Cultural Influences on the Construction of Knowledge in Japanese Higher Education

This article was downloaded by: [University of Birmingham]On: 05 October 2014, At: 09:16Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Comparative EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cced20

Cultural Influences on theConstruction of Knowledge inJapanese Higher EducationKen Kempner & Misao MakinoPublished online: 02 Aug 2006.

To cite this article: Ken Kempner & Misao Makino (1993) Cultural Influences on theConstruction of Knowledge in Japanese Higher Education, Comparative Education, 29:2,185-199, DOI: 10.1080/0305006930290206

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305006930290206

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information(the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warrantieswhatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions andviews of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. Theaccuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independentlyverified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liablefor any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly inconnection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expresslyforbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cced20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/0305006930290206

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305006930290206

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Comparative Education Volume 29 No. 2 1993 185

Cultural Influences on theConstruction of Knowledge inJapanese Higher EducationKEN KEMPNER & MISAO MAKINO

Introduction

Japan's economic influence is pervasive throughout the world, yet its role as an academic,political, and diplomatic leader is more problematic. Many individuals concerned aboutJapan's future role as a world leader focus initially on the problems with its educationalsystem. As Fukunaga (1992) explains:

[T]he collapse of education, for example, serves as eloquent proof that society hasrun aground. Japanese education was designed to produce good kigyo senshi, orcorporate soldiers for Japan, Inc. This made sense only when the nation wasrelatively poor and struggling to rebuild. Not anymore. School children today aresick of outdated educational policies, and many either drop out or becomedelinquent. Ironically, Japan may be unable to produce even good corporatesoldiers, (p. 5)

Higher education, in particular, is often singled out as an impediment to Japan's futuredevelopment (Amano, 1986). Competition for entry into elite institutions of higher educa-tion has caused Japan's elementary and secondary system to be structured around achievingsuccess on college entrance examinations. Meanwhile, however, the deficiencies of the highereducation system itself have largely been ignored (see Amano, 1986; OERI Japan Studyteam, 1987).

Foremost in understanding higher education in Japan is the significance education haswithin the larger social and political infrastructure of the country. Because the entranceexamination provides a sorting function, the actual educational process of higher education isalmost secondary. As Reischauer (1986, p. xviii) observed: "the squandering of four years atthe college level on poor teaching and very little study seems an incredible waste of time fora nation so passionately devoted to efficiency".

The focus for higher education in Japan is more upon the certification of individualsmost able to run the instruments of the state and industry. The former imperial universities(now the National) have traditionally been the training school for government elites. Atthese institutions teaching future bureaucrats has been the major focus. Increasing economicpressure on the Japanese economy from world markets has caused Japan's leaders to reassessthe role and function of higher education and research at the national levels. Faced with theburst of the bubble economy, federal bureaucrats are cutting the budgets of the nationaluniversities owing to increasing criticism of the failure of universities to contribute tonational development. The higher education system is criticised for its lack of creativity,parochialism, rigour and for its low quality of instruction. However true this criticism may

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4

186 K. Kempner & M. Makino

be, Kitamura (1991, p. 315) explains that little systematic evaluation has been conducted ofthe higher education system "in terms of its quality of its efficiency".

How quality and efficiency issues are denned in Japanese higher education provides theimpetus for our inquiry. Because Japanese higher education resides within the largerJapanese culture, it is a product both of its own culture and its membership in theinternational knowledge networks, dominated by the other industrialised countries (seeAltbach et al., 1989; Altbach, 1993). The science and knowledge that institutions of highereducation produce are human activities that reside within national and international culturesthat guide scientists' ways of thinking and the language they use to interpret their findings.How this larger cultural context defines what is efficient, what is quality, what is knowledgeand how it is produced are the basic questions guiding our study. Specifically, in this studywe consider the effect cultural issues have on what is accepted as knowledge in Japaneseuniversities and the influence this larger culture has on scientific communities' ways ofthinking and producing knowledge. First, we discuss the larger conceptual issues regardinghow knowledge is constructed and the role culture plays in defining this construction.Secondly, we address the method we used to gather and interpret the information collected.Thirdly, we present our findings and, finally, we conclude by discussing the cultural,political-historical and economic issues that affect the construction of knowledge in Japaneseuniversities.

