紀要論文

米国大学の教員評価制度と公的研究助成金制度 : 我が国大学における教員評価制度構築への参考事例としての観点より

Faculty Evaluation System of University and Research Grant-Giving System in USA : For Creating Evaluation Systems at Japanese Universities

jpn

00229741

https://doi.org/10.15002/00004533

法政大学経済学部学会

73

3

519

547

2006-03-03

Version of Record

Japanese universities have introduced various types of evaluation systems in recent years, in the midst of various discussions and experiments on this topic. "The culture of evaluation" has been gradually spreading, as Japanese universities were exposed to evaluations from a number of activities and initiatives, starting from the initiative by University Advisory Council in 1991, and recently, the change to "national university agencies" in 2004. This paper offers a comparison of systems in Japan and the United States based on case studies of B university and grant-giving institutions in the United States of America. In American universities, the primary faculty evaluations are in two types, which are evaluations for hiring faculty, and evaluations to determine tenure. Besides such evaluations, significant leeway is left up to each faculty members. In Japan recently, many universities choose to introduce complicated and detailed faculty evaluation system which includes detailed annual assessments on many criteria, such as research and teaching performance, social contribution, and university administration, etc. The selection of the most appropriate evaluation system depends on the objectives of the evaluation. "Detailed annual review methods" are effective in some cases, such as where catch-up or improvements to a certain level are desired, or where the goal is to ensure certain standards are met. In models that pursue high standards, however, the potential for abuse might be high. Besides considering whether or not the American models are appropriate for Japan, they do provide many useful points for consideration: (1) for hiring, be sure to spend an adequate amount of time and examine candidates rigorously; (2) monitor newly-hired faculty for a certain period of time; (3) during that time, give those faculty a fair degree of freedom, and (4) offer successful faculty opportunities for long-term, stable position, etc. For its future, Japan needs more "original","frontier-type" research activities. To this end, it is important to consider introducing evaluation systems that are appropriate for a Japanese setting. Four key points above are useful to consider such appropriate evaluation systems.

Article

AN00071028