|
CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS FOUNDATION
Bill of Rights in Action Winter
1992 (8:2) Issues in Education This issue of Bill of Rights in Action examines issues relating to the education system in the U.S. Each article provides a look at the system from a different perspective: a historical account of its problems and successes; a contemporary evaluation of criticisms and suggested reforms; and a comparison with the Japanese school system. Although a right to education is not specified within the Bill of Rights, we at Constitutional Rights Foundation recognize that education serves as the primary means by which we all can develop an understanding and appreciation for the freedoms and liberties guaranteed to us by the Bill of Rights. Furthermore, we believe that our freedom to learn is a prime example of the basic liberties which were so important to the founders of this nation, and which remain a fundamental part of our lives today. U.S. History: Educating European Immigrant Children Before World War I U.S. Government: The Debate Over School Choice World Studies: Teaching to the Test in Japan Educating European Immigrant Children Before World War I During the 1980s and 1990s, over 14 million people—mainly from Latin America and Asia—immigrated to the United States. The Census Bureau reported that as of March 2000, the foreign-born U.S. population was over 28.4 million, or 10.4 percent of the total U.S. population. Today, up to 5 million immigrant children speaking 150 languages attend public schools in this country. In seven states, a quarter or more of all students are not native English-speakers. Some schools in cities like New York, Miami, and Los Angeles are heavily populated by the children of foreign-born parents. Like today, the years before World War I were characterized by high rates of immigration to the United States. But the immigrants did not come from Latin America and Asia: They came mainly from Europe. The public schools in the great port-of-entry cities like New York were flooded with European children speaking little English. How did the schools at that time go about educating these youngsters? More importantly, did the schools succeed? Educating the Immigrant Child: 1900-1914 In 1909, the U.S. Immigration Commission reported that almost 60 percent of students in large cities were children of immigrants. This percentage was even higher (over 70 percent) in New York City, the "golden door" to America for most European immigrants. Between 1900 and the beginning of World War I in 1914, New York schools experienced a 60 percent jump in enrollment. The majority of these new students were Russian Jews and Italians, either immigrants themselves or the children of immigrants. Moreover, the cultural backgrounds and languages of these "new" immigrants were quite different from those of the English, Germans, and Irish who had dominated immigration to America before 1900. Overcrowding plagued New York schools at this time. Many schools held double sessions. A single classroom with one teacher often held 60 and occasionally up to 150 children. In the primary grades, pupils frequently sat three to a seat. Many immigrant children had only three hours of instruction a day. During some years, as many as 30,000 new students, mostly immigrants, were simply turned away at overcrowded New York schools. In 1898, William H. Maxwell was appointed superintendent of the newly consolidated New York City school system. An Irish immigrant himself, Maxwell was a visionary advocate of improving education for the immigrant children then flooding into New York's schools. Maxwell first fought and defeated the old corrupt system that permitted political bosses to hire teachers. He then sought better-trained, professional teachers and selected them based on their qualifications. Before Maxwell became superintendent, all immigrant children who entered school speaking no English were automatically placed in the first grade regardless of age. Maxwell established a special program to teach English to newly arrived immigrant children as soon as they enrolled in school. Called "steamer classes," named after immigrant passenger ships, the program featured English-only instructions with teachers using objects and gestures to teach the language. Those children who could already read and write in their own native language seemed to learn English the fastest. After about six months in a "steamer class," the immigrant child transferred to a regular grade level class. Even though the special English classes were apparently successful, only a small number of immigrant children actually attended them because of overcrowding, lack of funds, and some opposition from educators. Superintendent Maxwell supported the "steamer classes" and many other educational reforms because they fit the needs of the students entering the schools. Maxwell, believing that immigrant children would do better in school if they started earlier, opened kindergartens. He fought to shift the curriculum away from classical subjects like Latin in favor of practical subjects such as science, drawing, physical education, manual training for boys, and domestic arts for girls. He tried to steer teachers away from old methods of instruction which emphasized repetition, recitation, and memorization. Along with Julia Richman, a school administrator in the immigrant Lower East Side, Maxwell organized special remedial classes. In 1904, he introduced classes for students held back below the fifth grade level who were nevertheless approaching age 14 and about to leave school. A decade later, these classes were replaced by continuation schools. Maxwell also established other special classes and schools for handicapped, ill, blind, speech-impaired, and mentally retarded students as well as an accelerated