At the level of all international structures (UN, Governments, large international companies, ...), the ranking of universities is increasingly talked about. So it has become the choice of student recruitment, the choice of funding research projects. It allows decision-makers, students to make their choice. There are several types of rankings: - Academic Ranking of World Universities (Jiao Tong University of Shanghai in China in 2003); - Scimago; - Times Higher Education World University Rankings; - Webometrics; - Global university ranking; Each of its institutions apply different classification criteria. The choice of these criteria determines the position in the classification. What do you propose as criteria for ranking universities?
Of course financial resources, I agree with the professor Jasim Hassen
, but also human resources (researchers, students, academic personnel, etc )
To my opinion following four factors must be considered by all the ranking agencies:
1. Faculties: qualifications, association with professional & research organization, specialization
2. Research productivity: funds received, applicability of the research, quality publication.
3. Students support system: infrastructure, repository of academic & research materials, placement, exchange program.
4. Alumni: interaction, contribution.
Universities are ranked either according to the Shanghai ranking, which is based on quantifiable objective data, or according to the THES (Times Higher Education Supplement) ranking, which relies heavily on subjective expert assessments. These different classification methods and their relevance are strongly criticized and in particular the assertion that the criteria are relevant and objective. No classification criterion assesses the quality of teaching or the level of graduate students, which is paradoxical in a classification of institutions one of whose two primary vocations, alongside research, is teaching and the vocational training of pupils, most of whom are not intended for research. Furthermore, it seems illusory, not to say unrealistic, to propose to measure the quality of university work properly and precisely, in all institutions and for the benefit of all the stakeholders concerned. Finally, to assess the quality of higher education and research is not to represent an objective reality, measurable on a scale of 0 to 100. It is a complex question, which must be treated scientifically, by people competent (in bibliometrics, in higher education and research, in techniques of analysis and data processing), in other words by multidisciplinary teams, capable of analyzing with precision the interpretation and the use of the results of assessments.
Quality of research ( especially Nobel price winners among alumni and professors, publication in major journals as Nature)
In my opinion, ranking of universities as such makes no real sense whatsoever: a university excellent in one discipline may be (and usually is) very poor in another. A question making some real sense would be: on which university education (or research) in animal taxonomy (in planetary astronomy, in medieval history of Europe, or in any other concrete, relatively narrow discipline) is better in subjetive opinion of colleagues working in other institutions (and "free-lancers").
Dear Roman Bohdan Hołyński
Dear Colleague,
thank you for your contribution. I absolutely agree with you. In reality, we should classify the disciplines. Like that a university which has 5 disciplines, can be classified first in such discipline, and last in another discipline. classification should be done by research area.
Dear Colleague
I fully agree with you that it is complex and it is complicated. it takes 30 indicators to do this. you also need the real numbers and statistics. some classify universities by website. In summary, I launched this debate to try to see more clearly, and why not a report or article at the end? Once again thank you Best regards
There are many indicators for evaluation, including teacher student ratio, enrollment, publication etc. I think it's a good step for improvement in universities
Must need to follow the six metrics below
- Academic Reputation.
- Employer Reputation.
- Faculty/Student Ratio.
- Citations per faculty.
- International Faculty Ratio.
- International Student Ratio. The Qs ranking system follows these criteria to evaluate the universities
Universities ranking should be based on three main core areas: research, academia, and community-service.
La clasificaciòn de manera especial debe considerar indicadores de tesis publicadas que resuelvan problemàticas y sus artículos científicos publicados en revistas de alto impacto. estos debieran ser los dos indicadores mas importantes que justifiquen la existencia de una universidad al servicio de la comunidad.
University ranking should be based on the "Quality of Education", "Quality of Faculty", "Quality of new findings in Research Area like Pubished work in Science and nature" and "Per Capita Performance" ........
A. Kettab, important as the question you pose is, I think at its heart should lie a balance between the quantitative and the qualitative yardsticks against which stakeholder experiences of Universities should be focused on. This is an interesting area and worth debating and discussing.
It is important to note that I am grateful to have a unique and diverse perspective on this subject, having been an Assistant Professor, Co-Chair and Department Lead at numerous colleges/universities, and serving as a Leadership Consultant for businesses that frequently interface with other educational institutions.
If we, as a society, hope to shift to an expansive, more inclusive, and conscious educational paradigm, I would highly encourage criteria for ranking to include, but not exclusive, to the following:
1. A means by which to measure the capacity for "Critical Thinking" for students as a foundational outcome regardless of the subject matter studied.
2. To ascertain the capacity of the Universities/Colleges to "Walk the Talk" of their mission - i.e. If the goal is to empower students to successfully contribute beneficially in the world, have issues of power and dynamic governance been established and evaluated? Questions might include whether administrators, teachers, executives, and students are treated respectfully, through our constitutional rights and whether they are allowed to share multiple sides of issues, voicing their suggestions with transparency, consent (not consensus), and fair representation.
