'CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring website provides information on our project activities from 2011 to 2020.
NIC-Japan provides information on education to facilitate recognition of higher education qualifications
NIAD's publication for terminology relating to higher education and quality assurance system in Japan.
The quality assurance agencies in Japan (NIAD-QE), China (HEEC), and Korea (KCUE), conducted monitoring, namely "Monitoring+ (plus)," on 'CAMPUS Asia' full-fledged programs (Mode 2) during 2018-2019. Monitoring+ was conducted in accordance with the Joint Guidelines for Monitoring International Cooperative Academic Programs in 'CAMPUS Asia' developed after the implementation of the second monitoring.
* HEEC changed its name to "Education Quality Evaluation Agency" (EQEA) in 2022.
For Monitoring+ activities, 'CAMPUS Asia' joint monitoring committee and joint monitoring panels were established, following the method of the second monitoring. These panels were comprised of Japanese, Chinese, and Korean academic experts with knowledge on the internationalization of higher education and international collaborative programs, as well as representatives from quality assurance agencies.
The panel assessed that the previous two monitoring initiatives were successful in developing a framework for quality assurance and deepened the mutual trust between the quality assurance agencies in Japan, China, and Korea. Consequently, as seen below, each of the three countries' quality assurance agencies was responsible for monitoring three of the nine programs.
※ The universities listed above are the Japanese institutions participating in the consortium monitored by each quality assurance agency.
The process for the Monitoring+ is shown in the figure below.
The joint monitoring criteria for Monitoring+ were identical to those for the second monitoring, apart from Criterion 5, revised as "Continuous Quality Improvement," with no sub-criteria.
| Criteria | Sub-criteria |
|---|---|
| 1. Objectives and Implementation | 1.1. Achievement of Objectives 1.2. Organization and Administration |
| 2. Collaborative Development of Academic Program | 2.1. Curriculum Integration 2.2. Academic Staff and Teaching |
| 3. Student Support | 3.1. Student Admission 3.2. Support for Learning and Living |
| 4. Added-value of the Collaborative Program (Outcomes) | 4.1. Student Satisfaction 4.2. Credit Transfer and Degree Awarding |
| 5. Continuous Quality Improvement | |
CAMPUS Asia Monitoring+ Joint Monitoring Report
('CAMPUS Asia' Joint Monitoring Committee, December 2019)
This is the final report of Monitoring+, which collected good practices of international collaborative programs and elaborated expectations for further efforts by universities in Japan, China, and Korea. The report centers on 104 examples of good practices in the 'CAMPUS Asia' programs identified through Monitoring+. It also describes other examples of good practices from the second monitoring in 2016. This report provides the outcome of monitoring activities to date comprehensively.
Joint Guidelines for Monitoring International Cooperative Academic Programs in CAMPUS Asia (Second Edition)
(NIAD-QE, HEEC, KCUE, 2020)
This version of the guidelines is a revision of the first published edition of June 2017 and is based on the experiences from the last three monitoring rounds. It outlines the joint monitoring criteria and the methods for quality-assured international collaborative programs, with some details of the actual Monitoring+ activities. It also contains other useful information for those involved in international collaborative education programs, such as the differences in academic calendars between Japan, China, and Korea.
Lessons on Double Degree Programs from CAMPUS Asia Monitoring
(NIAD-QE, HEEC, KCUE, July 2021)
This publication focuses on double degree programs, which have become an important means of internationalization in East Asian universities, summarizing the knowledge on double degrees obtained from past monitoring activities. It also describes the outstanding efforts of universities reported in the "CAMPUS Asia Monitoring+ Joint Monitoring Report" published in December 2019. It explains the importance of double degree programs and provides tips on how to develop the programs by presenting the academic systems of Japan, China, and Korea.
The second Monitoring of the pilot 'CAMPUS Asia' programs (ten programs) was implemented jointly from 2015‒2016 by NIAD-UE, HEEC, and KCUE. For the implementation of the second monitoring, the three agencies developed a common framework, after a comparative analysis of the criteria, methods, and results of the first monitoring in each of the countries, in 2013-2014.
For the second monitoring, the 'CAMPUS Asia' Joint Monitoring Committee and Panel were established, consisting of academic experts with knowledge of the internationalization of higher education and international collaborative programs, as well as representatives of the quality assurance agencies from Japan, China, and Korea. The Joint Monitoring Committee made relevant decisions on agendas for monitoring and finalized reports. The Joint Monitoring Panel conducted document analysis of the self-assessment reports submitted by university consortiums and site visits, as well as produced monitoring reports.
