scholarly journals Global Ranking and Its Implications in Higher Education

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
P. S. Aithal ◽  
Suresh Kumar P. M.
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Financial Stability ◽  
Generic Model ◽  
Research Publication ◽  
University Ranking ◽  
Global Ranking ◽  
Ranking Systems ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
The World ◽  
Global University

Higher Education Institutions try to enhance their competitiveness so as to become distinguished centers of learning and research. Various agencies conduct rankings of institutions independent of each other using different criteria. Although the purpose of ranking is to encourage healthy competition and distinguish the best institution in the interest of the learners to choose, the differences in criteria have cast a lot of confusion in building a parity. Academic performance and allied factors, as well as research, publication, and allied factors, are common to all. Some ranking agencies take into consideration industry-institution collaborations, international outlook, alumni, overall reputation, and even financial stability. This paper aims to attempt a comparison of the ranking methodology adopted by selected prominent Global University Ranking Agencies all over the world and throw light on the positive and negative outcomes of the global ranking. Based on in-depth analysis and critical comments on the limitations of these ranking systems, a generic model for balanced global university ranking is also proposed. Given the fact that nations differ, cultures differ, and the context of higher education itself differ across nations, the study illuminates the fallacy and dangers of segregating all institutions under the same mould.

scholarly journals HEC Ranking Criteria in the Perspective of Global University Ranking Systems

2019 ◽  
Vol IV (II) ◽  
pp. 43-50
Author(s):  
Fazeelat Noreen ◽  
Bashir Hussain
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
National Level ◽  
University Ranking ◽  
Research And Teaching ◽  
International Trends ◽  
Use Of Resources ◽  
Ranking Criteria ◽  
Ranking Systems ◽  
Global University ◽  
University Ranking Systems

Globalization and market-based orientation of higher education institutions has increased interest of students, parents, employers, universities, funding agencies, governments, and relevant stakeholders in knowing the rank of their concerned universities at national/global level. This has led to the emergence of several global university ranking systems. Aligned with international trends of ranking, Higher Education of Pakistan [HEC] also initiated ranking of universities at the national level in Pakistan. Subsequently, HEC designed comprehensive ranking criteria for ranking of universities and has implemented it since 2010. This study analyzes the nature of HEC ranking criteria and its constituent indicators from the perspective of global university ranking systems. Using content and thematic analysis, this study found that global university ranking systems mainly focus quality of research and teaching, while HEC additionally focuses effective and efficient use of resources, provision of facilities, social integration, and impact on community development.

Invisible higher education: Higher education institutions from Central and Eastern Europe in global rankings

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 529-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pepka Boyadjieva
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Central And Eastern Europe ◽  
Higher Education Institutions ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Global Ranking ◽  
Quality Of Higher Education ◽  
Ranking Systems ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Global University

The starting point of this study is the argument that not only rankings of higher education institutions (HEIs) are inescapable, but so is the constant criticism to which they are subjected. Against this background, the paper discusses how HEIs from Central and Eastern Europe countries (CEECs) are (non)represented in the main global university rankings. The analysis adopts two perspectives: 1) From the point of view of higher education in CEECs – what are the specificity, basic problems and perspectives of higher education in CEECs as seen through the prism of the global ranking systems? 2) From the point of view of the ranking systems – what strengths and weaknesses of the global ranking systems can be identified through the prism of higher education in CEECs? The study shows that most of the HEIs from CEECs remain invisible in the international and European academic world and tries to identify the main reasons for their (non)appearance in global rankings. It is argued that although global rankings are an important instrument for measuring and comparing the achievements of HEIs by certain indicators, they are only one of the mechanisms – and not a perfect one – for assessing the quality of higher education.

scholarly journals FACTORS OF HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS RANKING (COMPARISON OF THREE WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS)

