The purpose of this article is to examine the situation of higher education research from the perspective of comparative education. Higher education is, by its nature, borderless. Compared to primary and secondary education, higher education becomes more transnational and international along with recent globalization. In this situation, areas covered by higher education research and comparative education research naturally overlap each other. The overlap has been observed in Japan before since people realized the importance of the method of comparison from the very beginning.

　 There is a common trend in two academic journals, Japanese Association of Higher Education Research (JAHER) and Japan Comparative Education Society (JCES), that the majority of their articles are based on domestic issues and the number of the articles on transnational higher education recently has started to increase. On the other hand, articles in JAHER mainly focus on U.S.A., higher education studies in JCES focus on Asia, U.S.A. and Europe.

　 Analyzing titles of presentation in annual conferences of JAHER and JCES, the major themes of JAHER include quality assurance, evaluation, and financing, while more presentations in JCES are focusing on so-called macro level, such as system, institutions and policies. In both societies, studies on globalization and internationalization are increasing, however, research on “practice” of higher education is very limited, which obviously need to be paid more attention and developed.

　 The method of comparison in higher educational research becomes more and more important now, when the need of educational reform which meets the requests of international society is increasing and transnational higher education rapidly expands.

　 In Japan, the most amount of research on higher education is conducted in terms of the sociology of education. In the field, research on higher education is conducted by associating it with such important topics in sociology as educational opportunity, proceeding to higher education, educational background, hierarchy, social mobility, and social inequality. The Japanese economy remained stagnant for 20 years after the economic bubble burst, and Japan relies on research and development and human resource development in universities as measures to overcome the sluggish economy. The neoliberal policy and development of information technology also affected the functioning of universities and induced them to gradually reform after 1990. The necessity of research on higher education was recognized in the reform process, and many universities established centers for the research, operation, and implementation of the university. Consequently, studies concerning sociological research on higher education increased qualitatively and quantitatively, and sociological research on higher education entered a new stage.

　 Examining The Journal of Educational Sociology published by the Japan Society of Educational Sociology, I found that the suggestions of 57 papers on higher education were adopted between 1983 and 2012, accounting for 20％ of a total of 285 papers whose suggestions were adopted in this period. This shows that research on higher education is given considerable weight in the sociology of education. Studying the contents, I learned that the journal published papers on “educational opportunity” and “university entrance” in the past 10 years, and the keyword “disparity” was popularly used. For example, some papers discuss the university entrance rate that varies greatly with prefecture and explain reasons for the difference between prefectures. The Journal of Educational Sociology reviewed a total of 580 books between 1983 and 2012, of which 86 (14.8％) books are on higher education. The 86 books include many studies from the viewpoints of historical sociology and comparative sociology. The number of books on university reform is currently increasing, indicating the growing interest in policy science.　 Research on higher education is being stimulated by university reform, but the focus seems to be on policy science and technological knowledge, reflecting the trend in government policies. Research perspectives should thus be separate from government policies to avoid the parochialism of the former.

　 The purpose of this paper is to review the research trends of the Japan Educational Administration Society (JEAS) in the field of higher education, and to present a couple of points for the further development of research in this field.

　 Higher education has not been a major subject of educational administration research. Textbooks on educational administration give little space to higher education. In the JEAS Journal, the number of articles or reports on higher education is also limited. In spite of this limited number, the themes of these articles and reports are scattered in many fields from financial affairs to the internationalization of graduate schools. In addition, their research methods are varied from legal studies to statistical analyses. Therefore, more researches are needed for each field of higher education.

　 First, I point out that, in research on policy-making processes, it has become important to analyze broader actors especially because of decision-making changes that have occurred since the 1990s. Also, it is important to clarify the inner processes of policy-making in the Ministry of Education, including the relations between the Ministry staffs and members of the advisory councils. Second, through these policy-making processes, what governance forms have been brought to higher education? I point out the need for more researches on governance reforms, including the trends in foreign countries. These researches may include both the system level and the institutional level of governance. The third point is the need for normative research on higher education systems and their relations to the government. Educational administration research should have both empirical and normative aspects. The theoretical developments in normative research are also expected.

