Supplementary Review Results

Tokyo Medical University

Basic Information of the Institution
Ownership: PrivateLocation: Tokyo, Japan

Accreditation Status
Year of the Review: 2020
Accreditation Status: accredited （Accreditation Period: April.1.2021 – March.31.2025）

Tokyo Medical University

Supplementary Reviewfor Tokyo Medical University
Overview
Regarding Tokyo Medical University, in response to the scandal surrounding the selectionof prospective students at the School of Medicine coming to light—namely, the briberyof senior MEXT officials and the subsequent fudging of entrance examination scores—
we established an investigatory subcommittee under the University AccreditationCommittee of the Association in 2018, and investigated the validity of the University
Accreditation (Certified Evaluation and Accreditation) Results for said University that weconducted in 2017. This consequently verified major issues in “Student Enrollment,”“Management,” and “Internal Quality Assurance” and as a result, the determination of the2017 University Accreditation Results stating that the University conformed to University
Standards was overturned and the University was deemed noncompliant.
In response to these issues surrounding the selection of prospective students, anemergency meeting of the Board of Trustees was held at Tokyo Medical University, theInternal Investigatory Committee and Third-Party Committee were promptly established,and fact-finding and causal analysis of the case in question were conducted in said
committees. Besides compiling a list of preventative measures in response to the resultsof these investigations and the problem areas indicated in the investigation results by theAssociation, the University is implementing measures such as governance and entrance
examination reforms after first formulating a progress schedule. In tandem, the University
receives consideration and approval every three months with regard to the progress of
those reforms at the Board of Trustees and promotes reforms while seeking advice andguidance from MEXT, and it is endeavoring toward building a framework that leaves noroom for corruption. Consequently, in addition to swift and appropriate action having
been taken since the scandal was uncovered in July 2018, concrete reform measures arebeing promoted, and we conclude that the University satisfies the University Standards.
First of all, with regard to Student Enrollment among the three serious issues,
individual scores were fudged for particular entrance examinees and scores were fudged
according to attributes such as gender and age since the 2006 entrance examination, andthe situation was such that we could not say “fair and proper enrollment following theadmission policy” required by the University Standards was being implemented. In
response to these problem areas, the University established the Entrance Examination
Committee, which is independent of its authorities, along with the Admission Center.

1

Tokyo Medical University

When making acceptance judgements, the University decided that the board of educationand the faculty council, which are responsible for considerations, will in all cases consider
acceptance using materials that only show examination scores, and is substantiating
deliberations. Furthermore, the University established the Entrance Examination Audit
Committee, which consists of three external members, after the scandal was uncovered,and with regard to the 2019 and 2020 entrance examinations, it implemented audits andverifications by said committee. Besides the aforementioned, the University reformed theenvironment for entrance examination work, installing such precautions as surveillancecameras and a finger vein authentication system in the computer lab that the personnel incharge use as well as implementing anti-fraud countermeasures in entrance examination
office work, such as introducing a system that records access logs and prevents fraudulent
point additions. It proactively discloses information concerning entrance examinations
and endeavors to assure fairness and transparency in them. Moreover, regarding theEntrance Examination Committee, the University verifies the acceptance rate by genderand age based on the final acceptance results after the confirmation of admission
applicants, and confirms that it is generally unbiased. Furthermore, the University
conducts a review of its entrance examination implementation system, including reforms
to the entrance examination problems and assessment standards, by posing aquestionnaire to all faculty members in charge of entrance examinations each year; andin addition, from the fact that verification is being continuously implemented based on
the Entrance Examination Audit Committee Bylaws, we can expect that endeavors towardreform will continue to be made. In this manner, the problem areas that were indicatedhave been drastically improved. However, the fact that a graph showing a positive
correlation between household income and academic achievement appeared among theproblems used in the 2020 oral examination for the School of Medicine is improper, andlikewise for an example question that would lead to ascertaining the financial situationsof examinees’ families appearing in the oral examination manual. While the University
has already decided to eliminate said example from the oral examination manual for thefollowing year, we hope that it thoroughly implements measures so that, hereafter, it canverify the appropriateness of the oral examination content based on the questionnaire it
gives after the entrance examination each year, and that cases like these inviting
misunderstanding do not occur.
With regard to the problem area of Management, the University's framework forgovernance being completely dysfunctional was an issue, stemming from issues such as
the supervisory function by the Board of Trustees over the Chair and President, thefunction of the Internal Audit Office and the internal reporting program, the audits

