1
Higher Education in Japan– Incorporation of national universities and
the development of private universities -
Jun ObaResearch Institute for Higher Education
Hiroshima University, [email protected]
Research Institute for Higher Education
Seminar on higher education at the Ministry of National Education,Ankara, Turkey, 4 February 2005
2
Contents
I Education system in JapanII Higher education in Japan
III Incorporation of national universitiesIV The development of private universitiesV Where are national universities going?
VI What is the future of Japanese higher educa-tion?
3
● Introduction of a modern education system after the Meiji Restoration (1868) - Education System Order (Gakusei) in 1872
● Generalisation of elementary education at the be-ginning of the 20th century
I Education system in Japan
41875 1880 1885 1890 1895 1900 1905 1910 1915 1920 1925
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
TotalBoysGirls
Percentage of children in full time elementary education between 1875 and 1925
5Organisation of the school system in 1944
6
After World War II
● Entire revision under the occupation● Nine-year compulsory education● Unified into a single track system– universities being open to every graduate of an upper-
secondary school– abolition of distinction among higher education insti-
tutions
7
Organisation of the present school system
normal ageschool year
Hig
her e
duca
tion26 21 Doctor University
25 20 (graduate school)24 1923 18 Master22 1721 1620 15 University19 14 (faculty) Junior college College Advanced18 13 courses Special17 12 of training16 11 Upper secondary school school15 10 Technology
com
puls
ory
educ
atio
n14 913 8 Lower secondary school12 711 610 59 4 Elementary school8 37 26 154 Kindergarten3
Seco
ndar
y ed
ucat
ion
Secondary education
school
Prim
ary
educ
atio
nPr
e-sc
hool
ed
ucat
ion
8
Number of schools, students and teachers as of 1st May 2004
Number of schools(private)
Number of students(private)
Number of teachers*(private)
Kindergarten 14,061 (8,363)
1,753,396(1,390,001)
109,853 (83,789)
Elementary school 23,420 (187)
7,200,929 (69,300)
414,887 (3,480)
Lower secondary school 11,102 (709)
3,663,512 (236,006)
249,801 (12,840)
Upper secondary school 5,429 (1,329)
3,719,048 (569,454)
255,629 (60,107)
Secondary education school 18 (9)
6,051 (3,355)
470 (247)
Special education schools(for handicapped children)
999 (12)
98,796 (815)
62,255 (259)
* full-time only
9
Number of schools(private)
Number of students(private)
Number of teachers*(private)
College of technology 63 (3)
58,681 (2,296)
4,474 (158)
Junior college 508 (451)
233,749 (214,264)
12,740 (11,082)
University 709 (542)
2,809,323(2,062,065)
158,756 (86,683)
Special training school 3,443 (3,228)
791,540 (761,735)
40,675 (37,902)
* full-time only
10
Cost of education
● Free compulsory education– very few private institutions
● Upper secondary education– cheap public education– expensive private education
● Higher education– 3/4 students enrolled in private institutions– expensive (public institutions as well to lesser degree)
11
Curriculum
● Primary and secondary schools– Curriculum determined by the Government– Textbooks edited by private publishers based on the
national curriculum, then authorised by the Govern-ment
● Higher education institutions– At their discretion
12
A very good performance in primary and sec-ondary education● Ranking in the OECD's PISA 2000– first group for mathematics and science– second group for reading
● PISA 2003– still in the same groups as the PISA 2000– Japan slightly lowered its ranking by country.
13
PISA 2000: Top 10
Reading Mathematics Science1 Finland Japan South Korea2 Canada South Korea Japan3 New Zealand New Zealand Finland4 Australia Finland UK5 Ireland Australia Canada6 South Korea Canada New Zealand7 UK Switzerland Australia8 Japan UK Austria9 Sweden Belgium Ireland
10 Austria France Sweden
14
PISA 2003 : Top 10 and JapanReading Mathematics Problem-solving
1 Finland Finland South Korea2 South Korea Japan Hong Kong3 Canada Hong Kong Finland4 Australia South Korea Japan5 Lichtenstein Lichtenstein New Zealand6 New Zealand Australia Macao7 Ireland Macao Australia8 Sweden Holland Lichtenstein9 Holland Czech Republic Canada
10 Hong Kong New Zealand Belgium--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14 Japan
15
Foundation of modern higher educa-tion institutions● Establishment of the University of Tokyo (later
Imperial University, then Tokyo Imperial Univer-sity) by the government in 1887
● Other imperial universities in major cities
II Higher education in Japan
16
● Characteristics of these institutions– Governmental institutions– Organised on the German model– Bureaucratic system with quasi-autonomous academic
units (faculties)
17
● Integration of the German model and the Japa-nese system– faculties of engineering and agriculture, generally
classed in a polytechnic system in Europe● cf. In the 1990s in the world– integration of polytechnics into university system
(UK, Australia, etc.)
