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

Okayama University of Science

Basic Information of the Institution
Ownership: Private

Location: Okayama, Japan

Accreditation Status
Year of the Review: 2020
Accreditation Status: accredited （Accreditation Period: April.1.2021 – March.31.2028）

Okayama University of Science

Certified Evaluation and Accreditation Resultsfor Okayama University of Science
Overview
Okayama University of Science holds “To draw out each and every youth’s abilities totheir maximum potential, and to educate individuals to contribute to society as skilled
professionals and as members of their communities” as the founding mission shared
among the schools of Kake Educational Institution. Likewise, the same institution hasclearly proclaimed “Kake Educational Institution provides an ‘opportunity for education’
where everyone can learn throughout their lives, nurtures interest in science via education,and mass produces human resources capable of contributing to world peace by cultivatinga harmonious character and global-mindedness” as its mission statement. Based on thesemissions, the purpose of its faculties and graduate schools have been established.
In order to achieve its founding mission and purpose, the University formulated
Okayama University of Science Vision 2026 (hereinafter referred to as “Vision 2026”)
as a mid- to long-term plan in 2016, and has been striving to enhance its education andresearch activities while verifying the results of its action plan (five-year mid-term
objectives and plan). To that end, the University established the University-WideAssessment and Planning Committee as a University-wide internal quality assuranceorganization, and it takes charge of the formulation and promotions of University-wide
policies and plans, the implementation of checks and reviews, and the formulation ofimprovement plans. In addition, the Faculty Assessment and Planning Committee isresponsible for checks and reviews as well as improvements at the level of theundergraduate and graduate divisions, and it tends to the internal quality assurance
framework. Under this system, the University verifies the degree of attainment and resultsof the operational plans of a single academic year based on the mid-term plan, and makes
a cycle leading to the improvements and progress of those results in the following
academic year function. Moreover, the University Accreditation Committee, whosemembers include external experts, members of the University-Wide Assessment andPlanning Committee and members of the Faculty Assessment and Planning Committee,
objectively verifies the effectiveness and appropriateness of the internal quality assurancesystem.
In particular, with regard to education, the University established the Committee
for the Promotion of University-Wide Educational Reforms in 2017 as an organizationthat promotes quality assurance of education throughout the University, and has beenOkayama University of Science

constructing a system that makes PDCA cycles function by assigning “educationaldevelopers”—faculty members who assume the central role in formulating educational
policies, designing curricula, and improving educational programs—to each department.
Under this system, the Educational Development Center—which was placed within theOrganization for Educational Promotion, the University-wide organization involved in
educational planning and management—checks the sequential and systematic nature ofcurricula in addition to establishing the degree award policies (diploma policies) andcurriculum design and implementation policies (curriculum policies) in each degree
program.
With regard to the measurement of educational outcomes, the University
established the Policy on Assessing Learning Outcomes (Assessment Policy), and hasbeen multilaterally assessing the educational outcomes of students that are indicated in
the degree award policies using direct and indirect assessments in each degree program.
Among which, the fact that “educational developers” take the lead in implementing“curriculum assessment and check” and “curriculum consulting” to ascertain how wellstudents have acquired the learning outcomes and have actually been tying them to
educational improvements can be described as an excellent initiative.
Furthermore, with regard to social cooperation and contribution, the University
established the Organization for Research Development and Outreach to prepare aframework for promoting research that contributes to community development, and thefact that it has been actively endeavoring in social cooperation and contribution activities
while ascertaining the needs of the local community is highly commendable.
However, there are several issues that should be addressed. Concerning
education, inadequacies are evident in the curriculum design and implementation policies
of some undergraduate divisions and departments, and we would like to see the University
make improvements considering the fact that measures to substantiate credits areinsufficient. Also, some departments that have failed to secure enough students and theratio of student enrollment to the student enrollment cap is low can be found. Furthermore,in the 2020 entrance examination for prospective students with recommendations of the
Department of Veterinary Medicine at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, considering
the fact that there were serious problems in its operational framework—such as theprocess for admission decisions having not been clearly indicated in the regulations andthe data concerning the entrance examination having not been securely managed inaddition to the fact that the interview examinations were conducted under vague
evaluation criteria—we would like to see the department correct course so that it suitably
improves its operational framework and methods for fairly and equitably conducting its

