History of Korean residents in Japan and their current life



Education Policy for Korean minority in Japan

Mutsumi MATSUMOTO

University of Bristol

mutsumi.matsumoto@bristol.ac.uk

As I have never formally studied what social Policy is, my interpretation might be different from those who are much more familiar with. But I hope to contribute to the conference.

Introduction

In this paper, I argue that the issue of Social Policy for Koreans in Japan faces two main dimensions. The problems that should be looked at are that the lack of education policy for Koreans in Japan, and that there is an unspoken assimilation policy. As my understanding of Since Social Policy is “the practice of social intervention aimed at securing social change to promote the welfare and wellbeing of citizens” (Alcock, 2004, p.4), this paper aims to point out to the fact that in the case for Korean minority in Japan, their situation seems to have more to do with the lack of social policy, rather than improving the already existing policy, at least in relation to their education. In fact, Japan’s education policy towards Korean minority appears to have the opposite meaning of “wellbeing” as in uncomforting or insecure. As I will explain later, it does not definitely aim to promote the welfare and wellbeing of Koreans in Japan, or improve their lives, if not making things difficult.

Despite the fact that Japan's policy for Koreans has become a little relaxed ( for example, it has become less difficult to naturalise and no fingerprint required any more), there seems to be no obvious policy for minority education for Koreans, although in the past there was the closing down policy. As I will discuss later, it is obvious that being an independent ethnic school without support has not given Koreans better social life, education policy is requited from Koreans’ point of view. This aspect reflects the practical problem of Japan’s policy towards Korean minority. I aim to explore what being ethnic school has done and has not done to Koreans’ life、and to show what the school has went through more than 50 years of their history.

Another point this paper wishes to examine is that the lack of policy for Korean minority is, in fact, the policy of assimilation that Japan has had country as a whole. For example, South Korean oriented schools are now given as an equal status as Japanese private schools because otherwise they could not have run the school, as they mostly had a financial problem to do so, although they now have to follow Japanese way of school system. By becoming Japanese private schools, they now receive financial support from Japan, which has made running school easier. As a result of following Japanese school curriculum, however, they have much less time to have Korean classes and their opportunity as Korean school is limited. For some, it is nothing but Japan's assimilation policy. In my understanding, this aspect reflects the ideological problem of Japan’s policy towards Korean minority, because the situation seems like as if Japan actually imply Koreans to become more like “Japanese” school, otherwise no support will be given.

Although there are both North oriented and South oriented Korean schools in Japan, I focus on North oriented school, as they are the schools that are not regarded as decent, which means that they are in less advantageous position. In relation to the issue of Korean school, this paper examines the issue of ichijōkō. What teachers in mind is the frustration of their school status as non- ichijōkō, which can be found from the interview that I conducted as my fieldwork. As well as looking at teachers’ perspective towards this issue. I will look for the reason why they are not regarded as formal and proper school, which might to be related to the notion of assimilation policy.

A note on terminology

These terms are used in throughout this paper for the convenience use.

Chongryon ( 総連=在日本朝鮮人総連合会) :the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan

Mindan(民団＝在日本大韓民国民団) :the Association of Korean Residents in Japan, or The Korean Residents Union in Japan

Chōsen (朝鮮)school: pro-North school

Mindan(民団) school: pro-South school

Zainichi (在日)Korean: Koreans living in Japan

Ichijōkō(一条校) school that follows Japanese curriculum, which is set by Japan’s School Education Law, Article one

Kakushu Gakkō (各種学校) school of a special kind

Korean residents in Japan

Koreans living in Japan is usually referred to zainichi Kankoku/Chousen jin, (在日韓国・朝鮮人) which means resident Koreans in Japan. The majority of Koreans living in Japan belongs to the third and the forth, and even the fifth generation of immigrants, which indicates that the Koreans have been a long term residents. Every year nearly 10,000 zainichi Koreans go through the process of naturalisation, by which they adopt nationality of Japan. At the moment, almost 90% of Koreans in Japan were born in Japan, and 97% of their origin is from southern part of Korean peninsula (Shutsunyūkoku, cited in Ryang, 1997, p.3).

