Discussion Presentation
Current Situation and Issues in University Governance
- the U.S. and Japan -
Professor Takashi Hata
Center for the Advancement of Higher Education, the University of Tohoku
Three Main Points for Discussion
`
What is the purpose of university governance, particularly at national
universities?
Due to rapid changes in government financing patterns, national university
governance objectives should focus on raising funds and cutting costs, regardless of
scale. We must once again clarify the purpose of governance at national universities.
`
Management at higher educational institutions and optimizing systems
Corporatization has increased university autonomy, but there are many systemlevel problems that must be addressed to optimize management at educational
institutions.
`
What can we learn from overseas higher education institutions,
particularly those in America?
The way in which higher education institutions become established depends on the
context specific to each country. Globally speaking, higher education institutions in
both the U.S. and Japanese possess unique characteristics. Finding areas of
common experience requires close examination.
1. The Crisis at Public Universities and University Governance
`
What is the “Crisis” of public universities in world-wide?
(Stephan Vincent-Lancrin.2007. The“Crisis” of Public Higher Education: A
Comparative Perspective Research & Occasional Paper Series)
`
`
`
Despite declining numbers, the public sector represents the
mainstream of higher education.
Japan and Korea have unique government financing structures
for higher education institutions.
The crisis at U.S. public universities:
・Characterized by high-tuition, high-aid, and competition derived from
the ranking system
`
How are the roles of public universities changing?
(Ehrenberg.2006. What’s Happening to Public Higher Education? The
Shifting Financial Burden)
%
Expenditure on educational Institutions as a percentage of GDP (2004)
OECD, Education at a Glance 2007
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Public
Private
%
Distribution of public and private expenditure on HEIs (2004)
OECD, Education at a Glance 2007
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1995
2000
2004
2. What is the “Crisis” of National Universities in Japan?
`
The macro-level government financing situation.
・Total resources don’t decline
・A decline in sources of public funding
・A decline in general funding sources and an increase in specific &
reserved funding sources
・Indirect expenses revenues unable to absorb decline in general funding
`
Disparities between educational institutions.
・Government funding and Personnel costs
・Differential capabilities for raising Competitive fund
`
Pre-corporatization disparities have been transferred to the
post-corporatization system.
・How should make a balance between Universities
Financial Trends at National University Corporations etc.
(unit: ￥100 million)
2007
2008
12,043
11,813
9,884
9,735
2004
12,415
10,369
2005
12,317
10,148
2006
12,214
9,983
741
786
800
781
790
5,957
3,480
121
21,973
56.5
6,061
3,567
120
22,065
55.8
98
98
1,890
6,145
3,556
130
22,045
55.4
103
201
1,780
6,219
3,567
137
21,966
54.8
171
372
1,937
6,284
3,557
154
21,808
54.2
230
602
2,286
121
106
125
Indirect expenses relating to scientific research
costs
Total operational costs (corporation revenues
23,690
24,061
23,950
+outsourced research + scientific research costs)
Discretionary sources of revenues (subsidies for
13,970
13,821
13,664
educational research expenses + tuition fees +
indirect expenses)
Source: Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Tech * outsourced research
206
210
24,109
24,304
13,657
13,502
Subsidies for operational expenses
Total for educational research expenses
Within which, total for special educational
research expenses
Revenues from attached hospitals
Tuition fees etc.
