At the beginning, Ms. Yoshiko Wazumi, deputy director for nursing education at the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology gave her words. Next, at the Kyoto meeting place, Toshiko Ibe, president (St. Luke's College of Nursing) gave her words on behalf of Japan Association of Nursing Programs in Universities, and at the Tokyo meeting place, Sayumi Nojima, vice-president (Kochi Women's University) gave words.

1. Explanation of the purposes and progress of activities of Japan Association of Nursing Programs in Universities (JANPU) Accreditation Review Committee:

Sachiyo Murashima (University of Tokyo), chairperson of "Japan Association of Nursing Programs in Universities (JANPU) Accreditation Review Committee (hereinafter referred to as "Committee")" established in 2005, gave explanations about the purpose of holding the symposium, efforts made by Japan Association of Nursing Programs in Universities to date, a brief overview of the 2007 program for Certified Evaluation and Accreditation Organization Accredited by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, the gist and past activities of Committee, and the necessity and background of the program ([1] Fast-growing nursing colleges and graduate schools; [2] necessity of evaluation specialized to the nursing profession).

2. Report on the Inspection Tours to the U.S. certified evaluation organization, "Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE)":

Azusa Arimoto (University of Tokyo), a collaborator for the committee, gave a report of the results of the inspection tours. It was explained that the main purposes of the inspection tours were [1] to grasp the current situation and merits of and problems with the pioneering efforts in terms of the accreditation evaluation system specialized to the nursing education in the United States; and [2] to investigate the issues regarding the standards and system of evaluation from an international viewpoint, by collecting information toward the construction of the Japanese version of third-person evaluation system for nursing science.
She presented a brief overview of the organization of the CCNA, and concrete methods and contents of evaluation (purposes, contents of evaluation standards, methods, publication of evaluation results, evaluation fees, etc.)

3. Report and information exchange regarding the 2007 trial evaluation of the undergraduate curriculum:

With Mutsuko Nakanishi (International University of Health and Welfare), a committee member, attending as the chair, the purposes and points of the trial of evaluation, opinions from the standpoint of having cooperated in the trial evaluation, and opinions from the standpoint of having taken charge of the trial of evaluation were presented, and active discussions were made with the floor in an unified manner.

4. Purposes and Points of the Evaluation:

Purposes and points of the evaluation were explained by committee member Asako Hirayama (Gifu College of Nursing) at the Kyoto meeting place, and committee member Noriko Hishinuma (St. Luke's College of Nursing) at the Tokyo meeting place. Their explanations included that this year's evaluation was clearly a trial to try to evaluate in terms of undergraduate curriculum, and that basically the evaluation is a peer review by two colleges
And with regard to concrete evaluation items and evaluation system (draft) that were created by Committee, various kinds of issues were raised, such as evaluation methods in which characteristics of each college will be reflected, principles for formulation of curriculum, techniques or competences at the level of graduation with a bachelor degree, the integration of theory and practice in practical training, and differences due to the scale or the main component of educational institution. Purpose of accreditation evaluation

5. From the Standpoint of having cooperated in the Trial Evaluation:

At the Kyoto meeting place, from the standpoint of a single-department college, Kieko Nakajima, President of Niigata College of Nursing first explained about the current situation and issues that public colleges have. Next, she presented an issue that while there is a merit that the points to look at were made clear by the trial of evaluation, it is not possible to grasp important contents due to the high number of evaluation items.
At the Tokyo meeting place, from the standpoint of a comprehensive university, Keiko Nakamura, Director of the nursing science major, Ehime University, mentioned matters such as segmentation of evaluation items and investigation of items that would not easily be expressed as peer review (e.g., scholarly achievements by each teacher). On the other hand, she mentioned merits such as that the field research gave an opportunity for the committee members in charge of evaluation to directly have a conversation with administrators in the administrative office of the university and to deepen the understanding of nursing science, and that the competence of clerical workers was re-confirmed and issues relating to education evaluation were made clear.

6. From the Standpoint of having taken charge of the Trial Evaluation

At the Kyoto meeting place, committee member Sumiko Maehara (Kyoto Tachibana University) who took charge of the trial evaluation for Niigata College of Nursing suggested that interviewing is indispensable particularly regarding the "way of thinking" and "efforts" of colleges/university that cannot be grasped from self-assessment/evaluation reports.
At the Tokyo meeting place, committee member Sanae Takata (Kobe City College of Nursing) who took charge of the trial evaluation for Ehime University pointed out that she had some difficulty matching up with related materials due to the high number and overlaps of evaluation items, and that some items may be influenced by the evaluator 's sense of value

7. Questions & Answers

The reports presented were mainly on the results of the trial, and a question & answer session was conducted. We show main questions/answers and discussions. Questions & Answers

8. Future direction and issues

Lastly, Sachiyo Murashima (University of Tokyo), chairperson of Committee concluded regarding future direction and issues, based on the results of the deliberation at the symposium.