To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: International University Rankings.
Journal articles on the topic 'International University Rankings'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'International University Rankings.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Gaisenok, V. A., O. A. Naumovich, and V. V. Samokhval. "Correlational Relationships between Various International Rankings for Higher Education Institutions." Higher Education in Russia 27, no. 12 (2019): 20–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2018-27-12-20-28.
Full textAbstract:
The task of the investigation was to study the interrelations of the results of university rankings presented by various ranking agencies. Data on the number of the participants in the World Rankings has been presented for the Webometrics Ranking of World Universities (WRWU), Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), Quacquarelli Symonds (QS), Times Higher Education (THE), U-Multirank, Round University Ranking (RUR), the Moscow International Rating “Three University Missions”, SCImago Institutions Rankings (SIR).The correlations have been studied by the methods of mathematical statistics for the results of the Moscow International Rating “Three University Missions” and the RUR, QS, THE, and the WRWU rankings; of the QS rankings with THE and the WRWU rankings, as well as for the two WRWU rankings published in January 2018 and July 2017. The linear regression formulas linking the positions of universities in different rankings have been obtained. The results of the Moscow International Rating “Three University Missions” moderately correlate with the results of the RUR rankings, the correlation with WRWU is low. The correlations for the QS ranking with THE and the WRWU rankings are moderate. Very high correlation has been detected only for the two WRWU rankings, which raises questions about the feasibility of conducting them with an interval of six months.
2
Poplavskyi, Mykhailo. "University Ranking As an Education Quality Assessment Tool." Ukrainian Information Space, no. 2(8) (November 15, 2021): 16–38. https://doi.org/10.31866/2616-7948.2(8).2021.245787.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of the article is a comprehensive analysis of the ranking methodology of leading international and European University rankings. The research methodology is based on abstraction use, analysis, and synthesis methods, which have provided theoretical comprehension for the phenomenon of world universities ranking. The scientific novelty of the findings involves proposal development for upgrading International University Rankings. Based on the analysis of rates, indicators, and weight assignment of the most influential International University Rankings in the world (ARWU, THE, QS World University Rankings, Webometrics, PRSP, CWTS Leiden Ranking, SCImago institutions Rankings, U-Multirank), the article stated that the composition of their rates varies within a relatively small number of key features, the choice of which is related to the degree of availability of data for analysis and the subjective position of developers regarding the primary characteristics of the university. It is concluded that the ranking indicators do not consider the organization features of training, scientific and innovative processes at university. In ranking methodologies, there are no indicators that would characterise the learning process, the teaching quality, the students’ achievements, the degree of their learning skills and being advanced in knowledge, in respect to international rankings, and the readiness of graduates for a career in a specific social context of a particular country, referring national rankings. It is noted that the marketing mechanism for assessing universities should be supplemented with a humanistic one, which provides an appreciation for the learning process as an interaction between the student, teacher, and the environment. When developing rankings, it is necessary to clearly define the indicators for universities of different training profiles and justify the indicators, their weight assignment, and score counting procedure.
3
Polezhaeva, Tatiana Yu. "World University Rankings: Peculiarities and Differences in Methodology." Теория и практика общественного развития, no. 2 (February 28, 2024): 60–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.24158/tipor.2024.2.7.
Full textAbstract:
This paper analyses world university rankings. Rankings remain a tool for assessing the effectiveness of edu-cational activities of both individual universities and national educational systems as a whole. The work consid-ers the methodologies of the QS World University Rankings, the Academic Ranking of World Universities (AR-WU), the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE), and the Moscow International University Ranking “Three Missions of the University”. Global rankings of leading universities can be based on various indicators and criteria, such as: academic reputation, quality of teaching and research activities, publication activity of faculties, international cooperation, university infrastructure and resources, as well as international influence and attractiveness for students. However, it is important to note that the methodology of university rankings has its own peculiarities and limitations. University rankings can be subjective, not taking into account all aspects of university activity and regional, political, and social peculiarities of higher education systems.
4
Abdulrazzak, Fuaad Hasan, Salah AL-Hagree, Maher Al-Sanabani, et al. "Exploring the Potential of Yemeni Universities for Rankings: An Analytical Study of Prominent International University Ranking Systems." Journal of Engineering and Technological Sciences - JOEATS 3, no. 1 (2025): 48–72. https://doi.org/10.59421/joeats.v3i1.2476.
Full textAbstract:
Specifically targeting Yemeni universities, this research focuses on their potential to enter and enhance their positions in the international rankings such as Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), Times Higher Education World University Ranking (THE), Quacquarelli Symonds World University Ranking (QS), and Webometrics Ranking and SCImago Institutions Rankings (SIR). Its objective is to encourage Yemeni universities to prioritize the criteria outlined in these rankings and view them as a means to access other international rankings. The research tackles the challenge of comprehending the criteria and application process required for Yemeni universities to participate in these rankings, as well as the rankings they have achieved. The study highlights the importance of this research by providing Yemeni university administrators with valuable insights regarding the criteria used for international rankings and the rankings obtained by Yemeni universities. This understanding can facilitate efforts to enhance the quality of higher education within these institutions. The findings of the study reveal that two Yemeni universities are listed in the QS. The University of Science and Technology, Yemen, ranks 151-170, while Thamar University in Thamar, Yemen, ranks 171-200. The findings of the study reveal that Ibb University secures the highest position among Yemeni universities in the SIR for 2023, with an overall score of 15.4 and a world rank of 3130. Sana’a University follows closely behind, ranking second among Yemeni universities according to these criteria, with a total score of 14.9 and a world rank of 3190.
5
Izharuddin, Muhammad, Faizal Susilo Hadi, and Meirza Cahya Lestyorini. "Evaluation of World University Rankings of Southeast Asia HEIs Image." Wiga : Jurnal Penelitian Ilmu Ekonomi 13, no. 1 (2023): 38–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.30741/wiga.v13i1.941.
Full textAbstract:
Today's world university rankings have gained prominence in tandem with internationalization endeavors. However, the impact of empirical rankings on the HEI brand image has yet to be thoroughly explored. This research aims to assess the impact of university rankings, based on universal standards and comparable metrics, on brand image at local, national, regional, and international levels. Using data from SciVal and QS World University, we analyzed 47 HEIs in Southeast Asia over ten years through panel data regression. The results shows that HEI rankings affect the brand image of the international media, regional media, national media, and local media. Awards received and mass media in general also got impacted by HEI global ranking. It expands the literature on higher education, providing ranking readings on multi-level reputation articulations. World university rankings can be used as a strategy to increase regional reputation in Southeast Asia as well as internationally. Future research could broaden the scope of regional data and use various types of world university rankings. In addition, other impacts, such as international students, inbound and outbound faculty, joint research, and other international indicators, can be further investigated.
