The Policy Analysis to Solve Academic Decline in Japan– Course of Study and National Assessment of Academic Ability
Author: Yi-Lin Lee (Center for Institutional Affairs, National Taichung University of Education), Szu-Wei Yang (Department of Education, National Taichung University of Education)
Vol.&No.:Vol. 70, No. 2
Date:June 2025
Pages:123-150
DOI:https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202506_70(2).0004
Abstract:
Since the late 1980s, influenced by neoliberalism, Japan implemented the “Third Education Reform” to address issues in standardized and rote-based teaching. With open education becoming popular in Western countries, Japan introduced “relaxed education” in the 1990s to alleviate long-standing pressures in education by substantially revising its curriculum guidelines, known as “Course of Study” in Japanese. However, this reform led to a significant drop in Japan’s ranking in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), shattering the “Japanese educational miracle” of the 1980s and prompting widespread societal concern. This sparked the “Great Debate on Academic Decline” in Japan from around 1995 to 2010, marked by extensive literature and arguments between proponents and critics of relaxed education (Nakai, 2001, 2003). In response to public criticism, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) carried out multiple revisions of the curriculum guidelines, refining the definition and approach to “academic ability” to ensure that students retained sufficient academic competency to prevent a decline in national strength.
The concept of “academic ability” (or “basic academic ability”) has been widely debated among Japanese scholars and government officials since World War II, with various research findings but no unified conclusion. Professor Kaneko divides academic ability into two main perspectives: a “subject-based academic ability,” focusing on traditional literacy and numeracy achieved through subject knowledge, and a “practical academic ability,” influenced by John Dewey’s progressivism, emphasizing learning as a means to develop life skills. These two perspectives have remained in tension and are reflected in various educational discourses, influencing education policies to this day.
Japan’s education leaned toward a subject-based perspective before World War II. However, post-war reflections and American influence led to a temporary shift to practical academic ability, but by the 1960s, the focus swung back to subject-based competencies due to exam-oriented debates, making subject-based academic ability mainstream once again.
In the 1980s, Japan’s economic peak and the global wave of open education rekindled interest in practical academic ability, initiating the advocacy for relaxed education.
“Relaxed Education” in the 1970s and 1980s emerged in response to both internal criticisms of rigidity and uniformity in Japanese education and external pressures from intensified global competition and economic changes. Japan’s education system thus faced a quality bottleneck, with a knowledge-heavy approach that struggled to meet the demands of a knowledge-based post-industrial economy. Mounting social issues, such as intense competition, school violence, absenteeism, student suicides, and juvenile crime, underscored the need for reform. Consequently, the idea of relaxed, personalized school education became a shared goal in Japan. In the 1980 curriculum, content was selectively reduced, lowering both lesson content and volume. Subsequent reports by the Temporary Education Council from 1985-1987 advocated for personalized, relaxed, lifelong learning, shifting Japanese education from rigidity and uniformity toward diversity and globalization.
In the 1990s, Japan’s government recognized the importance of relaxed education, and in July 1996, the Central Council for Education released a report on education’s future direction for the 21st century, emphasizing the cultivation of children’s “zest for life” within the relaxed education framework. Consequently, the 1998 curriculum (implemented in 2002) underwent major revisions, including a 30% reduction in content across subjects, lower teaching difficulty, a five-day school week, fewer class hours, and the introduction of “comprehensive learning periods” for interdisciplinary studies to promote enjoyable learning experiences.
Relaxed Education faced ongoing skepticism domestically, especially when Japan’s PISA rankings dropped significantly. Despite the similarities between PISA’s focus on practical problem-solving abilities and Japan’s emphasis on “zest for life” under relaxed education, the public associated the drop in rankings with academic decline and relaxed education (Nakai, 2003; Tan, 2017). This sparked renewed criticism of relaxed education in 1999 and the ensuing debate on academic decline (Akio et al., 2002). The discussions, focused on “new academic ability concepts” and “definite academic ability,” reflect an evolution in the ideals of Japan’s education reforms toward personalization, relaxation, diversity, and internationalization since the 1980s (Xu, 2008).
