The independent research and Paper 1 Section C — the largest single task in the qualification

You must choose one of the four subjects, as early in the year as possible. Work through the choice properly rather than picking the one that sounds most interesting.

1. 01Criterion one: can you find Japanese sources on all THREE aspects?

   The requirement is to cover all three aspects and to gather evidence from at least two authentic sources in Japanese. So the first test is availability, aspect by aspect, and it must be run before you commit. 高齢化社会's three aspects — isolation, family support, social support — are all extremely well covered in Japanese local-government and newspaper material. 変わっていく行事's tourism aspect is well covered; its Western-occasions aspect requires more searching. Run the search first and choose second.

2. 02Criterion two: does the subject give you something to ARGUE?

   The AO4 grid out of 20 rewards critical analysis, a sustained line of argument and conclusions drawn, not a description however thorough. So ask, for each subject, what the disagreement is. 省エネ生活 has one built in — the energy-supply argument is unresolved and both sides are serious. 家族関係 has one in 選択的夫婦別姓 and in the balance of care work. 高齢化社会 has one in the family-versus-society trade-off. 変わっていく行事 has one in tourism and authenticity. All four work; make sure you can state yours in a sentence.

3. 03Criterion three: is it clear of your Paper 2 works?

   The specification states that the independent research must not relate to, or make reference to, one of the literary works or films studied for Paper 2, and that teachers must ensure students do not intend to use them. This is a rule about the RESEARCH, not only about the essay, so a subject that would naturally draw on your set film is ruled out at the choosing stage. Check it now, in writing, with your teacher, rather than discovering it in the examination hall.

4. 04Criterion four: can you write about it without inventing numbers?

   Every one of the four subjects invites statistics — household composition, visitor numbers, the proportion of older people, energy consumption — and you will have no documentation in the examination. So the practical question is whether you can make your argument with comparative and structural language: 増加傾向にある, 以前に比べて, 制度の名前そのものが. If a subject's whole interest to you is a set of figures you would have to reproduce from memory, choose another one or find a different angle on it.

5. 05Criterion five: does the centre's pattern of choices leave you independent?

   The specification says teachers must monitor the different research subjects being undertaken in a centre to ensure independence is maintained, and that if more than one student chooses the same subject the teacher must ensure each is working independently. That is not a prohibition on sharing a subject, but it is a reason to talk to your teacher early: choosing a subject nobody else in your group has taken removes a whole class of complication and usually gives you more distinctive material.

6. 06Then commit, in writing, and start reading in Japanese

   The specification recommends deciding as early as possible in the academic year, and the reason is not administrative: research in a foreign language is slow at first and fast later, and the compounding only starts once you begin. Write down your chosen subject, its three aspects, and one Japanese search term for each aspect. That single page, produced in the first weeks, is worth more than any amount of deliberation about which subject would have been best.

Result: The five criteria: sources available in Japanese for all three aspects; a statable disagreement to argue about; no overlap with either Paper 2 work; an argument that survives without invented statistics; and a subject that leaves your independence unambiguous within your centre. Run all five, commit in writing, and start reading Japanese in the first weeks of the course.

A student has chosen 変わっていく行事, has read three English-language articles about Japanese festivals, has been given a Japanese newspaper article by their teacher, and intends to write about the festival that features in the film they are studying for Paper 2. Audit the plan.

1. 01Breach one: the sources are not in the assessed language

   The specification requires evidence gathered independently from at least two authentic sources IN THE ASSESSED LANGUAGE. Three English-language articles satisfy none of that requirement, however good they are. They are not worthless — background reading in English can orient you — but they cannot count towards the two, and more importantly they will not give you the Japanese vocabulary you need to write 600 to 700 characters. The repair: find at least two Japanese sources per aspect, and read them.

