University rankings: A review of methodological flaws

University rankings have gradually become an issue for concern in the academic community worldwide. Several mechanisms with different methodologies have been developed to rank the universities appropriately. However, some ranking tools have notable issues, especially with the indicators adopted. Som...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Issues in educational research Jg. 30; H. 1; S. 79 - 96
Hauptverfasser: Fauzi, Muhammad Ashraf, Tan, Christine Nya-Ling, Daud, Mahyuddin, Awalludin, Muhammad Mukhtar Noor
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: Perth Western Australian Institute for Educational Research Inc 01.01.2020
Schlagworte:
Colleges & universities
Comparative Analysis
Comparative Education
Education
Education, Higher
Educational Indicators
Educational Quality
Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation Methods
Institutional Characteristics
Institutional Evaluation
Methodology
Periodicals
Problems
Quality control
Ratings & rankings
Ratings and rankings
Reputation
Social aspects
Students
Universities
Universities and colleges
Webometrics
ISSN:1837-6290, 0313-7155, 1837-6290
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:University rankings have gradually become an issue for concern in the academic community worldwide. Several mechanisms with different methodologies have been developed to rank the universities appropriately. However, some ranking tools have notable issues, especially with the indicators adopted. Some are based merely on research performance, whilst others have focused solely on specific fields, such as science and technology - which could have deprived those in the arts and social sciences. This paper uses a narrative review to highlight a number of inconsistencies in the methodologies applied to rank universities. Five main ranking tools commonly applied to the world's universities are reviewed, namely 'Quacquarelli Symonds' (QS), 'Times Higher Education' (THE), 'Academic Ranking of World Universities' (ARWU), 'Leiden University' ranking and 'Webometrics' ranking. We found that several flaws in the rankings caused inconsistencies in university placings in different rankings. Suggestions for integrating multiple criteria and indicators for better ranking exercises are proposed.
Bibliographie:Issues in Educational Research, Vol. 30, No. 1, Feb 2020: 79-96
IER2.jpg
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:1837-6290
0313-7155
1837-6290