Constructing Knowledge

What scientists and the societies in which they live accept as knowledge depends not onlyupon how knowledge is produced, but also upon the social and cultural context in which thisknowledge is constructed. Language, for example, provides scientists the method of expres-sion to interpret and present their findings. The theories they derive from their observationsof the physical and social world are human interpretations of phenomena, not objectivereality. It is the context or larger culture in which scientists operate that defines how theyunderstand the world and what is accepted as appropriate behaviour and knowledge. Kuhn(1970) uses the example of the Copernican revolution to explain how the larger societydefines what is considered appropriate knowledge. What makes Copernicus so notable wasthat he interpreted a physical reality that was contrary to the dictates of his culture, i.e. theearth was not the centre of the universe. According to Geertz (1973, p. 5), we can think ofthe larger culture within which individuals operate as "webs of significance humans spinabout themselves". These webs of significance define how we understand social, political andeven scientific reality. The ways in which scientists, in particular, develop their theories andinterpret their findings is termed by Kuhn (1970, p. 182) a "disciplinary matrix". Thismatrix defines what is accepted as appropriate knowledge, language, and behaviour for acommunity of scientists. The matrix is the cultural 'web' scientists spin about themselves.Because scientists are also members of larger social and political cultures they are neverquite free from the influences and perspectives of the larger social and political cultureswithin which they find themselves. For this reason Keller (1985, p. 7) reminds us: "The lawsof nature are more than simple expressions of objective reality". These laws are manifesta-tions of how scientists interpret their findings in their own language and cultural terms.

What is accepted as scientific knowledge is defined not only by cultural issues, but byhow knowledge fits within the international knowledge networks (Altbach et al., 1989). Ourstudy here of research in Japanese universities attempts to understand how the constructionof knowledge is affected both by the Japanese culture and by the external, scientific cultureof Western countries. Foremost in understanding how the Japanese culture affects the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4

Cultural Influences on Japanese Higher Education 187

production of knowledge is the place institutions of higher education have within the largersocial, political and educational infrastructure of the country. For example, high schoolstudents' attendance at jukus (cram schools) in order to pass university entrance exams is awell-known feature of Japanese culture. Reischauer (1988, p. 195) explained, however, thathigher education in Japan "probably fills less of a role in society than the pressures overentrance examinations would suggest". The most difficult aspect of higher education forstudents is, simply, getting in. Because the entrance examination provides a sorting function,the actual educational process of higher education is almost secondary. Similarly, asReischauer (1988, p. 195) noted: "The role of the university in research activities, once veryimportant, is also shrinking in comparison with research conducted directly by business orgovernment". Herein lies the focus of our study: What role does research play in theJapanese university and how is this role affected by the larger Japanese culture?

Methodology

To understand the influence of culture on the production of research in higher education werelied on published and unpublished literature and documents (in Japanese and English), asurvey of National University professors by the Committee for the Financial Base ofNational Universities, and interviews we conducted with faculty members, administrators,students and parents. We interviewed faculty members and administrators from the Univer-sity of Tokyo and Waseda University, students from these universities and from KeioUniversity, and parents whose children are at several different institutions (approximately35 people in total).

The intent of our study is 'revelatory' (Yin, 1989, p. 49), in that we sought to illustratethe manner in which cultural issues influence the work that Japanese scholars do. The lenswe use to interpret the data we reviewed and gathered is a cultural one. Such a frame enablesus to consider the nature of social reality in ways traditional, and rationalistic approaches donot (see Fay, 1987). Rather than accepting social data as truths waiting to be collected, wepresume social information is always interpretive. Furthermore, this interpretive process isinfluenced by the culture within which the individual gathering the data resides. Similarly,by assuming this perspective in our investigation, we propose the effects of culture arecentral to understanding what knowledge is valued and what research is 'appropriate' inJapanese universities.

In our study we sought theoretical categories that would help to explain how research isdefined, produced and disseminated. Rather than presuming pre-ordinate explanations bytesting hypotheses, we sought explanations and interpretations to understand how scientists'disciplinary matrices mix and conflict with the larger social culture of Japan and the West.Similar to Wolcott's (1990) argument, in this study we are not trying to 'convince' anyone ofthe certainty of our findings, but rather to reveal and seek to understand the influence ofculture on the construction of knowledge.

We also are guided in our study by the four strategies for qualitative analysis proposedby Goetz & LeCompte (1981). We employ inductive logic rather than deductive logic, weseek propositions and contracts from the data rather than verification, we seek to generatepropositions in a constructive process rather than an enumerative one and we follow asubjective process of interpretation rather than an objective one. As Goetz & LeCompte(1981, p. 54) explain: "the goal is to reconstruct the categories used by subjects toconceptualize their own experiences and world view".

In our attempt to present this 'world view', we divide our findings into three majorsections. First, we address the function of higher education in Japan by considering findings

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4


from the literature and from our interviews and discussions with faculty, students, adminis-trators and parents. Secondly, we review the nature of the Japanese higher education systemand, thirdly, we address the role of research in Japanese higher education by presentingadditional findings from our interviews and a report of National University professors ontheir research activities.

The Function of Higher Education in Japanese Society

Foremost in understanding higher education in Japan is recognising the significance educa-tion has within the larger social and political infrastructure of the country. Thomas &Postlethwaite (1983, p. 57) address this issue by quoting from the Japanese FundamentalEducation Law of 1947:

Education shall aim at the full development of personality, at rearing a people, sound inmind and body, who love truth and justice, esteem individual values, respect labor, havea deep sense of responsibility, and are imbued with an independent spirit as builders ofa peaceful state and society.