　 This article will discuss the collaboration between the Japan Association of Higher Education Research and the Liberal and General Education Society of Japan by comparing the two organizations. Whereas the Japan Association of Higher Education Research has traditionally adopted a macroscopic approach of studying higher education in general, the Liberal and General Education Society of Japan has primarily taken a microscopic approach, focusing on reviews of individual classes by responsible faculty members to improve their own educational methods. During the past 10 to 15 years, however, increasing numbers of academicians have begun to join both organizations, steadily blurring the distinction between the two organizations. Although the individuality of respective localities is essential in educational programs, expressing this very individuality entails reference to universal categories; in addition to describing the context and background of specific educational programs, along with the diversity of students, the individuality must be described by referring to universal concepts, such as society, culture, history and institutions. In this sense, it will be important for the two organizations to fill the existing gap between theory and practice.

　 The number of members of The Japan Association of University Administrative Management (hereafter, JUAM) has dramatically grown. Fifteen years ago, when it was established, there were only 350 and now it has reached 1,351. At first, the members were only university administrators, but now it includes all kinds of university personnel, teachers, graduate students, and university related organization personnel. The main activities of JUAM are research activities. This research is actively pursued in different spheres such as workshops of regional areas by theme, academic conventions, and journals. The main theme of these activities focuses on the problems related to the role of the administrative personnel, how they should be, their management and problem-solving skills and abilities.

　 In this paper, what is being examined is whether research activities of JUAM are worthy to be considered as “Research on Higher Education”, if that is affirmative, in what perspectives. In addition, we are discussing the conceivable problems of JUAM and its envisioned directions as well. In this process, we are focusing on both the roles of “Research on Higher Education” and the final goal of JUAM, which is the cultivation of professional administrators in higher education.

　 How did higher education as field of study begin in the United States, and its learned society, the Association for the Study of Higher Education? Higher education as a field of study began in 1893 when President G. Stanley Hall taught its first course at Clark University in Massachusetts, leading to the first master’s and doctoral degree program there. In the 20th century expansion of American higher education led to its contemporary 4,500 colleges and universities. The need for advanced degreed administrators and student affairs professionals at these institutions fueled the growth of the now approximately 180 higher education degree programs, as the field reaches its 120 year anniversary in fall 2013.

　 During this development, higher education faculty sought a learned academic and professional association where its members could explore new research, discuss major issues in the field, and socialize new faculty into the specialization of higher education administration. In 1975, the Association for the Study of Higher Education was created by higher education faculty from major research universities. Three developments over its now 37 year history reflected how the association responded to changes in American higher education. First, from 1995 to 2002, the association went through an organizational transformation by creating four standing councils to accommodate member desires to present more research in various specialty areas: the Council for the Advancement of Higher Education Programs, the Council for Public Policy in Higher Education, the Council on International Higher Education, and Council on Ethnic Participation. Second, its membership expanded dramatically from the small group of tenured professors to now 2,200 members who are 60％ advanced graduate students. Third, the session presentations at its annual conferences moved from a predominate focus on higher education administration during its first 15 years. By 2012, a dramatic shift had occurred as researchers presented more on undergraduate and graduate students as well as ethnic and racial students, faculty, and administrative groups, comprising some 56 sessions (34％) of the association’s main conference. These moves signaled significant changes in the field’s research agenda, which has implications for the purpose of the American field of study itself.

　 In most countries of the world, higher education research is a relatively small field. It is difficult to define its size and borders, because many scholars conduct occasionally research on higher education and do not consider themselves as specialists of higher education. Moreover, the borderlines are fuzzy between academic scholars, analysts linked to policy and practice, as well as consultants and practitioners being occasionally involved in systematic analyses. Research projects on higher education are often stimulated by policy and practical concerns, and the development of research concepts and practical issues are closely intertwined. Higher education research notably addresses the quantitative and structural developments of higher education, curricula and knowledge domains of teaching and research, staff and students, and finally governance and management of higher education.

