Corruption and the Rankings?

One of the more interesting things about the publication of the QS and Times Higher Education world rankings is the reaction of university heads to minor rises or falls. Often they -- or their advisors --  display a thorough ignorance of basic procedures which are explained quite clearly by the rankers.

The Director of the Indian Institute of Technology at Kanpur, Indranil Manna, is reported to have said 


' “The standard of teaching, research and job placement are not the criteria for the ranking instead it is based on the paying capabilities of the institutions. An amount of one lakh and fifty thousand dollars needs to be paid to get a good ranking in such lists,” he claimed.
“These global rankings are more of a business rather than based on academic performance of institutions,” he said.'


and


"On IIT-Kanpur ranking at 295 in the 'QS World University Rankings', Manna said the institute was placed on the position based on old information provided on the its website.
“The ranking should have been after a team would have come to IIT-Kanpur and seen how the institute works. There have been so many students of IIT-Kanpur who have achieved so much on the world stage,” he said."


The Director should know that QS does not directly measure the standard of teaching or job placement and makes no claim to do so. Research, however, is measured by a reputation survey and by citations per faculty. Neither of these are very satisfactory but they are certainly criteria for the ranking. As for QS using old information from the IIT website, that is the Institute's fault for not keeping its site up to date, not QS's.

I am not a fan of QS but the claim about paying one and a half lakh dollars for a good ranking is way over the top and I suspect in a few days there will be a statement about a misunderstanding by a junior reporter.

I have a feeling that the Director has been getting mixed up with the QS Stars program.

What should be really frightening to Indian educators and students  is that the Director is apparently on a five member.committee appointed to "understand the methodology of the ranking agencies".

Not a very good start.