University Rankings: Seeking Prestige, Raising Visibility and Embedding Quality – the Editors' Views

Jan Sadlak,Jamie Merisotis,Nian Cai Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03797720802253645

2008-01-01

Higher Education in Europe

Abstract:Almost a decade ago, Jamie Merisotis and Jan Sadlak, two of the authors of this introductory article, initiated a serious dialogue about a relatively new international phenomenon in higher educatio...

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The Value Pursuit of World-Class Universities

Gu Jianmin,Liu Aisheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14121/j.cnki.1008-3855.2011.17.014

2011-01-01

Abstract:From the value pursuit of world-class universities,we can find that they devote to national mission and serving the society,while sticking to university autonomy and academic freedom;they contribute to imparting knowledge and cultivating people,while combining with academic inquiry appropriately;they attempt to be exceptional and distinguished,while appreciating and cooperating with each other.The value pursuit of world-class universities has the character of universality and the function of guide,which is meaningful for the building of Chinese world-class universities.
Competition between College Rivalries in the Era of University Ranking

Liu Haifeng

2009-01-01

Abstract:Our entry into "an Era of University Ranking" is a double-edged sword.As competition in all walks of life tends to become increasingly fierce today,it is impossible for us to go back to those good old days without university ranking game at all."College Rivalry" refers to those pairs of colleges and universities,who are close to each other in their academic achievements and overall strength.Competition between those college rivalries could be easily found among higher education institutions,esp.research universities.In the Era of University Ranking,such competition between research university rivalries is to be further intensified,as university rankings actually magnify the seemingly small gap between those pairs.We should not have blind faith in university rankings,nor should we simply dismiss it as nonsense.A blind faith in those rankings is even worse than sheer ignorance of them.Anyhow,competition between college rivalries is a commonplace,or rather inevitable phenomenon in today's university ecosystem.
International University Evaluation:Value and Choice

Xu Xiaozhou,Mei Weihui

2006-01-01

Educational Research

Abstract:With the pushing forward of higher education globalization,international university evaluation is showing its role of practical orientation increasingly.“Academic Ranking of World University”,“World University Ranking” and “International University Innovative Competence Ranking” are very influential in China.Each evaluation objective,norm and parameter designing has their characteristics.Some of the evaluation results are the same and others are different.With the development of higher education globalization,international university evaluation is important reference value and realistic significance because it can offer information about school running for different groups.The future international university evaluation should gradually sum up the experience and continuously perfect evaluation theory so as to promote university construction.
University Rankings:Either Raising Level or Optimizing System: The Review on Ellen Hazelkorn's Rankings Views

Wu Wei,Zou Xiaodong,Yi Gaofeng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14121/j.cnki.1008-3855.2011.z1.010

2011-01-01

Abstract:University rankings are a convenient argument,because the higher education institutions are not equivalent to univer-sities.These rankings feature at different angles,based on various indicators,and the results are also different,but they are common that the research is used as a core indicator.Under the driving of rankings,many higher education systems around the world get the impulse to build a few world-class universities,and even more serious is leading to the "academic arms race".And it result in many adverse consequences,such as convergence of universities,waste of educational resources,dislocation of knowledge and social needs.Ellen Hazelkorn keenly points out the defects of current rankings based on the perspective of university's entrepreneurship transition and strategic development of higher education,and sets the idea of focusing on creating a world-class(university) system rather than building a number of world-class universities.There is an important value to establish the scientific concept of development and cor-rect the blind impulse of educating for all kinds of higher education institutions.
A Longitudinal Analysis of University Rankings

