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

Saitama Institute of Technology

Basic Information of the Institution
Ownership: Private

Location: Saitama, Japan

Accreditation Status
Year of the Review: 2019
Accreditation Status: Accredited（Accreditation Period: April 1.2020 – March 31.2027）

Certified Evaluation and Accreditation Resultsfor Saitama Institute of Technology
Overview
The mission and purpose of both the graduate school and university of Saitama Instituteof Technology (hereinafter referred to as the “Institute”) is “to nurture working membersof society with a rich personality and education through the Buddhist spirit.” In theInstitute, the phrase “combination and harmony of technology and humanity” is widelyused to express this mission and purpose. The Institute formulated the Future Plan andMid- to Long-term Vision 2016-2020 in conjunction with the 40th anniversary of theuniversity’s founding. The pillars of the plan include entrance examination strategy,
educational reform and student support strategies, career and employment support
strategies, local cooperation strategy, research activity stimulation strategy, and strategies
to enhance governance structure.
The Institute has conducted educational activity in an agile and flexible mannerin an effort to produce educational effects. In AY2019, for example, the Institutedeveloped major-specific curriculum trees indicating the relationship between
educational objectives and subjects in order to enhance the methodical and systematic
nature of curriculum design and implementation policies (curriculum policies) andcurricula.
It is remarkable that the Institute has managed to reduce the number of dropouts throughimplementing a homeroom teacher/assistant homeroom teacher system that leverages thecomprehensive portal system and through providing meticulous student support based on
faculty-staff cooperation. Aiming to achieve automated driving, the Institute launched theNext-Generation Automobile Project as part of its research efforts in 2016. The project
has conducted an automated driving demonstration test on public roads, producing
research results through industry-university-government cooperation. This is a highly
commendable endeavor representing a contribution to society through education andresearch.
The Institute has established an internal quality assurance structure centeredaround the University Self-Study Committee; the organization responsible for promotinginternal quality assurance. The structure incorporates the Faculty Member Self-Study
System that is based on the Self-Study Committees of each division and class review
questionnaires. However, meaningful cooperation has not been achieved, and the roles
and methods related to improvement have not been clearly established. Going forward,
2

the Institute should enable its internal quality assurance system to function effectively. To
this end, the University Self-Study Committee should play a central role in establishing astructure in which measures for improvement can be implemented consistently,
conducting continuous self-study, and working on improvement based on the self-studyresults.
The graduate schools have not established research supervision methods andschedules in the form of a research supervision plan, and regarding finance, thecorporation does not have a sufficient financial base. These issues must be addressedurgently. Furthermore, some departments have constantly exceeded their quota, thegraduate program has failed to fulfill its quota, some graduate schools have notestablished thesis examination criteria, the curriculum design and implementation policy
is inadequate, the methods for grasping and assessing the learning outcomes indicated in
the degree award policy (diploma policy) have not been properly established in both thefaculties and graduate schools, and some regulations have not been establishedappropriately. These issues should be addressed.
Despite the fact that the previous university accreditation (certified evaluationand accreditation) raised similar points regarding curricula, learning outcomes,
enrollment, university management and finance, etc., no fundamental improvements havebeen made. Going forward, we hope the Institute develops a university-wide governancestructure under the president’s strong leadership, verifies and improves methods fororganic organizational management, and implements university management aiming atefficient and effective internal quality assurance for development of the university.
Notable Strengths
Student Support
 In order to provide organizational learning support, the Institute has established acomprehensive portal system where data on student attendance and grades aregathered so that information on student learning can be shared among staff members.
Faculty and staff members use this information when providing guidance to students
or supporting students with poor grades, which is conducted in the first year in groups.
It is commendable that the Institute has succeeded in reducing the number of dropouts
through providing detailed support based on such student data.