To clarify the content of academic ability and address academic decline scientifically, Japan initiated the “National Academic Ability and Learning Status Survey” annually from 2007. This survey aimed to evaluate student learning outcomes and use the results to refine curriculum, teaching methods, assessments, and teacher quality. Consequently, Japan saw an improvement in PISA and TIMSS scores, suggesting that its policies effectively addressed academic decline.
Since the 1990s, the rise of a knowledge-based society led Western nations to adopt competency-based models with a broader view of academic ability. The OECD’s PISA assessment emphasized competencies needed for citizenship, leading to a “PISA-type academic ability.” Influenced by this trend, Japan’s 2017 curriculum incorporated the “attributes and abilities” concept to articulate “zest for life” goals, gradually implementing them. On April 17, 2019, the Minister of Education submitted a consultation request to the Central Council for Education regarding “The Ideal Form of Elementary and Secondary Education in the New Era.” This document highlights that Japan’s students scored highest in mathematics and science literacy among OECD middle schools in PISA 2015. Additionally, disparities between lower-ranking prefectures and national average scores in the national academic test have narrowed, signaling that academic improvement is progressing. The document affirms that Japan has addressed academic decline and articulates a comprehensive policy for developing “zest for life” in the 2020 curriculum, preparing for Society 5.0, the anticipated “super-smart society.”
Thus, this study aims to evaluate Japan’s policy responses to academic decline, examining curriculum revisions and national academic testing policies that integrate feedback into curriculum, teaching methods, assessments, and teacher development. The study concludes with three findings: (1) Japan’s national academic tests have effectively shaped a cycle linking policy, curriculum, and assessment to enhance academic ability; (2) Japan’s performance in international assessments like PISA and TIMSS has improved since the 2003-2006 PISA SHOCK; (3) Japan’s national academic testing program requires continued evaluation. After analyzing domestic policy challenges, five recommendations are proposed for Taiwan: (1) examine the alignment between national curriculum competencies and international assessments; (2) ensure evidence-based curriculum revisions, informed by surveys and assessment results; (3) expand basic education assessments to align core competencies between curriculum and national academic assessments; (4) integrate existing assessments for comprehensive or sample-based evaluations of student outcomes as references for curriculum revisions; and (5) establish a PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) linkage mechanism for core competencies in curriculum, policy, and assessment.
Keywords:
academic decline, Japan, national assessment of academic ability, revisions of course of study
《Full Text》
References:徐征(2008)。尋求超越:戰後日本學力論爭。上海社會科學院。
【Xu, Z. (2008). Seeking transcendence: Debates about academic ability in postwar Japan. Shanghai Academy of Social Science.】
國立臺中教育大學(2023)。縣市學生學習能力檢測。https://saaassessment.ntcu.edu.tw/
【National Taichung University of Education. (2023). Students’ assessment of academic ability for counties and cities. https://saaassessment.ntcu.edu.tw/】
國家教育研究院(2018)。臺灣學生成就長期追蹤評量計畫。https://tasal.naer.edu.tw/
【National Academy for Educational Research. (2018). Taiwan assessment of student achievement longitudinal study. https://tasal.naer.edu.tw/】
國家教育研究院(2022)。國家教育研究院學生學習成就資料。https://tasal.naer.edu.tw/ dsa/rap#plan_release
【National Academy for Educational Research. (2022). Assessment data release of student achievement of National Academy for Education research. https://tasal.naer.edu.tw/dsa/rap#plan_release】
臺灣PISA國家研究中心(2018)。臺灣PISA2018結果報告。https://cirn.moe.edu.tw/Upload/ckfile/ files/81239-PISA%202018臺灣學生的表現%20(瀏覽檔).pdf
【Taiwan PISA National Research Center. (2018). Taiwan PISA 2018 results report. https://cirn.moe.edu.tw/Upload/ ckfile/files/81239-PISA%202018臺灣學生的表現%20(瀏覽檔).pdf】
