We are pleased to announce the publication of the following:
・Project Outcome Report for FY2021 Inter-University Exchange Project by Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) of Japan: CAMPUS Asia Common Quality Assurance Standards Project [FY2021–FY2025]

The Project Outcome Report summarizes the outcomes of the CAMPUS Asia Common Quality Assurance Standards Project, which was implemented with the aim of enhancing inter-university and quality-assured student exchanges in Asia.
This Report systematically presents the “CAMPUS Asia” initiatives, the development of “the Common Quality Assurance Standards,” and the dissemination of outcomes achieved through collaboration with the partner quality assurance agencies.

Please click here for the Project Outcome Report in PDF file

NIAD-QE, March 2026

“Project Outcome Report for CAMPUS Asia Common Quality Assurance Standards Project*” summarizes the outcomes of the project, which was implemented with the aim of enhancing inter-university and quality-assured student exchanges in Asia.
This Report systematically presents the “CAMPUS Asia” initiatives, the development of “the Common Quality Assurance Standards,” and the dissemination of project outcomes achieved through collaboration with the partner quality assurance agencies.

*The project selected for FY2021 Inter-University Exchange Project by Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) of Japan.

NIAD-QE, EQEA and KCUE <br>March 2026

Explanatory Notes for Common Quality Assurance Standards provides an explanation of the purpose and content of the “Common Quality Assurance Standards,” which are intended to serve as a reference point for fostering a shared understanding of quality expected in inter-university exchange programs in Asia, and to support autonomous and sustainable efforts for quality assurance and enhancement of such programs. In addition to an explanation for each standard, the Notes provide examples of supporting documents, which demonstrate that programs meet the Standards when conducting program self‑assessment using these Standards.

The "Quality Assurance -CAMPUS Asia" Website (hereafter "the Website"; https://qacampusasia.niad.ac.jp/ and https://qacampusasia.niad.ac.jp/en/) is operated by the National Institution for Academic Degrees and Quality Enhancement of Higher Education (NIAD-QE).
Please read the entire content below and only use the Website if you agree to the conditions stated. By using the Website, you are deemed to have agreed to all of the conditions set forth below.
Please also be aware that the content of this site policy is subject to change without notice.

Privacy Policy

Regarding the Use of Google Analytics

On the Website, access analysis is conducted using Google Analytics to identify browsing behavior and improve content. Data are collected anonymously and will only be used for the purposes described above.

The Website will not use the information collected for any purposes other than those provided above. The information collected will not be provided to third parties, unless a request for disclosure is made under laws and regulations, an illegal act such as fraudulent access or blackmail is committed, or there is any other special reason.
Data collected by Google Analytics are handled in accordance with Google's privacy policy. NIAD-QE takes no responsibility for damage arising from the use of Google Analytics services.

Please click this link to access Google Analytics' terms of service: Terms of Service | Google Analytics - Google

Scope of Application

This privacy policy applies only to the Website; it does not apply to other websites accessed via links from the Website.

Copyrights

The contents (articles, charts, photographs, programs, etc.) on the Website operated by NIAD-QE, are protected under the Copyright Act as copyright works (chosaku-butsu), and the entire Website operated by NIAD-QE is also thus protectd as a compilation (henshuu chosaku-butsu). Except as otherwise stated, copyrights of these works are owned by NIAD-QE.
The information on the Website can be cited where education is the main purpose, to the extent explicitly permitted by law.

Links (Citation of Information on the Website)

In principle, it is freely permitted to link to pages on the Website that is operated by NIAD-QE, with the understanding that content may change, and services may be terminated without notice.

However, linking from the following types of websites is strictly prohibited.

• Websites with content that libels NIAD-QE or undermines its credibility.
• Websites including illegal content that contravenes public order and morality (including laws, ordinances, and regulations).
• Other websites that NIAD-QE determines to be unsuitable.

Disclaimer

While NIAD-QE strives to ensure that the information on the Website is accurate, it does not guarantee to eliminate all possibility of content errors, including those arising as a result of unavoidable occurrences such as a third party tampering with the content. NIAD-QE accepts no responsibility for any harm or disadvantage to users arising from using the Website or using information or materials on the Website.
NIAD-QE will sometimes, without notice, correct, alter, augment, delete, or discontinue information on the Website.