Miscellaneous revenues
Total corporation revenues
Subsidies for operational expenses ratio
Changes to total subsidies
Changes to total subsidies, cumulative
Revenues from outsourced operations
1,596
Faculty and staff costs
0
Government funding
Government funding/Faculty & staff costs
Asahikawa Medical College
Okayama University
Otaru University of Commerce
Akita University
Hirosaki University
Kanazawa University
Niigata Universtiy
Tokyo University of Foreign Studies
40,000,000
Kobe University
77
Fukushima University
86 85 85 84
83 82 81
80 80 79 79
Ibaragi University
Shizuoka University
Gifu University
Hiroshima university
Hitotsubashi University
Fukuoka University of Education
Utsunomiya University
Tokyo University of Agriculture and…
Tokyo Gakugei University
Hokkaido University of Education
50,000,000
Nagoya University
89
Muroran Institute of technology
97 95
95 95 94
92
Iwate University
Miyagi University of Education
Tsukuba University
Osaka University
Tohoku University
60,000,000
Hokkaido University
103
Kyushu University
106 105
Kyoto University
Universty of Tokyo
111
Naruto University of Education
115
Joetsu University of Education
70,000,000
Hyogo University of Education
Tokyo Institute of Technology
(thousand yen)
%
90,000,000
140
80,000,000
120
100
72 71 71 71
70 68
67 66
65 63
80
30,000,000
10,000,000
59 60
40
20,000,000
20
0
Share of Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research
Top 11 National Universities
(thousand yen)
%
25,000,000
60.0
55.7
51.5
50.0
20,000,000
40.0
15,000,000
30.0
10,000,000
20.0
5,000,000
13.2
11.5
10.0
8.9
7.7
6.6
6.5
6.5
6.1
4.0
3.8
3.9
3.8
4.1
3.8
3.2
3.0
0
Universty of
Kyoto
Osaka
Tohoku
Hokkaido
Kyushu
Nagoya
Tokyo
University
University
University
University
University
University
Tokyo
Institute of
2.1
1.7
2007
Share 1998
1.8
1.3
0.0
Hiroshima
Tsukuba
Kobe
Share of Top
university
University
University
11
Technology
1998
2.1
1.7
share 2007
3. What is Public functions of National universities ?
`
Expanding participants in decision-making process
・Pressure to national universities for changing the role of them
・From institutions under the education policy to core-institutions for
comprehensive national policy
・Self-distrust of national universities
`
Exchange roles under dual higher education system
・“Success”of private universities for Massfication
・Challenging of private universities under decreasing of 18 age population
・Doubts on significance of national universities
`
Re-definition the public functions of national universities
4. Public functions of National universities
`
The role of government for higher education
・owner
・core funder
`
・planner
・partner
・customer
Achieving regional equality for educational opportunities.
・There remains major inequalities in the opportunities for students in regions to
progress to higher education.
`
Higher educational institutions opened to all income classes.
・An unusual situation exists in Japan, where income inequalities are not reflected
in inequalities in opportunities for students to progress to higher education.
・Problems with data
・The results of the efforts of families
・The combining of income, academic ability, and gender factors (Kobayashi
2008).
`
