Roundtable Discussion: The Future of the Classroom as Seen Through Digital Textbooks and Online Classes

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, MEXT issued a report this year titled "Toward the Creation of 'Reiwa-Era Japanese-Style School Education.'" It introduced the keywords "individually optimized learning" and "collaborative learning." Behind this is theGIGA School Program, and a proposal from the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) called "Classrooms of the Future" mentioned individual optimization using big data. The MEXT report follows these trends.

As you know, schools, including universities, have been encouraged to promote online education during the pandemic. On the other hand, the importance of in-person classes has also become apparent. Today, I would like us to exchange opinions on "the future of digital education in primary and secondary education."

First, I'd like to confirm the current situation. The discussion around "digital textbooks" is one major pillar. The direction has long been to use paper and digital textbooks in parallel and to promote this, but Mr. Kurokawa, you have been working in this field at a textbook company for a long time. Could you tell us about the history and current status?

I work for Mitsumura Tosho, a textbook publisher. At the same time, on behalf of the Japan Text Book Publishers Association, an organization of textbook companies, I serve as a member of MEXT's committee to discuss the future of digital textbooks. When I think about the future of digital education, I believe there is a difference between the landscape we want to see and the landscape we are currently seeing.

First, I'd like to talk about the history of digital textbooks and the GIGA School Program. Digital textbooks have evolved since 2000 as part of the national policy for the informatization of education. At that time, there was the e-Japan Strategy, and digital textbooks for teachers' instruction emerged. Then in 2010, there was a policy during the Aso administration called the "School New Deal," and large-screen TVs and electronic blackboards were distributed. After the government changed to the Democratic Party of Japan, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications' Future School Promotion Project and MEXT's Learning Innovation Project began after 2010. That was the first time digital textbooks for learners were developed and used in demonstration schools.

Ten years later, we have the current GIGA School Program. In fact, such policies have been implemented every ten years. Along with this, a bill concerning digital textbooks was passed, establishing a system for their use, and they can now be used in classes as an alternative to regular textbooks.

Digital textbooks for learners have the same content as paper textbooks, so they do not require authorization, but it was stipulated that they should be used in conjunction with paper textbooks. The problem, however, is that while textbooks are free, digital textbooks for learners are optional, paid materials, and publishers are not obligated to produce them. That positioning has not changed. The policy is also to use paper and digital materials together and to give consideration to special needs education.

Of course, paper textbooks and digital textbooks for learners are not completely equal. Digitalization adds QR codes and functions to support special needs. For example, there are functions for enlarging the page, adding furigana to all kanji, changing fonts and sizes, and text-to-speech, and this is the extent of what is recognized as a "textbook."

On the other hand, the characteristics of digital include various content such as videos, audio readings, worksheets, and applications. However, this part is positioned as "digital teaching materials" and is outside the scope of authorization. From the field, there are requests to use them integrally with digital textbooks.

What is the current status of the introduction of digital textbooks?

Initially, the GIGA School Program planned to distribute one device per student and build a network by 2024, and the full-scale introduction of digital textbooks was also envisioned for the 2024 textbook revision. However, the impact of COVID-19 suddenly moved everything forward, and the situation changed completely.

Following the distribution of devices and the development of network environments, a project to promote the spread of digital textbooks for learners has been underway since fiscal 2021, with the government distributing digital textbooks for one subject to fifth and sixth graders in elementary school and all grades in junior high school. Currently, about 40% of elementary and junior high schools, or 12,200 schools, are participating. In this way, demonstration classes have started, and we plan to further expand and continue this next fiscal year.

As of the end of July, 96% of all municipalities have completed the deployment of devices for the GIGA School Program. The remaining are 70 municipalities. Also, about 25% of the schools that have introduced them allow students to take the devices home.

One more point, from the first report of the MEXT review committee, the conclusion is that 2024 will not be a full-scale introduction, but rather the "first opportunity for a full-scale introduction."

Since the submission for authorization of elementary school textbooks is next April, there is still insufficient discussion to suddenly shift from paper to digital on a full scale. Realistically, there is not enough evidence to determine the direction in terms of both the system and the budget, so it was decided to proceed after waiting for the results of the verification projects currently underway. The full-scale review of "from paper to digital" is scheduled to aim for the revision period around fiscal 2030, which will be the start of the new Courses of Study.

