Ruriko Okada

Multicultural Education in Japan:
What Can Japan Learn from Multicultural Australia?

Introduction

Nowadays people in the world have opportunities to communicate, interact and cooperate with each other from everyday life to the political field. To survive and to be competitive in this shrunken world, it is necessary for Japanese to attain a high level of internationalization. Education can play an important role in accomplishing this goal. In 2002 in Japan, an educational reform was put into operation to raise more internationally-minded people from an early stage of life. However, ‘international education’ in Japan seems to be directly connected to ‘English education’. In this paper, I would like to stress that not only language education but also cultural education is and will be necessary to truly attain the internationalization of Japan. In order to discuss this matter, I would like to compare the educational system in Japan with that in Australia. Since Australia has introduced multiculturalism as a national policy, I would like to discover what Japan can learn from multicultural Australia.

The Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous
Affairs in Australia defines ‘multiculturalism’ as ‘the philosophy that recognizes, accepts, respects, and celebrates . . . cultural diversity’. Accordingly, the definition of ‘multicultural education’ in this paper is the education which helps students develop abilities to recognize, accept, respect and celebrate cultural diversity.

In order better to discuss multicultural education in Japan, I sent questionnaires to all the public primary schools in the Australian National Territory (ACT). I selected elementary education because people usually become aware of differences with others during this period of life, and education towards children in this age band is important to form ideas of others. In this paper I shall firstly provide general information on Australian educational systems, which is indispensable to understand the following discussion; secondly I shall describe data obtained from questionnaires; and lastly I shall analyze the data and make suggestions for the future educational systems in Japan.

General Information

This section of the paper introduces the characteristics of the educational systems of both countries, as stated in government curriculum guidelines. It takes six years to finish primary school in both Australia and Japan. In Japan, a teaching method in public schools is almost uniformly based on Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) guidelines; these are coordinated to ensure a minimum of differences between classes, schools, and regions in Japan. On the other hand, in Australia, compulsory education is under control of the state/territory government, and therefore what students learn varies in each state/territory. Moreover, individual schools are encouraged to develop curriculum materials which best meet the needs of students, schools, and local communities. One thing each state/territory states in common, among other things, is to place emphasis on understanding gender and racial equality, and the cultures of Aboriginal people and migrants (Hardgrave), which will have to be taken into more consideration in Japan.

Data

In order to grasp the situation of multicultural education in Australia, I focused on primary education in the ACT. As stated earlier, school curricula in Australia are different in each state/territory due to the Australian federal system. I chose the ACT because it is the only territory whose curriculum guideline corresponds to the government curriculum guideline, and therefore, understanding education in the ACT is to understand the attitude of the Australian government towards education.

There are 68 public primary schools in the ACT. I sent e-mails to all the schools except four primary schools whose e-mail addresses were not available, and a school which exclusively accepts French-speaking students. Therefore, 63 schools were the targets of my research. I asked four questions as follows:

1. Would you let me know the approximate percentage of your students’ ethnic background?

2. What is the approximate percentage of non-native speakers of English?

3. What do you do as multicultural education?

4. Which is regarded as positive, to be different from others, or to be harmonious with others?

The result was that of 63 schools, 27 replied.

The purpose of the first question was to discover how diverse elementary school students in Australia are. The answers are divided into three categories: answers with an approximate percentage; answers with the lists of students’ and their parents’ origins, and unknown or no answer. On average, about twenty to thirty percent of the students in the ACT have their origins in countries other than Australia; the percentage ranges from ten to fifty under the ambiguous definition of ‘ethnic background’ interpreted by each school. Some schools define ‘students from an ethnic background’ as those students who were born outside Australia, or who have parents born overseas; others define the same word as concerning children who come from an ethnic background other than Anglo-Australian. This is an example of the answers with the lists of students’ birthplace:

[w]e have children born in Algeria (2), England (3), Fiji (3), Hong Kong (1), Japan (1), Philippines (1), Russia (1), Syria (1), Thailand (1), Tonga (4), Ukraine (1), USA (1), Venezuela (1) and Vietnam (3). 258 children were born in Australia. In addition we have 12 indigenous students (I. Gillbert, personal communication, November 3, 2003).

This school gave data in which indigenous children are counted separately from children born in Australia. Thus there are many ways to define ‘ethnic background’ in present Australia. It is probably because of the consequence of mixed marriage, and the existence of second- or third-generation immigrants over the last three decades after the introduction of an official policy of multiculturalism. That might be a part of the reason that none of the school websites show the statistical data on the students’ ethnic background, and that the answers to the question were inconsistent. Though the percentage of the students from an ‘ethnic background’ is still unclear, the purpose of this question was accomplished in that I could vaguely grasp the diversity of students in the ACT.

