Upload
trananh
View
223
Download
6
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Demand for information on higher education qualifications in Japan:
For future development of FCE and NIC
(日本におけるFCEおよびNICの需要と展望)
Seminar and Workshop on International Comparison of Foreign Credential Evaluation (FCE) in Higher Education 「外国学歴・資格認証(FCE)にかかわるセミナー&ワークショップ」
Toyo University January 25, 2017
MORI Rie (森 利 枝)
YOSHIKAWA Yumiko (吉川 裕美子)
National Institution for Academic Degrees and Quality Enhancement of Higher Education: NIAD-QE
(大学改革支援・学位授与機構)
Agenda
• Background of surveys
• National survey to determine needs for Foreign Credential Evaluation
• International survey to determine needs of National Information Center
• Survey of mobile students’ needs
• Conclusion
2 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Background of surveys
3 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Trends in number of international students in Japanese higher education
January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE 4
94,347 93,751 95,841 102,513
111,762 110,993 111,002 108,906 107,761 110,801
117,927 118,498 123,829
132,720
141,774 138,075 137,747 135,519
139,185
152,062
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Int'l Students in Degree Programs Total Int'l Students
Reference: http://www.jasso.go.jp/about/statistics/intl_student/data2015.html (last retrieved Jan. 12, 2017) among others.
Regional Conventions on the Recognition of Studies initiated by UNESCO
Asia-Pacific
1983 Regional Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees in Higher Education in Asia and the Pacific
2011 Asia-Pacific Regional Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education ★
African States 1981 Regional Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Certificates, Diplomas, Degrees and other Academic Qualifications in Higher Education in the African States 2014 Revised Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Certificates, Diplomas, Degrees and Other Academic Qualifications in Higher Education in African States
Europe region 1979 Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees concerning Higher Education in the States belonging to the Europe Region 1997 Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications concerning Higher Education in the European Region
Arab States 1978 Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees in Higher Education in the Arab States
Mediterranean Region 1976 Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees in Higher Education in the Arab and European States Bordering on the Mediterranean
Latin America and the Caribbean
1974 Regional Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees in Higher Education in Latin America and the Caribbean
5 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Asia-Pacific Regional Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education, 2011 • Article VIII.1
Each Party shall provide adequate information on any institution belonging to its higher education system, and on its quality assurance system, with a view to enabling the competent recognition authorities of the other Parties to ascertain whether the quality of the qualifications issued by these institutions justifies recognition in the Party in which recognition is sought. This includes: (a) a description of its higher education system; (b) an overview of the different types of higher education institutions belonging to its higher education system, and of the typical characteristics of each type of institution; (c) a list of recognised and/or accredited higher education institutions (public and private) belonging to its higher education system, indicating their powers to award different types of qualifications and the requirements for gaining access to each type of institution and programme; (d) an explanation of quality assurance mechanisms; and (e) a list of educational institutions located outside its territory which the Party considers as belonging to its education system. Article VIII.2 Each Party shall provide relevant, accurate and up-to-date information in order to facilitate the recognition of qualifications in higher education by: (a) facilitating access to authoritative and accurate information on its higher education system and qualifications; (b) facilitating access to information on the higher education systems and qualifications of the other Parties; and (c) giving advice or information on recognition matters and assessment of qualifications, in accordance with national laws and regulations.
6 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Asia-Pacific Regional Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education, 2011 • Article VIII.3
Each Party shall take adequate measures for the development and maintenance of a national information centre that will provide higher education information. The form of the national information centre could vary. Article VIII.4 The Parties shall promote, through their national information centres or otherwise, the use of the: (a) “UNESCO Diploma Supplement” or any other comparable qualification supplement; and (b) the UNESCO/OECD Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education and/or any comparable document produced by the Parties’ respective higher education institutions, subject to their respective national laws and regulations.
7
Source: UNESCO (2011) January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
As January 2017, three states have ratified the convention.
