Communicative Aspect of University Reputation Assessment (on the Case of RUDN University)

This article is concerned with the communicative study of the issue of assessing the reputation of universities. The article presents the concept of "reputation" and its characteristics such as a long-term period of creation, the multiple nature of reputation, the relationship with the values that the audience gives to the company etc. Reputation is seen as the result of communicative interaction with the audience, which allows to create trust and inspire confidence in stakeholders. The authors review the characteristics of the three leading world university rankings: Times Higher Education World University Rankings; Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings; The Academic Ranking of World Universities. And also, the article describes the criteria by which these rankings are built. It either observes the indicators that are taken into account in the compilation of reputational ratings for companies and brands. It turns out during the comparing of the criteria for assessing the ratings of universities and the ratings of companies and brands, that emotional components are completely dismissed from the ratings of universities. While compilers of the company’s reputation rankings RepTrak ™ Pulse and the brand’s reputation rankings Interbrand always include them. The article presents the data from a study of the reputation of RUDN University, which the authors conducted by methods of survey and interview in November 2019. They show that an emotional assessment of a university's reputation is more important for an internal audience than a rational one.

Cambio climático y salud ambiental en carreras de salud de grado en Latinoamérica

OBJETIVO: Analizar la incorporación de cursos de cambio climático y salud ambiental en las mallas curriculares del grado en Medicina, Enfermería, Nutrición y Psicología clínica en universidades latinoamericanas. MÉTODOS: Revisión documental de tipo descriptiva y transversal. Se analizaron las mallas curriculares de las diez primeras universidades latinoamericanas según los rankings QS Latin American University 2020, Times Higher Education World University 2020 y Academic Ranking of World Universities 2019. En cada malla curricular se buscó la presencia de cursos relacionados al cambio climático y la salud ambiental. RESULTADOS: De las 161 universidades que se incluyeron en el estudio, 104 ofrecían la carrera de Medicina, 93 de Enfermería, 77 de Nutrición y 118 de Psicología clínica. La mayor parte de las mallas curriculares incorporaron cursos de salud pública y/o epidemiología (más del 70%), sin embargo, entre el 22% y el 41% incluyeron cursos de salud ambiental, y solo una malla curricular tuvo un curso en cambio climático en Medicina y Enfermería (1%). CONCLUSIONES: Los cursos de cambio climático y salud ambiental han sido introducidos, de forma escasa, en las mallas curriculares del campo de la salud en universidades latinoamericanas. Esto podría debilitar el importante rol que cumplen los profesionales de la salud en la asistencia sanitaria a la población.

Are Universities Better Off Without Rankings?

The advent of international rankings almost twenty years ago—pioneered by the first Academic Ranking of World Universities by Shanghai Jiao Tong University in 2003— changed the university landscape in an irreversible way. Today, the creation of world-class universities has become part of the political agenda in many countries.

OpenRank – a novel approach to rank universities using objective and publicly verifiable data sources

PurposeAcademic rankings are facing various issues, including the use of data sources that are not publicly verifiable, subjective parameters, a narrow focus on research productivity and regional biases and so forth. This research work is intended to enhance creditability of the ranking process by using the objective indicators based on publicly verifiable data sources.Design/methodology/approachThe proposed ranking methodology – OpenRank – drives the objective indicators from two well-known publicly verifiable data repositories: the ArnetMiner and DBpedia.FindingsThe resultant academic ranking reflects common tendencies of the international academic rankings published by the Shanghai Ranking Consultancy (SRC), Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) and Times Higher Education (THE). Evaluation of the proposed methodology advocates its effectiveness and quick reproducibility with low cost of data collection.Research limitations/implicationsImplementation of the OpenRank methodology faced the issue of availability of the quality data. In future, accuracy of the academic rankings can be improved further by employing more relevant public data sources like the Microsoft Academic Graph, millions of graduate's profiles available in the LinkedIn repositories and the bibliographic data maintained by Association for Computing Machinery and Scopus and so forth.Practical implicationsThe suggested use of open data sources would offer new dimensions to evaluate academic performance of the higher education institutions (HEIs) and having comprehensive understanding of the catalyst factors in the higher education.Social implicationsThe research work highlighted the need of a purposely built, publicly verifiable electronic data source for performance evaluation of the global HEIs. Availability of such a global database would help in better academic planning, monitoring and analysis. Definitely, more transparent, reliable and less controversial academic rankings can be generated by employing the aspired data source.Originality/valueWe suggested a satisfying solution for improvement of the HEIs' ranking process by making the following contributions: (1) enhancing creditability of the ranking results by merely employing the objective performance indicators extracted from the publicly verifiable data sources, (2) developing an academic ranking methodology based on the objective indicators using two well-known data repositories, the DBpedia and ArnetMiner and (3) demonstrating effectiveness of the proposed ranking methodology on the real data sources.