6
Polyakov, Maxim, Vladimir Bilozubenko, Maxim Korneyev, and Natalia Nebaba. "Analysis of key university leadership factors based on their international rankings (QS World University Rankings and Times Higher Education)." Problems and Perspectives in Management 18, no. 4 (2020): 142–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.18(4).2020.13.
Full textAbstract:
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.
7
Arkalı Olcay, Gökçen, and Melih Bulu. "Rankings of Turkish universities in international university ranking indexes." Yuksekogretim Dergisi 6, no. 2 (2016): 95–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.2399/yod.16.003.
Full text
8
Alsaed, Hadeel, and Zakaryia Almahasees. "JORDANIAN ACADEMIC STAFF AND ACADEMIC ADMINISTRATORS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE ROLE AND LIMITATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY RANKINGS." Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University 57, no. 6 (2022): 430–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.35741/issn.0258-2724.57.6.40.
Full textAbstract:
For education policymakers worldwide, the international university rankings have taken the lead as indicators of institutional performance that are bolstered by the pretense of objectivity in science. These rankings have supported the first world and developing-nations institutions’ hegemonic model of higher education on a global basis. This study aimed to identify Jordanian Academic Staff and Academic Administrators’ perceptions of the role and limitations of international university rankings. For this purpose, the researchers designed an online questionnaire that consisted of three sections: demographic, experience, role, and limitations of university rankings. The questionnaire was distributed to academics and administrative staff involved in the Jordanian universities’ rankings. The results showed that the QS university ranking is the most popular, followed by the Times, ARWU, and US News. University rankings helped universities in education, administration, and student services. Additionally, the study found that university rankings helped institutions form academic partnerships among universities with similar interests, improve competition with similar international universities, boost scientific research culture, and construct university study programs. At the administrative level, university rankings helped universities promote a transparent culture, facilitate decision-making and improve quality assurance procedures.
9
Mukhlisakhon Muzaffar kizi, Mamajonova. "Decoding International University Rankings: A Comparative Analysis of THE and QS Methodologies." American Journal of Economics and Business Management 8, no. 5 (2025): 2368–80. https://doi.org/10.31150/ajebm.v8i5.3601.
Full textAbstract:
This study presents a comprehensive comparative analysis of the two leading global university ranking systems: Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings and QS World University Rankings. Through examining their historical evolution, methodological frameworks, indicator weightings, and impact on institutional strategies, this research reveals significant differences in how these systems measure and evaluate higher education quality. THE’s balanced approach across teaching, research environment, research quality, international outlook, and industry engagement contrasts with QS’s emphasis on academic and employer reputation. The research includes a specific focus on how methodological differences affect strategic planning at developing institutions like New Uzbekistan University (NUU). Employing both quantitative analysis of ranking indicators and qualitative assessment of strategic implications, this study offers a theoretical framework for understanding rankings’ influence on institutional behavior and provides practical recommendations for university leaders seeking to engage effectively with ranking systems while maintaining focus on substantive educational excellence.
10
Babones, Salvatore. "International Student Revenue and International Rankings Success: A Case Study of Australian University Research Strategies." Youth and Globalization 4, no. 1 (2022): 56–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/25895745-bja10019.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The publication of the first major international university rankings in 2003 opened up a new era in the internationalization of higher education, with universities around the world reorienting their research efforts toward securing success in international (as opposed to domestic) ranking systems. This has generated a potential principal-agency problem, as nationally-funded universities increasingly seek international validation. This opens up the possibility that a focus on rankings success might actually lead universities to implement policies that undermine their educational missions. This paper examines Australian universities’ pursuit of international rankings over the first two decades of the twenty-first century as a case study in the internationalization of higher education, with a focus on the behavior of Australia’s Group of Eight (Go8) research-intensive universities. Two major findings emerge. First, many Australian universities seem to have excessively expanded their international student enrolments as a way to generate the funds needed to compete in the ‘rankings game’. Second, many Australian universities seem to have prioritized research in fields that yield higher returns in rankings outcomes. These findings provide circumstantial evidence that Go8 universities may have compromised their educational missions in the pursuit of rankings success.
11
Matkivskyi, Mykola, and Tetiana Taras. "Methods and technologies for evaluating the quality of higher education in the context of international standards: A comparison of the Ukrainian and Polish experience of creating ratings." Scientific Bulletin of Mukachevo State University Series “Pedagogy and Psychology” 10, no. 1 (2024): 116–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.52534/msu-pp1.2024.116.
Full textAbstract:
The need to study the methods and technologies used to assess the level of educational services is primarily due to constant transformations in educational processes, improvement of the system of criteria used to rank higher education institutions. The purpose of this study was to analyse the tools used to assess the performance of higher education institutions in the context of international standardization of educational processes. The main methods used in the study were statistical analysis, comparative and contrastive and analytical and synthetic methods. The comparative and contrastive analysis revealed that research activities were among the main indicators that influenced the creation of the rankings: Times Higher Education University Impact Rankings (60%), TOP-200 Ukraine (42%), Perspektywy (42%), and prestige and reputation: QS World University Rankings (40%), Times Higher Education University Impact Rankings (30%), TOP-200 Ukraine (12%). The methods used to create the rankings included statistical, pedagogical analysis, analytical and synthetic methods, and surveys. To create the Ukrainian ranking, 6 international (Webometrics, Scopus, Times Higher Education World University Rankings, Times Higher Education University Impact Rankings, UniRank, QS World University Rankings) and 4 national (participation in research project competitions, number of patents received, awards for young scientists, the ratio between the number of applications and the competition score) indicators were used. The Polish ranking was based on 29 indicators divided into groups: prestige, scientific effectiveness, scientific strength, scientific and educational potential, internationalization, graduates on the labour market, innovation, study conditions, and economic cooperation. In Poland, there was a balance between international and national criteria, while in Ukraine, about 70% of international criteria and 30% of national criteria were used. This work can be used in the future to improve national and international systems for assessing the quality of higher education, and to develop a unified mechanism for creating ratings
12
González Bueno, Jairo Alexander, and Gladys Elena Rueda Barrios. "El concepto de excelencia universitaria medido a través de los rankings internacionales / The Concept of University Excellence Measured by International Rankings." Revista Internacional de Aprendizaje en la Educación Superior 3, no. 1 (2016): 43–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.37467/gka-revedusup.v3.499.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACTDespite ongoing discussions and reviews regarding their application and validity, the university rankings are a popular means for comparing the Institutions of Higher Education at national and international level. These classification systems cover only 1 % of universities worldwide and focuses mostly on scientific research of these entities. Through this article will be presented a brief investigation of the origins of university rankings. Likewise, the position of Latin American universities will be discussed, in particular the Colombian in the international context. This descriptive analysis will be based on the results of the 2013 Academic Ranking of World University, the Times Higher Education Ranking, QS World University Ranking and SIR Scimago Institutions Rankings. Finally, will be analyzed the effects and impacts of using rankings to classify, compare and rank universities globally analyzed.RESUMENA pesar de los debates y críticas continuas con respecto a su validez y aplicación, los rankings universitarios son un medio popular para comparar las Instituciones de Educación Superior a nivel nacional e internacional. Estos sistemas de clasificación sólo abarcan el 1% de las universidades a nivel mundial y se enfocan en su gran mayoría en la investigación científica de estas instituciones. A través del presente artículo se realizará una breve investigación de los orígenes de los rankings universitarios. Así mismo, se analizará la posición de las universidades latinoamericanas, y en particular las colombianas, en el contexto internacional. Para ello se realizará un análisis descriptivo tomando como base los resultados al año 2013 del Academic Ranking of World University, del Times Higher Education Ranking, del QS World University Ranking y del SIR Scimago Institutions Rankings. Por último, se analizarán los efectos e impactos de usar los rankings para clasificar, comparar y calificar las universidades a nivel mundial. Contacto principal: jairoa.gonzalez@upb.edu.co
13
Sepehr, Romina, Maryam Shekofteh, Azam Shahbodaghi, and Sara Jambarsang. "Examining the Correlation between Presence in the University Ranking Systems with Countries’ Income and R&D Expenditure: A Study on Medical Sciences Universities." DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology 45, no. 3 (2025): 217–23. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.20443.
