In Japan, an education model to enhance students’ new academic abilities is being developed (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), 2014), and an active learning method is being promoted as a proactive learning approach that seeks solutions to problems through discussion and presentation. One approach for improving the instruction ability of teachers responsible for developing students’ new academic abilities focuses on quantitative aspects such as expanding the target teachers for training and increasing training frequency. Measures focusing on the results of such teacher training to improve the quality of teaching are not being taken.

 A survey on teacher awareness of training shows that most teachers in schools think that they acquire instruction methods by being given the methods or taught them (National Institute for Educational Policy Research; Center for Promotion of Science Education, Japan Science and Technology Agency: 2009). The results of the author’s past research also show that mainstream teacher training is trainer-centered; teaching skill is passed on to trainees (Goto: 2015).

 Considering these situations, the author believes that teacher training in Japan should be changed in terms of the training method and teacher awareness from a trainer-centered approach to a trainee-centered approach where practicing teachers undergoing additional teacher training (teacher-trainees) proactively seek solutions to problems for themselves.

 Therefore this study aims to transform the teacher view of learning centering on the existing teacher training approach. By dynamically changing the teachers’ view of learning and attitude concerning teacher training, we seek to establish a new training model that will substantially motivate teacher-trainees to proactively solve problems and transform education. This new training model requires an intervention design that will provoke an educational transformation process through the proactive learning of teacher-trainees as practitioners and sustain the process. Engeström (2010) describes such interventions as formative interventions. In formative interventions, researchers execute interventions, in principle; and the contents and course of the intervention are subject to negotiation between researchers and teacher-trainees as practitioners. It is important that formative interventions function to substantially motivate teacher-trainees to solve problems, so that they seek the causes of their own problems, and to guide them to hypothetically think about what they should do and what they can do (Goto: 2015). In the process of this learning centering on mutual negotiations between researchers and teacher-trainees as practitioners (this study refers to Engestrӧm’s expansive learning theory), teacher-trainees as practitioners are substantially motivated to solve their problems that need solving and their potential capacity for action is reached (Goto: 2013). In this study, teacher-trainee desire to solve problems, which is the motivation, is regarded as a bud of transformation and teacher capacity for action is a source of activity.

 Specifically, university researchers including the author seek to reform the current teacher training to create problem-solving training through formative interventions in the mandatory teacher training organized by the boards of education across Japan, and design new teacher training to nurture teacher action and changeability.

Kiyomi, A.(1997) Life-span development of teachers: Stumbling and growth. Child psychology 51(3), 118-125. Kiyomi, A.(author and editor)(2006) The process of the cooperative learning, research on teaching and school culture, teacher's life development and tuition's creation: Research on teaching and Discourse analysis. Foundation for Promotion of the Open University of Japan, 202-216,217-229, Tokyo. Chan,C.K.K.(2000) The search which put a problem in scientific learning by cooperation on the center: Kazuhiro,U.,Takesi,O.(editors) Look for knowledge by cooperation: Cognitive science of creative collaboration. Kyoritsu Shuppan Co., Ltd., 108-133. Engestrӧm,Y.(translators:Katuhiro,Y.,Kayo,M.,Teiji,Y.,Yuko,H.,Yosinobu,S.,Yosihiro,T.,Noboru,T.)(2007) Learning by Expanding: An Activity-Theoretical　Approach to Developmental Research. Shinyosha, Tokyo. Engestrӧm,Y.(1991b) Developmental work research: A paradigm in practice. The Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition 13, 79-80. Engestrӧm,Y., Sannino,A, (2010) Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and Future challenges. Educational Research Review 5,1-24. Ikuko,G.(2010) Isolation Mechanisms of Novice Elementary School Teachers: Focusing on the Relation with Guidance Teachers and Administrators. Journal of the Graduate School of Humanities and Sciences 13, 227-235. Ikuko,G.(2011) Collaborative Learning Design on the Development of Novice Elementary School Teachers’ Competencies: The Role of Managerial Personnel from the Perspective of the Theory of Expansive Learning. The 20 Annual Bulletin of the Japanese Study on Teacher Education, 111-120. Hargreaves,A.(2000)(translator: Yoko,N., editors: Hidenori,F.,Kokichi,S.) Sociology of a teaching for the twenty-first century: The education, knowledge and power in fluctuating society－Educational reform, teacher and school culture as a problem. Shinyosha, 262-299. Nobuyuki,K.(2007) ”Team” as a cooperative colleague－from school clinical sociology. The Japanese Journal of Educational Research 74(2), 174-188. OECD Center for Educational Research and Innovation (2014) (supervisors of translation: Yosihiro,T.,Yasumasa,H.) Essentials of learning－to practice from utilization of a study. Akashishoten. Junji,Y.(2002) Study of teacher's life course. Soufusha Co., Ltd. Katuhiro,Y.(2004) Creation of activity theory and educational practice－ to expanding learning. Kansai University Press.