University Accreditation Results(Results for Certified Evaluation and Accreditation for university)

Hiroshima Shudo University

Basic Information of the Institution
Ownership: Private

Location: Hiroshima, Japan

Accreditation Status
Year of the Review: 2018
Accreditation Status: accredited （Accreditation Period: April.01.2019 – March.31.2026）

2

Certified Evaluation and Accreditation Resultsfor Hiroshima Shudo University
Overview
Since its establishment, Hiroshima Shudo University (hereafter, the University) has
strived to conduct education and research activities based on its founding spirit of“Cultivating the Way” with the educational mission and goal of “fostering individuals
who can contribute to the development of the local community from a global perspective.”
The University defines its educational capabilities as the “capabilities for cultivating theway for learning.” It is now in the final fiscal year of the FY2015-2018 Medium-Term
Operational Plan, the third of such plans developed every four years. In line with theoperational plan’s main theme of “creating a university responsive to change (vision),”the University implements various projects in cooperation with the local community witha view to becoming a global institution as it strives to improve the learning environment
for students.
In accordance with the Medium-Term Operational Plan, the University
implements a curriculum consisting of general education subjects for students of all
faculties and major-specific subjects, and incorporates problem-solving and active
learning approaches in its classrooms. It also provides Manabi Commons as a space wherestudents engage in group work and operate a voluntary study group with the assistance ofacademic advisors. This is a commendable initiative that helps the participants develop
presentation skills and improve their motivation to learn. Furthermore, the University hassigned regional partnership agreements with local governments and other organizations
to promote activities with the local community and implements the “Building the Futureof Hiroshima with the Innovation Bridge Project,” which assists student-run activities
aimed at solving local problems. This on-going project is noteworthy for leading to theUniversity’s growth, such as the creation of a new department of study. It is alsocommendable that teaching and non-teaching staff actively work together on the project,sharing information and holding internal seminars to share achievements.
There are a number of issues the University needs to address, however. The
number of research supervisors or assistant research supervisors in several schools failed
to meet the requirements set out in the Standards for Establishment of Graduate Schools,
with the teacher shortage extending over a number of years for some of them. This
problem was addressed by adding teachers through open announcement hiring andpromoting eligible teachers within the University to these positions. In the future the3

University should ensure the number of teachers does not fall below the levels requiredin the standards.
There are other changes and improvements needed in the graduate leveleducation. The University should, for example, clearly communicate to students inadvance, and in writing, the evaluation criteria for research projects on specific topics andpresent the research supervision plans with clearly outlined schedules. Except for a few
departments, all undergraduate and graduate schools fail to effectively measure and assess
the student learning outcomes established in the degree award policy and should improvetheir practices. Furthermore, some undergraduate and graduate schools have student
enrollment issues that require better management.
It is important to evaluate the appropriateness of the improvement measures forthese issues in accordance with the relevant policies, but individual organizations, namely
the undergraduate and graduate schools, are failing to implement these steps effectively.
The University established an internal quality assurance (IQA) policy and procedures in
2017, and under this framework the University Steering Meeting and the Board ofCouncilors have adopted a holistic operational plan and other measures. However, it is
not clear which organization bears the overall responsibility for the university-wide
efforts to implement improvement measures based on the self-study results. Furthermore,while the self-study results of the undergraduate and graduate schools are communicatedto the Self-Study Committee and shared at meetings where the progress of the operational
plans are reported, the findings are not fully used to inform the university-wide
operational plans. Since the University is currently failing to implement institution-wide
improvement plans based on the self-study results of the undergraduate and graduate
schools, the allocation of authority and responsibilities among the University Steering
Meeting, the Board of Councilors, and the Self-Study Committee should be defined toensure the effective implementation of the IQA system. Going forward it is important that
the University operate an effective IQA system and address the issues it faces. Once thisis accomplished, the University is advised to enhance its unique projects and programs,
improve its education and research activities, and work on the quality assurance ofeducation.
Notable Strengths
Student Support
Manabi Commons is a resource where faculty members hold office hours to answer

