@article{oai:nagoya.repo.nii.ac.jp:00001587,
 author = {寺田, 盛紀 and TERADA, Moriki},
 journal = {職業と技術の教育学},
 month = {Apr},
 note = {In this article, I try to review the development of the comparative research in vocational education and training, and present a research framework, "A comparative model and its descriptive-analytical procedure for historical development stages and three dimensional system structure in vocational education and training". In the field of vocational education, we can distinguish three development stages concerning research approach in Germany and Japan. First stage which depended on subjective and impressive observation goes back to the books of K. F. Nebenius, H. v. Steinbeiss in the half of 19. century or some traveling reports written by S. Tejima in Japanese second half of 19. century. I estimate the Kerschensteiner's work in 1901 ("Beobachtungen und Vergleiche") and the first famous book of T. Hosoya in 1944 ("Gijutsu Kyoiku") as second stage of comparative studies, and those researches had some characteristics in the academic, but political predictive method. The third stage had started from the series of German international aids activities in 1960's and some comparative researches, for instance the article written by J. Zabeck in 1966. In Japan, some each co-operative researchers also made analytical, if exactly saying, comparative studies. Adding to these considerations concerninig German and Japanese proceeding researches, I have arranged the methodological issues which have been developed by principal German scientists, W.-D. Greinert, H.-. P. Blossfeld, T. Deissinger, and W. Georg and so on, in comparative vocational education since 1980's. As the result of my these analyses and other academic and empirical knowledge, I present a comparative model for some descriptions and analyses of the vocational education and training in the each country. The model is composed of two historical axes, economic and educational, and a three dimensional system structure which has three analytical aspects and factors decided with political decision making relationship, labour market, and pedagogical behavior. Those my schema are shown in Figure 1,2 and Table., 国立情報学研究所で電子化したコンテンツを使用している。},
 pages = {45--59},
 title = {職業教育の比較とその方法},
 volume = {13},
 year = {2000}
}