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

Kyoto Sangyo University

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

Accreditation Status
Year of the Review: 2023
Accreditation Status: accredited （Accreditation Period: April 1, 2024 – March 31, 2031）

Kyoto Sangyo University

Certified Evaluation and Accreditation Resultsfor Kyoto Sangyo University

Overview
Kyoto Sangyo University has created the unique concept of “Musubiwaza,” or“producing new industries and things,” based on part of its name “Sangyo (industry).”(The Japanese kanji for “sangyo” are “san,” meaning “produce,” and “gyo,” which means“industry,” and can also be read as “waza.” “Musubu” is derived from “musu” meaning“produce.”) With this concept, along with its founding principles and educational
philosophy, the University presents its ideal of a university and students from theperspective of cultivating “musubu-hito (creators/producers).” In 2015, marking the 50thanniversary of its founding, the University formulated the Koyama Style 2030 mediumto long-term plan as a grand design for what it aspires to be in 2030, and strives to enhanceits educational and research activities under the plan that serves as a guideline for specificmeasures related to university reform and infrastructure development.
The University has engaged in social contribution and community collaboration
activities under the slogan “Musunde Umidasu (connect and create)” based on the conceptof Musubiwaza. Among the representative examples is Machiya Manabi Terrace Nishijin,
which provides opportunities for people of various ages and occupations to interact. The
facility produces such educational benefits as encouraging students to freely generate
ideas and enhancing their planning, action, and communication skills. In this way, theUniversity undertakes distinctive social contribution and community collaboration
activities by supporting students’ learning experiences of “Musunde Umidasu,” andoffering its resources to the local community through its students.
Regarding internal quality assurance, the University established the Kyoto
Sangyo University Internal Quality Assurance Policy and Procedures in AY2022, andappropriately clarifies its internal quality assurance policy and procedures by informing
faculty and staff members through the Division Chief Meeting and the Section Chief
Meeting as well as publishing the documents on its website. The inspection andassessment results of the faculties, graduate schools, and divisions are compiled by theKyoto Sangyo University Self-Study Management Committee (hereafter “UniversityWide Self-Study Management Committee”) from a university-wide perspective, and theDivision Chief Meeting issues instructions for improvement based on the results. Theseimprovement instructions are also reflected in the Koyama Style 2030 action plan to make1

Kyoto Sangyo University

faculty and program improvements. However, the Koyama Style 2030 Review Meetingalso plays a part in the internal quality assurance system at the university level, although
the Kyoto Sangyo University Internal Quality Assurance Approaches and Procedures,
made public inside and outside the University, does not include this meeting body in theinternal quality assurance system chart. It is desirable to revise the system chart to be
more in line with the current situation. In addition, self-study reports prepared by thefaculties, graduate schools, and other programs based on their inspection and assessment
results undergo the approval process at the Division Chief Meeting, but it is unclear how
the meeting body actually instructs each division to undertake improvement measures in
response to the issues identified in the division-level self-studies. The University shouldorganically connect the cycles of division-level and university-level inspections,assessments, and improvements.
As for education, the University’s educational and research organizations are
all located on a single campus (single-site comprehensive university) to create anenvironment that facilitates educational activities combining liberal arts and science, andto launch programs designed in light of current academic trends and social demands. The
undergraduate programs have laid out course numbering systems, combined general andspecialized education subjects, teaching methods, and evaluations of student learning
outcomes based on the university-wide curriculum policy to teach students to acquire theknowledge stated in the diploma policy. The University outlines eight abilities and skills
for the learning outcomes stated in the faculty-wide diploma policy and designs acurriculum map to illustrate the relationship between each subject and these abilities andskills, with these items publicized to faculty and staff members and reflected in thesyllabuses as well.
There are several areas of improvement the University should address,
however. First, some of the graduate school’s divisions do not state the specific concepts
of educational methods in their curriculum policies. This situation should be addressed.
The screening criteria for dissertations are specified for each course, but the content
excluding submission requirements is identical in certain divisions, and this issue should
be addressed. Some master’s programs clearly explain the process from enrollment todegree acquisition as a research guidance plan in the Kyoto Sangyo University Graduate
School Course Registration Guide, but fail to specify the research guidance methods andschedules. These items must be established and clarified to students beforehand.
Moreover, some faculties and graduate school divisions have low ratios of student
enrollment to the student enrollment cap, and should thoroughly manage their student
quotas.

2

Kyoto Sangyo University

In the years ahead, the University is expected to resolve these issues throughongoing internal quality assurance efforts, and to progress further by enhancing its
distinctive initiatives that take advantage of a single-site comprehensive university.

Notable Strengths
Social Cooperation and Contribution
 “Machiya Manabi Terrace Nishijin” functions as a base for creating new value for
the Nishijin brand while promoting coexistence and cooperation with the local
community and preserving the traditions and culture that the Nishijin region hastreasured. This initiative is producing positive outcomes, such as creating new
businesses, and embodies the University’s Musubiwaza spirit. The facility is utilized
as a place where local residents, business people, and students gather for diverse
learning activities, providing students with opportunities to experience this spirit.
These social cooperation and contribution efforts are commendable.
Suggestions for Improvement
Educational Program and Learning Outcomes In terms of the curriculum policy, the Master’s Program in Sociology, Division ofSociology, does not specify the basic concept of curriculum implementation. Thisissue should be addressed.
 The maximum number of credits students can register for is specified, but students
are allowed to register for credits exceeding the upper limit. The syllabuses describe
the contents of preparation and review, offer guidance to students intending to takethe teacher training course, and give advice to students with a low number of credits.
However, these measures insufficiently ensure credit validity as the guidance is notbased on the actual learning status of the students who exceed the credit cap. Thisissue should be addressed in light of the purpose of the credit system.
 The Division of Frontier Informatics has established dissertation screening criteria
for each program, but the content excluding submission requirements is identical.

3

Kyoto Sangyo University

This issue should be addressed.
Student Enrollment The ratios of student enrollment to the student enrollment cap are low at 0.88 in theDepartment of Physics, Faculty of Science, 0.13 in the Master’s Program inManagement, Division of Management, 0.22 in the Doctoral Program inManagement, Division of Management, 0.10 in the Master’s Program in Law,Division of Law, 0.10 in the Doctoral Program in Law, Division of Law, 0.14 in theMaster’s Program, Division of Foreign Languages, and 0.28 in the Doctoral Programin Science, Division of Science. These ratios should be improved with the student
quotas of faculties and graduate school divisions thoroughly managed.
Recommendation
Educational Program and Learning Outcomes The research guidance methods and schedules are not defined in the Master’s
Program in Economics, Division of Economics; Master’s Program in Management,
Division of Management; Master’s Program in Law, Division of Law; Master’s
Program in Interdisciplinary Studies in Law and Policy, Division of Law; Master’s
Program in Sociology, Division of Sociology; Master’s Program in ChineseLinguistics, Division of Foreign Languages; Master’s Program in Mathematics,
Division of Science; Master’s Program in Physics, Division of Science; Master’s
Program in Frontier Informatics, Division of Frontier Informatics; Master’s Programin Life Sciences, Division of Life Sciences; Master’s Program in Economics,
Division of Economics, Correspondence Education; and Master’s Program in Kyoto
Studies, Division of Kyoto Studies, Correspondence Education. This situation must
be corrected with the methods and schedules established and clarified to students
beforehand.

4