I think we need to proceed by separating these two milestones, fiscal 2024 and fiscal 2030. A technical review committee has now been established to promote the unification of standard specifications and functions for digital textbooks, data linkage through coding, and consideration of how to manage accounts by fiscal 2024, and discussions are underway.

From fiscal 2022, research and studies will start for a review of the textbook system to further accommodate digitalization. In the future, consideration of a system design for authorization, adoption, and supply that also supports digital textbooks is included in next fiscal year's project budget, and it seems the government is motivated.

The bottleneck is, in any case, the budget. Educationally, a parallel system with choices is definitely better, but in Japan, textbooks are the cornerstone of public education, and there is the premise of free provision, so it must be done within a limited budget. I think that is the biggest challenge.

What is the significance of introducing digital textbooks in the first place?

I believe that digitalization will enrich learning. It can realize individually optimized learning, and above all, it will move away from just uniform classes where the textbook unilaterally imposes knowledge and ideas. I think that by digitalizing, we can return the subject of learning to the children.

Instead of classes ending with children just listening to the teacher's talk and their friends' correct answers, each individual's learning begins. I believe that is a major turning point and significance. The ability to customize individually also has great meaning for special needs education.

So the landscape you want to see is what you just described. I understand very well.

Next, Mr. Yamagami, could you please speak from your practical standpoint of having taught information education in high school?

I am an information teacher at Hyogo Prefectural Sanda Shounkan High School. Elementary and junior high schools are ahead on digital textbooks, and I feel that high schools have not yet grasped it as an urgent issue. On the other hand, the subject of information starts in high school and does not exist in elementary and junior high. What often causes confusion is the "informatization of education," which is progressing separately from the "information" subject that started in 2003, and I think this is what connects most to digital education.

Our school is the newest in Hyogo Prefecture, a young school celebrating its 20th anniversary this year, and we are undertaking several advanced initiatives. For example, seven years ago, a young math teacher proposed uploading preparatory videos for flipped classrooms to YouTube, and by last year, we had over 1,000 of them. During the school closure due to COVID-19, these videos were very helpful for math classes. Inspired by this, other subjects like English and science also started creating materials.

Furthermore, also starting seven years ago, we have been using NetCommons, a CMS (Educational Learning Support Information System) developed by the National Institute of Informatics, to interact with students on a daily basis. For example, we use the CMS to send students applications for supplementary lessons and announcements in the form of a circular. New information is sent to students by email. The sender can see who has not viewed it. Therefore, when a state of emergency was declared and a request for temporary school closure was issued, we were able to exchange information immediately via NetCommons.

At the peak during the closure period, there were 100 to 200 posts a day. Very few prefectural high schools were doing this, and we received inquiries from other schools asking "how do you do it?" but in that situation, we didn't have the luxury to deal with other schools and bluntly told them, "We can do it because we were doing it on a daily basis; you can't just suddenly start" (laughs).

So it's all thanks to your regular efforts.

Yes. Online classes and digital materials gained attention due to COVID-19, but six months before the outbreak, a law called the Act on the Promotion of Informatization in Education was passed by the Diet. So, it was something that had to be done sooner or later. I feel we need to appeal more that digitalization is necessary for our times, regardless of COVID-19.

I'm a bit concerned about what the term "digital education" refers to. If the data being exchanged is digital, then it's digital education, but is it enough for paper-based things to just change their form? If we talk about changing the so-called "chalk and talk" to something interactive, even in my high school days, classes using language labs or audiovisual rooms for language materials were becoming widespread.

I think it needs to be understood that we're not just using digital tools because they've become more accessible, but that interactive communication is necessary, and that not only the information provided by the teacher but also what comes from the students will be digitized, enabling things that were not possible before.

Earlier, there was talk of installing large monitors in classrooms nationwide. In preparing the investigation report that led to their introduction, I visited schools in the UK. There were projectors hanging in every room—the gym, the cafeteria, everywhere. Foreigners come to Japanese high schools as English assistants, and they have spent their school lives surrounded by information and communication technology since kindergarten and elementary school. And apparently, all of it was made in Japan.

But when they came to Japan, they were teaching with a blackboard and printouts (laughs). When they said they wanted to use a projector, they had to book a special classroom and take the students to the third floor of another building, and their Japanese partner teachers didn't look pleased. I feel that what's being demanded is how well teachers can adapt to such changes.

You point out that the significance of digital lies in promoting interactivity, and that this is not something that just started now, but that there have been various efforts since long ago.

