Japanese Returnees’ Reentry Cultural Struggles: Differences and Commonalities in the Research Findings Over Time
Abstract
The rapid business globalization in the 1980s markedly increased the number of Japanese returnees. It is reported that approximately 50,000 returnees are currently enrolled in educational institutions in Japan, many of whom experience severe reverse culture shock. This paper reviews the most acknowledged educational research from among all ethnographic studies on Japanese returnees in English and Japanese from the 1980s onwards. The paper also explores returnees’ reentry processes and factors that influenced their reentry, and analyzes differences and commonalities in returnees’ reentry over time. The paper further suggests a framework for future research inquiries, and identifies further avenues for investigation. (100 words)
Full text article
References
Bennett, M.J. (1993). Toward ethnorelativism: A developmental model of intercultural sensitivity. Education for the Intercultural Experience. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.
Bennett, M.J. (1998). Basic Concepts of Intercultural Communication. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.
Bennett, M.J. (2004). Becoming Interculturally Competent. Toward multiculturalism. Newton, MA: Intercultural Resource Corporation.
Bennett, M.J. and Hammer, M.R. (2006). The Intercultural Development Inventory manual. Portland, OR: Intercultural Communication Institute.
Boyle-Baise, M. and McIntyre, D. J. (2008). What kind of experience? Preparing teachers in PDS or community-settings. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, D. J. McIntyre, & K. E. Demers (Eds.) Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (3:rd Ed.). (pp. 307-330) New York: Routledge.
Burgess, C. (2007). Multicultural Japan? Discourse and the ‘myth’ of homogeneity. Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus (Article ID: 2389). Retrieved from: http://www.japanfocus.org/-Chris-Burgess/2389 on Oct. 1, 2012
Burgess, C. (2010). The illusion of Homogeneous Japan and National Character: Discourse as a Tool to Transcend the ‘Myth’ vs. Reality Binary. Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus (Article ID: 3310). Retrieved from: http://www.japanfocus.org/-Chris-Burgess/3310 on Oct. 1, 2012
Dale, P.N. (1986). The Myth of Japanese Uniqueness. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Emmert, P. and Baker, L.L. (1989). Measurement of Communication Behavior. New York: Longman.
Engestrom, Y., Miettinen, R., and Punamaki, R. (1999). Perspectives on Activity Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Goodman, R. (1990). Japan’s International Youth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hammer, M.R. Bennett, M.J. and Wiseman, R. (2003). Measuring Intercultural Sensitivity: The Intercultural Development Inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations (27) 421-433.
Hirano, R. (1995). The Diary of Returnees’ Mother. Tokyo: Kindai Bungei Sha Publication.
Hood, C. P. (2001). Japanese Education Reform. New York: Routledge.
Horio, T. (1988). Educational Thought and Ideology in Modern Japan. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press.
Kanno, Y. (2003). Negotiating Bilingual and Bicultural Identities: Japanese Returnees Betwixt Two Worlds. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Kano Podolsky, M. (2004). Cross-Cultural Upbringings: A Comparison of the “Third Culture Kids” Framework and “Kaigai/Kikoku-Shijo” Studies. Kyoto Women’s University Gendai Shakai Kenkyū (6), 67–78.
Kidder, L. H. (1992). Requirements for Being “Japanese”: Stories of Returnees. International Journal of Intercultural Relations (16). 383-393.
Kobayashi, Y. (1991). Japanese Schools Can’t Cope with Cosmopolitan Kids. Transcending Stereotypes. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Learning in doing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Mezirow, J. (1994). Understanding Transformation Theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 44 (4), 222-232.
Mezirow and Associates. (2000). Learning as Transformation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Mezirow, J., Taylor, E. and Associates. (2009). Transformative Learning in Practice: Insights from Community, Workplace, and Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Minami, Y. (2000). Understanding Identity of Japanese Children Overseas and Re-entering: Their Life Experiences and Intercultural Development. Tokyo: Toshindo Publishing.
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. (1999). Yori Yoi Deai No Tame Ni (For Better Encounters With Returnees). Tokyo: Gyosei Publishing.
Murphy-Shigematsu, S. (1993). Multiethnic Japan and the Monoethnic Myth. MELUS (18) 4, 63-80.
Osawa, C. (1986). Tatta Hitotsu no Aoi Sora: Kaigai Kikokushijo wa Gendai no Sutego ka? (The only one sky: Are returnees abandoned children of the modern era?). Tokyo: Bungei Shunju Publishing.
Osterman, K. F. (2000). Students’ Need for Belonging in the School Community. Review of Educational Research (70) 3, 323-367.
Pelto, P.J. (1968). The Differences Between “Tight” and “Loose” Societies. Trans-action (5)5, 37-40.
Pollock, D. et al. (2001). Third Culture Kids. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.
Schaetti, B. (1998). The History of Cultural Marginality: From Pathology to Possibility. Unpublished Dissertation. Cincinnati, OH: Union Institute.
Sleeter, C. E. (2001). Preparing white teachers for diversity: Overwhelming presence of whiteness. Journal of teacher education, 2001, 52, 94-106.
Sleeter, C. E. (2008). Preparing White teachers for diverse students. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, D. J. McIntyre, & K. E. Demers (Eds.) Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (3:rd Ed.). (pp. 559-582) New York: Routledge.
Stonequist, E.V. (1937). The Marginal Man. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Triandis, H. C., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M. J., Asai, M., and Lucca, N. (1988). Individualism and Collectivism: Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Self-Ingroup Relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. (54) 2, 323-338.
Triandis, H.C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Tsuneyoshi, R. (2001). The Japanese Model of Schooling: Comparison with the US. New York: Routledge.
Turner, J. and Reynolds, K. (2001). The Social Identity Perspective in Intergroup Relations: Theories, Themes, and Controversies. In M.A. Hoggs & S. Tindale (Eds.) Blackwell Handbook of social psychology: Intergroup processes. (pp.133-152). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Villegas, A. M. (2008). Diversity and teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feiman-Nemser, D. J. McIntyre, & K. E. Demers (Eds.) Handbook of research on teacher education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (3:rd Ed.). (pp. 551-558) New York: Routledge.
Weiner, M. (2009). Japan’s Minorities: The Illusion of Homogeneity (2:nd Ed). New York: Routledge.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. New York: Cambridge University Press
White, M. (1988). Japanese Overseas: Can They Go Home? New York: Free Press.
Yates, R. E. (1990, September 23). Japan’s ‘Returnees’ Face Rejection, Find That Coming Home Isn’t Easy. Chicago Tribune.
Yoneyama, R. (1999). The Japanese High School: Silence and Resistance. New York: Routledge.
Yoshida, T., Matsumoto, D., Akashi, S., Akiyama, T., Furuiye, A. Ishii, C. and Moriyoshi, N. (2009). Contrasting Experiences in Japanese Returnee Reentry: Those Who Adjust Easily and Those Who Do Not. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, (33) 4, 265-276.
Authors
Copyright (c) 2014 Fuyu Shimomura
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This journal provides immediate and free open access to all its content and is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This means readers are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author, as long as proper attribution is given. This policy is consistent with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition of open access.