Full textAbstract:
This study aims to examine the presence of various countries in international university ranking systems, specifically the Shanghai Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), QS, and the Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings, focusing on medicine and related sciences. It also explores the relationship between the presence in the university ranking systems and country’s income level and spending on Research and Development (R&D). Data was gathered from the websites of the three international university ranking systems, as well as from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the World Bank. Findings showed that 1191 universities from 100 countries are present in medical sciences sections of the three ranking systems. About half of these countries are classified as high-income, while fewer than five are classified as low-income. A significant correlation was found between a country’s income level and the number of its universities appearing in the rankings. High-income countries have a noticeably higher number of universities in these rankings than other income levels (p-value ≥ 0.001). Additionally, the study found a significant relationship between a country’s R&D spending and the presence of its universities in the rankings: THE (r = 0.33), QS (r = 0.24), and ARWU (r = 0.28). In conclusion, countries should consider increasing their investment in R&D to achieve higher positions in international university ranking systems.
14
Millot, Benoit. "Top Universities or Top Higher Education Systems?" International Higher Education, no. 75 (March 17, 2014): 7–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2014.75.5427.
Full textAbstract:
In reaction to the focus of international university rankings on a tiny cluster of “world class universities”, attempts are being made to rank national higher education systems. This paper compares the results of the U21 system ranking with those of major university rankings, reviews the reasons for their similarities. It argues that system rankings are critical and suggests how to enhance their usefulness
15
Doğan, Güleda, and Umut Al. "Is it possible to rank universities using fewer indicators? A study on five international university rankings." Aslib Journal of Information Management 71, no. 1 (2019): 18–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ajim-05-2018-0118.
Full textAbstract:
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.
16
Guimarães, José Augusto, Helber Holland, and Grant Campbell. "University rankings as knowledge organization systems." Scire: representación y organización del conocimiento 26, no. 2 (2020): 31–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.54886/scire.v26i2.4696.
Full textAbstract:
Considering the knowledge organization system as a core issue in the knowledge organization field, this paper focuses on international university rankings as a new incarnation of KOS through an analysis of their classificatory nature. For this, three important international university rankings are analyzed: THE, Shanghai, and QS in terms of their notation, facets, citation order, editions, and updating. The results confirm their classificatory nature as essentially faceted systems whose structure is derived from specific contextual slants and whose dynamic updating process leads to a constant remodeling of the structure and the weight of the facets.
 Keywords: Knowledge Organization Systems. University Ranking.; Classificatory structures.
17
Udartseva, Olga. "Assessing Results of University Research Activities: Indicators of Openness in Rankings." Science Management: Theory and Practice 6, no. 4 (2024): 29–47. https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2024.6.4.2.
Full textAbstract:
Open access to scientific results and research data becomes an engine for the successful development of modern science. The article examines popular rankings of world universities: the CWTS Leiden Ranking, the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE Rankings), the QS World University Rankings (QS), the SCImago Institutions Rankings (SIR) and the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU). The objective of the research was to study the ranking methodologies in the ratings under consideration and to determine the place of the openness criteria in them. A comparative analysis of world’s and Russia’s top universities in rankings is provided. The author has made an assessment of the significance of openness indicators in the world rankings, on the basis of which it has been concluded that only two world rankings pay due attention to these ranking criteria. Of those considered, only the evaluation methodologies of the CWTS Leiden Ranking and the SCImago Institutions Rankings take into account a quantitative analysis of open access publications and altmetric impact indicators. The rest of the considered rankings focus mainly on standard bibliometric indicators from different blocks related to the assessment of education, research, academic impact and international cooperation. Thus, in 2019–2022, the University College London (UK) was the top university in the CWTS Leiden Ranking in terms of the share of open access publications (90.8%) and Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology was ranked the first among Russian universities (66.6%).
18
Puzatykh, Alexander. "Russian institutions of higher education in international rankings: the problem social and environmental sustainability." E3S Web of Conferences 458 (2023): 06003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202345806003.
Full textAbstract:
The article analyzes the place of Russian institutions of higher education in the world leading university rankings not only by educational indicators but also taking into account social and environmental impact. For the study two of the most authoritative rankings: Shanghai University ranking and «QS World University Rankings» were selected, as they are recognized by the majority of the global academic community and try to tackle the world’s greatest environmental, social and governance challenges. The appeal to the international research is due to the fact that recently the importance of the compliance of Russian higher education with leading world standards has been admitted not only at the highest level, but also in the professional circles. We have analyzed the results for the last several years, the basic criteria of the international rankings, the place of Russian universities, and identified positions in which Russian universities are inferior to leading universities World University Rankings.
19
Vidal, Javier, and Camino Ferreira. "Universities Under Pressure: the Impact of International University Rankings." Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research 9, no. 2 (2020): 181. http://dx.doi.org/10.7821/naer.2020.7.475.
Full textAbstract:
This paper synthesizes the characteristics of university rankings that cause pressure or ‘harassment’ on universities and analyses possible strategies for action that can be carried out in the real context of the three main university rankings (QS, THE, ARWU), suggesting the consequences for the so-called world-class universities and others (which represent 95% of the total). Although there is controversy over the criteria of the university ranking systems, many universities are establishing strategies aimed at adapting to these criteria and indicators and improving their positions. This study concludes that international university rankings should not be a relevant source of information to consider the quality of universities because this can have a negative impact on the development of medium- and long-term policies in higher education and the universities themselves. Universities should concentrate on their mission and must provide valid and reliable information to all stakeholders about the level of achievement of their goals.
