A new perspective on university ranking methods worldwide and in the Arab region: facts and suggestions

IF 1.1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Quality in Higher Education Pub Date : 2021-06-16 DOI:10.1080/13538322.2021.1937819

A. R. Altakhaineh, Aseel Zibin

引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT This study reviews three university ranking methodologies: Quacquarelli Sysmonds University Rankings, The Times Higher Education World University Rankings, and the Shanghai Jiao Tong University’s Academic Ranking of World Universities. It also aims to suggest two new methodologies, one for World University Ranking and one for Arab University Ranking, and to propose data collecting tools for the new indicators if any. An online survey which elicited quantitative data and two focus-group discussions which produced qualitative data were used. The results of the survey show that the importance of some indicators as ranked by the respondents was similar to those found in the three international ranking systems, while others were not. The focus-groups suggested new weights for the indicators, since ranking systems overlook the differences between the institutions, resulting in unfair assessment of universities in the Arab region. Thus, new sub-indicators were proposed for both ranking systems.

查看原文本刊更多论文

全球和阿拉伯地区大学排名方法的新视角:事实和建议

摘要本研究综述了三种大学排名方法:Quacquarelli Sysmonds大学排名、泰晤士高等教育世界大学排名和上海交通大学世界大学学术排名。它还旨在提出两种新的方法，一种用于世界大学排名，另一种用于阿拉伯大学排名，并为新指标提出数据收集工具(如果有的话)。一项在线调查获得了定量数据，两次焦点小组讨论产生了定性数据。调查结果显示，受访者排名的一些指标的重要性与三个国际排名系统相似，而其他指标则不同。由于排名系统忽略了院校之间的差异，导致对阿拉伯地区大学的不公平评估，焦点小组建议为这些指标设定新的权重。因此，两种排名系统都提出了新的分指标。

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

Quality in Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

14.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： Quality in Higher Education is aimed at those interested in the theory, practice and policies relating to the control, management and improvement of quality in higher education. The journal is receptive to critical, phenomenological as well as positivistic studies. The journal would like to publish more studies that use hermeneutic, semiotic, ethnographic or dialectical research as well as the more traditional studies based on quantitative surveys and in-depth interviews and focus groups. Papers that have empirical research content are particularly welcome. The editor especially wishes to encourage papers on: reported research results, especially where these assess the impact of quality assurance systems, procedures and methodologies; theoretical analyses of quality and quality initiatives in higher education; comparative evaluation and international aspects of practice and policy with a view to identifying transportable methods, systems and good practice; quality assurance and standards monitoring of transnational higher education; the nature and impact and student feedback; improvements in learning and teaching that impact on quality and standards; links between quality assurance and employability; evaluations of the impact of quality procedures at national level, backed up by research evidence.