Some remarks on
the university evaluationfrom a viewpoint of private
universities
Norikazu Kudo
Keio University
At Japan-Nordic Symposium
28/9/06

A flood of evaluations?
Getting tired of evaluation?
• Internal inspection and evaluation (1991-)• External evaluation• Evaluation by certified organisations (2004-)• Funding or subsidising by evaluation (over 20% ofgovernmental spending for higher education)
Venture to make brief comments on this kind ofsituation as a member of private universities.
This does not represent opinions of private
universities as a whole.
2About private universities (1)Tradition of thinking somewhat peculiar to Japan:
Distinguishing (not classifying) universities andcolleges by their funding systems.
•••

Governmental (State)
Municipal governmental
Private3

About private universities (2)Number of institutions

Number of students
22%

12%
12%

74%

76%

State

4%

Municipal

PrivateState

Municipal

PrivateExcluding junior colleges
As of 1 May 2006
4

About private universities (3)Contributing to the society and the public welfare
through their education and research activities.
Educated people’s contribution to the society.

Private activities in the public sphere.

5About private universities (4)Mainly financed by private sectors: tuition,
donations, revenue from the fund, and businessactivities.
Subsidies from the government: c. 10%

The only way to continue their service to thesociety is to be supported by the public. How topersuade the people is the crucial matter.
6

About Keio University (1)• Founded in 1858 by intellectual leader
and visionary Yukichi Fukuzawa• One of the oldest private universities in JapanThe 150th anniversary in 2008
• Comprehensive educational system(primary through graduate level)• Media Centers on all campuses house
more than 3.7 million books and publications
7

About Keio University (2)• 7 campuses– Japan: Mita, Hiyoshi, Yagami, Shinanomachi, Shonan-Fujisawa (SFC)– Abroad: Keio Academy of New York (USA)• 9 undergraduate faculties; 11 graduate schools– Keio Business School (KBS) ranked number one in the country– 2005: Establishment of Graduate School of Health Management– 2004: Establishment of professional Law School• 8 affiliated primary, junior and senior high schools• 3 overseas offices (USA, UK, Korea)
8About Keio University (3)Faculty & Students(May 2005)• 3,600 Faculty andＳｔａｆｆ Members• 32,000 Students

Professors

718

Associate Professors

342

Assistant Professors

270

Instructors

479

Administrators

1,798

Total

3,607

Undergraduate
Graduate (Masters)
Professional (Law School)
PhD
Total

27,971
2,712
507
1,093
32,2839

About Keio University (4)Enrollment & Degrees Conferred• New Enrollments (2005)*
Undergradu
ate

Graduatefrom within
Keiosystem**

1,424

1,220

from outside
Keio system

5,054

502

Total

6,478

1,702

• Degrees conferred (2004)
Undergraduate (Bachelor)

6,747

Graduate (Masters)

1,087

Graduate (PhD)

226•* Correspondence school
students not included•** 71% of Keio affiliatedhigh school graduates
are accepted into Keio
undergraduate programs•** 97% of students whocomplete undergraduate
degrees at Keio areaccepted into one of thegraduate schools

10About Keio University (5)Finance• FY2004 Cash flow statement– 169,014,940,000 yen (approximately $1.5
billion USD)

• Credit Rating– Standards and Poors (USA): AA , stable
outlook– Rating and Investment Information (Japan):AA+11

About Keio University (6)Finance: Revenue & Expenditures(FY2004)
Tuition Fees
43,156,119 (37%)

Income from
Medical Activities
40,245,063 (34%)

Personnel
60,619,249 (52%)

Education and Research
29,360,707 (25%)

REVENUE

EXPENDITURES

117,013,454,000 yen(approx. $1.03 billion USD)

116,241,005,000 yen(approx. $1.02 billion USD)

Other
9,066,862(8%)
Donations
4,191,527(4%)

Income from
Business Activities
7,082,375 (6%)

Subsidies
13,271,509
(11%)

Other
1,790,311General(2%)
Administration
2,661,811 (2%)

Hospital Operation
21,808,927 (19%)

12A basic understanding of the current
environment for the higher education (1)Fierce competition in the international market for thehigher education.
••••

Saturated market in OECD countries.
Penetration of transnational institutions into the rapidly
growing market in Asia.
Technological advance: e-Learning. OCW etc.
Strength of English as an international language.

