited in Feldman, Bell, & Berger, 2003, p. 35).
Glesne (2006) argues a harmonious relationship is asymmetrical because
researchers work to achieve rapport to conduct their research. Therefore, “[t]he ideal of
rapport is developing sufficient trust for the conduct of a study. Sufficiency is largely
contextual, depending on [a researcher’s] goals; the personality, age, gender, and
ethnicity of all participants; and the setting and time of the study” (Glazer, 1972;
Gonzalez, 1986; Spradley, 1979, cited in Glesne, 2006).
To eliminate a sense of distance between me, as a researcher, and informants, I
looked for common topics with them to engage in conversations. For Japanese informants,
I shared my junior high school experiences and major news related to Midori and its
region. To approach foreign informants, I shared my challenges as an international
student studying at an American institution to let them understand that I was willing to
listen to their challenges in Japanese schools.
132
Once rapport was established with some of them, I asked if they would be
interested in being my interviewees. When they agreed to participate in my interview, I
tried to create a safe environment where they could relax and tell me their stories and
perspectives without any threat of disclosure to others. I guided them to think about their
experiences to help me understand those experiences in their context and situations. In
this scenario, both informants and researchers were active participants in the course of an
interview.
Prior to my fieldwork in Sakura, I had thought of myself both as an insider and an
outsider from the perspective of the Sakura school community: An insider in terms of
being Japanese and an outsider as a researcher who did not know the informants or the
school. In fact, in Sakura, sharing the same racial identity with informants, compared
with other attributes, worked as an advantage, fostering the rapport-making. Because I
also spoke Japanese and shared the same Japanese culture as my informants, it was not
difficult for me to practice culturally appropriate ways of introducing myself and building
rapport.
On the other hand, except for the rapport-making process, I strongly felt that I was
an outside researcher who observed teachers’ classes and interviewed some teachers and
students. I did not share any of the teachers’ tasks, except for some participation during
class observations. Except a few of them, teachers did not ask me my evaluations of their
classes or pay attention to me in class and in school. Because of teachers’ indifference to
me, I captured a fairly routine school life as a researcher.
At an interpersonal level, I could determine teachers’ openness to me by their
distinction of using public or private language. An official story is called tatemae, while a
133
private or real story is called honne. The Japanese use tatemae to “spell out the way
things should be while veiling the fact that reality is otherwise” (Miyamoto, 1994, p. 175,
cited in Johnson, 2003). Tatemae is used to explain and justify behaviors mainly to
outsiders. Once they accepted me as an insider, my informants start expressing honne to
me.
The distinction of using public and private language in Japanese is similar to the
concept of public and hidden transcript proposed by Scott (1990). Scott (1990) suggests
that the public transcript shows the “open interaction between subordinate [groups] and
those who dominate” (p. 2). Similar to tatemae, this public interaction of two parties “is
unlikely to tell the whole story about power relations and [rather] frequently in the
interest of both parties to tacitly conspire in misrepresentation” (p. 2). To the contrary,
subordinate groups possess a hidden transcript which is the discourse that takes place
behind the backs of the ruling class, so does honne. Thus, the hidden transcript is
“derivative in the sense that it consists of those offstage speeches, gestures, and practices
that confirm, contradict, or inflect what appears in the public transcript” (pp. 2-3).
Most honne (real voices) were heard from teachers in the course of interviews or
behind backs of other teachers and students. I used regional dialects to create the sense of
connectedness to hear honne from informants who grew up in the region as I did. This
distinction of tatemae and honne reminded me that ethnographic research needed to
differentiate between verbal information and observation. It means that what people tell
researchers would be different from what people actually do. In ethnography, “the
statements and acts offer qualitatively different type of material” (Eriksen, 2004, p. 49).
134
Thus, by observing actions of my informants in addition to what they told me, I was able
to explore contradictions between their statements and acts.
What I needed to be cautious about was to keep some distance from my
informants in order to carefully analyze their perspectives. As Feldman, Bell, and Berger
(2003) indicate, the data-collection might be conducted in the circle of a “take-it-forgranted” attitude because of the shared ethnicity between me and my informants. This
“ethnic insiderness” hindered me from asking sensitive or naïve questions. Since my
informants would expect me to know special activities and cultural values shared among
Japanese people, it might be sometimes more difficult for me to ask informants for an
elaborate explanation of these common activities and cultural values (Feldman, Bell, &
Berger, 2003).
There was also a chance researchers themselves might fail to realize the dynamics
of cultural practices due to take-for-granted attitudes about familiar practices. In fact,
Rauch (1992, p. 42, cited in Johnson, 2003, p. 148) claims that the Japanese possess the
dichotomy of “‘we Japanese are all the same’ myth of homogeneity, and the ‘we
Japanese are completely different than you foreigners’ myth of uniqueness.”
Intersubjectivity
Intersubjectivity is a term used to describe how researchers’ subjectivities are
transformed into new ones constructed through close interaction between researchers and
all informants for a long time. By interacting with all informants, new subjectivities
would influence interpretation of the data, as well as the content and process of fieldwork
(Glesne, 2006).
135
During the fieldwork, I experienced the world of intersubjectivity with my
informants. My small talk about interests in foreign and international themes guided
informants to share their own stories with foreign students, cultures, and other
international themes. Although I was listening to their stories, my responses led to clarify,
explain, or develop their stories. It was their stories; yet, intersubjectivity allowed me to
understand their view of the world because of engaging conversation.
By understanding those stories, I reached a point where I needed to redefine my
research questions. I realized that the scope of my study written before the fieldwork was
too narrow. To incorporate more voices into my research, I needed to re-organize
research questions. For instance, I was collecting data regarding challenges of foreign
students who come to a local junior high school. However, once I started collecting data,
I got rich data which were categorized as “outlying.”
Beyond the scope of ethnicity, I realized that some Japanese students also needed
special provisions and attention. Examples include a story of a returnee student (Research
Question 1), individualized instruction offered in special education and a counselor’s
room (Research Question 1), and the case of truancy (Research Question 3). My
idea/sense of diversity prior to the fieldwork was limited to ethnicity―ethnic Japanese,
domestic/indigenous minority groups, Koreans (old-timers), and foreigners (newcomers).
In the field, my perspective of ethnicity extended to “otherness” that incorporates those
unconventional Japanese students as a comparison with ethnic minorities and foreigners.
This is my example of intersubjectivity.
136
Data Analysis Procedures
I maintain the view that ethnographic description is the beginning of data
analysis because the delineation of the site in fieldwork relies on a researcher’s
perception, sense, and choices (Eriksen, 2004; Patton, 2002). Moreover, as mentioned
earlier, research designs and analytical insights emerge in the field with the naturalistic
inquiry approach (Patton, 2002). I embrace Agar’s (1980) description of ethnographic
work:
In ethnography…you learn something (“collect some data”), then you try to
make sense out of it (“analysis”), then you go back and see if the interpretation
makes sense in light of new experience (“collect more data”), then you refine
your interpretation (“more analysis”), and so on. The process is dialectic, not
linear. (Agar, 1980, p. 9)
Thus, early data analysis simultaneous with data collection is the key to modify and reshape research methods in the field (Glesne, 2006). The data analysis requires thick
description (Geertz, 1973 cited in Glesne, 2006) defined as “description that goes beyond
the mere or bare reporting of an act (thin description), but describes and probes the
intentions, motives, meanings, contexts, situations and circumstances of action” (Denzin,
1989a p. 39, cited in Glesne, 2006, p. 27).
Transcriptions
As mentioned earlier, all interviews, except with the AET, were conducted in
Japanese. I transcribed all interviews first in Japanese. I sent each interview script to the
appropriate teacher and the language counselor, either face-to-face or via emails, to
confirm their stories and experiences, except for those who told me it was not necessary.
When I emailed the interview script to some teachers, I asked additional questions to
clarify their stories. Translation from Japanese into English applied to most of my
137
documents as well, including general rules of the government guidelines for teaching, the
civics textbook, and other school-related materials.
When I translated voices of informants and documents into English verbatim, I
paid special attention not to lose contexts in translation. To validate my translation, I
asked a bilingual person to cross-check the accuracy of my English translation with
Japanese scripts and documents. Then, I worked with an English-language editor to edit
these translated quotes, adding some words and phrases to provide specific contexts for
American readers. Following these steps, I confirmed and validated my data.
I used inductive analysis “[which] involves discovering patterns, themes, and
categories in one’s data” (Patton, 2002, p. 453). From the outlook of naturalistic inquiry,
Lincoln and Guba (1985) also emphasize that inductive analysis enables researchers to
“identify the multiple realities to be found in those data [and]…identify the mutually
shaping influences that interact [between the researcher and informants] (p. 40).
Organization and Coding of Data
Once all interview data were transcribed, I reviewed each transcript several times
to capture emerging categories, themes, and patterns out of my data. Then, I chose a color
for each research question and highlighted sentences and paragraphs with the color
matched to each research question. Once parts of all interview scripts were color-coded, I
combined sentences of the same color together under each research question. Then, under
each research question, I categorized similar stories together and re-organized themes and
patterns to develop narrations. Finally, I named these narrations with themes. At this
stage, I translated Japanese quotes into English.
138
Once the interview data were organized with themes under each research question
I started working on documents. As I indicated, I analyzed all my documents to see
which documents fit best with my research questions. Some documents were used to
support themes that emerged from my interview data.
However, after the interview data and documents were organized under each
theme within each research question, I realized that research questions needed to be
revised to make the most of my data. After revising the research questions, based on the
new questions, I again re-sorted categories, themes, and patterns from interview scripts
and documents. Some additional interview scripts and documents were added, while
others were eliminated because of the nature of the process after the research questions
were revised.
Then, I started reviewing observation data and added themes and patterns under
the new research questions. These observation data also supported or contradicted themes
which emerged from the other two methods. Finally, interviews, documents, and
observations were all combined to triangulate my data. This triangulation enhanced the
validity of my data because of cross-checking the phenomena observed from the three
different methods I used.
Data Analysis Methods for Each Question
I indicate what sources of data were used to answer each research question
(R.Q.).
R.Q. 1: What are the structures and provisions available to accommodate diversity in the
selected junior high school?
139
Three sources of data were used to answer R.Q. 1: Documents, interviews and informal
conversations, and observations.
z
Documents: Article 26 of the Constitution of Japan; the MEXT website;
“Shinshū education” written by Kaoru Ueda.
z
Interviews and informal conversations with: The school principal; teachers
(Mr. Banno, Mr. Egawa, Mr. Harada, Mr. Koshino, Ms. Ono, and Ms. Tomita); a school
counselor (Ms. Noda); a Ran school JSL teacher; a student (Wakayama).
z
Observations: A school counselor’s room; classroom observations (special
education class and supplemental JSL instruction for foreign students); the Ran school;
Ms. Noda.
R.Q. 2: What pedagogical strategies do teachers use in teaching diversity in the selected
junior high school?
Three sources of data were used to answer R.Q. 2: A document, interviews and informal
conversations, and observations.
z
A document: The civics textbook.
z
Interviews and informal conversations with: Teachers (Mr. Egawa, Mr.
Harada, Ms. Ono, Ms. Tomita, and others); Ms. Noda; students (Ichino, Sendo, and
others).
z
Observations of classrooms: A foreign language (Mr. Banno’s, Mr.
Clark’s and another teacher’s); integrated studies (seven teachers’); social studies (Mr.
Egawa’s and Mr. Harada’s); supplemental JSL instruction for foreign students.
140
R.Q. 3: What are the attitudes of teachers toward students who are different in the
selected junior high school?
Three sources of data were used to answer R.Q. 3: Documents, interviews and informal
conversations, and observations.
z
Documents: An archival document of Midori; the list of parents of
students; the list of students with financial aid.
z
Interviews and informal conversations with: Teachers (Mr. Clark, Mr.
Egawa, Mr. Harada, Mr. Yamano, Ms. Ono, and Ms. Tomita); Ms. Noda; parents (Mr.
and Mrs. Doi); students (Maeda, and Sendo); an administrative staff member.
z
Observations: Teachers.
R.Q. 4: What is the nature of the interactions between Japanese teachers/students and
minority students in the selected junior high school?
One source of data was used to answer R.Q. 4: Interviews and informal conversations.
z
Interviews and informal conversations with: Teachers (Mr. Harada and Ms.
Tomita); Ms. Noda; students (Sendo and Maeda).
Summary
Chapter 3 provided research methodology, including research design, and data
collection procedures, as well as data analysis procedures. Research design explained the
rationale for the research site and participants. Data collection procedures provided each
process of documents, observations, and interviews during the data-collection period and
also described my role as a researcher in the field. Data analysis procedures explained
transcription, coding and organization of data, the source of data used for each research
141
question, samples of interview questions for each group of informants, and inductive
analysis.
142
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSES AND DISCUSSION
This chapter will address and analyze the data using the literature reviewed and
the theoretical framework where it is necessary. The four research questions raised in the
first chapter are addressed here. The layout of the chapter is as follows:
z
Overview of the city.
z
Sakura Junior High School.
z
Sakura’s teachers.
z
Sakura’s students.
z
Daily timetable at Sakura.
z
Weekly timetable at Sakura.
z
Homeroom environment at Sakura.
z
Major principles of the CCE and government guidelines for teaching.
z
Descriptions of minority groups in teachers’ manuals and textbooks.
z
Biographies of teachers.
z
Biographies of students.
z
Biography of parents.
After the contextual and background information on the participants of the
study, each research question will be analyzed separately within emerging themes.
Presentation of the data follows the order of the research questions from one through
six. The data presentation is done concurrently with analyses and discussion.
Presentation of data and analyses and discussion are found in Chapter 4 of the
dissertation.
143
Overview of the City
The city of Midori is located in the Tokai Area, south of one of the major cities of
Japan. Midori is the largest of ten cities and towns in the region, with a total population
of 119,730 as of October, 2007. The classification of the population was Japanese
(116,560) and registered foreigners (3,170) (Midori city homepage, 2007).
The Midori International Association (Midori International Association, n.d.) in
2007 gave the total number of foreign residents (resident aliens) as 3,058 which
constituted 2.56% of the total population. This percentage was higher than the national
average of foreign residents (1.63%) announced in 2006 (for details, see Chapter 1). This
suggests that Midori was a more multiethnic city than others. The population numbers of
immigrants were as follows: Brazilians (1,779), Koreans (425), Chinese (300), Filipinos
(189), and Peruvians (158).9
In the prefecture, a growing number of South American immigrants, mainly
Brazilians, work in factories as a result of revision of the Immigration Control and
Refugee Recognition Act of 1990. This revised law allowed first- to third-generation
South Americans to settle legally in Japan (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2004, March).
In addition to these newcomers, old-time Korean residents who lived in a
prefecture (International exchange in a prefecture, a prefectural government) and who
willingly, or as a result of being forced, relocated to Japan during World War II, currently
comprise a large number of residents. The background of the growth of Brazilians and
large numbers of Koreans in the prefecture fit the trend of Midori’s foreign population.
9
Countries of residence after Peru are: Bolivia (42), Argentina (19), Turkey (17), Sri Lanka (16),
Vietnam (14), U.S.A.(12), Australia (10), Indonesia (9), Pakistan (9), Thailand (8), Great Britain (7),
Canada (6), Columbia (6), Nepal (5), Paraguay (4), Romania (4), Chile (3), Germany (3) India (2),
Malaysia (2), Belgium (1) Iran (1), Lebanon (1), Nigeria (1), Sweden (1), and Others (3).
144
Historically, Midori is famous for traditional local industry, including vinegar
production, clothing manufacturing, and shipping factories. The mild climate is used for
agriculture, such as rice, garden crops, and dairy farming. These products are transported
via roads and ships to neighboring regions. The main businesses include food processing
and clothing factories, and various industries within the costal industrial areas, such as
steel, machines, automobile parts, chemistry, and metal (Midori city homepage, 2007).
Sakura Junior High School
The Sakura Junior High School, established in the 1940s, is one of the largest
schools in the region. According to a greeting by the school principal, Mr. Gotanda, on
the Sakura website, the school seeks to cultivate students to become well-balanced in
intellectual knowledge, value of virtue, and physical health. Moreover, the school motto
is Self, Collaboration, and Responsibility. To achieve the motto, students, led by the
student senate, are encouraged to actively be involved in school events, such as the
School Olympics in the spring and the school festival in the fall (Greetings from the
school principal of Sakura Junior High School website, 2007, May 21).
Again, according to the school website, in terms of academic work, this school
did extensive research on Education for International Understanding during 1998 and
1999. The school was named a designated school for further research in integrated studies
by the board of education of the prefecture for the 1998-1999 period. The theme
Education for International Understanding was to cultivate students who have global
visions and are able to handle changes of society by themselves: Through intellectual
approaches toward integrated studies. Contents of the research were presented to the
public in 1999 and also posted on the school’s website (Sakura Junior High School
145
website, 2007, May 21). Furthermore, the school has implemented collaborative study
among students in all subjects since 2004. The purpose is to help students work together
and increase their knowledge through interacting with their friends (Greetings from the
school principal of Sakura Junior High School website, 2007, May 21).
Finally, the school website asserts that the school is also famous for student club
activities linked with the local Sakura Sports Club. This organization functions as a
comprehensive local club to promote sports activities and to develop lifelong learning.
By collaborating with the local sports organization it is claimed that many students gain
solid instruction and receive many awards (Greetings from the school principal of Sakura
Junior High School website, 2007, May 21).
The Sakura school district served a government-built apartment complex (public
housing) for low-income families. According to a residential director, as of April, 2009, a
total of 600 households lived in the apartment complex. The annual income of the
average primary income provider was approximately below 4,400,000 yen for a family of
four (equivalent to 45,427.1 United States Dollars in the international currency exchange
on April 30, 2009, Onda.com.). If the family income was below this amount, the
nationality of residents was disregarded. In fact, 30% of all residents were foreigners. The
majority group was Nikkei (Japanese-descendant) Brazilians and the rest were Nikkei
other South Americans, Chinese, and Koreans. Parallel to the increase of foreign
residents in the apartment complex, the enrollment of foreign students in Matsu
Elementary School and Sakura Junior High School has increased for the last few years.
There were no data available to show how many Sakura students, both Japanese
and foreign, lived in this apartment complex. However, the list of financial aid recipients
146
indicated that over 100 students received financial support for public school facilities.
Another school document, the list of parents of students, showed that almost 150 students
were from single-parent families. According to an administrative staff member, a full 9095% of these single-parent households were financial-support recipients.
Sakura’s Teachers
During my fieldwork in late 2007 and early 2008, this school had 57 teachers
and staff including school administrators, administrative staff, and counselors. The
gender ratio among the teachers was almost equal, with 29 male teachers and 28 female
teachers. However, the gender ratio in managerial positions was skewed. There were 11
administrative positions: One school principal, one vice principal, one position for
student guidance, one position for school facilities, a curriculum coordinator, one team
leader in each of three groups and its three vice-team leaders. Among these 11 positions,
only one, a team leader of eighth-grade teachers, was a woman.
A team leader and a vice-leader of teachers supervised a total of seven to eight
homeroom teachers and several specialized teachers as a team at one grade level. In the
seventh and eighth grades, the team leader and the vice-team leader also acted as cohomeroom teachers in classrooms with less-experienced primary teachers handling
homeroom duties. In addition to teachers with homeroom duties, there were teachers for
only specialized subjects. They helped teachers in specific grades with grade-specific
activities, meetings, and support for homeroom duties. For instance, there were 16 ninthgrade teachers: Eight homeroom teachers (including an vice-team leader with homeroom
duties); a team leader of teachers, Ms. Tomita who taught Japanese language and was in
charge of JSL instruction; one male home economics teacher who also served as a career
147
counselor; and five specialized teachers who supported homeroom duties if necessary.
These 16 teachers mainly taught the ninth-grade curriculum.
Sakura’s Students
As of January 7, 2008, Sakura Junior High School had 896 students (445 males
and 443 females). Out of 896 students, as of November 2007, 12 were foreign students
with the legal status of foreign residents (nationals or citizens) (Ms. Tomita). All other
students were called “Japanese students,” which included the children of ethnic Japanese,
domestic/indigenous minority groups, and naturalized Japanese (ex-foreigners) (for
details of categorization of each group, see Background & Operational Definitions of
Terms in Chapter 1 and Emic and Etic Descriptions of Terms in Chapter 2).
Because school policies adopted the population dichotomy between Japanese
and foreigners, except for some school administrators, nobody knew whether or not nonethnic Japanese students were present in Sakura. Even if there were some, teachers and
students could not tell who because these groups look like ethnic Japanese and have
Japanese names.10
Most foreign students in Sakura also had physical features similar to ethnic
Japanese because most of them were Nikkei (Japanese-descendant) Brazilians. However,
either their non-Japanese names or their enrollment in the JSL instruction informed
teachers and students of their foreign student status.
10
Only if minority students themselves revealed their ethnic background would the teachers and other
students know of it. In fact, Theme 3 of Research Question 3 in Chapter 4 has a story of a student with
Korean ethnic background who openly talks about her Korean family heritage.
148
Following school policies, this dichotomy was used among school administrators,
teachers, and students. Thus, I used the terms, Japanese and foreign students in chapters 4
and 5.
One or two homeroom teachers managed between 37 and 40 students in each
homeroom. The gender ratio in each homeroom was almost equal ranging from 18 to 21
each. There were seven homerooms in the seventh grade, eight homerooms each in the
eighth and ninth grades, and two special education classes with four students in Class
Eleven and four in Class Twelve. Special education students also belonged to the regular
homerooms.
Daily Timetable at Sakura
Table 3 shows a general daily timetable of the school, consisting of either five or
six periods for learning nine subjects.
149
Table 3: A Ninth-Grade Homeroom’s Daily Timetable
Time
7:00-8:05
8:15-8:25
8:25-8:30
8:30-8:45
8:50-9:40
9:40-9:50
9:50-10:40
10:40-10:50
10:50-11:40
11:40-11:50
11:50-12:30
12:30-1:10
1:10-1:30
1:30-2:20
2:20-2:30
2:30-3:20
3:20-3:35
3:35-3:50
3:50-
Activity
Morning club activity (optional)
Reading time
Morning meeting among students
Morning homeroom guidance by a teacher
1st period
Break
2nd period
Break
3rd period
Break
4th period
Lunch
Afternoon break
5th period
Break
6th period
Cleaning time
Homeroom guidance by a teacher
Club activity (optional)
Note. If there was no sixth period, the schedule moved directly to the cleaning time after the fifth
period
The daily schedule began with reading time at 8:15 in the morning and lasted until
homeroom guidance in the afternoon. Club activities were optional in the sense that the
1998 government guidelines for teaching (2004) removed club activities from such
extracurricular activities as homeroom activities and cleaning time. The ending time of
evening club activities varied seasonally. Homeroom teachers dealt with the daily routine
of homeroom guidance and supervision of lunch and cleaning time, and also managed
class time, including homeroom activity, moral education, and integrated studies.
Weekly Timetable at Sakura
A school-wide assembly was usually held every Monday morning between 8:15
and 8:45 for general school announcements at gymnasium. If the meeting lasted beyond
150
8:45, some of the first period was used for the assembly and the rest of the time was used
for homeroom guidance by homeroom teachers. Sometimes, homeroom activity time was
used for grade-specific meetings for special occasions, including school trip preparation,
career counseling, or interview preparation for high school exams.
Table 4: A Ninth-Grade Homeroom’s Weekly Timetable
Period
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
6th
Time
8:50-9:40
9:50-10:40
10:50-11:40
11:50-12:30
1:30-2:20
2:30-3:20
A
HA
FL
JL
Mu
Ar
IS
Block Schedule
B
C
D
ME SS
FL
Ma
Ma
SS
JL
Sc
Sc
PE
FL
JL
Sc
PE
El
El
E
Ma
HE
FL
PE
SS
Note. Ar = Art, El = Elective, F L = Foreign Language, H A = Homeroom Activity, H E = Home
Economics, I S = Integrated studies, J L = Japanese Language, Ma =Math, M E = Moral Education,
Mu = Music, P E =Physical Education, Sc = Science, S S = Social Studies, Created by Takeuchi
(2009)
Table 4 above shows a weekly timetable in one of the ninth-grade homerooms.
Instead of a date schedule, this school used a block schedule, meaning that each week had
a different combination of alphabet designations between A and E. This kept the
timetable from being influenced by holidays which mainly fall on either Monday or
Friday. In addition to different combinations of A through E each week, periods one
through six were sometimes switched within a day. This change usually occurred when
the school had only morning classes, canceling afternoon classes due to such occasions as
parent-teacher conferences in the afternoon or grade-specific meetings for
announcements. These schedule arrangements were decided by the teachers of each grade
and students were notified by newsletter or during homeroom guidance.
151
The school clock chimes the time at the beginning and end of each period. The
teacher of a subject comes to a classroom when the chime rings. When the teacher enters,
the homeroom student leader says, “Stand up” and when all students are standing, the
leader says “Bow.” The teacher who stands behind the teacher’s platform also bows to
the students. This ceremony between the teacher and students occurs before and after
each class.
Homeroom Environment at Sakura
Front Blackboard
Teacher’s
desk
Platform
Bulletin board
Windows
Front Door
Book shelf
Back door
Porch door
Book shelf
Hallway
Windows
Porch
Back blackboard
Lockers
Figure 1: A Typical Homeroom Setting
Figure 1 shows a typical homeroom setting. A homeroom logo drawing with
colorful designs by students was framed and hung above the front blackboard in each
homeroom to indicate the goal of the academic year. A block schedule was posted on the
bulletin board next to the front blackboard. The back blackboard was framed for a weekly
152
schedule and a class schedule of the day, with extra spaces for materials and
announcements. Between the end of one class and the beginning of the next, a pair of
students in each subject asked the subject teacher about what materials to bring for the
next class, and if there would be submission of notebooks, or small quizzes. They wrote
teacher’s announcement on the back blackboard for the next day and reminded their peers
during the afternoon homeroom guidance.
While the positions of the hanging logo and posted block schedule were unified
throughout the homerooms, other homeroom decorations on the walls and bulletin boards
provided some atmosphere of the relations among students and between students and
their homeroom teacher. For instance, students’ work such as a homeroom flag created
for the School Olympics and school related announcements were displayed on the rest of
the bulletin boards.
A common rule of seating arrangements across homerooms was that every other
file was occupied by only one gender. If the file closest to the window was the boys’
seats, the next row would be occupied only by girls. Each row interchanged a boy’s seat
and a girl’s seat.
Major Principles of the CCE and Government Guidelines for Teaching
According to the Central Council for Education (CCE) guidelines (MEXT 2004;
MEXT, 2007), the creation of an identity as Japanese is the ultimate goal for providing
public education in Japan. These guidelines emphasize that the cultivation of a Japanese
identity would be accomplished through learning and loving the history of the country
and regions, national culture and traditions, and understanding different cultures and
international cooperation (MEXT, 2007). This view followed the condition for being
153
Japanese as “those Japanese who claim the identity of Japanese culture in a wider
international perspective” (n.d.) in The Report on the Japanese People in the World, as
Nakamura (2005b) claims.
Government guidelines for teaching, created based on the recommendations from
the CCE reports, confirm identity formation as the ultimate goal in different subjects. For
instance, the guideline for foreign languages stated that the first core indicated the
importance of learning the culture behind the foreign language, whereas it also stated the
importance of simultaneously understanding Japanese culture (MEXT, 2006). This
description reminds one that foreign language education aims to enable students to
express their identity and culture as Japanese in a foreign language at the international
level.
Descriptions of Minority Groups in Teachers’ Manuals and Textbooks
Under the goal of cultivating a Japanese identity, the description of
domestic/indigenous minority groups and foreign residents varies in social studies
teachers’ manuals (Chūgakusyakai chiriteki bunya shidōsyō henshū iinkai, 11 n.d.;
Chūgakusyakai kōminteki bunya shidōsyō henshū iinkai, 12 n.d.; Chūgakusyakai
rekishiteki bunya shidōsyō henshū iinkai,13 n.d.) and textbooks (Kinda, et al., 2007; Satō,
et al., 2007; Suzuki, et al., 2007) based on sociopolitical factors. The indigenous Ainu and
Okinawans (Ryūkyūmin) were usually described side-by-side in geography (Kinda, et al.,
2007) and history books (Suzuki, et al., 2007) for forced assimilation and its results. A
major difference between the two groups was seen in human rights education in civics
11
Authors are translated as “the editorial committee of the junior high school geography manual.”
Authors are translated as “the editorial committee of the junior high school civics manual.”
13
Authors are translated as “the editorial committee of the junior high school history manual.”
