Components of Japan's Relaxed-Education Policies

“Relaxed education” refers to both a philosophical approach to learning and a concrete set of initiatives designed to support that vision. Definitions of the concepts are often ambiguous, as flexible as the form of education they promote. While MEXT documents frequently refer to yutori kyoiku, it is not always clear which specific programs or initiatives fall under that umbrella. In my study, I consider the following developments as the central components of the relaxed-education movement:

Shortened school week. Beginning in 1992, MEXT reduced the number of minutes Japanese students spend in school each year. The sheer volume of time children were required to attend school, some believed, was symbolic of the excessive demands placed on students and teachers. The decisions to cut the school week represented such a significant modification to traditional practice that it was introduced in stages. In 1992—which could be identified as the beginning of the relaxed-education era—one Saturday per month was designed as a vacation day. Three years later, an additional Saturday each month was removed from the school calendar. Finally, in 2002, all public schools in the country were required to follow the comprehensive five-day school week (kansen shu itsukasei).

Modifications to the Course of Study. A series of revisions to the national Course of Study represented another significant step in the ministry’s reform plans. Similar to the strategy used to reduce the school week, the curriculum was cut in small increments over a span of two and a half decades, announced in revisions to the Course of Study implemented in 1978, 1992, and 2002 (See tables 1.1 and 1.2).[i] Although it is difficult to quantify the extent of these reductions, MEXT usually used a figure of 30% in reports on curricular changes. Ministry officials believed these changes were necessary after both media reports and government surveys attested that students’ interest in studying was declining (MEXT 2002b). Reducing the number of hours teachers were required to devote to core academic instruction was regarded as one way to rekindle students’ interest in academics. Trimming the contents of the Course of Study, MEXT asserted, would allow children to explore concepts in greater depth and to feel more engaged in the classroom.

Introduction of the Integrated Studies subject. The creation of a new subject called Integrated Studies (sogoteki na gakushu), which became part of the national curriculum in 2002,[ii] represented the symbolic embodiment of the relaxed approach to education advocated by MEXT (Bjork 2009). Schools could select topics for integrated study that fit the unique characteristics of their surrounding communities and the interests of their students. Ministry officials hoped that introduction of Integrated Studies (IS) curricula would catalyze substantial changes in instructional methodology, as well as students’ views about learning. IS was regarded as a vehicle that would encourage the investigation of provocative issues that children face in their daily lives. According to MEXT guidelines, students would explore those topics in an integrated fashion, drawing from a variety of relevant disciplines, as one naturally does in looking for answers to real-life questions. Taking part in such investigations would make learning more stimulating and personally relevant for students. Although IS became a distinct course, no additional instructors were hired to teach this subject. Instead, teachers from all disciplines were expected to take part in IS planning and implementation.

Expansion of elective offerings. Another strategy adopted to augment student motivation to learn was the expansion of elective courses offered at the secondary level. This shift created more frequent opportunities for pupils to “study in accordance with their interests, career inclinations, and level of proficiency. . . . Thus, students can study subject in more depth—as deeply as their level of motivation takes them” (MEXT 2000). As was true of the framework for IS, the Course of Study specified the total number of hours that should be devoted to elective studies, but schools were given the authority to organize those courses to fit their own goals. For example, at the upper secondary level, the minimum total number of credits for instruction in the core academic subjects was reduced from thirty-eight to thirty-one hours per week, to make more room in the schedule for elective coursework. Schools could offer electives that expanded on concepts introduced in the existing curriculum, or they could create new courses designed to appeal to students, such as environmental studies or photography (MacDonald 2006).

Innovative pedagogy. MEXT viewed the contents of the curriculum as well as the instructional methods used to present concepts as essential elements of relaxed education. Just as the policies were framed as an antidote to outdated practices, innovative instructional practices were presented as preferable to traditional modes of teaching. Responding to concerns that Japanese schools placed “too much emphasis on conformity (MEXT 2002b, 7), the Ministry exhorted teachers to design lessons that promoted a “zest for living” (ikiru chikara).[iii] New abilities demanded new pedagogical approaches, most of which would fall under the term “student-centered” as it is understood in the West. Moving away from the lecture and test model was considered an essential step toward relieving pressure on students. Teachers were encouraged to experiment with instructional strategies that were better aligned with the “new abilities” MEXT was promoting. Rather than simply memorize facts, students would be challenged to discuss, evaluate, and analyze information. One report, for example, states that “experiential learning such as experiences with nature, experiences in everyday life, observations, experiments, field trips and research, and problem-solving approaches to learning should be actively applied” (MEXT 2002b, 23) in the classroom.