How to add an intellectual value to the educational power.
13

A basic understanding of the current
environment for the higher education (2)Competition in the domestic market.
•••••

Demographic change: Decrease in the18-year-old population
Diversification of demands for the higher education: multi ages andmulti social backgrounds
Proliferation of ‘University’ since the 1990s along with the relaxationof the regulations.
Independent operation of state universities.
Non-price competition – competition in the quality of education.

How to build up own strength.
How to find its own market.
14

Reform to survive and grow in thecompetitive environment.
Excellent
Research

More Research
Fund

Able Students
Good
Education
More Research
Fund

Good
Education

Excellent
Research

Able Students

15

To participate in the competition• Quality assurance: variety with a comparable
standard though variety is the vital part of private
universities.
Bologna Process in Europe
UNESCO/OECD Guideline
Evaluation by certified organisations• Transparency: To overcome unsymmetrical
distribution of information, including financial
information of the institution
Essential factors to be a player in the market.
16

Two aspects of evaluation
1. Valuable opportunity to demonstrate thestrength of the institution esp., for privateuniversities.
Strength in education: e.g.. Liberal arts
education or Professional education?
Strength in research: e.g.. Science orLiterature?
2. Evaluation as a starting point of reform.
Continuous effort to reform the education andresearch system is the most essential factor toremain in the market.
17

Evaluation as a starting point of reform
Four stages of evaluation
1. Internal inspection and evaluation ofachievements: Common knowledge about thecurrent situation for all members.
2. External evaluation by external advisors:
Objectify the internal evaluation.
3. Evaluation by the certified organisation:
Commitment to the reform in public.
4. Actions for the reform.

18

A Case of Keio University (1)No unified organisation for internal inspectionand evaluation before 2003 though continuous
inspection and evaluation had been made byvarious committees, departments and faculties.
e.g.,
Business School’s external evaluation body.
SFC faculties as a forerunner in this field.
Keio Yearbook with a viewpoint of internal
inspection.
Individual faculty reports and external advisors.
19

A Case of Keio University (2)2003 All Keio Internal Inspection and Evaluation
Committee was formed.
Discussion about the format and procedures.
2004 Inspection and evaluation work.
A Provisional Report was published.
External evaluation committee.
2005 Application for the certified evaluation to Japan
University Accreditation Association with the final
version of the Report of Internal Evaluation.
2006 Evaluation report by JUAA
Obtained the certified evaluation.
Feedback to individual faculties and to University
education committee for the improvement ofeducation.
20

A Case of Keio University (3)JUAA’s Evaluation Report for Keio University• 98 merits such as vigorous initiative forinternationalisation, positive actions for thepromotion of research and so on.
• 34 demerits such as a lack of unified system forthe evaluation of lectures by students and little
effort for the faculty development and so on.
• No deficit indicated.
21

A Case of Keio University (4)Feedback for improvement• Efforts by each faculty – fundamental device.
• Efforts to establish a unified system of lectureevaluation by students and FD system by theUniversity Education Committee: 9 of 34
demerits were concerning these matters.
Learning from SFC’s experience (a pioneer andthe most advanced in this field in Japan).
• The 150th anniversary projects: A structuralreform programme for coming 10 years.
22

A Case of Keio University (5)Several weak points detected during the process.
• Multi-versity syndrome? : Conflicts between thetraditional autonomy of individual faculties andunified efforts as a university.
• Strength and weakness of Keio’s fundamental
idea: A spirit of ‘Independence and SelfRespect’ vs. tendency toward licence.
• A ‘brand’ university’s fate? : A lack of ‘a sense ofcrisis’ in the rapidly changing environment.

23

A Case of Keio University (6)• Necessity to overcome these problems throughthe persistent negotiations between faculties
and the university headquarters for survival andgrowth in the highly competitive environment.
• Evaluation as a basic material for policy making:
How to overcome the ‘demerits’, and How todevelop ‘the merits’ further.
• Determined to become ‘an advanced model ofthe university in the 21st century’.
24For the future of private universities
University Evaluation• Quality assurance and transparency to be aplayer in the market.
• Valuable opportunity for demonstrating theirstrength and persuading the society for their‘reason for being’ to remain in the market.
• A starting point of reform to become a strong
player in the market

25