日本政府自2003年起推動教育特區（special educational zone），期盼透過鬆綁相關教育制度，幫助地方政府與民間團體的另類教育理念得以在體制內執行，並於2005年後陸續將這些特區正名化，隨後開放全國自由實施。教育特區中以另類學校成立的「不登校特區」最受矚目，原因在於另類學校反對學歷主義，少數甚至否定學校存在的意義，屬於民間教育設施，卻藉特區制度加入體制內教育系統，雖然順利獲得私校補助與合法化地位，伴隨的卻是更多的制度限制，理念依舊未能為世人所知。教育特區作為教育改革的實際運作試驗場地，成功的增加了學生的基礎學力並拓展出多元的升學管道，但是卻未能有效解決招生不足問題，且衍生出更多教育經費的支出。礙於無償義務教育之理念，也無太多經濟上的連鎖效應，執行內容重複性高且欠缺創意。目前教育特區仍有經費來源不穩、缺乏行政資源、教職員流動率高等問題。配套措施尚未齊全的狀況下貿然正名化的結果，造成少數教育特區淪落為教育政策實驗失敗的例子。今後若要持續推動教育特區，必須建立完整配套措施與完善的評鑑制度，且應訂定專屬法規以因應其需求。

Japan government started special educational zone's operation in year 2003 then gradually legalized this system and promoted alternative education perspectives to public in year 2005. They expected the deregulation of related educational system could offer local educational bureaus and civilian organizations experimenting alternative education perspectives within existing frame work. The special truancy zone established by free school organization caught people's attention. Some free school's promoters seriously challenged the existence of school system and diplomaism but the establishment of private special truancy zone and its legalization through special educational zone's channel really conflicted with above concepts. The joint of special truancy zone into existing educational system led to imposed constraints from system as well as exchange of legalization and subsidy from government with its vanishing educational perspectives. Special educational zone, as experimental field of educational reform, had successfully improved student's learning capability as well as expanded multiple educating channels. However, it still could not effectively solve lower enrolled headcount issue but induced more educational expenses spent on this matter. From free compulsory education's perspective, special educational zone could not bring economic chain reactions but only duplicated and not creative practices. Issues such as instable income, lacking administration resources and high staff resign rate still seriously trouble this system. The abrupt legalization of special educational zone and promotion to public without associated measures already resulted in some practice's failures as experiment of educational policy. If continuous promotion and practice of special educational zone is required in the future, the associated regulations, measures, and proper evaluation systems must be established correspondingly.