This study was intended to investigate the relationship among the following factors: learning outcomes, including generic skills and grade-point average (GPA); subjective adjustment to university; learning motivation; and belief in cooperation among first-year university students. A progress report on generic skills (PROG) was used as a quantitative measure of generic skills, and both its results and studentsʼ GPA score were linked with data obtained in an online questionnaire survey. A total of 267 students were asked to answer a self-report questionnaire survey at the beginning and end of the 2020 and 2021 spring semesters. In addition, the PROG was conducted online at the end of the semester.

  As a result, a positive correlation was found between the subjective adjustment and the competency score of the PROG, especially the subscale of interpersonal and self-control ability, and GPA. When we examined the effect of learning motivation and the belief in cooperation on the studentsʼ subjective adjustment, PROG scores, and GPA, we found that the influence on subjective adjustment, generic skills, and GPA differed depending on studentsʼ learning motivation and their belief in cooperation. The autonomic motivation for learning directly affected the competency score of the PROG, while the positive belief in cooperation indirectly affected both the competency score and first-year GPA through subjective adjustment. On the basis of these results, both the importance and necessity of supporting first-year studentsʼ adjustment development were discussed as were the limitations of these results and future issues.

  The purpose of this study was to clarify the characteristics of university environments that tend to adversely affect the lives of students with developmental disabilities as well as to propose ways to support them in the future. We asked 780 universities across Japan (responsible for supporting students with developmental disabilities) to take part in an anonymous questionnaire survey. The contents of the survey were (1) 20 items about environments and systems specific to university life that students with developmental disabilities are likely to struggle with (four options); (2) environments and systems specific to university life that students with developmental disabilities are likely to struggle with (free writing), and (3) requests for support and accommodation from students with developmental disabilities and their guardians that were deemed to fall outside the scope by the university (free writing). Responses were obtained from 161 universities (response rate of 20.6%). For (1), the responses were quantified by assigning a value between 1 and 4 to calculate the average value of each item. The results suggested that students generally struggled with the 20 items. Furthermore, factor analysis identified the two factors “environments that require autonomy” and “non-uniform class systems.” Responses to items in sections (2) and (3) were organized using the KJ method. This revealed six major categories for (2), including “many situations that the student has to deal with on their own,” and five major categories for (3), including “everyday life support.” These results indicate that universities should expand their scope of support for students with developmental disabilities, provide clearer information about their facilities, and instruct prospective students on how to adapt to university life before admission.

  This study examined the factors that promote cooperation between career centers and faculty supervisors at Japanese universities to foster the studentsʼ ability to independently plan their careers and make career choices, based on interviews with career center staff. Drawing on domestic and international research on career support services and knowledge of inter-professional collaboration in adjacent fields, this interview survey was conducted with seven career center staff members at one public and six private universities. The questions concerned “Your career at the university and related background of career services or qualifications,” “Collaboration with supervisors. If not, why not?,” “Do you think you have a mutual understanding of each otherʼs duties?,” “Have you created an environment in which you can talk easily with supervisors and build a personal relationship with them?,” and “Do you think the employment status of the career center staff is a disincentive to cooperation?” The results of the survey showed that four factors overlapped with those of a previous study: “active communication,” “understanding of the roles of both parties,” “dissemination and sharing of information,” and “leadership of management.”

  On the other hand, the factors that differed from the previous study were “whether or not career center staff are directly employed,” “differences in faculty membersʼ areas of expertise,” “management awareness,” and “quality of career center staff,” and these factors might influence the promotion of collaboration. Therefore, in addition to supervisors and career center staff providing support in the same direction and improving the quality of the career center, it is important for supervisors to push students and career center staff to provide support suited to individual students by making use of their expertise in career support. As supervisors have a significant influence on studentsʼ career aspirations and their realization, it is suggested that supervisors and career center staff cooperate to support students so that they can attain the future they desire.

