Note: The Japan HEO Blog is currently in a 'hold' status, perhaps appropriate for the summer doldrums and the swell of work at the end of a university term (which is at the end of July).
In August-September, if I have successfully moved my office in early August, you can reasonably expect a finish to the three-part series on the demographic decline of Japan vis-a-vis university enrollments, as well as the 10-part series on 'Why English fails'. About the latter series, I am currently working on reason number 6, in which universities will face some harsh criticism. About the former, the article on 'demographic decline', that has been completed but requires some harsh, critical editing of its own before it is fit for publication.
Call for ONE MILLION foreign students in higher education in Japan
Japan Times published an article in June that was titled, 'Fukuda gets report on boosting immigrants'.
Basically, the plan (really a set of group-written suggestions marred by inconsistency and lack of coherence) calls for the government of Japan to stabilize the current population by increasing immigration to the extent that immigrants would comprise around 10% of the population by the year 2060. Japan's population is said to have peaked at somewhere between 127-8 million, with the total number of males already registering declines. Given the extremely low birth rate of around 1.3, demographic decline (without expansive immigration) is being predicted as inevitable.
Taking a cue from Australia apparently, some Japanese policy advisers who have the attention of the currently unpopular prime minister hope to use the overly large university system as a tool to manage immigration, and vice versa. That is, they are calling for a near ten-fold increase in the number of foreign students in further and higher education, from the currently stagnant 120,000 or so, to a world-beating level of 1 million by the year 2025.
This could help many universities, colleges and polytechnics which are facing stagnant or declining enrollments annually in the face of ever smaller high school graduate cohorts. In the long term, it is hoped apparently that many highly educated and skilled immigrants would stay in Japan, as, for example, many Chinese do once they go to Australia for graduate and professional degrees.
However, a few issues are glaring in their omission.
First, the Japanese university system is simply not prepared to teach, train or involve in research large numbers of Asian students (or any other foreign national) in any language except Japanese. Talk of using English to teach classes and whole programs in English is mostly just empty talk--so far. But this might just be what would be required if 1 out of 3 students are going to be non-Japanese (unless Japan could also increase its ability to teach Japanese to non-natives to the level required for university study). A related problem is that most Asian students are not prepared to study abroad in English--and Japan would be the last place on earth most would consider going to in order to improve their English!
Second, the current higher education system already produces a surplus of graduates (most Japanese of course) who are supposed to be skilled at the level of a technician, engineer, or the Japanese equivalent of a 'liberal arts' major (who for years swelled the ranks of the ever-swelling civil servant corps and academia--many of whom were also civil servants in the national and public university systems). Post-Koizumi, however, the civil servant corps is as stagnant as university enrollments, and academia's declining need for professors (especially male ones) is a direct reflection of those stagnant university enrollments as well as the fiscal move to privatize and streamline national and public universities.
But Japanese employers are hoping for an influx of cheap, exploitable, unskilled labor willing to accept physical labor and harsh working conditions that most Japanese would balk at. Perhaps there is one main area on which the expressed desires for skilled, educated foreign immigrants and the 'needs' of the current job market of Japan's capitalist political economy will converge. That would be medicine, specifically nursing. Japan's numerous hospitals need nurses to help take care of the aging population, and they will needs many more in the next 50 years. Again, however, it must be pointed out that language difficulties and cultural differences could cause many more problems than Japanese policy makers have anticipated.
Two key excerpts follow, an then a link to the full article at Japan Times.
Key quote 1
>>Members of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party submitted a bold report Friday to Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda, calling for Japan to increase its foreign residents to up to 10 percent of the nation's population in the next 50 years.<<end of excerpt
Key quote 2
>>Suggestions in the newest proposal include forming a plan to have 1 million foreign students in Japan by 2025, nurturing talent through education and professional training, and providing opportunities to live and work in Japan.<<end of excerpt
Fukuda gets report on boosting immigrants
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20080621a2.html
Showing posts with label university. Show all posts
Showing posts with label university. Show all posts
01 February 2008
A brief look at academic freedom in HE in Japan
A brief look at academic freedom in higher education in Japan
by Charles Jannuzi
Introduction
Unlike early modern Japan, in the post-war period, academic freedom is now firmly established as a positive right in the Japanese constitution, which the Occupation government promulgated in 1946. This document, along with fundamental laws creating a new education system, took effect in 1947, a year when most Japanese were struggling to feed, clothe, and house themselves. Along with the more commonly stated rights of' freedom of speech, thought, conscience, assembly and association, the constitution states that academic freedom is guaranteed. So who or what limits this constitutional right?