program for bright immigrant children who entered school late. High schools were rare in most parts of New York City until Maxwell became superintendent. "It is only through a high school education," he said, "that the son of a poor man obtains an approach to equality with the son of a rich man in opportunity for success in life." By the outset of World War I (which effectively shut down most European immigration to America), New York had over 20 high schools as well as a small number of vocational schools. They were filled with children of European immigrants. The New York City schools had changed because of the immigrant children. But, did the schools succeed in giving these children an "opportunity for success in life," as Superintendent Maxwell had hoped? Did the Schools Succeed? In 1913, a committee of education experts issued a report on the effectiveness of the New York City school system. It found that overcrowding, half-time classes, and widespread truancy were the rule. Half of the children who entered first grade failed to complete the eighth. A third of all elementary students had been held back one or more grades. Less than 10 percent of all school-age children in the city entered high school and nearly a third of those youngsters dropped out before completing the four-year program. The committee went on to criticize the high schools for being too few, too large, and too academic. Similarly, the small number of vocational schools could not reach enough students. The committee blamed the school bureaucracy as well as Superintendent Maxwell for the deplorable condition of education in the city. The report called for more emphasis on manual training and practical subjects. In some ways, the committee findings were overly harsh. Many of the programs recommended by the committee had been in operation for decades, but reached relatively few students. The committee also underestimated the many innovations introduced during Maxwell's superintendency. Finally, the committee failed to seriously address the chronic lack of funding for new schools and special programs for immigrant children. The 1913 report also missed the fact that some ethnic groups proved more successful in school than others. On the whole, Jewish children were less truant, less likely to be held back a grade, more likely to earn high grades, and more apt to remain in school through the eighth grade than children of other immigrant groups. One reason for the greater success of Jewish students in school was the long tradition of literacy and learning that formed such an important part of Jewish religious life in Europe. Also, Jewish immigrants more often came from cities where schooling was an accepted part of growing up. The Jewish newcomers had a saying: "Land on Saturday, settle on Sunday, school on Monday." Yet, formal education even for most Jewish youth ended by grade eight. The pressure to help support the family, as well as the availability of many unskilled jobs, made work, not school, the route to success in America for most Jewish immigrants at this time. Other immigrant children generally had a much tougher time in school. Those coming mainly from a rural peasant culture, had parents who valued physical labor (especially for males) more than book learning. Some families also resented attempts by the schools to Americanize their children by stripping them of their heritage and language. Leonard Cavello, an immigrant child from rural Italy who fought the odds to become a New York City school official, described his own Americanization experience: "We soon got the idea that `Italian' meant something inferior, and a barrier was erected between children of Italian origin and their parents. This was the accepted process of Americanization. We were becoming Americans by learning to be ashamed of our parents." Did the schools succeed? Largely due to the efforts of Superintendent William H. Maxwell, New York schools did provide opportunities for some immigrant young people before World War I. But for most, the schools were largely irrelevant. In spite of the New York state compulsory education law requiring children to remain in school until age 14 or upon completing the eighth grade, the majority of immigrant students were out of school and working after grade six. It would take one or two more generations before most of the descendants of these immigrants would be economically able to graduate from public high schools. For Discussion and Writing
For Further Information NYC 100 A history of New York in the 20th century. From the New York Times. Gotham Center for New York City History A huge collection of links. CityYouth: U.S. History Links Links on New York City education at the turn of the century. From Constitutional Rights Foundation. A C T I V I T Y New Chance "New Chance" is a fictitious city of today whose public schools have received a recent influx of immigrant students. Currently, 20 percent of the students in the school district are recent immigrants from Asia, 30 percent are newcomers from Latin America, and 50 percent are native-born Americans. Many of the newcomers have come to America from poor rural countries often torn apart by war. These youngsters usually have little schooling and sometimes cannot read or write in their native languages. Other immigrant students come from cities and cultural backgrounds where education is highly valued and supported by the family. About 60 percent of the immigrant students speak little or no English. The following activity will enable the class to participate in a simulated school board meeting on how to go about educating the newcomers in New Chance. A. The New Chance Board of Education has appointed four committees to recommend answers to key questions facing the school district:
B. Divide the class into five groups: the four committees and the New Chance Board of Education. Each of the committees should meet and decide how to gather information to make recommendations to the board. Committees might review the article on New York's experience with European immigrant students, research recent periodical articles on immigrant students in U.S. schools today, interview bilingual and ESL teachers, interview school administrators and subject teachers, or conduct surveys of students and parents. C. The committees should next meet by themselves to discuss the information they have gathered. Each committee should then prepare its recommendations to the school board. D. One board of education member should be elected by the others as chairperson of the board meeting. The chairperson should then ask each committee to give its report. The report should consist of the committee's recommendations together with facts, statistics, interview statements, survey results, and other supporting information and arguments. Dissenting views from each committee should also be reported. E. After hearing the committee recommendations, the school board should invite comments and arguments from anyone present. The board should then discuss the recommendations among themselves and finally vote on each one. After voting, the school board members should give reasons for their votes. Revolutions replace old institutions with new ones.
Throughout the 1980s, most states initiated school reforms to get test scores up and dropout rates down. These reforms typically focused on strengthening graduation requirements, increasing the number of school days, and requiring more homework. According to some critics, however, these changes merely tinkered with a public school system that had outlived its time and needed fundamental change. Today, a surprising mixture of educational reformers, business leaders, minority parents, conservatives, and liberals are arguing for a revolutionary restructuring of public education called "school choice." If adopted, this approach would radically change public schooling in the United States. What Is School Choice? The goal of school choice is to give parents the opportunity to select the schools they want their children to attend. As it is now, public school students must attend particular schools within their school district. Some choice plans would allow parents to choose any public school within their home district or even within the entire state. A "full-blown" choice system would provide state grants (also called "vouchers" or "scholarships") to parents who would then be free to enroll their children in any public, private, or religious school in the state. The voucher version of school choice was first proposed by conservative economist Milton Friedman in 1955 and then promoted by the Reagan administration in the mid-1980s. Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush also favored some form of vouchers. President George W. Bush has not pushed vouchers, but as a candidate he said he favored giving vouchers to parents of children who attend failing public schools. In 1991, J. Patrick Rooney founded the Educational CHOICE Charitable Trust in Indiana. This organization provides scholarships covering the cost half of the tuition of private elementary schools. These scholarships are distributed on a first-come, first-serve basis to the children of low-income parents. CHOICE was in the vanguard of the plethora of school choice programs that swept the nation during the 1990s. By 1998, over 35 cities—including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington D.C.—had instituted some form of school choice program. In 1999 alone, 57,000 children were awarded private school choice scholarships. The question of whether a similar program can be instituted by the government remains unanswered. Supporters of the choice idea point out that today only parents who can afford to move to neighborhoods with good schools or send their children to private schools have freedom of choice. Why not enable everyone to send their children to the schools that provide the best education? All schools would then have to compete to attract students. Those schools able to provide a rigorous academic program, increase achievement, motivate students, and keep parents satisfied would flourish. Those schools that could not keep up would inevitably fail and perhaps even close down. Choice advocates also argue that under this system individual schools could specialize in gifted, special education, vocational, teen pregnancy, and many other programs. The end result, say those in favor of school choice, would be a substantial improvement in the quality of American elementary and secondary education. Opposition to the school choice movement comes from those who argue that the emphasis on school reform should be on improving all public schools, not pitting one against the other or funneling scarce tax dollars into private and parochial schools. Opponents also wonder if choice would really benefit only well-off families financially able to transport their children to distant superior schools while poor inner-city students would be forced to stay in under-funded, deteriorating schools. Another argument against choice claims that using public tax money to send children to religious schools would violate the First Amendment principle of separation of church and state. State courts have ruled inconsistently on whether school choice violates the free exercise and establishment clauses of the First Amendment. Courts in Wisconsin and Arizona have ruled in that school choice is constitutional, while the top courts in Maine and Vermont have ruled that their respective states cannot provide school vouchers for use at religious schools. In 1999, a federal district judge ruled that Cleveland's program was