» More
一、中文文獻
徐征(2008)。尋求超越:戰後日本學力論爭。上海社會科學院。
【Xu, Z. (2008). Seeking transcendence: Debates about academic ability in postwar Japan. Shanghai Academy of Social Science.】
國立臺中教育大學(2023)。縣市學生學習能力檢測。https://saaassessment.ntcu.edu.tw/
【National Taichung University of Education. (2023). Students’ assessment of academic ability for counties and cities. https://saaassessment.ntcu.edu.tw/】
國家教育研究院(2018)。臺灣學生成就長期追蹤評量計畫。https://tasal.naer.edu.tw/
【National Academy for Educational Research. (2018). Taiwan assessment of student achievement longitudinal study. https://tasal.naer.edu.tw/】
國家教育研究院(2022)。國家教育研究院學生學習成就資料。https://tasal.naer.edu.tw/ dsa/rap#plan_release
【National Academy for Educational Research. (2022). Assessment data release of student achievement of National Academy for Education research. https://tasal.naer.edu.tw/dsa/rap#plan_release】
臺灣PISA國家研究中心(2018)。臺灣PISA2018結果報告。https://cirn.moe.edu.tw/Upload/ckfile/ files/81239-PISA%202018臺灣學生的表現%20(瀏覽檔).pdf
【Taiwan PISA National Research Center. (2018). Taiwan PISA 2018 results report. https://cirn.moe.edu.tw/Upload/ ckfile/files/81239-PISA%202018臺灣學生的表現%20(瀏覽檔).pdf】
臺灣PISA國家研究中心(2019)。學生能力國際排名。
【Taiwan PISA National Research Center. (2019). International ranking of student ability.】
譚建川(2017)。日本「寬鬆教育」的興衰及其啟示。https://kknews.cc/zh-tw/education/9y2y8bj.html
【Tan, J. C. (2017). The rise and fall of Japan’s “yutori-kyōiku” and its implications. https://kknews.cc/zh-tw/ education/9y2y8bj.html.】
二、外文文獻
小玉重夫(2013)。学力幻想。筑摩書房。
【Kodama, S. (2013). The fantasy of academic ability. Chikumashobo.】
山本由美(2009)。学力テスト体制とは何か:学力テスト‧学校統廃合‧小中一貫教育。花伝社、共栄書房。
【Yamamoto, Y. (2009). What is the assessment of academic ability? The assessment of academic ability, school consolidation, and educational continuity from primary through early secondary levels. Kadensha & Kyoeishobo.】
中井浩一(2001)。論争‧学力崩壊。中央公論新社。
【Nakai, K. (2001). Controversy and collapse of academic ability. Chuokoron-shinsha.】
中井浩一(2003)。論爭‧学力崩壞2003。中央公論新社。
【Nakai, K. (2003). Controversy and collapse of academic ability 2003. Chuokoron-shinsha.】
中央教育審議会(2021a)。「令和の日本型学校教育」の構築を目指して(答申)【概要】。https://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chukyo/chukyo3/079/sonota/1412985_00002.htm
【Central Council for Education. (2021a). Aiming to Build Japanese-Style School Education in the Reiwa Era (Report) (Summary). https://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chukyo/chukyo3/079/sonota/1412985_00002.htm】
中央教育審議会(2021b)。「令和の日本型学校教育」の構築を目指して(答申)【本文】。https://www.mext.go.jp/content/20210126-mxt_syoto02-000012321_2-4.pdf
【Central Council for Education. (2021b). Aiming to build Japanese-style school education in the reiwa era (Report) (Text). https://www.mext.go.jp/content/20210126-mxt_syoto02-000012321_2-4.pdf】
文部科学省(2007)。全国学力‧学習状況調査に関わる実施要領。https://www.mext.go.jp/ a_menu/shotou/gakuryoku-chousa/zenkoku/1344214.htm
【Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2007). The implement of guideline for national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/ gakuryoku-chousa/zenkoku/1344214.htm】
文部科学省(2011)。【改訂版】学習指導要領の変遷。https://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/ shotou/new-cs/idea/1304360_002.pdf
【Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2011). (Revised edition) The timelines of course of study. https://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/new-cs/idea/1304360_002.pdf.】
文部科学省(2018)。幼稚園教育要領、小‧中学校学習指導要領等の改訂のポイント。https://www.mext.go.jp/content/1421692_1.pdf
【Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2018). The point of revisions of the courses of study for elementary and secondary schools. https://www.mext.go.jp/content/1421692_1.pdf.】
文部科学省(2019a)。令和元年度文部科学白書。https://warp.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/13731853/ www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/hakusho/html/hpab202001/1420041.htm
【Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2019a). FY2019 white paper on Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. https://warp.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/13731853/www.mext.go.jp/ b_menu/hakusho/html/hpab202001/1420041.htm】