3. Whether the curriculum for each area of study has been updated as much as time and energy permit - have sufficient resources been allocated for the integration of valuable older wisdom and cutting-edge research/experiences?
4. How effectively has the University/College/Institute of learning created a bridge for students to take the theory-to-practice application for their subsequent career paths? i.e. Partnerships, collaborative grants, paid-unpaid internships, permission-based tracking of student outcomes.
5. Determining whether the budgetary structure allows for review and the fair and equitable exchange of goods and services - Are professors/teachers/trainers paid fairly for the roles they assume? Are those individuals providing effective teaching? Are evaluations done to determine both the efficacy and quality of content? Are people "expected" to evaluate positively because they are receiving huge funding from ___________ (Do the universities have appropriate safeguards against "Conflicts of Interest" when so many are vying for money and resources?
6. For research-related institutions, it is critical to include a similar criterion that minimizes "Conflicts of Interest" (especially related to 'donations with strings attached' (i.e. "I'll rub your back if you rub mine" or the age-old practice of wining and dining Doctors to promote certain new drugs, etc.) and maximizes ethical oversight that is REAL - not merely promotionally 'in theory.' This is also related to "who gets published" - how applicable are those published papers/experiments/ metadata for students and the institutes themselves? Are the studies replicable/verifiable?
7. Evaluating how accurate 5-year plans have been (i.e. integrating intuitive visioning and logical outcomes) - this includes how robust the plans were, are the budgetary calculations in alignment with the expected outcomes, how resilient has the university been, is there a balance between distance learning and in-person or hands-on, how have they handled diversity/retention/trouble-shooting? i.e. How have these institutes of higher learning handled this global shutdown with COVID19?
This is a fantastic question for dialogue! Thank you!
Sincerely - Joyce Anastasia, MA/MFA (Leadership Consultant-Lead By Wisdom)
According to CGC group provide the better platform for students in practical ways. Implement the method of create a sold bonding between teachers and students. Impact on student learning is therefore a natural criterion for evaluating teaching.
Evaluation of universities provides feedback to both, university and students. In general, evaluation results give us essential information about what our students are learning and about the extent to which we are meeting our teaching goals.
1. Faculty quality (in terms of research, publications, patents, innovation)
2. Student's quality and placement
3. Entrepreneurship skill etc.
But political intrusion has spoiled everything
There are three criteria:
1 - the quality of teaching and learning
2 - Research activities
3 - Community services
Through The Quality of Teaching, Research, and Community Services.
https://www.topuniversities.com/qs-world-university-rankings/methodology
The criteria used by Academic Ranking of World Universities for evaluating universities are (a) quality of education (b) quality of faculty (c) research output and (d) per capita academic performance. These are well thought out criteria and explain clearly why some universities may be ranked higher than others.
www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU-Methodology-2012.hml
Oswell: these "criteria" sound well but mean nothing (at least nothing more than if formulated simply "ranking of universities is based on their quality") - as Hungarians say, "nesze semmit, fogd meg jól!" ["here's nothing, grasp strongly!"]!
"(a) quality of education" - how measured?
"(b) quality of faculty" - what does it concretely mean?
"(c) research output" - in what kind of "units"?
"(d) per capita academic performance" - how evaluated?
Summarily: a great humbug!
In my opinion, the criteria for ranking universities are as follows: - The Number of articles published, number of patents made, number of research projects carried out with success and number of innovations made.
Smaoun: "Number of x, number of y, number of z..." - quatlty, originality, reliability, applicability &c., &c., &c. do not count???
With due respect Roman Bohdan Hołyński, I do not think you bothered to check the link I provided to the Academic Ranking of Universities' website. If you did, you would have found that their criteria mean a lot. They not only show how they are measured but how the various components are weighted as well. As Zimbabweans say: Kuverengesa kunobhadhara (Reading in depth pays).
Oswell: Please note, I do not discuss with the web-site, I am discussing with you, so I expect that the essence, the critical points of your argumentation will be formulated and explained by you and at most supported by something like "see also the similar opinion of..." - only in such situation my discussion with you would make sense - and even then only under the condition that the earlier formulated arguments will be addressed, whereas here, "with due respect Oswell Namasasu, I do not think you bothered to check" my earlier (15 V) comment in which I argued that no general (applied to entire universities and all aspectss of their work) criteria can be even but approximately adequate.. ["In my opinion, ranking of universities as such makes no real sense whatsoever: a university excellent in one discipline may be (and usually is) very poor in another. A question making some real sense would be: on which university education (or research) in animal taxonomy (in planetary astronomy, in medieval history of Europe, or in any other concrete, relatively narrow discipline) is better in subjetive opinion of colleagues working in other institutions (and "free-lancers")].
The reason why respondents give links to websites is to avoid rehearsing arguments which are presented elsewhere. This not only saves time and space, but is the advice given to researchers by ResearchGate. Of course, Roman Bohdan Hołyński is entitled to his opinion just as anybody is entitled to their opinion. I gave mine and I stand by it.
