A Delegation of All-Japanese Association of Comparative Pedagogy visited Kazan University

On October 01, 2012 a delegation of All-Japanese Association of Comparative Pedagogy led by its co-chairman, the head of the Post-Graduate Studies of Khitotsubasi University, professor Seki Keyko, visited Kazan Federal University.

Reference information: Khitotsubasi University is a Japanese higher education institution established in 1920, which has the status of state university. It is located in the city of Kunitati, close to Tokyo, and is a member of European Union Centre consortium of Tokyo. Khitotsubasi University is a leading higher education institution of Japan in the field of social-and-economic sciences; it trains masters and post-graduate students in the following specialities: science of law, economics, trade, linguistic sociology, international entrepreneurial strategy. There are the Institute of Economics, Innovation Center, Social Classics Center and others functioning under the University.

The guests began their visit with excursion over expositions of the Museum of History of Kazan University, got acquainted with the Assembly Hall and Memorial Lecture Room. Further on, an official meeting was organized in accordance with the visit schedule. Japanese scientists had a meeting with representatives of the Institute of Pedagogy and Psychology of KFU headed by the director, Mr. Aydar Kalimullin.

The discussion was organized in the “question – answer” form. Professor Seki Keyko, whose sphere of interests includes history of pedagogical thought, educational reforms development, intercultural pedagogy, ethno-national self-identification, showed interest in reforms in the sphere of Russian education and their reflection on Kazan University development, as well as in the role and historical mission of our University, which is located at the junction of cultures.

As for Kazan scientists, they were interested in the educational system existing in Japan: how training is organized, which forms of lessons prevail: lectures or independent work of students; how the training quality is assessed; what the percentage of schoolchildren entering higher education institutions is and so forth. In such a way, the discussion turned out to be very informative and cognitive for both of the parties.