20
Marconi, Gabriele, and Jo Ritzen. "Determinants of international university rankings scores." Applied Economics 47, no. 57 (2015): 6211–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2015.1068921.
Full text
21
Brzeziński, Jerzy Marian. "Uniwersytet w imadle rankingów." Humaniora. Czasopismo Internetowe 42, no. 2 (2023): 13–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.14746/h.2023.2.1.
Full textAbstract:
The author of the article focuses on a critical assessment of university rankings existing in general, not only in academic, space. Three different rankings with an international reach: (1) The Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) also known as the Shanghai Ranking, (2) Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE), (3) CWTS Leiden Ranking and one Polish ranking: The Perspektywy University Ranking have been subjected to a detailed critical evaluation. The main objection raised against the discussed international rankings is disregarding by them scientific works published in national languages of the authors. This decision of rankings’ creators is particularly detrimental to universities with scientifically strong faculties in the field of humanities and social sciences. The fact that monographs are ignored is difficult to comprehend (e.g. CWTS Leiden Ranking). Moreover, favouring publications in two journals: “Science” and “Nature” as well as the Nobel Prize and the Fields Medal (mathematics) has no deeper justification. The author calls for recognition of monographs and also academic textbooks which shape the culture of university. The percentage proportion of particular criteria in the total assessment leading to ranking results – which, in fact, boils down to marginalising scientific achievements of representatives of humanities and, partly, social sciences – raises the author’s reservations. Finally, if we look at our Polish local “backyard” where universities were fragmented after the Second World War and rebuilt according to the Soviet model of higher education with smaller higher education entities of a narrower profile (medical, agricultural, economic, sports) functioning alongside standard universities which had been stripped of these sections, we will notice that these classic, “full” universities have no chance of competing for a scientifically decent position in world rankings.
22
Lukács, Rita, and Árpád Papp-Váry. "Beyond green campuses: Sustainability rankings as strategic tools for university branding." Prosperitas, In press (2024): 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.31570/prosp_2023_0104.
Full textAbstract:
The paper introduces and compares four prominent sustainable university rankings: People & Planet’s University League, QS World University Rankings: Sustainability, Times Higher Education Impact Ranking, and UI GreenMetric. In the paper, the authors analyse the methodologies, thereby revealing similarities, differences, and top global performers. Additionally, the positions of Hungarian universities are evaluated in these rankings. The study addresses the need for universities to provide more information on their impacts and examines the relationship between sustainability rankings and overall university rankings. Based on the analysis of two global university rankings, no evidence was found about global leaders being the top performers in sustainability dimensions. Large international universities can benefit from overall university rankings, while sustainability rankings might be a good opportunity for smaller universities to differentiate themselves from their competitors. To put it simply: if a university is not performing super well in education and research, focusing on sustainability issues can provide a pathway to achieving a favourable position in sustainability rankings, which offers an alternative recognition and competitive advantage.
23
Kara, Karahan, Galip Cihan Yalçın, Esra Gökçen Kaygısız, and Sercan Edinsel. "Assessing the Academic Performance of Turkish Universities in 2023: A MEREC-WEDBA Hybrid Methodology Approach." Journal of Operations Intelligence 2, no. 1 (2024): 252–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.31181/jopi21202422.
Full textAbstract:
Research and reporting on university rankings serve as valuable tools for students in evaluating universities and understanding their current performance status. Within academic literature, university rankings are established using diverse criteria across various domains, each carrying varying degrees of importance. This study adopts a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) perspective to analyze the academic performance ranking of Turkish Universities in 2023. Data sourced from the 2023 reports of sixty-one universities from Times Higher Education (THE) serve as the basis for this research, with THE indicators—teaching, research, citations, industry income, and international outlook—considered as primary research criteria. The Method based on the Removal Effects of Criteria (MEREC) method is employed to ascertain criterion weights, while the Weighted Euclidean Distance-Based Approach (WEDBA) method is utilized for university ranking. The study identifies "citations" as the criterion of highest significance. Notably, the top-performing universities in the ranking include Çankaya University, Fırat University, and Bahçeşehir University. Furthermore, by comparing the rankings from this study with THE university rankings, the research offers tailored suggestions for universities. This study underscores the importance of deriving criterion weights from university performance datasets rather than relying on fixed weights, facilitating a more nuanced approach to university rankings. Moreover, it presents THE performance rankings for sixty-one Turkish universities, offering valuable insights for strategic planning within the university sector.
24
Choi, Da Jeong. "A Study on the Integration Approach between South Korean National Accreditation for higher education institutions and Major Global University Rankings." Korean Comparative Education Society 33, no. 4 (2023): 49–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.20306/kces.2023.9.30.49.
Full textAbstract:
[Purpose]As we enter the era of the 4th Industrial Revolution, characterized by intensified global competition, the importance of high-quality education and research capabilities has grown significantly. However, there is a projected significant decrease in the number of college admissions due to a declining school-age population, which has led to increased interest in university evaluation systems that influence university reform and government support policies. Nevertheless, recent South Korean universities have experienced declines in some rankings in global university evaluations, and their efforts to enhance international competitiveness are facing limitations.
 [Methods] In this study, I examined indicators from the South Korean domestic university accreditation evaluation known as the “3rd Cycle University Institutional Accreditation”, as well as evaluation indicators from major global university rankings such as QS and THE. I compared the evaluation indicators of QS and THE world university rankings and calculated their similarities. Additionally, detailed indicators between university institutional accreditation evaluations and major global university rankings were compared.
 [Results]The similarity between university institutional accreditation evaluations and major global university rankings(including sustainability evaluations) is very low. However, in the “University Performance and Social Responsibility” domain, which is closely related to global university rankings, there is a high potential for linkage. As a result, I have derived “strengthening indicators” with the aim of enhancing the international competitiveness of universities and indicated “linkage indicators”.
 [Conclusion]By aligning the indicators of legally binding the university accreditation evaluations with those of major global university rankings, it is anticipated that the preparation for domestic university institutional accreditation and the preparation for global university ranking assessments can be conducted simultaneously, thereby assisting in improving universities' international competitiveness and enhancing their internal competitive capabilities.
25
Mmantsetsa, Marope, Wells Peter J., and Florea Silvia. "University Rankings: The Many Sides of the Debate." Management of Sustainable Development 6, no. 1 (2014): 39–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/msd-2014-0006.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Within the context of bourgeoning institutions that rank higher education institutions, this paper examines the merits and demerits of university rankings and diverse ranking methodologies. It explores and presents recent developments and diversification of international rankings and highlights their general trend towards more broadly balanced and multidimensional criteria. The paper concludes that like any other complex endeavour, rankings have their pros and cons but the latter does not justify their abandonment. What is required is public education that builds a discerning user who can optimally gain from the use of rankings while avoiding their pitfalls. The original version of this article was first published in the UNESCO volume Rankings and Accountability in Higher Education: Uses and Misuses (2013) Paris: UNESCO.
