Education and social justice in Japan

Professor Kaori Okano is one of the leading specialists on Japanese education writing in English, especially on the sociology of education. This book is a follow-up to Education in Contemporary Japan: Inequality and Diversity (Okano & Tsuchiya, 1999), the ground-breaking work that has provided an invaluable analytical overview of contemporary Japanese education since its publication. The earlier book retains much of its value even today, partly because of its thoroughness and quality, and partly because of the relative stability of the Japanese education scene. Nonetheless, there have been important changes since the late 1990s, and this new book is an excellent analytical guide to the current situation.

The book is composed of eight chapters, including an introduction and conclusion. In the introduction, Okano states that the book will examine “the most significant developments in schooling in the last two decades” (3), their causes and effects on youth and society, and how they should be interpreted in terms of social justice and “the interests of disadvantaged social groups.” The introduction also outlines major sociological roles played by education (dissemination of knowledge and skills, socialization, assessment and differentiation, and legitimization of particular views of the world), and provides a valuable, concise summary of different theoretical approaches to education within sociology and anthropology (structural functionalist, conflict or critical theory, and interpretative approaches). Okano positions herself closer to critical theory than to structural functionalism. Finally, the chapter discusses the concept of social justice in education, which Okano understands as composed of “distributive justice” (“who gets how much of schooling”), and the content of what is distributed (what children learn, and how this relates to different social groups) (6). Okano argues that whereas distributive justice is primarily concerned with ensuring equality, focusing on the content of what is distributed requires consideration of differences between groups, and the ways in which what is taught may favour some groups over others.

The book’s second chapter provides a well-informed account of the history of education in Japan from pre-modern times to the post-1945 period. This is very useful for those unfamiliar with the subject.

Chapter 3, “Directions of change”, examines reforms to Japanese education in the last two decades. Overall, it provides an excellent overview, detailed but not losing sight of the big picture, though more use could have been made of research published in the last decade. Okano sees the process of change as incremental and cautious, “a pragmatic package” (39) whereby Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) has sought to respond to demands from diverse groups. She categorizes opinion into four broad groups, “neoliberals, neoconservatives, progressive humanist educationalists, and human rights advocates” (39), outlining roughly who falls into each group. This is a very reasonable analysis. Okano suggests that overall, the result of the changes has been an increased measure of diversity within the education system, which has benefited some, but may have meant greater influence of family background upon children’s educational experiences. This seems to me a fair assessment, though a little more attention might have been paid to the substantial diversity already existing in the system through the very significant private school sector. For example, the real growth in the number of six-year secondary schools is far less than indicated by government statistics, given that many private secondary schools had long been six-year schools in practice. Furthermore, the availability and attractiveness of private schooling is a crucial reason why Tokyo (especially) and some other metropolises introduced school choice for public middle schools. Effectively, choice already existed through the private sector, for those with enough money.

I am less convinced by the claims about the “slimming of school functions” over the last two decades (55–56). No evidence is offered to support the assertion that “more parents started sending their children to commercially offered cram schools” (55); indeed, later in the book (160), we are told that juku attendance rose between the 1970s and 1990s – that is, before the 2002 curricular reforms most associated with the “relaxed education” (yutori kyōiku) label – but has flatlined since. Reference could have been made to major surveys on this subject. For example, MEXT figures indicate that while juku attendance rose in the late 1980s, it decreased somewhat in the following 15 years (MEXT, 2008). Benesse surveys (since 1990) also indicate that the proportions of middle school students attending juku, using a home tutor, or using subscription home study aids (tsūshin kyōiku) all decreased between 1996 and 2015, though results for fifth grade elementary students are mixed: the proportion attending juku increased from 33% to 39% between 1996 and 2015, whereas the proportions using a home tutor or subscription study aids fell (Benesse Sōgō Kyōiku Kenkyūjo, 2015, p. 115). The picture seems more complex than Okano suggests.

Chapter 4 deals with culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) minoritized social groups. Okano suggests that “the incorporation of CLD young people into Japanese society is the most crucial challenge facing Japanese schools today” (68). This chapter too provides an excellent overview of its subject, including national policies, local government responses, and student experiences. As Okano notes, national policies to address the needs of CLD children (especially children of foreign migrants) have been limited, so most initiatives have been taken by local authorities and individual schools, resulting in significant variation. It is difficult for this reviewer to avoid feeling that the national government has been as reluctant to engage seriously with this challenge as with the wider issue of immigration to Japan. Perhaps more surprisingly, Okano also points to the continued absence of ethnicity, linguistic diversity, or non-Japanese nationals as subjects of study in the Social Stratification and Social Mobility (SSM) surveys, perhaps the most important quantitative research conducted by Japan’s sociologists. This raises the question of the responsibility borne by the sociological establishment for inadequate public understanding and policy response.