unconstitutional under the establishment clause. In 2002 in Zelmon v. Simmons-Harris, however, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Cleveland's voucher program as constitutional. Choice Among Public Schools Transfers among public schools have been possible in most states for a long time but have been used mainly in special cases. Originally designed to foster racial desegregation, magnet schools with specialties in science, the arts, and other programs became popular in the 1970s. But attempts to provide choice to parents and students for purely academic reasons until recently have been relatively rare in the public schools. One of the earliest experiments took place in New York City's District 4 in East Harlem, an area heavily populated by poor African-American and Hispanic families. A network of public schools was designed around curricular themes such as marine biology and the performing arts. Parents could choose among these alternative schools, which were granted a great deal of local independence. Today, over 50 small, specialized schools share space in 20 buildings. At one time, District 4 students had the lowest reading scores in Manhattan. Now they rank second from the top. Almost all District 4 students graduate from high school and half go on to college. Also, starting in the late 1980s, several states adopted school choice plans allowing parents to select public schools within or outside their home districts. The only limitations on admission to a school were availability of space and maintenance of racial balance. In the fall of 1990, Minnesota began its full-time state-wide public school choice plan. Initially, only about 6,000 out of 740,000 Minnesota public school students participated (less than 1 percent). Another phase of the state's choice plan allows juniors and seniors to attend state college classes for both high school and college credit. This option has involved more students than the regular choice program and has caused a dramatic increase in the number of high schools offering advanced placement courses. Charter Schools Another option in school choice is charter schools. These are public schools set up independent of school boards. The founders contract with the state or local school board to set up a charter school. The charter school is not controlled by the school board, but it must promise that its students will achieve certain results. At the end of a fixed year term (three to five years), the school's charter may be renewed or canceled. The first charter school opened in 1991 in Minnesota. Soon most other states passed laws allowing for charter schools. Charter schools offer parents greater choice within the public school system. They promise greater accountability. And they are free from administrative directives from the school board. Charter schools can be started by parents, teachers, community members, business people, or existing schools. The founders may want to get free from the constraints of the school board. Or they may have a different view of how a school should work. Or they may want to focus on a particular group of students. Many of the schools are small and offer students personal attention and safety. They promise results. The schools have support from groups across the political spectrum. In a decade, the number of charter schools has grown from one to more than 2,000. School Vouchers The first school voucher plan was limited to disadvantaged students in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Beginning in the 1990-91 school year, up to l,000 eligible Milwaukee students could use state vouchers worth $2,500 to enroll in one of several private schools. Voucher schools could not be church-affiliated, but some emphasized black or Hispanic history and culture. In the first year, only 258 students took up the offer, but they reportedly did better than they had in public school. In 1998, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that the Milwaukee school choice program did not violate the Wisconsin constitution because it operated primarily to the benefit of children, not religious schools. Currently, a few other states are considering plans like this one. In 1993, a voucher initiative called Proposition 174 went on the California ballot. The initiative attracted only 30 percent of the vote, with the California Teachers Association as its greatest opponent. In 1999, Florida passed the nation's first statewide voucher program. Under the Florida program, vouchers were limited to those children who have earned failing grades two years out of four at their public schools. In March 2000, a state judge ruled that Florida's school voucher law is unconstitutional. The case is being appealed. One of the most thoughtful voucher plans is spelled out in a recently published book, Politics, Markets, and American Schools by John E. Chubb and Terry M. Moe. After analyzing 500 public and private high schools in the United States, Chubb and Moe concluded that the school reforms of the 1980s were "destined to fail." The two researchers argued that the real problem with public education in America is the oppressive bureaucracies that stifle local school independence and creativity. "The key to effective education," they wrote, "rests with unleashing the productive potential already present in the schools and their personnel." Chubb and Moe went on to propose that the only effective solution to the educational crisis plaguing the nation is a "full-blown" voucher system, which would allow parents and students in each state to choose among competing public, private, and parochial schools. Below are the main points of their plan:
For Discussion and Writing
For Further Information Media
| Education Magazines | Government
| Education and Research
Stateline.org Source for news on state issues.