  In this study, we examined the capability of university staff to adeptly execute their routine tasks, an area that previous studies have largely overlooked, with a focus on the “student support work” that is universally present in all universities, to determine the characteristics of “skillful” work performance. Accordingly, we created a specific scenario centered on “handling course registration consultations at the counter,” a common student support work. We gathered insights by interviewing 12 mid-career university staff members, transcribing their responses verbatim, and having 5 senior-level faculty or staff members evaluate these responses.

  During our analysis, we developed a “response script,” which codified the distinctive work behaviors observed in each participantʼs role-play, arranged as a sequence of occurrence. Through comparative analysis, we identified behaviors common to many participants, as well as unique behaviors specific to certain individuals. Moreover, we charted the distribution of notably commendable responses and elicited the evaluatorsʼ rationales for their selections to elucidate their evaluation criteria. By juxtaposing evaluation perspectives with actual coded responses and the original transcriptions, we determined the connections between abstract evaluation criteria and tangible work behaviors.

  Our analysis yielded several key findings. First, top-rated responses showcased the proactive approach of “actively seeking methods to meet student desires.” Evaluators interpreted this as the behavior of “offering advice to students.” Second, two prominent “skillful” behaviors were identified when interacting with students: providing precise information and alleviating their concerns. While the ability to provide accurate information can develop with a university staff memberʼs general experience, effectively addressing anxieties requires specific experience in academic affairs.

  This study makes several significant contributions to the academic discourse on university staff performance. First, we introduced and executed a method to identify “skillful” work behaviors among university staff. It is posited that while some of these adept behaviors arise from general experience as a university staff member, others stem from specialized experience in particular areas of operation. This study offers fresh insights into the professional development of university staff. On a practical level, we have pinpointed specific work behaviors that align with the abstract competencies and characteristics previously outlined as essential for academic and student support roles, based on which we offer tangible guidance for those involved in student support work.

  The objective of this study is to clarify the relationship between studentsʼ entrepreneurial intentions and their role models. A questionnaire survey was conducted among 834 first-year university students to resolve the following research questions. First, is there a relationship between university studentsʼ entrepreneurial intentions and the presence of various entrepreneurial role models in a nurturing environment? The results indicated that parents, relatives, acquaintances, or friends, as entrepreneurial role models, promoted studentsʼ entrepreneurial intentions. However, fictitious characters, or those not closely associated with the students, did not affect their entrepreneurial intentions. Second, what is the impact exerted by “loosely connected” entrepreneur role models, on the studentsʼ entrepreneurial intentions? An analysis was conducted regarding the change in the perception of students before and after listening to a speech by a loosely connected entrepreneur role model. It was observed that studentsʼ entrepreneurial intentions were promoted by the speech, thereby indicating that loosely connected entrepreneurial role models could serve as what Granovetter (1973) and Aldrich & Zimmer (1986) termed “social resources.” They could be involved in various situations, including the acquisition of information, generation of motivation and orientation, and the deepening of self-understanding.

  The purpose of this study is to examine the educational effects of the Universityʼs curricular practices. Specifically, we are conducting interview surveys to clarify how the undergraduate students who study using our curriculum, which started in FY2019, face the prospect of becoming teachers. For this purpose, we asked all undergraduate students from the first to fourth year who were enrolled in the 2022 academic year to cooperate in this interview survey. 22 students cooperated and were interviewed in order to capture the changes in their attitudes towards teaching. The survey will be conducted continuously until the students graduate. This approach is unique in that it captures the growth of the students during their four years at our university.

  The students shown in this paper are the cases of 4 students, all of whom are fourth-year students. These 4 students were chosen for the analysis because they were judged to be typical cases for the following reasons. Students A and B belong to a group that obtained elementary and middle school licenses and are currently employed in elementary schools, while student C belongs to a group that obtained pre-school and elementary school licenses and is employed in a child-care facility. Student D chose not to seek employment in education following graduation, however we thought it was significant as a control case for the purpose of clarifying “attitudes toward the teaching profession”. These four students are students who have spent four years under a new curriculum. This study will be completed in the 2025 academic year, when the students who enrolled in the 2022 academic year graduate. In this sense, this paper can be considered an interim report.