Chapter 5 examines childhood poverty, gender disparities, and regional variations. In its use of recent research, it is perhaps the best chapter in the book, and should be a starting point for anyone coming to these subjects. There is an excellent discussion of the childhood poverty situation, its causes and effects, and the policies that have been introduced to tackle the problem. Not surprisingly, research shows that socio-economic status (SES) and family structure affects educational achievement. It is striking how much SES affects progression to tertiary education, which must be particularly significant given the greatly increased importance of degree qualifications for career prospects. The section on gender gaps reveals that Japan’s disappointing ranking of 65^th for educational attainment in the Global Gender Gap Report 2018 was entirely due to its ranking of 101^st for enrolment to tertiary education – again indicating the significance of this part of the education system. After dealing with institutional discrimination and girls’ educational attainment, Okano has an excellent discussion of why girls make gender-specific choices (largely due to reasons outside the education system itself).

Chapter 6 discusses shokuiku (education about eating) and school lunches. This is a valuable treatment of a subject rarely examined in literature to date, but which has fundamental importance for social justice and wellbeing. Most of those familiar with Japanese schools will have been impressed by the high nutritional quality and low cost of school lunches, as well as by the nutritional information provided to children. Okano gives an excellent historical account of the development of the school lunch programme, and places it in international context. She then discusses the Basic Shokuiku Act (2006) and its ramifications. Government figures showing that over 90% of fifth-graders always ate breakfast in 2010 (145) are impressive. However, I am confused by the concluding discussion on pages 146–47. Okano states that “the shokuiku legislation as a whole views individuals as responsible for making healthy eating choices. … It essentially adopts a neo-liberal view of individual responsibility and accountability” (146). Yet later on the same page, she writes that “Japanese shokuiku practice … forces schools to feed all children with a balanced identical lunch. This responsibility is increasingly important as childhood poverty becomes more visible,” and on page 147, she states that “we can interpret the shokuiku legislation as intervening excessively to influence what is essentially a matter of individual private ‘taste’.” These statements seem incompatible with the view that shokuiku legislation is fundamentally neo-liberal. Furthermore, it sounds as if Okano herself is endorsing a neo-liberal, individualistic view – which seems at odds with the earlier statement that schools’ responsibility to provide a balanced lunch to all children is increasingly important amid child poverty.

In this sense, Japanese school lunches seem to me to encapsulate a common dilemma, especially among those who consider themselves as on the “progressive” end of the political spectrum. Providing the same nutritious food for all at low cost must surely reduce inequality and redress the effects of poverty – a good thing in “progressive” terms. On the other hand, it also represents control by authority and deprivation of individual choice, and might be considered Foucauldian “discipline”, all of which might be viewed askance by liberal “progressives”. This dilemma is difficult, if not impossible, to resolve. It might be partially solved by providing a measure of choice in lunches, but this would almost certainly push up costs (and food waste) and require greater subsidy, or higher lunch fees.

To this reviewer, old enough to remember how compulsory school lunches in English schools were abandoned by the Thatcher government in 1980 (Garner, 1985), the contrast in approaches by conservative governments in Japan and the U.K. is striking, and worthy of more study. It seems a notable example of the relatively limited influence of neo-liberalism on Japan’s education system.

Chapter 7 deals with non-formal education for school-aged children. Within this broad category, Okano considers support schools and activities for migrant children, support for long-term absent (futōkō) students, support for children from disadvantaged families, alternative schools for foreign students, and shadow education (juku etc.). This provides a useful overview of a diverse and complex picture.

The book’s conclusion briefly analyses developments in Japanese education since 2000 in terms of the conceptualizations of social justice introduced earlier. Okano suggests that difference and diversity have become more valued and accommodated over the last decades, allowing “more students to participate longer in schooling” (175). However, relatively little has changed in terms of diversifying the content of schooling. Nor have affirmative action programmes found favour. The approach to social justice in Japanese education is still overwhelmingly about seeking to ensure that all children get the same amounts of the same educational content, regardless of their social group.

Okano’s authoritative work provides an excellent overview of recent developments in Japanese education. Inevitably, specialists on this inherently controversial field may disagree with some of her analyses or conclusions. However, none will fail to be impressed by the combination of scope, detail, and judiciousness that make the book an essential reference on its subject.