Comparing the consciousness of Taiwanese and Japanese principals on quality school and some suggestions from the point

1. Comparing the consciousness of Taiwanese and Japanese principals on �quality school� and some suggestions from the point of view of recent policy trends in Japan Masaaki Hayo Director, Research Department for Educational Policy and Evaluation, National Institute for Educational Policy Research Former Professor of Tokyo Gakugei University 1

2. World-wide policy trends towards outcome-based education International concern for school achievement of pupils in each country shown in PISA results or TIMSS Keen interest in the improvement of school achievement of Finland pupils Two international currencies of educational reforms: outcome-based policy, or policy of school rivalry, evaluation-oriented policy vs Finland model(school social capital policy) Taiwan and Japan which adopt former policy of educational reforms 2

3. Comparing the consciousness of principals on �Quality School� in Taipei, Taiwan and Japan Comparative survey on the consciousness of principals in Taiwan and Japan(1st survey in 2005, and 2nd summative survey in 2007) by using Delphi technique Result (1)Indicators of �Quality School� The variety of the indicators on �QS� is similar in two countries, but the emphasis on PDCA cycle of school organization is clearer in Taiwan than in Japan. 3

4. part2 (2)Standardized test as a tool for securing educational performance Present policy in Japan: National standardized test was revived in 2007 for 6th graders of primary school and 3nd graders of junior high school in Japan after the interruption of 46 years. The number of participants was about 230 million pupils and students of all over Japan. The division for analyzing the result of national standardized test has been organized within the Ministry of Education, Japan and is now doing analysis of the test by organizing scholar team of educational psychology, sociology of education and so on. Many factors affecting the level of achievement of students at each school have been analyzed by using multivariate analysis. The analysis is proceeding now, but I will point out some interesting results concerning the analysis so far. There are some cases of schools in which the level of student achievement has been improved drastically in comparison with last year and vice versa. Our institute has begun the factors affecting such situation. The positive correlation between achievement level at each school and student way of life in family or community could be found out. It seems that social capital of community Is some kind effect to achievement level of students. 4

5. part3 Participation of parents and community in school community Most of the principals agree that cooperative relationship between schools and community is essential for �QS�, but feel anxiety for too much involvement of parents and community to school management. The proper distance between schools and community seems to be desired by many principals of both countries instead of too intimate relationship of both. 5

6. part4 Evaluation for teacher appraisal system Many principals think that teacher appraisal system will be essential as driving forces of teacher professionalism, but many also agree that now has been at immature stage of the introduction of this system because of the immaturity of the consciousness of many teachers. 6

7. part5 Most important topics for securing �quality educational program� A Taiwan principal: 1.Ardent devotion of each principal for creative educational practice 2. Increasing discretionary power and duties of principals 3.Curriculum development for professional growth of teachers 4.Autonomy of teaching practice 5.Keen interest in conditions of children and the environment surrounding them 7

8. part6 A Japanese principal: 1.Most important point should be �trust� in education from parents and community. 2.Every teacher should have pride in teaching profession and should have sacred mission statement for teaching profession. 3.Every teacher should understand development stage and development tasks of each student and should have the skill and capacity for developing and organizing effective teaching-learning process in school. 4. Sharing developmental tasks of each student and the mission of each school for tackling these tasks among teachers and stakeholders is essential for the creation of �QS�. 8

9. Suggestions for outcome-based educational policy 1. Outcome-based educational policy could be considered as essential for �QS�, but support mechanism for �middle-ranged� schools or �poor� schools should be organized. The factors of �failure� of schools have been in the process of survey and leadership of principals should not be seen as only one factor for the fate of each school, for example. 2.The concept of school social capital and the strategy for cultivating it should be regarded essential for �QS�. The relationship of school social capital with educational performance should be the topic for educational policy research. 3.The indicators for �QS� should be developed continuously. As a tool for evaluating each school, standardized testing will be useful. But multivariate analysis will be essential for finding out true determinants of student achievement. 4.The relationship of school evaluation, teacher appraisal system with �QS� should be one of topics of educational research continuously and we should try to improve the way how these programs are carried out. 9