  In regards to empowering students, the interviews have revealed the importance of students studying in an environment where they learn while interacting with others. Students were inspired by encouragement, and found enjoyment and satisfaction in working together with other students to solve problems. In addition, the students were motivated to become teachers through the experience of working with school children and seeing them actually change positively and being treated with respect by them and their parents who approved their teaching approaches. It became clear that universities are challenged to ensure that students have opportunities to study and interact with others throughout their four-year curriculum.

  Learning strategies are an important factor contributing to student success. This study examines individual learning support that focuses on student success and clarifies its effect on studentsʼ learning strategies using mixed methods research that analyzes results quantitatively and qualitatively.

  In Study I, the author developed a scale to measure the effects of learning strategies that are essential for student success and surveyed 2,107 students across the country. As a result, a 12-item and 4-factor structure was identified, confirming that the study succeeded in developing a highly valid and reliable scale.

  In Study II, the author used the scale to examine how learning strategies changed from the beginning to the end of the semester for 42 students who had received learning support. The analysis confirmed that those who had received individual learning support acquired the strategy to reflect on their own learning toward the end of the semester. Furthermore, it identified a pattern of concurrent effects where the effectiveness of the strategy to seek support from others had a further positive effect in making plans and implementing them.

  In Study III, the author conducted a qualitative analysis of the content of the support based on the free descriptions by 132 students who had received learning support. The analysis found that individual learning support plays a vital role in not only improving studentsʼ learning strategies but also eliminating anxieties that could hinder their learning.

  The study revealed that the emotional involvement of faculty and staff is linked to student success.

  This study explores the effective ways to enhance the quality of hybrid courses in traditional universities. Historically, a single faculty member would handle a wide range of responsibilities, such as curriculum design, creation of instructional materials, classroom teaching, student engagement, providing feedback, and performing exhaustive evaluations. However, with the increasing prevalence of hybrid classes, the collaboration between administrative staff and domain-specific experts has become essential. Distance education universities possess extensive experience in both remote and face-to-face instruction, achieved through the collaborative efforts of faculty and staff. Traditional universities can learn about the organizational structure of faculty and staff and effective methods for supporting both distance and face-to-face instruction from distance education universities. To gain insights about the above, field research and interviews were conducted at five institutions from August to November 2022.

  The four types of classes offered by distance education universities were summarized: 1) those using printed materials, 2) broadcasted classes, 3) face-to-face instruction, and 4) classes utilizing various media. Only the first two (printed materials and broadcasted classes) are exclusive to distance education institutions. Based on the interviews, the findings highlight three key strategies employed by these universities to maintain pedagogical excellence: 1) Ensuring an adequate number of graders and sufficient feedback; 2) Establishing a functional organizational structure; and 3) Creating an environment that supports self-learning. Therefore, our study elucidates that distance education is not merely an extension of face-to-face education but embodies a distinct structural model designed specifically for distance learning. Recognizing this distinction is crucial for enhancing the quality of future online courses.

  Despite extensive discourse and Japanʼs “Promotion of Womenʼs Active Engagement in Professional Life” policy, Japanʼs gender gap persists. How can leadership development programs in universities and colleges better respond to this gap? Why is the gender gap a problem, and what role does “leadership” play in resolving or perpetuating the gap? Is “womenʼs leadership” the crux of the issue? Is developing “womenʼs leadership” the likely solution? What does developing “womenʼs leadership” exactly mean? Do we, as leadership educators, ever stop to take the time to reflect on the taken-for-granted, gendered notion of leadership, and on the possible systemic forces that make them “taken-for-granted”? How do students perceive and enact (or not enact) leadership, and why? How do “women” and “leadership development” intersect?

  The roundtable session emphasized the importance of understanding the interplay between social norms and leadership, recognizing that both leadership and gender are social constructs. It urged a more transformative approach, including womenʼs leadership. The five speakers provided a brief overview of transformative leadership development, introduced research findings on women in management, conducted an analysis of an assessment study on university leadership courses, reflected on leadership development education practices, and reported on a workshop on liberatory leadership learning. The speakers and participants together explored the possibility of approaching leadership with a “women ‘AND’” perspective rather than “womenʼs”, and discussed how leadership development in universities and colleges might be liberatory for not only females but also for all students.