12
154
(Satō, et al., 2007). Whereas Ainu were introduced as one of the discriminated groups,
Okinawans were not included as a targeted group for human rights education.
The descriptions of the Ainu and Okinawans presented historical events and
incidents plainly in the history manual (Chūgakusyakai rekishiteki bunya shidōsyō
henshū iinkai, n.d.), but Eta and Hinin (Burakumin) seemed written to create a sense of
sympathy among readers. For example, the mental and physical strength of Eta and Hinin
at the time of tax increases in the Edo Period were highlighted in comparison with the
weakness of farmers whose social class ranked second from the top of four divisions,
above Eta and Hinin. Moreover, there was not a single sentence written about Burakumin,
Eta, or Hinin in the geography textbook (Kinda, et al., 2007) and manual (Chūgakusyakai
chiriteki bunya shidōsyō henshū iinkai, n.d.). Since they were categorized as a former
outcaste group scattered in various regions of the country, they might not be listed in the
geography books.
Korean residents were introduced as the largest group of foreigners in Japan. In
the history textbook (Suzuki, et al., 2007), despite no background information of how
Koreans entered Japan since Meiji, their presence in the country first appeared in the
account of the massacre of many Koreans, Chinese, and socialists during the Great Kantō
Earthquake in 1923. In addition, as Mizuno (2003, March 21) argues, texts about the civil
rights movement and the cultural geography of Korean residents were much less common
than the rest of the minority groups. In linkage to Korean residents, foreigners were
described as laborers and residents from Asia and Latin America in a few paragraphs in
geography (Kinda, et al., 2007) and civics texts (Satō, et al., 2007). The presence of these
foreigners was also used to illustrate the concept of multicultural coexistence.
155
Despite the variety of ways to describe each minority group, a critical thinking
approach to understanding issues of minority groups was lacking in teachers’ manuals in
social studies (Chūgakusyakai chiriteki bunya shidōsyō henshū iinkai, n.d;
Chūgakusyakai kōminteki bunya shidōsyō henshū iinkai, n.d.; Chūgakusyakai rekishiteki
bunya shidōsyō henshū iinkai, n.d.) and moral education workbook/textbooks (MEXT,
2002a). Because of my focus only on minority groups, it cannot be concluded that the
critical thinking approach was insufficient throughout the entire scope of the social
studies manuals and moral education workbook/textbooks. However, the analyses of
approaches to learning about minority groups revealed that students were not encouraged
to question either past or present policies, although their current problems had been
strongly influenced by these imposed policies. The general rules of government
guidelines (MEXT, 2004) and social studies manuals (Chūgakusyakai chiriteki bunya
shidōsyō henshū iinkai, n.d; Chūgakusyakai kōminteki bunya shidōsyō henshū iinkai,
n.d.; Chūgakusyakai rekishiteki bunya shidōsyō henshū iinkai, n.d.) and textbooks (Kinda,
et al., 2007; Satō, et al., 2007; Suzuki, et al., 2007) have begun to acknowledge presence
of foreign residents in schools and communities. However, these descriptions do not
provide any contexts of how foreigners live.
Biographies of Teachers
Mr. Gotanda (school principal)
Mr. Gotanda was in his second year serving as the school principal at Sakura
Junior High School. He explained the role of school principal as the chair of all
responsibilities related to students’ matters and issues. He served as the chairperson in
such issues as bullying, truancy, and safety of students at the city level, and was also the
156
vice chairperson of social studies in the school principals’ organization in the region,
working on formulating a workbook of maps. He was doing a variety of research, such as
student guidance, roles of school lunch duty, and social studies curriculum, which he
presented at conferences for school principals. He had supervised various recreational
associations with teachers and community members, including a community baseball
team, city soccer competitions, and the go club. He supported student club activities, such
as purchasing new tools and materials, and going to watch students’ games at
competitions. His teaching subject was social studies.
Mr. Banno
Mr. Banno, 60, taught foreign language classes for the seventh-grade students. He
also had tutored JSL students for almost two years in Sakura. He had been a foreign
language teacher for 37 years in various junior high schools in the region. This was his
fourth year at Sakura and was also his final year as he would reach compulsory
retirement as a public school teacher. He retired in March, 2007.
Mr. Clark
Mr. Clark was a 30-year-old AET from Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Since April, 2007, he had rotated between Sakura and another school each month as a
visiting teacher of English language. His family had emigrated from Hong Kong, China,
to Vancouver when he was seven. He was bilingual in English and Cantonese. He
obtained a Bachelor’s in Agriculture Sciences (plants), and took Japanese as a foreign
language in university. He had lived in Japan since 2000 and started serving as an AET in
2006.
157
Mr. Egawa
Mr. Egawa, 34, supervised student guidance of the school. He also taught social
studies in three seventh-grade homerooms. He lived in the Sakura school district and had
graduated from the Sakura school almost 20 years ago. At a public teacher preparatory
university, he majored in psychology and added social studies education as a minor. He
taught five years in an elementary school and came to Sakura Junior High School eight
years ago. The job of student guidance counselor was to work on managing students in
school and also to work with the police for communities in the school district.
Mr. Harada
Mr. Harada was a 23-year-old male social studies instructor for seventh-grade
and ninth-grade students. He was regarded as a full-time instructor who had not passed
the teaching employment test conducted by the prefecture-level board of education.
When he passes, he will be considered a formal teacher. In his four years in a private
university, he majored in French literature and also obtained a social studies teaching
license. It was his second year teaching in junior high and his first year at Sakura Junior
High School. He worked as a vice-homeroom teacher supervising homeroom activities
when the homeroom teacher was absent. He also coached the soccer club.
Mr. Koshino
Mr. Koshino, 55, was a male homeroom teacher of students with special needs,
especially unstable students. He taught most classes for students with special needs along
with the female special education teacher. He also taught one seventh-grade social studies
class. He had experience teaching social studies and Japanese language during his 33-
158
year teaching career. For the three years he had worked as a special education teacher. He
coached the table-tennis club.
Ms. Noda
Ms. Noda, in her 30s, was a language counselor sent from the prefecture-level
board of education. She visited 83 elementary and junior high schools, socializing with
almost 230 foreign students in the region. Her Japanese parents emigrated to Brazil as
industrial immigrants who were not allowed to return to Japan. As a second-generation
Japanese-Brazilian, she spent one year studying at a Japanese high school, then went
back to Brazil to study to become a pharmacist. She held a hotel management job in
Australia for a while until she applied for the language counselor position in Japan. She
earned a career as a language counselor in a prefecture and moved to the Tokai Area for a
similar job. This was her second year in working as a counselor. After her two-year
experience, she planned to study in Canada to obtain a certificate in teaching English as a
second language.
Ms. Ono
Ms. Ono was a 62-year-old female part-time foreign language teacher for ninthgrade students. She retired from full-time teaching two years ago and was re-appointed to
teach for an additional three years after her formal retirement. In her life as a teacher, she
taught English language for a total of 37 years, including 33 years in junior high schools
and four years in high school. She taught at Sakura Junior High School 20 years ago as a
formal teacher and came back as a part-time teacher in 2007. At a previous school, she
taught Japanese to foreign students who needed supplemental JSL instruction for a year.
She was also a vice-adviser of the athletics club.
159
Ms. Tomita
Ms. Tomita, a 49-year-old female teacher, taught ninth-grade Japanese language
classes. She also served as the first chairperson of JSL instruction for Sakura foreign
students who needed supplemental JSL instruction. After teaching in elementary schools
for 19 years, Ms. Tomita came to the Sakura School, where she had been teaching
Japanese language for eight years. She also had participated in JSL seminars held in the
Tokai area.
Mr. Yamano
Mr. Yamano, in his 50s, was a ninth-grade homeroom teacher and taught ninthgrade math classes. He had also been a women’s softball club coach for over two decades
at various junior high schools, winning many prefectural and national competitions. He
was very passionate about engaging with students through softball and spent most
weekends with training and practices. He had experience in teaching special education
students. He had been at Sakura for eight years.
Biographies of Students
Ichino
Ichino was a 15-year-old Japanese returnee from the United States. He had
originally lived in the Sakura area and then his father’s job moved the family to Michigan
for six years. After he graduated from an American middle school in June of 2007, he
was re-enrolled in a middle-school equivalent, Sakura Junior High School, the following
September. He met up with his former friends at Sakura. He was an athlete, had belonged
to the athletic club at his American school and was a soccer club member at Sakura.
160
Maeda
Maeda, 15, was actively involved with school events by being a class leader, a
project manager, and the representative of the ninth-grade students. In addition to his
leadership in events, he spent extra time studying, especially English. His visit to Ichino
in Michigan with two friends during spring break had promoted his interest in studying in
North America in the future. He belonged to a swimming club which took second prize in
the prefecture-level competition, and participated in a regional competition.
Sendo
Sendo, a 13-year-old girl, played percussion in the brass band club. Her favorite
subject was math. She belonged to a Hippo Family Club, a private organization to
promote 19 different foreign language learning experiences through music, dance, and
international exchange programs. As a part of the international exchange program, she
experienced a month-long homestay in the United States in summer, 2007.
Wakayama
Wakayama, 13, was a seventh-grade student from Brazil. She was one of JSL
students. Her favorite subjects were math and art classes. She also belonged to an art
club. She had lived in Japan for two years but missed friends and relatives in Brazil.
Biography of Parents
Mr. and Mrs. Doi
Mr. and Mrs. Doi were parents of Doi who belonged in Mr. Yamano’s
homeroom. Mr. Doi was the president of the Parent-Teacher Association (PTA) at Sakura
Junior High School. He also served as the president of the PTA at the elementary school
located in the same district. He was appointed president of the community organization
161
for protecting Sakura youths in the school year of 2008-2009. He worked at Midori City
Hall as a local public information officer. Mrs. Doi was a housewife and also worked as
an officer of an organization called Future Children-bearing Network. The Dois had two
children and had lived in the Sakura area for over ten years.
162
ANALYSES OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Research Question 1
This question focused on exploring the structure and provisions that were
available in the schools to accommodate diversity. The three themes that emerged from
this research question are shown in the diagram below:
Research Question 1:
What are the structures and provisions available to accommodate diversity in the
selected junior high school?
Themes
z
Theme 1: Teachers’ opinions about their role as teachers
z
Theme 2: Institutional barriers to a returnee student for public high school
exams
z
Theme 3: Provisions for different/“Other” students
Figure 2: Research Question 1 and Emerging Themes
Theme 1: Teachers’ Opinions About Their Role As Teachers
Theme 1 focused on finding out what teachers thought about their role as public
servants. Some referred to government guidelines for teaching and to manuals, while
others did not. There were variations of the amount and quality of guidance among
different subject areas. However, teachers encountered various challenges from the
MEXT to provide appropriate guidance to students.
163
Figure 3 shows the progression of the government teaching guidelines, teachers’
manuals, and textbooks.
Note. Created by Takeuchi (2009) with reference to the MEXT website.
Figure 3: The Flow Chart Showing the Hierarchical Organization of the Japanese School
System
164
Government guidelines for teaching cover the national curriculum, the standard
foundation of creating a school curriculum in each school. Based on the content of these
guidelines, teachers’ manuals and textbooks were created and revised by private textbook
companies. The Textbook Authorization Council under the MEXT verifies and reviews
all textbooks for their appropriateness for use in schools. Once the authorization is
completed by the MEXT, the board of education, which administers each local school,
chooses one authorized textbook for each teaching subject. Because of the involvement
of MEXT in teachers’ manuals and the textbook authorization process, their perspectives
are reflected in these manuals and textbooks (MEXT, 2007, July).
This hierarchical structure positions the MEXT at the top, divided by the
prefectural-level boards of education or the boards of education of major cities, then
further by the city-level boards of education under the prefectural division, and then each
public school. Due to this structure, teachers’ opinions about these rules and guidance
materials demonstrate the possibilities and constraints of being a teacher.
Ms. Ono, a foreign language teacher, emphasized the importance of following
rules and regulations assigned for all public school teachers as follows:
I do refer to the government guidelines for teaching and teachers’ manuals.
Because we have legal constraints, we need to know the framework, rather than
details….First, the textbook is chosen [by the board of education]. We have
teachers’ manuals from the textbook company. So, as do the social studies, the
language manuals have details, too. (Ms. Ono)
Mr. Koshino, a social studies teacher, also cross-checked teachers’ manuals to
confirm the availability of related materials and keywords. He told me that he checked
the manual each year because the revised manuals were always slightly different from the
previous version. So, even if he taught the same grade as last year, he still needed to
165
review the latest version of the textbook and its manuals. These revisions are made every
three years.
In contrast to Ms. Ono and Mr. Koshino, Mr. Harada, a social studies teacher for
seventh and ninth grade, stopped using the manuals. He said, “In fact, at first, when I was
teaching classes, I often referred to the manual. I taught contents in the flow the manuals
guided, but the class itself did not go well.” I asked him, “Can you tell me any reasons
why your classes did not go well?” He said, “I felt that I might be too conscious of the
manual, like I had to teach the contents written in it.” However, he felt relieved of the
pressure when he started giving students short quizzes at the beginning or the end of
classes. He said:
Once I started doing small quizzes, like five questions in every class, I felt that
it would be all right to just point out the important keywords and events in class.
I cannot say it is all right, but at least I was relieved of that pressure from the
manuals and felt comfortable personally. Therefore, recently, I teach themes I
like to tell students while small quizzes cover the important events and key
words from the textbook. (Mr. Harada)
Both Ms. Ono and Mr. Koshino, who followed national guidelines and rules,
thought that government guidelines for teaching and teachers’ manuals were provided by
governmental officials and policymakers. According to Ms. Ono:
I think that it would be good to establish a system in which the textbook
companies listen to teachers’ responses about their textbooks. After all, the topdown approach is difficult. It should be interactive between the top and the
bottom. (Ms. Ono)
With her word “top” she meant the textbook companies and policymakers. I asked her if
the bottom would be teachers and students. She said:
Well, students do not know [about this situation]. They get the textbooks
teachers teach. We teachers might not be so different from students. Textbooks
166
are decided without teachers in the real teaching field. Textbooks are not so
much related to teachers. Because of that, teachers only follow the given
textbooks, although they are free to add relevant themes. At least teachers
explain textbooks in simple words to students. That process might involve risks
of being a simple operation. It might be easy and good, though. (Ms. Ono)
Her comment demonstrates the weaker position of teachers who are required to
teach materials provided by the government officials and policymakers. Despite some
space for teaching additional themes, her comment implies that teaching could become
mechanical if teachers are seen as the only ones who can explain the contents and facts
guided by the government guidelines for teaching and teachers’ manuals.
Mr. Koshino agreed with the view of the top-down approach as follows:
[The government guidelines for teaching and teacher’s manuals] are from the top.
I was born in the Nagano Prefecture and often heard of ‘Shinshū education.’ I
believe that teachers worked hard to research what they had taught to students. I
experienced that sort of education as a student. Also, I think about things by
socializing with children face-to-face. Teachers take the minimum requirement
of what they must teach given from the top. I believe that [things I experienced
as a student and things I do as a teacher guided from the top] are slightly in
different directions….I think that the Ministry of Education’s policies or
something like that has the great power for the status quo. (Mr. Koshino)
I was not familiar with ‘Shinshū education,’ so Mr. Koshino excerpted paragraphs of “the
educational theory of Shinshū” written by Kaoru Ueda (1976) with which he agreed.
According to the excerpts, after regular working hours, elementary school teachers in
Shinshū started discussing pedagogy and doing research to provide better education for
their students. Shinshū teachers’ pedagogy, formulated by passionate discussions among
teachers in schools, showed that teachers had freedom to practice their theories and ideals.
In contrast, stories from Ms. Ono and Mr. Koshino did not give a picture of teachers’
freedom to take decisive actions on their own. Moreover, they are discouraged from
167
creating their own pedagogy with students from the perspective of the MEXT which
overseas the role of teachers.
On the other hand, Ms. Tomita, the teacher of Japanese language, told me that
school provisions were another factor making it difficult for teachers to create their own
lesson plans. In comparison to the foreign language and social studies, guidelines for
Japanese language offered flexibility to create classes together with students. However, in
reality, two teachers were assigned to teach the entire ninth grade and to give the same
midterms and final exams. If one teacher tried new materials and activities in classes
without notifying the other, that class might lack consistency with other classes taught by
another teacher. The inconsistency needed to be eliminated as much as possible. In
addition to the structural barrier to create a curriculum because of the split teaching duty
for a whole grade, the midterm and final exams kept the class busy covering materials for
these exams.
Ms. Tomita used to teach at elementary schools prior to the Sakura school and
had experience in creating a curriculum as a member of the curriculum committee. So,
from that experience, she knew that it was possible to add various activities alongside the
textbook. What makes it possible for teachers to add various activities is the system that
homeroom teachers teach most subjects to their homeroom students. Most elementary
school teachers are responsible for teaching core subjects to students in one classroom to
which they are assigned as homeroom teachers. Therefore, homeroom teachers spend
much more time with their students and have more freedom to make decisions with the
students in their homeroom.
168
Unlike elementary school teachers, junior high school teachers teach a specific
subject to more than their own homerooms. Their time with homeroom students is less
than in elementary school, while more time is spent for exam preparation. Because of the
structural differences between elementary and junior high school, Ms. Tomita told me
that it was realistically difficult to make a creative learning environment in junior high
schools.
From the opinions of teachers about their role, most of them felt that the
government teaching guidelines and teachers’ manuals are hegemonic from the top.
Voices of teachers, who deliver knowledge from these guidelines to students, are neither
considered nor included in these guidelines and manuals. Mr. Harada’s reaction that he
no longer paid much attention to the manuals demonstrates the gap between official
knowledge imposed on teachers and what he thought was important for students to learn
in class. In addition to the hegemonic power of the curriculum, the school provision of
giving both the mid-term and final exams per academic semester and two subject teachers
assigned for each subject makes it difficult for teachers to create curricula with students.
The hegemonic curriculum and inflexible school provision would not encourage
teachers to try new pedagogy or to provide intriguing learning environments with
students in their class time. In this situation, how do teachers still keep their motivation to
stay on the job? To this question, two responses were heard: Some teachers try to connect
with students in their class time with their own pedagogy, and others devote themselves
to student club activity as coaches. In both cases, when they engage with students and see
students’ growth, teachers feel a sense of fulfillment. Moreover, teaching and coaching
are the two major activities teachers directly use to influence students’ achievement. This
169
is the common approach teachers take in order to motivate themselves and perform their
duties as teachers. In other words, teachers try to find personal and professional reasons
for this occupation, rather than resist the hegemonic curriculum and inflexible school
provisions.
These two activities teachers were involved in, however, would lead to different
outcomes for students. On one hand, teachers’ focus on the pedagogy and relationships
with students in classes would earn multiple advantages. Due to the creating of a caring
relationship between the teacher and the student, these students tended to be more
interested in subject matters taught by the teacher, their self-esteem was enhanced, and
they cared more about others (Noddings in foreward in Bingham & Sidorkin, 2004).
On the other hand, teachers who devote themselves to club activity might not be
as passionate about teaching as they are in the club activity. In fact, Mr. Koshino, who
was very committed to educating his table tennis (Ping pong) club members, did not have
the same passion about his social studies class. He was discouraged about teaching
students because he was unable to discipline them and to maintain control in class. In fact,
when I asked him for permission to observe his seventh-grade social studies class, he
indirectly refused my request.14 He told me that he was very reluctant to teach that class
because students were disruptive and did not have basic attitude to listen to his lectures.
His facial expression and gestures also showed that he was unmotivated. Consequently,
his students lost an opportunity to learn social studies and also to learn from the teacher
in class time.
14
Out of 58 periods of classroom observations, this was the only time my request to observe was
rejected. Prior to this, Mr. Koshino allowed me to observe his special education class and shared
various stories with me after that class.
170
Furthermore, from the current teaching guidelines, club activities have been
exempted from the time required for homeroom activities and have become an option for
students and teachers. In other words, the educational importance of the club activity has
diminished in the curriculum, even if the activity is still critical for many students, as well
as teachers, in terms of relationships between the teacher and students and among
students and to foster human development and discipline, as well as mental and physical
strength.
The different outcomes for students in these two cases would be articulated in a
caring relationship between the teacher and the students. Noddings (1992) argued that the
reaction of students as care-receivers reflects back to the enthusiasm of caregiving
teachers:
[Students] must understand that their responses enliven or dampen their
teachers’ enthusiasm. Students have tremendous effects on their teachers, and
these possibilities should be discussed openly. The contributions of teachers and
students are necessarily unequal, but they are nonetheless mutual; the
relationship is marked by reciprocity. Students cannot be expected to teach their
teachers, but they can be expected to respond with growing sensitivity to
attempts to promote their own growth. (p. 108)
Sakura teachers seek their personal fulfillment in building caring relationships with
students within their limited autonomy and freedom embedded in the fixed curriculum
and provisions. In this condition, their expectation for students’ responses as the carer
might be even higher to satisfy their sense of achievement as teachers.
Theme 2: Institutional Barriers to a Returnee Student for Public High School Exams
Public schools have various implicit and explicit rules, regulations, and customs.
Not only foreign, but also unconventional Japanese students, such as the children of
Japanese expatriates (returnee students), encounter structural problems because of their
171
unique backgrounds and experiences that their school communities have not experienced.
Structural problems for unconventional Japanese students are predictable because
guidelines for teaching presume that all students who attend Japanese schools “were born
and been brought up in Japan” (the 1989 government guidelines for moral education,
cited in Parmenter, 1999). Returnee students might not meet the assumption of either
condition. If they do not, what happens?
Returnee students encounter institutional barriers because school provisions are
created based on the life experiences of the majority students who “were born and been
brought up in Japan” (the 1989 government guidelines for moral education, cited in
Parmenter, 1999). The typical Japanese student graduates from a nearby elementary
school at 12 and enters a junior high school within the same school district, graduating
from there at 15. Those who do not experience this sequence of compulsory education,
such as foreign and returnee students, are likely to face difficulties in the closed and
inflexible school structure.
Mr. Gotanda told me of a ninth-grade student of a Japanese family returning
from the United States. Mr. Gotanda used his story to tell me how multicultural education,
which acknowledges and accepts individual differences, might be similar to making the
most of personality, but these two approaches are different. In the story, the student,
Ichino, lived in Michigan for six years. His family moved there when Ichino was a ninth
grader in an elementary school in the Sakura area. In Michigan, his family lived in an
area where many other Japanese expatriates stayed. He went to an American school from
Monday through Friday and sometimes went to a supplemental JSL school on Saturday.
In June of 2007, Ichino graduated from an American middle school which is equivalent
172
to the Japanese junior high school. Since his father’s work assignment was completed,
the family returned to the Sakura area.
Ichino had two options. He could enroll in the Sakura school in September and
graduate in March. The second option was to not go to Sakura, but to prepare to apply to
high school which had a special selection process for returnee children. In the second
option, he would have had six months of no schooling because of the timing of American
middle school graduation. Between these two options, his parents hoped that Ichino could
catch up with learning the Japanese language and the social studies which he had not
learned in the American school. His parents and the school officials decided to process
his enrollment in Sakura Junior High School.
Ichino started in the Sakura school in September with his old friends. He had a
hard time learning Japanese and social studies after a six-year gap. His grades in these
two subjects were not good compared to other subject areas. The lower grades in these
two subjects mattered because he now had to prepare for the regular high school entrance
examination process as a Sakura student. All public high schools and some private
schools require submission of a student’s academic records in the nine core subjects,
including Japanese and social studies, as part of the selection process.
If he had selected the special entrance examination system for returnee students,
Ichino could have entered a prestigious public or private high school with just letters of
recommendation along with the American middle school diploma. However, since he reenrolled in the Sakura school, he was treated as one of the Sakura students who did not
have American experiences.
173
These special entrance examination systems are available for children of
Japanese expatriates. However, Ichino did not use the special system and re-entered the
public school. Public high school exams in a prefecture select applicants using three
criteria: The total grades of the ninth grade, test scores in five core subjects on the exam
date, and an interview. However, in reality, total grades play a vital role in the selection
process because test scores and an interview do not show a wide enough range of
academic performances of all applicants. Therefore, it would be likely that Ichino’s lower
grades in Japanese and social studies in his grade report and his test scores would impact
more on the exams than his interview that would consider his outstanding talent in
conversation in English and adjustment to a different culture. Mr. Gotanda felt sad that
Ichino’s talent with multicultural experiences outside of Japan would be buried in the
reality of public school entrance examinations.
Mr. Gotanda’s idea of making the most of Ichino’s personality implies drawing
the boy’s talent out within the framework of the school structure. To the contrary,
multicultural education, which acknowledges individual differences, implies
transformation of the school structure if individual differences cannot fit into
conventional structure and provisions. In his case, teachers tried to help Ichino improve
his grades in Japanese language and social studies within the framework of the school
culture and the exam procedure, instead of changing the conventional provisions to make
the most of his talent. Similar to other foreign students, Ichino adjusted himself to fit into
the fixed system.
174
Theme 3: Provisions for Different/“Other” Students
Theme 3 pays special attention to provisions for meeting the needs of different/
“other” students. These students include special education students (autism, emotional
disturbance, and mental retardation), students of alternate placement in a counselor’s
room because of their temporary mental instability, and foreign students. One of the
major findings in this theme is unequal distribution of individualized instructions
between different/ “other” Japanese students and foreign students with limited Japanese
language skills.
This disparity of school provisions between Japanese and foreign students was
due to the influence of Article 26 of Constitution of Japan which states the compulsory
education requirement for “Japanese nationals.” Japanese nationals (citizens) include
ethnic Japanese, domestic/indigenous minority groups, and naturalized Japanese (exforeigners) and exclude students with foreign resident status, i.e., foreign students in my
study. Thus, Article 26 implies a hidden curriculum: Article 26 demonstrated the
exclusion of foreign students by not including them in the statement.
This section begins with an illustration of special education students and
students with temporary mental instability in need of alternate placement in a counselor’s
room. Sub-themes under foreign students include no obligation for compulsory education
in Article 26, the classification of foreign students and school provisions for their needs,
as well as other services provided by language counselors who visit the school from the
board of education.
In addition to returnee Ichino, Sakura has different/ “other” Japanese students:
Students with special needs, one set of students in Class Eleven and Class Twelve, and
175
the other group in a counselor’s room. Provisions for these students demonstrate how the
Sakura school treats students who are exceptional in terms of needing extra support and
provisions to attend school. I think that in view of these provisions for special needs
students, it is important to understand the school’s flexibility to meet their needs within
the framework of public schools.
In fact, I realized that the approach for special education students was similar to
that for foreign students. One factor was that the academic needs of each student were
different, so a teacher used different handouts in a small classroom setting. For instance,
in the Japanese language class for special education students, two teachers, Mr. Koshino
and a female teacher, taught a total of eight students. Among the eight, one was autistic,
another was emotionally disturbed, and the remaining six were developmentally delayed
with intelligence quotients below seventy-five.
Due to the different handicaps, teachers gave a different level of Japanese
language drill exercises to each student. These drill exercises, which help students write,
read, and memorize kanji (Chinese characters), specify the targeted grade levels based on
the national requirement for the numbers of kanji learned by certain grades. In the case of
special education students and foreign students, the grade written on the drill exercises
did not match their actual grade or sometimes even their age (for foreign students). For
example, one eighth-grade girl student had limited understanding of kanji characters due
to a learning disability. She was working on a fourth-grade drill.
In contrast to students with disabilities, foreign students’ literacy in Japanese
language relied heavily on the time and effort of learning Japanese as a second language,
so, each student’s knowledge varied. Furthermore, in some cases, the grade to which
176
foreign students belonged did not match their physical age because of the language
barrier. The grade of foreign students was determined by discussion between the board of
education and the students’ parents.
Therefore, students in special education and foreign students were gathered in
separate small classrooms for the purpose of individualized instruction. Each student in
the room was unique in age, grade, homeroom, and special needs for academic and
physical assistance. The commonality of these two groups of students was to share the
small learning environment in addition to their main homerooms. Because of different
academic needs, teachers guided each student individually to learn different materials and
to answer questions.
A similar kind of individualized instruction was used for students with
temporary emotional instability staying in a counselor’s room. According to Mr. Gotanda,
17 students were permitted to stay in a room different from their own homerooms and
their attendance was counted there. Being in the counselor’s room meant that students
were unable to take classes with their homeroom peers because of personal problems,
such as being bullied by their classmates.
According to a school counselor, the Sakura school used to use the nurse’s office
but with students there being treated for injuries or recuperating, the nurse’s office was
full and could not deal with everyone. Therefore, a few small classrooms were allocated
for the students with temporary emotional problems.