Next, the aim of the second question was to identify whether language ability can be an obstacle for children to interact with each other. The answers to this question were also divided into three parts: one is the percentage or the number of children who speak a language other than English at home; another is the percentage or the number of students who need extra help with English at school; and the third is no answer. The percentage or the number of students in the first category is almost equivalent to the percentage or the number of children who were born or whose parents were born overseas. Among these, some students need the extra help in English as a Second Language (ESL) classes. Their percentage is much lower than the percentage of ‘ethnic background’. It is five to six percent, or expressed as ‘a small group/percentage’. Jo Adams says ‘[t]hese children all speak English — some came here with very little English but have since developed English skills with extra teacher assistance (personal communication, November 6, 2003). In addition to ESL classes in each school, most schools have ‘an Introductory English Centre where children study English when they are new to Australia’ (C. Pilgrim, personal communication, November 4, 2003). This result demonstrates that fundamental language ability is a required part of school life.

There are a range of answers to the third question, concerning multicultural education. All the schools except two answered this question. One of the answers which appeared frequently was to have an Access Asia program, Multicultural Day, Harmony Day, and so on, ‘to celebrate the diversity of . . . the school population’ (J. Vella, personal communication, November 4, 2003). Another comment from a number of schools was that ‘multicultural education is . . . taught in conjunction with other key learning areas (such as Math, English, Science, etc.)’ (R. Mccioni, personal communication, October 30, 2003). In addition, some noteworthy comments represent Australian attitudes towards multicultural education, as follows: ‘[w]e "live" a multicultural community style . . . rather than saying we do’ (P. Southwell, personal communication, October 30, 2003); ‘[w]e promote the self-worth of students by acknowledging and appreciating all students’ cultural backgrounds and experiences’ (J. Vella, personal communication, November 4, 2003); and ‘[w]e have many programs of study with a multicultural flavor as well as programs that promote respect, acceptance, support, cooperation and friendship — we call these our SCARF principles’ (J. Day, personal communication, October 30, 2003). In the answers to this question, words such as ‘tolerance’, ‘valuing difference’, and ‘celebrating diversity’ appeared often. Australians take pride in diversity of school members, which is represented in Hans van Haalen’s comment below:

[w]e see that as a very positive aspect of our school, that we have so many representatives of other cultures. . . . We have some indigenous aboriginal students, as well as some hearing impaired students (personal communication, October 30, 2003).

This attitude of accepting difference and celebrating diversity is something that Japanese education has been lacking in, since Japanese education is more likely to standardize students. In order to grasp how Australian educators treat each student, I asked the last question about the preference for harmony or difference.

Twenty-one schools answered this question. Even though the question itself was simple, all the schools gave an answer with extra comments or explanation. In order to summarize the answers, I categorize the words ‘individuality’, ‘to be themselves’, and ‘independent learners’ to ‘difference’; and ‘live together’, ‘similarities’, ‘work cooperatively’ and ‘respectful relationships’ to ‘harmony’. The result was that eight schools answered that both were good, and the same number answered that they taught difference. Only one school replied ‘it is regarded good to be in harmony with other children’ (C. Pilgrim, personal communication, November 4, 2003). This result shows that generally, both harmony and difference are regarded as good rather than one or the other. If anything, according to the responses, difference or individuality is considered more important.

Analysis

In this section of the paper, I would like to analyze the data and make a judgment about multicultural education in Japan. As has been proved in the first question, primary schools in the ACT consist of students from a variety of backgrounds; that is, color of skin and hair, religion, and many other cultural factors are different in accordance with each student’s background. Some students wear earrings and rings in accordance with their own customs. So, the first significant difference between the educational scene in the two countries is a visual difference. Australian children are exposed to a variety of outward appearances from an early age, while Japanese children are disciplined to follow a strict school regulation in terms of appearance. Two of my Australian friends who studied in Japan in their high school days seem to have had their hair dyed black because they felt uncomfortable being stared at by Japanese who were not familiar with people with different backgrounds. Such an attitude to exclude or to make people from overseas feel uncomfortable is something to be changed, and to be able to change through education.

The second significant difference is the notion of language education. In multicultural Australia, the common language is English. John Stone pointed out that

[o]ur future immigration policy should have nothing to do with immigrants’ skin color or ethnicity. It should have everything to do with whether those concerned are capable of assimilating into Australia’s basically Judeo-Christian culture (p. 11).