  In Japan today, the “segmentation of high school-university articulation,” including the admission processes for university entrants, is becoming increasingly prominent. According to a report by the Science Council of Japanʼs Subcommittee on High School and University Articulation, “segmentation” refers to a situation in which the transition patterns of students from high school to university have become finely fragmented based on educational content, admission methods, and social attributes of learners. Various types of articulation between high schools and universities coexist. However, the report does not delve into specific cases of transition.

  The purpose of this roundtable report is to elucidate the actual state of segmentation of high school-university articulation through qualitative and quantitative research and to consider how transition support should be provided. This report focuses on the transition of students from high school to university in an elite university, six high schools affiliated with one elite university, and two open-entry universities. It depicts the commonalities and differences in student transitions within and across segments. One finding is that the transition to an elite university focuses on research, while the transition to an open-entry university emphasizes employment. Furthermore, by comparing the actual situation of specific transition support provided at each type of university, we highlight the need to envision transition support that provides students with opportunities for appropriate challenges, rather than solely focusing on a “smooth transition” as has been the approach in the past.

  In Japan, laws such as the School Health and Safety Act and the School Environmental Health Standards have been established concerning the health management of students. These regulations set standards for health management operations, health examinations, prevention of infectious diseases, school doctors, hygiene environments, and other aspects, ensuring a certain level is maintained at all universities. However, there are few universities in Japan that engage in awareness-raising and promotion activities for the local community beyond the universityʼs boundaries. On the other hand, overseas, initiatives that consider not only improving the physical and mental health of university students and staff but also strengthening the sustainability of the local community and the broader societal ecosystem and economy have become increasingly popular since around 2015. Since 2020, the International University Sports Federation has launched the Healthy Campus certification system. However, Japanese universities have not been actively involved or participated in the global trends, and there isnʼt much information available. In this roundtable discussion, we will assess the current situation and then discuss the significance and potential of the Healthy Campus certification system for Japanese universities.

  The roundtable discussion focused on the relationship between the professional development curriculum of health and human services colleges and “Competency Draft ver. 3.0” (referred to as “Comp 3.0” in Onishiʼs (2022) proposed draft of the common basic curriculum for health and human services).

  Comp 3.0 is presumed to be applicable to professional development education. However, liberal arts education plays a significant role in acquiring the fundamental competencies necessary for engaging in human care. Therefore, it may be necessary to broaden the scope of Comp 3.0 to include liberal arts education.

  Currently, Comp 3.0 lacks definitive educational evaluation or learning objectives, but it may offer insights for developing a new form of liberal arts education. If new courses are to be established at universities, it is essential to consider content related to liberal arts education.

  During the roundtable discussion, it was confirmed that courses other than the Common Core Courses for Qualifications contain content that aligns with Comp 3.0, and it is possible that even curricula that do not focus on qualifications can contribute to Comp 3.0.

  Furthermore, the discussion highlighted that implementing Comp 3.0 in connection with liberal arts education may be a more feasible approach.

  Recently, due to the influence of the World University Rankings, research universities around the world are being evaluated based on uniform standards and are becoming more hierarchical. However, through research based on education and research experiences in emerging Asian countries, the authors have become uncomfortable with the idea of using uniform standards to evaluate research universities in emerging Asian countries and Western countries. Therefore, this study explores the image of research universities in emerging Asian countries, focusing on China, Singapore, and Indonesia.

  As noted in previous studies, research universities in Western countries have academic autonomy, and most of them are public universities. However, Chinaʼs National Research University, which is required to offer courses in ideology and politics, and the National University of Singapore, which was forced to discontinue Yale-NUS College due to friction with Singapore government authorities, are the best examples of National policy universities; but it is questionable whether they uphold academic autonomy. In addition, if a university improves its world ranking by attracting excellent researchers based on the funding provided and number of articles published on Scopus, which has been done by some private Indonesian universities, it may be regarded as a research university. Thus, private research universities may increase in emerging Asian countries in the future.

