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

Chukyo University

Basic Information of the Institution
Ownership: Private

Location: Aichi, Japan

Accreditation Status
Year of the Review: 2021
Accreditation Status: accredited （Accreditation Period: April 1, 2022 – March 31, 2029）

Chukyo University

Certified Evaluation and Accreditation Resultsfor Chukyo University

Overview
Chukyo University upholds “focus on excellence in both learning and sports” as its
founding spirit and positions harmony in research and education as well as in learningand sports both as creative harmony. The University strives to constantly move
forward led by such creative harmony for its objective to deliver diverse andabundant academic results while sending off outstanding individuals who cancontribute to society. As a medium- to long-term plan for achieving its founding spirit
and purpose, the University has established the Chukyo University Long-Term Plan
NEXT10 (referred to below as “NEXT10”)）, and it can be said that the University
is making efforts to improve its education and research activities.
Regarding internal quality assurance, the Chukyo University President’sCouncil (referred to below as the “President’s Council”), Chukyo University
Education Quality Assurance Council (referred to below as “Education Quality
Assurance Council”), and the Self-Assessment Committee are three organizations
responsible for the promotion of those efforts. The target of internal quality assurance
is largely focused on education within undergraduate schools, with efforts directed atgraduate schools being insufficient. It is difficult to say that the PDCA cycle is being
sufficiently incorporated, considering checks and reviews of student support andsocial cooperation based on the internal quality assurance system were not evident,
and improvement is thus required.
Regarding education, all undergraduate and graduate divisions have organized
their curricula appropriately in accordance with the degree award policy (diplomapolicy) and curriculum design and implementation policy (curriculum policy). Career
education subjects are available in all undergraduate schools, characterized by their
aim to foster basic and general-purpose abilities. In ascertaining learning outcomesof students in undergraduate schools, diverse methods are implemented based on theassessment policy of the University, including degree-earning status, rate of students
graduating within the standard completion period, survey on self-assessment ofgrowth, evaluation of the graduation thesis, survey for improvements in class, statusof career/qualification acquisition, and survey of alumni. University-wide efforts arebeing expanded, such as the creation of course rubrics, under the direction of theEducation Quality Assurance Council. Meanwhile, it is hard to say that learning
1

Chukyo University

outcomes are being recognized and assessed adequately in graduate schools asindicated in their degree award policy in a multifaceted and appropriate manner, andimprovements are thus required.
The University’s basic policy on governance cites faculty–staff cooperation inpromoting reform through the sharing of information across the University regarding
various issues, with a system in place that allows public administration officials to beappointed an assistant dean of an undergraduate school or a president’s assistant,which can be considered as an outstanding effort. This can be commended as an
example of faculty–staff cooperation from which smooth and effective university
management and university operations are anticipated.
Nevertheless, several issues should be addressed. Besides the abovementioned
issues regarding internal quality assurance and recognizing/assessing learning
outcomes, improvement to the issue regarding enrollment of graduate students must
be made; there are graduate schools with low ratios of student enrollment to thestudent enrollment cap and those with high ones.
It seems that the promotion of internal quality assurance has only just started,as seen with the policy regarding internal quality assurance for educational activity
at Chukyo University being established in 2018. It is hoped that the establishment ofrelevant committees and regulations be thoroughly implemented and that a system
be further enhanced to promote numerous activities based on the founding spirit ofthe University.
Notable Strengths
University Management and Finance The University’s basic policy on governance cites the sharing of information
across the University regarding various issues through faculty–staff cooperation
to promote reform, with a system in place that allows public administration
officials to be appointed an assistant dean of an undergraduate school or apresident’s assistant. Public administration officials play a large role in thepromotion of educational activities within undergraduate schools and SD
activities throughout the University (from responses to items in a field survey).
This can be considered pioneering in faculty–staff cooperation and commended
as an effort from which smooth and effective university management anduniversity operations are anticipated.
Suggestions for Improvement
2Chukyo University

Internal Quality Assurance Efforts regarding the internal quality assurance system directed at graduate
schools are insufficient. Implementation of checks and reviews of student
support and social cooperation was not evident, and it is hard to say that thePDCA cycle is sufficiently incorporated, and improvement is thus required.
Regarding the Chukyo University Researcher Database, entries for “ResearchAreas” and “Research Keywords” are blank for many faculty members of the
Global Education Center, making most basic information unavailable; thus,improvements are necessary to appropriately disclose information.

Educational Program and Learning Outcomes The method for recognizing and assessing learning outcomes indicated in thedegree award policy for graduate schools is limited to an examination of thethesis, and the relationship between the method of thesis examination andlearning outcomes indicated in the degree award policy is not clearly indicated.
Therefore, it is hard to say that learning outcomes indicated in the degree award
policy are recognized and assessed in a multifaceted and appropriate manner,and improvements are thus required.
Student Enrollment
 For the master’s program, the ratios of student enrollment to the student
enrollment cap are low at 0.13 in the Graduate School of World Englishes, 0.10
in the Graduate School of Sociology, 0.33 in the Graduate School of Law, 0.15
in the Graduate School of Economics, and 0.10 in the Graduate School ofManagement, and it is high in the Graduate School of Health and Sport Sciences
at 2.00. For the doctoral program, the ratio is low at 0.17 for the Graduate Schoolof Letters, 0.17 in the Graduate School of Psychology, 0.25 in the Graduate
School of Law, 0.25 in the Graduate School of Economics, 0.11 in the Graduate
School of Management, 0.25 in the Graduate School of Engineering, and 0.00 inthe Graduate School of Sociology. Therefore, significant improvements should
be made to ensure proper graduate student quota management.

3