26
Techarattanased, Nattapong, and Pleumjai Sinarkorn. "FACTORS OF HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS RANKING (COMPARISON OF THREE WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS)." EUrASEANs: journal on global socio-economic dynamics, no. 3(16) (June 25, 2019): 62–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.35678/2539-5645.3(16).2019.62-70.
Full textAbstract:
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.
27
Ji, ChenYu. "The development of world’s best universities -Visual analysis of TIMES university rankings based on Tableau." Advances in Education, Humanities and Social Science Research 8, no. 1 (2023): 410. http://dx.doi.org/10.56028/aehssr.8.1.410.2023.
Full textAbstract:
With the stable and gradual development of the world economy, people have lived a better life than in the previous decade. In order to allow children to receive better education, studying abroad has become a very popular choice for students. The rapid increase in the number of international students also provides sufficient research motivation significance for how to screen the work of world universities. The Times Higher Education World University rankings, as a well-recognized basis for world university rankings, has become the research focus of this paper. In addition, the methodology of THE world university rankings and the original database (from kaggle) of the research on the 2023 university rankings are emphasized, and the analysis and research work are mainly carried out from the three aspects of teaching; research and citations. Enter the data into Tableau to get an intuitive visual chart to illustrate the ranking of world-class universities and the relationship between the above three aspects. At the same time, it intuitively shows the ranking of the world's top universities’ distribution, also the number and popularity of international students. Give international students objective advice on studying abroad to help students choose the universities they are interested in more intuitively.
28
Elbawab, Roba. "University Rankings and Goals: A Cluster Analysis." Economies 10, no. 9 (2022): 209. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/economies10090209.
Full textAbstract:
Nowadays, university rankings are used to assess all aspects of universities. Due to the impact of university rankings on assessing the performance of universities, this research aims to explore university rankings in depth. University rankings are considered contributors to assessing university performance. Previous literature showed different types of goals, such as output and support goals, where the literature advised to align between these two types of goals. Universities have different goals, but still, university rankings measure all universities on the same criteria. Subsequently, this research has used the most used university rankings in the literature, QS world ranking dataset. Then unsupervised machine learning was performed to cluster the universities. The results divided universities among four clusters. This study helps in allocating the university in the adequate cluster. This study helps university managers define the goals of their universities. The study recommends universities align their support goals with their output goals. The study recommends universities to develop international goals and strategies, and support the research in the universities by supporting the scholars. This study’s novelty lies in connecting the university rankings and goals using management analytics in education.
29
Magauova, Akmaral Sabitollayevna, and Zhamilya Targynovna Makhambetova. "INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN THE TRAINING OF DOCTORAL STUDENTS." ŠVIETIMAS: POLITIKA, VADYBA, KOKYBĖ / EDUCATION POLICY, MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY 11, no. 1 (2019): 38–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.48127/spvk-epmq/19.11.38.
Full textAbstract:
Al-Farabi Kazakh National University became the first University in Kazakhstan to sign the Bologna Declaration (Italy) on September 16, 2003 and today holds the leadership in international rankings. According to the research of the international Agency QS, in the ranking of the best universities of the world KazNU takes 220 place. In the global ranking "UI Green Metric Ranking of World Universities" University took 172 place and thus entered the top 200 most environmentally friendly universities in the world. In February 2014, al-Farabi Kazakh National University was entrusted to lead the Global hub of the United Nation Academic Impact (UN Academic influence) on sustainable development.
30
SLYUSARENKO, Olena. "MEASURING TOOLS QUALITIES OF EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES IN THE CONTEXT OF ENSURING EFFICIENCY UNDER THE CONDITIONS OF THE STATE OF WAR AND POST-WAR RECONSTRUCTION OF THE COUNTRY." Cherkasy University Bulletin: Pedagogical Sciences, no. 2 (2023): 5–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.31651/2524-2660-2023-2-5-14.
Full textAbstract:
Summary. This article the determined that there are various mechanisms for assessing the quality of educa-tional activity of higher education institutions: accredita-tion, framework and rating, but university ratings are the most optimal mechanism for measuring the quality of educational activity in the context of ensuring its effec-tiveness. The indicators for measuring the quality of edu-cational activity used in the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG), the European Teaching Rankings (THE Europe Teaching Rankings) were analyzed the Shanghai Aca-demic Ranking of World Universities (Shanghai Ranking, ARWU), the Times Higher Education World University Rankings and the QS (Quacquarelli Symonds Ltd) World University Rankings, QS), national rating "TОР-200". According to the criteria of dominance of objective or subjective and result or reputation components, the main international university rankings can be ranked in the following order: (Shanghai Ranking) – objective, result; THE World University Rankings – objective-subjective, result-reputational; QS World University Rankings –sub-jective-objective, reputation-resultative; reputational andadvertising.The use of this approach to ensure the quality of edu-cational activity will improve the reputation of national universities in the world educational space, and in the modern conditions of war and in the period of post-war reconstruction, it will provide an opportunity to update and update educational programs, increase the im-portance of universities as a leading component of the socio-economic recovery of the country.
31
Black, Ervin L., Lesley Stainbank, Dan Elnathan, et al. "Usage of Journal Rankings: An International Perspective." Journal of International Accounting Research 16, no. 3 (2017): 1–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/jiar-10571.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACTEstablished by the Global Engagement Task Force, this committee was charged with examining the usage of journal rankings internationally. Through questionnaires, literature review, and discussions with various international accounting organizations we gain a better understanding of the uses and challenges of journal rankings. Journal rankings are used by governments, professional accounting bodies, university organizations, individual universities, schools, and departments to evaluate the quality and quantity of faculty research productivity. Rewards for journal publications differ around the world, but can range from promotion and tenure to monetary rewards. Publishing in a journal that is on a journal list does provide some weight or legitimacy to the publication and thereby assists in promoting the academic's career, yields monetary awards, or is in other ways beneficial to the academic. However, there is a danger in using a one-size-fits-all model. We caution strongly against using journal rankings to primarily assess the research quality of individuals or even small groups, because rankings are by design unsuited for this purpose. When journal rankings are used, they should be used in conjunction with other metrics. It is highly unlikely that a single solution with regard to the usage of journal ranking lists can be proposed. Rather, different accounting schools and/or departments need to set up their own guidelines as to how journal ranking lists can be used in decision making. The balance of the evidence suggests that journal ranking lists should be used with caution, and should not be used to assess individuals or small groups, or to assess research quality across disciplines.
32
Nikiforova, E. V., and K. Yu Burtsevа. "Development of University Ranking System in Russia." Accounting. Analysis. Auditing 6, no. 1 (2019): 69–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.26794/2408-9303-2019-6-1-69-75.
