scholarly journals The publication performance of Hungarian universities in light of international university rankings: Challenges and possible solutions

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 355-372
Author(s):  
György Csomós
Keyword(s):  
University Rankings ◽  
International University

Is it possible to rank universities using fewer indicators? A study on five international university rankings

2019 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Güleda Doğan ◽  
Umut Al
Keyword(s):  
Similarity Measure ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Cosine Similarity ◽  
University Rankings ◽  
University Ranking ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Cosine Similarity Measure ◽  
International University

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the similarity of intra-indicators used in research-focused international university rankings (Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), NTU, University Ranking by Academic Performance (URAP), Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) and Round University Ranking (RUR)) over years, and show the effect of similar indicators on overall rankings for 2015. The research questions addressed in this study in accordance with these purposes are as follows: At what level are the intra-indicators used in international university rankings similar? Is it possible to group intra-indicators according to their similarities? What is the effect of similar intra-indicators on overall rankings? Design/methodology/approach Indicator-based scores of all universities in five research-focused international university rankings for all years they ranked form the data set of this study for the first and second research questions. The authors used a multidimensional scaling (MDS) and cosine similarity measure to analyze similarity of indicators and to answer these two research questions. Indicator-based scores and overall ranking scores for 2015 are used as data and Spearman correlation test is applied to answer the third research question. Findings Results of the analyses show that the intra-indicators used in ARWU, NTU and URAP are highly similar and that they can be grouped according to their similarities. The authors also examined the effect of similar indicators on 2015 overall ranking lists for these three rankings. NTU and URAP are affected least from the omitted similar indicators, which means it is possible for these two rankings to create very similar overall ranking lists to the existing overall ranking using fewer indicators. Research limitations/implications CWTS, Mapping Scientific Excellence, Nature Index, and SCImago Institutions Rankings (until 2015) are not included in the scope of this paper, since they do not create overall ranking lists. Likewise, Times Higher Education, CWUR and US are not included because of not presenting indicator-based scores. Required data were not accessible for QS for 2010 and 2011. Moreover, although QS ranks more than 700 universities, only first 400 universities in 2012–2015 rankings were able to be analyzed. Although QS’s and RUR’s data were analyzed in this study, it was statistically not possible to reach any conclusion for these two rankings. Practical implications The results of this study may be considered mainly by ranking bodies, policy- and decision-makers. The ranking bodies may use the results to review the indicators they use, to decide on which indicators to use in their rankings, and to question if it is necessary to continue overall rankings. Policy- and decision-makers may also benefit from the results of this study by thinking of giving up using overall ranking results as an important input in their decisions and policies. Originality/value This study is the first to use a MDS and cosine similarity measure for revealing the similarity of indicators. Ranking data is skewed that require conducting nonparametric statistical analysis; therefore, MDS is used. The study covers all ranking years and all universities in the ranking lists, and is different from the similar studies in the literature that analyze data for shorter time intervals and top-ranked universities in the ranking lists. It can be said that the similarity of intra-indicators for URAP, NTU and RUR is analyzed for the first time in this study, based on the literature review.

Korean Education and Foreign Direct Investment: Focusing on Entry Modes

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-111
Author(s):  
Lorna Baek ◽  
Jimmyn Parc
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Direct Investment ◽  
Direct Investment ◽  
Current System ◽  
University Rankings ◽  
Entry Modes ◽  
Korean Education ◽  
International University ◽  
Economic Advancement ◽  
Specific Education

Education is a key for economic advancement. Thus, this study d its development to date. In doing so and by simultaneously analyzing Brain Drain Index and international university rankings comparatively, a number of issues are highlighted as unsatisfactory. In order to overcome the problems presented by the current system, this paper applies a comprehensive entry mode model to education-based foreign direct investment. A case study, benchmarking Singapore, highlights specific education policy amendments regarding liberalization that could also be applicable to the Korean education field, ultimately aiding economic advancement.

scholarly journals Privileging the Privileged: The Effects of International University Rankings on a Chilean Fellowship Program for Graduate Studies Abroad

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (12) ◽  
pp. 243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulina Perez Mejias ◽  
Roxana Chiappa ◽  
Carolina Guzmán-Valenzuela
Keyword(s):  
Social Reproduction ◽  
Social Inequalities ◽  
Selection Criterion ◽  
Educational Opportunities ◽  
University Rankings ◽  
Educational Inequalities ◽  
Mediation Model ◽  
Fellowship Program ◽  
Graduate Studies ◽  
International University

In the last few decades, many developing countries have dramatically expanded the number of government-sponsored fellowships for graduate studies abroad to increase their participation in the knowledge economy. To award these grants, these programs have typically relied on international university rankings as their main selection criterion. Existing studies suggest these fellowships have been disproportionally awarded to applicants from privileged social backgrounds, thus intensifying existing national educational inequalities. However, this evidence is mostly anecdotal and descriptive in nature. In this article, we focus on a Chilean fellowship program, an iconic example of these policies. Using a causal path analysis mediation model and relying on social reproduction and stratification theories, we investigated whether the distribution of fellowships varied across applicants from different socioeconomic backgrounds and how university rankings affect applicants’ chances of obtaining the fellowship. Our findings revealed that, in a context of high social inequalities and a stratified education system, using international rankings as an awarding criterion reinforced the position of privilege of individuals who accrued educational advantages in high school, as well as the disadvantages of those less fortunate who faced fewer prior educational opportunities.

