This reflection paper examines how vocational education, rather than serving as a path to opportunity, can function as a tool of systemic oppression—particularly for women in Japan. Drawing on Paulo Freire's banking concept of education, Neil Postman's critique of false gods in schooling, and social justice frameworks articulated by Irving and others, the paper argues that vocational tracking reinforces class hierarchies and gender inequality. Using Japan as a central case study, the paper demonstrates how women from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are funneled into domestic vocational programs while their more privileged peers access professional academic pathways—a pattern that limits self-development, critical thinking, and social mobility.
Education is often viewed as the panacea to social marginalization—a tool members of society can use to obtain better wages, acquire social recognition, and become socially mobile. Unfortunately, education can also be a tool of subjugation, one that aids in perpetuating ongoing oppression and the systemic continuance of marginalization. This problem, often thought to be the fault of individuals, is in fact the fault of social and cultural influences (Mullaly, 2007). Also at fault are structural factors that invite communities to continue class patterns in which those already at the top remain there, while those at the bottom are locked into a systemic pattern where they can only continue what they do to survive (Mullaly, 2007).
When oppression exists, teachers seek similar outcomes as students when they provide an education that perpetuates suppression. Thus, common denominators exist between teachers and students as the primary driving forces behind education. Education is often viewed as a means to an end, or as a solution to a higher standard of living. Ultimately, however, education is nothing more than an end in itself—rather than a utilitarian tool that might allow all peoples to benefit as a whole society.
Paulo Freire, a Brazilian educator and critical pedagogy theorist, introduces two types of education—the banking concept and problem-posing education—in Pedagogy of the Oppressed. The banking concept of education separates the learner from their consciousness and their world; students are encouraged to passively accept the world as it is while teachers narrate static information to them.
In the problem-posing style of education, students and teachers both participate in dialogue to teach each other; students thus contribute to the process of change by taking an active role in shaping the world, which empowers and liberates them. Freire highlights the problem-posing education style, noting that it is a means to achieve greater freedom and equality through dialogue, inquiry, praxis, and reflection, because it engages students and promotes critical thinking. The banking style of education, on the other hand, does just the opposite—marginalizing students by promoting silence and greater oppression.
Neil Postman, an American author and educator, suggests that "the purpose of public education is to help the young transcend individual identity by finding inspiration in a story of humanity" (p. 171). Postman presents the compelling concept he calls "false gods," which consists of economic utility, consumership, technology, and multiculturalism in public education. Postman asks his readers to consider schools based on his alternative visions and approaches education by replacing these "false gods" with a sense of community, personal identity, continuity, and purpose.
Freire and Postman both encourage students and teachers to contribute to change and engage the learner in a dynamic learning environment—something vocational education fails to offer. They encourage a taste of the forbidden fruit, something for students seeking an education as a means to an end.
Nowhere is the divide between vocational and academic education more evident than at the high school level, where students are introduced to postsecondary pathways through career academies. Tsolakis (2008) states that the practices of traditional vocational education include the tracking of women, minorities, and other non-native English learners or special-needs students, which has enabled oppressive forces to devalue the potential educational benefit of vocational reform (p. 3). Many vocational education facilities focus on male trades such as building trades, which have historically not catered to the female population—particularly in the United States. Vocational education is often promoted as part of a larger educational movement known as "multiple pathways," meeting the needs of students interested in "college and careers" (Oakes & Saunders, 2007).
Ultimately, however, vocational education for many proves unsatisfying. It does not provide the challenging foundation that students need in order to progress. Rather, it offers a static future—one where a job can be found, but not necessarily a career that offers growth potential for those driven to move forward in a changing society. Vocational education, when compared with traditional education, is merely one step above mindless activity for individuals in some cultures, particularly those in which there is no hope unless one attains significant status through education.
In countries where women are oppressed and forced to bear the brunt of parenting and child-rearing, the only escape may be through a proper education. Yet social inequities keep women tied down. Some women are fed the lie of equal opportunity through the offer of a "fair" education in the form of vocational training. Okano and Tsuchiya note that vocational education in Japan is highly oppressive, keeping the poor as they are and the wealthy in their social camp. As an example, a student observed to be a capable reader and writer may be promoted to a better learning environment because her family is better educated and both parents are professionals. Another student who enjoys crafts, sewing, and cooking may be placed in a "domestic science course" at a vocational school—without being offered an opportunity for academic study, which the school will endorse because her parents are not educated professionals (p. 9).
This selection and promotion—or lack thereof—is considered fair because the system is based on class and individual achievement; schools "legitimate existing inequalities in such a way that the powerful maintain, and enhance their resources and power" (Okano & Tsuchiya, p. 9). Okano and Tsuchiya further explain that education simply serves to prepare women for "harmonious adult society through meritocratic selection," or consensus theory, or by instilling "the dominant ideology in children" so that they accept society based on "domination and conflict theories" (p. 9). This highlights Freire's observation that the oppressor manifests a false "generosity" that simply perpetuates injustice—an educational system that appears "fair" and just, yet is nourished by poverty and inequality, one that will become desperate at any threat to its existence. It is a false charity that creates the illusion that all children are treated fairly when offered any education—such as training in the "soft" domestic arts at a vocational institution—while a poor and uneducated family that desperately requires a more professional education remains without a genuine means to an end.
Freire adequately notes that true generosity fights to destroy the causes of false charity, which subdues and rejects life; it extends less in "supplication" so that more hands can transform the world. Freire (1993) suggests we must "adapt to the fact of reality" (p. 7), but what is reality? Is career education reality? Often, when considering individuals as independent wage earners, officials fail to account for the much broader "social justice considerations," including the "collective sense of identity, valuing of individuals," and "how life/careers might be differentially constructed and enacted" (Irving, 2010).
"Social justice frameworks applied to vocational education"
"Japanese women's employment and educational discrimination"
"Call for structural reform and equal opportunity"
You’re 51% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.