  Through lessons of liberal education, we learn about some problems which have more than one answer. And we recognize that there is more than one right answer. To discuss these problems, liberal education requires a dialogue with others and a multidisciplinary perspective. How do we introduce to liberal education a deliberative democracy which has much dialogue with others?

  In Japan, the word ‘Society’ has two meanings. One is ‘SYAKAI’ and the other is ‘SEKEN’. SEKEN is difficult to translate from Japanese into English. In Japan, SEKEN has more influence than SYAKAI. We see a difference between ‘The Individual in SYAKAI’ and ‘The Individual in SEKEN’. And we see a difference between ‘The Public in SYAKAI’ and ‘The Public in SEKEN’. The contradictions lead to dialogic learning in liberal education.

  This roundtable session aims to 1) review the discourse on the purpose and content of liberal arts education in the United States, Korea, and Japan, and 2) examine features that characterize the uniqueness and challenges of liberal arts education in Japan. The U.S. case study based on the comparison of liberal arts education in three research universities highlighted the diversity of mission and function while at the same time, revealing similarities in the learning outcomes being pursued as well as the overall curriculum structure. The Korean case study based on the overview of policies and organizational structure of liberal arts education highlighted the introduction of standardized liberal arts education curricula based on a “national liberal arts policy,” and its diversification after the university autonomy policy in the 1990s, which allowed a greater variety of course content for students to choose from. Guidance for universities to support the implementation of liberal arts education has also been provided by nationwide academic associations. The Japanese case study revealed the difficulty of identifying common functions and contents of liberal arts education, forcing liberal arts education to remain an abstract concept. However, it was suggested that this abstractness creates the potential for innovation in university education.

  The purpose of this report is to discuss the possibility of analogizing curriculum based on department names as a preliminary study to realize quality assurance in undergraduate education. In Japan, although the diversification of department names and the international acceptability of degrees have been considered problematic since the 1990s, there have been few attempts to determine how they are related to the actual curriculum. In this paper, we examine the relationship between “department name,” which is the basic unit for student recruitment and enrollment management, “degree name,” which corresponds to the name of the major field of study attached to the degree, and “middle classification” in the MEXTʼs departmental classification table, relying on a comprehensive data set for four-year bachelorʼs programs.

  Through the analysis, it became clear that there are two ways to discuss the possibility of analogizing curriculum based on the department name. When focusing on cases in which the department name uniquely determines the degree name and the middle classification, it is sufficient to see if there is a “clear commonality” in the curriculum of departments in question. On the other hand, if the department name does not uniquely determine the degree name or the middle classification, we should look for “decisive differences”. Since we are interested in the significance and limitations of the role of department names in the context of quality assurance of undergraduate education, it is necessary to clarify the existence and causes of “decisive differences” in curriculum.

  In recent years, the importance of providing learning support to university students has increased considerably, making it a vital area of research. On the other hand, within the diverse landscape of learning support, a comprehensive understanding remains elusive. In particular, cross-disciplinary surveys and research, including methodologies for fostering learner autonomy, are particularly needed. In view of these issues, a research team was formed in FY2020 to conduct a comprehensive survey of learning support. This endeavor started with a nationwide questionnaire survey in FY2021, followed by on-site surveys in Japan and abroad. In this roundtable discussion, based on the results of each survey, topics were presented from the viewpoints of objectives, leadership, and methodologies of learning support for university students. Through exchanges of opinions with the audience, we aimed to advance the systematization of learning support systems.

  According to the roundtable report, based on the comprehensive research conducted by the research team, it became clear that the effectiveness of learning support is closely tied to the clarity of learning support policies at universities. Furthermore, these policies influence the placement, securing, and training of individuals in charge of delivering learning support. This highlights the need to define the role of learning support in the academic management of universities. On the other hand, there is concern that this might hinder the inherent growth of students. It is necessary to discuss and evaluate what learning support should essentially be, while intertwining it with the concept of “student agency,” which respects the learnerʼs autonomy.