3

Social Cooperation and Contribution
The Institute has implemented practical initiatives based on its research findings. For
example, as part of its active engagement in the research and development ofadvanced technology, the Institute has participated in a large-scale automated driving
demonstration test conducted by the government, successfully held a demonstration
test on public roads, the first of its kind to be held in Saitama Prefecture, incooperation with businesses, and established a university venture that dispatches
automated driving operators who are necessary for demonstration tests. In AY2019,
the Institute established the Automated Driving Technology Development Center inorder to conduct research on automated driving technology that leverages cuttingedge AI technology and develop welfare vehicles with automated driving functions,
opening the way for further technological development. These are commendable
endeavors in that they reflect social needs and represent a contribution to society
through advanced research.

Suggestions for Improvement
Educational Program and Outcome
 The degree award policy of the MA Course in Digital Creation in the Department ofInformational Society Studies (Master's Course) does not indicate the learning
outcomes, including knowledge, skills, and abilities, that students need to attain inorder to receive a degree. This should be improved.
 The Master's Courses and Doctoral Courses in the Department of Life Science andGreen Chemistry, Department of Mechanical Engineering, and Department ofInformation Systems in the Graduate School of Engineering, respectively, do notpresent the basic ideas on curriculum organization and implementation in thecurriculum design and implementation policy. This should be improved.
 The Master's Courses in the Graduate School of Engineering and the Master’sCourses in the Graduate School of Human and Social Studies do not clearly indicate
the thesis examination criteria. This should be improved.
 Individual faculties and graduate schools do no clearly present the methods formeasuring the learning outcomes indicated in the degree award policy or the4indicators used when conducting assessments. Therefore, the faculties and graduate
schools should establish these and measure learning outcomes in a diversified andappropriate manner.

Student Enrollment
 The ratio of student enrollment to the student enrollment cap is low at 0.36 in theMaster’s Courses in the Graduate School of Human and Social Studies. Therefore,
the Institute should thoroughly implement graduate school quota management toimprove the situation.
University Management and Finance Committee regulations have not been revised appropriately and thus do notcorrespond to the current organizational structure. The Institute should review theregulations to ensure that decision-making, execution of authority, and other matters
are conducted appropriately in accordance with the provisions in the regulations.
Recommendations
Internal Quality Assurance In AY2018, the Institute established an internal quality assurance structure centeredaround the University Self-Study Committee, the organization responsible for
implementing self-study and promoting internal quality assurance, with the structurefeaturing division-specific Self-Study Committees and the Faculty Member SelfStudy System. However, a structure for implementing measures for improvement
based on the results of checks and reviews has not been established. Other than theFaculty Member Self-Study System, active self-study is not conducted in the Institute,including individual faculties and graduate schools. Going forward, the Instituteshould enable its internal quality assurance system to function effectively. To this end,
the University Self-Study Committee should play a central role in establishing astructure in which measures for improvement can be implemented consistently basedon the results of checks and reviews, conducting continuous self-study, and working
on improvement based on the self-study results.

5

Educational Program and Outcome
 The Graduate School of Engineering and the Graduate School of Human and Social
Studies have not set forth research supervision methods and schedules in the form ofa research supervision plan. These should be established and clearly presented tostudents in advance.

Student Enrollment
 In the last five years, the average of ratios of freshman enrollment to the freshmanenrollment cap and the ratio of student enrollment to the student enrollment cap havebeen high at 1.42 and 1.40, respectively, in the Department of Information Systems
in the Faculty of Engineering. The ratio of student enrollment to the student
enrollment cap is low at 0.81 in the Department of Life Science and Green Chemistry
in the Faculty of Engineering and 0.86 in the Department of Informational Society
Studies in the Faculty of Human and Social Studies. Therefore, the Institute should
thoroughly implement faculty quota management to improve the situation.
University Management and Finance Since AY2015, the ratio of the excessive amount of carried over expenditures for next
year to the income from business operations has been increasing, and the ratio of thefinancial assets to the required reserve fund is still hovering at a low level. Therefore,
the Institute has not established the financial base necessary for implementing
educational and research activities in a stable manner. The Institute should clarify themeasures for securing the funding required for dealing with the deterioration offacilities and equipment, which the Institute considers an issue of priority, formulate
a mid- to long-term financial plan including numerical targets, and work on
improving its financial health.

6