4students’ questions about their lectures or standard exams. It is also a place where avoluntary study group launched with assistance from academic advisors meets. The
extensive learning support programs provided in Manabi Commons are highly
appreciated by students, helping not only to address their academic concerns but also
provide an environment for students to practice group learning and improve theirmotivation and presentation and other skills. The increasing number of students who
visit Manabi Commons, a commendable and apparently effective resource,
demonstrates that the University’s student support program is widely known and usedby students.
Social Cooperation and Contribution
The “Building the Future of Hiroshima with the Innovation Bridge Project” wasselected as one of MEXT’s Center of Community Projects. The University
participates in, and sometimes leads, the planning and implementation of various
programs conducted by government bodies with which partnership agreements havebeen concluded, including the cities of Hiroshima and Hatsukaichi and the towns ofNorth Hiroshima and Sakacho. Under this project, education and research activities
that address issues identified by local communities are certified and supported by theUniversity. The students help revitalize the local communities through participationin the Community Innovation Courses and Connecting with the Community Projectthat are part of the “Building the Future of Hiroshima with the Innovation BridgeProject.” A think tank where faculty members offer consultation and advice, and open
lectures and extension courses, is also part of this project. After the COC designation
expired, these activities and programs were either succeeded by the “Next HiromiraProject” or developed and integrated into the newly established program offered by
the Department of Regional Administration in the Faculty of Global CommunityStudies. The project is a remarkable, highly commendable initiative in line with theUniversity’s social cooperation and contribution policy.

University Administration and FinancesIn keeping with the philosophy of “Kyoshoku Kyoso” (teaching and non-teaching
staff working together across organizational lines towards one goal) the University
systematically implements numerous teacher-staff cooperation programs on auniversity-wide level, such as the “Shudoryoku Forum”, FD and SD training sessions,5and seminars on enhancing teaching abilities. The FD and SD programs have highparticipation rates, with efforts made to ensure that information on education isshared among the teaching and non-teaching staff through internal seminars and thenewsletter “Jimukenshu” (clerical training). These are commendable undertakingsthat put into practice the idea of “university administration through teacher-staff
cooperation.”
Suggestions for Improvement
Internal Quality AssuranceUnder the current practice, the undergraduate and graduate schools create theiractivity plans based on the overall activity plans developed by the University Steering
Meeting and Board of Councilors. However, it is not clear which organization bears
the overall responsibility for overseeing the implementation of the improvement
activities carried out by the undergraduate and graduate schools based on their selfstudy results. Another problem is the Self-Study Committee that merely accepts andshares the self-study results of the undergraduate and graduate schools without taking
further action, meaning that the self-study results are not being used to drive
university-wide improvement. The University needs to clearly define the allocationof the authority and responsibilities of the related organizations and ensure the IQA
system is implemented effectively.

Educational Program and Outcome
The Doctoral Program in the Faculty of Humanities and Human Sciences Graduate
School provides a research instruction plan outlining research instruction methods
and schedules. However, the schedules in the document are mostly for the doctoral
thesis evaluation and should be amended to include more complete information.

Although all master’s and doctoral programs have established evaluation criteria forresearch projects on specific topics, not all the criteria have been put in writing andcommunicated to students in advance. This issue should be addressed.

Except for the Department of Education, Faculty of Humanities and Human Sciences,
all undergraduate and graduate schools determine student learning outcomes through6thesis and dissertation evaluations. However, the current practice fails to effectively
measure and assess the learning outcomes established in the degree award policy.
This issue should be addressed.
Student Enrollment
The average ratio of freshman enrollment to the freshman enrollment cap over thepast five years is high at 1.25 in the Department of Human Sciences, Faculty ofHumanities and Human Sciences. The ratios of student enrollment to the student
enrollment cap are high at 1.25 in the Department of International Politics, Facultyof Law, and low in the following programs: Master’s and Doctoral programs,Faculty of Commercial Sciences Graduate School (0.43 and 0.13, respectively);
Master’s and Doctoral programs, Faculty of Humanities and Human Sciences
Graduate School (0.20 in all three programs); Master’s program, Faculty of Law
Graduate School (0.40); and Master’s and Doctoral programs, Faculty of Economic
Sciences Graduate School (0.13 and 0.17, respectively). Student enrollment ofundergraduate and graduate school should be managed more effectively.