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

Osaka Sangyo University

Basic Information of the Institution
Ownership: Private

Location: Osaka, Japan

Accreditation Status
Year of the Review: 2022
Accreditation Status: accredited（Accreditation Period: April 1, 2023 – March 31, 2030）

Osaka Sangyo University

Certified Evaluation and Accreditation Resultsfor Osaka Sangyo University
Overview
Osaka Sangyo University is founded on the spirit of “Be a great ordinary person”,
meaning that “the greatest is one who finds purpose and pleasure in bettering humansociety, and is uninterested in a utilitarian or careerist way of life to attain honors orelevated positions.” In line with its founding spirit, the University defines its mission
as “contributing to society by fostering a spiritually rich human nature with a solid
education and sound ethical views important to a member of society as well as
nurturing citizens who can proactively promote the development of a sustainablesociety.” It also sets forth the purpose of “teaching fundamental knowledge andprofound specialized academic skills with respect to the humanities, social sciences,and natural sciences, while cultivating sensitivity, applied skills, and practicalabilities, and nurturing individuals with rich human skills.” To achieve its mission
and purpose, the University has developed and published the 10-year long-term“Vision 100” toward AY2028, the 100th anniversary of its founding. “Vision 100”
comprises the four pillars of “action strategy to enhance the institution’s overall
strength,” “organizational and HR strategy,” “financial strategy,” and “university
campus improvement plan.” To implement them, the University created threeconsecutive three-year medium-term business plans to clearly delineate the direction
the University will take in the future as it engages in educational and research
activities.
With respect to internal quality assurance, the University has reviewed its
internal quality assurance system in light of the comments made in the previous
certified evaluation and accreditation results. Under the Internal Quality Assurance
Promotion Committee, which has been the core internal quality assuranceorganization since AY2019, the University created the Curriculum Committee andthe Educational Plan Subcommittee as advisory organizations, and established aninternal quality assurance system with the committees and subcommittee working inconjunction with the Self-Study Committee and the IR, FD, and SD working groups.
The system began operation in AY2020. It can be said that the University quickly
established a mechanism to assure and improve the quality of education and that thesystem is now beginning to function, although it will take time for the new system tobecome fully operational and be able to enhance the quality of education and student

1

Osaka Sangyo University

learning outcomes. In particular, to encourage the development and steady
implementation of improvement plans based on self-studies, the University uses theImprovement Planning Sheet to clarify the entities responsible for improvements,issues, and annual plans, and is working to enhance the usability of the system,including checking the progress of implementation and carrying out semiannual
system maintenance with reference to the sheet. This makes it possible for theInternal Quality Assurance Promotion Committee to accurately understand theprogress the individual organizations have made in implementing the plans, and tostrengthen system management as necessary. These efforts ensure that the internalquality assurance system is functioning effectively.
Regarding education, in line with the founding spirit, the individualfaculties and graduate schools have organized their curricula in accordance with thediploma and curriculum policies, and created opportunities for students to learn
independently off campus through internships and fieldwork. They are also activelyinvolved in social cooperation activities with the participation of students, which
contributes not only to society but also to developing the skills of students. This isconsistent with the University’s mission and purpose.
In terms of student support, the University implements the Project-based
Joint Education to help students acquire basic skills as working adults. It is highly
commendable that students independently tackle a variety of self-selected themes,
including transportation, machinery, and the environment, which take advantage of
the University’s characteristics, and other such topics as community and culturaldevelopment. Faculty and administrative staff and students actively engage in these
activities that enhance their learning experiences out of the class.
There are several issues the University needs to address, however. With
respect to education, some graduate schools do not explicitly outline their basic viewsin the curriculum policies. At the graduate level, they try to assess and evaluate
student learning outcomes through an examination of degree dissertations, but therelationship between the criteria for degree dissertations and the diploma policy is
not clearly defined, and measurement is not conducted in a multifaceted way. Goingforward, the University should ensure the substantiation of credits by providing
detailed support, such as academic guidance, for students taking teacher-training
courses that are excluded from the cap on the maximum number of credits a studentcan register in a year. In addition, some graduate schools and programs should makeother improvements such as lifting the low ratio of student enrollment to the student
enrollment cap and ensuring that student quotas are thoroughly managed.

2

Osaka Sangyo University

The University has been striving to develop and improve its internal
quality assurance system. Going forward, JUAA expects the University to improve
the functionality of the system and ensure the quality assurance and outcomes of its
activities, including education. As many distinctive activities were identified in thestudents’ independent initiatives, JUAA also hopes that the systematicimplementation of these initiatives will develop into sustainable programs.
Notable Strengths
Internal Quality AssuranceBy entering in the Improvement Planning Sheet the entity responsible for
improvements based on the self-study results, summaries of issues, annual
improvement plan, and results of the plan, the heads of the organizations canclarify the issues, confirm the plan’s progress semiannually, revise the plan asnecessary, and report the outcomes to the Internal Quality Assurance Promotion
Committee. The Improvement Planning Sheet can clarify the issues and theprogress of improvement, and help the Internal Quality Assurance Promotion
Committee accurately assess the progress of the plan and provide additional
support for improvement as needed. This support has led to, for example, thedevelopment and implementation of an assessment plan for assessing andevaluating the learning outcomes in undergraduate programs. It is commendable
that the University has developed and utilized a mechanism to confirm theprogress and improvements based on self-studies, and enhanced the functionalityof its internal quality assurance system.

Student SupportAt the Center of Advanced Education, the University carries out the universitywide Project-based Joint Education designed to help students acquire basic skills
as working adults. Students independently tackle a variety of themes of theirchoice, including transportation, machinery, and the environment, which takeadvantage of the University’s characteristics, and other such topics as communityand cultural development. This effort is promoting student independence, andhelping them acquire the abilities necessary for teamwork as well as revitalizing
the local community through activities outside the class. This is a commendable3Osaka Sangyo University

effort that effectively achieves the University’s mission and purpose.
Suggestions for Improvement
Educational Program and Learning OutcomesIn the Division of Environmental Design Master's Degree Course, Graduate
School of Engineering, the curriculum policy does not explicitly outline the basic
views about curriculum design and implementation. This situation should beimproved.

The graduate schools assess and evaluate student learning outcomes by
examining degree dissertations, which does not sufficiently measure the learning
outcomes indicated in the diploma policy. Improvements should be made todevelop and implement methods and indicators to assess and evaluate student
learning outcomes in an appropriate and multifaceted way.

Student Enrollment
The ratio of student enrollment to the student enrollment cap is low at 0.25 in theMaster’s Degree Course of the Graduate School of Human Environment, 0.47 in
the Master’s Degree Course of the Graduate School of Business Administrationand Distribution, 0.22 in the Doctoral Degree Course of the Graduate School ofEconomics, 0.28 in the Master’s Degree Course of the Graduate School ofEngineering, and 0.06 in the Doctoral Degree Course of the Graduate School ofEngineering. Improvements are required to ensure that the graduate schools’
student quotas are thoroughly managed.

4