Relatively free
If viewed from the perspectives of the freedom to teach, do scholarship or research within a recognized specialty, academics at national and public universities in Japan have considerable latitude. They do not have to conform to a national curriculum or use ministry-approved textbooks. If they write textbooks for the lower levels of education, they will, however, find the content subject to the government's approval.
Compared with corporate researchers, many working at universities and national research centers can pursue pure research and abstract theory, regardless of immediate applications or returns on investment.
Most cases that concern academic freedom, at least in part, play themselves out in labor arbitration negotiations and courts. This is because academic freedom is often said to be violated when universities and their programs are accused of not providing a legitimate reason when demoting, financially penalizing, firing, or not renewing the contract of teaching or research personnel.
How reforms and restructuring hurt academic self-governance
An example is Tokyo Metropolitan University (TMU), the highest-ranking public (not national) university in Japan. Because of troubled finances at many local governments, starting in 2005, the 86 public universities were put on a path of 'consolidation' and 'corporatization' similar to national universities (all 87 of which were corporatized in 2003-04).
In anticipation of the reforms, as early as 2003, the Tokyo Metropolitan Government proposed combining several smaller institutions of higher education with TMU to save money while creating new programs of study that were supposed to be more in touch with post-industrial job markets.
Many academics at the smaller institutions facing absorption and re-organization have objected vehemently to the loss of autonomy the reforms would result in. For example, they cite the proposed imposition of performance-based pay and five-year contracts. A hundred professors and lecturers at institutions which would be absorbed by TMU also refused to sign agreements for new course assignments.
The administration needs these signatures to apply to the national government for approval in establishing the re-chartered public university corporation.
Moreover, the dissenting academics demanded that faculty councils retain control of teaching appointments and course assignments. Many object to the proposed heavier load of large, introductory level classes. They also wish to avoid being put into a lower status requiring them to become contractually or provisionally employed teachers of general education classes.
University educators nationwide have followed the contentious developments at TMU. Unlike at public universities, the administrations of former national universities (now National University Corporations or NUCs) have been reluctant to propose such a system for most of their academics.
University of Kobe
That reluctance changed recently and the largely powerless foreign lecturers became the precedent-setting example. In April 2005 University of Kobe, a top former national university, adopted a contract system for its foreign lecturers, limiting them to a three-year contract and no automatic renewals--although they would be allowed to compete for the position should it be re-opened to new candidates.
In contrast to institutions with national or public charters, the policies and practices that affect academic freedom and employment rights within Japan's extensive private system of universities and two-year colleges (together totaling 984 institutions) vary so much as to make concise generalizations nearly impossible.
It is illuminating to look at the situation foreign lecturers and instructors face at private universities because their cases often attract more attention than those of Japanese nationals.
The plight of foreign nationals at private universities
At one extreme, discrimination is obviously rampant: unlike their Japanese counterparts not on contracts, foreign teachers at many private universities and colleges face arbitrary dismissal, and have one-year or three-year contracts with strict renewal limits imposed while receiving lower salaries, no bonuses and higher pay cuts.
They may also be barred from meetings where decisions are made, excluded from union membership, and be denied health insurance and retirement benefits, since employers try to avoid bearing their share of fees for the national scheme.
Any charge of nationwide discrimination, however, has to be qualified because the administrations of some private universities and colleges are so dictatorial and the unions so weak that even Japanese nationals can face similarly severe employment conditions and unfair labor practices.