In general, the historical background of Korean residents is traced back from the restoration of Japanese imperial rule in 1868, although some Korean people had lived in Japan before. In any case, people from Korea, who came to Japan between 1910 and 1945 as colonial labour, are the origin of the majority of the current Korean residents in Japan (Kobayashi, cited in Wada and Ishizaka, 2002, p.102). The event of 1910 is called the Act of Annexation, and at that time, there were about 800 Koreans in Japan, and by 1945 when Japan’s colonisation was over, the number of Korean people ended up increasing to 2,000,000. This number included those who were forced to come to Japan and those who fought for Japan during the war. After the defeat of Japan in 1945, many of them went back to Korea, but others with various reasons remained in Japan. In fact, more than 500,000 remained in Japan (ibid). Their reasons were, for example, some stayed in Japan as they lost all their family members and relatives in the Korean peninsula, which made them realise that it was pointless to go back to homeland. And some stayed because they felt that they already established stable life in Japan.

As mentioned before, it is generally understood that Koreans in Japan are divided into two political groups; Minda and Chongryon. Mindan 民団＝在日本大韓民国民団. In English, it is called the Association of Korean Residents in Japan, or The Korean Residents Union in Japan, which Mindan claims the official English name. It is a pro-south organization. And Chongryon総連=在日本朝鮮人総連合会. Chongryon is Korean pronunciation, and Japanese pronunciation is Sōren. In English, it is called the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan, and English spell is Chongryun. The organisation uses the word Chongryun for the organisation’s English name. It is a pro-north organization. Korean schools in Japan are based on either Mindan or Chongryon. There are extreme supporters for both organizations; however, most of Koreans in Japan, especially the younger generation do not seem to care much about the organisations.

Historical background of Korean ethnic schools in Japan

School Education law, article 1 states; under this law, schools means that kindergartens, elementary schools, secondary schools, schools for blind, schools for the deaf, schools for the other disabled, colleges of technology, universities and junior colleges, and specialised training colleges. In order for schools to be accepted under this law, schools must use textbooks that are accepted by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and follow teaching guideline that is prepared by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and give teaching accordingly. In short, use Japanese textbook, teaching in Japanese language. Pro-North Korean school obviously does not belong to this category, which has influenced the school condition significantly.

Oyamada argues that the history of Korean schools in Japan could be divided into three brief periods from the end of the Second World War until the present (tech/korea.html). The first period started between 1945, from which Korea became free from Japan, and the Korean War (1950-53) broke out. During this time, ethnic education was mainly for the purpose to prepare for returning homeland. Korean people were strongly hoping to return home, and therefore, they wanted to teach the language to their children. This was how the Korean schools in Japan started. However, due to the Korean War, they lost the opportunity to return home, and they had to postpone the returning until their life became stable. Accordingly, Korean schools were also kept as places to study for Korean children. In 1948, the first policy for the closing of ethnic schools was issued by Japan. In this policy, it was stated that Korean children have to be educated at Japanese school with Japanese children. Secondly, Korean ethnic school was not approved even as school as a special kind, even though they were allowed to have an ethnic class as an extra curricular outside Japanese school (Uri hakkyo wo tsuzuru kai, 2001, p. 64). Koreans fought against the closure and kept negotiating with Japanese ministry of education, As a result, the second policy for the closing ethnic schools was issued in 1949, when Korean became a prefectural school of Japan. By this way, they were at least allowed to teach Korean history and language as an extra curricular, which basically meant that teachers were all Japanese and all other teaching was done in Japanese language (ibid, p.69). However, since the establishing of the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan in 1955, Korean school became independent and after several years of campaigning, they were given status as kakushu gakkō 各種学校; school of a special kind. The establishment of the organisation also contributed to build a Korea University.

The second period is between after the Korean War and the 1960s, during which many Koreans returned the North part of the Korean peninsula. This was also the time when the normalisation of relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea was announced. As they were divided into the North and the South, the remaining Koreans in Japan also started looking for different political preference. However, their opposition became severe and the schools were also involved in the opposition. Consequently, they sort of stopped to cooperate with each other, which brought two different kind of ethnic school; pro-South and pro-North.

