Lifelong learning in England and Japan: three translations

Abstract

This article provides a comparative analysis of the development of lifelong learning in England and Japan, while addressing the multi‐dimensional nature of ‘lifelong learning’. The article argues that ‘lifelong learning’ is a concept which has unusual adaptability and legitimacy, and for these reasons has been subject to multiple translations over the last twenty years in both England and Japan. These translations can be identified: a) through discourse; b) in the development of policy; and c) as the shift in the political ideology. Drawing on the insights generated from the three strands, the article concludes that lifelong learning is being translated to accommodate various agendas and has been adapted in diverse contexts.

Keywords:

• England
• Japan
• lifelong learning as discourse
• lifelong learning as an ideology
• lifelong learning as policy
• translation

Notes

1. The article is structured in the order of three translations, and therefore, it was inevitable that time sequence went back and forth across sections.

2. Allen wrote The British disease in 1979 straightforwardly pointing out the weakness of the country and its link with the economy.

3. In 2001, the MESSC became the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT).

4. 6300 fatalities and 200,000 collapsed residences.

5. In 2001, the Lifelong Learning Council which was originally established within the Lifelong Learning Policy Bureau was transferred to the Lifelong Learning Division located within the Central Council of Education.

6. For example, Research report on the national policies to promote lifelong learning: measures of community building through the collaboration of universities and communities [Shougai gakushuu suishin no tameno chiiki seisaku no chousa kenkyuu houkoku: daigaku to chiiki no renkei ni yoru machizukuri no arikata ni tsuite].

7. This article uses Etzioni's interpretation, which refers to ‘a reaffirmation of community values’ or ‘the restoration of civic virtues’: i.e. ‘cultural traditions’, ‘shared social understandings’, ‘the network of social environments’, ‘moral education in schools’ and ‘democratic self‐government’. Communitarianism seeks ‘to make government more representative, more participatory and more responsive to all members of the community’, ‘to find ways to accord citizens more information, and more say’ and ‘to curb the role of private money, special interests and corruption in government’, and in return, a community has to be responsive as well with ‘moral values’ which must: ‘be non‐discriminatory and applied equally to all members’, ‘be generalizable, justified in terms that are accessible and understandable’ and ‘incorporate the full range of legitimate needs and values rather than focusing on any one category, be it individualism, autonomy, interpersonal caring, or social justice’. Such moral values should be developed at home and also at educational institutions.

8. It should be noted that before the 1990s, Japanese society had often been identified as a society which had a strong sense of ‘groups’, ‘belongings’ or ‘communitarian values’. Harmony and co‐operation, and the habits of negotiation and discussions were important in Japanese society. What had led Japan to economic success was not ‘a carefully enunciated ideology’, but communitarian values, in which agreement of all participants in decision‐making was emphasized. Quasi‐communitarianism since the 1990s differs from the earlier notion of groups, belongings or communitarian values. These notions only concerned harmony and co‐operation within an institution, neglecting the world outside; whereas quasi‐communitarianism addresses the integration of different groups and communities, which aims for social development through social solidarity.