戦後日本における高等教育関連議員の構造分析 <論考>

The aims of this paper are 1) to identify the politicians (Diet members) who played important roles in higher education in post-war Japan; 2) to examine their social characteristics and (3) to investigate the patterns of their influence in the political structure of higher education and in policy making decisions.　　

The study identified the 376 Diet members who made statements in that body’s educational subcommittees from 1945 to 2012. Moreover, these 376 Diet members were divided into three groups ― “core,” “middle,” and “peripheral” ― in rank order of the number of their pronouncements, and their social characteristics were analyzed.　　

The analysis yielded the following results: 　　

1) More than half of the core group were born between 1925-1934 and belong in the generation growing up during World War II. 　　

2) Many of core group were from big cities. On the other hand, in the peripheral group, many of them were from Chugoku, Shikoku, Kyushu and Okinawa areas.　　

3) Almost half of the core group in the House of Councilors were Socialist Party of Japan (SPJ) members and 30% of them were Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) members. On the other hand, more than 60% of the core group in the House of Representatives were LDP members. The pattern and process of discussions were different between both houses.　　

4) A quarter of the members of the core group in the House of Councilors were graduates from normal schools under the old system. In the House of Representatives, many of them were graduates from The University of Tokyo and other national and public universities.　　

5) In the House of Councilors, about 30% of each group majored in pedagogy. In the House of Representatives, many of them majored in law and economics.　　

6) In the House of Councilors, almost half of the core group were union members (the Japan Teachers Union). In the House of Representatives, many were members of the local assemblies, and many of the core group was ex-bureaucrats.　　

As above, the political actors who participated in the post war educational policy were not uniformed. This means that a variety of ideas and discussions had been presented in policy making and decisions.