These students tended to be absent from school if they were forced to stay in
their homerooms. Because junior high school education is mandatory, students needed to
attend a certain number of days to graduate. Thus, allowing these students in an alternate
177
placement separated from their homeroom peers was an option that allowed their school
attendance to be counted.
The largest difference between these exceptional Japanese students and foreign
students was the obligation for compulsory education. According to the Constitution of
Japan and the FLE, six years of elementary school education and three years of junior
high school education, nine years in total, were considered compulsory for all children
aged six through 15 years. These rules were protected by Article 26 of the Constitution of
Japan which states:
1.
All people shall have the right to receive an equal education correspondent
to their ability, as provided for by law.
2.
All people shall be obligated to have all boys and girls under their
protection receive ordinary education as provided for by law. Such compulsory education
shall be free. (Japan Institute of Constitutional Law, 2004)
“All people” written in this statement implies the inclusion of both Japanese and foreign
students. However, the English translation of “all people” is not what is written in the
original Japanese text.
The original text states “the national (citizen),” instead of “all people” in English
translation. This “national” means “Japanese nationals” who have Japanese nationality
(citizenship). Whether or not students are protected by Article 26 depends on their
citizenship status. Japanese nationals include ethnic Japanese, and domestic/indigenous
minority groups, as well as naturalized Japanese (ex-foreigners). In contrast, students
with foreign resident status, such as the foreign students in my study, are not included.
178
To summarize, the right and obligation of children with Japanese citizenship to
receive an equal education are protected under this law, whereas there is no implication
that the same rights are available to children with foreign resident status. Moreover, no
written indications of rights of foreign residents exist throughout the entire text of the
Constitution of Japan. Thus, the rights of foreign residents depend on interpretations of
the Constitution (Ōta, 2000).
Among various interpretations of the rights for foreign residents, the major one
is that “fundamental human rights apply equally to resident foreigners living in our nation,
except for certain contents which are understood to target only Japanese citizens, based
on the nature of some rights” (Satō, 1991, p. 382, cited in Ōta, 2000, p. 140). On the basis
of this interpretation, there are two opposing views of whether the right to receive an
education applies to children with foreign resident status. In one interpretation, “the
national” in the text of the Constitution does not exclude foreign residents as follows:
Although Article 26 limits the subject as ‘all nationals,’ based on the nature of
this right, the target is not limited to Japanese nationals. It must be interpreted
that residents who stay in Japan for a long time are qualified for these rights and
obligations. (Tezuka, 1995, p. 270, cited in Ōta, 2000, p. 140)
The other interpretation is that the right to receive an education is similar to suffrage, the
right of maintaining the minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living, and the
right and the obligation to work, in terms of the peculiar rights for the Japanese in nature.
Thus, the right to receive an education does not apply to foreign residents (Shimada, 1993,
cited in Ōta, 2000).
Between these two interpretations, the MEXT follows the latter as follows:
The Constitution of Japan and the FLE state that nationals shall be obligated to
have all boys and girls under their protection receive ordinary education as
179
provided for by law. Therefore, this statement is understood that the obligation
to provide ordinary education applies only to those who hold the nationality of
our nation, and not to foreigners [italics added]. (MEXT, 2008, June)
This policy accepts citizens with permanent foreign resident status based on
discussions about educational matters in the treaty on basic relations between Japan and
the Republic of Korea in 1965. It promised that: The board of education must accept the
desire of enrollment of permanent foreign residents in nearby public elementary and
junior high schools, if requested (The notice of administrative vice-minister, 1965, cited
in Ōta, 2000). When this policy was announced by the Ministry of Education in 1965, it
applied only to Koreans residents. However, it has been considered the fundamental
measure of the Ministry of Education for education of foreign students (Ōta, 2000).
Furthermore, the MEXT stresses that acceptance of foreign students at the request of their
parents is one way to follow the International Covenant on Human Rights. It states:
…in order to follow the regulations of the International Covenant on Human
Rights, public elementary and junior high schools take the measure to accept
foreign children who hope for enrollment in public schools. From these
approaches, the right of receiving education for foreign children is guaranteed.
(MEXT, 2008, June)
In this statement, the MEXT points out that the public schools maintain the rules
of international law by accepting foreign children and pupils who wish to be enrolled.
Once accepted, these children are supposed to be treated equally with the Japanese, such
as requiring no fees for tuition and textbooks. The schools need to provide special
treatment, including Japanese language instruction, guidance for school life, and
academic work, to accept these students.
180
Government guidelines for teaching general rules (MEXT, 2004) also have a
statement about accepting Japanese children of overseas expatriates and foreign students
as follows: “teachers provide appropriate guidance to students, such as those returning
from overseas, such as trying to help them adapt to the school life and utilize their life
experiences in foreign countries” (p. 114). Detailed guidance specifies that teachers
understand the situation of each student, such as the country of stay, periods, age, and
educational materials, and care about each student. Japanese language instruction is
mentioned as “regarding the Japanese language acquisition, it is necessary to frame stepby-step an effective guidance mainly for reading and writing, while daily activities are
basic (p. 114).”
In the case of learning subject matter, government teaching guidelines emphasize
the importance of careful examination of the ability of each student and focuses on
appropriate training based on the child’s ability, such as extracurricular time for special
guidance. The guideline focuses more on suitable guidance for each student than on
trying to finish uncompleted themes. Teachers are expected to be sensitive about the
students’ relationship with their peers when they face troubles because of differences in
their life style, or language barriers. For foreign students, teachers should try to introduce
their language and culture in extracurricular activities. Teachers are encouraged to take
advantage of these different life experiences to help other students learn about languages
and cultures of other nations and deepen international understanding.
Under this fundamental measure of the MEXT and the guidelines for teaching,
many teachers encounter limits to providing enough support and care for foreign students
because of insufficient protection for them under Japanese law and insufficient resources.
181
In fact, when I visited the Ran Elementary School for a day with the language counselor,
Ms. Noda, I learned the limitation of teachers’ support for foreign students in public
schools. When a newly enrolled seven-year-old Brazilian girl student refused to come to
school because she couldn’t adapt to the school environment, her mother requested the
teachers’ extra care and support. Without that, her mother told teachers, she would
transfer her child to a privately owned Brazilian school for Brazilian children.
The reaction of JSL teachers and her homeroom teacher to the mother’s request
was that they could not provide special care only to that child because the school had 60
other foreign students. Three JSL classrooms and three teachers were provided to
accommodate those 60 foreign students. According to Ms. Noda, who observed over 80
schools in the region, the overall environment for foreign students at Ran Elementary was
more caring than at other schools.
These teachers had adopted unconventional rules only for this child. First, she
would not eat regular Japanese school lunches (with which she was not familiar and
which differed from her Brazilian diet at home), so she did not eat lunch at all. Her
mother sent a lunch box to school for her without any consultation with teachers. Despite
the unconventional treatment, the school had to tacitly approve the lunch box. Second,
she refused to enter her regular homeroom, so a teacher had her stand outside the door to
the homeroom. Thus, one extra teacher was assigned only to her during her first semester
in the school. Third, the girl stopped coming to the school once the third semester began
in early January, 2008.
182
The mother’s claim was that only if the school provided special treatment for the
child, would stay she in the school. Her aunt promised to notify Ms. Noda once the
family made a decision.
After discussions among the teachers who know her, they reached consensus that
the school could not force the child to come to school as long as her parents were
planning to transfer her to a Brazilian school. Because it was a public school, the teachers
could not provide special menus only for her. As long as she stayed in a Japanese school,
she needed to follow school rules. If not, the only option she had would be to change the
school itself. They also thought that all other foreign students had gone through hard
adjustment periods, so she needed to be patient and pass through a similar process.
From the standpoint of the homeroom teacher, his or her attention per child was
1:40 in a regular homeroom which typically had 40 students. To overcome the lack of
attention to foreign students, the school had special JSL classrooms to give them more
attention and care. If this child did not feel comfortable in a JSL classroom, there was
nothing much that the school could do for her. The homeroom teacher treated her in the
same way as her Japanese peers and could not provide special care only because the child
was “a foreigner.”
This story shows various challenges to public schools, such as limitations to
providing special menus for foreign students, one-sided claims by parents with little
understanding or consideration of Japanese school rules, and no consultation by parents
with teachers about important matters. One JSL teacher also told me that compulsory
education was mandatory for Japanese children, while foreign children did not have that
obligation. Therefore, even if the age of a foreign child matched the Japanese children’s
183
age for compulsory education, the school had the option of withdrawing a foreign child’s
enrollment in extreme cases where he or she caused problems. When the school needed
to make important decisions about its foreign students, Article 26 of the Constitution of
Japan played a critical role in the decisions of the school.
Ōta (2000) claims that “it is natural to have different treatment for foreign
students because their enrollment in the school is not ‘obligation,’ but ‘on request of
students.’ This is even if they were provided ‘the same provisions as the Japanese
pupils/students’ [guided by the MEXT]” (p. 143). In fact, teachers’ double standard
toward absences of students, discussed under Research Question 3, is an example of
different attitudes of teachers toward Japanese and foreign students. Teachers sometimes
give different treatment to foreign students because they are not obligated to help those
students complete compulsory education. Teachers’ decisions and mindset for different
provisions are strongly influenced by structures and provisions given by the MEXT.
Teachers’ decisions and mindset about foreign students, different from the
Japanese students, are articulated with social reproduction theory and the hidden
curriculum. The perception of teachers is a reflection of the hegemony of ethnic Japanese
demonstrated in Nihonjinron and educational policies and provisions proposed
hierarchically from the MEXT. These policies and provisions remind teachers that Japan
is a country for Japanese citizens, and education is to educate those future citizens of
Japan. Following the perceived mono-ethnic view of the society, future citizens of Japan
do not necessarily include citizens of foreign origins.
These messages teachers receive from educational policies and provisions are
the hidden curriculum because, along with Article 26, they do not explicitly describe the
184
exclusion of foreigners. However, by not actually mentioning them, the tacit “hidden”
message of these statements excludes foreigners, or at least people “read between lines”
and receive the hidden message of who is not included.
Moreover, teachers’ actions toward foreign students perpetuate the notion that
education is only for “Japanese” children. In other words, teachers embody the concept of
Nihonjinron and educational policies and provisions and transmit a racialized message to
people around them. Foreign students would also receive the message and internalize this
concept as their reality in living in Japan as foreigners.
According to Ms. Tomita, 12 foreign students were enrolled in Sakura as of
November, 2007. In April, 2007, JSL instruction with an assigned room and teachers
started with just over ten15 foreign students. Ms. Tomita, who also taught ninth-grade
Japanese, was the first chairperson of the JSL curriculum, collaborating with homeroom
teachers, and coordinating with language counselors sent from the board of education.
Two language counselors, one Brazilian and one Japanese, were sent from the prefectural
level of the board of education, while another Japanese counselor from the city’s board
of education visited.
As the MEXT definition of foreign pupils and students needing JSL instruction
revealed in Chapter 2, foreign students’ knowledge of the Japanese language varied
individually. Out of 12 foreign students, seven were required to take JSL classes. Sakura
adopted a combined method of separate intensive JSL classes and Team Teaching (T2) in
the classrooms.
15
According to rumors, one foreign student returned to his home country, but since he did not inform
the school, he is still included in the public documents. 185
During the normal academic schedule of the first to sixth periods, separate
intensive JSL classes were offered four times per week, with a twice-per-week class for
one ninth-grade student. The JSL instruction time schedule basically fit with the students’
Japanese language classes in their homerooms. In other words, the JSL students attended
supplemental JSL classes out of homeroom, while their classmates were studying
Japanese in their homerooms.
However, according to my observation, the academic time schedule often shifted
within a day, such as switching fifth period to first or vice versa, for various reasons. In
such cases, the JSL timetable did not switch along with the change of the normal time
schedule in the homeroom. As a result, supplementary Japanese language instruction was
offered when various subject matter other than Japanese language was taught in
homerooms.
A separate intensive JSL class was a tutoring system where one teacher tutored
one or two students per period. Six teachers were assigned to teach seven JSL students.
The teachers were chosen mainly because their teaching assignments in regular classes
were not tight, nor did and they have homeroom duties.
According to Ms. Tomita, in earlier times all six teachers taught Japanese
language at the beginning of the first semester. However, they gradually switched their
teaching subject from just Japanese to their areas of expertise. For instance, a foreign
language teacher tutored previews and reviews of an English textbook and assignments.
A vice principal was an art teacher, but taught math because of his teaching experience
with core subjects, including math, in elementary schools.
186
The change of subject in tutoring was due to the realization that many JSL
students needed assistance not only with the Japanese language, but also with other core
subjects, including social studies, foreign language, and math. During the tutoring time,
JSL students did some homework and read textbooks orally under supervision of the
teacher. The atmosphere of the JSL classroom was very different from regular
classrooms, in terms of the tutoring system, curriculum, the location at the periphery of
the school buildings, students speaking different languages, and a wall chart of a
hiragana (Japanese domestic alphabets showing how to pronounce Chinese characters,
called kanji) chart, a world map, and people around the world. Ōta’s description of the
JSL classrooms, “obviously different time and space from regular classrooms,” fit the
JSL classroom in this school (Ōta, 2000, p. 203).
Team Teaching (T2) was a system in which JSL students no longer needed the
intensive language instruction but did need additional academic support to catch up with
class materials. In some regular classes, one teacher lectured 40 students and a T2 teacher
seated near a JSL student guided him or her for help. The issue of a T2 teacher for a
foreign student was that the class subject was not in accordance with the T2 teacher’s
subject of expertise. So, I heard that Mr. Banno, one foreign language teacher, kept
checking a teacher’s manual on Japanese when they learned about Japanese classics.
Although JSL students had extra support related to language, they took the same
mid-term and final exams their Japanese peers did. According to the social studies
teachers I interviewed, Ms. Tomita listed JSL students whose exams needed hiragana on
top of kanji characters to help them read exam questions by themselves. Except for
hiragana, contents of exams were the same as for other students. One social studies
187
teacher, Mr. Egawa, told me how his social studies foreign student was doing in his class.
He said:
Well, I feel that he does not have much problem about oral communication. But,
reading and writing is tough for him, especially because he cannot read kanji,
things without hiragana. That’s why I guess he probably does not understand the
tests, although the tests have hiragana written above kanji. He probably does not
understand meanings even though he can read the questions. In that sense, it’s
pitiful. That’s why we have Ms. Tomita’s supplemental Japanese education. I
think it is good to have that option. After all, among 40 students, it is difficult to
deal only with him. (Mr. Egawa)
Similar to the mid-term and final exams, the same instructional guidance with
Japanese peers was also applied to counseling JSL students about future careers. All
students, regardless of whether they were Japanese or foreign, had two major choices of
either taking the high school exams to get a high school education or starting to work to
earn wages. Most Japanese chose high school education for further studies, but the high
school entrance exams were bigger challenges for foreign students because of language
and academic barriers.
According to Ms. Noda, the visiting Brazilian language counselor, foreign
students had limited possibilities of passing entrance exams in order to go to high
schools. This did not mean that the students and their parents were not interested in high
school enrollment. Many of them would have liked to go, but the foreign students in
junior high school were about as unprepared as Japanese elementary school students
would be. In general, foreign students who started school in first- or second- grade
elementary school would acquire as much knowledge as the Japanese children with fewer
language barriers. After second grade, the possibilities would be reduced because they
188
would have to learn Japanese as a second language, in addition to mastering subject
matter.
Despite academic and language barriers, some students are interested in entering
high schools. However, most teachers presuppose that foreign students will not take high
school exams. From the teachers’ own assumption without any discussion with the
students, some foreign students might be discouraged from telling teachers that they are
interested in high schools.
In terms of academic barriers and teachers’ assumptions, it was obvious that some
foreign students, in addition to those Japanese students who also decided to go into the
work force, do not need to prepare for high school exams during academic classes.
Although they might be a small group, the class time is only used for exam-preparation
and no other options were available whatsoever. As other examples indicated, this school
provided guidance mainly for the majority. As a result, those students who had decided to
start working could not find a comfortable space in school when the ninth-grade teachers
and students focused on exam-preparation.
From this context, it is understandable why Ms. Noda thought that junior high
teachers do not care enough for their students, especially for those who work after
graduation. Teachers were focusing mainly on the entrance examinations and neglected
students who did not plan for high school, including foreign students.
Regarding the enforcement of school rules, Mr. Egawa, who is in charge of
student guidance, told me that he exacted a promise from all foreign students that they
should follow the rules of Sakura, including the dress code, as long as they attended the
189
school. He did not make any exceptions for foreign students, such as wearing pierced
earrings, even if it was OK in their home country.
The majority of the rules seem to disadvantage the lives of foreign students at
school. However, the lack of adequate support services for them at school was
supplemented by the visit of language counselors. As mentioned earlier, a total of three
language counselors, two from the prefectural board of education and one from the city’s
board of education, regularly visited the school to provide academic and psychological
support for all foreign students.
In Ms. Noda’s story, the job of language counselors was to visit schools and be a
bridge between teachers and foreign students/parents. They were officially the counselors
for language-related matters, but in fact counseled foreign students on all issues. They
developed counseling skills through their daily jobs. In addition to counseling, they
presented their experiences in JSL-related seminars for teachers and multicultural
meetings for citizens. These language counselors were not multilingual in order to
provide all students with an opportunity to speak their native languages but they
supported all foreign students as a whole.
At Sakura, one language counselor from the city usually visited every month. She
suggested that the foreign students take the Japanese Language Proficiency Test as a goal
in learning Japanese language. She was closely involved in helping foreign students
apply for and take the test. Another counselor, Ms. Noda, was the only non-Japanese
language counselor. According to Ms. Tomita, “[Ms. Noda] is their senior in terms of
living in Japan as a foreign resident. She talks about stories as the senior of foreign
residents in Japan, something like caring for their hearts.”
190
Another language counselor knew Spanish well. There was one Bolivian student
whose native language was Spanish. Because most foreign students, including JSL
students, in Sakura spoke Portuguese, he could not even join the conversation with them
at school. So, when the language counselor visited school, the child was very happy. Here
is Ms. Tomita’s story:
When she [the language counselor] visits the school, he talks with her in Spanish
like a machine gun. As expected, his facial appearance is different. When
chatting with her, his face looks bright. Of course, he can speak Japanese
language. But, he is not able to express the nuances of his feelings in detail.
When she comes, he is able to talk about it. Also, he knows that the language
counselor will not scold him if he says something inappropriate. It really looks
like he opens his heart and talks with her. I have heard that he is waiting for her
next visit. So, I think that what she does is not necessarily language instruction,
but, so to speak, represent mental stability for him. That is quite a big deal for
him. (Ms. Tomita)
As shown in this example, communication in one’s native language plays an
important role in opening up the heart of JSL students and letting them speak up about
problems they face at school. In one case, when Ms. Noda visited Sakura in December,
Wakayama, a Brazilian girl who took the JSL instruction mentioned that she was not
getting along with her classmates. Once Ms. Noda heard the story in Portuguese, she told
Ms. Tomita about the issue. Then, Ms. Tomita told Wakayama’s homeroom teacher
about it. Until Ms. Noda’s visit, neither Ms. Tomita nor the homeroom teacher realized
bullying was happening. The child’s parents came to school to discuss the matter with
Ms. Tomita and the homeroom teacher. Ms. Noda translated the conversation between
parents and teachers and talked about provisions.
This incidence indicated that Wakayama only shared her experience regarding
bullying with the language counselor. Why didn’t she tell her homeroom teacher about it
191
or go to Ms. Tomita with whom she interacted on a daily basis at school? Was it simply
her lack of vocabulary to describe it in Japanese or lack of relationship with these
teachers that made her not feel safe to talk to them? At least, Wakayama told me that her
homeroom teacher was supportive of her in general and the bullying episode ended after
the teacher brought up the issue in class. She also told me that she enjoyed talking with
her friends during break and wanted to have more time in her classroom than the JSL
class.
This kind of translation service between Japanese teachers and foreign parents
was usual in Ms. Noda’s daily work. Japanese teachers have knowledge of English as a
second language, regardless of their actual communication skills. On the other hand, most
foreign parents in my study usually did not come from English-speaking countries. The
majority came from Brazil or some other South American countries, China, and the
Philippines. Thus, native languages of these parents were diverse: Portuguese, Spanish,
Chinese, and Tagalog. Moreover, most parents were incompetent in speaking, reading,
and writing in Japanese. In other words, no common language existed between teachers
and foreign parents in order for teachers to clarify stories of JSL students. Because of this
context, the language counselors who could be the bridge of their conversations were
strongly needed in schools.
When Ms. Noda and I visited Ran Elementary School, the JSL teachers asked Ms.
Noda to talk to the parents of foreign students to verify their stories. The Ran school had
three JSL classrooms and three teachers who did not speak any foreign languages. Thus,
the teachers relied on what JSL students told them in daily conversations in plain and
simple Japanese language, including parents’ plans to transfer to another school or return
192
to their home country. Sometimes, the teachers asked upper-level JSL students to
translate. However, what the students knew about their parents’ decisions was limited,
because these students were between six and 12 years old.
Teachers’ requests for verification were also linked to schools’ experiences that
many pupils who were enrolled in school transferred or went back to the home country
without any notice to the school. In one case, a pupil told teachers that the family was
leaving for the home country the next day. With these experiences, once teachers felt the
slightest hint of such situations, they waited for Ms. Noda’s next visit and asked her to
talk with parents to get the true stories.
This example demonstrates how difficult it is for teachers to help JSL students
due to the language barrier between JSL teachers and JSL students, and also JSL teachers
and parents of these students, even if teachers want to help them. According to Ms. Noda,
the Ran school focused very seriously on educating JSL students and built a solid
connection between JSL teachers and homeroom teachers to make arrangements for
individual students. One JSL teacher in Ran also told me that other teachers were very
supportive and took part in educating JSL students in the school.
In fact, my observation confirmed that JSL students in Ran were openly able to
talk with JSL teachers about their families and friends, as well as their school life. In
comparison to the incident of Wakayama in Sakura who did not share her bullied
experience with her homeroom teacher and JSL teacher she met every day, the open
conversation between JSL teachers and JSL students was a positive sign from the JSL
students. A caring relationship was established between those two parties. Caring
relationships meant the connection of two parties, a caregiver and a cared-for by which
193
each party completes its role as a caregiver or a care receiver (Nodding, 1992). In this
example, JSL teachers were the caregivers who showed their care and provided a safe
environment to let JSL students (the cared-for) talk about their stories. As a response to
care given by JSL teachers, JSL students openly shared their stories.
However, in this case, the caring relationship alone did not compensate for the
language barrier of two parties. On one hand, JSL students were able to share their stories
with teachers, instead of hesitating to speak Japanese as a foreign language. On the other
hand, these caring JSL teachers were confused about information their students gave to
them in face-to-face conversation. They were trying to respond to needs of their students;
yet, they were unable to fully understand the situations of the students.
To sum up, teachers’ confusion and perplexity show the importance of a common
language in order for teachers to consult with parents to manage problems foreign
students encounter. A caring environment alone did not provide enough support for JSL
students. The role of a language counselor to make communication work between JSL
teachers and students, and JSL teachers and parents, is very critical.
According to Ms. Tomita, three language counselors reported to each other to
update each student’s school life because their school visits to any one school were
limited to once every few months. Despite visiting so many schools, they remembered
what happened during their last visit and got updated on students’ situations. They also
dealt with students as if they were their own students and talked with them in a very
friendly manner. Thus, Ms. Tomita appreciated their work ethic and their hard work.
194
In summary, Research Question 1 focused on exploring structures and
provisions that were available in the schools to accommodate diversity. Three themes that
emerged were:
1.
Teachers’ opinions about their role as teachers.
2.
Institutional barriers to a returnee student for public high school exams.
3.
Provisions for different/“other” students.
First, teachers felt that the national curriculum and school provisions were
hegemonic and inflexible to them. The curriculum and provision made it difficult for
teachers to try new pedagogies with students. However, teachers sought their personal
fulfillment in building caring relationships with students within their limited autonomy
and freedom. These relationships were usually established in classroom teaching and
learning and the club activity.
Second, a story of a Japanese returnee student showed that the school was only
able to draw the student’s talent out within the framework of the school culture and
public high school exams. The school did not accommodate to make the most of his
talent by changing the conventional provisions that were created for the majority
students.
Last, there was an unequal distribution of individualized instructions between
different/ “other” Japanese students and foreign students with limited Japanese language
skills. This disparity of school provisions between Japanese and foreign students was due
to the influence of Article 26 of the Constitution of Japan which states the compulsory
education requirement for ethnic Japanese, domestic/indigenous minority groups, and
naturalized Japanese (ex-foreigners). This requirement did not include students with
195
foreign resident status, i.e., foreign students in my study. Furthermore, Theme 3 also
demonstrated the importance of the role of language counselors for JSL teachers, and JSL
students, as well as their parents. The Ran case indicated that the caring relationship
between JSL teachers and JSL students alone did not compensate for the language barrier
of the two parties.
196
Research Question 2
Research Question 2 looks into pedagogical strategies teachers can use to teach
diversity.
Research Question 2:
What pedagogical strategies do teachers use in teaching diversity in the selected junior
high school?
Themes
z
Theme 1: Social studies classes
z
Theme 2: Foreign language classes
z
Theme 3: Integrated studies classes
z
Theme 4: Extra support of teachers for foreign students
Figure 4: Research Question 2 and Emerging Themes
Theme 1: Social Studies Classes
Social studies teachers used various pedagogical strategies to interest students in
learning about a variety of cultures. Four pedagogical strategies I observed were:
Introducing influences of the Portuguese culture in Japan since the Edo Period; adding
geography and civics knowledge in history class; learning about the country of one JSL
197
student in civics class; using a popular example to explain self-determination in civics
class.
Social studies consisted of geography, history, and civics. Geography and
history classes rotated within each semester between seventh- and eighth-grade social
studies classes and were finished by the end of the second year. Geography and history
became the basic foundation to start learning about the field of civics, focusing on current
sociopolitical systems and issues in Japan and the world.
In the history class for the seventh-graders, Mr. Egawa introduced the first
European approach, Portugal to Japan, during the Edo Period (1603-1867). As an
introduction to this theme, he showed three pictures of food on the blackboard: The
Japanese words pão (bread), castella (sponge cake), and confeito (sugar candy). He asked
students to find a common theme in the three pictures. He gave a hint that these kinds of
food were brought to Japan along with the matchlock gun (harquebus). In this way, he
guided students to find the answer that all of them were brought from Portugal.
Once all students understood that the class focused on influences of the
Portuguese on current Japanese life, he wrote three options on blackboard with current
Japanese words which were created from the Portuguese language. He asked students to
choose a set of three qualified words: Organ, piano, and harmonica; swing, seesaw, and
monkey bars; water can, shovel, and bucket; udon, sukiyaki, and tempura. After allowing
time to discuss the choices, Mr. Egawa read each word and let students raise their hands
for the correct answers. The students were excited to choose and know which of the three
choices was correct.
198
Once all of the answers were announced to students, he explained that the
Japanese language pronunciation of the words for Dutch and Greece were both created
from the sound of Portuguese. In reference to denizens from Portugal, he explained that
sumo and sushi were widely known Japanese words which had gone directly into English.
Then, he told students that the Portuguese were the first Europeans to approach the
Japanese, although most people at present thought that the Americans were the closest
foreigners.
Mr. Egawa used a very creative introduction to interest students in learning
about influences of Portuguese on current frequently used words, with pictures and a quiz
of three choices. The linkage of the two languages is an example of the Japanese history
of adapting to foreign cultures from the Edo Period. Moreover, his references to students’
familiarity with English language and American culture helped them imagine how the
ancient Japanese had adapted new cultures from the European continent in their time. His
references to current influences of American culture let students be familiar with the
Portuguese not simply as a historical event, but also as relevant to current Japan. The
Portuguese influences on the Japanese vocabulary showed linguistic diversity, because
the students would probably not think about the foreign origins of commonly used words.
The approach of explaining foreign influences on Japanese food and culture was
also used by Mr. Harada. He displayed a picture of Asian ginseng which was brought to
Japan during the early Edo Period. He introduced it when the class was learning about
Japan’s relationship with East Asian countries. Using available food as the example of a
foreign approach to Japan seems to be a major method teachers use to interest students in
history, not as a single event, but as a lasting influence on the current life of people.