When we talk about digital education, there's an image of using the latest technologies like big data and AI, all connected as a network, as tools in education. During the pandemic, the biggest issue was whether digital devices were used or not, and schools that didn't use them were heavily criticized for being behind.

It can be said that digital education is possible precisely because the technology exists, but if the users are not aware of its significance, it's common for the educational theory to disappear, and it becomes just about introducing the technology. Those of us working in specialized fields need to be aware of this.

Mr. Nakano, you have been involved in inclusive education and special needs education for a long time. Universal design is also not a new concept; it's been around for a while. How do you view the current situation where digitalization is now progressing remarkably?

My original specialty is in the field of perceptual psychology, but after finishing graduate school, I got a job at the National Institute of Special Needs Education, so I have been engaged in research to improve the educational environment for children with disabilities for many years. For example, for children who are completely blind, paper textbooks written in normal characters are completely unreadable. Therefore, we have to think about how to make them accessible by converting them to Braille or audio, and how to provide alternatives for diagrams and charts.

Around 1988, when I joined the institute, was just when personal computers were starting to attract attention, and it was an era of exploring ways to use PCs to support the learning of people with disabilities. In special needs education, technology to compensate for various disabilities, not just visual impairments, is extremely important, and the introduction of cutting-edge technology has been continuously pursued.

For example, the year after NEC released the PC-8000 series in 1979, a workstation called Braille Master, capable of Braille input, editing, printing, and OCR, was developed and distributed to schools for the blind nationwide. In this way, special needs education has utilized technology from a very early stage. This is because they could not freely access various materials, including textbooks, and had no choice but to rely on technology.

How has that changed today?

Previously, the problem was how to access paper content using technology. However, in recent years, the content itself has been digitized, making it easier to access information.

Also, until now, accessing textbooks and other materials on a computer required learning complex procedures, so the benefits were limited to only some children. However, with the advent of tablets and the digitization of content, the number of children who can access textbooks and other materials has increased dramatically.

As Mr. Kurokawa mentioned earlier, at least for digital textbooks for learners, they come with special needs support functions, so even if not perfect, the number of children who can access textbooks has increased. However, just being able to access them is, of course, not enough. Information literacy—how to utilize the information obtained by accessing the content—is crucial.

Recently, the number of students with disabilities advancing to university is increasing. For students with disabilities to master technology during their time at university and participate in society, it is important that they are able to acquire not only how to use technology but also information literacy skills by the time they finish high school.

At the closing ceremony of the Paralympics, the French presentation featured a scene of composing and conducting music using an eye-gaze input device. Similar technology exists in Japan, but there are not yet that many people who use these technologies in their daily lives. However, I think digitalization is meaningless if it cannot be mastered in daily life. I believe it is important to cultivate the ability to master technology not just in textbooks, but in all aspects of life.

I made various requests to Mr. Kurokawa regarding the special needs support functions of digital textbooks for learners, and I am very grateful that they are now being realized. This is the first time that textbooks have been produced with the assumption that children with disabilities will use them from the outset. The first Braille textbooks were made by the Ministry of Education in 1929, but for a long time after that, until 2008, almost no accessible textbooks other than Braille were produced. Therefore, I think it is very valuable that children with disabilities were considered from the beginning in the production of digital textbooks for learners.

So, the development of technology as an alternative for children with disabilities is crucial, and the fact that this is coming to fruition with digital textbooks for learners is groundbreaking.

Perhaps the way society thinks has also changed, and the shift from positioning it as special education for children with disabilities to inclusive education has likely changed the very way of thinking.

At this point, I would like to say two things.

One is about the information literacy that Mr. Nakano just mentioned. This is not a matter of guaranteeing ability, but that the development of ability itself becomes the purpose of education. The demand for information literacy, regardless of whether one has a disability or not, means that all children are required to have the ability to control themselves, be conscious of their goals, and adjust their own learning processes.

If that ability is insufficient, disparities in home learning will emerge. Schools also have the educational effect of students studying because they are influenced by being gathered together. On the other hand, online education has the potential to create huge disparities due to differences in home environments.

What is being questioned there is whether they have information literacy and the power of self-regulation. However, the cultivation of that power is not discussed much, and in the end, it is passed on to the family, further exacerbating the disparities in home environments, which I believe is a major problem.