NIAD-QE is not liable to compensate for any harm or loss in relation to the above cases. Moreover, it is user's responsibility to resolve any transactions, communications, or disputes related to the Website between its users or between a user and a third party. Management and operation of content of other websites accessed via a link on the Website is the responsibility of the organization or group to which the link leads, and NIAD-QE takes no responsibility for any harm or loss arising from using such linked websites.

System Requirements (Browser, Cookies, SSL, etc.)

Browser

The Website is optimized for various screen sizes, including smartphones, tablets, and different types of desktop computers. Browsing is possible using the latest versions of Microsoft Edge, Firefox, Google Chrome, and Safari.

Cookie

Google Analytics uses cookies to gather user information. Please note that it is possible to disable the use of cookies via your browser "Settings." To find out how to disable cookies (how to disallow tracking), please consult your browser's "Help" pages.

SSL

The Website uses SSL（Secure Socket Layer) and ensures security via encryption.

Home

• News
• Site Map
• Site Policy

Objectives & Background

• 'CAMPUS Asia' Initiatives
• 'CAMPUS Asia' for Broader Asia
• Quality Assurance for 'CAMPUS Asia'
• 'CAMPUS Asia' Programs

Common Quality Assurance Standards

• Approach to Developing Standards
• Common Quality Assurance Standards
• Explanatory Notes

Achievements of Monitoring Activities

• Overview of "Monitoring"
• 1st Monitoring
• 2nd Monitoring
• Monitoring +

Topics & Reports & Publications

• Topics
• Reports
• Publications

Links

Relevant Organizations

• Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology - MEXT

• Japan Society for the Promotion of Science - JSPS

Japan-China-Korea Quality Assurance Council

• National Institution for Academic Degrees and Quality Enhancement of Higher Education - NIAD-QE

• Korean Council for University Education - KCUE

Information on Japanese Quality Assurance System for Higher Education

• 'CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring

'CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring website provides information on our project activities from 2011 to 2020.

• National Information Center for Academic Recognition Japan - NIC-Japan

NIC-Japan provides information on education to facilitate recognition of higher education qualifications

• Glossary of Quality Assurance in Japanese Higher Education

NIAD's publication for terminology relating to higher education and quality assurance system in Japan.

The quality assurance agencies in Japan (NIAD-QE), China (HEEC), and Korea (KCUE), conducted monitoring, namely "Monitoring+ (plus)," on 'CAMPUS Asia' full-fledged programs (Mode 2) during 2018-2019. Monitoring+ was conducted in accordance with the Joint Guidelines for Monitoring International Cooperative Academic Programs in 'CAMPUS Asia' developed after the implementation of the second monitoring.

• Implementation Structure and Procedures
• Joint Monitoring Criteria
• Joint Monitoring Report
• Joint Guidelines (2nd Edition)
• Lessons on Double Degree Programs

* HEEC changed its name to "Education Quality Evaluation Agency" (EQEA) in 2022.

Implementation Structure and Procedures

For Monitoring+ activities, 'CAMPUS Asia' joint monitoring committee and joint monitoring panels were established, following the method of the second monitoring. These panels were comprised of Japanese, Chinese, and Korean academic experts with knowledge on the internationalization of higher education and international collaborative programs, as well as representatives from quality assurance agencies.

The panel assessed that the previous two monitoring initiatives were successful in developing a framework for quality assurance and deepened the mutual trust between the quality assurance agencies in Japan, China, and Korea. Consequently, as seen below, each of the three countries' quality assurance agencies was responsible for monitoring three of the nine programs.

• Japan - NIAD-QE：The University of Tokyo, Osaka University, Waseda University
• China - HEEC：Tokyo Gakugei University, Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology, Nagasaki University
• Korea - KCUE：Chiba University, Tokyo University of the Arts, Kyushu University

※ The universities listed above are the Japanese institutions participating in the consortium monitored by each quality assurance agency.

The process for the Monitoring+ is shown in the figure below.

Joint Monitoring Criteria

The joint monitoring criteria for Monitoring+ were identical to those for the second monitoring, apart from Criterion 5, revised as "Continuous Quality Improvement," with no sub-criteria.

