ACADEMIC ENCOUNTER The American University in Japan and Korea r ACADEMIC ENCOUNTER The American University in Japan and Korea By Martin Bronfenbrennet THE FREE PRESS OF GLENCOE, INC. A division of the Crowell-Collier Publishing Co. New York t BUREAU OF SOCIAL AND POLITICAL RESEARCH Michigan State University f East Lansing, Michigan I Copyright@ 1961 BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY East Lansing, Michigan Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 61-63703 i t , PREFACE • This study of some 18 American university affiliations with Japanese and Korean institutions is a small part of a larger study of the American university overseas. The larger study l is undertaken by the Institute for Research on Overseas Pro­ grams at Michigan State University. What is said here about programs in Japan and Korea can be compared with what other staff members of the Institute have saidabout programs in other countries, particularly other Asian countries such as India and !t Indonesia. , Many believe with ex-President Eisenhower that the American university should expand its foreign affiliations as a contribution t to economic and cultural reconstruction and development over­ seas, and to better international understanding between America and other countries. In this view, university affiliations are an j important type of "people to people" contacts across national boundaries. Others believe that the American university should f concentrate its limited manpower and resources on the domestic job it does best, and reduce the scale of its commitments abroad. Part of the decision (or compromise) between these viewpoints should be based on a knowledge of what the existing international programs are in fact attempting or accomplishing. The Institute f for Research on Overseas Programs seeks to develop this knowl­ t edge and understanding; this report seeks to develop it for one important pair of countries, Japan and Korea. J This report is based mainly on my stay in Japan and Korea from June to December, 1958. In addition to preliminary inter­ views in America and readings in published sources, the study rests mainly upon approximately 2 00 interviews with persons connected in some capacity with one or more of the programs studied. (The need to protect the anonymity of particular inter­ viewees accounts for some apparently unsupported statements in the text. ) My period in Japan and Korea included the summer ,, vacation, and therefore permitted only partial justice to programs which were not in session. The Japanese programs received more attention than the Korean; within Japan, programs centering r in and near Tokyo were studied more fully than programs I v It elsewhere. Many of the programs are new and are evolving rapidly. Comments valid as of 1958 may have lost validity with the passage of relatively little time, particularly in Korea after the 1960 revolution. At least three new programs have also en­ tered the picture- a University of Oregon program in economic development in Korea, a Stanford-Tokyo study of the Occupation reforms in the Japanese educational system, anda Stanfordcenter for Japanese Studies in Tokyo, with the cooperationofKeio, Tokyo, and Waseda Universities. While the first two are mentioned in the text, nothing substantive could be said about any of the three. Let me admit some prejudices and preview some conclusions. I came to Asia a cynic, looking for boondoggling, sightseeing and meaningless wheel-spinning by semi-competent hacks. I found with few exceptions sincere efforts by able people, trying hard to compensate for deficiencies in their backgrounds. The programs are not the obvious wastes of time and manPQwer that their ex­ treme critics aver. On the other hand, it does seem true that the small-scale, unpretentious program built up by university people themselves has a better chance of long-run success in Japan than the grandiose "rush project" sponsored from outside. (This is less true in Korea, where the problems are too large and urgent to wait for the long run.) I also confirmed a belief with which I started: that it is better over the long pull to train Japanese and Koreans relatively slowly in America than to send numbers of American teachers or students for short periods to Japan or Korea. My main debts are to people connected with the 18 programs and the universities participating in them. They are adminis­ trators, teachers, and students. They are government workers and foundation employees. They are friendly and hostile to the university programs. They are American and Japanese and Korean. They took time to see me and answer questions that were sometimes foolish, sometimes leading, and possibly some­ times even hostile. The Institute for Research on Overseas Programs financed my study from a grant by the Carnegie Cor­ poration of New York. Its Director, Professor Edward W. Weidner, has been at once responsible for my research orienta­ \ tion, my initial editor, and my severest critic. (He also conducted vi I t ~ interviews with me in Japan during a short visit in September, f 1958,) His editorial and critical efforts were continued at the t Michigan State University Bureau of Social and Political Research by Dr. FrankPinner and Mrs. Hilda Jaffe. My