2019 ◽  
pp. 62-70
Author(s):  
Nattapong Techarattanased ◽  
Pleumjai Sinarkorn
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Science Citation Index ◽  
Citation Index ◽  
Social Science Citation Index ◽  
Science Citation ◽  
University Rankings ◽  
University Ranking ◽  
World University Rankings ◽  
Ranking Systems ◽  
Global University

Many universities have drawn attention to world university rankings, which reflect the international competition of universities and represent their relative statuses. This study does not radically contradict all types of global university rankings but calls for an examination of the effects of their indicators on the final ranking of universities. This study investigates the indicator contribution to the ranking of universities in world university ranking systems including the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), Times Higher Education (THE), and QS World University Rankings. Results showed that in the ARWU system, three indicators regarding faculty members who won Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals and papers published in Nature and Science and in the Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index journals predicted the ranking of universities. For the QS and THE systems, the more powerful contributors to the ranking of universities were expert-based reputation indicators.

Accreditation and ranking of higher education institutions (HEIs): review, observations and recommendations for the Indian higher education system

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerald Ozee Fernandes ◽  
Balgopal Singh
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Education System ◽  
Higher Education Institutions ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Academic Quality ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Global Ranking ◽  
Higher Education System ◽  
The World ◽  
Indian Higher Education

PurposeThe higher education system has been entrusted globally to provide quality education, especially to the youth, and equip them with required skills and capabilities. The visionaries and policymakers of the countries around the world have been working relentlessly to improve the standard of the higher education system by establishing national and global accreditation and ranking bodies and expecting measuring performance through setting up accreditation and ranking parameters. This paper focuses on the review of Indian university accreditation and ranking system and determining its efficacy in improving academic quality for achieving good position in global quality accreditation and ranking.Design/methodology/approachThe study employed exploratory research approach to know about the accreditation and ranking issues of Indian higher education institutions to overcome the challenges for being globally competitive. The accreditation and ranking parameters and score of leading Indian universities was collected from secondary data sources. Similarly, the global ranking parameters and scores of these Indian universities with top global universities was explored. The performance gaps of Indian university in global academic quality parameter is assessed by comparing it with scores of global top universities. Further, each domestic and global accreditation and ranking parameters have been taken up for discussion.FindingsThe study identified teaching and learning, research and industry collaboration as common parameter in the accreditation and ranking by Indian and global accreditation and ranking body. Furthermore, the study revealed that Indian accreditation and ranking body assess leniently on parameters and award high scores as compared to rigorous global accreditation and ranking practice. The study revealed that “research” and “citations” are important parameters for securing prestigious position in global ranking, this is the reason Indian universities are trailing. The study exposed that Indian academic fraternity lack prominence in research, publication and citations as per need of global accreditation and ranking standards.Research limitations/implicationsThe limitation of this study is that it focused only on few Indian and global accreditation and ranking bodies. The future implication of this study will be the use of methodology designed in this study for comparing accreditation and ranking bodies’ parameters of different continents and countries in different economic development stages i.e. emerging and developed economies to know the disparity and shortcomings in their higher education system.Practical implicationsThe article is a review and comparison of national and global accreditation and ranking parameters. The article explored the important criteria and key indicators of accreditation and ranking that would provide an important and meaningful insight to academic institutions of the emerging economies of the world to develop its competitiveness. The study contributed to the literature on identifying benchmark for improving academic and higher education institution quality. This study would be further helpful in fostering new ideas toward setting up of contemporary globally viable and acceptable academic quality standard.Originality/valueThis is possibly the first study conducted with novel methodology of comparing the Indian and global accreditation and ranking parameters to identify the academic quality performance gap and suggesting ways to attain academic benchmark through continuous improvement activity and process for global competitiveness.

scholarly journals Global Ranking of Universities by Reputation: The Hidden Criterion

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (1-3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor F. Peretomode
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Internationalization Of Higher Education ◽  
University Rankings ◽  
Important Criterion ◽  
Global Ranking ◽  
Ranking Systems ◽  
Salient Factor ◽  
Is Value

