Moves towards five-year integrated programmes in Japan could boost graduate school enrolment and ease labour shortages, but also risks compromising research quality and study flexibility, according to experts.

The country’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) has proposed universities shift to a “four-plus-one” model instead of the current “four-plus-two” from as early as next year.

Under the plan, students will be able to stay on at their institution to complete a shorter master’s course after finishing a four-year degree in a move designed to counter the country’s persistently low rate of progression to postgraduate study.

In 2024, only 12.6 per cent of undergraduates continued on to master’s or equivalent programmes – a figure well below the levels seen in many Western countries – with progression among humanities and social science graduates below 5 per cent, according to

�鶹

MEXT officials said the change also aims to produce more highly skilled professionals to address labour needs and make Japan’s higher education system more competitive internationally.

Some universities already offer fast-track options, though only on a limited scale. Keio University operates a four-year combined degree, Hitotsubashi University runs a five-year course, and the University of Tokyo plans to add a four-plus-one programme at its new College of Design in 2027.

�鶹

Futao Huang, professor at the Research Institute for Higher Education at Hiroshima University, said a rollout of the model nationwide was “a noteworthy reform aimed at addressing the country’s low graduate school participation and skills gap”.

“While it may enhance efficiency and attract more students to postgraduate study, challenges remain regarding research depth, curriculum quality and institutional readiness,” Huang told Times Higher Education.

“Internationally, this four-plus-one model aligns more closely with North American professional master’s pathways than the traditional European structure. Its success will depend on how universities balance accelerated training with maintaining rigorous research and learning outcomes.”

These concerns were mirrored in recent discussions of the policy at a subcommittee of the Central Council for Education, with members highlighting how requiring students to produce both bachelor’s and master’s theses in a compressed period could lower academic standards.

Reiko Yamada, professor in the Faculty of Social Studies and director of the Center for Higher Education and Student Research at Doshisha University, questioned whether the reform would significantly increase postgraduate numbers.

�鶹

“Unless society, including companies, begins to value the knowledge and skills acquired by humanities and social science graduates in graduate school, I doubt this system will take root and increase graduate school enrolment rates,” Yamada said.

She added that the new system could unintentionally narrow students’ options and reduce movement between institutions.

Many top-performing undergraduates at private institutions often move to national universities for graduate study, which could be lost if the new pathway becomes more popular.

�鶹

“While it might be beneficial to secure students early on, there is a fear that this could come at the cost of reduced fluidity,” she said.

Yamada added that it was unclear how universities will assess whether students are qualified to progress on to the master’s programme, given they won’t need to go through the usual admissions process.

“While entrance exams have traditionally provided a measure of academic ability assessment, it is unclear how this will be handled going forward,” she said.

“In this sense, the assurance of how the academic ability of prospective graduate students will be evaluated remains uncertain.”

�鶹

tash.mosheim@timeshighereducation.com