199
Mr. Harada, in his second year in teaching social studies, had a system of teaching
history classes that tended to be lecture-based. As a new approach, he used a video of a
historical event and pictures from the source book, when he taught the Shimabara
Rebellion, the uprising of Christian peasants against the central government in 1637-1638.
The overall reaction of the students seemed to be that the new approach was more
pleasant than lectures and reading from the textbook. I was able to see positive feedback
from the facial expressions and attention of students to the television screen and the
sourcebook during this class time.
For the first 30 minutes of class, video material was used to provide information
on the background of the uprising. Then, Mr. Harada showed a picture from the
sourcebook of those who were executed after the rebellion. He showed the main part of
the theme during class. Then, he announced that students who were interested in the rest
of the video or the sourcebook could check them out after class. Four students went to
chat with Mr. Harada after class and saw the pictures of the Shimabara Rebellion from
the sourcebook.
After introducing the uprising with the video, he posted pictures of the national
flags of four countries to check if students knew which countries were represented. He
pointed out some names of students and sometimes gave hints to help find correct
answers. These flags were from the Netherlands, Great Britain, Spain, and Portugal with
all of which Japan had had contact in the trade by the red seal ships system (Japanese
armed merchant sailing ships) between 1592 and 1635. He used the flags to review these
four countries, asking which country brought guns to Japan, to which a student correctly
200
answered Portugal. This flag itself was also related to world geography and civics in the
theme of international political relations.
Then, Mr. Harada taught students about the closed policy of Japan in 1639
because of the ineffectiveness of fumie (meaning a stepping on pictures). Fumie was a
governmental policy that Japanese people were forced to step on a picture of Christ to
prove that they did not believe in Christianity. This policy was used to execute Japanese
Christians. Discussing the closed policy, he picked the Dutch flag and also wrote China
on the blackboard to point out that these two countries maintained trade with Japan even
during the closed policy. Then, he asked if any students knew the country near Japan with
a current policy similar to this closed policy. One student answered, “North Korea.”
Again, a question linked the class with current world politics.
Such a variety of activities occurred in only one class time. Compared with other
times, Mr. Harada was well-prepared for this class. However, he could not necessarily
spend enough time to prepare that much for each class. How would teachers be able to
effectively teach classes without extensive preparation for each session? Godwyll (2008)
argues the importance of building a fine teacher-student relationship to lift the burden
from teachers. From classroom observations, he found that teachers who built a caring
relationship with students were easily able to allow them to make decisions. It means that
more students voluntarily participate in class activities, and that makes it easier for
teachers to facilitate these activities. It would also be beneficial for students because
dialogue among students creates a meaningful learning experience beyond the curriculum
content.
201
In another class, Mr. Harada was teaching about the four class divisions during
the Edo Period, he wrote samurai, farmers, artisans, and merchants on the blackboard.
Then, he asked each student his or her parents’ occupation and put markers next to the
four class divisions to count. He was linking the parents’ jobs with the occupations of the
Edo Period. For instance, public servants were counted as samurais because they were
hired by the government, while factory workers were regarded as artisans. Furthermore,
while the students were learning that 84% of farmers suffered from high taxes on rice, the
teacher asked, based on recent news reports, what kinds of taxes were going to increase
in the near future.
Another time, while he was teaching about Eta and Hinin, he explained “Those
worked in the jobs everyone least wanted to do,” such as three Ks in current words―
Kitanai (dirty), Kiken (dangerous), and Kitsui (hard). Then, Mr. Harada wrote
“discrimination against Burakumin” in colorful chalk to emphasize the importance of the
term with the explanation that they were discriminated against because people said they
used to be Eta and Hinin.
In my analyses, combining information across geography, history and civics in
social studies classes enables students to cultivate comprehensive knowledge linked with
their daily life. This linkage guides students to be interested in social studies subjects
beyond simple memorization of keywords for exams. The combination of social studies
knowledge is not necessarily directly linked to diversity in the short term, however,
interesting students in social problems around them is a vital step to making them link
what they learn in class and what they know as their own experiences. They would have
diversity-related issues in daily life of which they were unaware. Moreover, since not all
202
students are interested in history, giving them an opportunity to participate in social
studies-related knowledge would be a benefit by motivating them to participate. Visual
materials, including videos and photos, are great pedagogical tools to cultivate students’
curiosity to learn history.
Mr. Harada also taught two classes of ninth-grade civics. In one, he used
participatory learning when he posed questions and students answered them voluntarily.
These questions included things students had learned in previous classes and knowledge
of various matters beyond the textbook. Because many students promptly said the
answers or raised their hands to be called on, the conversational rhythm between the
teacher and students went at a good pace. When nobody seemed able to answer some
questions, the teacher started calling students’ names one by one to check if somebody
would know. Mr. Harada gave various hints and allowed coaching from other students.
As he described this class as “easy to teach,” I saw why students would be interested in
participation in his class.
Building a fine relationship with students was not the only technique Mr. Harada
used. He tried to connect students to his lecture and establish the caring relationship
(Nodding, 1992). The caring relationship was observed between Mr. Harada, a caregiver
and a JSL student from Turkey, a cared-for. Each party responded and played its
expected role for the other, either as a caregiver or a care receiver. On various occasions,
Mr. Harada indicated his attention and care to this Turkish student by mentioning
something related to Turkey. For instance, when they were learning about the European
Union (EU), Mr. Harada said, “Turkey is applying for membership in the EU.” As a
response to his teacher’s care and attention, the Turkish student often voluntarily
203
answered questions. One question was, “What would be the symbol of Japan?” and the
Turkish student said “Samurai.” In another occasion, when students were learning about
UNESCO world heritage sites, the student said, “Cappadocia.” The teacher pointed out
that Cappadocia is as one of the world heritage sites in Turkey.
The point I want to make is that the Turkish student was one of the active
respondents to random questions Mr. Harada posed. Unlike my other observations that
most JSL students tended to be quiet and nearly invisible in class, this Turkish student
was completely the opposite. He was able to show off his uniqueness in the classroom as
one who had a Turkish background. The environment which encouraged him to speak up
in class could be attributed to many factors. First, he seemed to have built fine
relationships within his homeroom. Second, he belonged to the soccer club of which Mr.
Harada was the coach. Through soccer practices, they got to know each other. Finally, Mr.
Harada encouraged him to be involved in class participation. He told me during the
interview: “Because he is from Turkey and is in my class, I raise issues related to him.
Thanks to him, there are issues we can think about with interest.”
When students started learning about the Nations and International Society
section, Mr. Harada first broached the concept of nations by asking, “How were countries
created?” Once everyone reached a consensus that a nation was defined by national
borders, the teacher introduced the concept of race/ethnicity. He explained that most
countries were made from a collection of racial/ethnic groups. He told the class, “While
people are oblivious to the concept of race/ethnicity in Japan, Japan has three ethnic
groups: Ainu, ethnic Japanese, and Okinawans.”
204
Then, he used the example of former Yugoslavia, a country introduced in a short
column about independence, telling of six different countries formed from one
Yugoslavia through ethnic conflicts in the 1990s. First, he posted on the blackboard the
picture of Ivica Osim, a former head coach of the Japanese national soccer team in the
year 2006-2007. The teacher explained that Osim was born in Sarajevo, Yugoslavia
(current Bosnia and Herzegovina), and was a player and coach from the former
Yugoslavia. According to mass media, he was currently a citizen of Austria. Then, the
teacher asked, “Who was another popular soccer player and coach from former
Yugoslavia who was appointed as coach of our regional professional team?” Once a
student answered, “Dragan Stojković,” Mr. Harada explained that both Osim and
Stojković participated in the 1990 World Cup in the last game as the Yugoslavian team.
Then, the teacher wrote Yugoslavia on the blackboard and drew arrows to show the
division of the country into five: Socialist Republic of Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro. Then he told students that Serbia and
Montenegro had recently divided into two independent countries.
In my interview with him, Mr. Harada was not familiar with the terms
“multicultural coexistence” and “multicultural education,” though, a similar term,
“multicultural society,” was written with some explanation in the first chapter of the
civics textbook. Once he found that section, he created some images of the word. He
asked me for my explanation of the word before I asked him if he taught multicultural
coexistence-related themes in his classes.
He told me that he followed the textbook in general, but he linked Brazilian or
Chinese residents in Midori with that concept. In other cases he talked about the cultural
205
influence of Russia in the Hokkaidō area because of close geographical proximity. He
was interested in cultural differences, especially people’s words and ways of thinking in
different cultures. So, he voluntary talked about cultural themes in his classes. Personally,
he was interested in issues of Korean residents in Japan about whom he had learned in his
college classes.
Theme 2: Foreign Language Classes
Sub-themes in a foreign language class included an English teacher who guided
students to understand reasons why they studied the English language and to provide
cross-cultural stories. Cross-cultural stories were also taught by a visiting Canadian AET.
As a native speaker of English, he provided various cultural themes through learning
English. While pedagogies focused more on the teachers’ side of stories in class, a
student’s resistance to English revealed her dissatisfaction of memorization of English
texts.
Foreign language classes were taught three times a week to the seventh and eighth
graders. Ninth-grade students received foreign language education four times per week
because teachers selected this subject as the common elective class applied to all the
ninth-grade students. In other words, instead of providing one extra elective class which
each student selected, the ninth-grade teachers decided to use the time for foreign
language.16
Unlike other subjects, foreign language education adopted a class size smaller
than the regular class size of around 40 students. All students in two homerooms, around
80 students, were divided into three separate classrooms consisting of around 26 students.
16
As a sample weekly timetable display, ninth-grade students still have two elective classes of their
own choice on the D schedule.
206
Ms. Ono tried to help students understand reasons for learning English language.
She told them:
Learning the English language is not only for high school exams...Exams are big
objectives, but not the ultimate goal. Beyond exams, knowing English is
something like having a conversation with people all over the world. It is the
closest way to start verbal communication with them. That’s why we are learning
English. (Ms. Ono)
According to Ms. Ono, students’ reactions were, “‘Oh, really?,’ ‘Well, I have heard of it
somewhere,’ or something like that.” Her story continued: “That [the reasons for learning
English as a foreign language] is what students learn first in the first English class [of the
seventh grade]. It is supposed that teachers explain to students why they should learn
English. If not, then,” I said, “no motivations?” She replied “Yes” and continued:
Why [do students learn English]? Students say many things, such as ‘making a
good grade on exams’ or something like that. Because many people go to cram
schools, English is not new to them [when they officially start learning English
as a subject in junior high school]...Yes, but English language education itself is
to approach and learn different cultures. Because of that, I try to mention that
English is different from Japanese language. Not only the language itself, but
there are comparative culture-related things I try to talk about. I like these topics.
They are interesting. Also, students show some interest in cultural themes. I try
to talk about these topics as my teaching style. (Ms. Ono)
In addition to Ms. Ono, I asked several students about their interest in English and
cultural perspectives beyond their own Japanese culture. Ichino, a returnee student from
the United States, told me that he first felt it strange when he saw many different racial
groups in the United States. In other words, physical and racial differences were much
more visible in the United States than in Japan. However, he got used to seeing different
people.
207
By contrast, in some cases, spending time in another country made students
realize the limitation of learning language through textbooks. Sendo, who had learned
English through songs and dances in a private organization since early childhood, was not
interested in the English language class at school prior to her homestay in the United
States over the summer. After spending extensive time talking with homestay families,
she learned that “real” (American) English is very different from the one in the textbook.
As the result, she is no longer interested in textbook English.
Her reaction would be understandable if English language teachers did not focus
on providing spoken English words and phrases beyond textbooks. In fact, during my
observation in one of Mr. Banno’s classes, he helped students memorize textbook phrases
and words verbally by repeating his words very quickly. The teacher pronounced one
phrase at least three times, and the students repeated each phrase. The back and forth
responses created quick rhythm in the class. This rhythmical response applied to his
questions and then to students’ answers. His focus in the class was on memorization.
However, he told me that he did not know if these phrases and words were actually used
overseas, and he was not interested in the practical side of English language.
Some teachers brought their experiences in different cultures to the class and the
school community. Ichino told me that in her English classes, Ms. Ono asked about his
experiences in the United States. Some teachers selected Ichino as the representative of
the ninth graders who provided the speech at the closing ceremony of the second
semester. His homeroom teacher, Ms. Ono, and I provided guidance to his speech in
English. At the ceremony, his English speech with his friend’s translation into Japanese
language was outstanding and showed his talent to the whole school community.
208
An AET was the native speaker of English language who helped students enhance
speaking skills and learn different cultures. In the Sakura School, the AET was Mr. Clark
who had lived in Japan for seven years after his graduated from a Canadian university.
He was assigned to rotate his work every month between two junior high schools. During
my fieldwork, he was in the Sakura school for the months of November and January. He
was a Chinese-Canadian living in Midori.
He said he told about personal experiences, such as the Canadian school system,
school lunches, holidays, club activities, and teachers’ responsibilities. He was seen as
the representative of other cultures; sometimes he researched other countries on the
internet and talked about them. These were not big topics but something related to lesson
plans. He sometimes related his own stories, but he preferred to talk about Canada. He
collected class material or information through internet sites for specific dates and
pictures, so that students could say something about these materials. He did not use
manuals for lesson plans, but used the worksheets for ideas.
In fact, classes created with the collaboration of Mr. Clark and a foreign
language teacher were very creative and used enjoyable additional themes, such as how
to write holiday greeting cards in English. Mr. Clark explained that people in Canada and
the United States believe in different religions and celebrate different holidays in
December, such as Hanukah, Christmas, and Kwanzaa. Due to the different religions
people believe in, “season’s greetings” were the most commonly used non-religious
holiday cards to send to friends and families.
Christmas cards are better known in Japan than other greeting cards, such as
season’s greetings or Happy Hanukah, for sending to non-Japanese friends and families.
209
Moreover, Christmas is widely celebrated in Japan, but mainly as a non-religious winter
event for Japanese families who mostly categorize themselves as Buddhists. Because of
these facts, Mr. Clark’s explanation of different celebrations in North America and
different holiday cards available was a good way to make students break the stereotypical
idea of all North Americans celebrating Christmas. This was a good example of removing
prejudice and stereotypes in English classes as the guidelines for teaching suggested.
Theme 3: Integrated Studies Classes
Sub-themes in integrated studies focus on decisions that ninth-grade student
groups made to work on projects related to international issues in Education for
International Understanding. Some of the student groups’ popular projects included the
collection of donations and un-used daily products to help people in developing countries.
In contrast, no student groups chose projects for their own foreign neighbors who live in
their community, nor did a civics textbook suggest any projects related to foreign
residents.
The time for integrated studies is allocated to one unit per week. During my
fieldwork, seventh-grade students were preparing for a field trip with a group of six
students within the region. Eighth-grade students were making plans to visit some private
high schools to collect unique characteristics of each school in a regional city. Ninthgrade students were trying to finish projects related to Education for International
Understanding.
Despite an allocation of specific integrated studies time, homeroom teachers,
who managed times for integrated studies, moral education, and homeroom activity,
interchanged activities among the three based on urgent preparations for up-coming
210
events. Particularly for ninth-grade student homerooms, more time was spent for high
school entrance exam-related activities, such as returning students’ final exam papers and
consultation between each student and the teacher who helped with applying to high
schools. Since the integrated studies time was a student-centered learning class divided
into small groups of five to seven students, students decided what they would do for their
projects during the class. At the same time, the teacher consulted with individual students
about the high schools to which they wanted to apply. In some classes, the teacher
motivated students to create serious projects by telling them that their projects would be
written about in the reports sent to the high schools for which they would take entrance
exams.
As the activity for Education for International Understanding, ninth-grade
students did a poster presentation at the Cultural Festival held in early November. They
chose one country and one major problem of that country. As the last activity to complete
this class, students were told to take some action to contribute to the issue they raised on
the poster. As far as I saw, most students wrote about environmental issues, such as the
lack of safe water, and deforestation, though the country of choice varied with each group.
I paid attention to how students made decisions about their actions relevant to
the international issues they raised. First, some ninth-grade students took the leading
action. At one school meeting, a few students announced that they would be requesting
donations to help eliminate landmines in Cambodia and deal with water issues in
Myanmar. The next day, other students were asking for donations with a collection box at
the school entrance in the morning. A few days later, I had the chance to observe their
integrated studies time.
211
In the class, the homeroom teacher noted that most students had been actively
working on the volunteer activity. However, he also mentioned that some of the students
seemed to force younger students to make donations. With this news, the teacher
emphasized the importance of reflecting on why they had started the activity. According
to him, voluntarism was to tell people that there were things students could do to help
with international problems; asking others to give money involuntary defeated their
purpose. Therefore, students needed to take class time to rethink how to explain to other
students why they should participate in the activity by donations. The teacher stressed the
importance of conveying to other students why they thought their activity was worth
doing.
In two other classes, the homeroom teachers’ advice to students worked to
specify students’ activity. For instance, in one class, a homeroom teacher let students
discuss what projects they wanted to do. Some students asked the teacher about collecting
donations in the school, having been influenced by the announcement of the donation in
the school assembly. Teacher responded jokingly: “Are you planning to deprive Sakura
students of all their money?” What the teacher meant was his disapproval of their
donation activity, while the other groups who announced in the assembly were collecting
money every day at the school entrance. From his response, students learned that they
could not do the donation activity.
This teacher also told students that if world problems were too far removed from
their daily lives, they should shift their focus from the world problems to problems
happening in Japan. Then, they could find things they could do about the problems in
Japan. His advice was on target. The world problems students raised included the impact
212
on the growth of coral reefs due to the rise of sea level from global warming; the
declining birthrate; social security benefits; an aging society; and land subsidence from
the rise of sea level. Most of these problems were on a large scale and students got lost in
ideas. Some of them categorized the problems into global warming and tried to find
projects from various textbooks.
In another class, the teacher facilitated students’ discussing ideas as a group first,
and then, based on their main ideas of environmental problems, guided them to specify
projects linked to raising awareness of those problems in the physical environment. First,
the teacher made a chart of each group and asked what problems they had written on the
poster. In each group of six, two issues were written on the chart. Then, the teacher
pointed out that the common idea across all groups was the environmental problem. Ideas
students discussed were donations, drawing posters, and turning off faucets. From these
three ideas, the teacher asked, “Drawing posters and what is next?” Students responded,
“Post them everywhere in the school.” Then, she suggested that the posters could be put
up at the regular supermarkets and public facilities where many people could see them,
instead of keeping them only in the school.
Ms. Tomita, who was in charge of supplemental JSL classes, believed that the
time for integrated studies can be used effectively to help students understand
international issues. She commented on students’ action of donating at the entire school
meeting as follows:
In the integrated studies class, students learn about Education for International
Understanding. But, there are huge gaps between what students understand in
their minds and what they are actually able to do…Although they are doing
something, I think it is based only on their thinking in their minds. Their action is
too impulsive. It seems not to be realistic for students to ask for donations with
limited knowledge.
213
I rather think of doing something for Brazilian residents because many have
lived in the Sakura District, if students are supposed to do something for
International Understanding. For example, students can look up the JapanesePortuguese dictionary and make bulletin boards for Brazilians. I believe that
making bulletin boards is a far more practical learning experience for this class.
For instance, our school will accept students from China, Turkey, and Spain next
year, so students can make something related to the new students’ languages.
Also, some facilities, including the Midori Hospital, have bulletin boards for
foreign residents. So, something like these bulletin boards help students think of
what they can do. That’s how the integrated studies will be beneficial and help
grow their care for foreigners, rather than things students can only watch through
mass media. (Ms. Tomita)
Ms. Tomita’s comment clarified the lack of information provided by textbooks for
students to decide what they could do in classes for international understanding.
According to the civics textbook (Satō et al., 2007), donations for international
cooperation were introduced as a major way junior high school students can work with
classmates. In the introduction to the last unit, The Nation and the International Society,
the introduction titled Let’s Do International Cooperation Near You offered five ideas on
which students might take action. They were:
z
Sending used telephone cards and postcards with mistaken marks written
on it (the postcards that had not been sent to anyone because of mistaken marks, such as a
wrong mail address and a wrong name written on the card) to organizations that exchange
them for money to help projects of these organizations.
z
Purchasing fair trade products.
z
Sending unused clothes and towels to people.
z
Participating in donation drives for international organizations, such as
UNICEF.
214
z
Taking care of exchange students and teaching them Japanese language
and Japanese culture. (Satō, et al., 2007, p. 156)
There were four pictures of projects some junior high school students were doing
for international cooperation. One showed several girls making different kinds of dolls to
sell to earn money to send to Afghanistan. Another showed six students asking for
donations for landmine clearance in Cambodia. One picture explained that Japanese
students invited children from Israel and Palestine to play soccer together and interact
together. In the last picture, one boy was guiding a foreign visitor who asked directions
for sightseeing.
All of these projects are well-organized based on the point that students can
perform and somehow link themselves with international people. However, the examples
are simply categorized into two actions―donations (collecting money or unused items
for donations or selling products) or interacting with foreign visitors to Japan. Foreigners
described in this section were categorized into two groups: People who live in other
countries and people who visit Japan for a short visit and go back to their own country.
As these two categories of foreigners demonstrate, what is missing is the obvious fact
that many foreigners live in Japan as residents.
From the standpoint in this civics textbook that foreigners are temporary visitors,
there are no practical samples of projects that students can do to help resident foreigners.
If there were some examples listed for these foreign residents, students would learn that
they could find projects related to international cooperation within their own
communities. Therefore, students’ decision to seek donations might have been influenced
215
by the civics textbook and other similar materials which focus mainly on sending funds
and in-kind contributions.
Theme 4: Extra Support of Teachers for Foreign Students
Ms. Noda did not want teachers to say “Do your best to study hard” to foreign
students because what they could try was limited compared with what Japanese students
could do. The motto only became a burden. She showed enthusiasm when I told her that
Mr. Harada gave his Turkish student red circles for correct answers in small quizzes
when the answers were written in hiragana. Mr. Harada told the student that he would
give him red circles to answers written in hiragana if some kanji characters were too
difficult for him to write. The teacher wanted the student to get good scores on small
quizzes on which he could earn partial credits for the final grade. When told that, the
Turkish student showed his motivation with better scores on small quizzes.
In most cases, answers to tests should be written in kanji characters as long as
the textbook writes the words in kanji. Since the textbook is used for ninth graders, a high
level of reading and writing in kanji is required in all nine core subjects. It means that the
answers should be correct both in knowledge and in the right kanji writing. Ms. Noda
wondered why answers written in hiragana or katakana (the other Japanese alphabet
used for foreign words) were considered incorrect although tests asked for correct
knowledge, not the writing itself. She believed that if tests checked each student’s
knowledge, right answers in hiragana should also be acceptable. If students did not get
points in writing in hiragana, their motivations for studying would be down. She felt that
some sort of special arrangement would be helpful for Japanese students as well.
216
In class, Mr. Harada also tried to write hiragana on top of kanji on the
blackboard, to help the JSL students. In addition, he used photos or drew pictures on the
blackboard to reinforce keywords visually. Moreover, when students started doing
handouts, the teacher always offered a Brazilian student a further explanation of them. I
had seen him showing consideration to this student in classes I observed. He said to me:
For example, because Wakayama, a Brazilian girl, is in the class, I try to write
hiragana on blackboard as much as I can. I try to talk to her in class, asking ‘Do
you understand here and what about there?’ After all, trying to help her
participate in class would be good for all foreign students who have some
understanding of the Japanese language. (Mr. Harada)
Even though Ms. Tomita had more experience than others in teaching the
Japanese language to JSL students, she still told me there were limitations to teaching
them in a regular academic class. Her story indicates the limitation on what one teacher
can do for JSL students within his or her daily duty, although the teacher understands the
situations of these students better than other teachers. Here is Ms. Tomita’s story:
When the current ninth-grade students were in the seventh grade, I taught
Japanese. There were two foreign students in my class. As expected it was
difficult. One student could not communicate at all and went back to Brazil at
the middle of the school year. That student did not understand at all and couldn’t
follow what I was teaching. So, I gave that student different kanji homework, but
he or she did not do it completely.
In addition, that student skipped one or two classes out of four for
supplemental JSL class per week. If the student missed a few classes, for
instance, the time for reading and understanding the contents of the reading in
the textbook was still OK. But, the time for compositions or speech was
troublesome if the child missed even one class because these classes need full
attendance for several consecutive sessions.
Then, in addition to missing one or two times for supplemental JSL class
per week, when the language counselors came to see foreign students, the child
was out of the class for that. After repeated absences for various reasons, it was
not clear to me whether that student should stay in the classroom or go to the
supplemental class. That student was also confused. It was very confusing for
everyone. (Ms. Tomita)
217
According to Ms. Tomita, when the current ninth-grade students were in seventh
grade, there were about five foreign students. However, some students increasingly did
not come to school. There were two students whose names remained on school records,
but people did not see them at school.
Ms. Tomita played the role of the homeroom teacher who focuses mainly on the
school life of JSL students per se, although each student had his or her own homeroom
and homeroom teacher. Supplemental JSL class teachers, including Ms. Tomita, were
similar to tutors, because each supplemental class had only one or two students. In a
small group of one teacher and one or two students, Ms. Tomita could ask students about
their school and life at home, such as “How were your tests?” and “Do you have any
plans for this winter holiday?” Because of these close engagements, she felt as if she
were their homeroom teacher. In fact, Ms. Noda commented that Ms. Tomita was the
only teacher who eagerly tried to educate JSL students in Sakura among all teachers she
met.
According to Ms. Noda, some teachers in other schools were very eager to help
foreign students. One teacher helped a foreign student pass exams to enter a high school,
and was seen as a friend, rather than a teacher, by the foreign students’ parents. The
student knew the teacher’s cell phone number. The teacher was with the student during
the entire process of receiving exam applications, going to take entrance exams, and
checking admissions.17 When the teacher planned to help the student enter high school
17
In general, teachers do not follow students when they go to high schools to get exam applications,
take exams, or check admission to high schools. What Ms. Noda was talking about here is how much
this teacher was committed to and supported the student beyond the teacher’s regular job.
218
other teachers doubted it could happen. Therefore, when the teacher reported that the
student passed the exam and was able to enter a high school, they were all surprised.
From this success story of the student’s strong trust in the teacher and the
teacher’s belief in the student, Ms. Noda believed that foreign students being able to enter
high school depended heavily on the characteristics of their homeroom teachers. She also
thought that a different discipline and passion for each student would guide teachers to
reflect on their way of teaching and contacting each student. Due to the increased
enrollment of foreign students, the traditional school system has been transformed and
these changes have made people realize diverse ways of looking at matters. As a result,
the realization of other options would be beneficial as well to different/ “other” Japanese
students who do not adjust to the conventional school system.
One instance Ms. Noda related was of a passionate elementary school teacher
who looked after a foreign student even after the student’s graduation from the
elementary school. The teacher stopped by the junior high school to see if the student was
able to catch up with classes after the club activity everyday. When the student had
questions about classes, the elementary school teacher spent time to straighten things out.
In my analyses, these two passionate teachers in Ms. Noda’s story were so
exceptional that they provide extra support to foreign students beyond their daily duty as
regular teachers. As Ms. Tomita’s voice indicated, there was a limitation to managing
needs of JSL students extensively in academic class within multiple roles played by each
teacher in school. In this context, two passionate teachers spent extra time and energy out
of their duty as teachers at school. They worked with these students for their academic
219
success out of “classroom” teaching and learning by meeting with them outside of the
school and guiding them step-by-step to make sure they were on the right track.
Their story showed that time spent with students depended heavily on the moral
decision of individual teachers when teachers themselves hold various expected roles and
duties. On the other hand, foreign students needed extra support and care to become as
successful as Japanese students in Japanese schools because of the language barrier and
unfamiliar Japanese school rules, norms, and expectations.
Research Question 2 focused on pedagogical strategies teachers used to teach
diversity. Themes that emerged were:
1.
Social studies classes.
2.
Foreign language classes.
3.
Integrated studies classes.
4.
Extra support of teachers for foreign students.
First, social studies teachers used various pedagogical strategies. These were:
Influences of the Portuguese culture in the Edo Period; adding geography and civics
knowledge in history class; learning about Turkey due to the presence of a Turkish
student in civics class; using a popular example to explain self-determination in civics
class.
In addition to teachers’ strategies and techniques to guide students to learn
contents of the class, some teachers demonstrated caring relationships with their students.
Mr. Harada used participatory learning when he posed questions and students answered
them voluntarily. The teacher also often commented on something related to Turkey to
encourage his Turkish student to be involved in the civics class. As a response to Mr.
220
Harada, this student actively participated in answering his questions. The teacher’s
comment on Turkey also helped his classmates understand where he came from and his
socio-cultural and political background.