Criteria	Sub-criteria
1. Objectives and Implementation	1.1. Achievement of Objectives 1.2. Organization and Administration
2. Collaborative Development of Academic Program	2.1. Curriculum Integration 2.2. Academic Staff and Teaching
3. Student Support	3.1. Student Admission 3.2. Support for Learning and Living
4. Added-value of the Collaborative Program (Outcomes)	4.1. Student Satisfaction 4.2. Credit Transfer and Degree Awarding
5. Continuous Quality Improvement

Joint Monitoring Report

CAMPUS Asia Monitoring+ Joint Monitoring Report
('CAMPUS Asia' Joint Monitoring Committee, December 2019)

This is the final report of Monitoring+, which collected good practices of international collaborative programs and elaborated expectations for further efforts by universities in Japan, China, and Korea. The report centers on 104 examples of good practices in the 'CAMPUS Asia' programs identified through Monitoring+. It also describes other examples of good practices from the second monitoring in 2016. This report provides the outcome of monitoring activities to date comprehensively.

Joint Guidelines (2nd Edition)

Joint Guidelines for Monitoring International Cooperative Academic Programs in CAMPUS Asia (Second Edition)
(NIAD-QE, HEEC, KCUE, 2020)

This version of the guidelines is a revision of the first published edition of June 2017 and is based on the experiences from the last three monitoring rounds. It outlines the joint monitoring criteria and the methods for quality-assured international collaborative programs, with some details of the actual Monitoring+ activities. It also contains other useful information for those involved in international collaborative education programs, such as the differences in academic calendars between Japan, China, and Korea.

Lessons on Double Degree Programs

Lessons on Double Degree Programs from CAMPUS Asia Monitoring
(NIAD-QE, HEEC, KCUE, July 2021)

This publication focuses on double degree programs, which have become an important means of internationalization in East Asian universities, summarizing the knowledge on double degrees obtained from past monitoring activities. It also describes the outstanding efforts of universities reported in the "CAMPUS Asia Monitoring+ Joint Monitoring Report" published in December 2019. It explains the importance of double degree programs and provides tips on how to develop the programs by presenting the academic systems of Japan, China, and Korea.

JCK 2nd Monitoring

The second Monitoring of the pilot 'CAMPUS Asia' programs (ten programs) was implemented jointly from 2015‒2016 by NIAD-UE, HEEC, and KCUE. For the implementation of the second monitoring, the three agencies developed a common framework, after a comparative analysis of the criteria, methods, and results of the first monitoring in each of the countries, in 2013-2014.

• Implementation Structure and Procedure
• Joint Monitoring Criteria
• Joint Monitoring Report
• Joint Guidelines

Implementation Structure and Procedure

For the second monitoring, the 'CAMPUS Asia' Joint Monitoring Committee and Panel were established, consisting of academic experts with knowledge of the internationalization of higher education and international collaborative programs, as well as representatives of the quality assurance agencies from Japan, China, and Korea. The Joint Monitoring Committee made relevant decisions on agendas for monitoring and finalized reports. The Joint Monitoring Panel conducted document analysis of the self-assessment reports submitted by university consortiums and site visits, as well as produced monitoring reports.

The process for implementing joint monitoring in Japan, China, and Korea are shown in the chart given below.

First, the ten consortiums of Japanese, Chinese, and Korean universities were requested to produce self-assessment reports. With adequate coordination between the participating universities, they were required to submit one report per consortium, in English, by referring to the joint monitoring criteria. Members of the Joint Monitoring Panel conducted a document analysis based on the reports produced by each consortium.

Second, following the document analysis, members of the Joint Monitoring Panel jointly visited each country, to conduct physical interviews for the three selected consortiums. Each site visit was organized using opportunities in program events, and other occasions when the member universities of the consortiums gathered. For the other seven consortiums, panel members from each country visited or interviewed the universities in their respective countries. The results of these investigations were shared among panel members from the three countries.

Subsequently, the good practices and challenges identified in each consortium's program, during the monitoring, were collected and summarized in a report. Finally, a joint monitoring report that included the results of the first monitoring, conducted in each country in 2013, was drafted by the collaborative work of the three quality assurance agencies. The report was finalized, with the monitoring results from the Joint Monitoring Committee.