Friso Selten,Cameron Neylon,Chun-Kai Huang,Paul Groth

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00052

2020-01-20

Abstract:Pressured by globalization and the increasing demand for public organisations to be accountable, efficient and transparent, university rankings have become an important tool for assessing the quality of higher education institutions. It is therefore important to carefully assess exactly what these rankings measure. In this paper, the three major global university rankings, The Academic Ranking of World Universities, The Times Higher Education and the Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings, are studied. After a description of the ranking methodologies, it is shown that university rankings are stable over time but that there is variation between the three rankings. Furthermore, using Principal Component Analysis and Exploratory Factor Analysis, we show that the variables used to construct the rankings primarily measure two underlying factors: a universities reputation and its research performance. By correlating these factors and plotting regional aggregates of universities on the two factors, differences between the rankings are made visible. Last, we elaborate how the results from these analysis can be viewed in light of often voiced critiques of the ranking process. This indicates that the variables used by the rankings might not capture the concepts they claim to measure. Doing so the study provides evidence of the ambiguous nature of university ranking's quantification of university performance.

Social and Information Networks,Digital Libraries,Physics and Society
Global Universities Rankings:Higher Education as a Market

LIU Cheng,JIANG Kai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-0717.2012.06.020

2012-01-01

Abstract:Under the background of global economy,higher education is becoming a market,which is oriented to market demand.University-Ranking is convenient for consumers to get more transparent and effective information as well as compare them.With the fierce competition of knowledge economy and globalization development,university-ranking developed into global ranking.This paper introduces three global university rankings which are widely spread at present——Academic Ranking of World Universities,QS World University Rankings,THE World University Rankings.By analyzing the differences between university-ranking and university-assessment,it expounds the former as a "trademark" or "brand" of the market.Moreover,global university ranking is beneficial for the higher education quality assurance,but inappropriate index design and the blind chase of "world class universities" may result in misleading or impeding for strategic development of each country's higher education quality.
University Rankings in Sport Science: A True Reflection of Excellence?

Ivana Matic Girard,Olivier Girard

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2024-0109

IF: 4.211

2024-09-15

International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance

Abstract:Background: University rankings often serve as benchmarks for excellence in academic evaluation. For example, ShanghaiRanking data from 2016 to 2023 for the Global Ranking of Sport Science Schools and Departments reveal consistent dominance by Australia (23.1%), Canada (18.0%), and the United States (12.0%), collectively counting over half of the top 50 universities worldwide. Nevertheless, there is uncertainty about how the methodology behind these rankings shapes a reality as much as it reflects one. Purpose: Our intention is to discuss the complexity of university rankings, using ShanghaiRanking as an example, to highlight how these rankings reflect academic excellence within the field of sport science. Current Evidence: When ranking universities in sport science, several aspects of academic excellence could be considered in addition to research metrics currently considered in ShanghaiRanking (publication, citation, citations per publication, top 25% journal publications, and internationally collaborated publications). These aspects may include (1) teaching quality, (2) practical training, (3) industry links and employability, (4) support services, (5) facilities and equipment, (6) international network, (7) community engagement, (8) sustainability and ethical practices, and (9) interdisciplinary approach. Altogether, they could provide a more comprehensive view of the quality and effectiveness of a sport-science program. Conclusions: The ranking of sport-science institutions poses a complex challenge due to diverse factors influencing academic excellence. Engaging in a broader dialogue and refining internationally relevant evaluation methodologies are crucial. These steps enable comparability between countries and provide a holistic understanding of the multidimensional nature of academic excellence in sport science.

physiology,sport sciences
Universities on the Catwalk

Hamish Coates

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/hemp-v19-art11-en

2007-01-01

Higher Education Management and Policy

Abstract:National and international rankings of institutional performance are playing a growing role in contemporary higher education. It is critical that researchers develop pragmatic, educationally sensitive and methodologically informed approaches for managing this aspect of higher education. This paper compares three approaches for modelling key indicators which underpin a national evaluation of university education in Australia: rankings of aggregate institutional performance; comparisons of institutional change over time; and performance variations within fields of education. The results show that simple institution-level aggregations are misleading, and that contemporary analytical methods must be used to account for the influence of fields of education. More broadly, the findings expose the need for a more robust methodological development of university rankings.
Inter-ranking reputational effects: an analysis of the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE) reputational relationship