Another point is that I think the hybrid of online and in-person will continue to advance. This is also true for university education. Even before COVID-19, digital technology was used in in-person classes. However, when it comes to flipped classrooms where students take tablets home to do prep work and assignments, a physical barrier is created, and that choice is bound to have a major impact on children's learning and growth.

In that case, I think a re-evaluation of in-person classes is necessary. In other words, I think we need to think properly about how digital education and in-person education overlap and how they differ.

In-person education is important because you can breathe the same air and feel things through your five senses and gut feelings. The exchange of digital information alone cannot guarantee sufficient learning and development; the essence of being human should lie in learning through the five senses.

From this perspective, how should we re-evaluate digital education?

Regarding the question of whether we can breathe the same air online, our use of the CMS for information dissemination started with just the school sending information to students. But through the ingenuity of each grade level, we made it so students could also send messages. We set up a question box and accepted questions about things they didn't understand in class or during self-study.

Teachers were answering them, but something unexpected happened. Students started answering other students' questions. I was surprised, but if you create the right atmosphere, such interactions can occur even online.

Another thing, I personally used to finish a 50-minute class in 45 minutes and spend the last 5 minutes conducting an online evaluation of that class. I would get very good feedback, and by the third or so of my six classes, I would think maybe I should change my wording a bit, and my teaching would change.

In this way, the later classes are improved, and I can get feedback. If each student has a device and can connect to the internet even in a regular classroom, it can be used in other classes, and I think there are various possibilities.

I see. It's true that technology can inspire new forms of communication that didn't exist before. The topic of students asking more questions in chat during Zoom classes is often discussed in university education.

When considering "can we breathe the same air" from the perspective of special needs education, it can be said that children with disabilities were not able to breathe the same air even while being in the same classroom. What I mean is that while being in the same place, the same information was not being conveyed to them. However, now that we are online, the information environment for all children has equally deteriorated, and I think the gap has narrowed.

For example, during in-person classes, only students with visual impairments could not read the other person's facial expressions. However, when classes are held online without showing faces, no one can read the other person's facial expressions. As a result, people with visual impairments can now breathe the same air.

This is not to say that I want everyone to know the struggles of people with disabilities. It's that if we make efforts to breathe the same air online, perhaps we can create a situation where everyone can breathe the same air in person, regardless of disability.

It may depend on the type of disability, but are there no cases where being online leads to isolation, and in-person was a better fit?

There are. In-person allows for flexible responses, and being able to talk to the teacher immediately is a good thing. In that sense, I think it's necessary to skillfully combine the good parts of online and in-person to suit the individual—in short, customization is needed. It would be great if this opportunity leads to the establishment of such a system, and I think it will be an opportunity to reconsider what was being shared.

Also, regarding home learning and the ability gap, what concerns me about home learning is that the GIGA School Program devices are meaningless if they cannot be carried anywhere. We conduct an annual survey on the use of digital textbooks and materials for children with disabilities, and at all levels—elementary, junior high, and high school—the percentage of digital use at home is higher than at school.

The reason for this is probably that digital is more accessible. Therefore, to eliminate disparities in home learning, I think it is essential to create an environment where every household has a device and a network. The idea that a device is meaningless if it cannot be carried freely is something that should absolutely be avoided from the perspective of continuity of learning and proactive learning, as learning should not stop within the school.

The word "customization" has come up. A paradigm shift is needed where we don't treat the school space as something separate.

That's right. I think we need to consider diverse learning environments. Also, what I find interesting in conducting the survey is that half of the children who say digital is convenient also answer that paper is necessary. I think children know the convenient aspects of paper and the convenient aspects of digital and are using them skillfully. I have been conducting this survey every year since 2014, and the actual usage of paper and digital has hardly changed.

Mr. Kurokawa, what are your thoughts?

Everyone says that both paper and digital are necessary. That is the frank opinion from the field. However, when schools were closed all at once last March, handling the inquiries was extremely difficult. We received requests from all over the world, including Japanese schools abroad, saying textbooks haven't arrived, teacher's manuals haven't arrived, sell us digital textbooks immediately. There were also such regions within Japan, and it is a fact that the digitalization of teaching materials and the move to do things online accelerated at once.

I have heard many cases where, while conducting classes in a hybrid of in-person and online, various combinations of dialogue—between teacher and child, and among children—began to emerge within the online classes. Schools that started to frequently use communication tools like Microsoft Teams or Google Classroom had cases where discussions became very lively, and it seems quite a few teachers saw potential there.