The pursuit of knowledge that exceeds short-term demand
and reproduction.
Entry rates into Higher Education(1987)
50.0
41.6
41.0
40.3
40.0
40.2
39.1
31.0
30.0
20.9
20.0
10.0
10.6
10.0
9.3
9.2
20.5
19.9
Aomori
Okinawa
19.4
18.9
8.1
0.0
0.0
Nara
Hoiroshima
Hyogo
-10.0
Kagawa
Ehime
average
Akita
(10.1)
(10.5)
(11.1)
-20.0
Entry Rates
Diffirence between each prefecture and average
Iwate
(11.6)
Niigata
(12.1)
Entry rates into Higher Education(1997)
60.0
51.2
50.0
50.2
49.8
48.4
48.4
40.7
40.0
30.0
30.0
29.7
29.2
28.7
26.2
20.0
10.0
10.5
9.5
9.1
7.7
7.7
0.0
0.0
hyogo
Aichi
Hiroshima
kyoto
Nara
National
Miyagi
Fukushima
Iwate
Aomori
Okinawa
(10.0)
(10.7)
(11.0)
(20.0)
Entry rates
Diffirence between each prefecture and average
(11.5)
(12.0)
(14.5)
Entry rates into Higher Education(2007)
70.0
63.0
61.4
60.0
59.3
58.0
57.7
51.2
50.0
39.2
40.0
38.9
38.4
37.5
33.5
30.0
20.0
11.8
10.0
10.2
8.1
6.8
6.5
0.0
0.0
Kyoto
Tokyo
Hiroshima
Hyogo
Aich
Average
Kagoshima Kumamoto Hokkaido
Iwate
Okinawa
10.0
12.0
12.3
20.0
12.8
13.7
17.7
Average
Diffirence between each prefecture and average
Entry rates in Each Region
Hokkaido
60.0
North-Tohoku
South-Tohou
50.0
North-Kanto
South-Kanto
40.0
Koshinetu
Tokai
30.0
Hokuriku
Kinki
20.0
Chugoku
Shikoku
10.0
North-Kyushu
0.0
South-Kyushu & Okinawa
1983
1990
1996
2002
National
Percentage of studens between the Income classes (MEXT,1998)
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
National
Public
lowest
lower
middle
higher
Private
highest
Percentage of students between the Income classes (MEXT,2004)
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
National
Public
lowest
lower
middle
higher
Private
highest
Percentage of students between the Income classes (JASSO,2006)
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
National
Public
lowest
lower
middle
higher
Private
highest
分位）では男女とも約半数であるのに対して，400 万円以下の低所得層（第I分位）では男 31%，
女 21％と男女とも所得階層差はきわめて大きい。また，男女とも所得が高いほど就職が少ない。
これらは，予想される結果である。しかし，ここで興味深いのは，国公立大学進学者は男女とも
所得階層差があまりみられないことである。この結果，国公私立をあわせた大学進学率は，低所
得層では男 42.9%，女 28.3％であるのに対して，高所得層では男 61.4％，女 58.7％と差は小さ
くなっている。しかし，女子で所得階層別格差が大きく，特に低所得層では男女差が大きい。こ
れに対して，高所得層では男女差はほとんどない。
また，短大・専門学校進学者は男女とも，おおまかな傾向として，所得が低い層ほど多くなっ
ている。この結果として，高等教育（大学・短大・専門学校）進学率（浪人含む）は，高所得層
では男女とも 82%であるのに対して，低所得層では男 56％，女 61％と差はみられるものの，大
学進学率に比べると小さくなっている。つまり，高等教育に進学できるか否かという点では，依
然として所得階層別の格差が存在しているものの，その差は比較的小さいと言える。しかし，と
りわけ女子の場合には，私立大学進学に関して，大きな格差がみられることも明らかである。
図 3 所得階層別進路
60
小林雅之「高校
生の進路選択の
要因分析」2007
年
%
50
40
男 短大・専門学校
男 国公立大学
30
男 私立大学
女 短大・専門学校
女 国公立大学
20
女 私立大学
10
0
-400
400-600 600-800
8001,000
1,000家計所得(万円）
（データ）学術創成科研「高校生調査」2005年11月，2006年３月
3.
3.1.
居住形態の選択と地域間格差
居住形態の選択
もう一つの大きな高卒者の進路選択は，自宅か自宅外かである。当然，自宅外では生活費が多
4
ていることが大きな問題である。学力は，所得階層と正の相関があり，所得が高いほど高くなっ
ている。この結果として，高所得層は大学進学しやすいのに対して，低所得層はしにくくなって
いる。このことは，先にもみたように「高校生調査」の結果にも明確に示されている。
図 7 男女別成績別所得分位別私立大学進学率
%
80
70
60
50
男 成績下
40
女 成績下
30
女 成績上
男 成績上
20
10
0
-400
400-600
600-800
800-1,000
1,000家計所得（万円）
（データ）学術創成科研「高校生調査」2005年11月，2006年３月
とりわけ，興味深いのは，男女の差である。先に，男子の場合には成績に関わりなく，私立大
学に進学していることをみたが，図７のように，所得階層別成績別に見ると，所得階層の影響は
みられるものの，いずれの階層でも成績が低くても進学している者は多い。とくに私立大学進学
率に関しては，この傾向は明瞭であり，男子の成績上の場合には，低所得層の進学率は 36.7%で
高所得層の 37.9%とほとんど変わらない。所得階層の影響を受けていないと言える。しかし，男
子の成績下の場合，高所得層では 68.8%が進学しているが，低所得層では 28.2%と低くなってい