2. 02Breach two: the teacher provided a source

   Teachers must not provide sources. An article handed over by a teacher cannot form part of your independent research, and using it as one of your two would misrepresent the work as independent when it was not. The repair is straightforward and is also better research: use the handed article to learn its vocabulary and its search terms, then find your own material on the same aspect. The teacher may legitimately comment on the AVAILABILITY of resources, which is a different thing from supplying one.

3. 03Breach three: overlap with a Paper 2 work

   The independent research must not relate to, or make reference to, one of the literary works or films studied for Paper 2, and the specification puts an explicit duty on teachers to ensure students do not intend to use them. Building the research around a festival that features in the set film relates the research to that film, and quoting the film as evidence in Section C would compound it. The repair: choose a different festival, or a different aspect of the subject, with no connection to either Paper 2 work.

4. 04The gap that is not a breach but will cost marks: coverage

   変わっていく行事 has three aspects — traditional festivals and modern events, the effect of events and festivals on tourism, and the arrival of Western occasions. A plan built entirely around one festival covers the first aspect and may touch the second. The third is untouched. The specification requires all three, and a Section C answer that can only address one is capped by the AO4 grid regardless of how good that one is. Plan by aspect, not by topic.

5. 05The rebuilt plan, aspect by aspect

   Aspect one: two Japanese sources on a specific local festival and on a modern urban event, giving a contrast to argue from. Aspect two: two Japanese sources on tourism at a named place, ideally one from a local-government site and one from a news feature so the perspectives differ. Aspect three: two Japanese sources on an imported occasion — the Japanese development of ホワイトデー or the growth of ハロウィン as a street event. Six sources, all Japanese, all found by the student, none connected to a Paper 2 work.

6. 06And the record to keep

   For each source: what it is, who published it, when, and one sentence in Japanese on what you take from it. You will not take that record into the examination — no research documentation is permitted — but building it forces you to read each source for a claim rather than for atmosphere, and the one-sentence summaries are the raw material of the memorised notes the next section builds. A record kept in Japanese also means you never have to translate your own research under time pressure.

Result: Three breaches — sources not in Japanese, a source provided by the teacher, and an overlap with a Paper 2 work — plus a coverage gap on the third aspect. The rebuilt plan: six sources, two per aspect, all authentic Japanese, all found independently, none connected to either Paper 2 work, each recorded with its publisher and date and one Japanese sentence saying what it contributes.

Your subject is 高齢化社会 and you are building the card for its third aspect, 社会的支援. Build the five items, then show how you test it.

1. 01Item one, the anchor: dated, documented, checkable

   介護保険制度 came into effect in April 2000, providing assessed care services funded by contributions and taxation. A date, an institution, and a mechanism. That is worth more in an examination than three impressions, because the AO4 grid rewards references from research findings and a dated institution is unmistakably one. Note that the anchor contains no statistic, which is deliberate: statistics are exactly what you cannot verify on the day.

2. 02Item two, the interpretation, attributed

   That the system's sustainability depends on a care workforce which a shrinking working-age population must supply — a concern raised in Japanese policy discussion. Written on the card as an attributed reading, not as a fact. Attributing on the CARD matters, because whatever is on the card is what you will write, and a card that says the system is unsustainable will produce an essay that asserts it.

3. 03Item three, the memorised sentence

   二〇〇〇年に介護保険制度が始まり、介護は家族だけの問題ではなくなった。 One sentence, memorised verbatim. It contains a date, an institution, a ます-stem chain (始まり) and a negative change-of-state (ではなくなった), so it feeds the range grid as well as the knowledge grid. And it is a claim — that care ceased to be only a family matter — rather than a definition, so a paragraph can be built from it.

4. 04Item four, the counter-evidence

   介護離職 — leaving employment to care for a relative — is a recognised policy concern with its own name, which indicates that a great deal of care continues to be provided by families despite the system. That fact runs against a simple reading of your memorised sentence, and having it on the card means your concession paragraph writes itself: 一方で、介護離職という言葉があること自体が、家族の負担が残っていることを示している。

5. 05Item five, the writable vocabulary

   介護, 保険, 制度, 支援, 負担, 施設, 相談, 地域, 高齢者, 家族. Ten terms, all within the kanji you should be able to produce, all specific to this aspect. Write each by hand until the stroke order is automatic. Anything you cannot write goes to kana or is replaced: ケアマネージャー in katakana is a perfectly good alternative to a kanji compound you would risk.

