Top 100 Ranked Indian Institutions by NIRF 2021 in Engineering: An Interesting Analysis of Individual/Combined Metrics

Dr. Sivaperumal S., Dr. A. Abudhahir
{"title":"Top 100 Ranked Indian Institutions by NIRF 2021 in Engineering: An Interesting Analysis of Individual/Combined Metrics","authors":"Dr. Sivaperumal S., Dr. A. Abudhahir","doi":"10.16920/jeet/2023/v36is2/23080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper analyses scores of the top 100 institutions ranked by the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF- 2021), Ministry of Education, Government of India in the Engineering category. It considered all five major parameters: Teaching, Learning & Resources, Research and Professional Practice, Graduation Outcome, Outreach and Inclusivity and Perception. Albeit the methodology has been publicly available, the participating institutions could not verify their scores for the ten sub-parameters (metric/combined metric) out of 17 even after the announcement of rankings every year. Of the ten, perception is one such parameter that carries 10% weight. The NIRF defines the functions for nine sub-parameters based on the data submitted by the participating institutions. Having done the extensive analysis in this work, it is found that there are quite a few cases where the function, representing the relationship between the data and score, is neither monotonically increasing nor decreasing. Hence, this paper compares the percentage change in average scores of the top 10, 25, 50 and 100, and bottom 10 and 50 ranked institutions on various parameters/sub-parameters to the extent possible and, in a few cases, reveals the nonlinear-multimodal function correlating the data and the scores. Finally, this work concludes with a few recommendations for the institutions to perform well in NIRF rankings in future and provides suggestions to NIRF to rank the institutions based on their size, years of existence and funding support by the government. Keywords — Engineering Education, Rankings, Quality Education, Ranking Parameters","PeriodicalId":52197,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education Transformations","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Engineering Education Transformations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2023/v36is2/23080","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper analyses scores of the top 100 institutions ranked by the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF- 2021), Ministry of Education, Government of India in the Engineering category. It considered all five major parameters: Teaching, Learning & Resources, Research and Professional Practice, Graduation Outcome, Outreach and Inclusivity and Perception. Albeit the methodology has been publicly available, the participating institutions could not verify their scores for the ten sub-parameters (metric/combined metric) out of 17 even after the announcement of rankings every year. Of the ten, perception is one such parameter that carries 10% weight. The NIRF defines the functions for nine sub-parameters based on the data submitted by the participating institutions. Having done the extensive analysis in this work, it is found that there are quite a few cases where the function, representing the relationship between the data and score, is neither monotonically increasing nor decreasing. Hence, this paper compares the percentage change in average scores of the top 10, 25, 50 and 100, and bottom 10 and 50 ranked institutions on various parameters/sub-parameters to the extent possible and, in a few cases, reveals the nonlinear-multimodal function correlating the data and the scores. Finally, this work concludes with a few recommendations for the institutions to perform well in NIRF rankings in future and provides suggestions to NIRF to rank the institutions based on their size, years of existence and funding support by the government. Keywords — Engineering Education, Rankings, Quality Education, Ranking Parameters
2021年NIRF工程学排名前100的印度院校:对单个/综合指标的有趣分析
本文分析了印度国家大学排名框架(NIRF- 2021)、教育部、印度政府在工程类中排名前100位的大学的分数。它考虑了所有五个主要参数:教学、学习与资源、研究与专业实践、毕业成果、拓展和包容性以及感知。尽管该方法是公开的,但即使在每年公布排名之后,参与机构也无法核实它们在17个子参数(指标/综合指标)中的10个子参数的得分。在这10个参数中,感知是其中一个权重为10%的参数。NIRF根据参与机构提交的数据,定义了九个子参数的功能。在这项工作中进行了广泛的分析,发现有相当多的情况下,表示数据与分数之间关系的函数既不是单调递增的,也不是单调递减的。因此,本文尽可能比较排名前10名、25名、50名和100名以及排名后10名和50名的院校在各个参数/子参数上的平均分数的百分比变化,并在少数情况下揭示了数据与分数之间的非线性多模态函数关系。最后,本工作总结了一些建议,以使这些机构在未来的NIRF排名中表现良好,并为NIRF根据其规模,存在年限和政府资金支持程度对机构进行排名提供建议。关键词:工程教育,排名,素质教育,排名参数
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
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
122
×
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