Full textAbstract:
The article deals with the modern trends in both the international and Russian educational systems, as well as the trends in the rankings of universities. There were studied and introduced domestic rankings of universities, created by the media and professional communities, the most famous of which are the Expert RA rating and rating of “Interfax”. The most reliable domestic rating that has passed an independent auditing procedure has become the Moscow International University ranking “The three University missions” (MosIUR). The article justifies the necessity for the development of the Russian system of ranking of domestic and foreign universities, which will improve the political status of Russia and motivate universities to compete. As part of the improvement and development of “The three University missions” rating there has been proposed the group rating of universities. The proposed recommendations for the formation of ranking groups for universities are acceptable not only for MosIUR but also for the ranking systems of universities such as Expert RA rating and Interfax, as well as other domestic and foreign media, agencies and professional communities.
33
Khrustalev, M. B., N. Yu Turbina, and A. A. Maksimova. "RUSSIAN MEDICAL UNIVERSITIES IN INTERNATIONAL RANKINGS: COMPARISON OF SCIENTOMETRIC CRITERIA." Scientific Notes of the I. P. Pavlov St. Petersburg State Medical University 25, no. 3 (2018): 25–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.24884/1607-4181-2018-25-3-25-34.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction. Currently, globalization and market economy have led to the necessary improving competitiveness of the universities. The parameters of academic efficiency along with reputation indicators become the main criteria for inclusion in international and domestic rankings and thus affect the financial well-being of the university.The objectiveof this study is to compare the indicators of scientific activity of the largest Russian medical universities and the foreign non-English speaking university that conducts training in medicine, according to data obtained from scientometric databases and to determine the prospects for including Russian medical universities into the leading international rankings.Material and methods.The publication activity of 9 largest Russian medical universities for 5 years was analyzed: the number of articles and the number of citations. For comparison, we used data from a similar number of employees of a foreign university that trains students in medicine, included in international rankings. The sources were the Scopus database, as well as international rankings: Times Higher Education, Academic Ranking of World Universities and QS World University Rankings.Results. Only two Russian medical universities are mentioned in the bottom lines (1000+) in the THE ranking and none of them fall into the QS WUR ranking. However, while maintaining the current trends of increasing the number of publications in Scopus, in the next 2–3 years there are prospects for inclusion in the THE ranking of «Pavlov First Saint Petersburg State Medical University» and «A. I. Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry».Conclusion. Based on the analysis of publication activity of the largest medical universities in Russia, it can be noted that it is necessary to develop international scientific cooperation and develop strategies for improving self citation in universities, and also need to work more actively with graduates and their employers.
34
Rūsīte, Evija. "Evaluation of the Significance of the Rankings of Higher Education Institutions." Humanities and Social Sciences: Latvia 28, no. 2 (2020): 91–100. http://dx.doi.org/10.22364/hssl.28.2.06.
Full textAbstract:
More and more attention is being paid to university rankings – for student and financing attraction, and for research and graduate employment of the respective university – the reputation of universities is becoming more and more important. However, it is important to underline, that only approximately 1–3% of the world universities (200–500 universities) are represented in the most popular international rankings. Previous studies confirm that most international rankings focus predominantly on indicators related to the research function of universities. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to search for some possible solutions for more effective research work organisation at the universities and correct reflection of achieved results to raise their position in university rankings. The methods used in this study are scientific publication analysis, investigation of university ranking results with special attention to research organisation at the university and expert interviews and expert survey. Main findings: possible solutions for more effective research work organisation at the universities with aim to raise the position in different university ratings, are innovative encouragement and financial support of academic staff for active scientific publication creation, as well as practical and methodological support in the preparing of high level publication for young scientists. Also significant aspect is support of academic staff for international communication and extensive information on research results.
35
Khan, Md Imran. "Evaluation of Bangladesh Universities Ranking in the Perspective of World University Ranking." East African Scholars Journal of Education, Humanities and Literature 6, no. 07 (2023): 301–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.36349/easjehl.2023.v06i07.005.
Full textAbstract:
University ranking has been a prominent issue of debate at both the international and national levels in recent years. Many worldwide university rankings have been published in recent years, each based on different performance measures. These evaluations take into account a variety of factors, including the institution's reputation, the student-to- faculty ratio, the percentage of international students, Nobel and other awards, the number of highly cited papers, the number of articles published in Science and Nature, the h-index, web visibility, and other factors due to severe global competition, international ranking systems seldom include any local universities from the standpoint of a developing country like Bangladesh. While it is becoming more difficult for institutions from developing countries to be included in these rankings, the major ranking indicators should be adapted or updated to compete. The study aimed to evaluate Bangladesh Universities ranking from the Perspective of the World University Ranking system by reviewing some of the most commonly referenced university ranking methodologies. A systematic literature review method was followed for this study. Relevant articles and literature were collected from different data sources like google scholar, research gate, Scopus, Web of Science, and ERIC.
36
Arwag, Hani M., Yasser F. Hassan, and Ashraf S. EL Saiad. "Ranking Egyptian Universities Using Fuzzy Logic." International Journal of Emerging Research in Management and Technology 6, no. 8 (2018): 40. http://dx.doi.org/10.23956/ijermt.v6i8.117.
Full textAbstract:
During the last quarter of a century, university ranking systems have been developed as an outcome of new academic fields and metrics. Although they have attracted wide attention from policy makers, students, academicians, authorities and the media, they have been subjected to criticism. Any university that does not change as with the environment around them is doomed to fail. The results of universities in international rankings are a disturbing and foreboding danger. Universities are seeking to improve its services, students, citizens and visitors, to achieve better results in the international rankings. The objective of this study is spread public awareness of the importance of ranking of universities and higher education institutions, and push these institutions towards excellence and competition in the quality of scientific research and academic performance, and spreading the culture of the orientation about the universities rankings and higher education institutions in Egypt. By using web service we have collected data on Egyptian Universities of interest from a more number of web Services for fifteen Indicator each Egyptian University, We have constructed the weight matrix for the Indicator, Where an algorithm was created to Ranking the Egyptian universities using the membership function (trapezoidal ) in fuzzy logic Has been applied the fuzzy logic algorithm on the that data, we have compared the results with some International rankings for example (QS,U.S Nwes, Webmatix).This study showed positive results about comparing the results we get with some of the global rankings, the study confirmed that the Egyptian universities have high capabilities in the field of scientific research.
37
Hamdan, Musa Abdullah, and Rateb Salameh Al-Soud. "The Application Degree of the Jordanian Public Universities of the (QS (World University Rankings Standards and Proposed Educational Policies to Improve their Ranking in this Classification." Jordanian Educational Journal 9, no. 2 (2024): 264–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.46515/jaes.v9i2.514.
