Sample English Paper on Japan Education System


The article explains the variations between the American, European, and Japanese educational systems and what makes the Asian country’s framework better than that of the other two. The documentation and evaluation of educational standards in the three nations started in the 1960s with the first one being recorded in 1967. From these assessments, it was established that adolescents in Japan recorded high intellectual levels than those in the other two states. The American government under Reagan’s administration tried to improve the situation noted that although these improvements had been made, the results were quite disappointing.

The success of Japan’s educational system is attributed to three pillars, developed by the country’s department of education (DOE). These include the national curriculum, incentives, and competitiveness. While the state’s curriculum is drawn by the department of education, which is also responsible for ensuring its implementation, in United States teachers tasked with the role.[1] The advantage of using DOE in structuring is that it ensures uniformity and high standards of teaching. States such as Britain have enacted laws that are meant to ensure that subjects such as English, science, history, math, geography, art music and design as well as a foreign language are considered to be major.

The provision of incentives such as government subsidies also contributes to the high standard of education in Japan. The Japanese secondary schools are divided into two levels, including the junior and senior high and tertiary. After completing the former, students have to study hard to gain entry levels into prestigious tertiary institutions, such as the University of Tokyo.[2] Joining such institutions not only earns the students respect but also categorizes them as some of the brightest in the country. Lastly, the high level of competition in Japan also enhances the achievement of quality education. Most senior secondary schools compete to produce some of the best students in the country and gain prestige for their accomplishments.


The article by Richard Lynn presents a resourceful argument on the factors that promote quality in education in Japan as opposed to other developed countries, including the United States and Britain. Primarily, education is the foundation of thriving economies and should, therefore, be considered important by both national and local authorities. The article suggests that the three aspects adopted by the Japanese federal government including incentives, curriculum, and competitiveness have greatly aided in improving the education standards. While they might be considered the primary factors that promote success, other aspects, including the availability of resources and supportive community should also be regarded as essential.

I consider developing and overseeing the implementation of the curriculum as a significant factor that has improved the quality of education in Japan. From the mentioned illustrations, nations such as the United States leave the said tasks to school principals and teachers thus limiting the effectiveness of the framework. Britain and U.S. have in the recent past tried to enact policies that would ensure that some of the educational requirements, including standardization, are adhered to but little success has been recorded. Although the research may have presented different facts, I think the Japanese education system is rigid and does not promote creativity among students. Most adolescents are forced to adhere to the norm of society and read hard to join some of the prestigious universities in the country, but no talent development methods are considered. With the changing economy and global trends, it is important for the country’s national government to redesign the curriculum to promote such aspect and to allow every child to pursue his/her dream.






Lynn, Richard. “Why Johnny Can’t Read, but Yoshio Can.” National Review 90, no. 21 (1988): 40-41.

[1] Lynn, Richard. “Why Johnny can’t read, but Yoshio can.” National Review 90, no. 21 (1988): 40-41.

[2] Ibid