Previous studies conducted on school reform for SLC in Japan can help to clarify some issues this book intends to address.
1.1.1 The formation and development of school reform for SLC
The development of the concept of school reform for SLC must first be outlined. The concept of the “learning community” was first proposed by Manabu Sato in a Japanese article published in 1992 titled “Perspectives of Questioning upon School: Toward Learning Community” (Sato, 1992).1 Sato concluded that
The road to the restoration of schools can only be started from the restoration of the natural “time”, “space”, and “relationship” which were lost in the process of the modern maintenance and the rational armament of the school, and in which the pains and joys of learning were valued and shared, and the transition to “learning community”.
(Sato, 1992, p. 223)
It should be noted here that Japanese terms for “learning community” were still variable: expressions such as manabi no kyodotai and gakusyu kyodotai were used.2 Then, through Sato’s conclusion, the concept of SLC remained speculative at that juncture. Perhaps this resulted from the fact that the concept of SLC encompassed a robust critique of the modernity of schools. Further, Sato examined the discourse on American school reform during the same period and distinguished the genealogy of school reforms to succeed the “progressivism” which was different from “nationalist school reform theory” and “industrialist school reform theory” as a main motif. The formation of SLC, according to Sato, was characterized by the opportunities of such critique and differentiation rather than a specific quest for it.
In 2007, Manabu Sato’s Japanese thesis titled “Philosophy on Restoration of Schools: The Vision, Principles and Activity System of School as Learning Community” was important (Sato, 2007). This study was the first to formalize the theory of school reform for SLC. As proof of this, this thesis later became the foundational text for the international development of the concept. In this thesis, Sato stated that “Although the vision and philosophy of the reform precede the practice in the school reform for SLC, the theoretical elucidation lags behind the progress of the practice”. Therefore, the paper emphasized that “I intended to describe this philosophy of reform in the theoretical language, rather than in the practical language, wherever possible” (Sato, 2007, pp. 93–94). Building on this, Sato published another paper, this time in English, titled “Philosophy on the Restoration of Schools in Japan: The Vision, Principles and Activity System of the Learning Community” in 2008 (Sato, 2008). In these papers, Sato attempted to formulate the theory of school reform for SLC on the basis of the first nationwide development of school reform for SLC in Japan. This included a definition of SLC, philosophical principles (“publicness”, “democracy”, and “excellence”) and fundamental strategies (construction of the “activity system”).
Subsequently, in 2019, Sato wrote another English paper titled “Spread and Progress of School as Learning Community in Asia”, which traced the global development of school reform for SLC over the past 30 years across Japan, the United States, Mexico, South Korea, China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Vietnam, Singapore, and Thailand (Sato, 2019). In addition, it is important to mention that Sato was careful in differentiating school reform for SLC from the orientation of extant pedagogical theories. He cautioned: “SLC is not a recipe, a technique or a formula, but a combination of a vision, philosophy and the activity systems”, “SLC is not a single approach, but an integrated and holistic practice”, and “SLC is not a ‘movement’ but a ‘network’” (Sato, 2019, pp. 4–5). Further, from the viewpoint of the development of educational reform across Asian countries, Sato emphasized the differentiation of school reform: “I named the ‘New Progressivism’ as ‘quasi-Progressivism’, as it is a sort of trap that is quite different to the authentic progressivism that SLC delivers” (Sato, 2019, p. 10). Sato thus highlighted that school reform for SLC represented “authentic progressivism”.
Finally, Sato delivered a keynote speech at the 2020 World Association of Lesson Studies (WALS) 2020 Virtual Conference titled “Equitable Education and Re-Innovation of Learning under COVID-19”. In his speech, he compared the lesson study of ordinary schools and of SLC schools in Japan, and also distinguishing between the Professional Learning Community (PLC) and SLC to emphasize the distinctive traits of school reform for SLC. In the former case, the SLC’s lesson study included the “realization of human rights” and “democratizing school”, while in the latter instance, the SLC identified “professional development for thoughtful, reflective and autonomous teachers” and emphasized a long-term evolution (Sato, 2020). SLC is different both from PLC and from traditional lesson study in Japan; an important feature of SLC is that it pursues lesson study reform through the introduction of new types of “value”, “strategy”, and “hypothesis”.