Vicente Safón

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03214-9

IF: 3.801

2019-08-30

Scientometrics

Abstract:Global university rankings have become a critical factor in the higher education sector, engendering increasing interest and exerting a notable influence over a wide variety of stakeholders. They are presented to different audiences as tools that evaluate and rank universities according to quality. However, some authors are of the opinion that rankings express reputational factors to a large extent. This article presents a model of the intra- and inter-ranking relationships from the perspective of reputation along with an empirical study on two of the most influential rankings: the Academic Ranking of World Universities and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings. Data from these two rankings between 2010 and 2018, and the application of ordinal regressions, provide evidence that both rankings are mutually influential, generating intra and reciprocal reputational effects over time.

information science & library science,computer science, interdisciplinary applications
Prestige of scholarly book publishers: an investigation into criteria, processes, and practices across countries

Eleonora Dagiene

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2008.06008

2021-09-04

Abstract:Numerous national research assessment policies set the goal of promoting "excellence" and incentivise scholars to publish their research in the most prestigious journals or with the most prestigious book publishers. We investigate the practicalities of the assessment of book outputs based on the prestige of book publishers (Denmark, Finland, Flanders, Lithuania, Norway). Additionally, we test whether such judgments are transparent and yield consistent results. We show inconsistencies in the levelling of publishers, such as the same publisher being ranked as prestigious and not-so-prestigious in different states or in consequent years within the same country. Likewise, we find that verification of compliance with the mandatory prerequisites is not always possible because of the lack of transparency. Our findings support doubts about whether the assessment of books based on a judgement about their publisher yields acceptable outcomes. Currently used rankings of publishers focus on evaluating the gatekeeping role of publishers but do not assess other essential stages in scholarly book publishing. Our suggestion for future research is to develop approaches to evaluate books by accounting for the value added to every book at every publishing stage, which is vital for the quality of book outputs from research assessment and scholarly communication perspectives.

Digital Libraries
Discursive Marketisation Through Positive Evaluation: A Diachronic Analysis of About Us Texts of Top-Tier Chinese Universities Over the Past Two Decades

Lihua Xu,Chaoqun Xie,Jun Lei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.789558

2021-12-02

Abstract:This study explored the marketisation process of top-tier Chinese universities by scrutinising their self-promotional strategies over the past two decades. Drawing on Martin and White's (2005) Appraisal framework, we identified all attitudinal markers in the About Us texts posted by 35 top-tier Chinese universities on their official websites at two time-points: the turn of the century and the year of 2021. The 35 universities were drawn from China's "Double First Class" Initiative that prioritises the development of a select group of elite universities in China. Close textual analyses focussing on the attitudinal markers with reference to their contexts were conducted to identify the themes evaluated in the About Us texts; Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were run to quantitatively compare the relative frequencies of the attitudinal markers between the two phases, which was then supplemented by diachronic qualitative comparisons on the fine-grained linguistic features surrounding the markers. The study identified seven major themes positively appraised by the universities at both time-points. It also revealed diachronic differences in the use of attitudinal markers, reflecting a mediated change of promotional strategies over the past 20 years or so in the Chinese higher education context. These findings point to the influence of market, government, and tradition on Chinese top-tier universities' promoting strategies and the role of social cognition in shaping student choice. They also suggest the emergence of a higher education system with Chinese characteristics that features a reconciliation of market and government forces.
Mind the gap in university rankings: a complex network approach towards fairness

Loredana Bellantuono,Alfonso Monaco,Nicola Amoroso,Vincenzo Aquaro,Marco Bardoscia,Annamaria Demarinis Loiotile,Angela Lombardi,Sabina Tangaro,Roberto Bellotti