Well, if you consider that the question has already been fully clarified by "arguments which are presented elsewhere", what is the sense of our discussion here? I have no chance to convince "the Academic Ranking of Universities' website", so will not try to discuss with them or analyse their criteria or argumentation, but - entering this discussion - I did it with the hope that I can know and possibly comment the arguments (including eventual counter-arguments against my comments...) of other participants (e.g. you), formulated by them (the participants, e.g. you) and so read here by all of them (not only known to those who have time and desire to search through web-sites)! So, indeed, my opinion is apparently different from yours: I (unlike you) do not wish to discuss with various web-sites and react to their opinions, but (also apparently unlike you...) I wish to discuss with those interested in my opinions (i.e. with other participants of this discussion) and always try to answer to their directly presented views and arguments.
Open discussion is precisely the purpose of this forum. If readers support your view they will recommend it. There is no point in harping on "my view is the only legitimate one." Time is spent more fruitfully replying to other questions.
Oswell: Yes, you are perfectly right: "There is no point in harping on "my view is the only legitimate one."", and just therefore we should discuss - but discussion does not mean simple unargumented declarations like "The criteria used by Academic Ranking of World Universities for evaluating universities are (a) quality of education (b) quality of faculty (c) research output and (d) per capita academic performance. These are well thought out criteria" [Roma (Oswell Namasasu) locuta, causa finita; I (Oswell Namasasu) have spoken. Howgh!]. The essence of discussion is exchange of arguments and counter-arguments - without argumentation, without substantial reaction to the opponent's arguments, there is only squabble, not discussion!
By the way, "recommendations" do not mean anything - just because they are unargumented, nobody knows why Mr. X or Mrs. Y recommend this or that: some people do not recommend anything, some others recommend almost everything, some recommend both my comment and my opponent's opposite view, some even criticized my opinion that recommendation should mean support of one's view and not only "courteous formality"...
I think it is not the University, but as you are the learner on what contribution you can offer. The arguments hereof is a good one and really appreciates their contributions. But, to be honest, in order for you to measure how talented you are, go to the State University or your country's national University where you can find and meet geniuses.
Thank you, Sir A. Kettab and kind regards.
In my opinion, the criteria for ranking universities are as follows: - The Number of articles published, number of patents made, number of research projects carried out with success and number of innovations made.
In my opinion, the criteria for ranking universities are as follows: - The Number of articles published, number of patents made, number of research projects carried out with success and number of innovations made.
In my opinion, the criteria for ranking universities are as follows: - The Number of articles published, number of patents made, number of research projects carried out with success and number of innovations made.
In my opinion, the criteria for ranking universities are as follows: - The Number of articles published, number of patents made, number of research projects carried out with success and number of innovations made.
In my opinion, the criteria for ranking universities are as follows: - The Number of articles published, number of patents made, number of research projects carried out with success and number of innovations made.
Universities should be ranked using the following aspects in my opinion
1. Number of articles, books and book chapters contributed by staff
2. Number of graduates
3. Quality of degrees offered
4. Availability of research facilities and ability to solicit research funds
The ranking of universities seems based on the money the universities have and seems mainly to reflect technical or scientific subjects. American and Chinese universities are gaining momentum and pulling away but are they really better? American university courses are different to British universities with less content, so can they really be compared in such fashions?
Observation & Evaluation in the teaching & learning process. How to measure spiritual achievement rather than physical accomplishment. We heard behavioral corruption, learning ethics no longer valued, etc on the rise among academicians as well as undergraduates/postgraduates. Are there any proven Research tools to measure university distinction based on human capital spiritual & mindfulness efficiency?
Dear Stanley, more specifically, the ranking of universities is based on the money the university has invested in the ranking, as ranking has high marketing value, and is the most efficient (money-saving) advertisement. Germany has a lot of reputable universities, but we never found their names in the top 50s.
That's already decided by ...ICAR in India ..having every thing including faculty strength infrastructure students placement extracirculum library elp industrial collaboration patient research papers RG and google scholar index of scientists .....collibratoon with international organizations and much more ....
In my opinion, the criteria to be used in the evaluation of a university are:
1. Quality assurance in training (level of teachers, respect for study cycles, supervision of students, evaluation of teaching by students, periodic evaluation of training programs).
2. Quality assurance in research (university scientific project, evaluation of laboratories and research teams,
maintenance of laboratory notebooks and verification of the information contained, definition of the terms of reference for researchers, status and career plans of researchers, international scientific partnership, scientific diplomacy, international scientific publications, etc.)
Successful cohorts of employable graduates, transparent governance, Socially impactful research outcome, effective research teaching nexus, effective staff development opportunities, effective implementation of OBE, extra curricular achievements of its students are can be factors according to me.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Higher Education
- Universities