[References] http://www.unesco.org/eri/la/convention.asp?KO=48975&language=F&order=alpha (last retrieved Jan. 12, 2017) http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/about-us/our-role/our-role-in-international-education/general-recognition-agreements/ (last retrieved Jan. 12, 2017)
Asia-Pacific Regional Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education, 2011
State Date of deposit of instrument
(=ratification)
Australia 17/07/2014
China 17/07/2014
New Zealand 12/02/2016
8 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Project to assess needs for FCE and NIC
• A research project by NIAD-QE (nee, NIAD-UE) sponsored by MEXT • Research on Development of an Appropriate Information-Provision System for
Domestic and Foreign HEIs to Support Student Mobility, 2013~2015:「学生移動(モビリティ)に伴い国内外の高等教育機関に必要とされる情報提供事業の在り方に 関する調査」(調査委託期間2013~2015年度)
• Components
① National survey to determine needs for Foreign Credential Evaluation (FCE)
② International survey to determine needs of National Information Center (NIC)
③ Assessment of needs for a unified institution with FCE and NIC functions
• Final report is available at http://www.niad.ac.jp/n_kokusai/publish/rsc
9 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
National survey to determine needs for FCE
for domestic 4-year institutions
10 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Outline of the Survey
• Online survey implemented from February 26 through April 15, 2014
• Targeting academic and administrative staff in charge of international admission at all 4-year institutions: Undergraduate and graduate
Type of Survey by Scope n
ⅠA: Evaluation of foreign diplomas@undergrad 484
ⅠB: Evaluation of foreign diplomas@graduate 468
ⅡA: Recognition of foreign credits@undergrad 469
ⅡB: Recognition of foreign credits@graduate 425
Type of Respondents
IA IB
Admin. 403 (83%) 381 (81%)
Academic 81 (17%) 87 (19%)
Total 484 (100%) 468 (100%)
Type of Respondents
IIA IIB
Admin. 379 (81%) 347 (82%)
Academic 90 (19%) 78 (18%)
Total 469 (100%) 425 (100%) 11 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Question: Have you ever suspected the authenticity of documents submitted by prospective international students?
9%
91%
ある(n=35) ない(n=376)
7%
93%
ある(n=30) ない(n=390)
undergraduate graduate
12 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Yes (n=35)
Yes (n=30)
No (n=376)
No (n=390)
Question:
Is there a prescribed process in your office to determine the authenticity of submitted documents?
undergraduate graduate
23%
77%
ある(n=94) ない(n=317)
23%
77%
ある(n=97) ない(n=323)
13 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Yes (n=94)
No (n=317)
Yes (n=97)
No (n=323)
Question:
How often do you check accreditation status of an applicant’s home institution without institutional credit-transfer contract?
14 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
35
40
41
41
24
19
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
undergraduate(n=190)
graduate (n=58)
always when suspected never
Question:
Which sources of information do you use to assess applicants’ qualifications? (multiple choice)
15 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
%
27
15
59
42
2
31
1
2
2
15
7
31
5
62
34
6
24
0
3
3
16
9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
conventional free websites/literature
database/manual prepared in the admissions office
academic staff colleague
personal knowledge and experience in the office
corresponding embassy/consulate in Japan
applicant's home institution
corresponding education association
foreign information services (e.g. WES)
domestic information services/alliance with other institutions
no such needs found
others
undergraduate (n=281) graduate (n=116)
Question:
How difficult do you find each activity of FCE? (undergraduate)
16 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
%
18.6
31.1
18.2
60.5
52.5
58.4
16.2
11.4
19.3
4.7
5.0
4.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
listing reliable information sources (n=360)
interpreting certifications (n=362)
collecting information on various education systems (n=361)
difficult relatively difficult relatively easy easy
Question:
How difficult do you find each activity of FCE? (graduate)
17 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
%
17.8
25.7
18.3
61.7
56.4
62.0
15.8
13.5
16.6
4.7
4.4
3.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
listing reliable information sources (n=360)
interpreting certifications (n=362)
collecting information on various education systems (n=361)
difficult relatively difficult relatively easy easy
Needs for different types of information in assessing foreign credentials by method of selection for admission @ undergraduate
18 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
87.12%
36.95%
55.25% 58.64%
77.97%
45.42%
35.93%
59.66%
51.53%
58.31% 56.95%
40.68% 42.03%
61.02%
41.69%
0.68% 0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
Exam at Home(n=59) Exam in Japan (n=209) Selection based on Documents (n=27) Total (n=295)
Needs for different types of information in assessing foreign credentials by percentage of international students @ undergraduate
19 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
71.35%
30.21%
44.53% 45.57%
62.76%
36.20%
28.13%
48.96%
40.36% 44.01%
49.22%
30.21% 32.29%
48.96%
30.47%
0.52% 0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
none(n=87) 1% or less (n=111) 2% or less (n=78) less than 10% (n=78) 10% or more(n=30) Total(n=384)
Question:
Have you ever felt a need for FCE services in Japan?