　 In Europe, higher education research reached visibility in the 1970s when many reforms challenged the trust in the traditions of the university. In some European countries, higher education is paid attention in the framework of faculties of education, while in other countries it became an area of interest in various faculties of humanities and social sciences or inter-disciplinary centres. While analyses traditionally have focussed on individual countries, many higher education research projects in recent decades emphasize the value of comparative research. This led to the foundation of EAIR (European Association for Institutional Research) in 1979 and of CHER (Consortium of Higher Education Researchers) in 1988 ―the latter an association with two thirds of members in Europe and one third from other continents. In the 1990s and the first decade of the 21st, interest in systematic information on higher education grew further, but this led to more substantial increase of evaluation and consultancy as well as to increased data production in terms of statistics and indicators, while higher education research spread only moderately across Europe.

　 The characteristic of China’s higher education research is that, based on an earlier research in issues concerning higher education, it focuses on developing academic disciplines and has formed two parallel but inter-related traces. One is concerned with research in disciplinary theory. The other is about research in practical issues. The first section of this paper examines the formation, development and major research achievements of higher education science and its discipline groups. The second section makes a brief introduction to the research in practical issues in educational reforms, including key research fields and issues in the early period of the implementation of the reform and open-door policy in the end of the 20^th century and in the stage of mass higher education in the beginning of the 21^st century. The third section deals with the general situation and functions of China’s associations of higher education. They include Association of China’s Higher Education, its branches and academic organizations which are not affiliated to the Association of China’s Higher Education.

　 15 years have passed since the establishment of the Japan Association of Higher Education Research (JAHER), which was established in July 1997, we have grown to more than 700 the number of members. Compared with the time of the establishment, variety of the member’s occupational positions has been increased, and their research interests are more expanded. These circumstances have led to recognition that the expected role in JAHER as academic organization might be changed.

　 Therefore, JAHER conducted a survey to all members in March 2011, as part of its 15th anniversary projects, to measure their opinions and requests for JAHER, as well as their activities in the organization. This paper reports the analysis of the membership survey. The main findings are below.

　 In recent years, not only traditional researchers such as university professors and graduate students but also administrative staff of universities become new members, moreover the proportion of the latter has been increased. Also the percentage of members with academic background in education-related discipline has declined, though they were the majority.

　 The analysis of members’ motivation to join JAHER shows that considerable number of members expect that JAHER functions as a forum for useful information gathering, as well as an opportunity to publish the research outcomes. This fact also affects the research area of our members.

　 Finally, this paper introduces that a lot of members have such opinions that JAHER should become an organization that can disseminate valuable information and recommendation to our society while maintain the quality of academic research.

　 We looked back over the 15 year’s activities of JAHER or Japanese Association of Higher Education Research, and examined the process and state of institutionalizing its knowledge and organization. Then we analyzed the coming problems and prospects. Concretely, we compared JAHER with LGESJ (Liberal and General Education Society of Japan) and JUAM (Japan Association of University Administrative Management) which were established in the same year of JAHER and analyzed research presentations at the annual conferences of them (from 1998 to 2011). The followings are what we found.

　 1. The percentage of existing themes of the other two associations, that is, “Lesson Analysis” and “Undergraduate Education” for LGESJ and “Management” for JUAM, has decreased. On the other hand, the percentage of themes, that is, “Lesson Analysis” for JUAM and “Management” for LGESJ and the number of presentations for those themes have increased. Some themes, such as “Academic profession & FD” and “Campus life & Student Culture,” have increased for all three associations. On the other hand, some themes can be found only for a particular association, such as “Quality Assurance” and “Globalism” for JAHER. Research orientation and approach vary by a theme. More appropriate approach has been chosen for every theme.

　 2. Complexity of joint research network for JAHER is more prominent compared to the other two associations. The number of researchers who join more than two associations is small, but the number of presentations is not small for all three associations.

　 3. Joint research network of JAHER consists of three groups such as a core (I, II), a middle, and a peripheral group. As for research approach, the percentage of hypothesis testing research has decreased and the percentage of fact-finding approach and case study has increased for the core II and the middle groups. On the contrary, the percentage of hypothesis testing research has increased for the core I and the peripheral groups.