Joint Monitoring Criteria

After a comparative analysis of each country's criteria in the first monitoring, five joint monitoring criteria were established for the second one, each with two sub-criteria, and totaling ten sub-criteria. These joint criteria were constructed from those established in each country, during the first monitoring. These criteria focused more on cooperation between participating universities, and the added value obtained from international collaborative programs.

Joint Monitoring Report

CAMPUS Asia Pilot Program Joint Monitoring Report
(CAMPUS Asia Joint Monitoring Committee, October 2016)

This report brought together good practices and challenges in international collaborative academic programs, identified during the monitoring of each consortium by Japanese, Chinese, and Korean panel members. Instances of good practices, under each criterion monitored, were described in detail, most notably quality assurance initiatives within 'CAMPUS Asia' programs.

Joint Guidelines

Joint Guidelines for Monitoring International Cooperative Academic Programs in CAMPUS Asia
(National Institution for Academic Degrees and Quality Enhancement of Higher Education, Higher Education Evaluation Center of the Ministry of Education, and Korean Council for University Education, June 2017)

These guidelines stipulated the quality assurance criteria and methods for international collaborative academic programs, based on experiences during the trilateral second monitoring. They were produced with the hope that they would serve as a helpful model, not only for the Japanese, Chinese, and Korean quality assurance agencies conducting this monitoring, but also for other quality assurance agencies when conducting monitoring or evaluation of international collaborative academic programs. This is especially predicted to be useful when working with partner agencies in other countries, and for higher education institutions, when conducting an internal quality assurance of international education.

The first monitoring was implemented individually by quality assurance agencies in Japan, China, and Korea, based on each nation's relevant domestic regulations, evaluation systems, and methods. Moreover, after the monitoring, the agencies shared their results for a comparative analysis, and discussed the possibility of conducting a second monitoring, in cooperation with all three countries.

The first monitoring in Japan was conducted by NIAD-UE from 2013‒2014, in cooperation with the Japanese universities running 'CAMPUS Asia' pilot programs. In line with the basic concept of the first monitoring outlined below, NIAD-UE summarized the details of the monitoring criteria and methods, in the Handbook for 'CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring - Criteria and Method of the 1st Monitoring in Japan.

• Based on the criteria determined by NIAD-UE, the universities that offer exchange programs first analyze the current state of their programs themselves (production of self-analysis reports). The monitoring committees identify the programs' good practices for quality assurance and effective measures to resolve the challenges of international exchange programs, through self-analysis reports.
• The self-analysis reports should include matters on which the program implementers wish to seek input from the monitoring committees. Thus, it is expected to improve quality, through exchanges of opinions and advice.

• Monitoring Procedure
• Monitoring Criteria
• Implementation Structure
• Monitoring Student Committee
• Monitoring Reports
• A Collection of Good Practices

Monitoring Procedure

The first monitoring in Japan was implemented as shown in the figure below.

For the first monitoring in Japan, a student monitoring committee was established, which was separate from the main monitoring committee and other subcommittees. It comprised students who had participated in 'CAMPUS Asia' programs. For details, please see Monitoring Student Committee.

Monitoring Criteria

The criteria for the first monitoring in Japan, as shown in the table below, were established by the monitoring committee, based on several discussions within the provisional monitoring committee, organized by NIAD-UE. These criteria also reflected the opinions exchanged with participating universities through liaison meetings and individual interviews. All the monitoring activities including self-analysis, document analysis, and site visits conducted, were based on these criteria.

Each criterion provides "examples of good practices," allowing universities' self-analysis to include their own successful practices and effective measures for resolving problems in international exchange programs. In addition, a rubric for a self-analysis of the quality level is introduced for each criterion.

Implementation Structure

'CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring Committee and Subcommittees

To implement the first monitoring, NIAD-UE organized a 'CAMPUS Asia' monitoring committee, and subcommittees comprising of academics and experts, with experience and knowledge of quality assurance in higher education/international collaborative programs.