Third period starts after the 1970s, and since then Korean schools have started losing their popularity as more Koreans have started settling in Japan as permanent residents. This is the time that the number of pupils at pro- North Korean school is decreasing, while at pro-South schools, the number of pupils from the republic of Korea is dramatically increasing.

At the moment, there are about 60,000 Koreans-Japanese who go to primary and junior high schools. Then, about 1 % of them go to Mindan related schools, while about 10% go to Chongryun related schools. The rest go to ordinary Japanese schools (tech/korea.html). It is reported that every year the number of students at any Korean schools are decreasing, and Oyamada argues that there are mainly two reasons for this (ibid). Firstly, he points out that those Korean schools may not be able to offer good opportunity for the students. Their educational curriculum does not seem to meet the student’s need, especially those who hope to enter Japanese universities. This might give the students less advantage situation for the students. The second reason seems to have a relation to Japan’s notion of assimilation. Japan tends not to look at her diversity and thus, Koreans feel pressure to become more like Japanese.

There are two types of Korean schools in Japan that shows schools’ political preference in general understanding. The fact that the Korean peninsula is divided into two results in that Koreans in Japan are also divided into two groups in which one group supports the south and the other supports the north. Although some argues that there is not a huge distinction between pro-South and pro-North, it is still largely understood that so-called Mindan schools are regarded as pro-South, where supposedly people follow South Korean way, although one teacher from pro-North Korean school said that many of Mindan executives graduated from pro-North school. It is often understood that Chōsen school follows the pro-North Korean education view, rather than pro-South Korea, from which some argue that this is one of the reasons why Japanese government is reluctant to accept them as a proper school. In this paper, for a convenience reason, I define Chōsen school as pro-North school in order to distinguish from Mindan school that are regarded as pro-South school. While there are four pro-South schools in Japan (three of them are now given a status as private school in Japan), there are about eighty pro-North schools that have their own school curriculum and text books. Since their establishment in 1940s, pro-North schools have been facing several disadvantages, and generally speaking, pro-North Korean school is still seen as a kind of school that lacks money to run a school, and hence, the school environment is well provided.

Typically, at the North oriented school, everything is taught in Korean, except for the language classes of Japanese and English. As they are not funded by the Japanese government, they are not examined by them, which mean that they are quite free to organize their curriculum including the textbooks that are used at schools. The textbooks are published by their own publishing company, while their own teachers examine the contents. In contrast, at Japanese schools these work are all done by the Japanese government. Most of the subjects that are taught at pro-North schools are similar to those at Japanese schools, such as English, geography, history, maths, natural science, physical education, and music (Ryang, 1997, p.25). They are treated as kakushu gakkō, which means schools of a special kind. People outside pro-North Korean schools tend to think that a lot of teaching on Kim Il Sung is the focus of the school. Ryang explains that while at Japanese primary schools pupils have moral studies class, pupils at the primary schools learn the childhood of Father Marshal Kim Il Sung. Whereas at Japanese middle schools pupils have moral and social studies, the middle schools teach the revolutionary activities of the Great Leader Kim Il Sung (ibid).

However, it should be noted that there was a dramatic change for their textbook and curriculum during the 1990s. They started thinking that it was time for them to alter their activities as the situation of Koreans in Japan has been changing. Re-examining school textbooks and curriculum was the part of the changes that they were going to make. The process took about 10 years, during which they published 30 new textbooks as well as altered more than 120 school textbooks. Their key theme for change was to educate people who are aware of their own ethnic identity as well as becoming an international person (my own translation, Urihakkyo wo tuzurukai, 2001, p.138). Their changes are as follows; they used to teach social studies from the 6th grade at primary schools. They changed it to start from the 3rd grade, in which they teach family values, Korean community in Japan, the homeland and ethnic identity as well as foreign and Japanese affairs. Subjects such as Japanese geography and Japanese history were only studied as a small part of world geography and world history at high schools. They are now taught at primary schools. The hour for English class was also 140 hours increased (ibid, pp.138-139). There are some features as a non- ichijōkō, that pro-North Korean school is allowed. For example, they have their own textbooks, teachers do not require having qualification of Japanese, and they have their own curriculum, which means that they can use Korean language all the time. These features are advantages for them, but what they really want is an approval from the government so that they can be ethnic school as well as ichijōkō style.