文部科学省(2019b)。全国学力‧学習状況調査について。https://www.mext.go.jp/content/ 1422597_04.pdf
【Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (2019b). National assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.mext.go.jp/content/1422597_04.pdf】
文部科学省初等中等教育局参事官付学力調査室学力調査推進係(2012)。全国的な学力調査に関する専門家会議。https://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chousa/shotou/085/index.htm
【Elementary and Secondary Education Bureau Academic Ability Support Division. (2012). Expert meeting of national academic ability surveys. https://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chousa/shotou/085/index.htm】
文部科学省総合教育政策局調査企画課学力調査室(2021)。全国的な学力調査に関する専門家会議(令和3年4月8日~)。https://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chousa/shotou/165/ index.html
【Education Policy Bureau Analytical Research Planning Division Academic Ability Office. (2021). Expert meeting of national academic ability surveys (April 8th 2021). https://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chousa/shotou/ 165/index.html】
文部科学省総合教育政策局調査企画課学力調査室(2022)。令和3年度「全国学力‧学習状況調査」経年変化分析調査テクニカルレポート。https://www.nier.go.jp/ 21chousakekkahoukoku/kannren_chousa/pdf/21keinen_tech_01.pdf
【Education Policy Bureau Analytical Research Planning Division Academic Ability Office. (2022). Technical report on longitudinal analysis of the 2021 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/21chousakekkahoukoku/kannren_chousa/pdf/21keinen_tech_01.pdf】
北野秋男、下司晶、小笠原喜康(2018)。現代学力テスト批判。東信堂。
【Kitano, A., Akira, G., & Hiroyasu, O. (2018). Criticism of modern assessment of academic ability. Toshindo.】
西村和雄、戶瀨信之、岡部恒治(1999)。分数ができない大学生。東洋經濟新報社。
【Nishimura, K., Tose, N., & Okabe, T. (1999). College students can’t do fractions. Toyo Keizai.】
西村和雄、戶瀨信之、岡部恒治(2000)。小数ができない大学生。東洋經濟新報社。
【Nishimura, K., Tose, N., & Okabe, T. (2000). College students can’t do decimals. Toyo Keizai.】
佐藤学(2001)。学力を問い直す。岩波書店。
【Sato, M. (1999). Questioning academic ability. Iwanami Shoten.】
囯立教育研究所(2000)。PISA(OECD生徒の学習到達度調査)2000年調査結果概要。https://www.mext.go.jp/component/b_menu/other/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2018/01/04/1245809_001.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2000). PISA (OECD Program for international student Assessment) 2000 survey results summary. https://www.mext.go.jp/component/b_menu/other/ __icsFiles/afieldfile/2018/01/04/1245809_001.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2007)。平成19年度全国学力‧学習状況調査調査結果のポイント。https://www.nier.go.jp/tyousakekka/tyousakekka_point.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2007). Point of survey results for 2007 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/tyousakekka/tyousakekka_point.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2008)。平成20年度全国学力‧学習状況調査調査結果のポイント。https://www.nier.go.jp/08chousakekkahoukoku/01chousakekka_houkokusho_point.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2008). Point of survey results for 2008 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/08chousakekkahoukoku/01chousakekka_ houkokusho_point.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2009)。平成21年度全国学力‧学習状況調査調査結果のポイント。https://www.nier.go.jp/09chousakekkahoukoku/01chousakekka_houkokusho_point.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2009). Point of survey results for 2009 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/09chousakekkahoukoku/01chousakekka_ houkokusho_point.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2010)。平成22年度全国学力‧学習状況調査調査結果のポイント。https://www.nier.go.jp/10chousakekkahoukoku/10_point.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2010). Point of survey results for 2010 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/10chousakekkahoukoku/10_point.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2012)。平成24年度全国学力‧学習状況調査の結果について(概要)。https://www.nier.go.jp/12chousakekkahoukoku/01gaiyou/24_chousanokekkanitsuite.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2012). Summary of survey results for 2012 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/12chousakekkahoukoku/ 01gaiyou/24_chousanokekkanitsuite.