How best to produce such "builders of a peaceful" state would appear to be at the coreof Japanese social, economic and educational policy. The ruling structure of Japanese societyresponsible for developing and implementing such policy is best illustrated by a triangle withstatesmen at one corner, businessmen at another and bureaucrats, at the third corner.Comparatively, the bureaucrats and businessmen (and it is almost exclusively men) hold thebalance of control. Members of these two groups often attended the same schools anduniversities and have been grooming for these positions since childhood. As one professorexplained to us, higher education is central in this attainment process, because, other than'marrying up', it offers the only other 'chance' for social mobility. He explained further thatas opposed to the United States, where individuals can also advance themselves by beingentrepreneurs, "Japan society is more closed. Japanese are not so adventuresome asAmericans, they have to get into the union". The union being, of course, elite highereducation institutions. For example, graduates of the University of Tokyo comprise asignificant number of the highest-level bureaucrats, while many top business leaders aregraduates of the elite private universities, such as Waseda and Keio.

The 'bureaucratic focus' of the national universities, according to one professor, issimply to "raise very able bureaucrats for governing the country". The former imperialuniversities (now the national) were the traditional "training school for government elites".Teaching at these institutions was and is the focus because, as this professor explained,"teaching is important to raise bureaucrats". He explained further that the purpose of thenational universities is, therefore, to provide "people useful for running Japan Inc.".

Because education provides the 'source of national power', as one professor explained, itis of such national importance that public higher education is heavily affected by the rolebureaucrats in the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (Monbusho) play. With theincreasing economic pressure on the Japanese economy from world markets, bureaucrats arebusily reassessing the role of public higher education in the national infrastructure. Federalbureaucrats are presently cutting the budgets of the national universities because they do notsee the universities as 'efficient'. As one professor explained, the government has "lostpatience" with the universities and is more and more inclined for efficiently organisededucation". In general, the Japanese government is "increasingly embarrassed that Japaneseuniversities are not contributing to the country's power . . . they see them as not contributingto national goals".

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4


For many professors, the functionalist view of education by the federal bureaucrats isdisturbing, especially in times of shrinking budgets. Whereas the national system of highereducation was designed to recruit students of the highest ability from all over Japan, thismeritocratic ideal is impeded because of urbanisation and testing. Because Tokyo is socentral to Japanese society, the most successful individuals are educated and employed there.As a professor said, you must go to Tokyo to be 'really educated'. To gain admittance to thebest Tokyo public and private universities students must have the best preparatory schoolingpossible. Students from cities outside of Tokyo are at a disadvantage because of location.Any student enrolled in an inferior preparatory school is unlikely to pass the entranceexamination to an elite university. Because only the wealthiest students can afford the bestschools, these students are those most likely to get into the best universities. Even amongthose less wealthy students who do pass the entrance examinations, many have greatdifficulty affording life in Tokyo, since there is virtually no financial assistance for them.

This dual bind of urbanisation and 'testing hell' mediates the meritocratic ideals of thefederal educational system. Furthermore, the emphasis on testing compromises the underly-ing goals of Japanese education. By teaching to the test, preparatory schools and jukus treatknowledge as a commodity to be bargained for employment (see Wexler, 1987, p. 71).Within this system, knowledge is a utilitarian commodity or package constructed for thepurpose of passing entrance examinations not for the "full development of personality"(Thomas & Postlethwaite, 1983, p. 57). "Indeed", as one professor observed, the system is"not accomplishing" its educational purpose. This professor explained that testing "is likethe nuclear arms race. We need disarmament".

While Japan's modern educational development continues to assure the traditional highesteem of the educated person, what constitutes education is being compromised by theconstruction of pre-packaged knowledge for the purpose of passing examinations. Thecompetition for having this package of definable knowledge continues to escalate, asevidenced by the number and prominence of jukus that high school students attend to passthe university entrance examinations. Jukus have become such an indispensable part of astudent's college preparation that those who can afford it attend. The most successful jukus(measured by the number who pass the elite universities' exams) have become so profitablethat they are able to hire the best teachers, and use the newest technology to evaluate andmonitor their teachers' performance. Teachers who do not turn out successful students arequickly replaced. Jukus, and the form of specific, packaged education they provide are soessential to Japanese preparatory education that some politicians propose ending publicsupport of education at the elementary and secondary levels, allowing the juku-typeeducation to replace public schools. Privatisation of schools would create a system for thesole purpose of passing college entrance examinations. According to several professors weinterviewed, however, more and more parents are choosing not to send their children tojukus and abandoning the idea of entry into the elite universities. Because the odds are so lowfor a student to gain admittance to the University of Tokyo, for example, some parents areseeking alternatives for their children, such as high quality private institutions that do notrequire entrance examinations or universities in other countries, notably the US.

