Dear colleagues,APU as Seen from the Classroom: Thoughts on UNITAS HOT NEWS 12 "The Achievements and Future Issues of APU"
I have received a sketch of APU as it is perceived from the APU classroom. I have heard that first-year students from overseas without exception live in a dormitory erected next to the APU campus and that many of these students hardly ever leave the dormitory because the high cost of a bus ticket into Beppu. I have also heard that many of these students say that, if they had known that the campus was so isolated and far from the city, they would never have elected to come to APU. (The Editor.)
Reprinting A Message from APU."At APU, not a few students are dissatisfied because the university does not respect the opinions of its students.
For instance, let me introduce an incident that happened in the 2005 academic year. Male students from Korea suspended their studies at APU because they were required to enlist in the army (in Korea, males have an obligation to serve in the military). On returning to APU, their options in terms of the classes they could enroll in were extremely limited, and so they decided to ask that something be done about this problem. A certain number of students, all in the same circumstances, petitioned the university. At the time, it appears, they were threatened, and told that "bastards who form cliques will be expelled". The university refused to talk to them. Of course, the students knew that if a single student went to talk about a concern, no one would pay him any attention. This is why students facing the same problem presented a joint petition. And, on these grounds alone, the university responded with threats of expulsion. This response surely must be viewed as abnormal.
Here is another example.
Many foreign students at APU are excellent singers and/or dancers. APU loves this type of festive "international exchange", and actively promotes such activities under the management and control of APU. However, when some students informed the university that they wished to create an APU branch of the United Nations HABITAT, APU refused them permission. The students, it seems, were told "if you have the ability to engage in these activities by yourselves, then please do so by yourselves [without any support from APU]". Many major universities, including Ritsumeikan itself, have HABITAT branches. Why does APU respond in this way? Is it because APU is unwilling to allow any student activity that it does not control?
I understand that APU spends a lot in helping to finance the trips of large groups of high school students from far away to visit the APU campus. This is also the case with the many cases in which groups of high school teachers visit APU from abroad. APU is willing to spend whatever it takes on pro-APU propaganda, but shouldn't some thought be given to the satisfaction of the students we already have? I believe that the opinions of students currently at APU and of students who have graduated from APU have a large influence on new students. If the students already here at APU enjoy a stimulating and meaningful university life, they would be able to, from their hearts, encourage younger students to also come to APU. On the other hand, if they have nothing but dissatisfaction and animosity, they will advise others to avoid APU like the plague. Some foreign students I have talked to say that they have older siblings at APU already, which made it easy for them to decide to come too. Many others frequently say that they advise others in their home countries not to come to APU. APU is making APU look much better than it really is, encouraging students to come here, and then disappointing them. From the viewpoint of creating a university brand, isn't this counterproductive?
When students arrive at APU, they enter under one of two categories: either as English-speaking or as Japanese-speaking students. In other words, on entrance, students are supposed to be able to communicate in at least one of APU's two languages. In actuality, this is not always the case. Not a few students who have entered as English-speaking students come into Japanese-language classes and do not understand even the most basic English words (words such as "big" and "post office"). If teachers take their concerns about such students to the Academic Office or to the Admissions Office, they are told "the students have already been let in ...", and so are forced to endure unreasonable hardships in the classroom. This happens every semester. We have asked over and over again for APU to refuse to accept such students, but nothing changes. Of course, in extreme cases [where students do not understand words like "big"], it is impossible to believe that the lack of language skills is not picked up at the interview which is part of the entrance examination. Students are let in despite the fact that APU knows that they do not have the necessary language skills [that they have no English and no Japanese]. Needless to say, these students themselves struggle a lot at APU, and in many cases, eventually drop out of school. It is not a situation in which all one needs to do is let them in.
I understand that those who are managing the legally incorporated educational institution that is Ritsumeikan applaud the high presentation skills [of APU students] and the bilingual education system. However, there can be no doubts but that APU is moving towards destroying this system. In the case of Japanese-language education, which supports the education of foreign students who make up 40 percent of the entire student body, the aim has been to make it possible for foreign students who enter APU with no Japanese whatsoever to be able to attend specialized lectures in Japanese, to give presentations, and to write reports, all within two years. This point has been one of the attractions that helps foreign students decide to come to APU. However, APU is now proposing that we set this aim aside, and instead allow only the very good students the option of learning Japanese to this level. Many faculty members who are working in APU's classrooms are opposed to this proposal. It is precisely because APU's foreign students have learned Japanese as well as they have that they are doing so well in terms of finding employment, but the university does not seem to be fully aware of this. Instead, in its language education, APU is increasingly emphasizing the results in licensing examinations which consist solely of multiple choice questions. APU is encouraging students to take these language examinations. Moreover, if students pass these examinations, APU will give them credits for passing whichever language level the examination corresponds to, while charging them tuition fees for the class. In other words, APU is "selling" credits for language classes students don't attend. From the point of management, APU can avoid providing the service [education], and so all monies received are clear profits. But is this something an institute of education should be doing? In the case of English, APU has already started to subcontract its teaching out to English conversation schools. We are concerned that it will do the same with Japanese. According to an interview given by the President of Ritsumeikan (see in Japanese http://www.kyoto-np.co.jp/kp/rensai/shidai/ 060404.html), Ritsumeikan plans to establish, within a few years, a company that will dispatch language teachers when needed, and so "rid ourselves of the damaging reliance on part-time teachers". Together with the problem that is very much in the public eye in which language lecturers have been fired at APU, this seems to indicate that Ritsumeikan is aiming to create a situation in which it will not need professionals in education and research [academics].
Language education is APU's lifeline. This is a point which clearly differentiates APU from Ritsumeikan University and other universities. Ritsumeikan itself acknowledges that APU's Asia Pacific Studies has taken but a first step. If one only listens to APU's students, it is abundantly apparent how important APU's language education is. Many faculty and students fear that it would be institutional suicide for APU to choose to neglect language education and destroy the bilingual nature of the university."