The impact of education reform on the quality assurance system in Japan

Abstract

International assessment studies have shown since decades that Japanese students score highly on math and science tests. As a consequence, many scholars, education policy officials and journalists outside Japan share the opinion that quality of education is ensured and turn to the Japanese educational system to identify educational effectiveness enhancing factors. Simultaneously, a sense of educational crisis exists within Japan, which resulted into numerous education reforms. In this paper, we describe how quality in education has been ensured in Japan, what changes in the assurance of quality are brought forth by the most recent wave of reform measures as well as the reaction of scholars toward these measures.

Impact of quality management systems in the performance of educational centers: educational policies and management processes

“…In the last few decades, educational reforms have evolved in terms of handling tensions between central control from administration and the autonomy of schools (Boateng, 2014;Chapman et al, 2010;Knipprath and Arimoto, 2007). Fullan (2009) considered that at the international level, educational reforms have undergone different stages where accountability is a flagship for monitoring and fostering school improvement.…”

“…Within educational communities, collaborative and collegial working procedures promote the fact that educators generate, exchange, and challenge their teaching practices. Thus, when teachers feel empowered and involved in decision-making regarding their students' learning processes, they improve their pedagogy and develop professionally (Knipprath and Arimoto, 2007). With the aim of supporting these networks for self-reflection and continuous learning, educational systems are provided with structures and professionals that articulate and facilitate these relationships within and among schools in their process of becoming autonomous learning communities (Chapman et al, 2010;Hopkins et al, 2014).…”

“…In conclusion, we would like to highlight that recent research has emphasized the use of evidence for school planning, organizational learning, and accountability (Leithwood, 2010). Knipprath and Arimoto (2007) highlight data as a valuable tool to measure quality in education and to assure a certain level of achievement throughout the entire process: prescribing standards (input), monitoring implementation (process), and checking the generation of desired results (output). Evidence suggests that establishing external and internal evaluation mechanisms has a strong effect in school improvement, particularly where the teaching quality in classrooms is poor (Creemers and Kyriakides, 2009).…”

“…Besides, networks of schools and teachers support each other's learning by visiting other schools and classes and by interchanging experiences and practices. Research has demonstrated that when interdependence and successful collaboration is established at the district level, professional learning networks improve, and collective capacity building is achieved (Boateng, 2014;Chapman et al, 2010;Fullan, 2010;Knipprath and Arimoto, 2007;Leithwood, 2010).…”

Cooperative Learning in CHC Countries

“…The education system of Japan is widely known as a competitive and highly bureaucratic system (Knipprath and Arimoto 2007;Doyon 2001). Historically, this competitive education system was effective in terms of resulting in Japanese students' high academic achievement, especially in maths and science on both local and international tests (Doyon 2001).…”