6. 06The test, and what to do with the result

   A week later, with the card face down: write the anchor, the interpretation with its attribution, the sentence verbatim, the counter-fact, and the ten words. Anything you cannot reproduce is not yet a resource. Shorten it, make it more concrete, or drop it — a card of five items you own is worth more than a card of twelve you half-remember. Repeat the test at increasing intervals; three cycles will make the card permanent, which is the point of building it this way rather than as notes.

Result: The card: anchor — 介護保険制度 in force from April 2000, contribution-and-tax funded, assessed services. Interpretation — sustainability depends on a workforce a shrinking population must supply, a concern raised in Japanese policy discussion. Sentence — 二〇〇〇年に介護保険制度が始まり、介護は家族だけの問題ではなくなった。 Counter-evidence — 介護離職 has its own name, which indicates family provision continues. Vocabulary — 介護, 保険, 制度, 支援, 負担, 施設, 相談, 地域, 高齢者, 家族. Tested face-down a week later, and revised until every item is reproducible.

A draft answer on 高齢化社会 contains: two paragraphs of well-researched description of the care insurance system and of family care; one paragraph summarising the unseen text about a local community space; and a conclusion saying that the ageing society is a serious problem requiring effort from everyone. Diagnose it grid by grid.

1. 01AO4, part one, knowledge: strong

   Two paragraphs of accurate researched content on a dated institution and on family care is genuine knowledge and understanding of society and culture based on research. That half of the AO4 grid is in good shape and the candidate should not spend revision time adding more facts. This diagnosis matters because the instinct on receiving a middling mark is always to add more content, and here more content is precisely what will not help.

2. 02AO4, part two, argument: absent

   There is no line of argument. Two descriptive paragraphs and a general conclusion is the structure the lower bands describe as relying on description rather than analysis. The repair is not more research; it is a thesis. Something like 介護をめぐる問題は、支援が足りないことよりも、家族と社会のどちらが担うかが定まっていないことにあるのではないか converts both existing paragraphs into evidence for a claim without adding a single new fact.

3. 03AO2: the text is summarised, not used

   A paragraph that summarises the community space and stops has demonstrated comprehension and contributed nothing. The grid asks for relevant information used to contribute to the ideas, arguments and conclusions. The repair: make the community space evidence for the thesis — 本文が紹介している場は、家族でも行政でもない第三の担い手が生まれていることを示している — which uses one detail from the text to advance the argument. Same text, same paragraph, entirely different mark.

4. 04AO4 again: the conclusion is a platitude

   高齢化社会は深刻な問題であり、みんなで努力する必要がある could be written by somebody who had done no research at all, which is the test of a bad conclusion. The grid asks for conclusions drawn about aspects of culture and society. The repair follows from the thesis: 高齢化そのものよりも、担い手が決まっていないことが問題であり、地域の取り組みはその空白を埋める試みだと考えられる. That conclusion could only be written by somebody who wrote this essay.

5. 05AO3: check what is not visible in the summary

   The diagnosis so far says nothing about language, which usually means the language is competent and unvaried — the commonest AO3 profile for a well-researched descriptive answer. Run the five-group checklist from the artistic-culture topic: aspect, cause, concession, stance, structure. A descriptive answer typically has cause and nothing else. Adding one concession (一方で), one stance form (のではないか) and one nominalised structure will move the grid without touching the content.

6. 06The repair plan, in order of return

   First, write the thesis, because it is worth the most and it re-purposes everything already there. Second, convert the text paragraph from summary to evidence, which is the cheapest ten marks available. Third, rewrite the conclusion from the thesis. Fourth, add three structures from the checklist. Nothing in that list requires new research, and the whole repair is achievable in one redraft — which is why diagnosing by grid rather than by impression is worth the ten minutes it takes.