る。これに対して，女子の場合，成績上でも高所得層は 56.１%が進学しているが，低所得層で
は，33.3%にすぎない。さらに，成績下では，高所得層の進学率 47.8％に対して，中低所得層で
は１割以下にすぎない。つまり，女子の場合には，所得階層が学力を媒介として進学を規定し，
女子低学力中低所得層の大学進学を困難にしている。
なお，学力と所得階層に相関がある要因のひとつは，学習時間にもよるとみられる。所得階層
が高いほど高校の学習時間は長くなっている。第I分位（家計所得 400 万円以下の低所得層）で
は，毎日，ほとんど勉強しない者が 51.0%と半数以上となっているのに対して，第V分位（家計
所得 1,000 万円以上の高所得層）では，27.3%と４分の１強となっている。逆に４時間以上勉強
する者は，第I分位では，12.4%であるのに対して，第V分位では，29.3%となっている。このこと
は，学習時間が進路希望と関連していることにもよるが，所得階層と学力は必ずしも直接関連し
8
Region
Hokkaido
Kita-Tohoku
(Aomori, Iwate, Akita)
Minami-Tohoku
(Miyagi, Yamagata, Fukushima)
Kita-Kanto
(Ibaraki, Tochigi, Gunma)
Minami-Kanto
(Saitama, Chiba,
Tokyo, Kanagawa)
Koshinetsu
(Niigata, Yamanashi,
Nagano, Shizuoka)
Tokai
(Gifu, Aichi, Mie)
Hokuriku
(Toyama, Ishikawa, Fukui)
Kinki
(Shigfa, Kyoto, Osaka,
Hyogo, Nara, Wakayama)
Chugoku
(Tottori, Shimane, Okayama,
Hiroshima, Yamaguchi)
Shikoku
(Tokushima, Kagawa,
Ehime, Kochi)
Kita-kKyushu
(Fukuoka, Saga,
Nagasaki, Oita)
Minami-Kyushu
(Kumamoto, Miyazaki,
Kagoshima, Okinawa)
All Japan
University
Status
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
National
Public
Private
Source:
Home
Education
Art
Economics
185
905
300
1,680
720
565
1,260
300
410
80
2,578
5,173
1,700
545
905
240
230
560
890
395
481
490
390
400
150
90
400
1,425
490
580
200
70
1,275
420
509
1,460
305
539
655
120
340
685
2,805
1,750
1,190
240
600
161
635
260
205
1,400
330
447
1,020
100
120
900
262
285
300
4,475
650
2,210
250
500
315
1,275
2,932
1,010
4,847
1,065
710
125
2,095
477
270
730
33,314
73,300
3,325
20,193
4,860
12,562
5,104
5,822
7,097
860
670
615
2,005
755
868
840
690
260
445
50
420
3,160
500
120
1,025
240
300
300
390
355
270
2,780
595
635
1,390
695
230
70
80
640
195
6,205
14,372
2,780
300
2,735
2,292
1,277
1,170
355
790
400
1,349
780
365
115
200
190
200
160
150
110
980
1,317
546
1,685
2,670
851
3,660
450
1,113
140
2,145
710
1,415
440
1,182
110
1,025
123
193
21,652
37,370
343
6,685
620
5,735
2,705
2,320
4,145
500
1,245
590
1,930
775
1,350
1,185
230
1,070
210
140
420
170
2,685
4,089
700
2,240
2,531
1,330
400
490
295
460
495
1,365
490
854
690
80
30
195
60
885
1,925
720
540
735
80
50
160
1,435
277
2,731
484
1,015
920
590
1,040
250
355
3,663
9,357
240
3,235
1,833
1,140
200
645
170
210
575
1,688
770
909
925
280
180
105
1,405
3,550
1,110
460
1,200
325
190
8,345
12,352
6,097
27,785
7,134
10,266
265
13,980
692
3,395
5,835
720
2,774
580
5,275
233
0
893
74,302
161,981
4,608
43,370
6,905
33,592
14,801
11,499
14,793
Data prepared by National Universities Association Survey and Research Department, based on the "List
of Japanese Universities" (MEXT Education Association) complied by the Center for Research
and Development for Higher Education, University of Tohoku
Humanities
Society
Science
Engineering Agriculture
Health
Other
240
840
590
390
180
440
2,240
1,220
60
1,480
1,287
1,950
41,490
780
180
3,040
175
6,635
160
1,630
730
1,145
15,020
1,095
365
3,004
770
1,115
380
2,915
1,170
380
1,405
9,272
5,530
79,769
Total Staff
5,615
1,030
12,211
3,406
1,420
3,165
5,343
900
9,671
5,617
1,627
10,180
15,823
2,950
207,067
7,393
1,625
9,105
6,590
1,910
37,766
4,314
900
4,583
13,444
6,343
96,595
8,670
2,605
17,469
5,419
365
4,935
8,137
2,615
23,228
6,417
945
9,645
96,188
25,235
445,620
5.How should we measure the public functions?