In contrast to pro-North school, as ichijōkō, pro-South Korean school do not have to suffer financially any more as the Japanese government support them. The students are also able to apply for all the universities in Japan. However, because their curriculum follows those based on the Japanese government, so-called ethnic education such as Korean language and history are restricted. They also have to use textbooks that are accepted by the Japanese government, which might contain different views from Korean educators. Furthermore, Japanese language is officially considered as their mother language. Korean kakushu gakkō have advantage in organising their teaching curriculum freely, which means that they could focus more on ethnic education if they want.

In the past, students at pro-North school could not receive a student discount for commuter pass for the train. This was improved in 1994, and they now receive a student discount with the same amount of Japanese students. They were also not allowed to participate in a national sports competition for high school students, although they are allowed now since 1994. The students also have less opportunity to get into Japanese universities, although some private and public universities accept candidates nowadays. However, all the national universities still did not accept (Oyamada, 01s2/korearesume.html), unless the students took the university entrance qualification test that is an official certification of qualifications for entry to universities.

However, the year 2003 witnessed a significant change for Korean students who graduated from North oriented school. The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology announced a new policy that allows these students to apply for Japanese national universities, although the actually decision making was left for each universities to make whether or not they are willing to accept Korean students. This appeared to be a positive change in contrast to the past when Korean students had to go through double schooling in order to be qualified to apply. As a result of this new policy, almost all the Japanese national university decided to accept applications from Korean students. However, it is also argued that the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology still does not make final conclusion, and they left their responsibility for each university. The decision is saying as if it is now possible for Korean students to apply for Japanese national universities, but Japan is somehow not making the process easy for them. In this case, it was fortunate that almost all the universities made the decision to accept, however, it could have been the case that the universities would not have done so. The policy remains a little unclear, and it seems as if Japan deliberately tries to avoid the definite decision. The issue of a qualification of school does not actually stop here, which is why it has been a controversial issue. It affects Korean students’ life outside and after schooling. By this I mean that because their school is not regarded as formal school, technically they do not have a formal school education, which leaves them with no school diploma of some kind. This inevitably reflects their life in order to get a job, as they are considered as people with no qualification.

Assimilation Policy

I have tried to show the evidences why the case of Korean minority could be seen as the case of the lack of policy for a practical reason. It is arguable that Japan-s policy for education of Korean minority is influenced by the notion of homogeneity, which Japan still seems to hang onto. In Japan, policy does not seem to mean for wellbeing. In fact, it appears to be the opposite meaning. For example, Ko argues that the fact that until recently students who graduated from pro-North Korean school were not allowed to apply for Japanese national universities is a policy defined as closed educational opportunity policy 教育鎖国政策. In relation to education and school, the fact that Japanese police force is not keen to pay attention to the incidents of Korean uniform cut is also a public peace incapacity policy 治安無能政策 (2004, p.7). This is the unpleasant incident that happened especially in 1994, when it was reported that North Korea was actively producing nuclear weapons. Between April and July, 1994, there were 160 cases of female students who were wearing Korean school uniform experienced that their uniform were cut by strangers on their way to school (Hong, 2004, p.44). In the sense of welfare and well being of people, it can be true to say that Japan does not have a policy for Korean minority education and thus, Koreans in Japan do not have much choice but try to assimilate into the majority society. This is sort of an implicit situation.

Unable to receive support from Japan, I argue that this fact is actually Japan’s policy of assimilation. For example, Eabara points out to the fact that Japan has always been pressuring that education in Japan is recommended to create Japanese citizens, and so their policy has been something to deny ethnic education. For example, in 1947, the closure of Korean schools was announced, and Korean children were forced to transfer to Japanese schools. In February 1965, the ministry of education then announced that Korean ethnic school that aims to educate Korean-ness does not deserved to be regarded as proper school to Japan (2004, p.62).

Similarly, Park describes Japan’s assimilation policy towards minority education as something that is influenced by the notion of homogeneity, which does not accept the minority and their education (1992, p.176). The policy also aims to make Korean children to go to Japanese school by placing several unequal treatments. Accordingly, as an ideological aspect, it can be said that Japan’s assimilation policy is so influential that Korean schools are controlled by it in many ways.

