Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across     boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project     and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Toward the quality assurance of ``collaborative'' educational programs across boarders: experiences from the "CAMPUS Asia" monitoring project and perspectives beyond (a personal observation)

145

Published on

Presentation at APQN International QA Seminar, at Fu Jen Catholic University, Taiwan, September 27, 2013

Presentation at APQN International QA Seminar, at Fu Jen Catholic University, Taiwan, September 27, 2013

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
145
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Toward the quality assurance of “collaborative” educational programs across boarders: experiences from the ”CAMPUS Asia” monitoring project and perspectives beyond (a personal observation) Syun Tutiya National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation September 27, 2013 at FuJen September 27, 2013 1/17
  • 2. Plan 1. Backgrounds Historical Geographical Policies 2. “CAMPUS Asia” and the “monitoring” thereof What it is How QA is involved What’s being done Some experiences 3. Beyond 3.1 “Joint” monitoring of CJK programs 3.2 Degree programs? 3.3 Beyond CJK, ie. ASEAN+CJK September 27, 2013 2/17
  • 3. Backgrounds, historically and geographically Primarily domestic “industry” with respect to student constituion, around 130,000 enrollment out of 3 million, obviously below the OECD average Student Constituion Primarily domestic “industry” again with respect to faculty constituion, incredibly so given Japan’s role in STM research worldwide Faculty Constitution International students are between 4 and 5 % of the total enrollment, with more than 90% from Asian countries Incoming students Few Japanese students don’t go out and don’t want to, apparently Students abroad September 27, 2013 3/17
  • 4. (Create by MEXT from OECD “Education at a Glance 2010”) BACK September 27, 2013 4/17
  • 5. (Create by MEXT from OECD “Education at a Glance 2010”) BACK September 27, 2013 5/17
  • 6. (Create by MEXT from JASSO’s reports) BACK September 27, 2013 6/17
  • 7. (Create by MEXT from OECD “Education at a Glance 2010” and other sources ) BACK September 27, 2013 7/17
  • 8. Policy changes observed Formerly, funds for moving students inwards and ourwards, which is still dominantly fiscally Shift to or new direction in funding awarded to universities to strengthen the infrastructure Further move forward to internationally “collaborative” projects “International” in former times meant “Western” but now it means “Asia” Can’t deny the bureaucratic mindset, but money is real And the perhaps innocent mention of “quality” language, and here comes NIAD-UE September 27, 2013 8/17
  • 9. MEXT’s ways of “Internationalization” 1. Project for Promotion of Global Human Resource Development “to overcome the Japanese younger generation’s ’inward tendency’ and to foster human resources who can positively meet the challenges and succeed in the global field, ...” 2. Global 30 Project: Establishing University Network for Internationalization “to promote internationalization of academic environment of Japanese universities and acceptance of excellent international students studying in Japan” 3. Re-inventing Japan “to foster human resources capable of being globally active, and to assure the quality of mechanisms for the mutual recognition of credits and grade management through an international framework, ...” 4. Support for two-way exchange programs, which is relatively big secure portion for exchange students September 27, 2013 9/17
  • 10. CAMPUS Asia, CJK Former Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama ’s proposal in 2009 to enhance university exchange with QA in East Asia Japan-China-Korea summit (October 2009 in Beijing) ASEAN+3 and EAS summit (October 2009 in Cha-am Hua Hin) 10 consortial, joint CJK programs currently, with the U of Tokyo, TIT, Hitotsubashi, GRIPS, Nagoya U, Tohoku U, Kobe U, Okayama U, Kyushu U and Ritsumeikan U, starting in 2011 Now in their third year September 27, 2013 10/17
  • 11. CAMPUS Asia, currently Under the “Re-inventing Japan” Project Type I: “Formation of a consortium among universities in Japan and ASEAN for implementing exchange programs with the assurance of credit transfers and grade management” Type II: “SEND program: Student Exchange - Nippon Discovery” In the Type I category, nine programs were selected out of 54 proposals for the year 2012, with Hokkaido U, The U of Tokyo, Tokyo Medical and Dental U, Kyoto U, Kobe, U & Osaka U, Ehime U, Kagawa U, Kochi U, Kyushu U, Waseda U, Keio U and Meiji U For the year 2013, selection is ongoing, with special emphasis on AIMS-participating universities September 27, 2013 11/17
  • 12. Current approaches in the CJK context As said, “quality assurance” is included in the whole concept We knew it is a challenge, a totally new thing Launch of Japan-China-Korea Quality Assurance Council, with NIAD-UE(Japan): National Institution for Academic Degrees and University Evaluation HEEC(China): Higher Education Evaluation Center of the Ministry of Education KCUE(Korea): Korean Council for University Education Three target activities Mutual understanding of each county ’s QA system Monitoring of‘ CAMPUS Asia ’pilot program for elaborating a joint guideline for QA of transnational programs Staff/Experts Exchange September 27, 2013 12/17
  • 13. With reference to ENQA(2005), TEEP II project ECA(2008-10), TAEM II Project ECA(2007), Principles for accreditation procedures regarding joint programmes Netherlands NVAO, Framework for the assessment of internationalisation as a distinctive (quality) feature European Commission: ERASMUS MUNDUS Quality Assessment Project(2009), Quality Handbook September 27, 2013 13/17
  • 14. Challenges that led to the “monitoring” idea, an empiricist approach The three countries have been mainly concerned with institutional as opposed to program QA, while all the “collaborative” programs are program-based, viz., specific group of students Participationg higher education institutions, and hence perhaps constituting programs also, are already quality assured in each country’s system, and actually are “elite” institutions, what is the added(?) quality to be assured? There are language barriers, which is a challege not only for the program design of each consortium, but for quality assurance entities. Japanese, Chinese and Korean are different languages and higher education in each country have an established tradition of using those languages. Using English is not a solution. September 27, 2013 14/17
  • 15. CAMPUS Asia Monitoring The monitoring project will identify good practices from the aspect of the quality of education disseminate them broadly to higher education community by way of symposia, guidelines etc Now we are doing the First Monitoring in each country independently, with different sets of starndards and criteria, though with mutual recognition of the standards. The second council meeting in August, 2013, which confirmed its progress and set up concrete agenda for the rest of the term September 27, 2013 15/17
  • 16. Some personal observations from someone not on the team There are no “degree” level programs in the sense that the participating institutions jointly award degrees, hence “collaborative” at most, though should there be such, what could it be? Actively involved faculty and international education specialists on the monitoring team might have different views of the situation, eg. about credit transfer and hours spent studying “Supervision of research” in postgraduate programs, which, though, are prevalent, is a grey area Faculty-level communication and trust make difference Troubles come from money, though money makes this project possible: To move, you need money September 27, 2013 16/17
  • 17. What’s to come next? “Joint” monitoring of CJK programs Challeges will remain Mutual observation has started Degree programs? Beyond CJK area-wise, ie. ASEAN+CJK, from Japan’s point of view, as represented by the current call for proposals A “jamming” or “concentration” situation, with different Japanese universities talking to a small set of ASEAN universities CJK were three countries, but ASEAN is already a network Most ASEAN countries have the idea of program-level accreditaton while Japan does not More communication and sharing is necessary September 27, 2013 17/17

×