18
● Other institutions– Governmental institutions other than imperial univer-
sities– Local public institutions– Private institutions
● University Order in 1918– acknowledgement of the university status to non-gov-
ernmental institutions
19
Number of higher education institu-tions as of 1943
Universities[imperial univer-
sities]
SpecialisedSchools Total
Governmental(national) 19 [7] 58 77
Local public 2 24 26
Private 28 134 162
Total 49 [7] 216 275
20
Characteristics of pre-war higher edu-cation● Well-organised bureaucratic administration sys-
tem in governmental institutions● Coexistence of the three sectors of higher educa-
tion institutions – governmental (national), local public and private
● Absolute priority to the national institutions, es-pecially the imperial universities
21
After the war (as of 1949)
● 70 national universities without difference in le-gal status among them
● 17 local public universities● 81 private universities● Junior colleges (regarded as provisional)
22
University education after the war
● Introduction of the American model● Two layers of undergraduate education– general education– two-year specialised education
● School of liberal arts
23
The planned expansion of higher edu-cation after 1975● A decade plan for higher education from 1976 to
1986● Creation of special training schools (advanced
courses) as non-university institutions
24
Trends in 18-year-old population and access to higher education
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
18-year-olds Entrants (universities & junior colleges)
Ratio of the age group advancing to universities and junior colleges
tens
of t
hous
ands
25
1. The University Council and de-regulation in higher education
● Towards the universal phase (M. Trow)– Over 50% in 1987 (non-university sector included)
● Decade plan was over in 1986● Establishment of the University Council in 1987– academic and non-academic members– comprehensive study on higher education
III Incorporation of national universi-ties
26
● Abolition of subject areas in 1991– structure curricula reflecting their own educational
ideals and objectives– no definition of subject areas, such as general educa-
tion and specialised education– no requirement on obtaining a certain number of cred-
its in each subject area (acquisition of a minimum to-tal number of credits only)
27
1998 Report A Vision for the University of the 21st Century and Future Reform Measures : Distinctive Universities in a Competitive Environment● Improve the quality of education and research with
the purpose of nurturing the ability to investigate issues;
● Secure university autonomy by making the educa-tional and research system structure more flexible;
● Establish university administration and manage-ment with responsible decision-making and im-plementation; and
● Individualise universities and continuously im-prove their education and research by establishing multiple evaluation systems.
28
2. Incorporation of national universi-ties in 2004
● Change in the status of the governmental institu-tions
● Legal personality and more autonomy● Non-public servant status for staff● Participation of external people in university ad-
ministration
29
MEXT
Evaluation Committeefor National University
Corporations
National university corporations
Draft (opinions) of MTG
Preparation of MTP
Preparation of annual plan
Presentation of MTG
Approval of MTP
Opinions on MTG/MTP, etc.
Independent Administrative Institution National Institution forAcademic Degrees andUniversity Evaluation
(NIAD-UE)
Report on the results of evaluation on education and research
Peer review
Evaluation
Commission on Policy Evaluation and Evaluation of Independent Administrative Institutions(Ministry of Public Management and Home Affairs)
Report on the results of evaluation
Opinions, if necessary
MTG: medium-term goals MTP: medium-term plan
Recommendations, if necessary
Consultations on MTG/MTP, etc.
