scholarly journals Novel World University Rankings Combining Academic, Environmental and Resource Indicators

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (24) ◽  
pp. 13873
Author(s):  
Wei-Chao Lin ◽  
Ching Chen

World university rankings are regarded as an important tool to assess higher education quality. There are several media sources that publish world university rankings every year. These ranking results are mainly based on academic indicators, including research and teaching, with different weightings. However, some of these academic indicators are questionable, which affects the objectivity of the ranking results. In addition, conducting more medical-related studies could enhance the research impact scores. Some universities that devote themselves to enhancing these academic indicators lose sight of their original development goals and directions. To make the rankings more comprehensive, it is necessary to consider different viewpoints in the assessment. In other words, the research question of this paper is: whether considering different kinds of indicators can provide better ranking results? Therefore, in this paper, we introduce a novel ranking approach that combines academic, environmental, and resource indicators based on the Borda count method. The top 100 world universities from the Academic Ranking of World Universities, QS World University Rankings, Times Higher Education World Universities, and U.S. News & World Report are chosen for the analysis. The comparisons between the original and new rankings show that many universities improve in the rankings, while some universities from particular countries drop in the rankings due to the scores obtained from the environmental and resource indicators.

Author(s):  
S. Moroz ◽  
O. Romanovs’kyj ◽  
V. Moroz ◽  
L. Gren ◽  
A. Pomaza-Ponomarenko ◽  
...  

Abstract. Taking into account the fact that Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area identify employers at the level of one of the main stakeholders in higher education quality assurance, the authors of the publication conducted their survey within the non-grant project «Higher Education Quality Assessment». Among the focuses of the project attention were also those questions, the content of which was focused on clarifying the employers’ opinion on the existence of dependence of the higher education quality on the sources of its funding and specialization of the Institute of Higher Education.Using the tools of expert interviews and questionnaires, 184 employers from Kharkiv, Poltava, Sumy, as well as Ukraine-controlled parts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions were interviewed. The obtained results were considered through the prism of the analysis of university ratings in the direction of finding out the specialization and forms of ownership of those universities that occupied the so‑called top positions within its framework. The analysis revealed fundamental differences between the trends of the national academic rating «TOP—200 Ukraine» and the international university rating «QS World University Rankings» on the specialization and forms of ownership of leaders of the Institutes of Higher Education. It was found that among the top world level universities, classical Institutes of Higher Education dominate and  within the sample selected for analysis there exists parity between the amount of private and public Institutes of Higher Education. The analysis of the national academic rating allowed to state the fact that among the top Ukrainian universities, specialized Institutes of Higher Education dominate, and the share of private Institutes of Higher Education is absent at all. The perception of the results of the survey of employers and the results of the analysis of the university rankings’ content through the prism of the dependence of the higher education quality on its sources of funding and specialization of the university, allowed to formulate proposals for improving public policy in higher education sphere. Among the practical measures, the implementation of which, on the one hand, will improve the quality of higher education, and on the other — will contribute to optimization of the state budget usage for the higher education maintenance and development, it was proposed to develop and implement two state target programs, namely: Programs of priority development of specialized Institutes of Higher Education and the Program of priority development of classical Institutes of Higher Education. For each of these programs, the criteria for selecting of Institutes of Higher Education  for inclusion in the program were determined, as well as the limit amount number of its participants was determined. In addition, the article substantiates the need to involve employers into the higher education quality monitoring at the regional and state levels, as well as formulates proposals for improving the mechanisms of public administration over assurance of the higher education quality. Keywords: higher education quality; the survey of employers; dependence of the higher education quality on sources of its financing and specialization of the Institute of Higher Education; directions to improve content of public policy in the higher education sphere; state target program to ensure the priority development of higher education institutions. JEL Classification I28, I22, E61 Formulas: 0; fig.: 2; tabl.: 0; bibl.: 42.


2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-225
Author(s):  
Olga V. Chorna

The article describes the peculiarities of the monitoring systems of higher education quality in Ukraine and Germany at the present stage, taking into account the national traditions, historical experience and mentality of the population, also enshrined at the legislative level. The impact of public administration in the field of education and independent public organizations (agencies) on the nature and quality of monitoring procedures should be evaluated, since the involvement of society in monitoring the quality of higher education should be an integral part of a full-fledged education system. Given the specifics of the step-by-step system for regional monitoring of the quality of higher education in Germany, the role of the Conference of Rectors of Higher Education Institutions in this issue was demonstrated. Recent years’ statistics are used to illustrate the polarity of Ukrainian and German universities positions in world rankings (for example, The Times Higher Education World University Rankings and World University Rankings). The results of a comparative analysis of the approaches to higher education quality assurance and monitoring in Germany and Ukraine, the activities of monitoring entities in the two countries at all levels, starting from the national level and ending with the level of the educational institution, are presented in a summary table. The table demonstrates also the conceptual and functional components of quality monitoring: the purpose of the monitoring, the objects of monitoring, the levels and entities, the public initiative, the priority of the monitoring levels, the dominant principles, the overall orientation and monitoring of the quality of higher education. The article outlines the prospects of using elements of the progressive international experience of organizing a monitoring system of higher education quality to reform the national higher school, which is a necessary step in the process of its entry into the European Higher Education Area.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Galleli ◽  
Noah Emanuel Brito Teles ◽  
Joyce Aparecida Ramos dos Santos ◽  
Mateus Santos Freitas-Martins ◽  
Flavio Hourneaux Junior

