Development and Practice of Training Program in Japanese Higher Education
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Development and Practice of Training Program in Japanese Higher Education - Benefits of Professional Development Across Institutions - Eiko Shimizu, Otemon Gakuin University Natsuko Kishioka, Ritsumeikan University Mariko Mikuriya, Meisei University Megumi Yamasaki, Soka University Objectives of this presentation • To understand the characteristics and issues of higher education in Japan in regards to Academic Advising • To understand the staff development program without professional staff • To understand the benefits of professional development across institutions Characteristics of Higher Education in Japan 1. Lack of Professional Staff ➠ “multiple roles” assigned to an individual staff e.g. Learning Support + Academic Advising 2. ”Job Rotation” ➠ Staff will be assigned to a new unit every 3 to 5 years 3. Lack of systemic professional development opportunities ➠Professional development = OJT Professional Staff (Ministry of Education, 2015) Issues in Higher Education in Japan 1. No systemic approach in academic advising ➡ Depend on an individual faculty/staff 2. No continuity in supporting system 3. No clear competencies and assessment base 4. No sharing information within institution Professional Development Trials Trial 1 Academic Advising Salon: Informational Session X6 ○ Issues presented by practitionars Trial 2 Academic Advising Workshop: Analysing own institution ○ Understanding NACADA’s Competencies and CAS Self Assessment Guide ○ Developing a competency framework based on “senior” practitionars Trial 1: Academic Advising Salon Goal: Share information on Academic Advising and develop a network across higher education ・Share histories and theories on Academic Advising internationally ・Share information on professional dvelopment practices ・Identify skills shared among institutions ・Develop a network among practitionars Academic Advising Salon Date/Place Content Participa nts# October 21, 2017/Osaka Academic Advising in the U.S. and Japan 13 Ottemon Gakuin University Discussion: Differences & similarities between U.S. and Japan March 24, 2018/Osaka Case Report Prefectural University of Hiroshima, Temple Univesity Japan 12 Campus Port Discussion: What is Academic Advising in Japan? Report on Academic Advising Salon October 20, 2018/Tokyo Case Report Ritsumeikan University, Showa Women’s University 68 Temple University Japan Discussion What can we learn from Academic Advising in the U.S.? February 10, 2019/Osaka Case Report Kanazawa University 37 Knowledge Salon Discussion November 9, 2019/Osaka Implementing Centrally Coordinated Academic Advising (Dr. McFarlane) 27 Ritsumeikan University How can we develop Centrally Coordinated Academic Advising? Thinking about Academic Advising during COVID-19 pendemic August 1, 2020/Online Case Report Temple University Japan, Okayama University of Science 81 Group Discussion August 1st Online Salon Questionnaire Participants: Faculty 8, Staff 20, Company employee 3, Other 2 1. Purpose of attending this salon ・Gain knowledge on practical academic advising information ・Get a hint to implement academic advising at my institution ・Had an interest in Academic Advising ・Get information on how to provide academic advising online 2. Things you find useful ・Other institutions’ practice ・Diverse participants as a result of online salon ・Common feeling toward a necessity of Academic Advising ・Sense of comradery Questionnaire cont. 3. Request to this Salon ・More time to network ・Professional development opportunity for academic advising ・More information/modification to fit Japanese higher education 4. Your Concerns ・Cooperation with other units・Issues with confidenciality ・Prevention of drop-outs ・Onlline Student Support ・Common understanding of the aim of student support in the organization ・Academic Advising beyond earning credits ・What is Student Success in Japanese context Trial 2 Academic Advising Workshop August 24, 2019 10:00~17:00 Goal of this workshop: Developing a competency framework based on “senior” practitionars Part 1: Reflecting and analyzing Part 2: Analyzing student services at own (individual) practice an own institution Demography of Participants • 9 Universities (Faculty members 7, Staff members 7) • Years of Experience Years of Experience Number ~ 1 year 1 2~5 years 4 6~10 years 5 11~15 years 1 … … 26~30 years 2 ※Respondent (13) Responsible Supporting Services Common Factors among Participants 1. Get necessary information before a session 2. Use different approach depending on students 3. Use active listening skills 4. Let students think for themselves 5. Cooperate with other units when necessary Picture: Individual analysis worksheet University-wide Student Support Program 1st year 2nd Year Major/Career • Numbers of Programs submitted by the WS participants 82 • Small numbers of program for 2nd year students c Student Service (Financial Aid/Disability) Benefits of Professional Development across the institutions 1. As an Inter-institutional Professional Development ● provides a network among practitionar ● share and explore possibilities at own institution 2. As a program assessment opportunity ● assess each student support programs ● assess goals of university through student support perspectives ● develop academic advising portfolio For Our Future Personal Financial Issues Needs Goal Setting Self-Assessment Academic Advising as the Key for Assessments Thank you very much for listening [email protected] JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP 18K02335.