The process for implementing joint monitoring in Japan, China, and Korea are shown in the chart given below.
First, the ten consortiums of Japanese, Chinese, and Korean universities were requested to produce self-assessment reports. With adequate coordination between the participating universities, they were required to submit one report per consortium, in English, by referring to the joint monitoring criteria. Members of the Joint Monitoring Panel conducted a document analysis based on the reports produced by each consortium.
Second, following the document analysis, members of the Joint Monitoring Panel jointly visited each country, to conduct physical interviews for the three selected consortiums. Each site visit was organized using opportunities in program events, and other occasions when the member universities of the consortiums gathered. For the other seven consortiums, panel members from each country visited or interviewed the universities in their respective countries. The results of these investigations were shared among panel members from the three countries.
Subsequently, the good practices and challenges identified in each consortium's program, during the monitoring, were collected and summarized in a report. Finally, a joint monitoring report that included the results of the first monitoring, conducted in each country in 2013, was drafted by the collaborative work of the three quality assurance agencies. The report was finalized, with the monitoring results from the Joint Monitoring Committee.
After a comparative analysis of each country's criteria in the first monitoring, five joint monitoring criteria were established for the second one, each with two sub-criteria, and totaling ten sub-criteria. These joint criteria were constructed from those established in each country, during the first monitoring. These criteria focused more on cooperation between participating universities, and the added value obtained from international collaborative programs.
| Criteria | Sub-criteria |
|---|---|
| 1. Objectives and Implementation | 1.1. Achievement of Objectives 1.2. Organization and Administration |
| 2. Collaborative Development of Academic Program | 2.1. Curriculum Integration 2.2. Academic Staff and Teaching |
| 3. Student Support | 3.1. Students Admission 3.2. Support for Learning and Living |
| 4. Added-value of the Collaborative Program (Outcomes) | 4.1. Student Satisfaction 4.2. Credit Transfer and Degree Awarding |
| 5. Internal Quality Assurance | 5.1. Self-assessment 5.2. Continuous Quality Improvement |
CAMPUS Asia Pilot Program Joint Monitoring Report
(CAMPUS Asia Joint Monitoring Committee, October 2016)
This report brought together good practices and challenges in international collaborative academic programs, identified during the monitoring of each consortium by Japanese, Chinese, and Korean panel members. Instances of good practices, under each criterion monitored, were described in detail, most notably quality assurance initiatives within 'CAMPUS Asia' programs.
Joint Guidelines for Monitoring International Cooperative Academic Programs in CAMPUS Asia
(National Institution for Academic Degrees and Quality Enhancement of Higher Education, Higher Education Evaluation Center of the Ministry of Education, and Korean Council for University Education, June 2017)
These guidelines stipulated the quality assurance criteria and methods for international collaborative academic programs, based on experiences during the trilateral second monitoring. They were produced with the hope that they would serve as a helpful model, not only for the Japanese, Chinese, and Korean quality assurance agencies conducting this monitoring, but also for other quality assurance agencies when conducting monitoring or evaluation of international collaborative academic programs. This is especially predicted to be useful when working with partner agencies in other countries, and for higher education institutions, when conducting an internal quality assurance of international education.
The first monitoring was implemented individually by quality assurance agencies in Japan, China, and Korea, based on each nation's relevant domestic regulations, evaluation systems, and methods. Moreover, after the monitoring, the agencies shared their results for a comparative analysis, and discussed the possibility of conducting a second monitoring, in cooperation with all three countries.
The first monitoring in Japan was conducted by NIAD-UE from 2013‒2014, in cooperation with the Japanese universities running 'CAMPUS Asia' pilot programs. In line with the basic concept of the first monitoring outlined below, NIAD-UE summarized the details of the monitoring criteria and methods, in the Handbook for 'CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring - Criteria and Method of the 1st Monitoring in Japan.
The first monitoring in Japan was implemented as shown in the figure below.
For the first monitoring in Japan, a student monitoring committee was established, which was separate from the main monitoring committee and other subcommittees. It comprised students who had participated in 'CAMPUS Asia' programs. For details, please see Monitoring Student Committee.
