The latest THE world rankings have just been announced. For most of the indicators there are few surprises. There are more universities from Japan in the rankings. Oxford is first, followed by Cambridge. The USA contributes the largest number of top universities. China rises steadily. India is as usual is a disappointment.
But, as in previous years, the most interesting thing is the citations indicator, which is supposed to measure research influence. Once again this has produced some very interesting results.
Here are some of the universities in the top 100.
Babol Noshirvani University of Technology: the most influential university in the world for research
Brighton and Sussex Medical School: most influential in Europe
Brandeis University: most influential in the USA
Reykjavik University
St George's, University of London: fallen a bit, probably because of Brexit
King Abdulaziz University: top university for research influence in the Middle East and Asia
Anglia Ruskin University
Jordan University of Science and Technology
Vita-Salute San Raffaele University
Ulsan National Institute for Science and Technology: top in Asia ex Middle East
University of Canberra: best in Australia
University of Dessarollo: best in Latin America
McMaster University: best in Canada
Universite de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines: best in France
Teikyo University: best in Japan
There are signs that THE are considering reforming this indicator. If that does happen, the rankings will be more valid but much less entertaining.
Discussion and analysis of international university rankings and topics related to the quality of higher education. Anyone wishing to contact Richard Holmes without worrying about ending up in comments can go to rjholmes2000@yahoo.com
Monday, October 01, 2018
Sunday, September 30, 2018
Rankings and Higher Education Policy
Two examples of how the need to perform well in the rankings is shaping national research and higher education policy.
From the Irish Examiner
From Times Higher Education
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/business/cern-membership-vital-for-irish-universities-872312.html
From the Irish Examiner
"Ireland must apply for membership of the world-renowned European Organisation for Nuclear Research (Cern) in order to combat the effect of Brexit and boost university rankings.
That is according to Cork senator Colm Burke as the campaign to join Cern gains momentum, after Ireland recently became a member of the European Space Observatory."
From Times Higher Education
"France’s programme of university mergers is paying off, improving the research performance and international visibility of its top providers, according to the Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2019.
Paris Sciences et Lettres – PSL Research University Paris, a 2010 merger of numerous institutions, climbed 31 places to 41st this year, becoming the first French university to feature in the top 50 best universities since 2011. PSL made its debut in the global table last year.
Its teaching and research scores improved, driven by increased global visibility and votes in the academic teaching and research reputation surveys.
Meanwhile, Sorbonne University, which was founded in January this year following the merger of Pierre and Marie Curie University and Paris-Sorbonne University, has joined the list at 73rd place – making it the highest-ranked newcomer in the table."
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/business/cern-membership-vital-for-irish-universities-872312.html
Thursday, September 20, 2018
Philosophy Department Will Ignore GRE Scores
The philosophy department at the University of Pennsylvania has taken a step away from fairness and objectivity in university admissions. It will no longer look at the GRE scores of applicants to its graduate programme.
The department is good but not great. It is ranked 27th in the Leiter Report rankings and in the 101-150 band in the QS world subject rankings.
So how will students be selected without GRE scores? It seems it will be by letters of recommendation, undergraduate GPA, writing samples, admission statements.
Letters of recommendation have very little validity. The value of undergraduate grades has eroded in recent years and very likely will continue to do so. Admission essays and diversity statements say little about academic ability and a lot about political conformism.
The reasons for the move are not convincing. Paying for the GRE is supposed to be a burden on low income students. But the cost is much less than Penn's exorbitant tuition fees. It is also claimed that the GRE and other standardised tests do not predict performance in graduate school. In fact they are a reasonably good predictor of academic success although they should not be used by themselves.
Then there is the claim that the GRE "sometimes" underpredicts the performance of minorities and women. No doubt it sometimes does but then presumably sometimes it does not. Unless there is evidence that the underprediction is significant and that it is greater than that of other indicators this claim is meaningless.
What will be the result of this? The department will be able to admit students who "do not test well" but who can get good grades, something that is becoming less difficult at US colleges, or persuade letter writers at reputable schools that they will do well.
It is likely that more departments across the US will follow Penn's lead. American graduate programmes will slowly become less rigorous and less able to compete with the rising universities of Asia.
The department is good but not great. It is ranked 27th in the Leiter Report rankings and in the 101-150 band in the QS world subject rankings.
So how will students be selected without GRE scores? It seems it will be by letters of recommendation, undergraduate GPA, writing samples, admission statements.
Letters of recommendation have very little validity. The value of undergraduate grades has eroded in recent years and very likely will continue to do so. Admission essays and diversity statements say little about academic ability and a lot about political conformism.
The reasons for the move are not convincing. Paying for the GRE is supposed to be a burden on low income students. But the cost is much less than Penn's exorbitant tuition fees. It is also claimed that the GRE and other standardised tests do not predict performance in graduate school. In fact they are a reasonably good predictor of academic success although they should not be used by themselves.
Then there is the claim that the GRE "sometimes" underpredicts the performance of minorities and women. No doubt it sometimes does but then presumably sometimes it does not. Unless there is evidence that the underprediction is significant and that it is greater than that of other indicators this claim is meaningless.
What will be the result of this? The department will be able to admit students who "do not test well" but who can get good grades, something that is becoming less difficult at US colleges, or persuade letter writers at reputable schools that they will do well.
It is likely that more departments across the US will follow Penn's lead. American graduate programmes will slowly become less rigorous and less able to compete with the rising universities of Asia.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)