scholarly journals International university rankings as a quality measure for the Spanish universities

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 33-44
Author(s):  
F. García
Keyword(s):  
Quality Control ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Teaching Staff ◽  
University Rankings ◽  
National Agency ◽  
Control Activity ◽  
University System ◽  
International University ◽  
Spanish Universities ◽  
The University

In Spain, the functions assigned to the University are varied and have changed over time. Currently, it is considered that university activity should be focused on improving the well-being of the society in which the university is located. Thus, any quality control of the Spanish university system must consider whether the university is fulfilling the purposes that society has assigned to it. In Spain, the task of quality control of universities is mainly assigned to the National Agency for Quality Assessment and Accreditation (ANECA). In principle, through different programs, this agency evaluates different aspects of the Universities. However, as can be seen in this research, the control activity is limited to university degrees and the activity of the teaching staff. Moreover, this control hardly measures to what extent the University system is achieving its goals.

scholarly journals Comparison of bibliographic data sources: Implications for the robustness of university rankings

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chun-Kai (Karl) Huang ◽  
Cameron Neylon ◽  
Chloe Brookes-Kenworthy ◽  
Richard Hosking ◽  
Lucy Montgomery ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Citation Count ◽  
Data Sources ◽  
University Rankings ◽  
Multiple Sources ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Bibliographic Data ◽  
Data Source ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
International University ◽  
Single Data

Universities are increasingly evaluated on the basis of their outputs. These are often converted to simple and contested rankings with substantial implications for recruitment, income, and perceived prestige. Such evaluation usually relies on a single data source to define the set of outputs for a university. However, few studies have explored differences across data sources and their implications for metrics and rankings at the institutional scale. We address this gap by performing detailed bibliographic comparisons between Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, and Microsoft Academic (MSA) at the institutional level and supplement this with a manual analysis of 15 universities. We further construct two simple rankings based on citation count and open access status. Our results show that there are significant differences across databases. These differences contribute to drastic changes in rank positions of universities, which are most prevalent for non-English-speaking universities and those outside the top positions in international university rankings. Overall, MSA has greater coverage than Scopus and WoS, but with less complete affiliation metadata. We suggest that robust evaluation measures need to consider the effect of choice of data sources and recommend an approach where data from multiple sources is integrated to provide a more robust data set.

scholarly journals Analysis of key university leadership factors based on their international rankings (QS World University Rankings and Times Higher Education)

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 142-152
Author(s):  
Maxim Polyakov ◽  
Vladimir Bilozubenko ◽  
Maxim Korneyev ◽  
Natalia Nebaba
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Market Competition ◽  
University Rankings ◽  
Key Factors ◽  
University Leadership ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Second Stage ◽  
World University Rankings ◽  
International University ◽  
Significant Factors

In the context of globalization of the educational services market, competition between universities is becoming more intense. This manifests itself, among other things, in the struggle for positions in international university rankings. Given that universities are evaluated according to many criteria in such rankings, it becomes necessary to identify the most significant factors in determining their positions.This study aims to identify the key factors determining the world’s leading universities’ leadership in international university rankings. The numerical values of the criteria for compiling the QS World University Rankings (QS) and Times Higher Education (THE) rankings were an empirical basis for the study. The analysis covered the Top 50 universities (according to the QS ranking) and was conducted based on reports for 2020 and 2021.At first, clustering was carried out (method – k-means); the data set was the combination of numerical values of QS and THE criteria (six and five criteria, respectively). The universities were divided into three clusters in 2020 (23, 19, 8 universities) and 2021 (23, 17, 10 universities). This showed the universities’ leadership relative to each other for each year.At the second stage, classification processing was performed (method – decision trees). As a result, criteria combinations that give an absolute separation of all clusters (2020 – five combinations; 2021 – eight combinations) were identified. The obtained combinations largely determine universities’ affiliation to clusters; their criteria are recognized as key factors of their leadership in the rankings. This study’s results can serve as guidelines for improving universities’ positions in the rankings.

scholarly journals International university rankings as indicators for the quality of the Spanish universities

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-84
Author(s):  
F. García
Keyword(s):  
Control Policy ◽  
University Rankings ◽  
University Policy ◽  
International University ◽  
Spanish Universities ◽  
Partial View ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Foreign Universities ◽  
Adequate Analysis

The mission of Spanish universities is to serve society by promoting the improvement of quality of life, culture and economic development. This objective is achieved through teaching, research, transfer and dissemination of knowledge. It is essential to ensure that the actions and strategies implemented by Spanish universities are guided by these objectives, which is why a quality control policy is essential. Within this policy, the comparison with foreign universities may be interesting, and institutions controlling for universities' quality are tempted to use international university rankings prepared by companies as a substitute for a more in-depth and adequate analysis. In this work it is verified that the most cited international rankings do not evaluate the quality, but the prestige of the universities based on mainly bibliometric criteria and surveys. In this way, a very partial view of the universities is obtained that does not consider the different functions that they have been entrusted with, at least in the case of Spain. Finally, some of the risks involved in using these rankings as guides in the definition of Spanish university policy are noted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document