  This roundtable is a part of the study on “Higher Education Graduate Programs for Professional Staff and Administrators of Universities,” a research project of the Japan Association for College and University Education (JACUE).

  This research has entered its third year since JACUE adopted it as a research project, and the time has come to summarize the research outcomes. This roundtable aims to reflect on the activities and capture the perspectives that have not yet been thoroughly discussed. The results may be summarized under the following five perspectives: (1) graduate program learners, (2) graduate program faculty members, (3) university management research, (4) university staff research, and (5) international comparisons. While all these perspectives have been discussed in past roundtables and research project symposiums, in this roundtable, we discussed how to think about educational programs from the practical point of view of the work of university staff, the curriculum, and the effectiveness of masterʼs theses in graduate higher education programs, and human potential in a wide range of professions, including faculty members, as well as how to understand the identity of university staff.

  This paper is a part of the JACUE supported research project “Possibilities of Higher Education in COVID-19,” and was carried out under the sub-theme “Assessment of Learning Outcomes in the Online Higher Education.” At this roundtable, we focused on some options for the higher education in Japan in the post-corona era, and discussed the following three cases.

  1. Online, global, and cross-disciplinary Project Based Learning (PBL) by Shibaura Institute of Technology (SIT). In this PBL, SIT, Institute of Technology at Surabaya (ITS) in Indonesia, and a Japanese company collaborated online to examine the social issues in the city of Surabaya and proposed solutions. Compared to on-site visit, online meetings are easier for diverse stakeholders to participate in, and can be implemented over a longer period of time. In 2021, 42 SIT students participated 10 weekly tasks, and in 2022, 55 students performed 15 weekly tasks. The contribution of ITS is significant in this case, and the ability of the partner is one of the essential factors that determine the outcome of the PBL program.

  2. Case method class at the business school, in a face-to-face or a two-way synchronous online environment by Nagoya University of Commerce & Business (NUCB). NUCB started remote classes in April 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Since the case method class is a discussion-based educational method, the remote classes were conducted in a live format rather than a recorded format. In September of the same year, the masterʼs course was returned to classroom instruction. A rapid return to classroom teaching is a global trend in MBA education, led by the companies that employ graduates.

  3. The digital transformation of classroom education with the introduction of the advanced Learning Management System (LMS) by Kansai University (KU). Since 2018, KU has been promoting Bring Your Own Device, in which students bring their own laptops or tablets and learn autonomously, and this has spread rapidly due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2021, KU improved its LMS with a government subsidy, enabling automatic text display of the lectures by professors, playback search of video materials by slide unit, and monitoring student history of the online viewing. This seamless learning environment was utilized in the classroom teaching returned in 2022.

  During the question and answer session after the presentations, many doubts were raised about the strong tendency to return to the classroom teaching in Japan compared to other countries. In addition, the need for teachersʼ support in creating online teaching materials and learning support for online class students were pointed out.

  This roundtable was held as a workshop with four topical reports and group work based on the reports. The roundtable focused on the structure of the learning environment handbook currently under development, an extended version of the Learning Space Rating System (LSRS) was introduced, and opinions were exchanged with participants to make the handbook better suited to the needs of the field.

  The following four topics were presented: first, a report on the subject matter and handbook structure was presented, focusing on Chapter 4, “Designing Learning Support in the Learning Environment.” Second, the presentations reported on the development status of an extended version of the LSRS, which would also be included in the handbook. Third, a report on two cases of trials of the extended LSRS was presented: its use in training student staff responsible for managing the learning environment and the results of trials from three perspectives of teachers, staff, and faculty involved in the learning environment.

  After the above topics were presented, a workshop was held in which participants were divided into two groups to exchange opinions with each other on the elements necessary for future learning environments and support. As a result of the workshop, suggestions for the development of the extended LSRS and the learning environment handbook were obtained from the participants.

  We will continue to improve the extended LSRS and review items based on the collected suggestions to complete the learning environment handbook.