Second, in foreign language education classes, one teacher, Ms. Ono, reminded
students of reasons for learning English beyond high school entrance exams. The other
teacher, Mr. Banno, was rather good at preparing students for exams by guiding them to
verbally memorize words, phrases, and sentences which were all written in the English
textbook.
An example of a student, Sendo, demonstrated that textbook knowledge alone did
not motivate some students to study English. Her homestay experience in the United
States made her aware of the limitations of textbook words and phrases in an actual
communication with English-speakers. For the needs of these students, such as Sendo,
regarding practical communication skills and cross-cultural learning, AET helped them
avoid stereotypical ideas of other cultures through learning English.
Third, in Education for International Understanding, some student groups’
favorite international projects included the collection of donations and un-used daily
products to help people in developing countries. In contrast, no student groups chose
projects for their own foreign neighbors who live in their community. A civics textbook
suggested no sample projects directly related to foreign residents in the theme for
“international cooperation.” In this theme, “foreigners” were categorized into two groups:
People living in other countries or some foreigners visiting Japan for tourism or short
visits. There was no perspective that some foreigners could be residents of Japan.
221
Finally, a story of Sakura JSL teacher, Ms. Tomita, showed what a teacher could
do to help JSL students within the classroom. In comparison, two other teachers spent
extra time with their foreign students outside of school beyond their duty as teachers. The
contrast of these two demonstrated the variation of an individual teacher’s decision of
how to support these foreign students. Their decision directly related to their own
morality and belief because foreign students needed additional support to be
academically successful in their disadvantaged circumstances in terms of language and
cultural barriers.
222
Research Question 3
Research Question 3 focuses on the mindset of teachers when they deal with
foreign students and Japanese students. Here are the emerging themes:
Research Question 3:
What are the attitudes of teachers toward students who are different in the selected
junior high school?
Themes:
z
Theme 1: Teachers’ major focus on students with poor grades
z
Theme 2: Teachers’ fairness of care between Japanese remedial students and
JSL students
z
Theme 3: Teachers’ double standard toward absences
z
Theme 4: Teachers’ perception of a mono-ethnic culture in Japan
z
Theme 5: Experiences of foreign teachers outside of the school
Figure 5: Research Question 3 and Emerging Themes
The first three themes explore how teachers’ attitudes differ between Japanese
and foreign students at Sakura. No. 4 focuses on two teachers’ explanations of the
perceived mono-ethnic culture in Japan as reasons why diversity has not grown in Japan.
No. 5 pays special attention to experiences of the Brazilian language counselor and the
223
Canadian English language teacher outside of Sakura. Their experiences provide
additional insights to the problem of diversity in Japan.
Theme 1: Teachers’ Major Focus on Students with Poor Grades
In addition to the direct positive effect of the fine relationship between Japanese
teachers and foreign students, some teachers also talked about other advantages, which
include paying further attention to students with lower grades in general, both Japanese
and foreign. Ms. Noda believed that the approach for the JSL students resulted in benefits
to all students through repeated explanations in simple Japanese words. A report by a
Ministry of Education model school for JSL instruction confirmed this. At a seminar the
school said they found that explanations in simple words had been effective both for JSL
students and for Japanese students with lower grades.
Teachers’ attention to students with lower grades was a crucial issue at Sakura
and at the model elementary school I visited for the seminar. Each school district covered
a government-built apartment complex (public housing) for low-income families (for
details, see Sakura Junior High School in Chapter 4). It meant that children of lowincome families, both Japanese and foreign, were enrolled. In the case of Sakura,
according to the list of students with financial aid, over 100 students received financial
support for public school facilities. The list of parents of students showed that almost 150
students were from single-parent families. An administrative staff member told me that a
full 90-95% of these single-parent households were financial support recipients.
In addition to the financial problems, one teacher told me that the school’s
average score on standardized tests was lower than at other schools whose students came
224
from middle-class families. Therefore, many teachers talked about the balance of care
between the small numbers of foreign students and Japanese students with lower grades.
Theme 2: Teachers’ Fairness of Care Between Japanese Remedial Students and JSL
Students
In interviews, some teachers mentioned their fairness to all students when talking
about JSL students. Mr. Egawa, who gave a positive evaluation to Ms. Tomita’s efforts in
JSL instruction, continued:
Well, if [the foreign student] is in class, at least he can enjoy the learning
environment together which will help him participate in questions he can
answer. It is very difficult that we have not only immigrant students, but also
students who are poor at reading and writing. So, the situation is the same. It
would be great to be able to explain to him each time, but it is quite difficult to
do that…So, I do not do like to say ‘You alone do not need to turn it in,” or
something like that. (Mr. Egawa)
In terms of fairness to all students in the classroom, Shimizu (2000) observed that
many elementary school teachers told him during interviews that they could not provide
special care for foreign students merely because they were foreigners. In the eyes of
homeroom teachers, there were many students who held various issues, so they could not
pay special attention only to foreign students. This example applies to Kojima’s (2002)
unification of teachers’ guidance that there are students who are poor at reading and
writing regardless of nationality. Therefore, as the Japanese students try to understand the
class in their ways, the foreign students have to deal with it in theirs. This comment also
links to Shimizu’s (2000) de-contextualization that Mr. Egawa’s view is limited to
similarities in reading and writing skills between Japanese and JSL students, not to
cultural or familial backgrounds.
225
I suppose that cultural and familial backgrounds play a vital role in understanding
social studies contents because textbooks presuppose that readers are Japanese who
embrace common cultural values and behaviors. The shared life experiences of the
Japanese are the foundation of learning about social studies which the foreign students
lack. Therefore, the difference between remedial Japanese students and foreign students
is their fundamental life experiences in understanding Japanese social studies classes. I
conclude that Tuneyoshi’s (2001 in Gordon, 2006) claim of need for a high level of
commonalities in schools applies to learning of subject matter, as well as to school life in
general.
The following comment from Mr. Egawa showed the class structure of one
teacher and all students in his social studies class:
…I want students to take classes seriously, we set up rules, students take notes
on one page per class and earn one point [toward the grade]…In any case, even
if they do not understand meanings, [students] just copy things written on the
blackboard. I evaluate the copy, regardless of whether [a foreign student]
understands the copied notes or not. He does that. It might just be to copy some
figures in his mind. Then, he turns in his notes… he brings in notes full of
correct answers written in red. We need to help him be able to do that. (Mr.
Egawa)
This comment implies Shimizu’s (2000) argument of individualization. Whether
their notebooks are full of blackboard notes depends on an individual student’s effort
(Individualization). Mr. Egawa will evaluate the individual efforts with partial points.
The teacher’s comment also illustrates the case of assimilation that Mr. Egawa believes is
needed to help JSL students learn about the standard way of note-taking as the Japanese
peers have learned in school.
226
Theme 3: Teachers’ Double Standard Toward Absences
Ms. Noda was a second-generation Nikkeijin who works as a language
counselor. From her interviews and observations of her work, I realized that she was the
mediator between JSL students and teachers/school administrators.
Ms. Noda, working as a language counselor visiting over 80 elementary and
junior high school in the region, felt the sense of distance between teachers and foreign
students. Teachers supported foreign students formally, but did not touch their hearts. She
felt that teachers treated foreign students differently from Japanese students. One
example was teachers’ action about students’ absences. When she visited the Sakura
school, Ms. Noda was told that one foreign student had been absent for almost 20 days.
Until Ms. Noda’s visit, that student’s absence was ignored by teachers and students. On
the other hand, she knew that there were teachers who checked foreign students’ absences
and contacted the families to learn the reasons for absences. Moreover, she was told that
homeroom teachers usually visited students’ houses if students were absent from school
without notification. Ms. Noda felt that teachers had a double standard concerning
Japanese and foreign students.
According to Ms. Tomita, some language counselors from ten years ago had
visited the school. During her tenure, she was not involved with foreign students and
therefore did not know anything about them. Ms. Tomita told me that because Sakura had
so many students, teachers had many things they would not know if they did not care
about them. She thought that some present-day teachers would also not know about
foreign students. Here is her comment:
In our teachers, because [foreign students] look like the Japanese, there would be
people who do not know about them. If they really have foreign faces, it is easy
227
to know. But if [the face] is mixed with [another race], it is not noticeable. (Ms.
Tomita)
In fact, Mr. Yamano only knew of two foreign students belonging to the ninth graders
and did not know the total number of foreigners in the school. His response to my
question symbolized two things. First, the attention of teachers seemed to be limited to
students of the grade they taught and were responsible for in the homeroom. Second, the
presence of foreign students was a peripheral matter for teachers.
These two reasons explain which students teachers interact with on a daily basis.
I observed the typical full-time teachers who had duties in their homeroom, classes they
taught, a grade they belonged to, as well as club activities they supervised. It became
clear to me that of all these different duties, the priority went to students in their
homeroom and club activity. If one were to rank these the following will emerge:
homeroom and club activity as first and second responsibilities or vice versa, the third
position would go to subject area teaching. The last would be the grade level assigned to
teachers. Thus students falling outside these parameters were ostensibly outside the
teachers’ purview. Therefore foreign students who may not be involved in these ranked
activities would also be unknown to the teachers.
The different levels of duty meant that different roles were played among
teachers when one student caused a problem and teachers had to solve it. The student’s
homeroom teacher holds the primary responsibility to make decisions with school
administrators and parents. If that teacher is unavailable for an emergency, teachers from
the same grade share the responsibility, including a team leader of teachers of a specific
grade, and a vice-team leader. Only if they are also not available can teachers from other
228
grades take on the responsibility. In other words, as long as the homeroom teacher is
present, other teachers cannot interfere in his or her management of the student and it is
therefore difficult for language counselors to intervene in such situations. Thus if a
language barrier exists and the foreign student has a problem it may go unnoticed,
unresolved, or simply ignored.
When I mentioned to Ms. Noda that Ms. Tomita thought that JSL students were
usually absent from school because of their parents’ issues, Ms. Noda said that she
wanted teachers to find out the reasons for the absences. Instead of actually finding
reasons, teachers just resorted to “parental matters (private matters at home)” or “cultural
differences” which Ms. Noda felt were teachers’ excuses.
Kojima’s (2002) fixed management in teachers’ guidance of differences in foreign
students applies to teachers’ double standard toward absences. Teachers do not care when
foreign students, who are not required by law to finish compulsory education, are absent.
The lack of law enforcement means that foreign students do not have a required number
of days of attendance to graduate from junior high school. Without such enforcement, the
absence is not a school’s matter. Therefore, foreign students who disappeared from
school would not be managed as students in general. As Ms. Noda pointed out, Ms.
Tomita’s explanation of cultural differences or parental matters is an example of Japanese
teachers’ justification for the exemption from school rules for foreign students in
Kojima’s (2002) fixed management.
The story of one Japanese ninth-grade male truant, a child of Mr. and Mrs. Doi,
supported Ms. Noda’s claim of a double standard. His success in overcoming school
refusal was the result of a cooperative effort involving him, Mrs. Doi, and his homeroom
229
teachers. I was able to interview Mrs. Doi about her son’s truancy experience. He had
stopped going to school during some part of his second year. Looking back, Mrs. Doi
reflected that the parents alone were not able to persuade him, but only to keep an eye on
him. She worked hard with his seventh- and eighth-year homeroom teachers to figure out
what happened to him in school. Although these homeroom teachers could not find any
reasons for his truancy, Mrs. Doi was glad about their willingness to work with her for
her son. She also knew that Mr. Yamano, his seventh-grade homeroom teacher, always
talked with him when he came to his math class.
On Mrs. Doi’s suggestion, she and her son went to a temple to meditate there until
he said he wanted to go back to school. It took him two weeks of meditation until he
finally said that he should go back to school. Once returning from the temple, he was able
to go back to school. However, it was a challenge for him to change his daily life from
being absent for a while to attending school five days per week. During that time, his
homeroom teachers advised him to come only for a club activity if he was not ready for
classes. Following the teachers’ suggestion, he visited the school only for the club
activity first and the teachers were supportive.
By the time he moved to the ninth grade half a year later, he was able to attend
school five days a week. Mr. Yamano, who became his homeroom teacher again, told
Mrs. Doi, “Everything is all right with him.” In addition to that, Mr. Yamano also paid
attention every time the boy was absent from school. Once Mr. Yamano telephoned him
in the morning and said, “If you are able to attend class, I will pick you up in my car.”
The child was absent three times during his ninth grade because of sickness. Mrs. Doi felt
230
that her son was finally aware that he needed to attend school, and that he did not have
valid reasons for being absent.
This story shows how much two homeroom teachers were involved and
committed to help one truant student, not based on a nationality, but from the perspective
that Mr. and Mrs. Doi’s child had different needs from regular Japanese students who
attended school every day. Neither homeroom teachers who would know him the best nor
the parents knew what made him avoid school. However, teachers were supportive and
provided special treatment for him to get him to come to school every day as a routine.
The key to understanding his case would be the relationship between homeroom
teachers and parents, in addition to the rules of compulsory education. Parents asked for
help and kept communications open with homeroom teachers. Moreover, Mr. Doi was a
vice-president of the PTA at that time and Mrs. Doi supported school and community
events. That kind of close relationship with the school enabled teachers and parents to
work together.
To the contrary, one factor of ignoring foreign students’ absences would be the
lack of connection and communication between the school and the families due to the
language barrier, as also observed in Theme 3 of Research Question 1.
Theme 4: Teachers’ Perception of a Mono-Ethnic Culture in Japan
The terms, multicultural coexistence or multicultural education, were not familiar
to most teachers. Therefore, during the interview, I explained that “multicultural
coexistence or multicultural education is one in which people acknowledge and accept
individual differences.” Some teachers who provided JSL instruction for JSL students
were aware of these terms.
231
Ms. Tomita was one of teachers who socialized with JSL students on a daily
basis. She told me the majority reacted toward outsiders, including foreign students, as
follows:
Despite foreigners having increased, this is the country the Japanese have lived
in for a long time, in this way. For instance, not too long ago, not foreigners, but
children who transferred from another school were called ‘outsiders.’ We have
that kind of reaction, don’t we? Besides that, they are the foreigners…Japan has
been mono-ethnic and consisted of islands so, historically, not many people
moved to this country. That’s why I believe [the system of helping foreign
residents] is behind that of overseas...This kind of situation exists because of
Japanese history, uniqueness, or being an island nation, rather than a continent,
mono-ethnicity, or something like that. (Ms. Tomita)
Similarly, Ms. Ono, who had also interacted extensively with foreign students at a
previous junior high school, told me about the homogeneity of culture. She said:
We, students and teachers, have grown up in a mono-ethnic, mono-lingual, and
homogeneous culture, which is such a rare situation [compared with other
countries in the world]. So, we do have diverse things, such as children of
registered foreigners and the peripheral existence of Koreans, especially. But, if
we ask, ‘Are they multicultural?’ ‘Do they have a different culture?’ Then, we
will say, it has been in the same culture, hasn’t it? Because the children of
immigrant workers, from Brazil and the Philippines, have increased, we have to
find a way to accept them. Until now, we did not think about it, right? Because
the numbers of foreigners were small, we did not pay attention to them. Yes,
although it was very important for these foreigners, there was no system. I believe
that [multicultural coexistence] has just started and this has really been the
beginning of it. (Ms. Ono)
These comments, from two teachers, were similar in terms of emphasizing the monoethnic view of culture and the country, although they both were experienced in teaching
the Japanese language to JSL students and had been familiar with the concept of
multicultural coexistence or multiculturalism. Moreover, their view is the dichotomy of
Japanese and foreigners. They did not mention anything about domestic/indigenous
minority groups, Ainu, Burakumin, and Okinawans who have been partially described in
232
textbooks and teachers’ manuals (see the Description of Minority Groups in Teacher’s
Manuals and Textbooks in Chapter 4).
The contradiction between their multicultural experiences/knowledge and their
perceptions of a mono-ethnic culture would be explained by Befu’s (2001) illustration
about the political ideology of Nihonjinron. He states:
…what is at issue [in the Japanese mind] is the invincible belief in [italics in
original] that uniqueness and the claiming of uniqueness in the Nihonjinron
discourse.… Comprehension of these unique features supposedly requires not
rational or logical understanding, but an intuitive insight into Japanese culture
that only natives can achieve. (Befu, 2001, p. 67)
Ōta (2000) also shows that the perception is created by the ideology of regarding ethnic
homogeneity as a better condition than multiculturalism, regardless of the real formation
of the society. Although the firm belief of Nihonjinron stands only at the ideology level,
this perception has worked strongly to unite people socially and culturally in order to
achieve political unity.
Lie (2001) also describes the reaction of Japanese people when he asked them
about the existing minorities. He states:
[W]hen I asked Japanese people about the existing minorities, [m]any people
produced puzzled looks. Confronted with evidence of ethnic diversity, most either
ignored or defined it…There was a persistent fissure between the articulated
assumption of monoethnicity and the tacit awareness of multiethnicity.
Paradoxically, many people acknowledged the existence of one or another
exception to the monoethnic rule, all the while insisting on it. As a bank employee
in his fifties concluded after we discussed the Ainu, Burakumin, and Korean
Japanese for half an hour, ‘but, of course, Japan is an ethnically homogeneous
society.’ (p. 46)
Lie’s view that Japanese people acknowledge a few exceptions of the monoethnic culture despite the homogeneous discourse is conformed by the comment made by
233
Ms. Ono who talked about the presence of Koreans in Japan. In her view, the Japanese
cultural system was homogeneous in terms of ethnicity and language, despite
acknowledging the presence of minority groups. I wanted to clarify her meaning of “the
homogeneous culture.” I asked her if the cultural homogeneity stemmed from the
assimilation policy toward non-ethnic Japanese, or was it simply the similarity of East
Asian cultures between the Korean-Japanese and the ethnic Japanese in Japan. Ms. Ono
supported the assimilation policy with a few examples:
Although there would have been cultural similarities and also a historical
background [between the two groups], Japan seems not to take to coexistence
policies based on accepting different cultures. I am not quite sure, but, I believe it
must have not. That’s why there are Korean schools, isn’t it? I believe that
Japanese schools did not take action to the point of boycotting different cultures;
yet, the school stance has not been multi-dimensional and multicultural. Probably,
the school does not have any guideline to think about it. Foreign students remain a
minority group in schools. So, the school does not support coexistence. (Ms. Ono)
Furthermore, Ms. Ono explained the relationship between Korean residents and ethnic
Japanese in a historical context:
Discrimination/anti-discrimination is like someone stepping on someone’s foot or
being stepped by others. The person who does the stepping is not usually aware of
having done so. Although, it is painful to be stepped on, the reaction of the
stepping person would be, ‘Really? We didn’t know that.’ Probably, Japan might
have boycotted [the Koreans], but at my level, I mean, in my generation, there are
no reasons for boycotting them because of being raised in a peaceful time after
World War II…But, I think that my parent’s generation obviously had disdain. It
was not at the personal level, but because of the generation where people thought
in the way the majority thought. (Ms. Ono)
In Ms. Ono’s explanation, the Japanese perception of Koreans had improved
significantly from the past. What then would be the major reaction from the younger
generation? When Mr. Harada was talking about his classes related to diversity, he
mentioned the reactions of students toward Korean residents:
234
For instance, when I started talking about stories of Korean residents, as I
expected, I felt that they looked down at their desks. And in another case, there
were some students who were interested in stories about people living in the
United States or other countries. Others would show that they did not understand
when I talked about a little difficult story. (Mr. Harada)
In this quote, I paid the most attention to students’ reaction toward Korean residents.
Therefore, I asked him, “When did students the look down? What did it mean?” He
responded:
I believe that there are various occasions and reasons when students look down.
For instance, when they are not interested in a topic, then they look down and do
not listen. On another occasion, I might be thinking too much, but I felt that, as I
expected, there might be a topic they want to avoid and not touch on in society.
(Mr. Harada)
In his explanation, looking down at their desks was the students’ gesture of showing their
indifference in the topic for the variety of reasons. In the context, the majority of students
would have negative reactions to the problems of Korean residents.
Then, Mr. Harada told me a story of a seventh-grade girl student. She told him
that her grandfather was a famous person in a Korean organization in this area. She
openly talked about her grandfather without any hesitation and asked the teacher to find
him on the website. The teacher checked the website and found an article about him. Her
grandfather passed away a few years ago and many people attended the large-scale
funeral service.
Mr. Harada was very surprised at her openness to talk about him. It also implied
that she also has a Korean background. He rather assumed that students with Korean
backgrounds tended to hide their ethnic heritage. She was opposite to his expectation.
From her openness to Mr. Harada, the teacher thought that this student would have had
235
openly talked about it with her friends and classmates. Or, because her grandfather was
well-known in the community, they had already known about it. Based on this context,
the teacher said: “If there are students whose families used to be Koreans, then, other
students might already have known about it and do not want to hear more.” He implied
two things in this comment. First, students were tired of hearing the same Korean stories
repeatedly. Second, some of these students might have a negative image of Koreans; thus,
they responded as if they were indifferent about it.
Between two implications, his following story maintained the negative image of
Koreans. He told me a story of this Korean girl, warning: “It is going to be a weird story,
but this Sakura District seems to be the area where former North and South Korean
residents lived” (Mr. Harada). In fact, I had heard the story at the school during my
fieldwork, but I was asked not to share it with anybody because it was a “taboo.” Thus, I
was surprised by his words why he knew it. I asked, “From whom did you hear it?” and
he said: “teachers around me are talking about it” (Mr. Harada).
His first words of “a weird story” implied that this was a secret. I learned the root
cause of the lack of diversity: There were no open discussions about anything sensitive
even as many people shared the stories outside of the public discourse. This was an
example of the hidden transcript, the private conversation of teachers that took place
behind students’ backs. This hidden transcript confirmed students’ negative reaction to
Korean residents in Mr. Harada’s story.
As Mr. Harada told me, the Sakura area has had a history of Korean inhabitants.
According to local Midori history books (Midori city committee of the editorial board,
1995), during World War II, a little over 1,200 North and South Koreans were sent to
236
work in a major arsenal in Midori. Korean inhabitants were scattered in many areas of the
region. In fact, a major newspaper article published in 1992 indicated that over 200
Korean students stayed in Japanese elementary schools during the final stages of World
War II. The majority of them went to school in the Sakura area. Despite showing that
Korean populations existed in Midori, nothing specified how many Koreans remained in
Midori after the war ended. What the books said was that most of these Korean youth
were sent home after the war (Midori city committee of the editorial board, 1995).
Despite being sensitive to students’ reactions to certain topics, Mr. Harada told
me that he still mentioned themes he thought important for students to know. This
attitude would be critical to giving students a chance to respond to issues in which they
had showed no interest. There might be some sensitive issues or things seen as taboo, and
students might have known some aspects of them. Regarding problems of resident
Koreans, Mr. Harada talked with students about Pacchigi, the prize-winning Japanese
movie released in January, 2005, focusing on the 1968 friendship between a Japanese boy
and a resident Korean girl which went beyond racial divisions between the Japanese and
Korean families.
Theme 5: Experiences of Foreign Teachers Outside of the School
Ms. Noda was a second-generation Nikkeijin in Brazil. Her Japanese parents
immigrated there and were the first generation of Nikkei in the Brazilian society. As a
second generation, “80% of identity is Brazilian and 100% of DNA is Japanese. After
living in Japan for a long time, I want to go back to who I really am as a Brazilian.” What
she meant was that the Japanese people treated her as ethnic Japanese, so she felt as if she
would become more and more ethnic Japanese if she stayed in Japan and she was not
237
comfortable with that kind of feeling. She encountered her identity clash between a
common ethnic (racial) background with the ethnic Japanese and Latin socialization she
have grown up with, as many Nikkeijin experience (Murphy-Shigematsu, 2006).
I asked her if she had had experiences of being seen as Japanese or forced to act
as if she were Japanese. She had such experiences, and told me that the Japanese took a
different attitude toward foreign residents depending on whether the foreigners were
guests or not. For instance, the Japanese treated a White American woman as a guest by
providing private taxi-related services, so she did not need to use public transportation in
her daily life, while Ms. Noda often used public trains. Interestingly, she told me that the
Japanese became very kind and their eyes filled with joy if she spoke English to them.
Sometimes, Japanese people bought her a train ticket, and others took her to the train
platform. Ms. Noda believed that the Japanese had a complex about people speaking
English which they did not speak, so they tried to treat English speakers nicely.
In contrast, according to Ms. Noda, the Japanese showed “the real Japanese
thinking and attitude” if the foreigners had Asian faces and spoke to them in Japanese. In
other words, the Japanese treated these Asian residents as if they were Japanese because
that was how the Japanese socialized with each other. In Ms. Noda’s understanding, the
Japanese had a very cold demeanor toward strangers, but a very kind attitude toward
someone they knew. Since the Asian residents were total strangers, the Japanese treated
them as they would Japanese strangers. Because of her experience, she recommended that
her foreign friends speak English in emergencies. She said, “[Speaking English to the
Japanese] is the life wisdom [to live in Japan as foreign residents].”
238
Mr. Clark, a Chinese-Canadian English teacher, also had occasions when the
Japanese thought that he was Japanese. On such occasions, he just said, “I don’t know” in
English. Sometimes people realized he was not Japanese because of his foreign accent
speaking Japanese. He also told me of an interesting aspect of his foreign status as
follows:
Like in terms of being accepted, [the Japanese] accept you as being a foreigner
not into the Japanese society, but accept you as being…somebody, that’s not
Japanese? That way, it’s a good point, many times, that the people recognize you
as being not Japanese…You’re given a bit more freedom, like if you make
mistakes and stuff, they know you’re not rude or anything, you just don’t know.
(Mr. Clark)
Unlike Ms. Noda’s story that skin color mattered in the Japanese attitude toward
foreign residents, Mr. Clark told me about the importance of nationality and native
language to a particular group of Japanese. He said his Canadian nationality and being a
native speaker of English provided a positive impression to the Japanese who were
interested in learning and speaking English. Also, he understood that his Canadian
nationality influenced the Japanese attitude because they had relatively positive images of
Canada.
Mr. Clark’s talk about favoritism toward the English language seems to conflict
with what Ms. Noda talked about as a complex feeling toward English. In my
understanding, English is associated with prestige and status. People know that English is
just one of many foreign languages, and not the only one. But because all junior high and
most high schools teach English as the primary, of not only, foreign language, English
creates a complex feeling in terms of people who are able to speak it and those who are
not. Spoken English is the easy way (other than learning other languages outside of
239
school) to communicate with people overseas, so for those who want to study, work, or
live abroad, English is a necessary skill. Therefore, those who are interested in
intercultural communication and socialization tend to favor English and English speakers.
The Japanese in Mr. Clark’s story would be the people who love such socialization in
English. However, though English is not the only language spoken among foreign
residents, those Japanese tend to favor English-speakers. That kind of divided interest
between English and non-English speakers was apparent even in my student
interviewees.
One seventh-grade girl, Sendo, had a homestay experience in the United States
one summer. She hoped that foreigners would increase in Japanese schools and
communities. But, she wished that they spoke English instead of Japanese, so that she
could talk to them in English, too. During her time with me, I felt that she really wanted
to have more opportunities to speak English. Maeda, a ninth-grade boy, also wanted to
visit the area where English-speakers lived in order to have conversation with them
because of his knowledge of English.
I asked Ms. Noda, “What kind of change, do you think, would help Brazilians
and foreign residents live in Japan more comfortably?” According to her, it will take a
long time for Japan to change. Japanese patriotism is different from that of Brazil or the
United States. In the case of Brazil, the country is made up of immigrants; thus, people
love Brazil as the country which accepted them. The Japanese do not share that kind of
patriotism, but they have their pride as the Japanese people. They do not love Japan as
their country; their pride is in being Japanese and they are closed to foreigners. Many
people suggest reasons for this attitude, including that Japan is an island nation, a place
240
where foreigners did not live originally, or that the Japanese do not even see foreigners.
But, Ms. Noda believes that “the Japanese do not tell us the real reasons” because there
are so many island nations in the world and all people in these island nations are not like
the Japanese.
Her view of the actions for multicultural coexistence was a declaration, not actual
plans for implementation. Although many representatives participated in various
meetings regarding multicultural coexistence, the meetings did not go beyond the talking
stage. She believed that although multicultural forums were important, participants in
these forums did not interact with foreign residents in their daily lives, so the declaration
was not realistic. So, she said “multicultural coexistence is a utopia.”
I asked Ms. Noda, “What do you think are the challenges and issues based on
your two-year experience of being a language counselor?” According to Ms. Noda,
foreigners entered Japan in the late 1980s as temporary short-term visitors. But, now,
they have become residents and demand changes in schools and society. However,
neither the schools, nor Japanese society itself have been familiar with foreigners living
in the society.