Report on the results of evaluation
30
National University Corporation
President
Executives
Board of directors
Internal representativesdesignated by the president
Administrativecouncil
Internal representativesconcerning education
and research
Education andresearch council
President selection committeeAuditors
Externalexperts
External experts only
31
After incorporation - what has hap-pened and problems● Finance● Governance● Evaluation
32
(1) Financial stability of national uni-versities
● Operational grant to be diminished from FY2005● Rise of standards of fees set by the MEXT– revision of fees up to each university
● Difficulty in finding other sources
33
● Cost of the increased autonomy– Confrontation with student and staff unions– Pressure from the community
● Different fees among national universities?● Very precarious situation of national universities
34
(2) Improvement of the university governance
● Efforts for dissolution of the "dual structure"● Construction of an administrative structure cen-
tring on the president
35
President
President’s bureau
Board of DirectorsAdministrative
CouncilEducation and
Research Council
Vice-president(attachedschools)
AttachedSchoolsOffice
Vice-presidentExecutive
(education andstudents)
EducationOffice
Vice-presidentExecutive
(research andinternational
relations
ResearchOffice
Vice-presidentExecutive
(collaboration)
CollaborationOffice
Vice-presidentExecutive
(ICT)
ICT PolicyOffice
Vice-presidentExecutive(finances)
Officeof Finance
Vice-presidentExecutive
(personnel andgeneral affairs)
Personnel andGeneral Affairs
Office
Vice-presidentExecutive(hospital)
Office ofthe Hospital
Centres for common useFaculties
Graduate schools
University hospital
Co-ordination Committee of directors of Faculties, Graduate Schools
and Research InstitutesAuditors
Research institutes
Control Bureau
Eval. Committee
36
● Leadership of the president● Wide (and positive) participation of constituent
members● Development of non-academic staff
37
(3) The evaluation
● Underdeveloped evaluation methods● Time consuming
38
IV The development of private uni-versities
● Expansion of private institutions instead of public institutions
● Private School Promotion Subsidy Law in 1975
1. Public financing to private institu-tions
39
Current expenditures of private HE institutions and Government subsidies
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
0
2,500
5,000
7,500
10,000
12,500
15,000
17,500
20,000
22,500
25,000
27,500
30,000
0.0%
2.5%
5.0%
7.5%
10.0%
12.5%
15.0%
17.5%
20.0%
22.5%
25.0%
27.5%
30.0%Total cost (100 million yen)Subsidies (100 million yen)subsidies/total cost (%)
40
2. Public and private universities in direct competition
● Governmental funds to HE institutions in the FY2003– 97 national institutions and others : 1,525,606 million
yen– 989 private universities and junior colleges : 321,750
million yen
41
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
050,000
100,000150,000200,000250,000300,000350,000400,000450,000500,000550,000600,000650,000700,000750,000800,000850,000900,000950,000
1,000,0001,050,0001,100,000
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25National UniversitiesLocal public universitiesPrivate universitiesPrivate/National
Yen
The first year tuition fees (entrance fees included) by sector and the ratio of tuition fees of private universities to those of national universities
42
Public expenditure on higher educa-tion (2000) in OECD countries
Aust
ralia
Aust
ria
Belg
ium
Can
ada
Cze
ck R
ep.
Den
mar
k
Finl
and
Fran
ce
Ger
man
y
Gre
ece
Hun
gary
Icel
and
Irela
nd Italy
Japa
n
Kore
a
Mex
ico
NL
Nor
way
Pola
nd
Portu
gal
Spai
n
Swed
en
Switz
erla
nd UK
USA
OEC
D T
otal
0.0
0.3
0.5
0.8
1.0
1.3
1.5
1.8
2.0
2.3
2.5
2.8
3.0
3.3
3.5
3.8
4.0
4.3
4.5
4.8
3.2
2.72.6
4.7
1.8
4.6
4.2
2.0
2.4
2.1
3.0
2.6
4.1
1.8
1.6
2.7
4.3
2.9
4.1
1.8
2.32.4
3.6
3.4
2.5
3.5
2.9
1.2
1.41.3
2.0
0.8
2.5
2.0
1.01.1
0.91.0
1.1
1.3
0.8
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.3
1.7
0.8
1.0 1.0
2.0
1.2
1.01.1
1.2
as a percentage of total public expenditureas a percentage of GDP
43
Increase in competitive funds open to public and private institutions● Competitive funds open indifferently to public
and private institutions
44
Top 15 universities ranked by the amount of competitive research funds awarded by the Government (million yen)
Toky
o
Kyot
o
Osak
a
Toho
ku
Nago
ya
Kyus
hu
Hokk
aido
TITe
ch
Keio
(priv
ate)
Tsuk
uba
Hiro
shim
a
Chiba
Was
eda
(priv
ate)
TMDU
Kobe
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
37,177
18,601
15,591
11,924
8,784 8,4207,640
5,9244,978
4,1693,138 2,586 2,586 2,554 2,517
45
For-profit universities
● For-profit universities in Special Zones for Struc-tural Reform on experimental basis from 2004
46
V Where are national universities go-ing?
● Continuous discussions on the privatisation of national universities– Prime Minister Koizumi at the Diet– Opposition party's policy– Newspapers' questionnaire etc.
● Where are national universities going?
47
State Facility Model
State Management Model
State Trust Model
Corporate ModelBased on the model presented by M. Kaneko
US (state universities)
United KingdomGermanyJapan (former national universities)
China ? US (private universities)
Japan (private universities)
Government control Strong Weak
Financial autonomy
Weak
Strong
France
?
?
?
?
48
● Increasingly blurred distinction between public and private sectors– increased autonomy for national universities– declining governmental support for national
universities– competitive funds open to every sector– institutional evaluation (accreditation) for all
universities every seven years
49
VI What is the future of Japanese higher education?
● Closing distance between the public and private sectors
● National universities will survive, at least for the time being.– political– administrative
50
● Functional differentiation being more important.● Difficult institutional evaluation.
51
● The Government should be more supportive.– rather than controls or evaluations– paraeducational activities or services