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2112.01341

2022-03-08

Abstract:University rankings are increasingly adopted for academic comparison and success quantification, even to establish performance-based criteria for funding assignment. However, rankings are not neutral tools, and their use frequently overlooks disparities in the starting conditions of institutions. In this research, we detect and measure structural biases that affect in inhomogeneous ways the ranking outcomes of universities from diversified territorial and educational contexts. Moreover, we develop a fairer rating system based on a fully data-driven debiasing strategy that returns an equity-oriented redefinition of the achieved scores. The key idea consists in partitioning universities in similarity groups, determined from multifaceted data using complex network analysis, and referring the performance of each institution to an expectation based on its peers. Significant evidence of territorial biases emerges for official rankings concerning both the OECD and Italian university systems, hence debiasing provides relevant insights suggesting the design of fairer strategies for performance-based funding allocations.

Physics and Society
World-Class Universities: An Exploration of the Transnational Convergence Process

Olivier Bégin-Caouette

2013-01-22

Abstract:Since the creation of the first ranking of world universities in 2003, universities are engaged in a global competition based on reputation and scientific production (Liu & Cheng, 2005). These rankings have become private governance mechanisms of the globalization of universities as well as tools for quality assurance, accountability and knowledge diplomacy (Olds, 2009). Benefiting from an increasing popularity among governments, institutions, professors and students, world university rankings have caused a transnational convergence process (Hassenteufel, 2008; Vught, 2008) by using specific indicators and henceforth promoting corresponding practices. Deem, Mok and Lucas (2008) even argue that these indicators have fostered the construction of a new ideal type: the Emerging Global Model of Universities. Using Sassen’s (2005) concept of spatial scales and Steiner-Khamsi’s (2010) theory of policy borrowing and lending, this presentation will analyze the impact of these global mechanisms on sub-national units, i.e. the universities. The analysis reveals five levels of convergence: archetypical, programmatic, organizational, cybernetic (governance), and linguistic. Indeed, univesities must deal with a new ideal type (the Emerging Global Model); the Licence-Master-Doctorate reform in Europe; the pressure to become "real universities"; a greater autonomy granted by the State; and a pressure to work, publish and teach in English. It is worth noting that this presentation will pay special attention to non-Anglophone and emerging countries as well as to non-university higher education instutions.

Political Science,Education
An international perspective on the German Excellence Initiative

FENG Li-yin,ZHONG Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-4519.2009.03.002

2009-01-01

Abstract:In every country in the world, politicians, scholars, university administrators and others are concerned with the quality of their nation’s universities. In this article, I look at the way in which one major world power, Germany, has reacted to the realisation that its universities are not regarded as excellent around the world, and that this judgement is supported by data on citations and other measures. The German government has reacted to this awareness by putting significant sums of money into a small number of universities to sharpen and deepen their excellence in research and scholarship. This approach imitates that taken in the United States and the United Kingdom. In these countries, which dominate university rankings, most research money goes into a small number of elite universities, which also attract the best-qualified students. But we need to realise that there is a difference between having a few top universities, and having a good university system. In the modern world, all nations need a growing supply of skilled, innovative professionals, to build their economies and to run public services. It would be wrong to prioritise competing with Harvard above having a large, effective higher education sector. Excellence, even on the world stage, is only one aspect of effective education.
Commensuration of the globalised higher education sector: how university rankings act as a credential for world-class status in China

Ryan M. Allen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2019.1686607

2019-11-19

Abstract:The concept of the world-class university has proliferated throughout the world, yet there is no universal consensus on how to define these elite institutions. Without a unified definition, rankings have become a direct proxy for sense-making in the sector and a commensurate indicator that decision-makers have used to understand the world-class concept. Through interviews with 48 informants from the Chinese higher education sector, I explore how institutions in China conceptualise world-class status through university rankings. First, I show that the sector in China has intently focused on league table positioning, with the top-100 as a popular cut-off point for guaranteed world-class status. Next, I explore which global rankings have been the most influential – QS, <i>THE</i>, ARWU, and <i>US News</i>. Finally, I discuss how actors living in this competitive higher education environment have altered research agendas and institutional partnerships to align with global ranking metrics.
From Rejection to Acceptance: the Institutionalization of Adopting University Ranking Outcomes As Policy and Strategic Tools in China Since the 1980S