The Higher Education System

As noted, the most difficult aspect of higher education for students is gaining admittance totheir college of choice. Once accepted, however, students are freed from the rote learningthey underwent in the secondary schools and jukus. The entrance examination provides a

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4


sorting function that is of such importance that the academic process of higher education isof secondary concern for many institutions (Amano, 1986).

National and local public universities and colleges account for 28% of the totalinstitutions of higher education in Japan (US Department of Education, 1985). In 1990, thetotal enrolment in all public universities and colleges was 685,675 with 100,898 full-timefaculty for a student teacher ratio of 7 to 1. In comparison, 2,017,230 students enrolled inprivate institutions with 97,635 full-time teachers for a student ratio of 21 to 1. Education atthe exceptional public universities, such as the University of Tokyo and Kyoto University,and at the top private universities, such as Waseda and Keio, is of the highest quality.Classes at these institutions are generally smaller and the professors are limited to theamount of outside teaching they can do. For most students, even in the high prestigeuniversities, the goal is to gain the highest possible position in the workplace, not toparticipate in research or the production of knowledge for the social good. In fact, theorientation toward gaining a good position in business among Japanese students is sopervasive that little evaluation or consideration of the academic role of higher education hasbeen conducted (Kitmaura, 1991).

In contrast to the public universities are the overwhelming majority of privateinstitutions. The governance and funding structure of these private institutions is somewhatunique to Japan. Control of private institutions is often exercised through a president by aBoard of Directors, who often own the university. The Board chair, who has the mostdiscretion in allocating resources, is often not an educator and lacks academic credentials.Although the Board may select an educator to be president, more often presidents are chosenon the basis of their family ties, their loyalty to the institution or their ability to raise money.Although private universities are self-supporting, educational reforms in Japan have allo-cated an increasing amount of public funds to these institutions (Schoppa, 1991).

Among the many private Japanese universities, control by a single family or person iscommon. The criteria for hiring faculty in such institutions does not rest solely on academicmerit or considerations. For example, a typical procedure at many private institutions is toincrease their status by filling faculty positions with retired professors of public universities.Many of these faculty members have already completed the years of their most activeteaching, research and writing at their primary institutions. The least active among theseretired faculty help contribute to an educational culture where students do little workcompared to their peers in Western institutions.

Whereas institutions of higher education may presume to serve an altruistic publicservice, many private institutions merely increase the status, prestige, power or profit of aparticular family. Even though these institutions may be dedicated to academic excellence,they do so in terms of Japanese social values, not in terms of institutional academic practicescommon in the West. The motives for private ownership are often simply for the accrual ofpersonal benefits to a small family or group of owners and not for the production ofknowledge or cultural enrichment.

The conflict between private interests and public service is particularly problematic forthe older generation of private university leaders and owners in Japan. This conflict createsan academic climate for the production of knowledge and research in Japanese universitiesmuch different from those in the West. Considering the US, in particular, Baldridge (1971,pp. 9-11) identifies two characteristics of US universities that differentiate them fromJapanese higher education institutions: (1) 'competence' as the criterion for appointment and(2) the exclusivity of the career—'no other work is done'. In Japan, although hiring andpromotion require publications and research, loyalty and deference are important criteria inuniversity success. Although university professors in the United States may hold other jobs,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4


the criterion for exclusivity is much stricter, both formally and informally, than in Japaneseuniversities, where some professors may teach at several institutions at once.

These differences between the US and the Japanese professorates have importantconsequences for the relationships between faculty and students and between the faculty andthe university. Many Japanese professors teach as many as 500 students in five lectureclasses that meet 2 days a week. Some of these professors will then teach another 200students at a different institution. Often, mid-term and final exams are not returned tostudents after grading and students receive grade reports only at the end of the year-longterm. Obviously, the quality of interaction and communication between students andprofessors is impeded by this situation. Faculty members' ability to conduct research isgreatly compromised by multiple teaching positions and by personnel evaluation based oncompetence defined in social rather than academic terms.

Research in Higher Education

The history of the development of modern research in Japan began at the turn of the centurywith a pivotal event being the establishment of the Rikagaku Kenkyujo (Institute for Physicsand Chemistry) in 1917. This institute was founded by Nakamura Seiji, a professor atTokyo Imperial University and Takamine Jokichi, the discoverer of adrenalin in 1900.Riken, as the institute is known, "has done more to advance creative research than any othersingle organisation in modern Japanese history" (Nagai, 1971, p. 69). Under the eventualdirection of Okochi Masatoshi and the appointment of the renown physicist Nishina Yoshio,as section chief in 1928, Riken was at the forefront of physics research in modern Japan.Unfortunately, the contributions of Riken and its stature in research has largely beenoverlooked in the development of Japanese higher education.

