糖心破解版

Unlike elementary and secondary schools, universities do not follow a national curriculum. Each university determines what and how to teach based on its mission and the characteristics of its academic fields and students. Although university education comprises numerous individual courses, it should not be treated merely as an aggregation of classes; rather, it requires a certain level of coordination and management.
 
Over the past decade, the concept of “educational management” has been emphasized in universities  to support this coordination. In 2020, Japan’s Central Council for Education published the Guidelines for Educational Management that serve as a reference for universities seeking to engage in serious educational reforms. While some universities are improving education, others are lagging behind. These guidelines aimed to provide useful perspectives and points of consideration, particularly for the latter group. As a committee member involved in the development of the guidelines, I emphasize that the document should neither function as a one-size-fits-all manual nor attempt to impose uniformity across diverse academic disciplines and institutional contexts. Nevertheless, as these guidelines have become tied to funding programs and accreditation processes, I have become increasingly concerned about whether such developments truly improve university education.
 
This book presents the outcomes of a research project titled “A Study on Educational Management in Universities,” conducted under the auspices of the Japan University Accreditation Association’s Research Institute for University Evaluation during 2021–2022. Chaired by Professor Fujio Omori of Tohoku University, the researchers shared the aforementioned concerns. To better understand the current state of affairs, they conducted nationwide surveys of university faculty members, as well as interviews with both faculty and students.
 
This book aims to assess current educational management policies and to propose a more desirable approach. While readers are encouraged to refer to the book for a detailed analysis, the key findings can be summarized as follows: The concept of educational management has not sufficiently reached individual faculty members, and does not necessarily contribute to improvement on the ground; in some cases, it has even increased the administrative burden. The researchers also found a significant variation in preferred teaching methods and intended learning outcomes, depending on the academic discipline. Moreover, daily efforts in educational management at the departmental level were crucial for faculty to feel the impact of educational improvement. This underscores the importance of enhancing internal discipline-based discussions and practices, an approach aligned with the concept of Discipline-Based Education Research (DBER).
 
Based on these findings, the book offers the following three proposals:

1. Emphasizing the role of faculty and departments as the primary owners and drivers of educational programs and their management.

2. Shifting from uniform, top-down educational management toward more diverse and creative practices.

3. Increasing student involvement in educational management. 

Reflection on and improvement of education is an ongoing process. To ensure meaningful progress, it is essential to design systems and incentives that enable faculties and departments to engage in continuous, self-directed innovation, with the aim of enhancing student learning.
 

(Written by MOROZUMI Akiko, Professor, Graduate School of Education / 2025)