When students upload what they have written in their digital textbooks as images and share them, an exchange of opinions about those ideas occurs in the comment section. For example, in Japanese language class, heated debates frequently occurred over the interpretation of a text. Everyone wanted to interact, and there was never enough class time. That's why I've heard many opinions that the environment where they could take their devices home and continue at home was very much appreciated.

Also, regarding children with learning difficulties, the ability to write freely in digital textbooks is a big deal. There was an opinion that a teacher was surprised to find a lot of writing from a child they thought had no opinions in regular classes. That teacher said they had been under the illusion that class was going well by running it with the top 10 or so students out of 30, but with the introduction of digital textbooks, it seemed that all 30 students started to move at the same time.

I see various possibilities with digital. It seems that the place and environment for learning are expanding beyond the confines of the school.

The expansion of the "place of learning" is very important. At the same time, I would like to point out that just thinking about textbooks is not enough to acquire information literacy. In other words, supplementary materials and study guides other than textbooks also need to be digitized, and digital technology needs to be introduced into the evaluation of learning achievement.

For example, there is an app called "UD Browser," a textbook and teaching material viewing app developed in my laboratory, which is popular with children with disabilities. This app was initially created for viewing textbooks, but we received feedback from children who wanted to use it not only for textbooks but also for self-made materials and tests distributed by teachers during class. So, we made it possible to view self-made materials and developed a test mode with security features that can be used for the Common Test for University Admissions. In this way, I believe that information literacy is cultivated through its use in various spaces and situations.

I think the part that is currently in the spotlight in digital education is verbal expression. However, there are areas like physical expression in music, physical education, and art that cannot be taught with technology alone. These are things that human culture has possessed outside of digital thinking, and they are educationally important areas for character formation. I think this is an important experience that connects to the five senses and gut feelings. I feel that this part is not getting enough attention.

Furthermore, it's fine for children who are interested in digital, but there is a possibility that children who don't care will be left behind, and for children with low self-regulation skills, I am worried about the part that comes before information literacy.

Of course, I sympathize with the ideal aspects, but on the other hand, what should we do about these things?

I'm a cold teacher who speaks bluntly to students, but I often ask them half-jokingly, "What do you think when you hear someone say, 'I'm an analog person'?" What are they trying to be excused for by saying that? Are they saying they tried but are not good at it, or do they have no intention of trying from the beginning? I often tell them, "That's not going to work in this day and age."

Basically, I have everyone touch it in class, so I'm lowering the hurdle, but I think if you don't show them how convenient it is once they overcome it, it will just be a painful experience. I want to convey the "oh, this is interesting" part by exaggerating that you can acquire quite convenient skills without a high hurdle.

Of course, I am aware of students with financial difficulties, and I intend to support them where I notice it, through the school's overall follow-up or by consulting with the prefecture.

You mentioned earlier that your school is also creating streaming content for flipped classrooms. That also requires self-regulation skills on the part of the receiver, doesn't it?

When the idea of creating streaming materials came up, I asked the young teacher who proposed it to, one, please upload it at least one week before the class, because students who can't watch it at home will watch it at school after school.

And I asked him to keep the videos to within 10 minutes, around 8 minutes. I asked him to make it just a teaser for the next class, where they bring in what they don't understand, and to avoid long ones.

That's a clever approach. Using streaming for flipped classrooms is said to be quite effective in primary and secondary education as well. But that's on the premise that they will definitely watch it as homework. If so, it will be effective in a hybrid with in-person classes. So, creating materials requires ingenuity to maintain attention until the end.

The topic of streaming is something I think about a lot because I use it in my university classes and struggle with it. When I compare with other faculty members, I think the ingenuity in creating content is important, and there is a gap between faculty members.

Even with streaming, it will fail if you are not conscious of interaction with students. For example, using a method like checking students' reactions and understanding through reaction papers and reflecting that in the next stream is well-received. But in the end, it takes many times more time than a regular in-person class, so there is a possibility that a gap will arise depending on whether you put in the effort or not, so you need to be careful.

Perhaps it is the role of us flesh-and-blood teachers to provide detailed customization.

On the iPad, there is a quiz-based learning app calledKahoot!. When I took students to Australia and visited several high schools, every school used it as an icebreaker at the beginning of class. I thought it was interesting and decided to try it when I returned to Japan, and I introduced it to other teachers.