Although Riken offers an excellent example of the capacity of Japan's research in highereducation, many existing universities and colleges have no research facilities, centres, orinstitutes. A recent survey by the Ministry of Education Science and Culture (Monbusho,1990) indicates that of the total research institutes in Japan, 14,761 are owned and operatedby private businesses or corporations, 1396 research institutes are free-standing withoutcompany or university affiliations, and 2146 are associated with universities and colleges.This information reflects the long-range trend in post-war development that research is notprimarily done in universities, which focus instead on the sorting and selecting of the newgeneration of Japanese elites.

Because higher education serves predominantly a selection process, faculty researchinherently conflicts with this traditional goal. As one professor observed: there is a"permanent friction between the teaching function and research function". He explainedfurther that the view of the bureaucrats is that "Japan should be armed with efficienteducation—forget the search for truth". For this reason Government bureaucrats questionthose aspects of higher education that do not directly and substantially contribute to thenational goals of Japan, as defined in economic terms. Accordingly, as this professorexplained, the federal bureaucrats are asking: "Is funding for social science necessary forJapan? What good has it been? . . . There is no pressing need to continue to support theseprofessors".

Faculty do receive support for research, but it is by no means a uniform distribution offunding. Research money comes from three major sources: automatic funds from Monbusho,grants from private companies and grants directly from federal agencies. Monbushodistributes funds to universities on a formula based on number of faculty, number ofstudents, and a fixed amount dependent on the national importance and prestige of the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4


institution. In general, faculty do not find this 'automatic' amount sufficient to support theirresearch and related activities. As one faculty member explained: Monbusho "is interestedmore and more in the American system. Monbusho's idea is to make them [the faculty] moredependent on private companies for grants". Preference in national support, as in the US, isfor research in high technology areas that yield immediate economic pay-offs (see Slaughter,1990). Because of the limited nature of Monbusho's funding and the priorities on hightechnology research, many faculty seek funds from outside sources. Grants from privatecompanies are awarded to professors, but even these grants must be approved by the fulldepartmental faculty. As one professor explained, social science faculty are especiallyresistant to outside money. A variety of federal agencies do offer grant awards directly tofaculty, but as the overall federal budget declines so do opportunities for such grants.

To understand better the present state of research in Japanese universities we presentthe findings from a recent study conducted by the Survey and Study Committee for theFinancial Base of National Universities (1991). Questionnaires were mailed to every level ofuniversity professor, lecturer and research associate. A total of 34,325 completed question-naires were returned (a response rate of 65%). Not surprisingly, the faculties of science,engineering and agriculture had the highest response rate, "reflecting their grave concern andinterest in E&R [education and research] funding problems" (Survey and Study Committee,1991, p. 1).

Overall, the faculty surveyed were quite positive about the contribution of the nationaluniversities to the public good (see Fig. 1). Over 90% of the faculty believed the nationaluniversities contribute 'greatly' to the advancement of academic research. This confidence ismediated by concerns over the current situation for funding of the research environment, aspresented in Fig. 2. As Fig. 2 indicates, a high percentage of the faculty believe theirresearch equipment (60%), buildings (42%) and salary (88%) are currently worse than thosein private institutes and universities. Perhaps, even more significant is the concern of facultyover the deterioration of their research environment in the next 10 years. While 65% of thefaculty believe the national universities are currently superior to private universities, in 10years 30% fear the private universities will be superior in research (Survey and StudyCommittee, 1991, p. 8). Faculty also expressed concern over how the deteriorating financialsituation affects the recruitment of quality researchers, students and the promotion ofacademic exchanges.

When asked to compare the current level of departmental expenses to actual needs, allfaculty found great discrepancies. Most faculty believed their departments were funded atless than 50% of actual need, with faculty in the Health Sciences facing the worst situation(see Fig. 3). Faculty in all areas felt increases in the budgets for salary and travel were mostimportant, followed by increases in allocation for equipment (see Fig. 4). The priority ofsalary increases over equipment did vary by academic area. For example, 85% of the Scienceand Humanities faculty expressed the greatest preference for reform in the allocation ofsalaries, with only 8% choosing increases in equipment as most important. In contrast, 50%of the Health Sciences faculty selected salaries as most important with 34% preferringincreases in budget allocations for equipment.

Because all faculty find support of research to be declining, many report having to buyprofessional books and equipment from their own personal funds. This trend of supplement-ing a university's expenses with personal funds has direct impact on the faculty's ability toparticipate in the larger, international knowledge networks. A substantial number of facultyresearchers in the Health Sciences (20%) and in the Science and Engineering (30%) fieldsreport spending between 300,000 and 500,000 yen ($2500-4000) per year to attendacademic conferences and to conduct research outside of Japan.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4


Equal opportunity

Economy and culture

International students

Education of researchers

Personnel education

Academic research

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

Source: Survey and Study Committee for the FinancialBase of National Universities, 1991.