The criteria for the first monitoring in Japan, as shown in the table below, were established by the monitoring committee, based on several discussions within the provisional monitoring committee, organized by NIAD-UE. These criteria also reflected the opinions exchanged with participating universities through liaison meetings and individual interviews. All the monitoring activities including self-analysis, document analysis, and site visits conducted, were based on these criteria.
| Criteria |
|---|
| 1 Goals of the Academic Program |
| 2 Teaching and Learning 2-1 Organization and Staff 2-2 Contents of Academic Program 2-3 Support for Learning and Living 2-4 Credit Transfer and Grading System |
| 3 Learning Outcomes |
| 4 Internal Quality Assurance System |
Each criterion provides "examples of good practices," allowing universities' self-analysis to include their own successful practices and effective measures for resolving problems in international exchange programs. In addition, a rubric for a self-analysis of the quality level is introduced for each criterion.
To implement the first monitoring, NIAD-UE organized a 'CAMPUS Asia' monitoring committee, and subcommittees comprising of academics and experts, with experience and knowledge of quality assurance in higher education/international collaborative programs.
The monitoring committee was comprised of eight members, and its main role was to decide on monitoring criteria and methods, as well as to finalize the monitoring results. Moreover, two representatives of the participating program were included in the committee. This approach allowed them to express their perspectives, through discussions on disseminating the monitoring outcomes.
The subcommittees performed document analysis, site visits, and drafting of monitoring reports, based on the self-analysis reports submitted by universities. The subcommittees were composed of university presidents, faculty, and experts from university-related organizations and industries.
One of the characteristics of the first monitoring in Japan, was the liaison meetings for universities offering 'CAMPUS Asia' programs which were organized during the preparatory stage. These liaison meetings consisted of university representatives, from the ten 'CAMPUS Asia' programs in Japan.
The meetings were established to exchange views and opinions between NIAD-UE and the universities (program implementers) to enhance the effectiveness of monitoring implementation. Through this exchange of opinions, the liaison meetings supported the development of a basic framework, for the monitoring and criteria of quality-assured international collaborative education. Moreover, from the viewpoint of enhancing the effectiveness of the 'CAMPUS Asia' project itself, the meetings also intended to provide opportunities for universities, to share operational challenges, resolutions, and information regarding their programs' progress.
Three liaison meetings were held in July and September 2012, and March 2013, prior to the start of the monitoring process. Furthermore, after finalization of the monitoring results, a fourth meeting was held in February 2014, at which those involved in participating programs shared the results of the first monitoring, and exchanged views on those results.
During the first monitoring in Japan, apart from the monitoring committee and subcommittees, a monitoring student committee was established, with students who had participated in different 'CAMPUS Asia' programs. The purpose of this student committee was to encourage students to freely exchange their opinions across university boundaries from the perspective of promoting student engagement in external quality assurance. The committee also aimed to collect students' opinions on how to further improve the 'CAMPUS Asia' project, and provide feedback to the monitoring committees.
The monitoring student committee held a workshop in December 2013, to create more attractive 'CAMPUS Asia' programs for all students. At the workshop, 19 students from Japan, China, and Korea engaged in group work and discussions, and compiled the 'CAMPUS Asia' proposal. This proposal outlined the strengths and areas for improvement, both in terms of learning and living, based on the students' experience of program participation, and provided suggestions from the student committee.
This proposal was presented to the monitoring committee in January 2014, by the student committee representatives. The monitoring committee utilized their opinions in the second monitoring of 'CAMPUS Asia.'
A monitoring report was compiled by the monitoring committee for each program, comprising overall conclusion and results for each criterion. Within the results for each criterion, "initiative characteristics" and "good practices," identified from the viewpoint of the quality of education, were presented. In addition, to contribute to the future development of the programs, the reports included comments from the monitoring committee members, regarding future challenges listed by the universities.
The self-analysis by universities initially covered activities up until the end of the 2012 academic year. However, given that the pilot programs entered their third year in the 2013 academic year, and student exchange was becoming full-fledged, the subcommittees also conducted monitoring activities in the 2013 academic year, and included these results in the reports.
'CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring on Quality Assurance -Collaboration among Japan, China, and Korea- Overview of the First Monitoring in Japan
('CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring Committee of NIAD-UE, March 2014)
Alongside an outline of monitoring activities with criteria, it includes the monitoring reports for each of the 10 programs, the proposals submitted by the monitoring student committee, and summaries of the self-analysis reports.
'CAMPUS Asia' Programs in Light of Quality Assurance : A Collection of Good Practices
('CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring Committee of NIAD-UE, November 2014)
One of the major goals of monitoring is the dissemination and adoption of good practices, identified from the perspective of the quality of education. This collection lists and describes good practices within the pilot programs, identified by the first monitoring program in Japan. In addition to the good practices listed in the monitoring reports, this includes various initiatives confirmed during the site visits.
独立行政法人 大学改革支援・学位授与機構 powered by 