`
New trend , university ranking
University of Tokyo(17, Times),
Kyoto University(25), Osaka
University(46), Tokyo Institute of Technology (90), Tohoku University
(102), Nagoya University (112), Kyushu University(136), Hokkaido
University (151), Keio University (161) , Waseda University (180)・・・・
`
Could university rankings become a indicator for national
universities?
・Do the rankings reflect the functions of HEIs, especially of national universities?
6. Governance Issues for national Systems and
Institutions
`
Has government control changed with capitalization?
・Control by other government ministries has replaced MEXT controls.
・ Continuative evolution for universities
`
`
University presidents, departmental heads, and department
chairpersons have different perspectives on the nature of
governance
An ideal model for governance at each level
・Bureaucratic level: the University President, the Vice-President, the Management
Council
・Departmental representative level: the University Council, the All-Department
Committee
・Decentralized departmental level: faculty meetings
`
A gap exists to those national university presidents, departments,
and faculties that have gone ahead of the rest.
`
A high-level strategic agreement through a private universities agreement model.
7. The National University as Sector
`
Higher education governance throughout the world - creating a
“peak” group reflecting the interests of all higher education
institutions.
・the United Kingdom (UUK)
`
`
`
`
・Australia (UA) ・the U.S. (UAE)
Trends toward the creation of higher education groups
Japanese university groups are partitioned according to sector,
national, public and private
Can the Japan Association of National Universities grow up
real university organization not a saloon?
What responsibilities should the leading national universities
fulfill for all of national universities and higher education?
University Management Model
National Universities
University
President
Bureaucracy
systems
Public Universities
Private Universities
Bureaucracy systems
Bureaucracy systems
Departmental representation
systems
Departmental representation
systems
Weak departmental
decentralization systems
Head of
Department
Departmental representation
systems
Department decentralization
systems
Chairperson Departmental representation
systems
of
Department
Department decentralization
systems
Bureaucracy systems
Bureaucracy systems
Weak departmental
decentralization systems
Departmental representation
systems
Department decentralization
systems
Departmental representation
systems
Bureaucracy systems
Department decentralization
systems
Departmental representation
systems
Department decentralization
systems
Opposition
University President v heads of
departments & department
Chairpersons
University President & heads of
departments v department
chairpersons
University President; heads of
Departments; department
chairpersons
Graph 1 Strengthened by University Management (National Universities)
(1) Local government,
school corporations
(11)Operations-related organizations
（10)Faculty meetings
(2)MEXT
(3) Gov’t bodies such as Ministry of
Finance, Cabinet Office etc.
(9)Chairperson of
(4) Board of governors, management
departments etc.
council etc.
University President,nat’l univ.
Dep’t head, nat’l univ.
(8)Heads of departments
(7)All-university type committees
(5) University president,
Dep’t chairperson, nat’l univ.
vice-president
(6) All-university type management bodies, such as a university council
広島大学高等教育開発研究センター『大学の組織変容
”Survey
Research on University Organizational Changes”; Researcher,
Takashi
Hata, 2007; Research Institute for Higher Education,
the University of Hiroshima
に関する調査研究』（研究代表
羽田貴史，２００７）
Graph 3 Strengthened by University Management (Private Universities)
(1) Local government,
school corporations
(11)Operations-related
organizations
（10)Faculty meetings
(2)MEXT
(3) Gov’t bodies such as Ministry of
Finance, Cabinet Office etc.
(9)Chairperson of
(4) Board of governors, management
departments etc.
council etc.
University President, private univ.
Dep’t head, private univ.
Dep’t chairperson, private univ.