20
59%
55%
41%
45%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
学部レベル(n=469)
大学院レベル(n=425)
考えたことがある 考えたことはない
January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Yes No
undergraduate
graduate
International survey to determine needs of NIC in Japan
for overseas NICs
21 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Outline of the Survey
• Online survey implemented from October 24 through November 28, 2014
• Targeting 57 NICs in states that had ratified the Lisbon Recognition Convention (ENIC/NARICs)
• 24 NICs responded from:
Armenia, Australia, Belgium(French community), Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, San Marino, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, UK, Ukraine and one unnamed state
• Of these, 18 NICs have dealt with Japanese credentials
22 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Question:
How often do you deal with Japanese credentials?
23
Annually States
100+ times UK, New Zealand
50-99 Germany
20-49 Australia
10-19 Norway, Denmark
1-9 Estonia, Finland, Greece, Poland, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Switzerland, Unnamed
0-1 Croatia, Ireland, Slovenia, Belgium(French community) January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Question:
Which information sources do you rely on in assessing Japanese credentials? Name all.
24 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
*AEI-NOOSR(Now CEP), UK-NARIC
(n=18, multiple choice)
11
10
17
17
15
16
13
7
2
9
7
3
4
0
9
8
9
12
10
13
9
5
1
7
4
1
3
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
database prepared in the office
database prepared by other NICs*
UNESCO
IAU(WHED)
ANABIN
MEXT
Study in Japan
JASSO
NIER
JUAA
NIAD-UE
JIHEE
JACA
others
have heard of it have used it
Question:
Which aspects do you find difficult in assessing Japanese credentials?
January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE 25 (n=18, multiple choice)
3
7
6
1
6
7
5
11
1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
nothing
type of institutions
type of credentials
education system
existence of institutions
license/accreditation of institution
authenticity of diplomas
Japanese language
others
For overseas NIC:
Examples of aspects found to be difficult in assessing Japanese credentials; • The difference between current Tanki-Daigakushi(短期大学士) and
Associate (準学士), awarded through 2005, is not clear.
• Transcripts don’t specify whether courses are of “theory” or “practice.”
• Documents in Japanese and English do not always correspond.
• Admission criteria for different programs are not clear.
26 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Survey of mobile students’ needs
(in a different project)
27 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Student workshop on CAMPUS-Asia
• Hosted by NIAD-UE, December 11, 2013.
• 19 students who were in CAMPUS-Asia programs joined the program- monitoring process: • 13 students from Japanese institutions
• 2 students from Chinese institutions
• 4 students from Korean institutions
28 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Examples of suggestions by students:
“There are instances in which there is no credit transfer system in place, and so I would like to see a mechanism for the smooth transfer of credits.”
“Semesters start at different times of the year.”
“There were times when no reply came even when I made personal inquiries in the research lab at the host university.”
“I would like a flexible system in which credits are transferrable for classes besides those that have been prepared for the program.”
29 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Some findings of these surveys
• Standard process to assess the authenticity of foreign credentials has not been equally shared among Japanese higher education institutions.
• Variations in information among institutions have been caused by differing extents of institutional proficiency.
• Examinations can reinstate FCE functions at institutions.
• Examination of students for admission are possible partly because students are already in Japan studying in Japanese language schools.
• Japanese language is the greatest barrier for credential recognition overseas.
January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE 30
Conclusion (i)
• Importance of FCE has not been promoted enough among academic and administrative staff in Japanese higher education institutions.
• Approximately 55% of them find needs for FCE functions: This percentage will be higher if;
1) more institutions start to require a more detailed process in foreign-credential assessment as is relatively common outside Japan,
2) more institutions shift from exam-based admission to document-based admission as is relatively common outside Japan,
3) more international student come to study in Japan, which was projected by the government.
31 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Conclusion (ii)
• It is quite probable that redundancy can be found with functions performed by international-admission offices in Japan.
• There had been rarely mentioned needs for Japanese NIC that were found through the survey, among international NICs.
32 January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE
Thank you very much for your attention.
January 25, 2017 Mori & Yoshikawa, NIAD-QE 33