According to Noddings (1992):
Attitudes and ‘mentalities’ are shaped, at least in part, by experience. Most of us
speak regularly of a ‘military mind,’ a ‘police mentality,’ ‘business thinking,’ and
the like. Although some of this talk is a product of stereotyping, it seems clear
that it also captures some truth about human behavior. All disciplines and
institutional organizations have training programs designed not only to teach
specific skills but also to ‘shape minds,’ that is, to induce certain attitudes and
ways of looking at the world. (p. 23)
Thus when the Japanese schools do not foster possibilities for students to reshape their
thinking about foreigners, the pervasive stereotype remains with them.
241
In conclusion, Research Question 3 focused on the perception and attitudes of
teachers towards foreign students. The emerging themes were:
1.
Teachers’ major focus on students with poor grades.
2.
Teachers’ fairness of care between Japanese remedial students and JSL
students.
3.
Teachers’ double standard toward absences.
4.
Teachers’ perception of a mono-ethnic culture in Japan.
5.
Experiences of foreign teachers outside of the school.
The first three themes highlighted that teachers’ attitudes differ between
Japanese and foreign students. The first theme clarified that teachers’ major concerns
went to students with poor grades. The emphasis of the fairness of care, in the second
theme, showed that JSL students were treated in the same way as Japanese students in
order to be “fair” to Japanese students. In contrast, teachers’ attitudes towards student
absences showed differences in treatment of Japanese and foreign students for truancy
cases due to the relationship between homeroom teachers and parents and the influence
of Article 26 of the Constitution of Japan.
Fourth, JSL teachers’ multicultural experiences/knowledge contrasted with their
perception of a mono-ethnic culture. Moreover, the case of Koreans demonstrated that
students and teachers maintained a negative image of Koreans. Last, the experiences of
the Brazilian counselor and the Canadian English teacher confirmed different attributes
of foreigners, including skin color, nationality and native language, influenced the
Japanese attitude toward foreigners outside of schools.
242
Research Question 4
Research Question 4 focuses on the nature of interaction between Japanese
teachers/students and minority students. Responses demonstrate how interaction would
change the perception of “others.” The following two themes and issues emerged:
Research Question 4:
What is the nature of the interactions between Japanese teachers/students and minority
students in the selected junior high school?
Themes:
z
Theme 1: The value of socialization to change perceptions of “others”
z
Theme 2: A language barrier between teachers and JSL students’ parents
Figure 6: Research Question 4 and Emerging Themes
Theme 1: The Value of Socialization to Change Perceptions of “Others”
Ms. Tomita emphasized the importance of building a good relationship between
foreign and Japanese students in their homerooms. She told me a story she had heard
from a language counselor:
According to a language counselor, when she visited a school, a Brazilian student
had been bullied. One factor for bullying was that classmates did not understand
about a foreign peer. So, the language counselor went to the foreign student’s
homeroom where she introduced many features of Brazilian culture to the
student’s peers. The introduction of culture became a breakthrough, and the
Brazilian student was finally able to fit in the classroom environment. As we
expect, students do not know about many things, do they? Therefore, even if the
243
foreign student did something without thinking, students take it wrong because
they don’t know about that student. I believe that incidents of that kind take place.
(Ms. Tomita)
In this example, the language counselor was the mediator between the foreign and
Japanese students. What the counselor did was dialogue with Japanese students by
introducing Brazilian cultures. Noddings (1992) discusses the importance of dialogue to
understand “others:”
When we are struggling to understand, when we are committed to connection
but are unsure how to achieve it, we need genuine dialogue with concrete others.
Then we may come to a satisfactory resolution governing this time, these people,
this place. Even in genuine dialogue, the end is often uncertainty and the sort of
tension that will lead to fresh and more vigorous exploration. (p. 120)
In this case, the counselor’s dialogue with students would have established “a satisfactory
resolution” because the counselor was a teacher/adult in the eyes of students and also
used unique approaches to introduce the Brazilian student’s culture into the classroom.
Ms. Tomita also believed that it would be a great benefit for students to have
foreign peers in their classrooms when thinking about the future internationalization of
Japan. She said:
I believe that students can find it is very lucky to have a foreign student in the
same homeroom. Since Japan is going to be an internationalized society, people
will experience having foreign peers in their workplace or even in
schools…Without having such experiences, people might not know how to
socialize with them. But, there will be a natural ability to become familiar with
having them around by living together, won’t there? So, I believe that it will be
very important for homeroom teachers to feel lucky to have these foreign students
and to guide all students in that positive viewpoint. If teachers feel ‘I am in
trouble to have them,’ then, I believe that students will sense the teachers’
bewilderment. Therefore, thinking like, thanks to foreign students, for instance,
students learn more about something overseas and open up their view of the
world. Or, if students help teach something to foreign students, human morality
will grow. To sum up, I hope that these homerooms with foreign students can see
it as a lucky environment. (Ms. Tomita)
244
What Ms. Tomita emphasized was the responsibilities of homeroom teachers in
creating a positive homeroom environment for both Japanese and foreign students.
Homeroom teachers can facilitate interaction among students and make sure that foreign
students are physically and mentally included in the circle of friends.
While Ms. Tomita stressed the advantage of socialization in general, Ms. Noda
talked about the synergy of developing human relations and creating anti-racist attitudes.
For instance, if elementary schools’ integrated studies time was used to help students
contact with people from different countries, “friendship goes beyond the national
border.” In her story, she explained that people tended to look down on the Black people
in Brazil, but, if students could build good relationships with these people, the friendships
would help students feel closer to other Black people. If the Blacks are total strangers, the
image of the Black does not change. Ms. Noda said, “By socializing with other people,
they will share empathy. By creating the empathy, they will learn that people are not so
different from each other.”
Ms. Noda also told me a story about the friendship between foreign students and
the students with temporary emotional instability in a counselor’s room for alternate
placement. In two schools she visited, teachers arranged for students with temporary
emotional instability to teach Japanese language to JSL students. The JSL students were
happy to have Japanese students teaching them Japanese and did not know that these
students had mental problems. The Japanese students in the counselor’s room liked the
supplemental JSL classes because the JSL students trusted them. These students with
temporary emotional instability had tried so hard to get along with peers in their
245
homeroom but they did not need to try hard to socialize with the JSL students. The
interaction with the JSL students gave the Japanese students a chance to overcome their
weakness in mind. Finally, their minds got stronger and they were able to go back to their
homerooms.
Based on that story, Ms. Noda believed that there was something natural
connecting these students, regardless of what weakness each had. The strong friendship
made these vulnerable students stronger and helped eliminate school-related stresses. She
also categorized the students into five groups: Students who can take classes regularly in
their homerooms; who stay in the alternate placement at school; who do not come to
school; special education students; foreign students. Each student has his or her own
problems and concerns. Especially regarding unconventional students, painful
experiences encountered as a minority group in school become commonalities to share.
As Ms. Noda told me that friendship did not care about the nationality of
students, the friendship with conversations in Japanese made Japanese students feel
closer to the foreign students. A student, Sendo, said she had interaction with a Brazilian
student born in Japan, when they were elementary school students. Because their
conversation was in Japanese, Sendo saw her foreign friend as physically, but not quite a
foreigner. Another student, Maeda, told me that he was friends with two foreign students
in the ninth grade; one Brazilian and another Turkish. When he was with them, he felt
that they were “a little bit foreign, but they get along with the Japanese, I feel that they
are not different from the Japanese.”
These kinds of personal experiences with people from other countries should
influence the pedagogy for teaching. Mr. Harada told me that his interests in foreign
246
people stemmed from his homestay experience in Australia when he was a sixth grader.
He said:
When I went to Australia, what I now think was a good experience was that the
host family was Black. Despite being Australian, they were an immigrant family
from Sri Lanka… It was my first homestay experience. I went there [Australia]
without seeing pictures of the host family. While other Japanese people’s host
families were the Whites, my host family was Black, or, so to speak, a different
color…different race. But, at that time, I did not think about that at all because I
was a child. Then, later, after I became a junior high school student and saw
pictures again, I realized that my host family was a different race from other
families. (Mr. Harada)
His personal experience explains why he is more open-minded about getting JSL students
involved in his class by asking the Turkish student about particular themes or adding
information about Turkey. Mr. Harada’s story and Ichino’s multicultural experience in
the United States indicate that unusual experiences at a younger age let students adjust to
new things more easily than adults. As Mr. Harada reflected, even if he did not realize
how great the experience was to be hosted by the Sri Lankan family in Australia at that
time of the homestay, he gradually grew to understand the importance of his special
experiences.
Moreover, this is not the only experience by which he was impacted in his youth.
Here is another story of his:
Even the story about the resident Koreans, I became interested in them when I
learned about them in a history class in elementary school. So, when I was
talking with my mother at home, she told me that either the father or the grandpa
of my long-time childhood friend was from Korea. It made a huge impact, didn’t
it? I felt something weird. (Mr. Harada)
When I heard these stories, I was very surprised that he had had such critical
experiences in terms of ethnic diversity as a child. What he experienced was shared with
247
“others,” the Sri Lankan migrant family in Australia and the close friendship coincidently
with a Korean background. If he shared these lived experiences with students, students
would be able to learn more about the concept of diversity and the coexistence society
beyond the textbook explanation.
Theme 2: A Language Barrier Between Teachers and JSL Students’ Parents
Whereas the nature of socialization could break the stereotypical perception of
foreigners, the presence of a common language would be a key to having conversations
with them. As the case of the truant boy demonstrated in Research Question 3, the
relationship between the school and parents plays a vital role in Japanese schooling, with
parent-teacher conferences and homeroom teachers’ home visits to meet the parents
every school year.
In reality, as described in Theme 3 of Research Question 1, JSL students’
parents were not necessarily proficient in Japanese. Therefore, the communication
between homeroom teachers and foreign parents was a major problem. Teachers were
concerned whether or not school announcements were understood by these parents.
Because of the language barrier, the parent-teacher conferences were held on the date the
language counselor visited, for translation.
Language counselors from the board of education played important roles in
helping these kinds of communication and relational problems between teachers, JSL
students and their parents. These language counselors were not multilingual and so
unable to communicate with all foreign students in their native languages, but they
supported all foreign students as a whole. I observed that none of the language counselors
for the Sakura school spoke Turkish which has implications for the students in this
248
category. That is to say if the Turkish students do not become fluent in Japanese they are
literally on their own.
The nature of socialization, a way of eliminating stereotypical views about
minority groups, needs a common language to begin a conversation and build
relationships between the Japanese and the foreign residents. On one hand, foreign
students who regularly come to school would learn basic conversational Japanese
language by being surrounded by Japanese speakers. In addition to these skills, foreign
students would relate to their Japanese peers through learning and socializing with them,
as shown in the example of Sendo and Maeda.
What Sendo and Maeda called “not quite foreigners” indicated that these students
had certain images of “foreigners” as absolute “others.” However, their foreign friends
did not belong to their images of “foreigners.” These foreign friends were no longer
“others” because of their daily interaction with Japanese. By sharing school life together,
they had built commonalities by which they could relate rather than emphasizing a sense
of difference in terms of physical appearance, nationality, and so on. The school life for
students is a chance to be exposed to something unfamiliar through learning and
interaction.
On the other hand, foreign parents do not always have an opportunity to learn the
language of the host country. Because there is no common language for communication
between teachers and these parents, the school needs to establish certain policies or
provisions to facilitate more conversations with these parents regarding school
announcements.
249
Summary
This chapter addressed and analyzed the data using the literature reviewed and the
theoretical framework where applicable. After the contextual and background
information or the participants of the study, each research question was analyzed
separately within its emerging themes.
Research Question 1 focused on exploring structures and provisions that were
available in the schools to accommodate diversity. Three themes emerged: Teachers’
opinions about their role as teachers; institutional barriers to a returnee student for public
high school exams; provisions for different/“other” students. First, teachers felt that the
national curriculum and school provisions were hegemonic and inflexible to them. The
curriculum and provision made it difficult for teachers to try new pedagogies with
students. However, teachers sought their personal fulfillment in building caring
relationships with students within their limited autonomy and freedom.
Second, a story of a Japanese returnee student showed that the school was only
able to draw the student’s talent out within the framework of the school culture and
public high school exams. The school did not adjust to make the most of his talent by
changing the conventional provisions that were created for the majority students.
Last, there was an unequal distribution of individualized instruction between
different/ “other” Japanese students and foreign students with limited Japanese language
skills. This disparity of school provisions between Japanese and foreign students was due
to the influence of Article 26 of the Constitution of Japan which states the compulsory
education requirement for ethnic Japanese, domestic/indigenous minority groups, and
naturalized Japanese (ex-foreigners). This requirement did not include students with
250
foreign resident status, i.e., foreign students in my study. Furthermore, Theme 3 also
demonstrated the importance of the role of language counselors for JSL teachers, JSL
students, as well as their parents. The Ran case indicated that the caring relationship
between JSL teachers and JSL students alone did not compensate for the language barrier
between the two parties.
Research Question 2 paid attention to pedagogical strategies teachers used to
teach diversity. Themes that emerged were: Social studies classes; foreign language
classes; integrated studies classes; extra support of teachers for foreign students.
First, social studies teachers used various pedagogical strategies. These were: Influences
of the Portuguese culture in the Edo Period; adding geography and civics knowledge in
history class; learning about Turkey due to the presence of a Turkish student in civics
class; using a popular example to explain self-determination in civics class.
In addition to teachers’ strategies and techniques to guide students to learn
contents of the class, some teachers demonstrated the caring relationships with their
students. Mr. Harada used participatory learning when he posed questions and students
answered them voluntarily. The teacher also frequently commented on something related
to Turkey to encourage his Turkish student involved in the civics class. As a response to
Mr. Harada, this student actively participated in his posing questions to students. The
teacher’s comment on Turkey also helped his classmates understand where he came from
and his socio-cultural and political background.
Second, in foreign language education classes, one teacher, Ms. Ono, reminded
students of reasons for learning the English language beyond high school entrance exams.
The other teacher, Mr. Banno, was rather good at preparing students for exams by
251
guiding them to verbally memorize words, phrases, and sentences which were all written
in the English textbook. An example a student, Sendo, demonstrated that textbook
knowledge alone did not motivate some students to study English. Her homestay
experience in the United States made her aware of the limitation of textbook words and
phrases in actual communication with English speakers. For the needs of students such as
Sendo, regarding practical communication skills and cross-cultural learning, the AET
helped them avoid stereotypical ideas of other cultures through learning English.
Third, in Education for International Understanding, some student groups’
popular international projects included the collection of donations and un-used daily
products to help people in developing countries. In contrast, no student groups chose
projects for their own foreign neighbors who live in their community. A civics textbook
also did not suggest any sample projects directly related to foreign residents in the theme
for “international cooperation.” In this theme, “foreigners” were categorized into two
groups: People living in other countries or some foreigners visit Japan for tourism or
short visits. There was no perspective that some foreigners could be residents of Japan.
Finally, a story of Sakura JSL teacher, Ms. Tomita, showed what a teacher could
do to help JSL students within the classroom. In comparison, two other teachers spent
extra time with their JSL students outside of school beyond their duty as teachers. The
contrast of these two demonstrated the variation of an individual teacher’s decision of
how to support these JSL students. Their decisions related directly to their own morality
and beliefs because JSL students needed additional support to be academically successful
in their disadvantaged circumstances in terms of language and cultural barriers.
252
Research Question 3 explored the perception and attitudes of teachers towards
foreign students. The emerging themes were: Teachers’ major focus on students with
poor grades; teachers’ fairness of care between Japanese remedial students and JSL
students; teachers’ perception of a mono-ethnic culture in Japan; experiences of foreign
teachers outside of the school. The first three themes highlighted that teachers’ attitudes
differ between Japanese and foreign students. The first theme clarified that teachers’
major concerns went to students with poor grades. The emphasis of the fairness of care,
in the second theme, showed that JSL students were treated in the same way as Japanese
students in order to be “fair” to Japanese students. In contrast, teachers’ attitudes towards
student absences showed differences in treatment for truancy cases of Japanese and
foreign students due to the relationship between homeroom teachers and parents and the
influence of Article 26 of the Constitution of Japan.
Fourth, JSL teachers’ multicultural experiences/knowledge contrasted with their
perception of a mono-ethnic culture. Moreover, the case of Koreans demonstrated that
students and teachers maintained a negative image of Koreans. Last, the experiences of
the Brazilian counselor and the Canadian English teacher confirmed different attributes
of foreigners, including skin color, nationality and native language influenced the
Japanese attitude toward foreigners outside school.
Research Question 4 looked into the nature of interaction between Japanese
teachers/students and minority students. Two themes emerged under this question: The
value of socialization to change perceptions of “others,” and a language barrier between
teachers and JSL students’ parents. On one hand, building relationships through daily
interaction changes the image of foreigners in positive ways among Japanese students.
253
Examples of a teacher, Mr. Harada, and a returnee student, Ichino, indicated that
multicultural experiences at a younger age enabled them to adjust to new things more
easily than adults. The nature of socialization, a way of eliminating stereotypical views
about minority groups, needs a common language to begin a conversation and build
relationships between the Japanese and the foreign residents. On the other hand, the
language barrier makes it difficult for foreign parents to build relationships with the
homeroom teachers of their children.
254
CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND POLICY
RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary of the Study
Chapter 1 provided the background, the statement of the problem, the purpose of
the study, research questions, case study framework, the significance of the study,
delimitations of the study, limitations of the study, and operational definitions of terms.
The current Japanese society is intertwined with two opposite sociopolitical
forces: the state reinforcement of homogeneity of the nation and the local responses
toward multiculturalism. The governmental policies have shifted to reinforcing the ethnic
Japanese as the dominant majority, while not allowing non-ethnic Japanese, such as
domestic/indigenous minority groups and immigrants, to fully participate in economic
and political activities. In contrast, grassroots organizations and local communities
struggle to mediate a serious tension between the ethnic Japanese and immigrants.
In this context, public schools are caught in the middle between the government
stance and local communities. The national government guidelines for teaching reinforce
patriotism in the official documents and discourse whereas classroom teaching and
learning respond heavily to social and intellectual needs of children, parents, and
communities. For instance, teaching and learning of national culture and traditions has
been stressed in various subjects, including history, foreign language, and moral
education. The content of the revised Fundamental Law of Education (FLE) of 2006
replaced a curriculum built on democratic ideas with a curriculum focused on patriotism
and morality. As Japanese culture and society are becoming more multicultural, the
emphasis of the homogeneity does not fit the realities of the public sphere, such as
255
schools, particularly in towns and cities where there are significant immigrant
populations.
The goal of the research was to examine various diversity-related challenges for
domestic/indigenous minority and foreign students in Japanese schools and how they
provided for these students. Four research questions were created: Structures and
provisions available to accommodate diversity; pedagogical strategies of teachers;
perceptions of teachers toward students; the nature of the interactions between students.
The significance of this study is threefold. First, targeting issues of foreign
students in a local Japanese school will address new perspectives in considering
educational opportunities for a diverse student population. My findings would be useful
for policy recommendations from the perspective of a local junior high school. Second,
my lived experiences of 20 years of growing up in a town near Midori provided me with
a critical view of socio-cultural and economic changes that occurred in my surrounding
towns and cities, including Midori. This lived experience served as the basis of
interpreting and analyzing the phenomena I had observed during the fieldwork.
In addition to the contribution to the scholarly work, I believe that my findings
will benefit teachers and school administrators in other cities and towns who try to deal
with issues related to increasing numbers of immigrants in their schools or cities.
Operational definitions of terms provided meanings of critical words mentioned
throughout this dissertation. Organization of the study provided the organizational
structure.
Chapter 2 reviewed and organized available literature based on the focus of my
study. The organization of the literature was: Cultural boundaries of “we” and “others”;
256
national identity formation through Nihonjinron; national identity formation through
education; an alternative for homogeneous policies―Multiculturalism. As a theoretical
framework, I referred to hegemony and social reproduction theory.
Chapter 3 provided my research methodology, including research design and data
collection procedures, as well as data analysis procedures. For research design, I used a
qualitative case study methodology. The case study is a method which enables
researchers to understand the complexities and uniqueness of a case within a limited
frame (Stake, 1995).
For selection of participants, two methods were used: Purposeful and snowball
sampling methods. With the purposeful sampling, school administrators, teachers, and
students in one junior high school, Sakura Junior High School, were selected. With the
snowball sampling, parents of Sakura students, language counselors, school
administrators, teachers, and students in two elementary schools, Ran and Matsu, were
selected.
Research sites were: One junior high school (Sakura) and two elementary schools
(Ran and Matsu), and one seminar regarding JSL curriculum. This is a bounded case
study of Sakura Junior High School. Other research sites of the Ran and Matsu
elementary schools and the JSL curriculum seminar were used to confirm and validate
my data observed in Sakura.
Sakura Junior High School met the needs of my dissertation research in terms of
examining diversity-related challenges for domestic/indigenous minority and foreign
students in 2007 in the local contexts where I grew up. My interest in diversity issues is
rooted in my public school experiences in Heiwa between 1984 and 1996. A time during
257
which the existence of minority groups in Japan was not discussed in school. However,
11 years later, my town’s region, including Midori, has a greater immigrant population
than ever before. In 2007, the foreign population in Midori was 3,058 (2.56% of the
total population). Because that total has increased almost three times over those 11 years,
the Sakura school provided me with an opportunity to explore new features of learning
diversity issues within their context.
Limitations of the study include that the results of my findings cannot be
generalized to the entire country but provide in-depth understanding of the particular case
that the findings of which could be informative to other school settings. Another
limitation was the time constraint. I was able to interact with my informants for a total of
three months. Therefore, I missed opportunities of engagement in other terms of the
school year. The time constraint impacted my perception, interpretation, and analysis of
the phenomena occurring in the observed classrooms.
Data collection procedures provided each process with documents, observations,
and interviews during the data-collection period and also described my role as a
researcher in the field. Data were collected from the middle of November, 2007 to early
February, 2008. In November, I gained entrée to Sakura through my former teacher to do
fieldwork for about three months. I started collecting school-related documents, relevant
curriculum, teachers’ manuals, and textbooks. I also began to observe classes from six
different subjects. In December, once I developed a rapport with teachers and students, I
conducted interviews. Interviews with teachers lasted from 40 minutes to two hours
depending upon the conversation and teacher’s schedule after the interview. In January,
2008, I visited Ran Elementary School with a Brazilian language counselor for a day. I
258
also attended the JSL curriculum seminar. At the end of January, my fieldwork in Sakura
ended. In the first week of February, I did fieldwork in Matsu Elementary school.
All interviews with teachers, except one, were tape-recorded. Interviews were not
tape-recorded in conversation with the school principal, one teacher, a Brazilian language
counselor, students, and parents of one Sakura student because of various factors,
including unexpectedly long conversations, noisy environment, and risks of nervousness
among informants during recording. Data without tape-recording were re-written in my
fieldnotes right after the conversation to incorporate everything I had heard during the
interview. For additional information, I collected archival documents about Midori in
December, 2008. I also collected information about the government-built apartment
complex from a residential director through my mother by phone.
Three sources of data were used for this research: Document analyses, classroom
observations, and interviews. I did content analyses of school-related documents, relevant
national curriculum, teachers’ manuals, and textbooks. School-related documents include
the weekly academic schedule of all homerooms from seventh- to ninth-grade, the seating
arrangement of teachers in the teacher’s room, weekly school newsletters, the sketch of
the school buildings, as well as the Midori local history document in the city archive.
Another set of documents included the general rules of the government teaching
guidelines, and the teaching guidelines for four subjects, three teachers’ manuals for
social studies, and textbooks for four subjects.
Among all documents, some relevant educational sources, including government
teaching guidelines for social studies and a foreign language, three teachers’ manuals for
social studies, and geography and history textbooks, were used to provide contexts to the
259
study. On the other hand, documents most relevant to my data, such as the general rules
of the government teaching guidelines and the civics textbook, were used to confirm and
validate my data in the analyses section, as well as in contexts to the study.
Classroom observations were done for a total of 58 periods in six subject areas:
Social studies (24 periods); Japanese language (10.5 periods); foreign language (10);
integrated studies (7.5); moral education (4), and JSL instruction (2). Semi-structured
interviews were conducted in Japanese, except with the Canadian English teacher, with
18 informants: One school principal at Sakura, six teachers (three social studies, two
foreign language, and one Japanese language), one visiting Canadian English teacher, one
visiting Brazilian language counselor from the prefecture-level board of education, seven
students (four Japanese and three foreign students), and parents of a ninth-grade male
student. This section also provided examples of interview questions.
As a researcher, I spent extended time developing rapport with both Japanese and
foreign informants. My lived experiences of Japanese education as an ethnic Japanese
helped Japanese informants share their views of the world. As an approach to foreign
informants, I told them about my challenges to study at an American institute of higher
education to let them understand that I was willing to listen to their stories. I also
experienced the world of intersubjectivity with my informants. Engaging in conversation
with my informants made me realize that the focus on my research in ethnic diversity
needed to be revised. My idea/sense of diversity prior to the fieldwork was limited to
ethnicity―ethnic Japanese, domestic/indigenous minorities, Koreans (old-timers), and
foreigners (newcomers). In the field, my perspective of ethnicity extended to “otherness”
that incorporates unconventional Japanese students who needed individualized instruction
260
because of their special needs. These special-needs Japanese students were compared and
contrasted with foreign students in terms of school provisions and teachers’ management
of issues of students.
Data analysis procedures explained transcriptions, organization and coding of data,
as well as data analysis methods for each question. To validate my data, I sent interview
scripts to informants either face-to-face or via emails to confirm each story and to ask for
clarification and additional information. After I translated these scripts into English
verbatim, a bilingual person checked the accuracy of my English translation of the
interview scripts and documents. Then I worked with an editor to make sure that contexts
stayed in the English text. Organization and coding of data provided all processes I took
to organize my data in themes under each question. I used inductive analysis [which]
“involves discovering patterns, themes, and categories in one’s data” (Patton, 2002, p.
453). Once patterns, themes, and categories emerged, I used literature review and
theoretical frameworks to confirm my analyses and findings. Data analysis methods for
each question showed the list of documents, interviews and informal conversations, and
observations used for each research question.
Chapter 4 addressed and analyzed the data using the literature reviewed and the
theoretical framework where it was necessary. After the contextual and background
information or the participants of the study, each research question was analyzed
separately within its emerging themes. Major findings demonstrated all themes.
Major Findings
Themes in Chapter 4 were organized based on the research questions 1 through 4.
Some themes could be combined into larger frames and categories beyond each research
261
question. Thus, major findings put themes into perspective in larger frames and
categories.
Figure 7 shows the hierarchical structure of policy decisions and the influences
brought to bear on the school structure, the teacher and inadvertently on the child.
Figure 7: Hierarchical Arrangement of Power Dynamics in Education
The very top of the hierarchy is the Constitution of Japan, the FLE, the School
Education Law, and other educational laws that are dictated through the national
curriculum, the government guidelines for teaching, teachers’ manuals, and textbooks.
262
Pictorially Area I covers the larger section of the page which is symptomatic of
the influence this power block has on the entire school system. It is as heavy as it is
pervasive. As invisible as it may be to the casual onlooker it is the hand that controls the
twists and turns of teachers in the classrooms. The teachers and the students occupy the
bottom two levels in this hierarchy.
The manifestation of the force of this hierarchy was echoed by Ms. Ono’s voice in
response to Research Question 1 that teachers might be the same level as students since
teachers were only expected to explain manuals to students in simple words. The national
curriculum was created without the voices of teachers who engage and interact with
students in classroom teaching and learning. This hierarchical structure clearly
demonstrates why Ms. Ono felt discouraged.
These frames and categories are organized as findings 1 through 6 as follows:
1.
Influence of Article 26 on teachers’ decisions for foreign students.
2.
Caring relationships between some teachers and foreign students.
3.
New challenges in the school as seen by the language counselor.
4.
Socialization as a major way of changing the perception of “others.”
5.
Japanese attitude toward foreigners outside the school.
6.
Implication of hegemony and social reproduction theory.
Each finding will be discussed below.
Finding 1: Influence of Article 26 on Teachers’ Decisions for Foreign Students
The ineffectiveness of Article 26 (the compulsory education obligation) in the
Constitution of Japan toward students with foreign resident status strongly influenced
263
decisions of teachers in managing foreign students. Figure 8 demonstrates the impact of
Article 26 on teachers’ guidance toward students with the arrows that represent influence.