However, perhaps due to the seriousness of Japanese teachers, there is a resistance to using materials created by others as they are. Even if there is almost the same thing, they arrange it in their own way, or perhaps they are embarrassed by what they have made and do not offer it to others. The Australian teachers were all using things without knowing who made them. In the case of digitalization, I think it's necessary to be pragmatic and use such things.

It's the teacher's mentality. But that dedication is also the excellence of Japanese teachers.

Regarding the part that Mr. Kage was worried about, being too biased towards digital, I dare to say from my experience working in digital that the current situation in schools is that there is still little inclination towards digital. The methods of digital education and online education are not very familiar in the educational field, but I think we need to properly separate the content and purpose of learning from how we proceed with it.

It has been said for a long time, "paper or digital," and I always say half-jokingly, let's stop the theological debate hooked on the word "paper" (kami, which also means god). What paper conveys and what is conveyed through images on a computer, as McLuhan said, "The medium is the message," even if what is being conveyed is the same, if the method of transmission is different, something different is conveyed. I believe it is necessary to make good use of this in education.

Many keywords have come up today. One is customization. This is about responding to each and every one of the diverse children, beyond whether they have a disability or not, and whether it's digital or analog is not a given, but something to be developed.

Another word is hybrid. In my understanding, this should lead to "taking the best of both worlds." It's not just about doing both, but about identifying the strengths of each and then using them separately or combining them.

In that case, as Mr. Kurokawa said, a judgment is needed to select based on the purpose, content, and method of education. If teachers and related parties use technology without being aware of the purpose and content of education, it could end up being just a lot of noise with nothing changing.

What does it mean to "learn" in the first place? The government talks about the individualization of learning, but how should we face this problem as a theory of learning or a theory of education? How do we envision the classroom of the future, the education of the future? I would like to think about how we will face learning in digital education over the next 10 years and what we will aim for.

There are many challenges. To use an analogy, we've been preparing bicycles because you can't ride one without it, but a policy like the GIGA School Program is a once-in-a-decade event-like policy, so to be a bit sarcastic, there won't be a next one.

A huge problem of what to do after this is waiting, but MEXT has not yet given a clear answer. It's not so easy for municipalities to prepare on their own or to switch to BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) with the cooperation of each family. There is a possibility that a large regional disparity will arise there.

This is a completely different story, but I believe that a paradigm shift will be brought about by a trinity of changes in technology, system, and culture. "Technology" includes one device per person, cloud delivery, and the use of big data. "System" means changes in the textbook authorization system, revisions to related laws, and changes in budget allocation.

The problem is "culture." Since COVID-19, we talk about a new lifestyle, but at the same time, the establishment of a new learning style as a culture is being questioned. In the field, there are urgent questions about what individually optimized learning is, what to do about home learning and online learning, and how to use learning tools. We often talk about educational DX, but it won't work unless the underlying culture changes, not just the technology and system, so I feel that a change in consciousness is urgently needed.

I actually think that the clock has been turned back by COVID-19. It has become acceptable to just teach via Zoom, and things are happening that are not interactive but one-way, even regressing from proactive learning. It seems that everyone is satisfied with the fact that technology is supporting remote learning.

I think there is a possibility that if consciousness or culture does not change, in the end, teachers, children, and even education researchers will just be swayed by technology and nothing will change.

Last April, schools were closed, but programming was supposed to start being taught in elementary and junior high schools. When schools reopened in June, there was a lot of talk about how to catch up on delays in math, Japanese, and science, but it seems that the topic of programming was left ambiguous in many schools.

"Taking the best of both worlds" with a hybrid of digital and paper is exactly right. What we teachers are aiming for is to convey the fun of the subject. I always think that I want to convey the fun more than the content of the textbook.

The system of subject-specific teachers in elementary school is now emerging, and I am all for it. Can a teacher who ran away from math in high school teach arithmetic in elementary school and convey its fun? It's not that they are teaching calculus to elementary school students, but I think the way they can convey that such interesting things are waiting ahead is different. I think our job is to get closer to the fun using the good parts of digital and the good parts of paper. I want to use both skillfully as tools.

That's exactly right. If you're not the kind of person who can predict that using this kind of technology might make students learn with excitement, you could end up just doing what you're told.

