Shifting from traditional Compulsory Attendance: Introducing Compulsory Enrollment as the third way for Japan

• In Event: Diverse studies exploring educational topics: internationalisation, etwining, compulsory attendance, and online learning platforms

Proposal

The presentation aims to argue and renew the typology of the mandatory education systems by exploring the history and future path of the Japanese education system. How have mandatory education systems been classified? What challenge was brought to the traditional typology by the digitalization of society? Can you find a new type of mandatory education system, and what are the advantages? By exploring these questions, the presentation proposes a new typology useful for understanding current and possible educational reforms and envisioning new alternatives.
Previous research divides mandatory education systems into two categories: Compulsory Attendance and Compulsory Education. The Compulsory Attendance system “refers to state legislative mandates for attendance in public school (or authorized alternatives) by children within certain age” (Guthrie, 2003, p.464), and the Compulsory Education system simply requires some education for school-age children; while these two are often used interchangeably (i.e., English, 2006). The traditional criterion of distinguishing systems is where learning occurs. For example, as McCulloch & Crook (2008) wrote about Compulsory Education, “some or all of the instruction received by children may occur at home or in some other place, as long as the authorities can be satisfied” (p.121).
Digital society has challenged this criterion. Digitalization makes it easier and more popular for schools to provide education remotely, although remote education itself is not new to society and has been provided via mail and other media, such as in Alaska and Iowa in the U.S. Then, if parents can choose traditional schooling (physical attendance of children) or remote school education, should it be regarded as Compulsory Education? Following the traditional criterion, the answer is yes because it distinguishes the systems where learning occurs. However, if every child has to receive education from school, “attendance” in the school education program is still compulsory. This means it is hard or even useless to distinguish systems by the place where children learn.
Then, how can we distinguish between Compulsory Attendance and Compulsory Education? I propose classifying them by who provides education. This criterion is more useful for comparative and international education research than the traditional one because it is more critical to identify who can provide mandatory education than the learning places. Before digitalization and the prevalence of remote education, there was no problem with distinguishing Compulsory Attendance and Compulsory Education by the place because the learning place and the provider of education were hard to separate before digitalization. If you go to school, the school is responsible for your education, and if you stay home, your parents are responsible. Digitalization has changed the situation, so the criterion should also be updated.
To examine more about the typology, this presentation explores the history and the future path of the Japanese education system. It has been criticized that Japanese schools cannot adequately meet various educational needs and produce many school refusers. Recently, as some other countries experienced, Japan is seeking to shift from the traditional Compulsory Attendance system, where every school-age child has to physically attend school regularly. The shift has already started in the late 20th century when the Ministry of Education issued the notification that school principals could recognize education outside of school as school attendance if they can be satisfied with its quality. Today, principals can even evaluate it and reflect on the formal educational record at school if the education utilizes Information and Communication Technology such as digital devices or online learning.
What can be the future paths of the Japanese education system? There are three ways in terms of the typology. The first one is sticking to the Compulsory Attendance system. Even within that system, Japan can make school education more flexible by taking new measures such as introducing virtual schools. This path has limitations because many school refusers and potential school refusers want much more flexible educational opportunities to learn what they want to explore at their own pace (Nippon Zaidan, 2018). The second one is shifting to the Compulsory Education system. This also has limitations because many school refusers come from families with lower socioeconomic status, and it is hard for them to provide education independently. The third way is the Compulsory Enrollment system. This is an unprecedented new system where children must be enrolled in school, but they can voluntarily attend school as far as they choose and comply with alternative educational regulations. Because Japan has already introduced the system where principals can recognize education outside of school as school attendance, enrollment is only compulsory in the current system. So, there are only a few steps left, including setting alternative regulations. In that system children can learn outside of school as well as at school. This system allows various kinds of children to access both school education and alternative education.

Author

• Seiya Miyaguchi, Tohoku University