Evaluation of doctoral nursing programs in Japan by faculty members and their educational and research activities

Azusa Arimoto, Misuzu F. Gregg, Satoko Nagata, Yuko Miki, Sachiyo Murashima

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

13 Citations (Scopus)


Evaluation of doctoral programs in nursing is becoming more important with the rapid increase in the programs in Japan. This study aimed to evaluate doctoral nursing programs by faculty members and to analyze the relationship of the evaluation with educational and research activities of faculty members in Japan. Target settings were all 46 doctoral nursing programs. Eighty-five faculty members from 28 programs answered the questionnaire, which included 17 items for program evaluation, 12 items for faculty evaluation, 9 items for resource evaluation, 3 items for overall evaluations, and educational and research activities. A majority gave low evaluations for sources of funding, the number of faculty members and support staff, and administrative systems. Faculty members who financially supported a greater number of students gave a higher evaluation for extramural funding support, publication, provision of diverse learning experiences, time of supervision, and research infrastructure. The more time a faculty member spent on advising doctoral students, the higher were their evaluations on the supportive learning environment, administrative systems, time of supervision, and timely feedback on students' research. The findings of this study indicate a need for improvement in research infrastructure, funding sources, and human resources to achieve quality nursing doctoral education in Japan.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)e1-e7
JournalNurse Education Today
Issue number5
Publication statusPublished - 2012 Jul


  • Evaluation
  • Faculty
  • Japan
  • Quality of doctoral nursing education

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Nursing
  • Education


Dive into the research topics of 'Evaluation of doctoral nursing programs in Japan by faculty members and their educational and research activities'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this