| Project/Area Number |
16K04602
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Multi-year Fund |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
Sociology of education
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Chiba University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
Okada Satoshi 千葉大学, アカデミック・リンク・センター, 准教授 (00581779)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2016-04-01 – 2019-03-31
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2018)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥2,470,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,900,000、Indirect Cost: ¥570,000)
Fiscal Year 2018: ¥780,000 (Direct Cost: ¥600,000、Indirect Cost: ¥180,000)
Fiscal Year 2017: ¥1,040,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000、Indirect Cost: ¥240,000)
Fiscal Year 2016: ¥650,000 (Direct Cost: ¥500,000、Indirect Cost: ¥150,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | Institutional Research / 教育研究評価 / 非営利組織 / 分野別認証評価 / 高等教育研究 / 医療教育研究 / postsecondary education / WWC基準 / 分野別質保証 / 医療教育 / 医学教育 / 薬学教育 / 看護学教育 / 医療者教育 / 内部質保証 / エビデンス / アウトカム / 機関別認証評価 |
|---|
| Outline of Final Research Achievements |
This study was intended to clarify how to use relevant and reliable evidence for IR. The following findings were obtained as a result of this study.
First, higher education research and medical education research conducted in Japan have issues in terms of methodology as well as the number of articles. This suggests the need to consider a framework for evaluating the quality of research and its applicability to practice in a way other than peer review. Second, non-profit organizations and intermediate organizations have much contribute to support IR and to ensure the responsiveness of educational research and practice. Third, while the reference framework of IR staff is largely defined in their own specialties, the use of advanced analysis and educational research findings is not emphasized in IR practice in Japan.
|
| Academic Significance and Societal Importance of the Research Achievements |
本研究の意義としては、実践領域としてのIRと研究領域としてのエビデンス、そして知識共有のあり方の検討から、特に国内の高等教育研究の評価の仕組みとして、学問の自由や同業者内での査読だけに過度に依存しすぎるのではなく、既存の研究評価基準やその認識枠組みを相対化するという観点からも、実践に対する応答性や有用性を軸とした教育研究成果の異なる評価枠組みの必要性を提起している点などが挙げられる。
|
