Introduction



Efforts towards Evaluation; Guiding towards Improvement (Sep. 20,2007)
Strategy and Methodology for Using University Evaluation (July 7,2008)
Effective Use of Academic Resources for Enhancement of the Internal
Quality Assurance System – For Developing University’s
Distinctiveness – (Aug. 3, 2009)
Establishing a Quality Assurance System based on the Learning
Outcomes – Effective Assessment, Visualization and Publication of theLearning Outcomes - (Aug. 2, 2010)
New Paradigm of Quality Assurance in the Age of Globalization – The“Functions” Viewing from the Practices at International Organizations– (Oct. 26, 2011)
Student Learning and the Future of Higher Education (Jul. 23, 2012)2

 Most higher education systems now have well-established quality assurance arrangements.
Internal and external quality assurance havepositive impacts on the quality of education
provision of program and institutional level.
 The concept of “quality imperative” has pervaded
the higher education systems.
 Assessing the achievements to date now seems
appropriate.
Presentation by Prof. Dirk Van Damme (OECD, Head of CERI）

3

 Balancing functions of accountability (to presentachievements to society) and improvement (toreflect on quality improvement) remains very
difficult.
 Input and process standards remain far more
important than learning output measures aswell as outcome’s analysis.
 Threshold level indicators are still used more
frequently than excellence-oriented standards.
4 Quality assurance arrangements and agencies

should be able to support innovative developments
in higher education, such as widening access andpromoting success, developing innovative teaching
and learning arrangements or innovating curriculaof study programs.
 International mobility of students and graduates,
exchanges of degrees and credits and theglobalization of higher education and research ingeneral demands a stronger international quality
assurance framework.
5Internal Quality Assurance: the responsibility primarily restson the institutions themselves.
 External Quality Assurance: standards for the establishment;
approval for the establishment (ex-ante restrictions; assuringand ensuring the threshold level); certified evaluation andaccreditation (ex-post checking; accreditation and facilitationof quality improvement in education and research) While institutions provide internal quality assurance in theirown unique ways, it is sometimes difficult for those outside
the institutions to assess their efforts. Accordingly, there
should be some commonalities in standards or indicators forinternal quality assurance.
 At the same time, institutions should articulate their own
distinctiveness (individuality).
6 Education = Teaching + Learning; Clearlypresenting students’ Learning Outcomes tosociety is important.
 Clearly expressing Expected Learning Outcomes Analyzing Achieved Learning Outcomesregularly The analytical results should be communicatedto society and utilized to enhance quality.
7 Analysis of the results of student questionnaires
 Creation of a Learning Portfolio
 Analysis of the results of internal/external

examinations
 Analysis of the results of questionnaires tograduates and their employers

8The course “English I”, which was introduced in FY1993 and is
one of the courses under English curriculum reform, isdesigned to develop students’ listening ability in English(Expected Learning Outcomes).
 An example based on analysis of the results of student
questionnaires
 Examples from answers by students to questionnaires andcomments by an expert on external evaluation
 An example based on analysis of the results of academic
ability tests for first and second year students


Education and Research Evaluation ReportCollege of Arts and Sciences, University of Tokyo (July 1994)
9

The questionnaire was sent to students in the 2nd year (2,546 students) in April 1994.
10 I find “The Universe of English” very interesting. The

book itself is an introduction of various academic fields
and I feel it is excellent material for students in theCollege of Arts and Science. (Student) The main subjects of this textbook cover “anything that
may be termed intellectual interest” such as chaos, music,endoscopes, human faces, etc. I assume that this is thepractice of philosophy of this foreign language education
for the first two years, i.e. “the course will be
implemented in accordance with the students’intellectual desire”. (External Evaluator).
11

1st year students
average
2nd year students
average

Improvements
in score (%)

No. ofstudents

Q1

Q2

Q3

(Reading)(Listening)(Listening)

3,459

19.83

19.42

12.02

51.27

2,572

21.29

21.17

17.53

60.00

7.36

9.01

45.84

17.02

Total

All students took the same academic ability tests in April 1994.
Reading and listening abilities show improvements of 7.36 and 23.09%,respectively.
With respect to Q3 for the 2nd year students, the figures in this table
represent the results of tests taken during examinations for the winter termin their 1st year in February, rather than April 1994.
12 Measure at the level of institution (organization),educational program and particular component
 Measure the learning outcomes
qualitatively/quantitatively compared with the standards(benchmarks) set within/outside the institution(organization) in relation to input, process output andoutcomes The status of objects must be measured at every
important stage of the process Achievements regarding learning outcomes establishedwhen designing of the plan must be specified
13 Dr. Richard A. DeMillo, “Abelard to Apple: The Fateof American Colleges and Universities “- A warning
for American colleges and universities: changes inthe society would have major implications forhigher education institutions.
 Dr. Staci Provezis, “Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment in the United States: Trends and Good
Practices” – While accreditation is a main motivator
for institutions and programs to do learning
outcomes assessment, improvement is also a key
impetus behind this work.
14