2

Tokyo Medical University

conducted by auditors, and the supervision by the Board of Councilors losing theirsubstance. In response, the previous Chair and President resigned, a new Chair andPresident were appointed, and the framework for governance was reformed. Moreover,
the University has made modifications to the Articles of Endowment, and restructuringhas been implemented in addition to building a framework for the Board of Trustees under
new Bylaws for the Appointment of Trustees. In other words, besides increasing thenumber of external experts among the trustees and incorporating opinions from anexternal perspective, the University has made the area of teaching and learning—
including entrance examinations—subject to audit by adding teaching and learning to theexpertise of the auditors, and has reinforced on-campus monitoring, such as by permanent
auditors and university attorneys witnessing acceptance judgements by the Entrance
Examination Committee. Moreover, along with holding an Operational Liaison
Committee meeting prior to the monthly regular Board of Trustees meeting for thepurpose of expanding monitoring by the Board of Trustees over the operational trustees,
the University has increased the number of external experts among the members in theBoard of Councilors. Besides the aforementioned, the University has revised the relevant
regulations of the internal reporting system, and reports on the misconduct of the Chair
and trustees are covered. In this manner, the situation is generally improved with regard
to this problem area, and we can conclude that the framework for governance has beenreconstructed. Hereafter, we hope that the University will continue to conduct proper
administration under the reformed framework.
Concerning Internal Quality Assurance, descriptions contrary to the facts weregiven in the Checks and Reviews Report, and it came to light that a system capable ofperforming checks and assessment as well as improvement and progress of its own
conduct did not come to fruition. In response to this issue, the University enacted theInternal Quality Assurance Regulations in 2020, and the Internal Quality Assurance andPromotion Committee was newly established as a framework for promoting internal
quality assurance. Accordingly, the Self-Assessment Committee compiles the checks andreviews of each area in charge of teaching and learning based on the basic policy of checks
and reviews formulated by said committee, and the University is building a framework
for internal quality assurance in which the Internal Quality Assurance and Promotion
Committee verifies those results from a University-wide perspective. Additionally, theUniversity holds workshops for faculty development (FD) and staff development (SD) on
internal quality assurance, and on-campus developmental activities for teaching andlearning management are conducted in accordance with the internal quality assurance
system. Hereafter, as it is planing to establish an External Review Committee for Internal

3

Tokyo Medical University

Quality Assurance to verify the internal quality assurance system, we hope that theUniversity steadily implements it and enhances the framework for internal quality
assurance.
Next, with regard to the problem areas indicated in the previous University
Accreditation (Certified Evaluation and Accreditation), improvements have been made to
the research guidance plan, which was an area of serious concern, and to the enactmentof qualification review standards for faculty members, which was a suggestion forimprovement. However, with regard to the following two areas, continual endeavors
toward further improvements are needed.
With regard to the entry “Students of the Graduate School for Working Adults &Clinical Research may substitute a dissertation with a paper recommended by the seniorprofessor and three case reports” in the Educational Guidelines for the Doctoral Program,concerning the passages under “Educational Program, Methods, and Outcomes” that
required the University to make the entry appropriate in light of the Standards for
Establishment of Universities and clarify its consistency with the definition of adissertation by the university in question (i.e. “a paper that has been published or acceptedfor publication in a journal requiring peer review”), we can acknowledge improvement in
the case of the University changing that entry of the dissertation requirements to have aninternational perspective based on the Tokyo Medical University Graduate SchoolRegulations. However, from the fact that, in practice, applications for dissertations written
in Japanese are also possible, we hope to see the University make improvements so thatit conducts assessments of dissertations based on the academic regulations, such as
making it a condition to publish in an authoritative international journal.
In the problem area of Student Enrollment, concerning the fact that the ratios ofstudent enrollment to the student enrollment cap are high in the School of Medicine, theUniversity has made various endeavors aiming to reduce the number of holdover students,
such as reviewing educational programs for acquiring fundamental academic skills andimproving the framework for student mental healthcare; however, as the improvement ofsaid ratio is not yet sufficient, we hope to see the University make further considerations.
In this manner, improvement initiatives are being implemented regarding theareas of serious concern and suggestions for improvement indicated in the 2017
University Accreditation (Certified Evaluation and Accreditation). It takes time for theeffects of improvements to institutions to become clear in many cases, and while the final
outcome is expected hereafter as the outcome of internal quality assurance throughimprovement activities based on the results of checks and reviews, we can conclude that,as immediate reform measures, they are generally satisfactory. We expect the University4

Tokyo Medical University

to continue to make its internal quality assurance function effectively, endeavor to verify
its reform measures in addition to endeavoring toward improving its problem areas, andmake further strides in improving its education.
Suggestions for Improvement
Student Enrollment


We hope to see the University continue to make improvements as the ratio of student
enrollment to the student enrollment cap in the School of Medicine was still high at
1.03 in 2019.

5