Can Webometrics Predict the Academic Rankings of Institutes?

Webometrics can be used for understanding the quantitative aspects of web resources. The present study investigates the role of webometrics in determining the academic ranking of the institute. The extensive research was conducted on a sample of 59 reputed academic institutes based out of India. The data was analysed using two techniques viz. linear regression and classification and regression tree. From the results of the study, it was found that among all the webometrics parameters, Alexa rank and Semrush rank of the website was found to be the most crucial factor for determining the academic ranking of the institute. The study has insights for policymakers of the institute as the results of the study can be used for devising various ways to improve the webometrics parameters in order to enhance the academic ranking of the institute.

WORLD-CLASS UNIVERSITIES COMO CONCEITO EM DISPUTA NA EDUCAÇÃO SUPERIOR

O artigo tem como objetivo analisar o conceito de world-class universities como objeto de disputa no competitivo campo da educação superior, partindo da premissa que no mundo globalizado sua origem e consolidação ocorrem tomando como referência básica padrões internacionais de qualidade. De natureza teórica, o trabalho problematiza a educação superior na economia do conhecimento, de maneira articulada à exploração de dados produzido pelos dois principais rankings que classificam essas universidades – Academic Ranking of World Universities e Times Higher Education World University Rankings – publicados, respectivamente, nos anos de 2019 e 2020. Conclui-se que o conceito desse novo modelo de universidade considera critérios e indicadores globais de qualidade, mas também a ação das demais universidades que fazem parte do campo da educação superior.

Ranking Web of Universities: Is Webometrics a Reliable Academic Ranking?

Global university rankings continue to gain growing interest and have high visibility from all stakeholders. Of these, Webometrics Ranking (WR) faces many criticisms about its function. Some people believe WR evaluates only the websites of universities but not their global performance and impact as mentioned by WR authors. This stimulates us to examine the idea of using WR as a reliable academic ranking for the world universities. To test this hypothesis, we apply the WR results with two widely accepted indexes, i.e., the global university rankings and the bibliometrics. Therefore, the WR ranking of the Top 100 institutions are correlated with the corresponding values of six world ranking systems’ 2015 edition (ARWU, USNWR, QS, THE, NTU and URAP) that commonly accepted to evaluate the academic performance of the university, as well as with the objectively bibliometric indicators gathered from the Web of Science (WOS) InCitesTM - Thomson Reuters. The findings revealed that the WR results provide a good correlation with both ranking systems’ results and with 12 bibliometric variables namely: WOS Documents, Times Cited, Citation Impact (CI), Citation Impact: Category Normalized (CNCI), Citation Impact: Journal Normalized (JNCI), Impact Relative to World, % of Top 1% Documents, % of Top 10% Documents, Highly Cited Papers, h-index, International Collaborations, and % Industry Collaborations. The consistency between WR and the studied six rankings increases with increasing the weight percent of the research or bibliometric indicators in these six global rankings. Moreover, the consistency between WR and survey-based rankings (USNWR, THE and QS) increases with decreasing the weight of the subjective reputation survey indicators. The North American, especially USA universities are characterized by the extremely high visibility in WR as well as in the studied seven global rankings. Thus, web-based indicators ranking (WR) offers results of comparable and similar quality to those of the six major global university rankings. Accordingly, they have the capability to rank institutional academic performance. Moreover, the reliability could be enhanced if each university has only one web-domain that accurately reflects its actual performance and activity. We recommend all institutions to apply all ranking systems together since their criteria and indicators complement each other and can form a comprehensive index for covering various HEIs activities/functions worldwide.