- 著者
-
新海 英行
- 雑誌
- 研究紀要 (ISSN:13427997)
- 巻号頁・発行日
- vol.38, pp.7-28, 2016-12-20
Soon after I entered the university, I joined a group which supports youth activities in local area and as a member of the group I experienced some volunteer activities. Through these experiences I recognized that people naturally thrive in school educational context as well as social context which includes families, local communities, and workplaces. Perhaps you can even argue that social context may play larger role in the formation of personality than the school education does. That is why I became interested in identifying the significance of social education, the reason why social education came into being, and the ideological as well as historical characteristics of social education. Thus, I selected social education as my major study subject. So far, I have been engaged in (1) the theoretical and political study of social education (life-long learning ), (2) the study of the modern history of social education, (3) the research of the social educational practice in the local communities of Tokai area, particularly in Aichi prefecture, (4) and the comparative study of ‘Volkshochshule’(Folk High School) in Germany with Japanese social educational institution, all of which were analized from the viewpoint of right to education. In this paper, I try to look back what I have studied so far about modern history of social education which constituted from two epochs, namely the period of 1920 years and the period between 1945 and 1952. Firstly, this study involves the ideology and policy of social education in the period between two World Wars. In particular, during the days of ‘Taishou-Democracy’, some liberal, democratic social educational ideas were glowing among several senior government officials (Kajyu Norisugi, Unosuke Kawamoto, etc) within the ministry of education under the thoughtful influence of‘New Education’ (Progressive Education) of USA. Those government officials criticized social education controlled under the nationalistic policy, and insisted that ‘Self-Learning’ ‘Educational Democracy’ and ‘Educational Autonomy’ should be established as the basic idea of social education. They also criticized the formal school system without free method of education, and proposed extension of compulsory education to be upgraded from 4 years to 6 years , the school committee to be governed by representatives of community-people, and establishment of libraryin community. Regrettably those liberal ideas about social education had disappeared before long under the nationalistic and militaristic policy. They had been unrealized until the democratic reform which happened only after the World War 2. Secondly, another study that I undertook is the analysis of social educational policy of GHQ/SCAP. CI&E. GHQ’s policy of social education was also one of occupational policies. It’s aim was Demilitarization and Democratization of Japan. In order to realize them, CI&E (represented by J.M Nelson,etc)recognizing social education so important , criticized super-military nationalism enforced by Confucianism and Shintouism, and valued positively liberal social education in the days of Taishou-Democracy. They encouraged for the Japanese government to establish ‘Kouminkan’ ( Citizen’s Public Hall ) and to enact ‘Shakaikyouikuhou’( the Law of Social Education ) based on freedom of education , right to social education and independence of social education from politics involved in the Constitution and the Fundamental Law of Education even though they were compelled by the occupational authority. Through the two above described studies I could find continuity of modern social education between social education in the period of Taisho Democracy and the one in the days soon after the World War 2.