Note. The width of arrows represents the scale of influence
Figure 8: Takeuchi’s Conceptual Model of Influences of Article 26
The figure above depicts different forms of influences which include the amount
and the quality of such interactions as guidance, advice, and daily communications, and
engagement between two parties. The width of arrows represents the scale of influence.
For example, one influence from teachers to Japanese students shows very strongly,
while the influence from teachers to foreign students is much less heavily represented by
an arrow with broken lines.
264
The yellow boundary represents the school, while the green is the community.
The school boundary is shaped like an “L” because of the presence of foreign students in
schools who are not protected by Article 26 because of their foreign resident status. By
the same token, foreign parents are located at the other end away from Article 26. Their
peripheral position in the chart is in accordance with partial influence i.e., between
teachers and foreign students, teachers and foreign parents, teachers and language
counselors, as well as the language counselor and foreign parents. This partial influence
happens between the board of education to foreign parents as well. Beyond the scope of
my research, some authors, as Ōta (2000) and others, observe that the board of education
is likely to be reluctant to contact foreign households for their school-age children to
attend school.
As an alternative to the limited guidance from teachers to foreign students within
the school, the board of education sends language counselors. Because of their limited
availability, the influence from the counselor on foreign students does not compensate for
the large scale influence from teachers on Japanese students on a daily basis which they
mostly miss out on.
This diagram also illustrates that the arrow with broken lines and the thin arrows
are the areas that need special attention for policy recommendations. This includes
teachers’ relationships with foreign students and parents, the contact between the board
of education and foreign parents, and that between the counselor and foreign parents.
Moreover, foreign students and parents have contacts with language counselors to
supplement services of the school. With language barriers, what teachers can do to
educate foreign students would be limited under the current policies and provisions. Thus,
265
hiring more counselors with multilingual communication skills is highly needed (for
detail, see Implications for Actions).
As the examples of the problem of a seven-year-old Brazilian girl at Ran
Elementary School and the double standard of teachers toward student absences showed,
no obligation for compulsory education for foreign students tended to be the ultimate
barrier for teachers managing foreign students. At least they tried to manage it in the
same way by providing assimilation policies to foreign students. Teachers’ emphasis of
their fairness of care between the foreign students and Japanese remedial students was an
example of the same guidance. As long as foreign students’ differences were manageable
by the teachers, differences of foreign students, including their behavior and cultural
practices, became invisible. This analysis was in accordance with the unification of
teachers’ guidance proposed by Kojima (2002).
In contrast, their reactions to absences of Japanese students and foreign students
clarified how teachers’ treatment could be different for a similar issue because there is no
law enforcement of compulsory education for foreign students. This is exacerbated by the
lack of communication between the school and foreign parents. Kojima’s (2002) fixed
management in teachers’ guidance of differences of foreign students applied to teachers’
double standard toward absences.
In this latter case, decisions of teachers contradicted the MEXT policy that
foreign students enrolled in schools on request were to be treated in the “same” way as
the Japanese. The ultimate factor would be the exclusion in Article 26. For the Japanese
students, not only the truant boy but also for students with temporary emotional
instability issues, were the recipients of special treatment available for five days a week
266
from the school. The school offered separate rooms for these students and allowed their
attendance to count when they came to these rooms. The minimum dates of attendance
for graduation for the Japanese students could become an incentive for this special
provision. But this attendance requirement did not apply to foreign students.
Finding 2: Caring Relationships Between Some Teachers and Foreign Students
Despite strong influences of Article 26 and a homogeneous paradigm in the
national curriculum, teachers’ manuals, and textbooks, some teachers supported
extensively educating foreign students. In Sakura, a caring relationship was observed
between Mr. Harada, a caregiver, and his JSL student with Turkish background, a caredfor (Noddings, 1992). On various occasions, Mr. Harada, indicated his attention and care
of his Turkish student by mentioning something related to Turkey. As a response to his
attention and care, this Turkish student was one of the active respondents to random
questions Mr. Harada posed. This student was completely opposite to most JSL students
who tended to be quiet and easily became invisible in class in my observation. This
Turkish student was able to show off his uniqueness in the classroom as one who had a
Turkish background. His active participation in class was the sign that Mr. Harada’s
caring was received and his caring facilitated his active learning. This caring relationship
also enhanced learning of his Japanese peers in class because they learned a lot about
Turkey which has not been incorporated much in social studies textbooks.
Another story in Ran school demonstrated that caring relationships alone were
inadequate to deal with issues concerning language barriers to JSL students. JSL teachers
were the caregivers who showed their care and provided a safe environment to let JSL
students (the cared-for) talk about their stories. As a response to care given by JSL
267
teachers, JSL students openly shared their stories. However, in this case, the caring
relationship alone did not compensate for the language barrier of two parties. On one
hand, JSL students were able to share their stories with teachers, instead of hesitating to
speak Japanese as a foreign language. On the other hand, these caring JSL teachers were
confused about information their students gave to them in face-to-face conversation.
They were trying to respond to needs of their students; yet, they were unable to fully
understand situations of students.
Last, Ms. Noda’s story about two passionate elementary school teachers indicated
that time spent with students depended heavily on the moral decision of individual
teachers whether or not they spent extensive time to help their foreign students, when
teachers themselves hold various expected roles and duties as teachers. Ms. Tomita’s
story in the same section (Theme 4 in Research Question 2) showed that there was a
limitation to managing needs of JSL students extensively in academic class within the
multiple roles played by each teacher in school. In this context, these two passionate
teachers worked with these students for their academic success outside of a physical
“classroom” teaching and learning. These teachers met with their students outside of the
school and guided them step-by-step to make sure they were on the right track.
Their decision directly related to their morality and belief due to holding their
own duties and tasks at school. On the other hand, foreign students needed extra support
and care to become as successful as Japanese students in Japanese schools because of
their language barrier and unfamiliar Japanese school rules, norms, and expectations.
These three stories highlighted different issues related to maintaining the caring
relationship between teachers and foreign students. First, Mr. Harada and his Turkish
268
student created an active learning environment in his civics class because the student
showed off his uniqueness in the classroom as one who had a Turkish background. In
contrast, in the second story, when JSL students had not developed a competence in
Japanese language, caring teachers were not adequately able to respond to their needs.
This story stressed the importance of a common language, in this case, Japanese, to make
the caring relationship more engaging between two parties. The last story indicated that
caring teachers needed to make moral decisions whether or not they spent extra time and
energy to support foreign students’ academic success, when they also dealt with their
multiple duties and expectations as teachers.
According to Noddings (1992):
[P]ractice in caring should transform schools and, eventually, the society in
which we live. If the practice is assimilated to the present structures of
schooling, it may lose its transformative powers. It may be transformed―that is,
distorted [italics in original]. If we were to give grades for caregiving, for
example, students might well begin to compete for honors in caring. Clearly,
then, their attention could be diverted from cared-fors to themselves. If, on the
other hand, we neither grade nor give credit for such work, it may inevitably
have second-class status in our schools. So long as our schools are organized
hierarchically with emphasis on rewards and penalties, it will be very difficult to
provide the kind of experiences envisioned. (p. 25)
Finding 3: New Challenges in the School As Seen by the Language Counselor
Unlike limitations of services for foreign students in the public schools discussed
in Finding 1, the jobs of language counselors illuminated how to manage new needs and
challenges for public schools related to foreign students. Their main jobs, such as
language translations, mental care for foreign students, and the role of mediator between
teachers and JSL students/parents, play a vital role in filling the gap between the
traditional school system and the needs of foreign students/parents.
269
In fact, the needs of language translation, mainly between teachers and parents
of foreign students, were very high due to the lack of a common language to
communicate. Teachers were concerned whether or not school announcements were
understood by these parents. In bridging the conversation of these two parties as
translators, language counselors also played important roles in helping relational
problems between teachers and foreign parents. My analyses showed that the common
language was the first step to building a good relationship between two parties. Without it,
how much do both parties, teachers and foreign parents, need their translation services to
communicate and relate in order to educate foreign students? There are many tasks to be
conducted by language counselors who have the skill to translate, and guide people to
relate to each other.
The case of Wakayama who shared her bullied experience only with Ms. Noda
also illuminated the importance of giving chances to let them communicate with language
counselors in their native language. Her example showed that some JSL students open
their hearts more to language counselors than to their homeroom teachers and the JSL
teacher who interacted with them on a daily-basis at school. Ms. Tomita confirmed this
point when she told me about a Bolivian boy’s facial expressions and gestures when he
spoke with a language counselor in Spanish. Communications in their native language
itself was a great part of counseling services that the language counselor provided for
foreign students.
Finding 4: Socialization As a Major Way of Changing the Perception of “Others”
My findings clarified that socialization plays a vital role in changing the
perception of “others.” The Brazilian language counselor, Ms. Noda, said, “By
270
socializing with other people, they will share empathy. By creating the empathy, they will
learn that people are not so different from each other.” As Ms. Noda told me that
friendship did not care about the nationality of students, the friendship with conversations
in Japanese made Japanese students feel closer to the foreign students. What Sendo and
Maeda called “not quite foreigners” indicated that these students had certain images of
“foreigners” as absolute “others.” However, their foreign friends did not belong to their
images of “foreigners” because of their daily interaction with Japanese students. By
sharing school life together, they had built commonalities by which they could relate
rather than emphasizing a sense of difference in terms of physical appearance, nationality,
and so on. The school life for students is a chance to expose something unfamiliar
through learning and interaction.
In fact, Maeda showed me two different sides. On one side, he was a smart
student, with a great academic record, who plays the role of class leader and project
manager, as well as the representative of the ninth-grade students. His future goal is to be
an international business person or an NGO staff member taking an active role in the
international field as a Japanese person. In my interview, he said he preferred native
English speakers with whom he could speak English over the rest of the foreign residents
who used different languages. All of these characteristics were the product of the national
curriculum that tacitly disseminated an “ideal image of Japanese smart students.” As a
good student with great test scores, he would have internalized what is important as
“official knowledge” (Apple, 2000).
On the other hand, Maeda also told me that he does not see the “foreignness” of
his foreign friends who, in my eyes, visibly looked different from Japanese students. His
271
socialization with these foreign students influenced his image of “others” because of his
friendships with them. By building friendships, he and these foreigners became “we” as
friends.
Maeda’s socialization indicated that the perception of “others” would change
when he communicated with them in Japanese. It is the power of socialization which
removed stereotypical ideas of foreigners in the mind of this Japanese boy. This is a
promising finding that could work as a main tool in a counter-hegemonic strategy to the
homogeneous paradigm of the national curriculum and school provisions. Maeda showed
the internalization of what was expected of students in the curriculum through
standardized tests and official knowledge; yet, he did not internalize everything what was
written and expected in the curriculum and taught in classrooms.
In addition to Maeda, examples of the teacher, Mr. Harada and the returnee
student, Ichino, indicated that multicultural experiences at a young age enabled them to
adjust to new things more easily than could adults. The nature of socialization, a way of
eliminating stereotypical views about minority groups, needs a common language to
begin a conversation and build relationships between the Japanese and the foreign
residents.
Finding 5: Japanese Attitude Toward Foreigners Outside the School
Beyond school provisions and voices of teachers and students, two foreign
school personnel, the Brazilian counselor Ms. Noda and the Canadian English teacher Mr.
Clark, provided their opinions about the Japanese attitude toward them outside of school.
According to their stories, the Japanese behaved differently toward foreigners based on
their skin color, nationality, and the language spoken.
272
Due to the selection of English as the foreign language requirement in most
public schools, English language built both a sense of prestige and an inferiority complex.
Those interested in cross-cultural communication and socialization were likely to favor
English speakers over other foreign residents. Those who had a built-in complex would
tend to treat foreigners as guests by helping them.
In contrast, when foreigners spoke Japanese, the attitude was very similar to that
towards Japanese strangers. Regardless of whether they were English speakers or not, the
Japanese did not fully accept them into the society. Ms. Noda felt that Japanese society
was unaccustomed to foreigners living in the community.
Finding 6: Implication of Hegemony and Social Reproduction Theory
The theory of hegemony implied variety of categories and themes in my data.
The superstructure proposed by Gramsci (1971) is maintained by overtly coercive
institutions and the form of control based on consent (Morrow & Torres, 1995). The
coercive institutions maintain political power, while the civil society holds ideological
domination (Morrow & Torres, 1995). The coercive institutions were the mono-ethnic
views of the Constitution of Japan and government guidelines for teaching―most
contents of social studies manuals and textbooks of social studies and the foreign
language, the Kokoro-no-nōto, and teachers’ roles as public servants, as well as the
education-examination system and patriotism in the revised FLE.
These examples of the coercive institutions were the hierarchical structure of
education itself shown in Hierarchical Arrangement of Power Dynamics in Education
Figure 7, in Chapter 5. The very top of the hierarchy is the Constitution of Japan followed
by the FLE, the School Education Law, and other educational laws. These laws do not
273
explicitly include the children with foreign resident status in their wording; thus,
education for these foreign children is not protected. Based on the mono-ethnic laws, the
national curriculum, the government guidelines for teaching, teachers’ manuals, and
textbooks were all impacted hierarchically in one direction. This structure itself is
hegemonic toward the children of foreign resident status because they were left out from
the top of the hierarchy of educational policy.
In contrast, examples of consent were the forced assimilation of foreign students
under the hegemonic curriculum, silenced existence of students with Korean backgrounds,
and teachers’ perception of the mono-ethnic culture and the nation, as well as
Nihonjinron. Moreover, the subordinate groups are not necessarily minority groups.
Under the hegemonic curriculum and school provisions, teachers are discouraged from
making creative lesson plans and projects with students. Despite their complaints, they
follow their duties in the homeroom, classroom teaching, and extracurricular activities, as
these duties were expected in policies and provisions.
Social reproduction of cultural nationalism appeared in my data. In Figure 7 in
Chapter 5, school itself reproduced what is written and expected in the hierarchical
structure of education as a subordinate institution. If the school functions as a
subordinated institution, school administrators, teachers, and students within the school
are also subordinated. School administrators and teachers can be categorized as a group
subordinate to the MEXT because of an indirect hiring process as public servants. Public
servants are expected to maintain the curriculum, policies, provisions, and embedded
values of the MEXT. By teaching subjects that are based on the manuals and the
274
textbooks supervised by the MEXT, school administrators and teachers disseminate the
ideology of the MEXT to students in their assigned roles.
In this power structure, for instance, unequal distributions of individualized
instruction between Japanese different/“other” students and foreign students were created
by the decision of school administrators. Their decisions perpetuated the same monoethnic view as the major laws and the MEXT. Moreover, teachers’ reactions to absences
of Japanese students and foreign students were another example of the impact of the
major laws, particularly Article 26, as well as the MEXT guidelines. Teachers’ treatment
of truancy cases between Japanese and foreign students could be different for a similar
issue because there is no law enforcement of compulsory education for foreign students.
Hidden curriculum is applied to the perception of teachers who were trained to
take a mono-ethnic view of educational policies and provisions proposed hierarchically
from the MEXT. Following this perceived mono-ethnic view of society, future citizens of
Japan do not necessarily include citizens of foreign origin. These messages are the hidden
curriculum because these policies and provisions, including Article 26, do not explicitly
describe the exclusion of foreigners. However, by not mentioning them, these statements
tacitly, in a hidden manner, exclude foreigners or at least people can “read between the
lines” and receive the hidden message of who is not included.
Implications for Action
My findings revealed that mono-ethnic policies in education had strongly
impacted the Japanese perceptions of and attitudes toward foreign residents. In other
words, the ultimate goal of implications for action would be the realization of a
multicultural/ethnic society among Japanese citizens and the acceptance of unity with
275
diversity. In my understanding, peoples’ realization of the existence of minority groups
and foreigners as citizens would break through the concept of ethnic homogeneity. Thus,
the constant effort of spreading the concept of multiculturalism through learning,
experiences, and reflections is essential to change the perception of mono-ethnicity. The
following objectives are ways to spread the message of embracing and practicing
multicultural coexistence. I indicate each objective and explain how to approach it.
In addition to using the descriptions in the textbook and manuals, how teachers
facilitate students’ learning about minority groups is also critical in raising awareness of
diversity. For instance, Mr. Harada used the movie Pacchigi to help students understand
problems of resident Koreans, although he felt that his students did not want to hear about
it because it was a sensitive issue. But he is an exception. Not all teachers are interested
in teaching about the minority groups, since these sensitive issues need extra precautions
in approaching them. Understanding their concerns about teaching sensitive problems, I
suggest that teachers participate in a variety of workshops to learn techniques and
increase their own knowledge about the topic in order to improve the school life of
foreign students. Moreover, teachers must create awareness of diversity among Japanese
students through their pedagogy and they must also facilitate interaction between
Japanese and foreign students as a pedagogical strategy.
My findings clarified that the MEXT’s interpretation of the ineligibility of
foreign students in Article 26 of the Constitution of Japan made these students vulnerable
in schools. The interpretation of enrollment on the basis of their requests is much
different from the enrollment obligation under the Constitution of Japan concerning
276
teachers’ responsibility for Japanese students’ education. The MEXT must apply the
force of this article to all school-age children, regardless of their nationality.
Applying the eligibility of Article 26 to the foreign students would eliminate the
barrier of nationality in educating students, so teachers would be expected to treat all
students based on their needs. Without the nationality requirement, the individualized
instruction and guidance based on each need is required of teachers. The individualized
instruction would be the absolute opposite to Shimizu’s (2000) observation of teachers’
classroom guidance that features de-contextualization from students’ background and
home environment, homogenized instruction in classes, and individualization by the
students’ own efforts for success.
The need for student-specific guidance becomes more recognizable partly
because of the presence of foreign students in schools. However, they are not the first
“others” teachers have had to manage. Regardless of the range of differences students
have, schools have always encountered and accepted the “other” students, with such
issues as special education, mental fortitude, and school refusal. Thus, the enrollment of
foreign students should not be considered the toughest challenge for teachers merely
because of the language barrier and cultural differences.
To familiarize them with the management of foreign students, all teachers would
be required to attend workshops related to JSL students and curriculum. At Sakura, Ms.
Tomita, who was in charge of the JSL classroom, had attended regular workshops to
learn about problems and challenges facing JSL students and schools. In the workshop I
attended, teachers and school administrators shared various challenges and problems and
tried to create a regional network to work together. I observed that many teachers
277
expressed satisfaction with the workshop. Therefore, I suggest that such workshops
become available, not just to JSL teachers, but to any homeroom teacher who provides
guidance to JSL students.
My findings highlighted the importance of the job of the language counselor in
terms of helping JSL students adjust in Japanese schools. Their main jobs, including
language translations, mental care for foreign students, and mediating between Japanese
teachers and JSL students/parents, show new needs and challenges the foreign students
bring to schools. As the number of foreign students has dramatically increased over the
last decade, the needs of the language counselor have grown simultaneously.
The board of education must hire more highly qualified multilingual language
counselors to serve in this position. Not just quantity, but the quality of each language
counselor needs to be considered. To give incentives to applying for this job, the board of
education should consider improving the working conditions. The contract of the
counselor is limited to a maximum of three years so a major problem is the frequent
rotation in one position. Secure job conditions are necessary to maintain highly qualified
counselors.
Better working conditions for the language counselors would lead to better care
and services for foreign students. Moreover, teachers and school administrators would be
better able to collaborate with the counselors to facilitate communication with foreign
parents, as well as students. As a result, there would be less of a burden on teachers and
school administrators to manage foreign students without understanding their cultural
backgrounds and contexts. If they expect multiple positive effects for the schools as well
278
as foreign students, the board of education should consider the role of the language
counselor as core, rather than peripheral, services to small numbers of foreign students.
Conclusion
My findings revealed that mono-ethnic policies are prevalently available in the
curriculum to reproduce the perceived homogeneous society. The perpetuation of these
hegemonic policies was seen in the Japanese perception of and attitudes toward foreign
residents, as well as minority groups. Although the educational policies and provisions
were established and implemented by people in different positions and occupations, the
Sakura case demonstrates that Japanese teachers and students are heavily influenced by
the core value of ethnic homogeneity in terms of their decisions and behavior toward
“others.” Moreover, these phenomena were also observed in larger settings, such as
communities. From this linkage between the school and the community, it can be
concluded that how and what teachers and students do in classrooms would build a
foundation of how they will interact with “others.”
These findings reflect back to my own school experience of being unaware of
ethnic diversity in Japan in the early 1990s. This journey was to find out what
characteristics of Japanese schooling had created the foundation of my own perception of
a homogeneous society. Over a decade later, some school policies and cultures still
maintain similar embedded homogeneous values in daily school life. From another
perspective, the presence of the foreign students rather highlights unique features of
school culture that Japanese teachers and students take for granted. As Kojima (2007)
pointed out, the foreign students are the mirror that reflects these characteristics.
279
The relationship between ethnic Japanese and “others” can be applied to the
world-systems theory that illustrates economic disparity between the “core” zone—–
developed countries, and the “periphery,”–—developing countries. The core nations
control power and extract surplus, while the periphery nations participate in the economic
activity and their natural resources are exploited (Clayton, 1998). Relationships between
the ethnic Japanese and domestic/indigenous minorities and foreigners in the school
system can be likened to the core and the periphery as described above. In this scenario,
the ethnic Japanese serves as the core, and the majority of the rules and structures work in
their favor; on the other hand domestic/indigenous minority and foreign students are left
on the periphery.
The various themes showed different ways in which the hegemony of
homogeneity, the title of Harumi Befu’s book (2001), is reproduced in different places,
including educational policies, teaching and learning in classrooms, and manuals and
textbooks. People’s attitudes toward foreigners and teachers’ double standard are two
more examples of how the daily grind of school projects demonstrates hegemonic
paradigms in classrooms and outside the school.
Is it ethically appropriate not to educate people to realize the existence of
“others” who are pushed away from the core because they are not born with “pureblood”? How long have the ethnic Japanese oppressed “others” to de-culture their
heritage and but still not included them in the core? Should it be right that the majority of
the rules work for the majority and do not pay attention to the minorities because they are
problems for smaller groups?
280
In 21st Century Japan, I have seen significant changes in the demography of the
population and multiculturalism has become more visible in society. Regardless of
whether people like it or not, this is the reality we all need to face.
Suggestions for Future Research
z
An alternative framework to the nation-state to educate people should be
re-examined in the age of globalization. Within the nation-state framework, public school
education would be limited to merely creating patriotic Japanese citizens. Under the
strong influence of globalization, this goal needs to be re-examined.
z
The influence of mass media in disseminating ethnic homogeneity or
cultural diversity is another area to study.
z
Socioeconomic and political factors for differentiating the attributes of
minority groups, such as the exclusion of Burakumin in the geography textbook, the
exclusion of Okinawans in human rights education, and highly positive evaluations of the
life of Eta and Hinin in comparison to other groups.
z
Challenges to the boards of education and language counselors who
respond to the needs of community in terms of promoting education for foreign students.
281
REFERENCES
Agar, M. H. (1980). The professional stranger: An informal introduction to ethnography.
San Diego: Academic Press.
Aida, M. (2006). Earnestly (T. Jensen, and others, Trans.) (8th ed.). Tōkyō: Bunka
Shuppan Kyōku.
The Ainu Association of Hokkaidō. (n.d.). Retrieved May 1, 2009, from http://www.ainuassn.or.jp/
Anderson, B. (1992). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of
nationalism (Rev. ed.). London: Verso.
Apple, M. W. (2000). Official knowledge: Democratic education in a conservative age
(2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Bassey, M. (1999). Case study research in educational settings. Backingham. Open
University Press.
Befu, H. (1992). Symbols of nationalism and Nihonjinron. In R. Goodman & K. Refsing
(Eds.), Ideology and practice in modern Japan (pp. 26-46). London: Routledge.
Befu, H. (2001). Hegemony of homogeneity: An anthropological analysis of Nihonjinron.
Melbourne: Trans Pacific Press.
Benhabib, S. (2002). “Nous” et les “autres” (we and the others): Is universalism
ethnocentric? In The claims of culture: Equality and diversity in the
global era (pp. 24-48). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
282
Buraku Liberation League. (written in English) (1998, last updated 2005, December 15).
Retrieved May 8, 2009 http://www.bll.gr.jp/eng.html
Buraku Liberation League. (written in Japanese) (1998, last updated 2009, May 2).
Retrieved May 8, 2009 from http://www.bll.gr.jp/
Burbules, N.C., & Torres, C. A. (2000). Globalization and education: An introduction. In
N. C. Burbules & C. A. Torres (Eds.), Globalization and education: Critical
perspective (pp. 1-26). New York: Routledge.
Burke, B. (1999 & 2005) “Antonio Gramsci, schooling and education,” the encyclopedia
of informal education, Retrieved May 7, 2009, from
http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-gram.htm
Cave, P. (2001). Educational reform in Japan in the 1990s: ‘Individuality’ and other
uncertainties. Comparative Education, 37(2), 173-191. (ERIC No. EJ627000).
Chūgakusyakai chiriteki bunya shidōsyō henshū iinkai [the editorial committee of the
junior high school geography manual]. (n.d.). Chūgakusyakai chiriteki bunya:
Kenkyū to shiryō [Junior high school geography: Research and materials]. Ōsaka,
Japan: Ōsaka Shoseki.
Chūgakusyakai kōminteki bunya shidōsyō henshū iinkai [the editorial committee of the
junior high school civics manual]. (n.d.). Chūgakusyakai kōminteki bunya:
Kenkyū to shiryō [Junior high school civics: Research and materials]. Ōsaka,
Japan: Ōsaka Shoseki.
Chūgakusyakai rekishiteki bunya shidōsyō henshū iinkai [the editorial committee of the
junior high school history manual]. (n.d.). Chūgakusyakai rekishiteki bunya:
Kenkyū to shiryō [Junior high school history: Research and materials]. Ōsaka,
283
Japan: Ōsaka Shoseki.
Clayton, T. (1998). Beyond mystification: Reconnecting world-system theory for
comparative education. Comparative Education Review, 42(4), 479-496. (ERIC
No. EJ576188).
Delamont, S. (2002). Spikenard, mastic and terebinth: Varieties of data collected and
recorded. In Fieldwork in educational settings (2nd ed.) (pp. 121-139). London:
Routledge.
deMarrais, K. B., & Lecompte, M. D. (1999). The way schools work: A sociological
analysis of education (3rd ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Eriksen, T. H. (2004). Fieldwork. In What is anthropology? (pp. 42-60). London: Pluto
Press.
Feldman, M. S., Bell, J., & Berger, M. T. (2003). Developing rapport. In Gaining Access:
A practical and theoretical guide for qualitative researchers (pp. 35-45). Walnut
Creek, CA: Altamira Press.
Fontana, A., & Frey, J. M. (2005). The interview: From neutral stance to political
involvement. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of
qualitative research (3rd ed.) (pp. 695-727). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Freire, P. (2003). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Bamos, Trans.). 30th anniversary
edition. New York: Continuum. (Original work published 1970).
Fujita, H. (2000). Education reform and education politics in Japan. American
Sociologist,
284
31(3), 42-57. Retrieved May 7, 2009, from Academic Search Complete database.
Fundamental Law of Education. (1947). Retrieved February 21, 2007, from
http://pegasus.phys.saga-u.ac.jp/Education/law-of-educationE.html
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Glesne, C. (2006). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. (3rd ed.). Boston:
Pearson.
Godwyll, F. E. (2008). Diagnostically supported teaching strategies to reduce school
failure: An evaluation of selected schools in Ghana. Germany: VDM Verlag Dr.
Müller Aktiengesellschaft.
Gordon, J. A. (2006). Assigned to the margins: Teachers for minority and immigrant
communities in Japan. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(7), 766–776. (ERIC
No. EJ744973).
Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. New
York: International Publishers.
Itsumi, T. (2003). Gakkō ni okeru kokoro no toriagekata ni kansuru kōsatsu: Kokoro
no nōto to school counseling [The examination of the way of dealing with
“heart” at schools: The heart of the book and school counseling]. Rikkyō Social
Work Review, 23, 15-25. Retrieved Oct 7, 2006, from
http://www.rikkyo.ne.jp/grp/rfukushi/23henmi.pdf#search=%22%E9%80%B8%E8%A6%8B%E3%80%80%E
6%95%8F%E9%83%8E%E3%80%80%E9%81%93%E5%BE%B3%20%E5%B
285
F%83%E3%81%AE%E3%83%8E%E3%83%BC%E3%83%88%E3%80%80%E
4%B8%AD%E5%AD%A6%22
Japan Institute of Constitutional Law. (2004). The Constitution of Japan. Retrieved
October 18, 2007, from http://www.jicl.jp/kenpou_all/kenpou_english.html
Johnson, D. T. (2003). Getting in and getting along in the prosecutors office. In T. C.