Wenqin Shen,Qiang Zha,Chao Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2023.2209655

2023-01-01

Policy Reviews in Higher Education

Abstract:China is an important player in global university ranking exercise. Nevertheless, existing studies have not adequately explored how the legitimacy of adopting university ranking outcomes has been chronologically established on Chinese soil. This paper attempts to fill this knowledge gap drawing on interviews with 37 stakeholders between 2003-2021 and an analysis of 2086 articles and reports published between 1984-2022 concerning university rankings. It first analyses the process of institutionalization of adopting university ranking outcomes in China, and discusses how the policy initiatives such as the '985 Project' in 1998 and the 'Double First-Class' Project in 2016 intertwined with university rankings over the time and provide opportunities for establishing such legitimacy. Secondly, it analyses the mechanisms through which university ranking outcomes gain legitimacy, and suggests that interactions among the stakeholders are one of the key mechanisms, whereby the central government plays a pivotal role in legitimizing adoption of international university ranking results. Furthermore, we argue that the universities have responded actively to adopting the ranking outcomes and use them as strategic tools to achieve their own goals. As such, this paper sheds a new light on the impact of university rankings in China and beyond.
Global data on the freedom indispensable for scientific research: towards a reconciliation of academic reputation and academic freedom

Katrin Kinzelbach,Ilyas Saliba,Janika Spannagel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2021.1998000

2021-12-07

The International Journal of Human Rights

Abstract:Universities striving for reputational gains in the competitive global higher education market rely on international rankings that claim to meaningfully identify ‘world class’ institutions. These rankings turn a blind eye to varying levels of academic freedom. We explore the origin of the first global university ranking in Shanghai, China, and argue that the current system of academic reputation management has been tailored to advance the interests of an authoritarian regime. From a human rights perspective, we argue that the notion of academic reputation should be reconciled with academic freedom. We also show how data from the new Academic Freedom Index (AFi) could inform international rankings and discuss other avenues for introducing a rights-perspective into academic reputation politics. The article includes ideas for how scholars, students, university administrations, funding organisations, and higher education policymakers can use the AFi to promote state compliance with the ‘freedom indispensable for scientific research’, which is a binding obligation under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
‘Heavy Mountains’ for Chinese Humanities and Social Science Academics in the Quest for World-Class Universities

Xuesong (Andy) Gao,Yongyan Zheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2018.1538770

2018-01-01

Compare

Abstract:This paper explores the impacts of research excellence evaluation entailed in global ranking exercises, a control strategy characteristic of new managerialism, on Chinese Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) academics. The enquiry combines the Critical Incidents Technique (CIT) and internet-based discourse analysis, drawing on mass media texts and social media discussions. Our analysis identified three major dilemmas that may be created for Chinese HSS academics by their country’s aspirations for world-class universities embedded in its complicated socio-political context. First, a highly centralised system restrains academics’ autonomy to decide what to research and where to publish. Second, they are conflicted by the need to simultaneously attend to nationalistic interests and publish internationally. Third, ideological correctness is highly important. These findings invite us to reflect on the profound impact of university ranking exercises as a mode of university governance on HSS academics in many contexts.
University rankings and sustainable development: the state of the art

Walter Leal Filho,Laís Viera Trevisan,Zujaja Wahaj,Denner Déda Araújo Nunes,Claudio Ruy Portela de Vasconcelos,Thais Aparecida Dibbern,Valeria Ruiz Vargas,Usha Iyer-Raniga,Rosley Anholon,Aliaksandr Novikau,Ismaila Rimi Abubakar,Maria Alzira Pimenta Dinis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ijshe-11-2023-0530