Full textAbstract:
The study aimed to determine the degree to which Jordanian public universities apply the standards of the World University Rankings (QS) and proposed educational policies to improve their ranking in this world ranking. The descriptive survey methodology was used. The study sample consisted of (285) academic leaders from Jordanian public universities who were selected using a random cluster sampling method. The results of the study indicated that the degree of application of the Jordanian public universities to the standards of the world university rankings (QS) from the point of view of academic leaders was moderate in all five domains of study, which were: academic reputation, scientific research, international dimension, job reputation, and. Academic accreditation. The results also showed that there were no statistically significant differences (α=0.05) between the mean of the study sample members’ perceptions of the degree to which Jordanian public universities apply the standards of the world university rankings (QS) according to the variables of job position and university. In light of the results of the study, a group of educational policies were proposed to improve the ranking of these universities in this world university rankings (QS).
38
Biolcati Rinaldi, Ferruccio, Daniele Checchi, Chiara Guglielmetti, Silvia Salini, and Matteo Turri. "Ranking e valutazione: il caso delle classifiche delle universitŕ." RIV Rassegna Italiana di Valutazione, no. 41 (May 2009): 81–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.3280/riv2008-041006.
Full textAbstract:
- Abstract The paper consists of two parts. The first is more general: it introduces to university ranking, shows the leading international ranking, discusses the uses people make of rankings. The second focuses on Italian ranking Censis-la Repubblica developing two different kinds of analyses: after considering indicators validity and reliability, principal components analysis and cluster analysis are applied to a partial replication of Censis-la Repubblica data. A list of points to pay attention comes out of these analyses: it can be useful when defining rankings of complex institutions such as universities.Key words: ranking, university ranking, Censis-la Repubblica, validity and reliability, normalisation and combination of indicators.
39
Khan, Hira, Khairul Anuar Mohammad Shah, Jamshed Khalid, Majed Ageel A. Harnmal, and Anees Janee Ali. "Globalization and University Rankings: Consequences and Prospects." International Journal of Higher Education 9, no. 6 (2020): 190. http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v9n6p190.
Full textAbstract:
This study focuses on the effect of globalization on university ranking and current developments and challenges that HEIs face in the global higher education market. It provides detailed information about the origins of international ranking systems, diversification of university rankings and strategic planning of higher education institutes. Moreover, this study describes the global university classification, continuous exposure to elite universities, neglect of the humanities, arts and the social sciences researches, limited description of methods and indigent metrics. The expected effects on ranking system amid the COVID-19 crisis are mentioned which are widely being discussed by the researchers. The study concludes that there is a threat that universities which are investing time and money in accumulating and using statistics and data for the sake of improvement in their performance for the rankings may destabilize themselves from the development in other areas such as learning, teaching or community involvement.
40
Handayani, Tri, and Daivangga Maheswari. "Diponegoro University Heading to become a Research University (Phase I – Phase IV) Between Expectation and Reality." E3S Web of Conferences 202 (2020): 03026. http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202020203026.
Full textAbstract:
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.
41
Popov, A. A., and P. P. Glukhov. "The Role of Universities in the Competitiveness of Cities and Urban Agglomerations." Vysshee Obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia 29, no. 11 (2020): 75–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.31992/0869-3617-2020-29-11-75-87.
Full textAbstract:
The article examines the problem of assessing the competitiveness of universities from the perspective of regional and urban development. The paper raises the question of taking into account the criteria aimed at examining the benefits of universities for the territory of presence in the modern methodology of assessing the effectiveness of universities. The article considers the advisability of integrating the results of international university rankings in the development of indices which assess the impact of universities on urban development. It includes a review of the methodologies of compiling international city rankings (Global Cities Index, Cities of opportunity, Mercer Quality of Living, The Global City Competitiveness Index, QS Best Student Cities) in order to identify the content and significance of the criteria aimed at assessment of the effectiveness of universities. The paper gives a critical assessment of international university rankings (Qs World University Rankings, Times Higher Education, Academic Ranking of World Universities). It also proposes criteria to evaluate universities from the perspective of the benefits they bring to the cities in which they are present. The article was prepared as part of the research work of the state task of the RANEPA under the President of the Russian Federation.
42
Mihus, Iryna. "OVERVIEW OF THE METHODOLOGY OF UNIVERSITIES` INTERNATIONAL RANKINGS FOR MEETING THE CHALLENGES OF OPEN SCIENCE." PEDAGOGY AND EDUCATION MANAGEMENT REVIEW, no. 1 (March 31, 2023): 13–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.36690/2733-2039-2023-1-13.
Full textAbstract:
International rankings directly affect the development of universities around the world, especially in the context of Open Science.The purpose of the article is a comparative analysis of the methodology for calculating the main international university rankings and establishing the readiness of their transformation to meet the requirements of open science. The methodological basis of the study was the methodology of the main international universities presented on their websites. The article analyzes the methodologies of the main international university rankings and highlights the main criteria by which the rankings are calculated. According to the results of the conducted research, the main sources of information necessary for determining international ratings were systematized, namely: Information from official sources external to the university, which is publicly available; Results of a survey of the academic community; University survey results; Student survey results; The results of the survey of employers; Information from the university website; Information on scientific profiles of the university; Information on scientific profiles of university employees; Information from the websites of scientific journals; Information from university repositories. The main features that universities should take into account in order to achieve higher positions in international rankings, which will become possible if they comply with the requirements of Plan S regarding Open Science, have been clarified.
43
Bekheet, Heider Nima. "International University Rankings and The Accessibility of University Websites: An Analysis of Arabic and Iraqi Universities." Akkad Journal Of Multidisciplinary Studies 1, no. 3 (2022): 229–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.55202/ajms.v1i3.39.
Full textAbstract:
Prioritizing educational achievements, notably higher education, is critical for economic and social growth in developing or developed countries. Educational institutions in general, whether universities, institutes, or others, seek to apply their academic programs to their inputs through the most advanced scientific methods to produce program-digesting outputs prepared for entry into the labor market. As a result, educational institutions are often classified according to many worldwide classifications, ranked sequentially according to the type in charge of this process and the criteria and indicators used. One of the most well-known classifications in this field is that of China's Shanghai Jiao Tong University. The Times THES-QS ranking of world universities THES QS World University Rankings, and a third classification, no less significant than the previous two, is that of the Spanish Webometrics website. Arab institutions have typically been excluded from higher ranks in these three rankings, save one of Saudi Arabia's universities. Nevertheless, it was listed among the top 200 institutions in the online metrics webometrics ranking when King Saud University was placed 99th after being ranked 100 in the second edition of 2010.
44
Augusto Chaves Guimarães, José, D. Grant Campbell, Suellen Oliveira Milani, and Helber Holland. "Cultural Biases in Knowledge Organization Systems: A Discussion Regarding International University Rankings." NASKO 7, no. 1 (2019): 48. http://dx.doi.org/10.7152/nasko.v7i1.15621.
Full textAbstract:
This paper aims to: 1. present university rankings as knowledge organization systems; 2. compare the structures from the following rankings: Times, QS, Shangai, and Linden; and 3. point out cultural biases which permeate these university rankings.