Supportive teacher guidance/class management. In the past, teachers in Japan were given great latitude to respond to student misbehavior as they saw fit. At the secondary level, the combination of “intimacy coupled with severity” (Rohlen 1983, 201) was considered an effective way to encourage adolescents but also keep them in line. In some cases, however, teachers responded to pupil misconduct with excessive force (Miller 2010). Beginning in the 1990s, MEXT encouraged teachers to refrain from all forms of physical punishment. Instead, instructors were advised to mentor their students using more compassionate techniques. Shifting to more relaxed class management and guidance methods would reduce the prevalence of the social maladies that were attracting extensive media coverage. (See chapter 8 for more information about this topic.)

More than a decade has passed since yutori kyoiku was introduced. Education stakeholders have witnessed firsthand the repercussions of MEXT’s attempts to alleviate pressure in the schools. Many of those people are equipped to compare conditions in the schools before and after the Course of Study was revised in 2002. Veteran educators have taught when the curriculum was more voluminous and examinations more pervasive; they have also implemented the new curriculum designed to give children more “room to grow.” Administrators have witnessed the effects of yutori kyoiku on the schools they oversee. They understand the demands associated with such an ambitious reform, and the specific conditions that may support or impede its implementation. Parents, too, have observed the effects of relaxed education on their children. They can shed light on the degree to which relaxed education has augmented their children’s creativity, independence, and love for learning. In combination, these perspectives can provide valuable insights into the process of altering attitudes about testing, accountability, and academic achievement.

In Japan as well as the US, the populations of students served by the schools are more diverse and complex in recent years (Gordon et al. 2009; Tsuneyoshi, Okano, and Boocock 2011). The work of educators employed in the two systems has become more challenging as a result. As I detail in the next chapter, in both countries, proclamations of educational crisis have prompted policy makers to endorse policies that have forced education stakeholders at all levels of the system to reexamine their core beliefs about the purpose of schooling. Yet the two nations have employed fundamentally different strategies to address perceived deficiencies in students and schools. In the US, the solutions attracting the most attention have emphasized the need to set more ambitious standards for students, teachers, and schools, and provide sanctions to those that do not meet those standards. In Japan, those types of solutions have been decried as the very root of the problems currently plaguing the schools.

Underlying the relaxed-education initiatives were widespread concerns about the state of Japanese youth, who were portrayed as stressed out, lacking motivation, undisciplined, uncaring, and deficient in basic academic skills—in sum, socially, and intellectually unprepared to face the challenges of modern society. Interestingly, many of the negative traits applied to the younger generation implicitly juxtaposed contemporary children against previous generations of children, as if the solution to all education-related problems was to convince young citizens to fit a mold of the ideal student embraced in the past. Yet the policies embraced by MEXT were distinctly forward looking, representing a break from traditional educational practices. The relaxed-education reforms were anchored by the notion that the traditional model of schooling in Japan was no longer meeting the needs of students or society.

Arguments in favor of yutori kyoiku emphasized the importance of reshaping the schools to fit the realities of contemporary society, the dispositions of their students, and the demands of the business world. Central to this conception of reform was a belief that schools should be more supportive and engaging settings for children. Both the curriculum and the methods used to deliver it needed to be revised so as to enhance students’ interest in studying. Requiring pupils to memorize a large body of facts was no longer considered an effective approach. Instead, MEXT encouraged teachers to design learning activities that required children to participate actively in the discovery and application of knowledge. Through such experiences, students would acquire skills that could be nimbly applied to the unpredictable challenges they face in their lives.

What has been the impact of relaxed-education reforms? Have they met the goals outlined in MEXT reports? It has been difficult to answer these questions, despite a plethora of information pertaining to yutori kyoiku. According to MEXT forecasts, relaxed education would make learning more relevant and appealing to students, and would create more balance in their lives. However, MEXT predictions have not been matched with solid supporting evidence. The effects of policy changes on actual schools and classrooms have been overshadowed by fiery debates about the state of the schools, driven by ideology rather than evidence. As Tsuneyoshi (2004b) observes, those debates “seemed to have the attraction of a talk show, where prominent critics took their stance and the audience could cheer for their favorites” (371). Most discussions of relaxed education have provided incomplete—and sometimes inaccurate—information about the effects of the reforms.

—Reprinted with permission from High-Stakes Schooling, by Christopher Bjork, published by the University of Chicago Press. © 2015 University of Chicago Press. All rights reserved.