Result: Diagnosis: AO4 knowledge strong, AO4 argument absent, AO2 comprehension shown but not contributed, AO3 accurate but unvaried, conclusion a platitude. Repair, in order of return: state an arguable thesis that re-purposes the existing content; convert the text paragraph from summary to evidence for that thesis; rewrite the conclusion from the thesis; add a concession, a stance form and a nominalisation. No new research required.

Your subject is 変わっていく行事. The unseen text describes a town that revived a lapsed festival with a committee of younger residents and a shorter programme. The statement is: 観光のために行事を変えることは、その行事の価値を失わせる。あなたはどう考えるか。Run the full 85 minutes.

1. 01Minutes 0 to 3: read the statement and find the claim inside it

   The statement contains a causal claim — changing a festival FOR TOURISM causes it to lose its value — and a hidden premise, that value resides in the unchanged form. Two lines of attack are available: dispute the causation, or dispute the premise. The premise is the better target, because disputing causation would require evidence about many festivals that you do not have, while disputing the premise requires only an argument about what value means. Choose it, and you have your thesis in three minutes.

2. 02Minutes 3 to 6: read the unseen text once, for position not detail

   Read to find out what the text would say if it could argue. Here it describes a revival with new organisers and a reduced programme — which is a case of change that preserved continuity of a kind. Note the one detail you will use and move on; you will reread the relevant sentence when you write paragraph three. Reading the text closely now costs minutes you will want later, and the AO2 grid asks for relevant information used, not for total comprehension.

3. 03Minutes 6 to 10: write the plan, in Japanese, six lines

   One: 価値は形にあるのか。位置＝形ではない。 Two: 伝統的な祭りと現代的な行事の境目はすでに曖昧（側面一）。 Three: 本文の例＝担い手が受け継がれた（本文）。 Four: 観光の利益と決定権（側面二）＋反論。 Five: 西洋行事も作りかえられて定着（側面三）。 Six: 結論＝失われるのは形が変わるときではなく担い手が消えるとき。 Six lines, all three aspects present, the text placed, and the conclusion decided before a word of prose is written.

4. 04Minutes 10 to 75: write, one paragraph at a time, checking the clock

   Thirteen minutes per paragraph is generous, so the pace is comfortable if the plan holds. Do not go back to improve a paragraph you have finished; in a foreign language under time pressure, revision usually adds errors, and the accuracy half of a combined 10-mark grid is not worth a lost paragraph. If you fall behind, compress paragraph five rather than the conclusion, because the third aspect can be covered in two sentences if it must while a missing conclusion costs the AO4 band outright.

5. 05Minutes 75 to 85: the four checks, in order

   Coverage: are all three aspects visible? Paragraphs two, four and five, yes. The text: does it contribute in more than one place? Paragraph three plus one clause in paragraph four, yes. Register: read only the endings — である, ある, 示している, ないか, であろう — uniform plain register, yes. Fatal classes: scan for an unmarked change of subject, for giving-and-receiving particles, and for any uncertain kanji, converting those to kana. Ten minutes, four checks, done.

6. 06And the discipline that makes the whole thing possible

   None of the above works unless you arrive at Section C on time and with memorised material. The 65-minute boundary in Paper 1 and the memorised cards from the previous section are the two decisions that make an 85-minute plan executable; without them, the ten minutes of planning become twenty minutes of trying to remember what you read in October. Both decisions are taken months before the examination, which is the real lesson of this topic.

Result: The routine: three minutes to find the claim inside the statement and choose whether to dispute its causation or its premise; three to read the unseen text for position; four to write a six-line Japanese plan covering all three aspects with the text placed and the conclusion decided; sixty-five to write five paragraphs of about 130 characters without going back; ten to check coverage, the text's contribution, register, and the specification's own fatal error classes — in that order.