FIG. 1 Roles played by National Universities in Japan.

Private University - ,

Salary

Buildings

Equipment

Private Co./lnstitute

Salary

Buildings

Equipment

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0%

Source: National Universities Survey, 1991.

100.0%

FIG. 2 Present research environment in Japan.

Inadequacy of research funds from the 'Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research' (GASR)programme through Monbusho is a critical concern for the faculty. Because GASR is theprimary source of research funding for faculty in the national universities, the programme iscriticised as being inadequate. Even though the national universities are among the mostprestigious in Japan, only 53% of the faculty report having received a GASR only once in 5years, with 33% of the faculty never having received a grant. This finding is even worse for

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4


Health sciences

Science, Engineering& Architecture

Education

Social sciences/humanities

General educationFresh/Soph

0 Actual need

Status quo

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00

Note: Scale is in Million Yen, a weighted calculation of funding per student FTE.Source: National Universities, 1991, Japan.

FIG. 3 University expenditures.

Note: Percentage is proportion of Faculty preference for budget reform.Source: National Universities Survey, 1991, Japan.

FIG. 4 Priority of faculty budget needs.

the national universities in smaller cities where 40% of the faculty have never received agrant.

Whereas GASR funds, theoretically, are given to enable and foster new research,faculty report needing GASR money to support expenses for research that are not coveredby grants apportioned by the unversities. Although the GASR is a significant source forresearch funding outside of the university, it alone is 'far from satisfactory' to fill the needfor Educational and Research funds at the individual university level (Survey and Study

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4


Committee, 1991, p. 6). Approximately 70% of the faculty, therefore, support furtherexpansion of GASR support along with similar increases in funding from municipalgovernments and private foundations. Fewer faculty (approximately 50%) favour theacceptability of research funds from private companies, however.

Because advanced measurement and analytic instruments are such a vital part of hightechnology research, faculty members express, as well, grave concern over the adequacy oftheir equipment. Approximately 80% of the faculty rate their current equipment asinadequate or very inadequate and 85% express the need for new equipment.

On how to renew national universities, the majority of faculty selected 'openness' and apolicy of 'publicity', particularly regarding achievements in academics and research from thechoices presented in the questionnaire (see Fig. 5). A large number of faculty also favouredinstructional innovations, such as student ratings and self-assessment, but an equally largenumber are neutral on such ideas. Similarly, faculty were diverse in their opinions regardingthird-party evaluation or accreditation.

Discussion

Carnoy & Samoff (1990, p. 8) suggest that the key to understanding the role of education inmodern societies lies in the development of "a coherent theory of the relations among theeconomy, ideology, and political system (the state) and, in turn, a theory of the relationshipbetween the state and the educational system". Our purpose in this study is not so ambitiousas to develop a completed, coherent theory. Rather, our intent is to illustrate the effectcultural issues have on what is accepted as knowledge in Japanese universities and theinfluence culture has on scientific communities' ways of thinking and producing knowledge.We believe the actions of three inter-related cultural groups are central to understanding thisconstruction process in Japan: the state, corporate or business interests and scientiststhemselves.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4


The State

Because Japan's government, business and education is so centralised, the federal andprefecture 'state' apparatus in Tokyo exerts tight control over the modern cultural websspun in Japan. The worry expressed by professors over the state's irritation with theirinefficiency and inability to contribute to national development is indicative of the state'sinterests in protecting its bureaucrats through educational and economic policy. Becausehigher education serves predominantly a selection process, there is little incentive for statebureaucrats to foster research that does not directly contribute to their functionalist notionsof the 'national goals'. There appears little interest among bureaucrats, therefore, in the'disarmament' of the culture of testing, since the present system does indeed offer theappearance of a meritocracy. Failure to succeed in the university examination is accepted asindividual misfortune, not a larger social one. That there are differences by gender and classdoes not seem problematic to the state (see Kitmura, 1991).

Within the educational and cultural webs the state spins and supports there is obviousconflict between the selection and research functions of higher education. Higher education'srole in supporting a democracy is not a major issue of concern, but how higher educationcontributes to national economic development is. We found the concept of educationalpolicy to be decidedly utilitarian among many of the educational administrators with whomwe talked. Some were openly confused by the concept of educational policy and others didnot understand the argument that knowledge is a social construction. Most administratorssimply accepted uncritically the form and function of Japanese higher education.

