Getting to Know Visiting Scholar Satoshi Takahashi

We sat down with Satoshi Takahashi to learn more about his research as a visiting scholar here at the Center for Educational Equity at Teachers College, Columbia University. 

Takahashi is an Associate Professor of Education Policy and Law at the University of Osaka, Japan. His research focuses on the right to meaningful educational opportunities for all kids and adequate working conditions for school teachers. Facing the gross shortage of teachers due to their detrimental working conditions and inadequate school funding, he embarked on litigation in Japan, based on the issue of teachers working overtime without pay. Approaching the issues, he modeled the school finance litigation in the U.S., initiated by Center for Educational Equity executive director Michael A. Rebell, to improve the school finance systems and education policy in each state.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity. 

Could you tell us a little about yourself and how you got involved in education policy and law?

Takahashi: Actually, when I was a student, I wanted to be an elementary school teacher, and I even took a course on student teaching in elementary schools. However, I found that teachers had a huge workload, and students faced severe learning conditions. There were 40 students in a classroom with just one teacher. The detrimental working and learning conditions, along with the intense pressure students felt to compete with each other—because Japan is one of the most highly competitive countries for getting into high school or college—made me reconsider. Additionally, I noticed huge gaps between urban cities and rural areas in terms of educational opportunities. These issues made me think about national education policy and school funding. After graduating from college, I decided to attend graduate school to study education law. That was the starting point of my journey into education law and policy.

What interested you most about education law and policy? 

Takahashi: Before I came to Teachers College, I was researching teachers' workloads and the legal mechanisms behind their long working hours. Public school teachers in Japan are exempt from the general labor law, called the Labor Standards Act, which limits all workers to eight hours a day and 40 hours a week. Unlike in the United States, Japanese public school teachers work beyond these limits without overtime pay due to a special act. I got involved in litigation that claimed overtime pay for teachers. Although the plaintiff didn’t prevail in the lower court decision, the court also established a legal framework stating that if an employer doesn't take any action to correct excessive overtime, it could be deemed illegal, holding the employer liable. We are now preparing for the next litigation to secure more funding for teachers, which is not just about working conditions but also about obtaining enough public funding for students, similar to what Center for Educational Equity does.

What led you to come to the Center for Educational Equity at Teachers College as a visiting scholar? 

Takahashi: I was really stimulated by Professor Rebell’s concept of comprehensive educational opportunities. This concept insists on wrapping all educational programs around students, especially those with disabilities, special needs, or from disadvantaged backgrounds. Poverty is a growing issue in Japan, and there are many students who are chronically absent from school—over 200,000 students are out of school. Many researchers focus on how to support these special needs outside of the public education system, but Professor Rebell argues that public education should cover all needs. This includes providing meals, dental care, and nursing within schools. This concept of comprehensive education is very important and needed in Japan. The Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE) case in New York State, which resulted in the state government providing more funding based on student needs, showed me how litigation could compel the government to allocate more funds to public education. This is what led me to CEE to learn from their practices.

What challenges have you encountered in your research, and how have you addressed them?

Takahashi: That's a good question but difficult to answer because I have not yet overcome my difficulties. My English is clumsy, making it challenging to communicate, especially in writing. Besides language skills, it is also difficult to connect the issues in Japan with those in the United States due to different backgrounds. I need to find common ground between the two. To address this, I spend a lot of time reading books and articles to bridge both issues. It’s time-consuming and sometimes painful, but necessary.

What were some of the key differences you noticed between education policy in Japan and the United States?

Takahashi: One of the biggest differences is the role of the courts. In Japan, almost all education policies are made by the executive and legislative branches without court involvement or stakeholder input. Policies, including those related to teachers' working conditions, are developed without consulting teachers, parents, or students. In contrast, in the United States, court litigation, like the CFE case, involves extensive public engagement and input from various stakeholders. The judicial branch plays an active role in policymaking, which is a significant difference from Japan.

What have you enjoyed most about your research? 

Takahashi: The most enjoyable aspect of my research is seeing how it relates to social movements. Researching law and policy to improve society and realize students' human rights is my biggest motivation. At the Center for Educational Equity, I appreciate how their work connects with social movements and citizen activism. Interacting with people who share the common goal of addressing societal issues, such as racial disparities and economic inequalities in education, is gratifying. This international exchange of ideas and experiences enriches my research and reinforces the global struggle for educational equity.

Drawing from your extensive experience with a range of experts and research findings, what unique perspective or insight have you developed through your work at CEE?

Takahashi: My research interest lies in the public engagement process of the CFE case, focusing on the practical aspects of litigation. While many researchers concentrate on court decisions and their implementation, I am interested in how litigators organize plaintiffs and frame their claims. Analyzing unpublished documents and primary resources at CEE provides a unique perspective on the public engagement process, contributing originality to my research in school finance litigation.

What practical applications or implications do you foresee for your research?

Takahashi: The primary goal of my research is to transfer its findings to Japan. The practices observed in the CFE case and the work of Professor Rebell and CEE are vital for Japan, where court involvement in education policy is minimal. I aim to activate the courts in Japan to influence education policy, using the knowledge gained at CEE. Within ten years, I hope to initiate school finance litigation in Japan, drawing from the insights and practical aspects of the CFE case. The daily conversations and exchanges at CEE are crucial for understanding the practical implementation of school finance litigation.