IF: 4.12

2024-11-18

International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education

Abstract:Purpose In light of the growing emphasis on sustainability in higher education, this paper aims to explore the effectiveness of sustainability university rankings, specifically focusing on sustainable development (SD), to understand their impact on advancing universities' sustainability goals and address gaps in practical implications and limitations. Design/methodology/approach This study examines sustainability rankings in higher education (HE) through document analysis. Chosen for significance, these rankings were evaluated for regional participation, criteria and the top 20 universities. The method involved scrutinising official ranking websites for diverse perspectives on sustainability. The results are classified into three categories: regional participation, assessment criteria and top universities in the latest iterations. Findings The findings show that sustainability rankings are widely spread, and their existence has led to an increased motivation for universities to further engage in efforts in the field of SD. This study offers suggestions for optimising the role of promoting SD principles and practices in HE. Originality/value This comprehensive assessment sheds light on rankings' operations and success levels. It makes a significant contribution to the literature, providing an unprecedented overview of analysed rankings and on sustainability assessment and their impact. This analysis will be valuable for universities towards the integration of SD principles and practices into the HE environment.

green & sustainable science & technology,education & educational research
Peru and its new challenge in higher education: Towards a research university

Carlos Lavalle,Victor Luis de Nicolas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182631

IF: 3.7

2017-08-07

PLoS ONE

Abstract:The paradigm of research universities linked to the emergence of university rankings has unified and universalized the criteria relating to the quality of higher education. This situation has led to multiple responses across global society, which has started rating the quality of higher education systems through these rankings, supported by a series of indicators aligned to the characteristics of research universities. Given that the quality of a country's higher education is one of the fundamental pillars of its development, many countries have started to take government action in this respect. In the case of Peru this has not taken long, with the approval of Law 30220 in 2014. This aims to regulate the quality of higher education through a series of specific conditions governed by a newly created body known as SUNEDU. This article uses a Delphi panel to analyze the existing relationship between the conditions imposed by SUNEDU and the research universities' intrinsic characteristics. During the Delphi panel a consensus was reached through an acceptable and stable level of responses, resulting in confirmation that there is alignment between the conditions imposed by SUNEDU and the intrinsic characteristics of research universities.

multidisciplinary sciences

University Rankings: Seeking Prestige, Raising Visibility and Embedding Quality – the Editors' Views

The Value Pursuit of World-Class Universities

Competition between College Rivalries in the Era of University Ranking

International University Evaluation:Value and Choice

University Rankings:Either Raising Level or Optimizing System: The Review on Ellen Hazelkorn's Rankings Views

A Longitudinal Analysis of University Rankings

Global Universities Rankings:Higher Education as a Market

University Rankings in Sport Science: A True Reflection of Excellence?

Universities on the Catwalk

Inter-ranking reputational effects: an analysis of the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE) reputational relationship

Prestige of scholarly book publishers: an investigation into criteria, processes, and practices across countries

Discursive Marketisation Through Positive Evaluation: A Diachronic Analysis of About Us Texts of Top-Tier Chinese Universities Over the Past Two Decades

Mind the gap in university rankings: a complex network approach towards fairness

World-Class Universities: An Exploration of the Transnational Convergence Process

An international perspective on the German Excellence Initiative

Commensuration of the globalised higher education sector: how university rankings act as a credential for world-class status in China

From Rejection to Acceptance: the Institutionalization of Adopting University Ranking Outcomes As Policy and Strategic Tools in China Since the 1980S

Global data on the freedom indispensable for scientific research: towards a reconciliation of academic reputation and academic freedom

‘Heavy Mountains’ for Chinese Humanities and Social Science Academics in the Quest for World-Class Universities

University rankings and sustainable development: the state of the art

Peru and its new challenge in higher education: Towards a research university