　 Higher Education Studies in Japan have undergone substantial development in the past forty years. One may argue that it is firmly institutionalized as an academic field. Institutionalization, however, may entail stagnation. What are the possibilities to introduce innovation? This paper examines the concept of innovation (Section 1), traces the past development of higher education studies from this perspective (Section 2), examines the problems brought about by the past innovation and subsequent institutionalization (Section 3), before exploring the directions and conditions for innovation of the field towards future (Section 4).

　 This paper examines the reform of teacher education in national universities through case study methodology from the mid and long term perspective because a meso-level approach to educational reforms has not been sufficiently studied yet and also the methodology of case study has not been established as academic standards in higher education research in Japan. First, a singular case is extracted objectively based on the published information about employment situation of graduates by MEXT. Next, the details of cause and effect in educational reforms to improve newly-recruited teachers from three points of view: entrance examination, organization and curriculum, and employment support, are identified by using both qualitative and quantitative methods. Thirdly, the reason why reform succeeded is analyzed and lastly, analytical frameworks on educational reforms that can be applied for other cases of teacher education reform are hypothetically presented. Four Important points are: Common goal is shared among faculty members especially when organization faces a crisis. No clear distinction between teacher training course and other courses exists. Comprehensive management beyond curriculum reform is practiced. And evidence-based approach toward strategic development or verification of reform is adopted.

　 When examining the results of assessment across modules in Japanese universities, glaring inconsistencies are immediately noticeable. Marks are likely to be extremely high or low (i.e. either the majority of the marks are failing grades or over half of students receive the highest marks). This is widely recognised as a problem in almost all Japanese universities (Amano 1999, Fujimura 2004, Tatematsu 2008).

　 With regard to the present state of such assessment practices, the Central Council for Education in Japan (2008: 26), in its Report entitled ‘Toward the Creation of an Undergraduate Curriculum’, points out that ‘In our nation’s universities, assessment criteria are assigned fully to individual academics, and systematic methods of handling them are inefficient.’ To encourage reform, the Report calls for ‘an objective, systematic method to evaluate learning―with mutual understanding among academics―that starts with the introduction of the Grade Point Average (GPA) system as well as the establishment of assessment criteria and final objectives for each module or subject.’

　 However, as long as trust in marks remains low―regardless of whether individual levels of attainment (student achievement) are clearly reported―society will have little confidence in them. Accordingly, this paper presents some examples of a British autonomous internal quality assurance system for assessment. Then, the paper tries to explain why this system keeps functioning despite the restricted working condition where more than two academics have to not only prepare examination contents but also grade results for each module. Through comparing curricular, the paper shows that the total number of examinations in British universities is lower than in Japanese universities. Finally, using the British system as an example, the paper describes the infrastructure needed to construct an internal quality assurance system for grading processes in Japan.

　 The purpose of this study is to clarify, by means of the analysis of a questionnaire targeted at the full-time teaching staff of 23 higher education institutions in the Tohoku area, the challenges posed to the career development and capacity building of faculty members of universities and junior colleges.

　 The analysis begins by giving an overview of the relationship between a person’s academic career, capabilities and experience; binomial regression analysis is then used to pinpoint the factors that affect the self-evaluation of comprehensive capability as a university faculty member.

　 The three main findings that are confirmed are as set out below.

　 Firstly, it is research capabilities that have the most powerful effect on the self-evaluation of comprehensive capability. This is followed by teaching capabilities as the second most influential factor.　 Secondly, the experiences that exert a positive effect in terms of enhancing the self-evaluation of comprehensive capability comprise authorship of a textbook, participation in training for faculty development within the university, and receipt of a grant from the university for individual research.

　 Finally, even after the effects of research, teaching, other capabilities and experience are controlled, it still remains a fact that the sum total of years of experience as a full-time faculty member exerts a positive effect, while fixed-term employment exerts a negative effect.

　 The above findings substantiate the relationship linking capacity building and university management. In particular, fixed-term faculty members tend to be of a younger age and occupy a lower grade than tenured staff. The challenges in terms of career development and capacity building are how to enhance the research as well as the teaching capabilities of junior members of staff.