GLOBAL UNIVERSITY RANKINGS AND STRATEGIC PLANNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS

Author(s):  
Julija Sarupiciute ◽  
Greta Druteikiene
Education ◽  
2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen Hazelkorn

Global university rankings have become a significant feature of international higher education and are commonly interpreted as an indicator of success in the global economy. They came to prominence in 2003 with the publication of the Shanghai Jiao Tong Academic Rankings of World Universities (ARWU). Today, there are ten global rankings of varying degrees of popularity, reliability, and trustworthiness. National rankings have existed since the early 19th century, primarily in the United States, but they now exist in many countries around the world. It is the ability of global rankings to provide a simple, easily understood method by which to compare higher education internationally that has made them a phenomenon. Thus, rankings are viewed as a measure of “world-class excellence.” The performance and quality of higher education is a vital sign of a country’s capacity to participate successfully in the global economy. This follows from studies that continue to highlight strong correlations between investment in education and research and economic growth. While this has highlighted the importance of higher education in creating competitive advantage, it has also brought increased public scrutiny to how higher education is governed and managed, and about value-for-money. This is now the subject of policy debate and public discourse at both the national and the supranational levels. Rankings are also a response to growing pressure from students and parents for more consumer information. As students look for the “best” universities and colleges, rankings appear to provide information about educational quality and, correspondingly, about career prospects. Because rankings are seen as independent of the higher education sector and individual institutions, they are perceived as a more reliable source of information for employers, policymakers, and the public. But rankings are also controversial. Studies raise many questions about their methodology and choice of indicators, which are widely seen as promoting a narrow definition of excellence, and thus as favoring a small subset of the world’s 18,000 higher education institutions. Nonetheless, international research shows that the influence of global rankings on the choices and decisions taken by governments, higher education institutions, students, employers, and others continues to grow. Today’s debates have moved beyond discussing the advantages and disadvantages of global rankings to examining their impact and influence, alternative accountability and transparency instruments, and what global rankings are telling us about the changing shape or the geopolitics of higher education internationally. For further information on a related topic, see the separate Oxford Bibliographies in Education article “Value of Higher Education for Students and Other Stakeholders.”


2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maruša Hauptman Komotar

Purpose This paper aims to investigate how global university rankings interact with quality and quality assurance in higher education along the two lines of investigation, that is, from the perspective of their relationship with the concept of quality (assurance) and the development of quality assurance policies in higher education, with particular emphasis on accreditation as the prevalent quality assurance approach. Design/methodology/approach The paper firstly conceptualises quality and quality assurance in higher education and critically examines the methodological construction of the four selected world university rankings and their references to “quality”. On this basis, it answers the two “how” questions: How is the concept of quality (assurance) in higher education perceived by world university rankings and how do they interact with quality assurance and accreditation policies in higher education? Answers are provided through the analysis of different documentary sources, such as academic literature, glossaries, international studies, institutional strategies and other documents, with particular focus on official websites of international ranking systems and individual higher education institutions, media announcements, and so on. Findings The paper argues that given their quantitative orientation, it is quite problematic to perceive world university rankings as a means of assessing or assuring the institutional quality. Like (international) accreditations, they may foster vertical differentiation of higher education systems and institutions. Because of their predominant accountability purpose, they cannot encourage improvements in the quality of higher education institutions. Practical implications Research results are beneficial to different higher education stakeholders (e.g. policymakers, institutional leadership, academics and students), as they offer them a comprehensive view on rankings’ ability to assess, assure or improve the quality in higher education. Originality/value The existing research focuses principally either on interactions of global university rankings with the concept of quality or with processes of quality assurance in higher education. The comprehensive and detailed analysis of their relationship with both concepts thus adds value to the prevailing scholarly debates.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
Zoljargal Dembereldorj

This paper discusses the relevant literature on higher education rankings and its impact on higher education institutions across the globe. The literature suggests that global university rankings impact higher education institutions both in advanced economy and developing countries to build competence to race and exist. Universities in an advanced economy are building institutional competitive competence to race in the global university rankings under the umbrella term of ‘World Class University,’ whereas universities in developing countries are building institutional competence by pursuing to build research intensive universities. The essay argues that global university rankings are shaping the field of higher education institutions, and the capacity of resources dictates universities the type of competence to build to exist: institutional competitive competence and institutional competence.   


2020 ◽  
Vol 202 ◽  
pp. 03026
Author(s):  
Tri Handayani ◽  
Daivangga Maheswari

Diponegoro University is one reputable university belonging to Indonesia. This state university is located in Semarang, Central Java Province. Global dynamics have also colored its journey in implementing its traditionally assigned three missions: teaching, conducting research, and providing public services. These make this university highly confident heading to become a research university. A research university is a step to take that the university has its competitiveness to compete with the others in the world. There are some Higher Education-rankings institutions which evaluate all Higher Education Institutions in the world, such as Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings, Times Higher Education (THE) University Rankings, 4 International Colleges and Universities (4ICU), and Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU). Meanwhile, the ministry which has the function to make coordination with higher education institutions in Indonesia has also conducted higher education institutional ratings, primarily for Indonesian internal needs. The criteria of a research university refer to those evaluated by the higher education institutional ratings in the international level. A research university is a new paradigm which encourages a higher education institution in Indonesia to become highly confident to globally compete with the others in the whole world.


Author(s):  
Magdalena Platis

In the contemporary context, educational sector faces many challenges which are reflected in specific institutional reactions. Rankings specific to higher education systems are a real phenomenon. Management teams at all levels understand differently the role of being active towards rankings – from a national support and institutional scope, to a lack of interest from both levels. Methodologies of different rankings are also different. In fact, participating in a ranking or another is something to be decided by the university management. The mission of this chapter is to reveal the role of rankings in the contemporary context of resource decreasing. Some answers will improve the decision-making process related to rankings, as well as to other institutional changes adopted in higher education institutions. The existence of rankings cannot be denied. Understanding the role of rankings is one of the most important premises for a correct strategic development of the higher education institutions.


Author(s):  
Magdalena Platis

In the contemporary context, educational sector faces many challenges which are reflected in specific institutional reactions. Rankings specific to higher education systems are a real phenomenon. Management teams at all levels understand differently the role of being active towards rankings – from a national support and institutional scope, to a lack of interest from both levels. Methodologies of different rankings are also different. In fact, participating in a ranking or another is something to be decided by the university management. The mission of this chapter is to reveal the role of rankings in the contemporary context of resource decreasing. Some answers will improve the decision-making process related to rankings, as well as to other institutional changes adopted in higher education institutions. The existence of rankings cannot be denied. Understanding the role of rankings is one of the most important premises for a correct strategic development of the higher education institutions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document