The Corporatist Culture I

The second influence we found critical to understanding research in higher education wasthat of the corporatist or business culture—'Japan Inc.' as many people refer to it. Thiscorporatist culture exerts a pervasive influence over the place of higher education inJapanese society. We found, as Slaughter (1990, p. 29) noted in the US: "Indeed, basicresearch in graduate universities is in the process of being redefined as entrepreneurialscience". Educational 'efficiency' is determined by its contribution directly to corporatewelfare. Unlike the US, however, the lines between public and private interests are not aswell denned in Japan. Nonetheless, the questions Slaughter (1990, p. 36) poses for highereducation in the US are equally problematic for Japan: "What kinds of social priorities orderresearch and whom do they benefit? What kinds of expertise are being provided to whichsectors of society? What is the social utility of teaching, research, and service?".

The Scientists

Finally, the scientists themselves and the disciplinary matrices within which they operate arecritical to understanding how knowledge is constructed in Japanese universities. As we havefound, the conflict among the social, economic and cultural interests in Japan creates aclimate that confines appropriate avenues of inquiry to utilitarian conceptions of knowledge.The structure of higher education itself greatly limits professors' ability in the pursuit ofknowledge in realms not deemed useful by state or corporatist interests. Scientists domediate somewhat the effects of state and corporatist interests by their membership in theinternational knowledge networks. As intellectuals, scientists also are free to exercise theirindividual volition of 'human agency' in choosing what they wish to study and write (Fay,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4


1987). Unfortunately, the pessimism in the national survey reported above does not augurwell for the evolution of an open system for scientific inquiry.

The ability of Japanese professors, especially in the social sciences, to produceknowledge, is severely restricted by the utilitarian conceptions of higher education. Asquoted above, one professor explained that state bureaucrats are questioning why fundingfor social science is even necessary for Japan. If higher education's function is simply as aselection device and its research is only to serve short-term corporatist interests, then socialscience may indeed be peripheral. If, however, higher education is to be central to the long-term continuation of a democratic society then construction of new forms of knowledgeshould be fostered. Utilitarian self-interests in higher education may actually be counter-productive to the long-term national interests of Japan. Ironically, social science researchmay be far more utilitarian than state bureaucrats realise, if Japan is to become both aneconomic and political world leader.

Conclusion

Our purpose, as stated above, is not to convince anyone of the correctness of our findings,but rather to illustrate how Japan's modern culture influences the construction of knowledgein its universities. We propose here that understanding the interactions among the state,corporatist interests, and the scientists reveals insights into how the larger culture influenceseducational policy and the knowledge that is produced in universities.

In seeking to understand the role of higher education in Japan we found the relationshipbetween the state and the educational system to be primarily a functional one. The statedefines the role of the university in terms of its level of efficiency in promoting economicdevelopment for Japan Inc. Effectiveness, therefore, is judged by the state in terms of theefficiency of the university in its contribution to 'national goals'. Because of the highlycentralised system in Japan, the state exerts tight control over what is considered appropriateknowledge production and who has access to the national universities. State control overhigher education is both supported and enabled by the corporatist or business community.

Because the state bureacracy functions in such close concordance with private businessinterests in Japan, policy concerns for education are highly dependent upon the 'efficiency'concerns for economic development. Higher education is judged on its ability to supportcorporatist interests, not on its ability to distribute expertise throughout all sectors of societyfor the public good. For example, in discussions with higher education administrators welearned presidents of many smaller private universities spend a considerable amount of timevisiting officials of major corporations to encourage them to hire the university's graduates.Because the prestige of universities is tied directly to which businesses hire their graduates,university presidents lobby corporate executives to hire their students in hopes of increasingthe university's status. New students are then attracted to the private universities whosegraduates are employed by the most prestigious corporations, which then increases thecompetition for entry into these universities.

Because higher education functions primarily as a filter to certify students for entry intocorporations or government, the actual education process of universities is secondary.Students are hired by corporations principally on the basis of which university they attended.Because, as noted, the most rigorous part of higher education is getting in—passing theentrance examination—academic performance while at the university is a subsidiary concern.Each university secures its place in the market through the examination process of students.The very best students are those who pass the examinations for the University of Tokyo,and so on down the status hierarchy of the national and private universities. High schools

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4


secure their places in the educational market by which universities their students attend andmiddle schools by which high schools their graduates attend. Even grade schools and nurseryschools have their place in this status hierarchy. We were told by one parent that her childwas denied admission to nursery school because she did not have the 'proper credentials'.Within this educational structure knowledge is a commodity only to improve one's chancesto gain entrance to the next level.

Even within this strict hierarchical system, we found many professors do mediate thefunctional nature of university education. Because many professors are linked to the larger,international knowledge networks, they do practice their science and are educating the nextgeneration of scientists. Although we consider the effect of state policy to be quite pervasivein the national universities, individual scientists, many of whom were educated in the West,continue to pursue avenues of research not supported or only marginally supported by thestate. The role scientists' individual volition or 'human agency' plays in the production ofknowledge is an important consideration along with the interactive effects of the largerculture and the scientists' disciplinary matrices. Certainly, the human agency of individualscientists is remarkably strong, especially among those scientists who are connected to theinternational knowledge networks through colleagues in other countries. Notably, manyJapanese social scientists are pursuing critical avenues of cultural and social inquiry withinternational colleagues. Our investigation here is an example of such collaborative researchthat bridges national cultures in the production and construction of knowledge.