Whether one can convey the fun of a subject is a very fundamental issue. In special needs education, since the types and degrees of children's disabilities, developmental stages, and abilities are diverse, various customizations according to the individual are essential in subject learning as well. For example, for children with visual impairments, we have them touch real objects or taxidermy instead of photos and pictures, and for children with intellectual disabilities, we devise ways for them to learn by setting concrete activities and tasks rooted in daily life, such as shopping and customer service.

I heard a story from Mr. Takiya Shimura, who taught deaf-blind children with Professor Hachizo Umezu of the University of Tokyo, about a deaf-blind child who loved solving algebra problems. This person apparently enjoyed solving problems even after graduating from school. The teacher not only converted the problems into Braille and finger spelling but also conveyed the joy of solving math problems. I think it's a wonderful story that this continued even after graduation.

I believe these efforts are the essence of customization in education. Therefore, when utilizing technology, I think it is important to provide guidance so that it can be mastered as a tool for self-determination and self-selection, rather than just using it as a substitute.

Currently, in special needs education, the keywords are "fundamental environmental improvement" and "reasonable accommodation." I hope that technology can be utilized as a tool to realize fundamental environmental improvement and reasonable accommodation, thereby achieving a fair environment, even if just a little.

I believe that Society 5.0 should be a society that realizes normalization by using technology. We will create an inclusive society where everyone, including people with disabilities, can benefit fairly by utilizing technology. I recognize that digital textbooks are the first step toward an inclusive society realized through digital technology.

Experiencing fun is truly something that lasts a lifetime. Einstein said that the result of education is what remains after you have forgotten everything you learned in school, and that's exactly it.

I hope that the three sacred treasures that have supported Japanese education for many years—the textbook, the blackboard, and the notebook—will change a little with this digitalization. Textbooks are made with national taxes and are said to be the cornerstone of public education. However, I have a thought that it would be interesting if children themselves could treat this as material that they can experiment with, rearrange the order, and exchange.

I was originally an editor, so for example, in Japanese language, I think it would be very interesting if what they have learned could be edited and constructed into a single book when they graduate, and I have a wish that such learning could be possible. I also feel that digital textbooks could be a step toward that.

Another thing, I used to specialize in the period for integrated studies and life environment studies, and what I learned there was to cultivate the attitude of "learning from anything, from anywhere, from anyone." Learning from books and from digital. Learning from the stories of teachers and friends. Of course, you can also learn from nature and society. I believe that is what learning is originally about. Within that, I always want to be conscious of the ideal use of digital textbooks and materials. I think the issue of accessibility is also connected to that.

What I feel about digital education is how to bridge the gap between those who do it and those who don't.

For example, a physical education teacher using a delayed playback app to explain while showing a delayed playback of their own performance is something that has been possible for 20 years. But even though it is definitely effective, there are people who do it and people who don't. I want to spread the possibility of being able to do things that were not possible before to various people, so that it doesn't end with "that person is amazing, it's nice to have good equipment."

I strongly hope that digital does not become a tool that creates similar people. Instead, I want it to be a tool that can emphasize individuality, and I think that applies not only to children but also to teachers.

What I am a little worried about is that if many teaching material functions are included in digital textbooks, education may become self-contained to some extent, and the individuality of each teacher will not come out. I think children's learning is born from interaction, so in that sense, I would like you to create a tool that emphasizes individuality.

Some digital teaching materials are developed with the aim of enabling students to acquire a certain level of academic ability without a teacher, but I don't want Japanese digital textbooks to become like that. I think Japanese textbooks themselves are very well-designed, made so that teachers can teach in many different ways. Just as paper textbooks have been devised so far, I hope that even when they become digital, they will be tools that allow for diverse teaching methods.

Today's discussion was very stimulating, and there were new discoveries. I think it all comes down to how we think about the nature of education, the nature of learning, or the nature of human growth. Otherwise, I think digital education could end up being just a pipe dream, or just spending money and ending in confusion.

The introduction of convenient tools will test our wisdom in how to use them. I think that wisdom is insight. It is the fundamental way of thinking about what education is or what it means for a person to learn. We must share this kind of awareness.

I thought what Mr. Nakano said at the end was exactly right. Technology must not take away individuality and diversity. In fact, it could. As education has valued up to now, learning exists as a process for each individual to grow better. Just as the individuality of each learner is nurtured, it is better to use technology as a means for teachers to demonstrate their own individuality. I felt that the future of digital education will open up beyond the point where it is focused on such things.

Thank you very much for today.