比較教育学研究
Online ISSN : 2185-2073
Print ISSN : 0916-6785
ISSN-L : 0916-6785
論文
日韓における留学生10万人達成と留学生政策
―留学生受入れにおける量と質の両立を中心に―
塚田 亜弥子太田 浩
著者情報
ジャーナル フリー

2018 年 2018 巻 57 号 p. 89-110

詳細
抄録

  International student mobility is expanding throughout the world with the advancement of globalization, and the recruitment marketplace for international students is becoming competitive even among Asian countries. The development of international student recruitment plans, which aim to draw 300,000 students to Japan and 200,000 to South Korea, is in progress. Both Japan and Korea had to improve the international student recruitment process and support systems in order to resolve problems such as illegal overstaying and unfavorable reputations of their higher education institutions among other countries. These issues occurred due to the rapid increase of international students while Japan and Korea each implemented a 100,000 international students plan.

  In Japan, problems concerning international students and Japanese language institutes are recently reported, as their working hours exceed the upper limit of the permitted working time and the institutes overlook it. It is a worrisome possibility that the negative impact felt during the influx of international students under the 100,000 international students plan will repeat. It is important to review the problems and policies of the 100,000 international students plan to avoid recurring issues.

  This study analyzes the 100,000 international students plan of both Japan and Korea. The overarching goal is to develop some prescriptive implications to improve the quality of hosting international students. First, the authors describe the background, problems, and policies of the Japanese and Korean 100,000 international students plans. Second, each country’s factors, which affected the quality of hosting international students, are examined. Third, the quality control systems of institutions hosting international students in Japan and Korea are compared. Finally, policy implications from the results of the analysis are drawn.

  In Japan, the 100,000 international students plan was launched in 1983 to support the growth of human resources in developing countries. Most international students who came to study in Japan first learned Japanese at private language institutes before entering higher education institutions. Many low-quality language institutes were established by private companies that wanted to recruit students for manpower supply, causing quality problems. The Japanese government tried to solve those problems through visa restrictions and Association for the Promotion of Japanese Language Education was established to accredit language institutes. As a result, although the quality of language institutes improved, the number of institutes and international students decreased. Later international student numbers began increasing again after the government relaxed visa regulations in the latter half of the 1990s. Japan achieved its numerical target with the 100,000 international students plan in 2003, but the reforms caused quality problems and the retightening of visa restriction began to decrease the number of international students again.

  In Korea, an educational services deficit triggered a quantitative expansion plan to attract international students. The Study Korea Project, initiated in 2004, was designed to increase the number of international students. However, the rapid expansion of the project caused problems such as illegal overstaying and inability to adapt, leading Korean higher education to develop a negative reputation overseas. The government prepared regulatory standards for universities to admit international students; however, these standards were not effective as they were non-binding. The government began checking universities that had problems with hosting international students and implemented visa restrictions against them. After trials of punitive policies toward such universities, the government decided to launch a new quality control (View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

著者関連情報
© 2018 日本比較教育学会
前の記事 次の記事
feedback
Top