Finally, our investigation demonstrates the necessity that scientists understand howtheir research supports and contests state and business interests. We encourage not only thescientists, but state bureaucrats and members of the business community, as well, tounderstand the role culture plays in influencing the knowledge scientists produce. Ulti-mately, to further both social and economic development for Japan these three culturalgroups should promote higher education policy that truly aims "at the full development ofpersonality" and helps create "builders of a peaceful state and society".

Acknowledgements

Funding for this research was provided by the Yamada Foundation. The authors also thankNozumo Matsubara for his assistance, without which this research could not have beenconducted. Initial findings from this study were presented at the AERA Annual Meeting,San Francisco, California, April 1992.

REFERENCES

ALTBACH, PHILIP G. (1993) International knowledge networks, in: B. CLARK & G. NEAVE (Eds) InternationalEncyclopedia of Higher Education (Oxford, Pergamon).

ALTBACH, PHILIP G. et al. (1989) Scientific Development and Higher Education: The Case of Newly IndustrializingNations (New York, Praeger).

AMANO, IKUO (1986) Educational crisis in Japan, in: W. K. CUMMINGS et al. (Ed.) Educational Policies in Crisis:Japanese and American Perspectives (New York, Praeger).

BALDRIDGE, J. VICTOR (1971) Power and Conflict in the University: Research in the Sociology of ComplexOrganizations (New York, John Wiley & Sons).

CARNOY, MARTIN & SAMOFF, JOEL (1990) Education and Social Transition in the Third World (Princeton, NJ,Princeton University Press).

FAY, BRIAN (1987) Critical Social Science (Ithaca, NY, Cornell).FUKUNAGA, HIROSHI (1992) Japan at a dead end, Tokyo Business Today, 60(9), p. 5.GEERTZ, CLIFFORD (1973) The Interpretation of Cultures (New York, Basic Books).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4


GOETZ, JUDITH P. & LECOMPTE, MARGARET D. (1981) Ethnographic research and the problem of data reduction,Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 12, pp. 51-70.

KELLER, EVELYN FOX (1985) Reflections on Gender and Science (New Heaven, Yale Press).KITAMURA, KAZUYUKI (1991) The future of Japanese higher education, in: E. BEAUCHAMP (Ed.) Windows on

Japanese Education (New York, Greenwood Press).KUHN, THOMAS (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd edn (Chicago, Uniersity of Chicago).MINISTRY OF EDUCATION, SCIENCE, AND CULTURE [MONBVSHO] (1990) Waga Kuni no Bunkyo Shisaku [White

Paper on Japan's Educational Policies] (Tokyo, Monbusho).NAGAI, MICHIO (1971) Higher Education in Japan: Its take-off and crash, Jerry Dusenbury (trans.) (Tokyo,

University of Tokyo).OERI JAPAN STUDY TEAM (1987) Japanese Education Today: A Report from the US Study of Education in Japan

(Washington, DC, US Department of Education).Reischauer, EDWIN O. (1986) Introduction, in: B. DUKE (Ed.) The Japanese School: Lessons for Industrial America

(New York, Praeger).REISCHAUER, Edwin O. (1988) The Japanese Today: Change and continuity (Tokyo, Tuttle).SCHOPPA, LEONARD JAMES (1991) Education Reform in Japan: a case of immobilist politics (New York, Routledge).SLAUGHTER, SHEILA (1990) The Higher Learning and High Technology: dynamics of higher education policy

formation (Albany, SUNY Press).SURVEY AND STUDY COMMITTEE FOR THE FINANCIAL BASE OF NATIONAL UNIVERSITIES (March 1991) Interim status

report: national university scholars now face the fund problem of Education and research, Unpublisheddocument (Tokyo, University of Tokyo).

THOMAS, R. MURRAY & POSTLEWATTE, T. NEVILLE (1983) Schooling in East Asia: forces of change (New York,Pergamon Press).

US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (1985) Japanese Education Today (Washington, DC, US Government PrintingOffice).

WEXLER, PHILIP (1987) Social Analysis of Education: after the new sociology of education (New York, Routledge,Kegan Paul).

Wolco t t , HARRY (1990) On seeking -- and rejecting -- validity in qualitative research, in: E. EISNER & A. PESHKIN(Eds) Qualitative Inquiry in Education: the continuing debate (New York, Teachers College).

YIN, ROBERT K. (1989) Case Study Research: design and methods, revised edn (Newbury Park, California, Sage).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 0

9:16

05

Oct

ober

201

4

Documents

Cultural Influences on the Construction of Knowledge in Japanese Higher Education