Bestor, P. G. Steinhoff & V. L. Bestor (Eds.), Doing fieldwork in Japan (pp. 139155). Honolulu, University of Hawaii Press.
Johnson, J., Bootorff, J., Browne, A., Grewal, S., Hilton, B., & Clarke, H. (2004).
Othering and being othered in the context of health care services. Health
Communication, 16(2), 253-271. Retrieved May 7, 2009, from Academic Search
Complete database.
Kinda, A. et al. (2007). Chūgakusyakai chiriteki bunya [Junior high school geography]. Ōsaka, Japan: Ōsaka Shoseki.
Kobayashi, T. (1986). The internationalisation of Japanese education. Comparative
Education, 22(1), 65-71. (ERIC No. EJ338009).
Kōjien [Japanese dictionary]. (5th ed.). (1998 & 2004). Iwanami Shoten. (Incorporated in
an electronic dictionary).
Kojima, A. (2002). Newcomer ukeirekō ni okeru sai no kanri [The management of
differences in the school that accepts newcomers]. The Journal of Presentation
Summary of Japan Society of Educational Society, 54, 50-51. Retrieved October
7, 2008, from
http://nels.nii.ac.jp/els/110004557758.pdf?id=ART0007298044&type=pdf&lang=
jp&host=cinii&order_no=&ppv_type=0&lang_sw=&no=1223388482&cp=
286
Kojima, A. (2007). Newcomer no kodomo to gakōkbunka: Nikkei Brazilujin seito no
kyōiku ethnography [Newcomer children and school culture: Educational
ethnography of Nikkei Brazilian students]. Tōkyō: Keisō Shobō.
Kunihiro, Y. (2003). Terebi CM ni miru nihonjin no jiishiki: Tanitsuminzoku syakai no
sinwa to gaikokujin category wo megutte [Self-consciousness of the Japanese in
TV commercials: Between the category of the myth of mono-ethnic society and
foreigners]. Media Communication Kenkyū Kiyō, 54, 27-42. Retrieved May, 7,
2009 from http://www.mediacom.keio.ac.jp/publication/pdf2004/kiyou54/3.pdf
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Langman, L. (1998). Identity, hegemony, and social reproduction. In J. M. Lehmann
(Vol. Ed.), Current perspectives in social theory (Vol. 18, pp. 185-226).
Greenwich, CT: Jai Press.
Lee, S. (2006). The cultural exclusiveness of ethnocentrism: Japan’s treatment of foreign
residents. In S. Lee, S. Murphy-Shigematsu, & H. Befu (Eds.), Japan’s diversity
dilemmas: Ethnicity, citizenship, and education (pp. 100-124). New York:
IUniverse.
Lie, J. (2001). Multiethnic Japan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lie, J. (2004). The politics of recognition in contemporary Japan. In S. J. Henders (Ed.),
Democratization and identity: Regimes and ethnicity in East and Southeast Asia,
(pp. 117-131). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
287
Lincicome, M. (1993). Nationalism, internationalization, and the dilemma of educational
reform in Japan. Comparative Education Review 37(2), 123-51. (ERIC No.
EJ467623).
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury, CA: Sage.
Lingard, B. (2000). It is and it isn’t: Vernacular globalization, educational policy, and
restructuring. In N. C. Burbules & C. A. Torres (Eds.), Globalization and
education: Critical perspective (pp. 79-108). New York: Routledge.
Lull, J. (2003). Hegemony. In G. Dines, & J. M. Humez, (Eds.), Gender, race, and
class in media: A text-reader (2nd ed.) (pp. 61-66). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
McVeigh, B. J. (2004). Postimperial ethnos nationalism: Homogeneity, uniqueness,
and peace. In Nationalisms of Japan: Managing and mystifying identity (pp.
203-218). Maryland: Roman and Littlefield Publishers.
MEXT. (2002a). Kokoro-no-nōto Chūgakkō [the Notebook for the Heart for junior
high school]. Japan: Akatsuki Kyōiku Tosho.
MEXT. (2002b). Shōgakkō gakusyū shidō yōryō [The government guidelines for teaching
for elementary schools partly revised in 2002]. Retrieved January 12, 2007, from
http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shuppan/sonota/990301b.htm
MEXT. (2004). Chūgakkō gakusyū shidō yōryō (heisei10nen 12gatsu): Kaisetsu―
Sōsokuhen [The junior high school government guidelines for teaching
(December, 2004): General rules] (Rev. ed.). Tōkyō: Tōkyō Shoseki.
MEXT. (2006). Chūgakkō gakusyū shidō yōryō (heisei10nen 12gatsu): Kaisetsu―
Gaikokugohen [The junior high school government guidelines for teaching
(December, 2004): Foreign languages] (4th ed.). Tōkyō: Tōkyō Shoseki.
288
MEXT. (2007). Chūgakkō gakusyū shidō yōryō (heisei10nen 12gatsu): Kaisetsu―
Syakaihen [The junior high school government guidelines for teaching (December,
2004): Social studies] (Rev. ed.) (9th ed.). Tōkyō: Tōkyō Shoseki.
MEXT. (2007, July). Kyōkasho ga shiyō sareru made [Until textbooks will be used].
Retrieved October 12, 2007, from
http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/kyoukasho/gaiyou/04060901/002.htm
MEXT. (2008, June). Gaikokujin jidōseito kyōiku no jyūjitsuhōsaku ni tsuite [The report
about the full provisions in education for foreign pupils and students in primary
and secondary education]. Retrieved October 7, 2008, from
http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chousa/shotou/042/houkoku/08070301.ht
m
MEXT. (2008a, August). Nihongo shidō ga hitsuyōna gaikokujin jidōseito kyōiku no
ukeiretōni kansuru chōsa: Heisei 19nendo no kekka ni tsuite [The report about
the acceptance of foreign pupils and students needing Japanese language
instruction: The result of year 2007]. Retrieved October 7, 2008, from
http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/houdou/20/08/08073011/001.htm
MEXT. (2008b, August). Nihongoshidō ga hitsuyōna gaikokujin jidōseito no ukeire
jyōkyō [the survey regarding conditions of acceptance of foreign pupils and
students who need Japanese language instruction]. Retrieved October 7, 2008,
from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/houdou/20/08/08073011/001/001.htm
MEXT. (n.d. a). Progress on education reform. Retrieved February 1, 2007, from
http://www.mext.go.jp/english/statist/05101901/002.pdf
289
MEXT. (n.d. b). Sōgoutekina gakushū no jikan no shinsetsu [The opening of the time for
integrated studies]. Retrieved October 16, 2007, from
http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/sougou/020501.htm
Midori city committee of the editorial board. (Eds.). (1995). Midori no sensō kiroku:
Midorishishi bekkan [The Report of War in Midori: The History of Midori
Supplemental Volume]. Midori, Japan: Seishindō.
Midori city homepage. Retrieved October 2, 2007, from
http://www.city.Midori.aichi.jp/index.shtml
Midori International Association. (n.d.). Midorishi no kokubetsu gaikokujin tōroku
syasū [The number of registered foreigners by nation]. Retrieved April 7, 2009,
from http://www.midorikokusai.ecnet.jp/foreigner_info/heisei.htm
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2004, March). Zainichi Burajirujin ni kakawaru syomondai
ni kansuru symposium [Symposium about various issues related to resident
Brazilians]. Retrieved May 7, 2009, from
http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/area/latinamerica/kaigi/brazil/sympo_2004.html
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the economic department. (2007, June). Nihon no keizai
rentai kyōtei (EPA) kōshō: Genjyō to kadai [Japan’s negotiation with other
countries Regarding Economic Partnership Agreement: Current situation and
issues]. [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved May 7, 2009, from
http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/fta/pdfs/kyotei_0703.pdf
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. (2006, March). Tabunka kyōsei no
suishin ni kansuru kenkyūkai hōkokusho: Chiiki ni okeru tabunkakyōsei no suishin
ni mukete [The research committee report regarding the promotion of
290
multicultural coexistence: Toward promoting multicultural coexistence in
communities]. Retrieved October 7, 2007, from http://www.soumu.go.jp/snews/2006/pdf/060307_2_bs1.pdf
Ministry of Justice Immigration Bureau. (2008, June). Heisei 19nendomatu genzai ni
okeru gaikokujintōrokusya tōkei ni tsuite [The overview of registered foreign
nationals by the end of 2007]. Retrieved May 7, 2009 from
http://www.moj.go.jp/PRESS/080601-1.pdf
Mizuno, N. (2003, March 21). Shakaika kyōkashō ni okeru zainichi
kankoku/chōsenjin kankei kijyutu: Chūgakkō kyōkasyo wo reinishite [Descriptions
related to resident South and North Koreans in social studies textbooks: Examples
of junior high school textbooks]. Lecture presented in Kyoto seminar. Retrieved
May 7, 2009, from http://members.at.infoseek.co.jp/zencho/kouen/mizuno.html
Morrow, R. A., & Torres, C. A. (1995). The two Gramscis and education: Technical
competence versus political consciousness. In Social theory and education: A
critique of theories of social and cultural reproduction (pp. 249-281). N.Y.: State
University of New York.
Morrow, R. A., & Torres, C. A. (2000). The state, globalization, and educational policy.
In N. C. Burbules & C. A. Torres (Eds.), Globalization and education: Critical
perspective (pp. 27-56). New York: Routledge.
Motani, Y. (2005). Hopes and challenges for progressive educators in Japan: Assessment
of the ‘progressive turn’ in the 2002 educational reform. Comparative Education,
41(3), 309-327. Retrieved May 7, 2009, doi:10.1080/03050060500211666
291
Murphy-Shigematsu, S. (2006). Diverse forms of minority national identities in Japan’s
multicultural society. In S. Lee, S. Murphy-Shigematsu, & H. Befu (Eds.),
Japan’s diversity dilemmas: Ethnicity, citizenship, and education (pp. 75-99).
New York: IUniverse.
Nakamura, K. (2005a). Gurōbaruka jidaino kōkyōiku [Public education in the age of
globalization]. Japanese Journal of Educational Research, 72(4). 519-529.
Retrieved January 18, 2009, from
http://nels.nii.ac.jp/els/110002978516.pdf?id=ART0003989428&type=pdf&lang
=jp&host=cinii&order_no=&ppv_type=0&lang_sw=&no=1232331645&cp=
Nakamura, K. (2005b). Kōkyōiku ni okeru dentōtekina bunka to fuhentekina bunka
[Traditional and universal cultures in public education]. The Technology in
Education, Utsunomiya University Bulletin of the Integrated Research Center
for Educational Practice, 28, 153-164. Retrieved January 18, 2009, from
http://nels.nii.ac.jp/els/110004633127.pdf;jsessionid=50784DB1C9DA234B516
2CB9F330DC351?id=ART0007346880&type=pdf&lang=jp&host=cinii&order_
no=&ppv_type=0&lang_sw=&no=1232321819&cp=
Nitani, S. (1996, September 20). Shakaika kyōkashō no gengohyōgen ni tuite: Shō/
Chūgakkō no rekishi kyōkasyo jyojyutu wo megutte [Regarding linguistic
expressions in social studies textbooks: Descriptions of history textbooks in
elementary and junior high schools]. Paper presented at Fourth International
Symposium held at the National Institute for Japanese Language. Retrieved June
10, 2008, from www2.kokken.go.jp/jalic/group5/97.8p15.pdf
292
Noddings, N. (1992). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to
education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Noddings, N. (2004). Forward. In C. Bingham, &, A. M. Sidorkin, (Eds.), No education
without relation (pp. vii-viii). New York: Peter Lang.
Okada, A. (2002). Education of whom, for whom, by whom? Revising the Fundamental
Law of Education in Japan. Japan Forum, 14(3), 425-441. Retrieved May 7,
2009, doi:10.1080/0955580022000008754.
Okano, K. (2006). The Impact of immigrants on long-lasting ethnic minorities in
Japanese schools: Globalization from below. Language and Education: An
International Journal, 20(4), 338-354. Retrieved May 7, 2009,
doi:10.2167/le634.0.
Onda.com. (2009, April 30). FXconverter - Currency converter for 164 currencies.
Retrieved April 30, 2009, from http://www.oanda.com/converter/classic.
Ōta, H. (2000). Newcomer no kodomo to nihon no gakkō [Newcomer children and
Japanese public schools]. Tōkyō: Kokusai Shoin.
Oxford dictionary of English. (2003). Oxford University Press. (Incorporated in an
electronic dictionary).
Parmenter, L. (1999, December). Constructing national identity in a changing world:
Perspectives in Japanese education. British Journal of Sociology of Education,
20(4), 453-463. Retrieved May 7, 2009, doi:10.1080/01425699995209.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
293
Sakura junior high school. (2007, May 21). Retrieved October 3, 2007, from
http://www.Sakura-j.ed.jp/Welcome.htm
Satō, K. Iokibe, M., Itō, M., Kuwabara, T., Tanahashi, K., Hashimoto, Y., et al. (2007).
Chūgakusyakai kōminteki Bunya [Junior high school civics].
Ōsaka, Japan: Ōsaka Shoseki.
Scott, J. C. (1990). Domination and the arts of resistance: Hidden transcripts. New
Haven: Yale University Press.
Senki (October, 5, 2006). Abe Naikaku no kyoiku kaikaku ha Ningen wo dame ni suru:
Aikokushin no kyosei ni iken hanketsu [Abe administration’s educational reform
would ruin the human being: Illegal adjudication for enforced patriotism].
Retrieved March 11, 2007, from http://www.bund.org/editorial/20061005-1.htm
Shimizu, K. (2000). Uragawa no Nippon: Nikkei nanbeijin no dekasegi to gakkōkyōiku
[The reverse side of “Nippon”: “dekassegui (migrant)” South-Americans of
Japanese descent, and Japanese schools]. The Journal of Educational Sociology,
66, 21-38. Retrieved October 7, 2008, from
http://nels.nii.ac.jp/els/110001877974.pdf?id=ART0002052739&type=pdf&lang
=jp&host=cinii&order_no=&ppv_type=0&lang_sw=&no=1223396592&cp=
Sidorkin, A. M. (2002). Learning relations: Impure education, deschooled schools, and
Dialogue with evil. New York: Peter Lang.
Spring, J. (1998). Japan: Western science, Eastern morals. In J. Spring, Education and the
rise of the global economy (pp. 37-69). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
294
Spring, J. (2004). Nationalistic education in the age of globalization: Global workers
carrying their nations in their hearts. In J. Spring, How educational ideologies
are shaping global society: Intergovernmental organizations, NGO's, and the
decline of the nation-state (pp. 1-27). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stronach, B. (1995). Beyond the rising sun: Nationalism in contemporary Japan.
Westport, CT: Praeger.
Suzuki, M. et al. (2007). Chūgakusyakai rekishiteki bunya [Junior high school history].
Ōsaka, Japan: Ōsaka Shoseki.
Takahashi, T. & Miyake, A. (2003). Kore wa “kokumin sēshin kaizō undō da [This is
the ‘movement for reconstructing the national spirit’]. Sekai, 712, 33-47.
Takeuchi, M. (2006). The reinforcement of cultural nationalism in Japan: An
investigation of Japaneseness and “the notebook for the heart.” JSAC 2006
Annual Conference, Kamloops, British Columbia. Retrieved October 21, 2008,
from
http://www.tru.ca/jsac2006/pdf/jsac2006_proceedings_mito_takeuchi_manuscript
.Pdf
Thayer-Bacon, B. J. (with Bacon, C. S.). (1998). Philosophy applied to education:
Nurturing a democratic community in the classroom. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Thayer-Bacon, B. J. (2000). Transforming critical thinking: Thinking constructively. New
York: Teachers College Press.
295
Ueda, K. (1976). Shinshū Kyōkuron [the educational theory of Shinshū]. Japan:
Meijitosho.
Weis L. (1995). Identity formation and the processes of “othering”: Unraveling sexual
threads. Educational Foundations 9(1).17–33. (ERIC No. EJ510975).
Wetherall, W. (2006). Nationality in Japan. In S. Lee, S. Murphy-Shigematsu, & H. Befu
(Eds.), Japan’s diversity dilemmas: Ethnicity, citizenship, and education (pp. 1146). New York: IUniverse.
Willis, D. B. (2006). Learning culture, learning citizenship: Japanese education and the
challenge of multiculturalism. In S. Lee, S. Murphy-Shigematsu, & H. Befu
(Eds.), Japan’s diversity dilemmas: Ethnicity, citizenship, and education (pp.
47-74). New York: IUniverse.
Yamawaki, K., Kondō, A., & Kashiwazaki, C. (2000). Imin Kokka Nihin no jyōken
[immigrant nation and Japan’s conditions]. Meiji Daigaku syakaikagaku
kennkyūgyo. Discussion paper series. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from
http://www.kisc.meiji.ac.jp/~yamawaki/etc/migration.pdf
Yamawaki, K., Kondō, A., & Kashiwazaki, C. (2001). Taminzoku kokka. Nihon no
kōzō [A multiethnic nation: Japanese structure]. Sekai, 7, 141-160.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yoshino, K. (1992). Cultural nationalism in contemporary Japan: A sociological
enquiry. London: Routledge.
Yoshino, K. (1998). Culturalism, racialism, and internationalism in the discourse on
Japanese identity. In D. C. Gladney (Ed.), Making majorities: Constituting the
nation in Japan, Korea, China, Malaysia, Fiji, Turkey, and the United States (pp.
296
13-30). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Yoshino, K. (1999a). Introduction. In K. Yoshino (Ed.), Consuming ethnicity and
nationalism: Asian experiences (pp. 1-7). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Yoshino, K. (1999b). Rethinking theories of nationalism: Japan’s nationalism in a
marketplace perspective. In K. Yoshino (Ed.), Consuming ethnicity and
nationalism: Asian experiences (pp. 8-28). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Yoshino, K. (2002). Globalization as “internationalization”: Perspectives on nationalism
in Japan. In K. Tam, W. Dissanayake, & T. S. Yip (Eds.), Sights of contestation:
Localism, globalism and cultural production in Asia and the Pacific (pp. 175195). Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.
297
APPENDIX A
Informed Consent to Participate in Research (Adult Subjects)
My name is Mito Takeuchi and I am a doctoral student in Cultural Studies, the
Department of Educational Studies in the College of Education at Ohio University,
Athens, Ohio, USA. I am conducting this research on learning diversity issues at the
Sakura Junior High School. I am specifically interested in understanding what aspects of
diversity are learned in implementing the national government guidelines for teaching. To
that end, I have selected your school community in the city of Midori to interview
different people about diversity education.
I will be seeking the help of six teachers, six Japanese students, two school
administrators, three parents, six immigrant students, and three immigrant parents at
Sakura Junior High School to participate in one-hour interviews. I will also request two
Japanese language teachers from the Midori International Association and three policymakers to participate in one-hour interviews. I will further request three students, two
teachers, and one school principal for one-hour interviews at the Ministry of Education
pilot project school. At some point in the research process, I may ask if you would like
follow-up meetings for purposes of clarification. If you agree to participate, you do not
have to answer any questions with which you are not comfortable and you may choose to
withdraw or terminate the interview at any time.
Please know that the activities I observe during my meetings and your responses
to interview questions are for my educational purposes only. All information will be held
in the strictest confidence. If you have any questions regarding your rights as a research
participant, please contact Jo Ellen Sherow, Director of Research Compliance, Ohio
298
University, (+1)-(740)593-0664. My personal e-mail and phone number are
[email protected] (Japanese is readable) and (+1)-740-274-0912. For those of you
who might want them, I am happy to provide contact numbers for my academic adviser
and/or department chair.
I certify that I have read and understand this consent form and agree to participate as a
subject in the research described. I agree that known risks to me have been explained to
my satisfaction and I understand that no compensation is available from Ohio University
and its employees for any injury resulting from my participation in this research. I certify
that I am 18 years of age or older. My participation in this research is given voluntarily. I
understand that I may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of any
benefits to which I may otherwise be entitled. I certify that I have been given a copy of
this consent form to take with me.
Signature
Printed Name
Date
Assent to Participate in Research (Minor subjects):
My name is Mito Takeuchi and I am a doctoral student in Cultural Studies, the
Department of Educational Studies in the College of Education at Ohio University,
Athens, Ohio, USA. I am conducting this research on learning diversity issues at the
Sakura Junior High School. I am specifically interested in understanding what aspects of
diversity are learned in implementing the national government guidelines for teaching. To
that end I have selected your school community in the city of Midori to interview
different people about diversity education.
I will be seeking the help of six Japanese students and six immigrant students at
the Sakura Junior High School to participate in one-hour interviews. I will also request
three students for one-hour interviews at the Ministry of Education pilot project junior
high school. At some point in the research process, I may ask if you would like follow-up
299
meetings for purposes of clarification. If you agree to participate, you do not have to
answer any questions with which that you are not comfortable and you may choose to
withdraw or terminate the interview at any time.
Please know that the activities I observe during my meetings and your responses
to interview questions are for my educational purposes only. All information will be held
in the strictest confidence. If you have any questions regarding your rights as a research
participant, please contact Jo Ellen Sherow, Director of Research Compliance, Ohio
University, (+1)-(740)593-0664. My personal e-mail and phone number are
[email protected] (Japanese is readable) and (+1)-740-274-0912. For those of you
who might want them, I am happy to provide contact numbers for my academic adviser
and/or department chair.
I certify that I have read and understand this consent form and agree to participate as a
subject in the research described. I agree that known risks to me have been explained to
my satisfaction and I understand that no compensation is available from Ohio University
and its employees for any injury resulting from my participation in this research. I certify
that I am 18 years of age or older. My participation in this research is given voluntarily. I
understand that I may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of any
benefits to which I may otherwise be entitled. I certify that I have been given a copy of
this consent form to take with me.
Signature
Printed Name
Date
300
Parental Permission/Informed Consent (parents of subjects who are minors or children)
Your child is being asked to participate in a study about learning diversity issues at
the Sakura Junior High School. The goal of this study is to understand what aspects of
diversity are learned in implementing the national government guidelines for teaching.
Your child is being asked to take part in this study because most of the time we do not give
children the opportunity to share their own experiences. Please read this form and ask any
questions you may have before you agree to your child being involved in the study.
If you decide to let your child take part in this study he or she will be asked to tell
me about his or her experiences of learning diversity in the school. This will take the form
of interview in the school during school hours. This will take about 45 to 60 minutes.
During the interview, I will audio tape the discussions and also take notes. This is only for
the purposes of remembering what will be discussed during the interviews.
Though there do not appear to be any risks or discomforts to your child, as a
researcher I will let the child know that he or she may withdraw from the study at
anytime without any penalties. Also, your decision to allow your child to take part in the
study is voluntary. Your child is free to choose not to take part in the study or to stop
taking part at any time without any penalty.
Any information obtained about your child from the research, including
observations and responses to interview questions will be kept strictly confidential. I will
also protect your child’s confidentiality by coding his or her information with a fictitious
name so no one can trace the answers back to him or her. I will ensure notes taken during
interviews are properly disposed of and other research records are stored in locked
301
cabinets. Please note that the data derived from this study could be used in reports,
presentations, and publications but your child will not be individually identified.
If you have questions now, feel free to ask me. If you have questions later, you may
contact me. My personal e-mail and phone number are [email protected] (Japanese is
readable) and (+1)-740-274-0912. For those of you who might want them, I am happy to
provide contact numbers for my academic adviser and/or department chair. If you have
any questions regarding your rights as a research participant, please contact Jo Ellen
Sherow, Director of Research Compliance, Ohio University, (+1)-(740)593-0664.
Statement of Consent:
I understand the procedures described above. My questions have been answered to my
satisfaction, and I agree to allow my child (CHILDS’ NAME) to participate in this study. I
have been provided a copy of this form.
If appropriate:
Please check the box that applies:
My child may be tape recorded
My child may not be tape recorded
Print Parent/Guardian Name
302
APPENDIX B
Subjects and Number of Observations from Each Teacher (1 period = 50 minutes)
Subject Teacher
Grade
FL
Mr. Banno
7th
Mr. M.
8th
Ms. I.
9th
Ms. I. & Mr. Clark 9th
Ms. O.
9th
Ms. O. & Mr. Clark 9th
Ms. Ono
9th
Ms. Ono
9th
Ms. Ono & Mr. Clark 9th
Class No.
Number of Observations
6/7
2
5
1
5/6
1
7/8
1
5/6
1
7/8
1
1/2
1
3/4
1
7/8
1
F L Total Observations: 10 periods
IS
Ms. M.
Ms. I.
Mr. A.
Mr. N.
Mr. T.
Mr. Yamano
Ms. K.
6
1
7
1
1
1
3
0.5
8
1
8
2
7
1
I S Total Observations: 7.5 periods
JL
Mr. K.
7th
Ms. H.
7th
Ms. H.
8th
Ms. M.
8th
Ms. I.
9th
Ms. I.
9th
Ms. Tomita
9th
Mr. Koshino & Ms. H. Special Ed.
7th
7th
9th
9th
9th
9th
9th
J S L Mr. Banno.
Ms. Tomita
ME
Mr. K.
Ms. M.
Mr. S.
Ms. I.
7
1.5
5
1
8
1
2
1
2
1
4
1
8
3
11& 12
1
J L Total Observations: 10.5 periods
J S L room
1
J S L room
1
J S L Total Observations: 2 periods
7th
7th
8th
9th
4
1
3
1
6
1
4
1
M E Total Observations: 4 periods
303
Subjects and Number of Observations from Each Teacher (1 period = 50 minutes)
(continued).
Subject Teacher
Grade
Class No.
Number of Observations
SS
Mr. Egawa
7th
1
1
Mr. Egawa
7th
3
1
Mr. Harada
7th
2
7
Mr. Harada
7th
7
1
Mr. M.
8th
4
1
Mr. Harada
9th
4
7
Mr. N.
9th
6
3
Mr. N.
9th
8
2
Mr. Koshino & Ms. H. Special Ed. 11& 12
1
S S Total Observations: 24 periods
Note. Abbreviations are used for subject titles: F L = Foreign Language, I S = Integrated Studies, J L =
Japanese Language, J S L = Japanese as a Second Language, M E = Moral Education, and S S =
Social Studies. Initials are used for names of teachers, except for informants introduced in my
dissertation. Mr. K’s Japanese and Mr. N’s integrated studies were 0.5 period each because I observed
their classes within the same class period because of observing an extracurricular activity in Mr. K’s
class, in addition to Mr. N’s class as planned.
APPENDIX C
Biographical Information of Interviewees and Dates of Interview (continued on page 305)
kura Teachers
sition
incipal
udent guidance
ecial education
b-homeroom teacher
L supervisor
b-homeroom teacher
b-homeroom teacher
siting teachers
sistant English Teacher
nguage counselor
kura Students
sition
udent
udent
udent
udent
udent
udent
udent
rents
Employment status
Administrator
Administrator
Certified teacher
Uncertified teacher
Certified teacher
Certified teacher
Re-hired part-period teacher
Subjects
Contract teacher from Canada
Prefectural Board of Education
Nationality
Japanese
Japanese
Japanese
Japanese
Brazilian
Brazilian
Brazilian
SS
SS
SS
JL
FL
FL
Grade
N/A
7th
N/A
9th
9th
7th
9th
Age
50s
34
55
24
49
60
62
Gender
Male
Male
Male
Male
Female
Male
Female
Interview Date
12/10/07 & 1/16/08
1/11/2008
1/10/2008
12/18/07& 12/21/07
12/25/2007
1/18/2008
12/13/2007
FL
JSL
N/A
N/A
30
30s
Male
Female
1/10/2008
12/17/07 & 12/28/07
Grade
7th
9th
9th
9th
7th
7th
9th
Age
13
15
15
15
13
13
15
Gender
Female
Male
Male
Male
Female
Female
Male
Interview Date
1/17/2008
1/23/2008
1/24/2008
1/25/2008
1/18/2008
1/18/2008
1/24/2008
sition
mother of a 9th-grade student
father of a 9th-grade student
Occupation
Housewife, a officer of a NPO
Age Gender Interview Date
49
Female 1/23/2008
40s Male
1/23/2008
City public officer, President of PTA
e. Abbreviations are used for subject titles: F L = Foreign Language, J L = Japanese Language, J S L = Japanese as a Second Language, and S S =
ial Studies. Since some data from certain informants will not be used in the dissertation, this biographical information does not specify the name of
h informant. Research participants will be specified prior to the presentation of data.