大学排名:是时候重新考虑了。

IF 2.2 4区 工程技术 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Bioimpacts Pub Date : 2024-04-06 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.34172/bi.2024.30290
Khaled Moustafa
{"title":"大学排名:是时候重新考虑了。","authors":"Khaled Moustafa","doi":"10.34172/bi.2024.30290","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>University rankings offer some benefits but also come with significant drawbacks. While they can encourage healthy competition, they often lead to unethical practices and prioritize short- term gains over long-term educational purposes. Relying on biased metrics like citations and journal impact factors is a major flaw, potentially misrepresenting the true value of scholarly work. The foremost focus of universities should be on educating proficient students, advancing dependable knowledge, and addressing societal needs. Annual rankings based on one year's criteria and output prove impractical, as research outcomes and educational impact require more time to materialize. It is crucial to consider abandoning or reevaluating ranking systems to prevent biased, financially-driven approaches from causing harm. An internal assessment, gauging satisfaction levels within the university community and the quality of education provided, could offer a more effective approach to ranking universities. Acknowledging the negative impact of journal rankings took decades. It is imperative to avoid subjecting educational systems to similarly detrimental effects from university rankings. The most effective method for ranking universities is through an internal system that takes into account the satisfaction levels of university community members regarding their work conditions and overall institution, as well as whether students are acquiring the education and skills they seek.</p>","PeriodicalId":48614,"journal":{"name":"Bioimpacts","volume":"15 ","pages":"30290"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11830122/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"University rankings: Time to reconsider.\",\"authors\":\"Khaled Moustafa\",\"doi\":\"10.34172/bi.2024.30290\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>University rankings offer some benefits but also come with significant drawbacks. While they can encourage healthy competition, they often lead to unethical practices and prioritize short- term gains over long-term educational purposes. Relying on biased metrics like citations and journal impact factors is a major flaw, potentially misrepresenting the true value of scholarly work. The foremost focus of universities should be on educating proficient students, advancing dependable knowledge, and addressing societal needs. Annual rankings based on one year's criteria and output prove impractical, as research outcomes and educational impact require more time to materialize. It is crucial to consider abandoning or reevaluating ranking systems to prevent biased, financially-driven approaches from causing harm. An internal assessment, gauging satisfaction levels within the university community and the quality of education provided, could offer a more effective approach to ranking universities. Acknowledging the negative impact of journal rankings took decades. It is imperative to avoid subjecting educational systems to similarly detrimental effects from university rankings. The most effective method for ranking universities is through an internal system that takes into account the satisfaction levels of university community members regarding their work conditions and overall institution, as well as whether students are acquiring the education and skills they seek.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48614,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bioimpacts\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"30290\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11830122/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bioimpacts\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34172/bi.2024.30290\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioimpacts","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/bi.2024.30290","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大学排名提供了一些好处,但也有明显的缺点。虽然它们可以鼓励良性竞争,但它们往往会导致不道德的行为,并且优先考虑短期利益而不是长期教育目的。依赖引用和期刊影响因子等有偏见的指标是一个主要缺陷,可能会歪曲学术工作的真实价值。大学的首要重点应该是培养熟练的学生,传授可靠的知识,满足社会需求。基于一年的标准和产出的年度排名被证明是不切实际的,因为研究成果和教育影响需要更多的时间来实现。考虑放弃或重新评估排名系统是至关重要的,以防止有偏见的、受经济驱动的方法造成伤害。一项内部评估,衡量大学社区的满意度和所提供的教育质量,可以为大学排名提供更有效的方法。承认期刊排名的负面影响花了几十年时间。必须避免让教育系统受到大学排名的类似不利影响。最有效的大学排名方法是通过一个内部系统,该系统考虑到大学社区成员对其工作条件和整体机构的满意度,以及学生是否获得了他们所寻求的教育和技能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
University rankings: Time to reconsider.

University rankings offer some benefits but also come with significant drawbacks. While they can encourage healthy competition, they often lead to unethical practices and prioritize short- term gains over long-term educational purposes. Relying on biased metrics like citations and journal impact factors is a major flaw, potentially misrepresenting the true value of scholarly work. The foremost focus of universities should be on educating proficient students, advancing dependable knowledge, and addressing societal needs. Annual rankings based on one year's criteria and output prove impractical, as research outcomes and educational impact require more time to materialize. It is crucial to consider abandoning or reevaluating ranking systems to prevent biased, financially-driven approaches from causing harm. An internal assessment, gauging satisfaction levels within the university community and the quality of education provided, could offer a more effective approach to ranking universities. Acknowledging the negative impact of journal rankings took decades. It is imperative to avoid subjecting educational systems to similarly detrimental effects from university rankings. The most effective method for ranking universities is through an internal system that takes into account the satisfaction levels of university community members regarding their work conditions and overall institution, as well as whether students are acquiring the education and skills they seek.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Bioimpacts
Bioimpacts Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmaceutical Science
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
36
审稿时长
5 weeks
期刊介绍: BioImpacts (BI) is a peer-reviewed multidisciplinary international journal, covering original research articles, reviews, commentaries, hypotheses, methodologies, and visions/reflections dealing with all aspects of biological and biomedical researches at molecular, cellular, functional and translational dimensions.
×
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