Teachers’ perspectives on minority education in Japan

Teachers’ comments were based on my fieldwork that was conducted as interview.

The following simple and clear cut sentence could describe the entire situation the school is facing;

The biggest problem is obviously the status of our school.

[teacher 1]

The school’s problem could not be expressed in better way than this sentence. From interviews with teachers at pro-North Korean school, other typical finding from the interviews was as follows;

So, like us ethnic school have more problems than other schools, you know. Because we don’t receive financial help. That kind of financial crisis made parents to send their children to Japanese school, without any choice.

[teacher 3]

It seems obvious that the status of the school remains a main concern for teachers as much as the schools hopes to carry on their own education;

We are going to protect our heritage. It is that kind of idea. So, well, it became like now because of Japanese government, but we are not doing things as we were told by Japanese government. That is why we are not Ichijōkō. That kind of policy is still alive. It is from the 1940s, and the 1950s. Discrimination against our school is still going on. After 60 years. They still don’t look at our education! After 60 years, I think that it was time to be accepted.

[teacher 1]

This teacher’s comment could imply that because of Japan’s unwritten assimilation policy, that has affected the choice of school that Korean people make. Opinions towards Japan’s policy or lack of policy could be explained in typical sentences in the following quotes;

Like I said, it depends on the parent’s or the country’s policy, mainly. […] The country is small and poor. Well, like that there are many people who do not care about their ethnic background. We live as Koreans while being in Japan. Like we want to protect our ethnic background, […] this is the result of the education one received. Another thing is that it is the result of Japan’s policy.[…] So, for them, it is convenient if Koreans in Japan disappear.

[…]because of Japanese government, but we are not doing things as we were told by Japanese government. That is why we are not Ichijōkō. That kind of policy is still alive. It is from the 1940s, and the 1950s. Discrimination against our school is still going on. After 60 years.

[teacher1]

Although there are parents who wish to send their children to go to Korean ethnic school, the fact that parents have to pay extra money inevitably unable some to do so, as they do not receive financial support;

That kind of financial crisis made parents to send their children to Japanese school, without any choice

[teacher 4]

All the comments above are closely related to the fact that pro-north school is not regarded as proper school, and therefore, they do not have an equal status as Japanese schools. It is obvious that teachers have much to say to this situation, however, it is another matter of whether or not these opinions could be reflected.

Conclusion

As Koreans in Japan has changed their life style from aiming to go back to the Korean peninsula to the idea of settling down in Japan permanently, Japan’s policy towards them seems to have influentially changed accordingly. Japan had to change the way regarding them as from people who were temporarily there to leave eventually to people who are permanent residents in Japan. This change of their life style has also given many impacts on their educational view. As Neary argues, the fingerprinting was abolished, and the process of naturalisation has become relatively easier (2002, pp.211-212). It is, thus, a mystery why education policy for Koreans in Japan has little changes in past years.

There are several possibilities of Social Policy that could apply for the case of Korean minority in Japan. Firstly, they demand for the equal status as Japanese ichijōkō since this status seems to be the best solution for improving school condition. They ask for the recognition as a proper school, where education of Korean language and culture are protected as well as having an equal status as ichijōkō. Then, if it is not possible secondly, they ask for the financial support from the government. Although the local government in each prefecture have their own policy for financial support for foreign schools, it does not always give sufficient money, and also, for Koreans, it is government responsibility to look after the minority education. At least with the financial support, they would be able to keep up the school running. The third demand from Koreans is that there should be ethnic class at public Japanese school. It has to be said that almost all the Korean minority children go to Japanese school for several different reasons, and one of the reasons is related to the financial issue again. As mentioned before, going to Korean ethnic school is more expensive that Japanese regular schools, and for some families it is difficult. Thus, children should be able to learn some of their cultural background even at Japanese school. This kind of education is often called Ethnic Class, which should be funded by the government.