Moreover, the very numerous part-time staff who often do more teaching than full-time faculty, regardless of nationality have very little control over their job situations and fewer employment rights or benefits.
by Charles Jannuzi
Introduction
Unlike early modern Japan, in the post-war period, academic freedom is now firmly established as a positive right in the Japanese constitution, which the Occupation government promulgated in 1946. This document, along with fundamental laws creating a new education system, took effect in 1947, a year when most Japanese were struggling to feed, clothe, and house themselves. Along with the more commonly stated rights of' freedom of speech, thought, conscience, assembly and association, the constitution states that academic freedom is guaranteed. So who or what limits this constitutional right?
Relatively free
If viewed from the perspectives of the freedom to teach, do scholarship or research within a recognized specialty, academics at national and public universities in Japan have considerable latitude. They do not have to conform to a national curriculum or use ministry-approved textbooks. If they write textbooks for the lower levels of education, they will, however, find the content subject to the government's approval.
Compared with corporate researchers, many working at universities and national research centers can pursue pure research and abstract theory, regardless of immediate applications or returns on investment.
Most cases that concern academic freedom, at least in part, play themselves out in labor arbitration negotiations and courts. This is because academic freedom is often said to be violated when universities and their programs are accused of not providing a legitimate reason when demoting, financially penalizing, firing, or not renewing the contract of teaching or research personnel.
How reforms and restructuring hurt academic self-governance
An example is Tokyo Metropolitan University (TMU), the highest-ranking public (not national) university in Japan. Because of troubled finances at many local governments, starting in 2005, the 86 public universities were put on a path of 'consolidation' and 'corporatization' similar to national universities (all 87 of which were corporatized in 2003-04).
In anticipation of the reforms, as early as 2003, the Tokyo Metropolitan Government proposed combining several smaller institutions of higher education with TMU to save money while creating new programs of study that were supposed to be more in touch with post-industrial job markets.
Many academics at the smaller institutions facing absorption and re-organization have objected vehemently to the loss of autonomy the reforms would result in. For example, they cite the proposed imposition of performance-based pay and five-year contracts. A hundred professors and lecturers at institutions which would be absorbed by TMU also refused to sign agreements for new course assignments.
The administration needs these signatures to apply to the national government for approval in establishing the re-chartered public university corporation.
Moreover, the dissenting academics demanded that faculty councils retain control of teaching appointments and course assignments. Many object to the proposed heavier load of large, introductory level classes. They also wish to avoid being put into a lower status requiring them to become contractually or provisionally employed teachers of general education classes.
University educators nationwide have followed the contentious developments at TMU. Unlike at public universities, the administrations of former national universities (now National University Corporations or NUCs) have been reluctant to propose such a system for most of their academics.
University of Kobe
That reluctance changed recently and the largely powerless foreign lecturers became the precedent-setting example. In April 2005 University of Kobe, a top former national university, adopted a contract system for its foreign lecturers, limiting them to a three-year contract and no automatic renewals--although they would be allowed to compete for the position should it be re-opened to new candidates.
In contrast to institutions with national or public charters, the policies and practices that affect academic freedom and employment rights within Japan's extensive private system of universities and two-year colleges (together totaling 984 institutions) vary so much as to make concise generalizations nearly impossible.
It is illuminating to look at the situation foreign lecturers and instructors face at private universities because their cases often attract more attention than those of Japanese nationals.
The plight of foreign nationals at private universities
At one extreme, discrimination is obviously rampant: unlike their Japanese counterparts not on contracts, foreign teachers at many private universities and colleges face arbitrary dismissal, and have one-year or three-year contracts with strict renewal limits imposed while receiving lower salaries, no bonuses and higher pay cuts.
They may also be barred from meetings where decisions are made, excluded from union membership, and be denied health insurance and retirement benefits, since employers try to avoid bearing their share of fees for the national scheme.
Any charge of nationwide discrimination, however, has to be qualified because the administrations of some private universities and colleges are so dictatorial and the unions so weak that even Japanese nationals can face similarly severe employment conditions and unfair labor practices.
Moreover, the very numerous part-time staff who often do more teaching than full-time faculty, regardless of nationality have very little control over their job situations and fewer employment rights or benefits.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Back to top
Click on logo to go back to top page.