University Ranking As an Education Quality Assessment Tool
Description
The purpose of the article is a comprehensive analysis of the ranking methodology of leading international and European University rankings. The research methodology is based on abstraction use, analysis, and synthesis methods, which have provided theoretical comprehension for the phenomenon of world universities ranking. The scientific novelty of the findings involves proposal development for upgrading International University Rankings.
Based on the analysis of rates, indicators, and weight assignment of the most influential International University Rankings in the world (ARWU, THE, QS World University Rankings, Webometrics, PRSP, CWTS Leiden Ranking, SCImago institutions Rankings, U-Multirank), the article stated that the composition of their rates varies within a relatively small number of key features, the choice of which is related to the degree of availability of data for analysis and the subjective position of developers regarding the primary characteristics of the university. It is concluded that the ranking indicators do not consider the organization features of training, scientific and innovative processes at university.
In ranking methodologies, there are no indicators that would characterise the learning process, the teaching quality, the students’ achievements, the degree of their learning skills and being advanced in knowledge, in respect to international rankings, and the readiness of graduates for a career in a specific social context of a particular country, referring national rankings. It is noted that the marketing mechanism for assessing universities should be supplemented with a humanistic one, which provides an appreciation for the learning process as an interaction between the student, teacher, and the environment. When developing rankings, it is necessary to clearly define the indicators for universities of different training profiles and justify the indicators, their weight assignment, and score counting procedure.
Files
University_Ranking_As_an_Education_Quality_Assessment_Tool.pdf
Files
(502.9 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:db0f0b1fef15147bfe434c2f8ffb14d7
|
502.9 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
References
- Aguillo, I. F. (2021). Methodology. Ranking Web of Universities. https://www.webometrics.info/en/Methodology [in English].
- Altbach, P. G., & Hazelkorn, E. (2017). Pursuing Rankings in the Age of Massification: For Most-Forget About It. International Higher Education, 89, 8–10. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2017.89.9834 [in English].
- Altbach, P. G., & Peterson, P. M. (2007). Higher Education in the New Century: Global Challenges and Innovative Ideas. UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789087903169_001 [in English].
- Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. (2010). Trends in Global Higher Education: Tracking an Academic Revolution. UNESCO [in English].
- Carey, K. (2006, September 22). College Rankings Reformed: The Case for a New Order in Higher Education. Eric. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED502114 [in English].
- Cohen, D. (2001, August 1). Asiaweek Cancels Controversial University Survey. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2001/aug/01/highereducation.uk [in English].
- Federkeil, G. (2008). Ranking and Quality Assurance in Higher Education. Higher Education in Europe, 33(2–3), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/03797720802254023 [in English].
- Hazelcorn, E. (2011). Ranking and the Reshaping of Higher Education: The Battle for World-Class Excellence. Palgrave Macmillan [in English].
- Indicators. (n.d.). NTU Ranking. http://nturanking.csti.tw/methodoloyg/indicators [in English].
- IREG Inventory on International Rankings. (n.d.a). IREG Observatory on Academic Ranking and Excellence. https://ireg-observatory.org/en/initiatives/ireginventory-of-international-rankings/ [in English].
- IREG Inventory on National Rankings. (n.d.b). IREG Observatory on Academic Ranking and Excellence. https://ireg-observatory.org/en/initiatives/ireginventory-of-national-rankings/ [in English].
- Kabinet Ministriv Ukrainy. (2018, March 14). Pro zatverdzhennia pereliku svitovykh reitynhiv universytetiv dlia vyznachennia osoblyvoi katehorii inozemtsiv ta osib bez hromadianstva, yaki pretenduiut na pratsevlashtuvannia v Ukraini: Rozporiadzhennia [On Approval of the List of World Rankings of Universities to Determine a Special Category of Foreigners and Stateless Persons Applying for Employment in Ukraine: Order] (№ 154-r). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/154–2018-%D1%80#Text [in Ukrainian].
- Kong, L. (1999). Asian Higher Education and the Politics of Identity. Environment and Planning A, 31, 1525–1528. https://doi.org/10.1068/a311525 [in English].
- Marginson, S. & Wende, M. van der (2007). To Rank or To Be Ranked: The Impact of Global Rankings in Higher Education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3–4). https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315307303544 [in English].
- Marginson, S. (2014). University Rankings and Social Science. European Journal of Education, 49(1), 45–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12061 [in English].
- McCormic, A. (2008). The Complex Interplay Between Classification and Ranking of Colleges and Universities: Should the Berlin Principles Apply Equally to Classification? Higher Education in Europe, 33(2–3), 209–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03797720802253744 [in English].
- Merisotis, J., & Sadlak, J. (2006, May 30). International Partnership Issues Groundbreaking Principles on Ranking of Higher Education Institutions. http://200.6.99.248/~bru487cl/files/Berlin_Principles_Release.pdf [in English].
- Parkhomenko, N. O. (2020). Vplyv mizhnarodnykh reitynhiv na konkurentospromozhnist zakladiv vyshchoi osvity [Impact of International Rankings on the Competitiveness of Higher Education Institutions]. Efektyvna ekonomika, 3. https://doi.org/10.32702/2307–2105–2020.3.76 [in Ukrainian].
- QS Audience. (n.d.). QS. https://www.qs.com/press-room/ [in English].
- Ranking Methodology. (n.d.). Scimago Institutions Rankings. https://www.scimagoir.com/methodology.php [in English].
- Rankings Methodology. (n.d.). QS. https://www.qs.com/rankings/ [in English].
- Roehampton Ranked in Top 10 Universities in London. (2018, September 21). University of Roehampton. https://www.roehampton.ac.uk/news/2018/september/roehampton-ranked-in-top-10-universities-in-london/ [in English].
- Sacks, P. (2011). America's Best College Scam. HuffPost. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/americas-best-college-sca_b_45064 [in English].
- Salmi, J. (2009). The Challenge of Establishing World-Class Universities. The World Bank [in English].
- Shanghai Ranking's. (n.d.). Home. https://www.shanghairanking.com [in English].
- Shanghai Ranking's Academic Ranking of World Universities Methodology 2020. (n.d.). ShanghaiRanking. https://www.shanghairanking.com/methodology/arwu/2020 [in English].
- Tatarinov, I. Ye., & Herasymov, O. V. (2013). Svitova praktyka formuvannia reitynhiv universytetiv: vyznachennia naibilsh obiektyvnykh kryteriiv ta indykatoriv otsiniuvannia [International Experience in Universities Ratings Formation: Most Objective Criteria and Assessing Indicators Determination]. Ukrainian Society, 1(44), 100–116 [in Ukrainian].
- U.S. News & World Report. (2021, 15 November). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._News_%26_World_Report [in English].
- Web of Science. (2021, 18 November). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_of_Science [in English].
- World Universities Insights Limited. (2021, August 26). World University Rankings 2022: Methodology. World University Rankings. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/world-university-rankings-2022-methodology [in English].
- World University Rankings By 2021. (n.d.). NTU Ranking. http://nturanking.csti.tw/ranking/OverallRanking/ [in English].