wife, Mrs. Teruko Okuaki Bronfenbrenner, has been extraordinarily important to f this study because her native tongue is Japanese. My own frag­ • mentary background is due both to her educational efforts and to two public agencies: the United States Naval Training School (Oriental Languages)and the headquarters of the Supreme Com­ f mander for the Allied Powers in Tokyo. At the University of l Minnesota, I was fortunate to be assigned the services of an ex­ t cellent Korean research assistant, Mr. Chul Soon Khang, who has done his best to compensate for the deficiencies of my Korean t orientation. None of these people or organizations are responsible t for my errors of fact or interpretation. Many have, indeed, dis­ agreed with me actively. t My final debt is to numerous publishers, both commercial and f scholarly, who have permitted me to quote from works bearing f their imprints. ; Minneapolis, Minnesota Martin Bronfenbrenner I' March, 1961 I l t r I vii f f t TABLE OF CONTENTS ~ Preface vii f Chapter 1: NINETEENTH-CENTURY BACKGROUND 1 INTRODUCTION, page 1 . I THE FOUNDING OF TOKYO UNIVERSITY. page t 4.1 THE FOUNDING OF HOKKAIDO UNIVERSITY, page 11.1 TWO PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES, page 16.1 THE JAPANESE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM, page 2?..1 JAPANESE STUDENTS IN AMELUCA, page 25. r\ Chapter 2: ICA-FINANCEDPROGRAMS 38 CHANGES IN THE JAPANESE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, page 38./ ICA OBJECTIVES, page 49./ USOMANDAMERICAN UNIVERSITIES,page 44.1 MICHIGAN-WASEDA PROGRAM IN INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTIVITY, page 46. I MASSACHUSETTS­ HOKKAIDO PROGRAM IN AGRICULTURE, page 61.1 HARVARD-KEIO PROGRAM IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, page 68. I ZENG AKUREN, page 71. ll Chapter 3: FOUNDATION-FINANCED PROGRAMS 77 STANFORD-TOKYO PROGRAM IN AMERICAN STUDIES, page 79.1 MICHIGAN­ KYOTO- DOSHISHA PROGRAM IN AMERICAN STUDIES,page 88./ COOPERATIVE PROGRAM IN LEGAL STUDIES, page 96 .I THE MICHIGAN PROGRAM IN OKA­ f y AMA, page 106. f Chapter 4: PROGRAMS OF INDIVIDUAL INSTITUTIONS 109 t AMHERST IN JAPAN. page 110. I CARLETON IN JAPAN, page 117. I ROCKFORD- t KOBE AFFILIATION, page 123.1 JUNIOR YEAR AT INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY, page 131.1 STANFORD-KEIO STUDENT EXCHANGE, page 138. I PENNSYLVANIA-KANAZAWA STUDENT AFFILIATION, page 143.1 FAR EAST DIVISION, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, page 149 .I OVERSEAS PROGRAMS OF JAPANESE UNIVERSITIES, page 156. I Chapter 5: PROGRAMS IN KOREA 163 BACKGROUND BEFORE 1945, page 165.1 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA-SEOUL ~ NATIONAL UNIVERSITY AFFILIATION, page 170./ PEABODY COLLEGE PROJECTS ' IN EDUCATION, page 186 .I WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY PROGRAM IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, page 196./ SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY AUDIO- VISUAL CON­ TRACTS, page 203. Chapter 6: PURPOSES OF PROGRAMS 209 STATED PURPOSES, page 209./ OTHER PURPOSES OF AMERICAN PARTICIPANTS, page 213 ./ OTHER PURPOSES OF ASIAN PARTICIPANTS, page 215. I FOREIGN POLICY PURPOSES, page 217./ CONFLICTS OF PURPOSES, page 219. C ha pte r 7: SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 221 t "LITTLE BROWN BROTHERS," page 221.1 THE ACADEMIC SCENE, page 224./ CULTURAL INVESTMENT, page 227 ./ GOLDEN GHETTOS AND UGLY AMERICANS, page 228 ./ CHOOSING INSTITUTIONS, page 232 ./ CHOOSING PEOPLE, page ! 235 ./ RELATIONS WITH WASHINGTON, page 240. I DISAPPOINTING DOMESTIC IMPACT OF PROGRAMS, page 246./ SUGGESTIONS FOR CHANGE, page 247. r Index 253 ix f I f ·~ CHAPTER NINETEENTH­ f CENTURY l 1 BACKGROUND f I t I t Some of the overseas programs of American universities involve countries with which American cultural contact was f virtuallynon-existentuntil the end of World Warii -- for example, Vietnam and Indonesia. Others involve countries from which • America had traditionally imported culture --for example, France and Germany. Japan is a different case entirely. There is a long history of educational and developmental missions from the f United States to Japan during the half-century following the first visit of Commodore Perry in 1853. At least one of the existing programs is founded directly on a half-forgotten one of the last It century. INTRODUCTION The period 1860-1900, particularly the two middle decades, represents a golden age of American contact with Japan. Japan was acquiring from Europe and America a basic knowledge of Western science and technology. The American missions, however small by twentieth-century standards, had broad inter­ ests and made real contributions to the westernization of Japan. Curti and Birr describe most nineteenth -century American overseas missions as "of minor· importance" and "designed to gaininformationforthe United States ratherthanto help others." I "Only the missions to Japan," they conti:pue, "approach some of 2 ACADEMIC ENCOUNTER the twentieth -century ventures in scope and complexity." 1 And Reischauer, surveying the same period as an epoch in Japanese history, concludes that, "In the long run the Japanese probably borrowed more from the United States than from any one European nation.