It can be said that the proper policy to protect Korean ethnic school, or any foreign schools are urgently needed from Korean’s point of view. Eabara also suggests that while Japan needs to examine the necessity of the policy for foreign schools, school that will guarantee ethnic education should be protected under the law. In his opinion, ethnic class also should be taught as a formal curriculum, and the education policy should be introduced both to the government and any educational institutions. The fact that only parents of ethnic school are suffering has to be looked after (2004, p.64).

I interviewed expressed their frustration towards the school’s status. At the moment, it seems that because there is no concrete policy, Japan is able to escape with some excuse by saying that there is no previous example, when Koreans try to win support. This is why special treatment for minority education would be ideal as a policy. Interestingly, there were several cases when the policy for foreign schools was proposed at Japanese diet during the 1960s and the 1970s (Park, 1992, p.170).However, the contents of the policy was far from policy that is supposed to protect minority education. The policy was designed to give the ministry of education a power to inspect, observe, and interfere the Korean schools. This policy, for Koreans, simply meant another closing down policy. It was failed to pass the policy as a result of Korean’s eager protests (ibid, p.171).

According to Hill, in the case of Britain where parents of Asian pupils demand for separation schools with public fund, the government has showed their willingness to support (2003, p.219). This is probably the treatment that most Koreans hope for. Ideally, it is that they should be able to receive support from the government. It is actually beneficial that they are kakushu gakkō as they are able to have their own school curriculum. Thus, policy of some kind could be introduced for them to enable to have both aspects of ichijōkō and non- ichijōkō; policy that allows Korean school to be both ethnic school and have an equal status as ichijōkō. Koreans would probably like to keep the status as non- ichijōkō in order for them to keep their Korean-ness. However, before reaching that kind of stage, as Neary predicts, it might take some time for Japan as a whole to accept the Koreans and their existence (2002, p.212), and leaving the notion of homogeneity would be necessary.

Bibliography

Alcock, Pete. 2004, ‘Social policy and professional practice’ in Saul Becher and alan Bryman (ed.), Understanding research for social policy and practice, pp.4-13, (Bristol, Polity Press)

Hill, Michael. 2003, Understanding Social Policy (Oxford : Blackwell Publishing)

Hong, Jong Su 洪正秀. 2004, ‘在日朝鮮人の人権状況はどうなったか…１０年を振り返るzainichi chōsen no jinken jōkyō ha dounattaka… 10 nen wo furikaeru’, in人権と生活　The Human rights and Life , vol.18, June 2004, pp.43-45.

Ko, Yon Wi. 高演義. 2004, ’とにかくこの地は住みずづらいtonikaku konochiha sumizurai’, in 人権と生活　The Human rights and Life, vol.18, June 2004, pp.7-10.

Kobayashi, Tomoko 高橋知子., “在日コリアン　Zainichi korian, ”, cited in Wada, Haruki 和田春樹 and Ishizaka, Kouichi　石坂浩一, 現代朝鮮･韓国Gendai Kankoku chousen, (Tokyo, Iwanami Publishers)

Mamoru, Egara 江原護 2004, ‘民族学校問題へのかかわりのなかでMinzokugakkōmondai heno kakawarino nakade’, in人権と生活　The Human rights and Life , vol.18, June 2004, pp.60-65

Neary, Ian. 2002, The State and Politics in Japan (Oxford : Polity Press)

Oyamada, Moritada.　小山田守忠. 2001, “在日コリアン民族学校の研究　zainichi korian minzoku gakkou no kenkyu, The study of Korean ethnic schools”, , Accessed 6 Dec 02

Oyamada, Moritada. 小山田守忠.2001, “在日韓国･朝鮮人民族教育に関する研究Zainichi Kankoku chousenjin minzoku kyouiku ni kansuru kenkyu,”, , Accessed 6 Dec 02

Park, Sumsok 朴三石. 1997, 日本のなかの朝鮮学校　Nihon no naka no chōsen gakkō, (Chōsen Seinen Publishers)

Ryang, Sonya. !997, North Koreans in Japan: Language, Ideology, and Identity, (Boulder, Westview Press)

Uri hakkyo wo tsuzuru kai ウリハッキョをつづる会. 2001, 朝鮮学校ってどんなとこ？Chōsen gakkō tte donna koto?(Shakai hyouron Publishers)

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download