Okayama University of Science

selection of prospective students.
At Okayama University of Science, an internal quality assurance system wasconstructed on the opportunity of the formulation of Vision 2026, and a system for
University-wide educational management not divided by department has been developed.
Hereafter, we hope that the University further endeavors in the quality assurance of its
education in addition to solving the aforementioned issues through the effective usage ofsaid system.
Notable Strengths
Educational Program and Learning OutcomesIn order to improve its curricula, the University established the Policy on Assessing
Learning Outcomes (Assessment Policy), and under a system of cooperation between
the Educational Development Center and “educational developers,” it has been
conducting “curriculum assessment” in which each department and major selfassesses its curricula, and then the “educational developers” of other departments andmajors evaluate whether the results of those self-assessments are valid. Moreover, it
is commendable that the University has been actively promoting its progressive
initiatives for improving its curricula and has indeed been tying them toimprovements, such as by conducting “curriculum consulting” in which it directlylistens to feedback from future graduates concerning its curricula.

Social Cooperation and Contribution
 Based on a vision for social cooperation and contribution, the University establishedits mid-term objectives and plan as well as the matters it ought to focus its endeavors
upon, and the Organization for Research and Development and Outreach has been
actively and continuously developing various activities such as holding a “ScienceMuseum,” etc. while cooperating with the Research Support, such as a revitalization
project for tourism with institutions including the local government and apromotional project for local sports. In particular, as to its implementation of joint
research projects with the local government in order to return the fruits of its research,
it is commendable in light of the policy of the University that it has been endeavoring
to reinforce cooperation through interfacing with the local government andentrepreneurs at forums such as OUS (Okayama University of Science) Forum inOkayama University of Science

addition to understanding the needs of the local community through regularinteractions.
Suggestions for Improvement
Educational Program and Learning Outcomes Improvements are needed as the curriculum design and implementation policies do
not indicate the basic approach to curriculum design in the Graduate School ofEngineering (Doctoral Program) and curriculum implementation in the Faculty ofEducation.
 Although the maximum number of credits that students can register in a year has been
set in the Faculty of Science and the Faculty of Biosphere-Geosphere Science, theUniversity permits students to register credits in excess of the maximum number withregard to such subjects as those concerned with acquiring qualifications—forexample, subjects related to the teaching profession. For this reason, there are aconsiderable number of students who actually register for many credits in excess ofthe limit. Although considerations for improvement are being promoted mainly by“education developers,” improvement is required in light of the purpose of the credit
system as currently the measures to substantiate credits are inadequate.
Student Enrollment
 With regard to the ratios of student enrollment to the student enrollment cap,
improvements are needed so that student quotas are thoroughly implemented ingraduate schools as the Master's Program of the Graduate School of Science is lowat 0.47, the Doctoral Program of said graduate school is low at 0.21, and the Master's
Program of the Graduate School of Informatics is low at 0.42.
Recommendations
Student Enrollment
 With regard to the average ratios of freshman enrollment to the freshman enrollment
cap for the past five years, the Department of Chemistry at the Faculty of Science isOkayama University of Science

low at 0.85, the Department of Applied Physics at said faculty is low at 0.78, and theDepartment of Biomedical Engineering at the Faculty of Engineering is low at 0.80.
Moreover, with regard to the ratios of student enrollment to the student enrollment
cap, we would like to see the University correct its course so that student quotas arethoroughly implemented in faculties as the Faculty of Science is low at 0.87, theDepartment of Chemistry at said faculty is low at 0.81, the Department of Applied
Physics at said faculty is low at 0.73, the Department of Biochemistry at said faculty
is low at 0.86, the Department of Life Science at said faculty is low at 0.80, theDepartment of Applied Chemistry and Biotechnology at the Faculty of Engineering
is low at 0.84, the Department of Intelligent Mechanical Engineering at said faculty
is low at 0.88, and the Department of Biomedical Engineering at said faculty is low
at 0.69.
 Concerning the selection of prospective students, in the entrance examination forprospective students with recommendations (A Method) of the Department of
Veterinary Medicine at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, interview examinations
were conducted under vague evaluation criteria that could have given theinterviewers leeway for making arbitrary judgments, and admission decisions are notbeing implemented based on a process clearly indicated in the regulations, such asorganizations not indicated in the regulations becoming involved even in the process
for admission decisions. Moreover, the department also does not securely manage
the data concerning the entrance examination, and we would like to see it correctcourse as we cannot say that it is suitably improving its operational framework andmethods for fairly and equitably conducting its selection of prospective students.