私立大学等改革総合支援事業の政策評価 : タイプ１への申請・非申請に着目して

This study investigated policy evaluations in private university reform by Panel Data Analysis, with a focus on universities that apply for type 1 status. In particular, the main study questions were: (1) what kind of universities has applied for type 1 status? (2) Has educational investment increased because of the application or because these universities have applied for type 1 status? (3) How are the four representative approaches (“IR” “Assessment” “Classes Evaluation” “Numbering”) specified in related to the first and second questions? The results show that large universities or those that do not require resources for educational investment are applying for type 1 status to obtain funds. “Numbering” that explain the systematic nature of curriculum was the only approach that positively influenced application for type 1 status. Applying for type 1 status was found to have a rather negative effect on educational investment. In addition, the increase in educational investment proved that the size of the university, its age of history, or individualized education were effective. In addition, among the four representative approaches that positively influenced educational investment, “Numbering” was the most representative. The primary results show the (1) Differentiation by function by subsidy guidance is not promoted, rather it may have a negative effects; 2) the necessary scientific basis in the government’s selection of institutional functions; and 3) these policy evaluations hobble small-scale universities, which find it difficult to apply for funding.