State Education Agencies Links to each state's education department. National Association of State Boards of Education
California Department of Education Minnesota Department of Children, Families & Learning Ask Eric Eric is a federally funded program that provides information on education issues. North Central Regional Education Laboratory Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
Organizations Favoring or Opposing Vouchers and Charter Schools Children First America An organization advocating for school choice. School Choices An organization in favor of vouchers. U.S. Charter Schools An organization that supports charter schools. Charter Schools Development Center An organization that provides technical assistance to the charter school movement. Center for Education Reform A group advocating for school choice and charter schools. Friedman Foundation An organization supporting vouchers. School Choices A group advocating school choice and vouchers. Partners for Public Education A group opposing vouchers. Americans United for Separation of Church and State An organization opposed to vouchers. National Education Association American Federation of Teachers National School Boards Association
Educator Resource Center World Book's huge collection of links to education associations, educational offices, curriculum standards, boards of education, and much more. Excellent site. A C T I V I T Y What Is Your Choice?
By some measures, the Japanese elementary and secondary school systems are far superior to those in the United States. Japanese youngsters consistently outperform American students in most academic areas, especially in math and science. According to some who have studied both educational systems, the average high school graduate in Japan has learned as much as the average college graduate in the United States. In Japan, nearly 95 percent of the nation's youth attend high school even though compulsory education ends at grade nine. Furthermore, 90 percent of the high school students graduate as contrasted to only 71 percent in the United States. The apparent superiority of Japanese schools is one of the factors that has made Japan a powerhouse in the world economy. Japan educates two times the number of engineers per capita than does the United States. Even more significantly, the average factory worker in Japan tends to be more skilled and disciplined, knows more math and science, and understands more about technology than the average American factory worker. How does Japan do it? One driving force in the lives of school children in Japan is a series of school entrance examinations starting at the junior high level. These tests literally make or break a young person's future in Japan. From preschool onward through high school, most Japanese young people go to school focused on one single-minded purpose: to pass the entrance tests which will enable them eventually to end up with a good job in business or government. Diane Ravitch, an American educator who has observed Japanese schools, puts it this way: "The Japanese succeed in schooling their population because they take education seriously." Teaching to the Test Following World War II, both private employers and the Japanese government began to rely heavily on college graduates to rebuild the country. Japanese families soon realized that for their sons and (to a much lesser degree) their daughters to land high-status and high-paying jobs, they would have to get into college, preferably one of the handful of top-rated universities. Today, the competition for admission into four-year colleges in Japan is intense. Over a million high school graduates each year apply for about half that many university spaces. The system works like this. Parents put their children in school as soon as possible. Almost all Japanese children are enrolled in preschool by age five. After that, the first six elementary grades are geared toward preparing the student for the junior high school entrance examination. Japanese parents know that the junior and senior high schools, as well as the universities, are informally ranked from superior to mediocre. A high score on the junior high entrance test for students in their final year of elementary school will help a student be admitted into a top-ranked junior high school. This, in turn, will increase the student's chances for doing well on the high school entrance exam three years later. Getting into a highly rated, academic high school places the student in position for mastering the all-important entrance test of one of Japan's prestigious universities. To have a child attend a first-rate university is the prime goal of many parents. If the student makes it into a top school like the University of Tokyo, his or her future is virtually guaranteed. Japan's corporate and government employers traditionally look only at the name of an individual's university when hiring college graduates. Everything depends on the university entrance tests and the schooling that leads up to them. Japanese elementary and secondary students go to school