NC86 wrote:
> > I don't know how you got that impression, their entire curriculum is
> > JLPT and EJU oriented. That may be the reason why they have a very high
> > ratio of JLPT1 & 2 examinees (pass rate about 50%) as a percentage of
> > total student body. Another hint that this is basically a university
> > prep cram school is the high concentration of mainland Chinese and
> > "non-Malaysian/Indonesian/Thai/Phillipines ASEAN" students (which in
> > nisshinkyo-speak means Vietnam).
> >
> > The number of proficiency levels should be enough if your main priority
> > is to improve your grammar and reading skills. It isn't a short course
> > but a 2 year program you would be sitting in on.
>
> The website shows many pictures of white people... maybe the short
> course students aren't included in the stats?

On April 1st this year, the data they submitted to the APJLE lists 90
students with shugaku visas, and 65 with other visas. It would be
logical to assume that some long term students would be included in the
"other visa" category (for example people studying using spouse, child
of a Japanese national, or working holiday visas), but the majority of
"other" are likely to have tankitaizai status, so they would be short
term/course students. It is also possible that part-time and private
students are included.

The following URL is interesting

http://tinyurl.com/a5xeh
(http://www.geos-japanese-insti.co.jp/english/nationality/kudanmonthlynationalityreport2005july.htm)

though it would be the height of the short term summer courses. And
also a little worrying. I can understand why it is possible to list 57
Americans on the website, and report 0 Americans to the APJLE, because
it is possible for all of the Americans to be short term students on
tourist visas. What I can't understand is how they can list China (PRC)
student numbers as 9, when the APJLE and Immigration Bureau figures
state clearly the exact number of student visa holders by nationality
for each and every school. Looking through the previous months, there
are also some discrepancies understating the numbers of some
nationalities when compared to the corresponding 3rd party audits.