The monitoring committee was comprised of eight members, and its main role was to decide on monitoring criteria and methods, as well as to finalize the monitoring results. Moreover, two representatives of the participating program were included in the committee. This approach allowed them to express their perspectives, through discussions on disseminating the monitoring outcomes.

The subcommittees performed document analysis, site visits, and drafting of monitoring reports, based on the self-analysis reports submitted by universities. The subcommittees were composed of university presidents, faculty, and experts from university-related organizations and industries.

Liaison Meetings for the 'CAMPUS Asia' Programs

One of the characteristics of the first monitoring in Japan, was the liaison meetings for universities offering 'CAMPUS Asia' programs which were organized during the preparatory stage. These liaison meetings consisted of university representatives, from the ten 'CAMPUS Asia' programs in Japan.

The meetings were established to exchange views and opinions between NIAD-UE and the universities (program implementers) to enhance the effectiveness of monitoring implementation. Through this exchange of opinions, the liaison meetings supported the development of a basic framework, for the monitoring and criteria of quality-assured international collaborative education. Moreover, from the viewpoint of enhancing the effectiveness of the 'CAMPUS Asia' project itself, the meetings also intended to provide opportunities for universities, to share operational challenges, resolutions, and information regarding their programs' progress.

Three liaison meetings were held in July and September 2012, and March 2013, prior to the start of the monitoring process. Furthermore, after finalization of the monitoring results, a fourth meeting was held in February 2014, at which those involved in participating programs shared the results of the first monitoring, and exchanged views on those results.

Monitoring Student Committee

Student Engagement in 'CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring

During the first monitoring in Japan, apart from the monitoring committee and subcommittees, a monitoring student committee was established, with students who had participated in different 'CAMPUS Asia' programs. The purpose of this student committee was to encourage students to freely exchange their opinions across university boundaries from the perspective of promoting student engagement in external quality assurance. The committee also aimed to collect students' opinions on how to further improve the 'CAMPUS Asia' project, and provide feedback to the monitoring committees.

The monitoring student committee held a workshop in December 2013, to create more attractive 'CAMPUS Asia' programs for all students. At the workshop, 19 students from Japan, China, and Korea engaged in group work and discussions, and compiled the 'CAMPUS Asia' proposal. This proposal outlined the strengths and areas for improvement, both in terms of learning and living, based on the students' experience of program participation, and provided suggestions from the student committee.

This proposal was presented to the monitoring committee in January 2014, by the student committee representatives. The monitoring committee utilized their opinions in the second monitoring of 'CAMPUS Asia.'

Monitoring Reports

A monitoring report was compiled by the monitoring committee for each program, comprising overall conclusion and results for each criterion. Within the results for each criterion, "initiative characteristics" and "good practices," identified from the viewpoint of the quality of education, were presented. In addition, to contribute to the future development of the programs, the reports included comments from the monitoring committee members, regarding future challenges listed by the universities.

The self-analysis by universities initially covered activities up until the end of the 2012 academic year. However, given that the pilot programs entered their third year in the 2013 academic year, and student exchange was becoming full-fledged, the subcommittees also conducted monitoring activities in the 2013 academic year, and included these results in the reports.

Comprehensive Report of the 1st 'CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring in Japan

'CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring on Quality Assurance -Collaboration among Japan, China, and Korea- Overview of the First Monitoring in Japan
('CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring Committee of NIAD-UE, March 2014)

Alongside an outline of monitoring activities with criteria, it includes the monitoring reports for each of the 10 programs, the proposals submitted by the monitoring student committee, and summaries of the self-analysis reports.

A Collection of Good Practices

'CAMPUS Asia' Programs in Light of Quality Assurance : A Collection of Good Practices
('CAMPUS Asia' Monitoring Committee of NIAD-UE, November 2014)

One of the major goals of monitoring is the dissemination and adoption of good practices, identified from the perspective of the quality of education. This collection lists and describes good practices within the pilot programs, identified by the first monitoring program in Japan. In addition to the good practices listed in the monitoring reports, this includes various initiatives confirmed during the site visits.

What are Common Quality Assurance Standards?