for 240 days a year, including Saturday mornings. There is no ability grouping or tracking through the ninth grade. The emphasis on equal treatment changes dramatically after the high school entrance exam. The top two-thirds of the ninth grade graduates are admitted (according to their test scores) to public and private academic high schools. Junior high graduates from the bottom third of their class either go to vocational high schools or, in a small number of cases, directly to work. In Japan, there is a single national public school system. (In the United States public schools are operated by thousands of separate school districts.) The Japanese Ministry of Education decides what will be taught to all students, selects textbooks, and sees to it that schools are properly funded. Public education is free through the ninth grade. Public high schools charge a tuition of about $550 per year. All teachers are paid by the national government and earn higher average salaries than American instructors. Moreover, teachers themselves are drawn from the upper third of university graduates and have high status in Japan. All Japanese students study the same carefully sequenced subjects, leaving little time for electives or teacher creativity. The subject matter must be covered thoroughly if students are going to be ready for the difficult school entrance tests. Students spend a quarter of their class time studying the Japanese language, which includes three separate writing systems. They devote another quarter of their time to concentrating on math and science. Japanese students are generally well-disciplined. In most cases, they wear school uniforms and stand and bow when their teacher enters the classroom. The textbook, teacher lecture, and student memorization dominate classroom instruction in academic high schools. There is little time for class discussions or innovative teaching methods. Instead, students focus on mastering the factual information that they will have to know for the university entrance exams. This includes basic knowledge of a foreign language, usually English. Most Japanese teenagers going to academic high schools do not date, drive cars, or hold part-time jobs. Pressured by parents and the approaching university exams, they usually spend their time after school studying. When test time arrives during February and March of their senior year, high schoolers become consumed with exam preparation. They even have a saying: "Sleep four hours, pass; sleep five hours, fail." Cramming Japanese parents typically believe that regular schools cannot adequately prepare their children for the crucial school entrance tests. Consequently, many parents send their sons and daughters to juku, the 40,000 privately operated Japanese "cram schools." About 70 percent of elementary and junior high children attend juku, often for two or more hours after regular school. Parents spend $2,000 to $4,000 a year on juku trying to give their children an edge when test time comes. The great majority of the students attending juku are boys. Japan is still a male-dominated society where women are expected to be wives and mothers rather than corporate executives or government bureaucrats. There are also juku for university entrance examination preparation. About 10 percent of the high school students attend. These students are joined by thousands of youths who failed the previous year's exams and are preparing for a second or even a third try. They are known as ronin, after the masterless samurai (warriors) who once roamed feudal Japan. The guiding spirits behind schooling and cramming are typically the students' mothers. Called kyoiku mamas ("education mothers"), they go to great lengths to help their children pass the entrance tests. Kyoiku mamas pack exquisite school lunches, meet regularly with teachers, sometimes work part-time to get money to pay for a cram school, and even sit in on classes missed by a sick child. Japanese Critical of School System Despite the obvious successes of the Japanese school system, there are criticisms. Parents and teachers complain that too much pressure is put on Japanese children and teenagers. Also, the emphasis on memorizing masses of often meaningless facts prevents Japanese youngsters from developing their creative talents, learning to think on their own, or expressing themselves. Ironically, after all the effort focusing on school and test preparation, only about a third of all Japanese high school graduates actually end up going to college (contrasted with 60 percent in the United States). Of even greater concern is what happens once a young person reaches the university level. Others voice concern about the overly rigid discipline of the Japanese system. Detailed rules—formal and informal—govern every aspect of school life including dress, hair style, behavior, and even outside activities. The rules and standards are often enforced by teachers humiliating and brow beating students. Corporal punishment is also widespread. Traditionalists defend these practices as a necessary part of schooling. Critics