That is, everyone is expected to speak English no matter where people are from. In primary schools in the ACT, Language Other Than English (LOTE) courses are compulsory, but the significant purpose of this course is to develop cross-cultural understanding rather than to master the language. In applying this idea to Japanese multicultural education, first of all, teachers should let the students know that they do not necessarily have to speak a language other than Japanese when they communicate with foreign people. Most of the time, xenophobia among Japanese comes from a phobia about English. Therefore, the first step towards multicultural education is to eliminate a sense of fear towards foreign people and to arouse children’s interest in other cultures by letting them know that everyone can communicate with foreigners without English ability. On the side of foreigners, of course, the attitude of adapting to Japanese culture and society is important.

In my judgment, multicultural education is all about respecting individuals. This includes accepting and valuing differences, and being tolerant of others. Hashizume Daizaburo pointed out that in Australia everyone could be in the minority, so the spirit of minority is implanted in everyone’s mind through education. Therefore, Australians fights against discrimination, and educate their children to be certain and confident in their own values even when they are discriminated against (p. 5). The perspective of multicultural education is to enhance ‘the self-worth of students by acknowledging and appreciating all students’ cultural backgrounds and experiences’ (Australian Capital Territory, Department of Education and Training [ACTDET], 1997, p. 10).

So what do Australians do to enhance the self-worth of students and to appreciate individual personalities in a multicultural education? Here, I would like to explore the concrete contents of multicultural education with a specific focus on five key learning areas. First, I would like to introduce the Japanese educational reform which was introduced in 1998 and put into operation in 2002. There are four significant changes in the new educational guideline. It intends:

1. To bring up rich humanity, sociality, and self-awareness as a Japanese in this international society.

2. To switch the educational goal from implanting a range of knowledge to bringing up the ability to learn and think voluntarily.

3. To develop education in which children enjoy considerable latitude, and to value each child’s personality.

4. For each school to create unique educational styles (MEXT).

As can be seen in this new educational guideline, Japanese education is trying to get out of the conventional cramming (tsumekomi) method of education; respecting individuality is becoming more important. The reason I showed these four changes is that as far as I understand from the website of Makiko Ikeda, head of the Japan-Australia Enterprise, and a mother of two children in the ACT, those four reforms in Japanese educational guidelines have already been implemented in the ACT, and in heading towards the similar educational goals, Japan can take Australia as a model.

Now I would like to show briefly the examples of multicultural education in key learning areas, which many schools answered is the chief content of multicultural education. I pick up the examples of multicultural education which Japanese education can take as a model from a publication by ACTDET, and the Children’s, Youth and Family Services Bureau. Of the key learning subjects, I regard English as Kokugo (Japanese), LOTE as Eigo (English), Mathematics as Sansu, Science as Rika, and Studies of Society and Environment as Shakai.

Firstly, in English classes in the ACT, students are encouraged to ‘explore the diversity of culture and how culture is socially constructed’, and to ‘explore how discourse styles and genres vary between cultures’ (ACTDET, 1997, p. 17), by exploring literature from all over the world. Teachers bring in multicultural content such as rhymes, humor, poetry, signals and morals of different cultures at every opportunity. ACTDET pointed out that children ‘enrich their understandings of other cultures through hearing minority voices (of authors, critics and other students) as they experience and explore texts’ (1997, p. 17). Japanese education can follow these examples in Kokugo classes, and it will probably bring about an interest in other cultures as well as Japanese culture.

Secondly, Japan and Australia seem to have different goals in terms of foreign language education. Kayoko Hashimoto has pointed out that Japan’s foreign language education fosters ‘Japanisation’ of Japanese students of English’. Hashimoto criticizes the tendency to believe that mastering English is for ‘self-expression’ of the uniqueness of Japanese culture (p. 40). However, ideal foreign language education is to explore ‘the sense of self that might develop through foreign language learning’ (Hashimoto, p. 41). In LOTE classes in the ACT, teachers encourage students to explore their own culture as well as other cultures, including ‘ways of life, social institutions, political organization, . . . religion’ (ACTDET, 1997, p. 18); to learn body languages in different cultures; and to ‘gain valuable understanding of people learning English in Australia’ (ACTDET, 1997, p. 19). Eigo education, which was put into operation in elementary school for the first time in 2002, should learn from these examples, and place emphasis on understanding other cultures and languages rather than solely on mastering the language.

