Abstract ▼

The objective of this research is to present a comprehensive consulting strategy for universities to enhance the quality of university education. The specific research questions to achieve this objective are as follows.
First, what factors influence the quality of university education?
Second,

The objective of this research is to present a comprehensive consulting strategy for universities to enhance the quality of university education. The specific research questions to achieve this objective are as follows.
First, what factors influence the quality of university education?
Second, how are universities categorized by education environment, and what are the characteristics of each category?
Third, what are the specific efforts implemented by each university for university system reorganization – including environmental analysis, objective and strategy for reorganization, organizational reform, rules and procedures reform, curriculum reform, and analysis of feedbacks for outcome management?
Fourth, what is the appropriate consulting strategy to support mid- to long-term university system reorganization after university structural reform evaluation? What government support is available for an efficient implementation of recommendations from consulting after university structural reform evaluation?
The theoretical background section examines different types of university system reorganization in accordance with universities’ visions. This establishes the types of university system reorganization available for universities to adopt for their mid- to long-term visions after university structural reform evaluation. The concept of university system reorganization and the visions of universities were reviewed, and different types of university system reorganizations in accordance with the universities' visions were presented. In addition, the concept of university consulting is introduced for better understanding of university consulting procedures, including the recent trends in university consulting. In this research, university system reorganization focuses on how to systematically and methodically reorganize universities, to reflect social demand or implement university structural reforms.
The objective of analyzing the determinants of the quality of university education and university categorization is to derive basic information to establish university consulting strategy to be applied after university structural reform evaluation. First, major factors influencing the quality of university education were analyzed, to search for measures to enhance the quality of university education in the future. Most data used in the analysis is derived from the Higher Education in Korea dataset. The variables were defined based on available data from government-funded project selectees, universities' regular admission results, and anticipated CSAT(College Scholastic Ability Test) cut-off score table for university departments. The analysis includes data from 4-year universities and university colleges that have participated in 2015 university structural reform evaluation. The main statistical method used in this section is multiple regression analysis.
Next, Korean universities were categorized according to university input and education environment. A cluster analysis was conducted to categorize 163 4-year universities and 135 university colleges that have participated in 2015 university structural reform evaluation into groups with similar education environments and financial conditions. The analysis revealed eight categories of 4-year universities: small-scale, specialized private university, special-purpose national university, religious university, small-scale engineering-specialized research-centered university, teaching-oriented private university, research-oriented private university, national and other public universities serving as regional hubs, and research-centered incorporated general university. University colleges were divided into six categories: small-scale, specialized university, universities with leadership in educational capability, universities focused on job training, national and other public university colleges serving as regional centers, unauthorized university in institutional evaluationⅠ, and unauthorized university in institutional evaluationⅡ.
Case studies were conducted in each category to provide basic information relevant to various university system reorganization efforts. This information can be used as a reference by universities pursuing mid- to long-term system reorganization. The types of reorganization are defined by the university system’s mission focus - student capability, industry-academia collaboration & job training, global engagement, and lifelong job training. Specific reorganization category for both 4-year university and university college were defined, and some universities were presented as examples in each category. For each case, an overview of the university, strategy for university system reorganization, and the success factors and difficulties in the process ofuniversity system reorganization were analyzed.
As examples of university systems with mission focus on student capability, University of Seoul and Incheon JEI University are presented. As examples of university systems with mission focus on industry-academia collaboration & job training, Sungkyunkwan University, Korea Polytechnic University, and Ajou Motor College are presented. As examples of university systems with mission focus on global engagement, Gyeongsang National University, Koje Collge, Keimyung College University, and Sahmyook Health University College are presented. As examples of university systems with mission focus on lifelong job training, Kongju National University and Chung Cheong University are presented.
The final section utilizes the results of the analyses from previous sections to propose a comprehensive consulting strategy for universities. First, the objective and procedures of university consulting are introduced. The consulting strategies to enhance the quality of university education in near term after university structural reform evaluation are presented, followed by more detailed consulting strategies for different university system reorganization categories to effectively support universities. These strategies can be adopted by universities seeking mid- to long-term system reorganization to transform its system to better fit the university’s current conditions, and to meet demand for higher education. Lastly, government support available for an effective implementation of recommendations from consulting after university structural reform evaluation are presented.