worry that the system brutalizes students into stagnant conformity. Of even greater concern is what happens once a young person reaches the university level. Tests are few, term papers are rare, and hardly anyone flunks. Most students view college as a time of leisure and for catching up on dating and other youthful activities they missed while struggling to get into a university. After all, it is the university diploma itself, not what a student learned, that is the ticket to success in Japan. As a result, university education is often noted as the weak link in the whole system. In 1984, a major Japanese newspaper opinion poll revealed that over 80 percent of the people wanted significant changes or the outright abolition of the school entrance-exam system. Although the government has been slow to respond, education reforms are beginning to take place. Until they are in place, most parents still continue to push their children in school and send them to juku. To do otherwise, they say, would jeopardize their children's future. The Reform Movement As a result of such criticism, a movement calling for the reform of the Japanese school system has gained great momentum in Japan. As early as 1960, the Central Council for Education in Japan called for the creation of a school system promoting greater diversity and independent thinking. Since then, the Japanese school system has been under constant attack for its emphasis on standardization, conformity, and testing. Some have argued that the rigidity of the system explains the fact that the Japanese drop-out rate increased during the 1970s and 1980s. In the mid-1980s, Prime Minister Nakasone created the National Council on Educational Reform in order to address some of these criticisms. The council conducted several studies and supported a policy nurturing creativity, decentralization, and moral education in schools. The council reasoned that the increasing complexity of the economic and technological fields will require workers to possess greater flexibility, responsiveness, and creativity in the future. While these reforms are yet to be enacted, the pendulum is swinging toward more freedom and flexibility in Japanese education. At the same time, the U.S. educational system, which has historically comprised a greater degree of freedom and flexibility than the Japanese system, is responding to criticisms calling for more standardized curriculum and testing. For Discussion and Writing
For Further Information Education in Japan An illustrated report from Fulbright scholar Peggy Steffens from a trip to Japan in November 2000. Education in Japan Another report from an educator visiting Japan. Experience a Day in a Student's Life in Higashiharima A dialog and photo essay. Links From the National Clearinghouse for Japan-U.S. Studies. Highlights include: Japan: A Web Guide: Education A quick breakdown of the educational system, teachers, and curriculum. To Sum It Up: Case Studies in Education in Germany, Japan, and the United States From the U.S. Department of Education. Japanese Education Today: This U.S. department of Education web page describes in great detail the nature of the Japanese educational system throughout history. Japan Echo An Interactive Journal of Informed Opinion
Culture Quest: Japanese Junior High Schools A detailed guide with a list of resources. Exam Wars, Prepping and Other Nursery Crimes From the New York Times. Mommy Dearest: A Toddler's Murder Extends the Japanese Education Debate to Parents and Pressure From Asia Week. Japanese Government Policies in Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology 2001: Educational Reform for the 21st Century A report from the Japanese Ministry of Education. Education System An in-depth look from Japan Insight. Japan Education Guide A complete listing of all the colleges and universities in Japan. English Education in Japan An account of some of the problems with how Japan teaches English. Foreign Press Center: Japan Good source of current information on Japan. A C T I V I T Y Should We Adopt Japanese Educational Ideas? Below is a list of ideas from the Japanese education system. Which of them do you think we should adopt to improve education in the United States? Meet in small groups. Discuss each Japanese educational idea and decide whether the United States should adopt it. Prepare to report your group's conclusions to the rest of the class. Japanese Educational Ideas
Officers: Alan Friedman, President; Harry Usher, Immediate Past President; Publications Committee: Jerome C. Byrne, Chairperson; Peggy Saferstein, Marvin Sears, Eugene Shutler, Lloyd M. Smith, Marjorie Steinberg, Susan Troy, Daniel H Willick; Staff: Todd Clark, Executive Director; Marshall L. Croddy, Director of Program and Materials Development; Carlton Martz, Writer ;Bill Hayes, Editor; Bill Hayes, Cristy Lytal, Web Editors; Andrew Costly, Production Manager; Jerome C. Byrne, CRF Board Reviewer. © 1992, Constitutional Rights Foundation, 601 South Kingsley Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90005, (213) 487-5590 |