45
Prikhodko, L. V., A. N. Amerslanova, and E. A. Kameneva. "University Financial Support and Academic Ranking: Aspects of Interconnection." Finance: Theory and Practice 28, no. 4 (2024): 157–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.26794/2587-5671-2024-28-4-157-180.
Full textAbstract:
Increasing the competitiveness of Russian education is an important national strategic priority, enshrined within the framework of the national project “Education” and the concept of Russia’s humanitarian policy abroad. National and international academic rankings, despite the barriers that have arisen are a highly proven information resource in the world for all categories of participants in the higher education system. The purpose of the study is to identify whether there is an interconnection between a university’s financial support and its position in academic rankings. The authors use the classical correlation analysis, ranking and comparison of universities’ funding amounts and their position change in academic rankings. The examined development strategies, competitiveness improvement programs, sustainable development reports of the Russian and world’s universities that are constantly improving their positions in the world rankings. Based on the results obtained conclude that there is no direct interconnection between universities’ funding amounts and their positions in the rankings and a determining factor in the promotion of the universities in the academic rankings. For universities, direct competitive funding algorithms appear to be more effective in achieving the specific objective than regulatory funding. Russian universities seeking to advance in rankings focus on the combined application of mechanisms and sources of funding.
46
Urdari, Claudia, Teodora Viorica Farcas, and Adriana Tiron-Tudor. "Assessing the legitimacy of HEIs’ contributions to society." Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal 8, no. 2 (2017): 191–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/sampj-12-2015-0108.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose This paper aims to inquire about the types of measurements used by international university rankings and their connection to the higher education institutions’ (HEIs) third mission activities, namely, the contribution to society. Design/methodology/approach The paper is based on a review of literature and content analysis of nine international rankings. Findings This empirical study corroborates that rankings focus on teaching and research activities but rarely measure the HEIs’ connection to practice. Originality/value As the measurements used by international university rankings are claimed to have a huge impact on the structuring of the academic environment, this paper shows that international rankings fail to measure the HEIs’ success in developing third mission activities.
47
Buinytska, Oksana, and Valeriia Smirnova. "INCREASING THE COMPETITIVENESS OF AN OPEN UNIVERSITY IN THE CONTEXT OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT." Continuing Professional Education: Theory and Practice 79, no. 2 (2024): 29–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.28925/2412-0774.2024.2.3.
Full textAbstract:
Digital transformation and globalization processes require universities to adapt to new challenges and demands of society and integrate the principles of sustainable development into all areas of their activities. Under martial law, the issue of increasing the competitiveness of universities is particularly relevant. Each university seeks to attract the most talented students, teachers, and researchers. One of the tools for assessing the competitiveness of universities is international rankings, including those aimed at measuring the achievements of universities in the field of sustainable development and their contribution to the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals, which are an indicator of effective management and improvement of the quality of education for its sustainability. The key rankings that rank universities by their contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals are the Times Higher Education Impact Rankings, QS World University Rankings, and UI GreenMetric. Based on the analysis of the methodologies of these rankings, are identified the main criteria and indicators used in each of the rankings that have a significant impact on the competitiveness of the university in the context of sustainable development. The analysis made it possible to outline the guidelines for the university's activities to improve its ranking in the context of sustainable development, and the recommendations of the European Association of Universities prompted and became the basis for the development of the Roadmap (Policy) for Sustainable Development, which consolidates key strategic guidelines aimed at systematic integration of sustainable development principles in the areas of the university's activities: education for sustainable development, research and innovation, social impact, public engagement, partnership and cooperation, image and sustainable reputation, sustainable infrastructure. The Sustainable Development Roadmap (Policy) is aimed at systematically integrating sustainability principles into the educational process, research, and management processes of the university. The goals identified by the areas of activity will serve as indicators for the development of an internal sustainability rating of the university's structural units, which will improve the university's ranking in international sustainability rankings and ensure its competitiveness.
48
Ordorika, Imanol, and Marion Lloyd. "International rankings and the contest for university hegemony." Journal of Education Policy 30, no. 3 (2014): 385–405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2014.979247.
Full text
49
Anokhina, Elena M. "Ratings as a Constituent Part of the State Policy Aimed at Raising Competitiveness of Russian Universities." Competition law 2 (April 25, 2024): 16–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.18572/2225-8302-2024-2-16-19.
Full textAbstract:
The work is devoted to ratings as components of state policy to increase the competitiveness of Russian universities. It is noted that in recent years ratings have become the most important instrument of public policy in Russia. The results of rating studies are used to regulate many socio-economic processes, including the development of regions and organizations. This is due to the fact that ratings help analyze the process based on the use of a large number of indicators, as well as manage this process. As a tool for regulating the development of higher education, rankings have been actively used in Russia since 2012, when the practical implementation of a program to increase the competitiveness of leading Russian universities among world research and educational centers began. However, focusing on the indicators of international rankings, which do not take into account the peculiarities of the organization of science and higher education in Russia, along with positive results, also had a negative impact on a number of processes in the development of higher education. University rankings developed in Russia, for example, the Moscow International University Ranking “Three University Missions,” contain indicators that take into account the quality of education, the volume of scientific research performed, and the participation of universities in the life of local communities. As a result, it was noted that the experience of developing university rankings in Russia can form the basis for the formation of a national ranking of universities. The effectiveness of the national ranking of universities, as an instrument of state policy of the Russian Ministry of Education and Science, will depend on what indicators are included in the ranking. To determine the most effective indicators, it is necessary to assess the regulatory impact for each indicator, calculate the effects and risks of using indicators that evaluate Russian universities.
50
Vlasova, Inna, and Olha Palamarchuk. "EVALUATION OF EFFICIENCY OF HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS’ ACTIVITIES IN UKRAINE." Scientific Journal of Polonia University 42, no. 5 (2021): 126–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.23856/4217.
Full textAbstract:
The metrics of the European University Association and indicators of other organizations (UK Committee of University Chairs, Teaching Excellence Framework) have been analyzed in the article. Leading international rankings (Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings, Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), QS World University Rankings, THE Impact Rankings, THE Europe Teaching Rankings) have been investigated in order to determine the main indicators of higher education institutions. National metrics and indicators have been studied (rating “Top 200 Ukraine 2020”, the formula for the distribution of expenditures under the article “Training of freelancers and ensuring the activities of their bases of practice” for 2020). The approaches and views of domestic and foreign researchers on the problem of efficiency in the field of higher education have been clarified. As a result of the analysis, the urgency of the problem of finding adequate mechanisms for evaluating the effectiveness of higher education institutions in Ukraine have been proved. Based on the study, a system of indicators for assessing the effectiveness of higher education institutions in Ukraine in terms of organizational, academic, research and financial / economic components have been suggested.