ABSTRACT The ranking of World Universities is a fairly recent phenomenon. It is one of the products of internationalization of higher education. Many of the indices used by the ranking systems are now familiar to readers and writers. The age of an institution is one salient factor often not considered in rankings. The objective of this study is to critically discuss the relevance of age in relation to the metrics used and to determine whether or not age can be shown to have a place in university rankings .The analysis of data shows the average age of the top 50 institutions by reputation to be 206 years and the median 162. A look at the rankings will not reveal this important criterion except each of these ranked universities is linked with the year it was founded. It concludes that there is value in age and should be factored into university rankings.

scholarly journals Determining the Standard of Quality: Examining the Turkish University Ranking Systems According to the Berlin Principles

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 260-268
Author(s):  
Engin Karadağ ◽  
Cüneyt Belenkuyu
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Educational Policies ◽  
Competitive Environment ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
University Ranking ◽  
Assessment Study ◽  
Ranking Systems ◽  
Critical Problems ◽  
Methodological Assessment ◽  
University Ranking Systems

The increasing competitive environment arising from the commercialization and internationalization of higher education (HE) and the increasing influence of the liberal character of educational policies have led to the emergence of HE ranking systems which have become an inevitable part of HE with the effect they have created. The lack of unambiguous methodological processes is one of the oft-cited critical problems in the HE ranking system literature. These systems vary due to the particular methods they adopt in creating their ranking results. This variation requires a set of principles on how best to perform these rankings. The principles established under Berlin Principles in 2006 aimed to address this need. This study aims to determine to what extent Turkish ranking systems comply with the basic tenets determined in the Berlin Principles. The study was designed as a methodological assessment study and the data were obtained from the websites and printed and electronic publications related to Turkish ranking systems. The data obtained were scored according to an evaluation form consisting of the tenets set out in the Berlin Principles. The findings show that the majority of the Turkish university ranking systems were not designed to be fully compliant with the Berlin Principles and instead they evaluate HE institutions by their research approach and quality definitions.

Globalization of World University Rankings and Its Impact on Asian Universities

2017 ◽  
pp. 329-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fraide A. Ganotice Jr. ◽  
Hei-Hang Hayes Tang ◽  
Gordon Tsui ◽  
Jonalyn B. Villarosa ◽  
Susanna S. Yeung
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
University Rankings ◽  
University Ranking ◽  
Global Prevalence ◽  
World University Rankings ◽  
Ranking Systems ◽  
Academic Ranking

This chapter discusses how Asian universities respond to the global prevalence of university rankings, which are operated in various form with different emphases. First, it defines the context and rationales of the rise of world university rankings. Next, it compares and contrasts the three dominant university rankings, namely, Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), Quacquarelli Symonds (QS), and Times higher Education University Rankings (THE). After assessing the controversies, limitations and solutions of the dominant ranking systems, we will evaluate the current performance of Asian universities and discuss what lessons are to be learned by Asian universities amid the globalizing forces of world university ranking.

Uses and Abuses of Ranking in University Strategic Planning

2017 ◽  
pp. 232-251
Author(s):  
Zaw Wint ◽  
Kevin Downing
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Strategic Planning ◽  
Higher Education Institutions ◽  
Substantial Influence ◽  
Ranking Systems ◽  
The World ◽  
Short And Long Term ◽  
National Boundaries ◽  
World Ranking

The ranking of higher education institutions is a growing phenomenon around the world, with ranking systems in place in more than 40 countries. The emergence of world ranking systems that compare higher education institutions across national boundaries and the proliferation of these since the past decade, are indeed a reality now, and are already exerting substantial influence on both short and long term developments of higher education institutions. Rankings are being used by a variety of stakeholders for different purposes. Rankings are no doubt, useful for fostering institutional strategic planning and management, and their communication externally as well as their own institutional community and the national interest.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document