Global Ranking and Its Implications in Higher Education

P. Aithal, P. Kumar
{"title":"Global Ranking and Its Implications in Higher Education","authors":"P. Aithal, P. Kumar","doi":"10.19085/sijbpg070301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Higher Education Institutions try to enhance their competitiveness so as to become distinguished centers of learning and research. Various agencies conduct rankings of institutions independent of each other using different criteria. Although the purpose of ranking is to encourage healthy competition and distinguish the best institution in the interest of the learners to choose, the differences in criteria have cast a lot of confusion in building a parity. Academic performance and allied factors, as well as research, publication, and allied factors, are common to all. Some ranking agencies take into consideration industry-institution collaborations, international outlook, alumni, overall reputation, and even financial stability. This paper aims to attempt a comparison of the ranking methodology adopted by selected prominent Global University Ranking Agencies all over the world and throw light on the positive and negative outcomes of the global ranking. Based on in-depth analysis and critical comments on the limitations of these ranking systems, a generic model for balanced global university ranking is also proposed. Given the fact that nations differ, cultures differ, and the context of higher education itself differ across nations, the study illuminates the fallacy and dangers of segregating all institutions under the same mould.","PeriodicalId":153381,"journal":{"name":"Scholedge International Journal of Business Policy & Governance ISSN 2394-3351","volume":"78 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scholedge International Journal of Business Policy & Governance ISSN 2394-3351","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19085/sijbpg070301","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Higher Education Institutions try to enhance their competitiveness so as to become distinguished centers of learning and research. Various agencies conduct rankings of institutions independent of each other using different criteria. Although the purpose of ranking is to encourage healthy competition and distinguish the best institution in the interest of the learners to choose, the differences in criteria have cast a lot of confusion in building a parity. Academic performance and allied factors, as well as research, publication, and allied factors, are common to all. Some ranking agencies take into consideration industry-institution collaborations, international outlook, alumni, overall reputation, and even financial stability. This paper aims to attempt a comparison of the ranking methodology adopted by selected prominent Global University Ranking Agencies all over the world and throw light on the positive and negative outcomes of the global ranking. Based on in-depth analysis and critical comments on the limitations of these ranking systems, a generic model for balanced global university ranking is also proposed. Given the fact that nations differ, cultures differ, and the context of higher education itself differ across nations, the study illuminates the fallacy and dangers of segregating all institutions under the same mould.
全球排名及其对高等教育的影响
高等教育机构努力提高自己的竞争力,以成为杰出的学习和研究中心。不同的机构使用不同的标准对院校进行独立的排名。虽然排名的目的是鼓励良性竞争,并区分出最好的大学,以供学习者选择,但标准的差异给建立平等带来了很多混乱。学术表现和相关因素,以及研究、出版和相关因素,对所有人来说都是共同的。一些排名机构会考虑行业-机构合作、国际视野、校友、整体声誉,甚至财务稳定性。本文旨在尝试比较世界各地选定的著名全球大学排名机构采用的排名方法,并阐明全球排名的积极和消极结果。在深入分析和批判这些排名系统局限性的基础上,提出了一个均衡的全球大学排名通用模型。鉴于国家不同,文化不同,高等教育本身的背景也因国家而异,这项研究阐明了在同一模式下将所有机构隔离开来的谬误和危险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信