On the above discussion that illuminated how Sato developed the theory of school reform for SLC, the decade between 1998 and 2008 that this book focuses on means the initial process of formation of the theory of school reform for SLC in Japan. This book examines the five pilot schools of school reform for SLC in Japan and attempts to explain how the corresponding theory was formed.
1.1.2 The development of research on school reform for SLC
Academic research on school reform for SLC was generated in the 2010s based on the development of school reform for SLC in the 2000s. Significantly, these scholarly investigations were conducted primarily by Sato’s students at the University of Tokyo. As for the points to be discussed next, it should be kept in mind that the development of educational research by Sato’s students as “action researchers” made it possible to conduct academic investigations into school reform for SLC.
In 2015, Lesson Study for Learning Community: A Guide to Sustainable School Reform, an English book co-authored by Eisuke Saito, Masatsugu Murase, Atushi Tsukui and JohnYeo, which includes Sato’s student Murase, is an important book (Saito, Murase, Tsukui and Yeo, 2015). As its subtitle suggests, it aims to provide guidance on sustainable school reform. It also initiates inquiry into the theory and history of school reform for SLC, particularly in Chapters 1 and 2, respectively titled “What is Lesson Study for Learning Community (LSLC)?” and “What Kind of School Can Be Created by Reform under LSLC?” (Saito, Murase, Tsukui and Yeo, 2015, pp. 1–23).
The findings of these inquiries came to fruition in the 2019 English book titled Lesson Study and Schools as Learning Communities: Asian School Reform in Theory and Practice edited by Tsukui and Murase (2019). The subtitle of this book clarified its attempts to illuminate the theory and practice of lesson study and SLC, focusing on educational reform in Asia. Sato’s paper titled “Spread and Progress of School as Learning Community in Asia” and Murase’s paper titled “History and Theory of School as Learning Community” constituted Part 1 of the book: “Theory of SLC” (Sato, 2019; Murase, 2019). Murase’s paper was especially important, as it started to elucidate the theoretical underpinnings of SLC. Murase identified three problems in Japanese education that led to the emergence of SLC: “(1) competition combined with isolation that dominated the learning process, (2) superficial understanding that recognized teachers as unified technical experts without autonomy, and (3) a bureaucratic formal educational system that did not respect diversity”. In response to them, Murase characterized SLC by presenting three concepts: “collaborative learning, reflective practitioners, and democracy” (Murase, 2019, p. 17). Significantly, Murase described the structure of the problems brought to light by SLC and positioned it as a multifaceted development in three dimensions: classrooms, staff rooms, and schools. Additionally, he emphasized “to bridge SLC theory and practice” or to “transform philosophy of SLC into practice” (Murase, 2019, p. 20). This is where we can point out the challenges that this book needs to address. It is also important to examine how Murase viewed the relationship between theory and practice.
In 2007, Murase’s Japanese paper titled “Present State of Lesson Study” was published in The Japanese Journal of Educational Research, which is a leading educational research journal in Japan (Murase, 2007). In that paper, Murase proposed abandoning “action research” for “reaction search”, which aims “to discover academic research issues while engaging in lesson study” and “to search to discover academic issues while reacting to practical problems in the field” (Murase, 2007, p. 46). It should be noted, however, that Murase did not conduct a theoretical examination of “action research” itself. Hence, there remains a need to theoretically deliberate on the relation between SLC theory or philosophy and its practice in principle, including a theoretical consideration of “action research”, which this book seeks to address.
Lesson Study and Schools as Learning Communities also includes Yoshiko Kitada’s eminent English paper titled “School-wide Lesson Study across Subject Areas: Creating School-Based Professional Learning Communities in Japanese Secondary Schools” (Kitada, 2019). As a case study for her paper, Kitada examined the changes that took place at Motoyoshiwara Junior High School in Fuji City, Shizuoka Prefecture, a pilot school that implemented school reform for SLC in 2005. Yoshio Inaba, the former vice principal of Gakuyo Junior High School (GYJ), mentioned in this book, was appointed principal of Motoyoshiwara Junior High School in 2005, while Kitada investigated school reform as an “action researcher”. In her paper, Kitada described the process of building a “professional learning community” in the school through school-wide SLC lesson study across subject areas. According to her, this process helped teachers accumulate “pedagogical content knowledge” beyond the knowledge barrier of subjects, which had been obstacles to teacher collaboration in junior high schools. The practice also helped teachers to become “reflective practitioners” (...
