{"title":"日本学生学习成果的外部质量保证的作用:官僚主义和同行评议之间的证据评价","authors":"Ayaka Noda","doi":"10.1080/13538322.2021.1986252","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study examines the roles and challenges of external quality assurance in reviewing learning outcome assessments of Japanese universities. Following criticism that Japan has overly relied on the difficulty of entrance examination as a quality metric for a given institution, rather than graduates’ competencies, there is more pressure for transparency in higher education. Recognising the shift from the old dichotomy to a new ‘trinity’ (accountability, improvement and transparency), Japanese accreditation has pushed universities to define, assess and improve learning outcomes. Applying the double logic of quality assurance (bureaucracy and peer review) and employing interviews with key quality assurance agency personnel, this study shows peer reviewers’ professional judgment as qualitative, contextual and even philosophical, thus helping enhance a university’s uniqueness and diversity while maintaining objectivity and equity. Furthermore, accreditation needs to cultivate a ‘culture of evidence’ in universities to capture their initiatives and make such efforts empirically meaningful.","PeriodicalId":46354,"journal":{"name":"Quality in Higher Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of external quality assurance for student learning outcomes in Japan: evaluation of evidence between bureaucracy and peer reviews\",\"authors\":\"Ayaka Noda\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13538322.2021.1986252\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This study examines the roles and challenges of external quality assurance in reviewing learning outcome assessments of Japanese universities. Following criticism that Japan has overly relied on the difficulty of entrance examination as a quality metric for a given institution, rather than graduates’ competencies, there is more pressure for transparency in higher education. Recognising the shift from the old dichotomy to a new ‘trinity’ (accountability, improvement and transparency), Japanese accreditation has pushed universities to define, assess and improve learning outcomes. Applying the double logic of quality assurance (bureaucracy and peer review) and employing interviews with key quality assurance agency personnel, this study shows peer reviewers’ professional judgment as qualitative, contextual and even philosophical, thus helping enhance a university’s uniqueness and diversity while maintaining objectivity and equity. Furthermore, accreditation needs to cultivate a ‘culture of evidence’ in universities to capture their initiatives and make such efforts empirically meaningful.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46354,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quality in Higher Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quality in Higher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2021.1986252\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2021.1986252","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
The role of external quality assurance for student learning outcomes in Japan: evaluation of evidence between bureaucracy and peer reviews
ABSTRACT This study examines the roles and challenges of external quality assurance in reviewing learning outcome assessments of Japanese universities. Following criticism that Japan has overly relied on the difficulty of entrance examination as a quality metric for a given institution, rather than graduates’ competencies, there is more pressure for transparency in higher education. Recognising the shift from the old dichotomy to a new ‘trinity’ (accountability, improvement and transparency), Japanese accreditation has pushed universities to define, assess and improve learning outcomes. Applying the double logic of quality assurance (bureaucracy and peer review) and employing interviews with key quality assurance agency personnel, this study shows peer reviewers’ professional judgment as qualitative, contextual and even philosophical, thus helping enhance a university’s uniqueness and diversity while maintaining objectivity and equity. Furthermore, accreditation needs to cultivate a ‘culture of evidence’ in universities to capture their initiatives and make such efforts empirically meaningful.
期刊介绍:
Quality in Higher Education is aimed at those interested in the theory, practice and policies relating to the control, management and improvement of quality in higher education. The journal is receptive to critical, phenomenological as well as positivistic studies. The journal would like to publish more studies that use hermeneutic, semiotic, ethnographic or dialectical research as well as the more traditional studies based on quantitative surveys and in-depth interviews and focus groups. Papers that have empirical research content are particularly welcome. The editor especially wishes to encourage papers on: reported research results, especially where these assess the impact of quality assurance systems, procedures and methodologies; theoretical analyses of quality and quality initiatives in higher education; comparative evaluation and international aspects of practice and policy with a view to identifying transportable methods, systems and good practice; quality assurance and standards monitoring of transnational higher education; the nature and impact and student feedback; improvements in learning and teaching that impact on quality and standards; links between quality assurance and employability; evaluations of the impact of quality procedures at national level, backed up by research evidence.