Purpose This study aims to answer the research question: How to evaluate the structure of global university sustainability rankings according to the Berlin Principles (BP) framework. Design/methodology/approach The authors investigated two global sustainability rankings in universities, The UI green metric World University Ranking (WUR) and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE-WUR). The authors performed content analysis regarding their evaluation criteria and assessed both rankings using the BP framework. Findings Results show that there is still a gap to be filled regarding the specificity of global university sustainability rankings. Although the THE-WUR had a better performance in this research, there are several items for improvement, especially regarding the methodological procedures. There are structural differences, limitations and points for improvement in both rankings. Besides, it may not be possible to have a unique and more appropriate ranking, but one that can be more suitable for a contextual reality. Practical implications This study can be helpful for university managers when deliberating on the most appropriate ranking for their institutions and better preparing their higher education institutions for participating in sustainability-related rankings. Besides, it suggests possible improvements on the rankings’ criteria. Social implications The authors shed light on challenges for improving the existing university sustainability rankings, besides generating insights for developing new ones. In a provocative but constructive perspective, the authors question their bases and understandings of being “the best university” regarding sustainability. Originality/value This is the first study that provides an in-depth analysis and comparison between two of the most important global university sustainability rankings.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 664
Author(s):  
Nataliia Stukalo ◽  
Maryna Lytvyn

This study aims to identify the role of higher education quality assurance in achieving sustainable development goals. To support this aim, the following objectives were formulated: to discuss and summarize the best practices of QA agencies in promoting SDGs, to identify how Ukrainian universities consider SDGs in their policies, to develop recommendations for internal, and external quality assurance systems regarding SDG achievement. This qualitative study is based on a case study, observation, and questionnaire methods. Ukrainian higher education quality assurance systems are taken as a case study for this article. Primary data are collected through an online questionnaire and observation of Ukrainian universities’ publicly available information regarding sustainable development activities at their official websites. Additionally, some publicly available documents, reports, and materials on the experience of foreign quality assurance agencies are also reviewed, compared, and contrasted. The results of the research can be used at national levels where higher education standards should include competence in sustainable development goals, at institutional level to improve HEIs’ quality assurance system, and at the study program level to include SDG consideration as one of the requirements during internal quality assurance procedures.


2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 74-82
Author(s):  
Olga Chorna

AbstractThe article reveals specific features of functioning systems of higher education quality monitoring at the present stage, taking into account national traditions, historical experience and mentality of the population. The article introduces a comparative analysis of monitoring actors at national, regional and local levels in two countries. The ratio of influence of the state administration in education sphere and of the independent public organizations (agencies) on the nature and quality of monitoring procedures has been estimated. The positions polarity of Ukrainian and German universities in world rankings (“Top 50” The Times Higher Education World University Rankings (2010-2011/2014-2015); “Top 500” Academic Ranking of World Universities for 2010-2015) in form of statistical generalizations have been presented. A comparative analysis of approaches to assuring and monitoring the quality of higher education in Germany and Ukraine has been shown in the table. It demonstrates the conceptual and functional components of monitoring: the monitoring purpose, monitoring objects, levels and actors, public initiative, the priority of monitoring levels, the dominant principles, the general orientation and procedure for monitoring the higher education quality. The use of prospects of elements in progressive international experience as for organising the monitoring system of higher education quality to reform the national high school have been determined here. That could be especially important taking into consideration the creating of the European Higher Education Area.


2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Irma MESIRIDZE ◽  
Nino TVALTCHRELIDZE

The Bologna Process, Information and Communication Technology, and market forces have brought manyinnovations and great changes to higher education systems throughout Europe. Reforms in higher educationhave taken a new direction, towards making higher education students more autonomous. However, manycountries have not really adopted this innovative way of teaching and still maintain an old ‘transmission’ stylewhich often entails teachers trying to pour knowledge into the minds of their students. Promoting autonomouslearning (the ability of students to manage their own learning) in higher education is crucial both for theindividual and society, as the idea of an academic student comprises critical reflective thinking and theimportance of becoming an independent learner. This article will discuss the importance of promotingautonomous learning throughout self, peer and co-assessment for higher education quality enhancement. Thepaper will examine the case of International Black Sea University’s MA students enrolled in the Higher EducationManagement program. The analyses of a survey will be used to discuss the significance of autonomous learningfor students and their readiness for self, peer and co-assessment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document