Common Quality Assurance Standards are intended to serve as common reference points for all program stakeholders to explain the expected quality as well as methods for maintaining and improving that quality with the goal of promoting inter-university exchange with quality assurance within the broader Asian region. In particular, Common Quality Assurance Standards aim to provide a guideline for universities involved in exchanges to promote the mutual understanding of their respective educational environment and systems and to sustainably improve their quality while working together and complementing each other.

Essential Elements for the Standards

The following elements are essential to the Common Quality Assurance Standards.

• Consideration of Diversity
  
• Diversity does not only refer to the diverse countries of Asia, and it is essential to include in any standards due to the various types of exchange programs that have been established such as degree programs (including double/joint degrees), semester-level exchanges, and short-term intensive programs.
• Promotion of Flexibility
  
• In times of uncertainty caused by the pandemic and social changes, the standards should promote the provision of appropriate educational methods and support systems to ensure that students' learning is not interrupted.
• Support for Sustainable Quality Assurance
  
• Based on the basic principles of quality assurance, the standards should support university consortiums to further strengthen the structure, function of their quality assurance initiatives (their internal quality assurance mechanisms) and assist autonomous and sustainable efforts in program improvement and quality assurance.

Creating Common Quality Assurance Standards

The first step in creating common quality assurance standards incorporating these essential elements would be to collect and organize overseas examples of inter-university student exchange programs and guidelines/reference documents that summarize the qualities to be considered. A course is being set for the standards, specifically referring to the guidelines that have been agreed upon already at the government level and carefully considering the perspectives required. Moreover, the standards will be developed through cooperation and collaboration with the quality assurance agencies in Japan, China, Korea, and ASEAN countries.

Key Reference Examples

• Guidelines for Exchange and Cooperation among Universities in China, Japan, and Korea with Quality Assurance
  
• These guidelines were developed based on the discussions at the second meeting of the Japan-China-Korea Committee for Promoting Exchange and Cooperation among Universities in Beijing in 2010. They outline the expected actions by the governments, universities, and quality assurance agencies to promote quality-assured exchange and collaboration between universities in the three countries.
• ASEAN Plus Three Guidelines on Student Exchanges and Mobility
  
• These guidelines were adopted at the third ASEAN Plus Three Education Ministers Meeting held in Malaysia in 2016. They provide reference for the establishment and implementation of international student exchange programs in the region, notably the elements to include and information given to students.
• Joint Guidelines for Monitoring International Cooperative Academic Programs in 'CAMPUS Asia' (Second Edition)
  
• NIAD-QE jointly formulated these guidelines in 2020 with the quality assurance agencies in China and Korea. They provide a set of criteria in monitoring activities to improve program quality, by identifying the status of the academic programs offered by university consortiums in Japan, China, and Korea.

Since these three sets of guidelines present various elements from the viewpoint of establishing common quality assurance standards, we will focus on, for example, the characteristic items shown in the table below and utilize them.

Key Examples for Reference

Guidelines	Characteristic items	Reference points
Guidelines for Exchange and Cooperation among Universities in China, Japan, and Korea with Quality Assurance	Criteria for each stakeholder group Student-centered principles Establishment of internal quality assurance mechanisms	Focus on criteria for higher education institutions Consideration of student-centered perspectives Reference to initiatives to improve quality through internal quality assurance mechanisms
ASEAN Plus Three Guidelines on Student Exchanges and Mobility	A balance between inbound and outbound students Specifics of student-life support	Attention to sustainable balance Consideration of the importance of wide-range student-life support
Joint Guidelines for Monitoring International Cooperative Academic Programs in 'CAMPUS Asia'	Structure and design based on actual examples of'CAMPUS Asia' programs Detailed criteria Emphasis on the collaborative nature of the programs Standards for degree programs	Balanced framework of criteria Elements required for degree programs

Other Examples for Reference

Examples of AIMS* programs mainly in the ASEAN region are also collected [*student exchange programs promoted by SEAMEO-RIHED (Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization Regional Centre specializing in higher education and development)]. Furthermore, Erasmus+ programs funded by the European Commission to support education, training, and youth exchanges within and outside Europe, are another example for reference.

In addition, evaluation criteria within the screening guidelines for the 2021 Inter-University Exchange Project are used as reference points.

Other Examples for Reference