(8)Heads of departments
(5) University president,
vice-president
(7)All-university type committees
(6) All-university type management bodies, such as a university council
Graph 4 Strengthening of the University President’s position
(1) Local government,
school corporations
(11)Operations-related organizations
（10)Faculty meetings
(2)MEXT
(3) Gov’t bodies such as Ministry of
Finance, Cabinet Office etc.
(9)Chairperson of
(4) Board of governors, management
departments etc.
council etc.
University President,nat’l univ.
University President,
public univ.
(5) University president,
(8)Heads of departments
(7)All-university type committees
vice-president
University President,
private univ.
(6) All-university type management bodies, such as a university council
Graph 5 Strengthening of the position of Head of Department
(1) Local government,
school corporations
(11)Operations-related organizations
（10)Faculty meetings
(2)MEXT
(3) Gov’t bodies such as Ministry of
Finance, Cabinet Office etc.
(9)Chairperson of
(4) Board of governors, management
departments etc.
council etc.
Department head, nat’l univ.
Dep’t head, public univ.
(5) University president,
(8)Heads of departments
(7)All-university type committees
Dep’thead, private univ.
vice-president
(6) All-university type management bodies, such as a university council
Graph 6 Strengthening of the position of Department Chairperson
(1) Local government,
school corporations
(11)Operations-related organizations
（10)Faculty meetings
(2)MEXT
(3) Gov’t bodies such as Ministry of
Finance, Cabinet Office etc.
(9)Chairperson of
(4) Board of governors, management
departments etc.
council etc.
(5) University president,
(8)Heads of departments
(7)All-university type committees
Department chairperson,
national univ.
Dep’t chairperson,
public univ.
Dep’t chairperson,
private univ.
vice-president
(6) All-university type management bodies, such as a university council
Graph 11 Directions in University Management (at National Universities, According to Level)
（1）Strategic research
(17)Review and reorganization of
the curriculum
(2) Individual research
(16)Review and reorganization of
faculty organizations
(3) Horizontal-type research
(15) University management based
on long-term planning
(4) Horizontal-type education
(5)Industry & society
(14)Academic staff management from
an all-university perspective
affiliated
(13)Management of academic staff
(6)Domestic & international
university affiliations
numbers for the entire school
(7) Selection of university
president, other than by election
(12) Development of internal academic staff
(8)Selection of department head,
other than by election
(11)Outsourcing of administrative duties to external specialists
(9)Selection of department chairperson,
other than by election
(10)Management that reflects the opinions of students
University President,nat’l univ.
Dep’t head, nat’l univ.
Dep’t chairperson, nat’l univ.
Graph 12 Directions in University Management (at Public Universities, According to Level)
（1）Strategic research
(17)Review and reorganization of the curriculum
(2) Individual research
(16)Review and reorganization of faculty organizations
(3) Horizontal-type research
(15) University management based
on long-term planning
(4) Horizontal-type education
(5)Industry & society
affiliated
(14)Academic staff management from
an all-university perspective
(13)Management of academic staff
numbers for the entire school
(6)Domestic & international
university affiliations
(7) Selection of university
president, other than by election
(12) Development of internal academic staff
(11)Outsourcing of administrative duties to external specialists
(10)Management that reflects the opinions of students
University President, public univ.
(8)Selection of department head, other than by election
(9)Selection of department chairperson, other than by election
Dep’t head, public univ.
Dep’t chairperson, public univ.
Graph 13 Directions in University Management (at Private Universities)
（1）Strategic research
(17)Review and reorganization of the curriculum
(2) Individual research
(16)Review and reorganization of faculty organizations
(3) Horizontal-type research
(15) University management based
on long-term planning
(4) Horizontal-type education
(14)Academic staff management from
an all-university perspective
(5)Industry & society
affiliated
(13)Management of academic staff
numbers for the entire school
(6)Domestic & international
university affiliations
(12) Development of internal academic staff
(7) Selection of university
president, other than by election
(8)Selection of department head, other than by election
(11)Outsourcing of administrative duties to external specialists
(10)Management that reflects the opinions of students
University President, private univ.
(9)Selection of department chairperson, other than by election
Dep’t head, private univ.
Dep’t chairperson, private univ.