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2013)。平成25年度全国学力‧学習状況調査の結果。https://www.nier.go.jp/ 13chousakekkahoukoku/data/research-report/13-summary.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2013). Point of survey results for 2013 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/13chousakekkahoukoku/data/research-report/ 13-summary.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2014)。平成26年度全国学力‧学習状況調査の結果。https://www. nier.go.jp/14chousakekkahoukoku/summaryb.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2014). Point of survey results for 2014 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/14chousakekkahoukoku/summaryb.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2015)。平成27年度全国学力‧学習状況調査の結果。https://www.nier.go.jp/ 15chousakekkahoukoku/summary.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2015). Point of survey results for 2015 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/15chousakekkahoukoku/summary.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2016)。平成28年度全国学力‧学習状況調査の結果。https:// www.nier.go.jp/16chousakekkahoukoku/16summary.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2016). Point of survey results for 2016 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/16chousakekkahoukoku/16summary.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2017)。平成29年度全国学力‧学習状況調査の結果。https://www. nier.go.jp/17chousakekkahoukoku/17summary.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2017). Point of survey results for 2017 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/17chousakekkahoukoku/17summary.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2018)。平成30年度全国学力‧学習状況調査調の結果。https:// www.nier.go.jp/18chousakekkahoukoku/18summary.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2018). Point of survey results for 2018 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/17chousakekkahoukoku/17summary.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2019)。OECD生徒の学習到達度調査2018年調査(PISA2018)のポイント。https://www.nier.go.jp/kokusai/pisa/pdf/2018/01_point.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2019). Point of OECD program for student assessment 2018 (PISA2018). https://www.nier.go.jp/kokusai/pisa/pdf/2018/01_point.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2021)。令和3年度全国学力‧学習状況調査の結果(概要)。https:// www.nier.go.jp/21chousakekkahoukoku/21summary.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2021). Summary of survey result of 2021 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/21chousakekkahoukoku/21summary.pdf】
囯立教育研究所(2022)。令和4年度全国学力‧学習状況調査の結果(概要)。https://www. nier.go.jp/22chousakekkahoukoku/22summary.pdf
【National Institute for Educational Policy Research. (2022). Summary of survey result of 2022 national assessment of academic ability and learning situation. https://www.nier.go.jp/22chousakekkahoukoku/22summary.pdf】
志水宏吉(2009a)。エスニシティと教育。日本図書センター。
【Shimizu, K. (2009a). Ethnicity and education. Nihon Tosho Center.】
志水宏吉(2009b)。全国学力テスト:その功罪を問う。岩波書店。
【Shimizu, K. (2009b). Question the merits and demerits of national assessment of academic ability. Iwanami Shoten.】
奈須正裕(2017)。資質‧能力と学びのメカニズム。東洋館。
【Nasu, M. (2017). The mechanism of attributes and abilities for learning. Toyokan Shuppan.】
苅谷剛彦(2003)。なぜ教育論争は不毛なのかー学力論争を超えて。中央公論新社。
【Kariya, T. (2003). Why the education controversy is barren: Beyond the controversy over academic ability. Chuokoron-shinsha.】
金子元久(2006)。学力問題の構図。21世紀COEプログラム、東京大学大学院教育学研究科、基礎学力研究開発センター(共編),日本の教育と基礎学力(頁21-34)。明石書房。
【Kaneko, M. (2006). Composition of problem of academic ability. In 21th Century COE Program, Graduate School of Education of the University Tokyo, Center for Research of Core Academic Competences (Eds.), Education and basic academic ability in Japan (pp. 21-34). Akashishoten.】
長尾彰夫、志水宏吉、野口克海、本田由紀、宮田彰、堀家由妃代(2002)。「学力低下」批判-私は言いたい6人の主張。アドバンテージサーバー。
【Akio, N., Shimizu, K., Katsumi, N., Honda, Y., Akira, M., & Horike Y. (2002). Criticism of “declining academic ability”– Six scholars’ claims. Advant Age Server.】
尾木直樹(2009)。「ケータイ時代」を生きるきみへ。岩波書店。
【Ogi, N. (2009). To live in the age of mobile phones. Iwanami Shoten.】