National Institute of Technology, Kumamoto College
1. Decision of institutional certified evaluation and accreditation
The National Institute of Technology, Kumamoto College, complies with the Standards for the Establishment ofColleges of Technology and other relevant laws and regulations and meets the Standards for Evaluation andAccreditation of Colleges of Technology set by the National Institution for Academic Degrees and Quality
Enhancement of Higher Education (NIAD-QE). It fulfills all the requirements defined as priority evaluation items inViewpoint 1-1.
The best practices identified by the review committee were as follows:1)

To improve classes and teaching skills through collaboration among teachers, Kumamoto College hasdeveloped a group advocating improvement in education; target classes are selected for on-campus lesson
research and observed, information is exchanged to enhance instructors’ teaching skills, and evaluations on
the teaching performance are reported by the group advocating improvement in education. These group
activities are distinct initiatives by the college.

2)

Kumamoto College offers liberal arts subjects in all departments as part of its educational method topromote creativity. These subjects aim to enhance students’ ability to explore solutions to questions forwhich no correct answers have been specified. The compulsory subjects are as follows: 1st year:
Introduction to Liberal Arts, 2nd year: Practice on Liberal Arts I, 3rd year: Practice on Liberal Arts II, and4th year: Practice on Liberal Arts III. These are distinct initiatives by the college.

3)

The employment rate (the number of students employed divided by those seeking postgraduate employment)
for associate and diploma courses is extremely high, with graduates employed in manufacturing and otherindustries to which the engineers that the college hopes to produce are well-suited. The rate of students
advancing to higher education (the number of students advancing to higher education divided by those wishing
to do so) for associate and diploma courses is also extremely high, with graduates advancing to diploma courses
at colleges of technology, engineering faculties, or graduate schools related to their associate and diploma
courses.

Points to be improved:1)

The published checklist for self-assessment is not suitable as a self-assessment report, as it does not allowfor confirmation of the kind of evidence and data used to conduct the self-assessment [Viewpoint 1-1-(2)].

2)

Regarding the improvement points indicated in the previous institutional certified evaluation andaccreditation report, the following issue has not been addressed by relevant committees related to internal
quality assurance: “Some course subjects have used the same exam questions for several years” [Viewpoint1-1-(4)].

3)

Re-examinations are not implemented similarly across different campuses. Additionally, oral reexaminations do not ensure the objectivity and rigor of grade evaluations [Viewpoint 5-3-(1)].

4)Based on the opinions of students, postgraduates who graduated five years ago, and people related to theircareer paths, there is no sufficient system in place to consider the academic abilities, qualities, andcapabilities that students acquire upon graduation (completion). [Viewpoint 7-1-(2), Viewpoint 8-3-(2)].

The NIAD-QE has translated this document with consent from the college for reader information only.