In Australia, multicultural education is also implemented in such academic areas as mathematics and science. In math classes, they teach not only calculation but also ideas about time, and origins of mathematical knowledge, e.g. ‘Italy: Fibonacci’s sequence [and] the Hindu Arabic origin of the number system’ (ACTDET, 1997, p. 20), which helps students form positive images of different cultures. In science classes, ‘[s]tudents can explore how different countries use different science-based technologies for the same task, including responses to . . . overpopulation, pollution and over-consumption of non-renewable resources’ (ACTDET, 1997, p. 21). When adopting multicultural education, we might be able to teach Sansu and Rika as Australians teach math and science to the students, because of the universality of these subjects.

Lastly, Studies of Society and Environment courses seem to be the best time in taking up the multicultural perspectives. ‘Examples of areas of study with a multicultural perspective’ are ‘Australian studies’, ‘Environmental studies’, ‘culture and identity’, and ‘religious studies’ and ‘systems’ (ACTDET, 1997, p. 23). Since Shakai classes in Japan address similar matters, simply introducing and sharing the diverse cultures, social problems and solutions of other cultures would ‘allow students to reflect critically on their own identity while enriching their intercultural understandings’ (ACTDET, 1997, p. 22).

Conclusion

The Japanese educational system has been in a transitional period from a style of cramming knowledge to another which places emphasis on fostering an individual personality. It is because strong human skills are becoming more important to be internationally competitive. In this sense, the gap between education in Australia and in Japan is becoming smaller. However, there still exist a number of differences, such as the presence of competitive entrance examinations in Japan and the difference of constituents of students in both countries. Considering the circumstances each culture brings in, it is not always possible to apply the Australian multicultural education to education in Japan. However, it is true that by experiencing and being aware of differences, and by listening to minority voices, people will be able to accept other people’s senses of values, to become broad-minded, and consequently better to cope with anything anywhere in the world. In the future, when the population in Japan becomes more multifarious, and when Japan needs a further educational reform to raise more internationally competitive people, what I have said in this paper might become the reality.

References

On-line sources:
Primary schools in the Australian Capital Territory

Ainslie School. Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Amaroo School. Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Aranda Primary School. Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Arawang Primary School. (2003). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Bonython Primary School. (2003). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Calwell Primary School. (2003). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Campbell Primary School. (2003). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Chapman Primary School. (2003). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Charies Conder Primary School. (2002). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Charnwood Primary School. (2002). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Chisholm Primary School. (2003). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Cook Primary School. Retrieved on October 21, 2003

Curtin Primary School. (2002). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Duffy Primary School. (2003). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Evatt Primary School. (2003). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Fadden Primary School. (2003). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Farrer Primary School. (2003). Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Florey Primary School. Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Flynn Primary School. Retrieved on October 21, 2003.

Other on-line sources

Australian Capital Territory, Department of Education & Training, and Children’s, Youth & Family Services Bureau. (1997). Multicultural education curriculum support paper (pdf, 100 KB). 1997. Retrieved on Decembeer 3, 2003.

Australian Capital Territory, Department of Education & Training. Studies of society and environment curriculum framework (pdf, 169 KB). (1993). Retrieved on December 3, 2003.

Australian Capital Territory, Department of Education, Youth & Family Services. (2003). Retrieved on October 18, 2003.

Australian Capital Territory Government. Welcome to the Australian Capital Territory. (2003). Retrieved on October 18, 2003.

Australian Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. Australian multicultural policy. Retrieved on October 1, 2003.

Hardgrave, G. Australian Multiculturalism. Gary Hardgrave MP. (2002). Retrieved on October 20, 2003. Unretrievable 27 February 2004, Google cache here.

Hashizume, D. Tabunkashugi senshinkoku Australia ni manabu. [What we can learn from multicultural Australia]. Retrieved on October 18, 2003.

Ikeda, M. Australia no ikuji, kyoiku jijo. [Child-rearing and education in Australia]. Retrieved on November 30, 2003.

[Japanese] Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). Retrieved on October 1, 2003.

Sugimoto, S. Multiculturalism no yukue. [Future Multiculturalism]. (1998). Retrieved on October 18, 2003.

Other sources

Hashiuchi, T., & T. Asaoka (2000). Tabunka kyousei shakai eno tenbou. [Prospect of multicultural society]. Tokyo: Nihon hyoronsha.

Hashimoto, K. (2000). ‘“Internationalization” is “Japanisation”: Japan’s foreign language education and national identity.’ Journal of intercultural studies, vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 39-51.

Ishida, H., & S. Ishida (2000). Australia no shougakkou. [Primary schools in Australia]. Tokyo: Yukansha.

Stone, J. (November 26, 2001). ‘We only want those prepared to be like us.’ The Australian, p.11.