著者

井深 雄二

出版者

名古屋工業大学

雑誌

名古屋工業大学紀要 (ISSN:0918595X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.47, pp.43-51, 1996-03-31

著者

井深 雄二

出版者

日本教育行政学会

雑誌

日本教育行政学会年報 (ISSN:09198393)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.23, pp.55-66, 1997-10-17 (Released:2018-01-09)

---

The principle of defrayment of school expenses by the establishers of schools has been one of the basic principles of the educational finance system in Japan since World War II. There is, however, little common comprehension about the significance of this principle, either in the administrative world or in the academic world. In this paper, the significance of this principle in the school system is examined through analysis of the formation of School Education Law Article 5 that prescribes this principle. This sentence of School Educational Law Article 5 reads as follows; "The establishers of schools shall manage the school which they established and defray the expenses of the school except for the cases specifically stipulated by laws or ordinances." The first half of this provision calls for the principle that school management is carried out by the establishers of schools while the latter part is called the principle of defrayment of school expenses by the establishers of schools. It is often said that the principle of defrayment of school expenses by the establishers of schools was valid not only after World War II but also before World War II, even before the establishment of the School Educational Law. However, before World War II, although there were ten types of Imperial Ordinances for schools, the provisions concerning this principle were written in only four Ordinaces: the Elementary School Ordinance, the Youth School Ordinance, the Secondary School Ordinance and the School for the Blind and School for the Deaf and Dumb Ordinance. From this fact it may be deduced that in cases where cities, towns and villages (or prefectures) were obligated to establish schools by the state, these provisions were required specifically, because it was assumed that the affairs of education were those of the state. Accordingly, before World War II, this principle meant that, although the state managed the shcools, cities, towns and villages (or prefectures) were obliged to defray the expenses of these schools. After World War II, responsibility for educational affairs were changed from the state level to the local level by educational reforms as well as local government reforms. The authority for school management, together with responsibility for defrayment of school expenses, has since belonged to the founders of schools as specified in the School Educational Law, Article 5. In this case, the point should be emphasized especially that local education has been separated from the control of the state. It can therefore be said that the principle of the defrayment of shcool expenses by the establishers has come to obtain significance concerning the principle that financially secures the self-governing control of the schools which have been established by cities, towns and villages (or prefectures).

著者

井深 雄二

出版者

一般社団法人日本教育学会

雑誌

日本教育学会大會研究発表要項

巻号頁・発行日

vol.59, pp.40-41, 2000-08-25

著者

井深 雄二

出版者

日本教育制度学会

雑誌

教育制度学研究 (ISSN:2189759X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2005, no.12, pp.53-58, 2005 (Released:2020-04-24)

著者

井深 雄二

出版者

日本教育行政学会

雑誌

日本教育行政学会年報 (ISSN:09198393)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.43, pp.104-120, 2017 (Released:2019-03-20)

---

The purpose of this paper is to reexamine the “School Standard Bill” and “School Finance Bill” which were planned in the educational reform period after World War II in Japan.The main results of this research are as follows: 1. The research on the school standard bill was initiated by Taro Nakajima & Mitsui Ito. However, the origin and the date of the “Bill concerning the Standard of Curricula of Schools” that was a subject of research in their paper were unknown. In this research, I confirmed that it existed as the bill which is dated December 19th, 1949 in the “Tomejiro Atsuzawa collection”.2. Previously, the “Bill concerning the Standard of Curricula and Organization of Schools (first tentative plan)” (November 1st, 1950) was reviewed as having been created by the Ministry of Education. However, I pointed out that it was the bill which was translated as “BILL CONCERNING THE STANDARD OF CURRICULA AND ORGANIZATION OF SCHOOLS” which originated with Osborne's proposal by CIE Education Division.3. The principle of educational finance came into existence in accordance with the “Bill concerning the Local Educational Administration”. However, it was deleted in the “School Board Law”. Therefore, the problem of educational finance reform remained even after this was concluded. Regarding this case, I showed that there was an “offer” from the CIE to “specify a nationwide education standard by the law.” It then became clear that, the idea of a “School Standard bill” depended on this point.4. The Ministry of Education’s “School Finance Bill” which was planned together with the “School Standard Bill” included the theory of equal contributions from state funds and local expenditure. However, I pointed out that this was different from the principle of “Equalization Formula for the distribution of state funds” which was sought by the CIE as a way of determining the role of the state in educational finance.5. Regarding the tax and fiscal reforms, which were based on the “Report by the Shoup Mission”, the expenses for the compulsory education treasury charge were absorbed by the local finance equalization grant. Therefore, the Ministry of Education tried to make the local governments pay for the standard schooling in the “Bill concerning the Securing of Standard Expenses for Compulsory Education”. I pointed out that this fact was related to the “School Standard Bill” which was divided into “School Facilities Standard Bill” and “Bill concerning the Standards of Curricula and Organization of Schools”.6. The School Standard Bill was ultimately not submitted to the Diet. I pointed out the reasons for this : being that the “School Finance Bill” and “Bill concerning the Securing of Standard Expenses for Compulsory Education” were not put into effect.

著者

井深 雄二

出版者

日本教育政策学会

雑誌

日本教育政策学会年報 (ISSN:24241474)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.24, pp.80-89, 2017 (Released:2018-08-27)

---

In this paper, the associated structure of the compulsory education expense government contribution system, and the system by which the prefecture provides the salary of the staff of municipalities was examined. The paper considers the basic issue of the school personnel management of city, town or village-owned elementary and junior high schools and the salary mechanisms. Structural contradictions existed between the management and the expense burden of the elementary school before World War II, and this led to the creation of the compulsory education expense government contribution system. Moreover, the centralization system whereby the prefecture provides the salary of the staff of municipalities was approved in 1940. The compulsory education expense government contribution system was abolished in the educational reform period after World War II under the decentralization policy for education, and the authority to appoint and dismiss was moved from the local secretary to municipal boards of education. However, the system by which the prefecture provides the salary of the staff of municipalities was maintained. The compulsory education expense government contribution system was revived by the process of the review of the educational reform after World War II, and the authority to appoint and dismiss was moved from the municipal boards of education to the prefectural board of education. A further development was that the compulsory education expense government contribution system was reduced and that the authority to appoint and dismiss the teacher was moved to municipalities under the decentralization of education as the educational policy of neo liberalism after the 1980ʼs.

著者

井深 雄二

出版者

名古屋工業大学

雑誌

名古屋工業大学学報 (ISSN:03693171)

巻号頁・発行日

no.38, pp.p29-37, 1986

著者

井深 雄二

出版者

名古屋大学

雑誌

教育行政研究

巻号頁・発行日

vol.12, pp.73-95, 2003-03

---

国立情報学研究所で電子化したコンテンツを使用している。