Haaretz has published a story about Ariel University, in the occupied West Bank, suggesting that it is offering to pay researchers for adding its name to papers and grant proposals.
The report may be biased and the offer, which seems to apply to only one field, is probably an attempt to get round local and international ostracism. It is a much less blatant attempt to buy affiliations and therefore citations than the wholesale distribution of part time contracts by King Abdulaziz University in Jeddah to researchers on the Thomson Reuters Highly Cited lists.
Another case of affiliation abuse was that of Mohamed El Naschie, formerly editor of the journal Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, and writer of many articles that were cited frequently by himself and a few friends. El Naschie was also fond of giving himself affiliations that had little or no substance: Cambridge where he was a Visiting Scholar, allowed to use the library and other facilities, the University of Surrey for no discernible reason, and Alexandria University with which he had a tenuous connection.
Most of El Naschie's affiliation did not mean very much. Cambridge was getting lots of citations anyway and did not need him. But Alexandria University produced a modest amount of research and El Naschie's self-citations went a long way and took Alexandria into the top 200 of the THE 2010 world university rankings.
This sort of thing is likely to continue, especially since there is now a stream of papers and reviews in physics and sometimes in medicine and genetics that have hundreds of contributors and scores of contributing institutions. A part-time contract with a contributor to the Review of Particle Physics that includes adding the institution as a secondary affiliation could give an enormous boost to citation counts, especially if they are field and year- normalised..
It would be a good idea for academic editors and publishers to review their policies about the listing of affiliations. Perhaps second (or more) affiliations should only be allowed if documentary evidence of a significant connection is provided.
Likewise rankers ought to think about not counting secondary affiliations, as Shanghai Center for World Class Universities did last year, or giving them a reduced weighting.
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, February 09, 2015
Saturday, February 07, 2015
Ranking Universities is a Really Serious Business
It seems that Webometrics has been hacked. Let's hope the problem is sorted out soon.
Ranking Web of Universities was attacked by external hackers. They did published hate messages and they had access to the Ranking, changing significantly the rank of at least one university and altering the structure and arrangement of the system. We are trying to fix the problems and sincerely apologize for any inconvenience. We hope to be able to be back in a few days with very exciting news and updated information. Thanks for your patience.
Ranking Web of Universities was attacked by external hackers. They did published hate messages and they had access to the Ranking, changing significantly the rank of at least one university and altering the structure and arrangement of the system. We are trying to fix the problems and sincerely apologize for any inconvenience. We hope to be able to be back in a few days with very exciting news and updated information. Thanks for your patience.
Wednesday, February 04, 2015
New York Times said it was a really big gap closing. It didn't seem so big then.
[Apologies to Bob Dylan, 'Talkin' New York']
The world of education is obsessed with gaps. Every
time the PISA results come out there is renewed concern about the stubborn and
growing gap between the United States and some Asian and Eastern European
countries although the US should perhaps be congratulated for every large ethnic
group doing as well or better than its international counterparts.
At the same time, there is recurrent anguish over the
failure of African Americans and Hispanics to match the academic achievements
of Whites and (East?) Asians.
According to the New York Times (NYT),
the huge achievement gap between wealthy and poor American children is a major cause of the mediocre performance of the American economy. Just closing the American gap and going up a few
points in the PISA rankings would apparently boost the economy significantly and create
billions of tax revenues.
So how to do this? The NYT reports that a recent
study by the Washington Center for Equitable Growth claims that things like more early
childhood education, reducing lead paint exposure and letting students
sleep a bit more will do the trick.
And has anyone managed to close the gap? Yes, according to the study, Montgomery County in Maryland, an affluent, racially mixed county near
Washington DC,
"was able to reduce the gap and increase scores after instituting all-day kindergarten programs, reducing class size, investing in teacher development and reducing housing -based segregation in its schools and a host of other reforms, Montgomery County, Maryland was successful in both improving average achievement test scores and reducing achievement gaps. The percentage of 5th graders reading at or above the proficient level on the Maryland State Assessment rose for all racial and ethnic groups between 2003 and 2009. In addition, gaps between the disproportionately lower-income black and Hispanic students and the disproportionately higher-income white and Asian students narrowed.”
So we should all go to Montgomery County
to find out how to close the gap, bring America up to OECD or even Finnish or Korean
standards and achieve Chinese rates of economic growth?
Perhaps not.
The good news from Montgomery was a
little surprising because I was sure that I had read a story that painted a
rather less cheerful picture of the school system there.
Here it is. From the Washington Post of March 12, 2013. 'In Montgomery schools, the achievement gap widens in some areas', by Donna St George
Locals were baffled how the school system could spend so much money and still do so badly.
Anyway, here are some extracts from the report from Montgomery County itself.
Here it is. From the Washington Post of March 12, 2013. 'In Montgomery schools, the achievement gap widens in some areas', by Donna St George
"The achievement gap that separates white and Asian students from black and Latino students has grown wider in Montgomery County in several measures of academic success, according to a report released Tuesday."
“The 130-page report points to progress in five of 11 performance indicators in recent years. The school system improved on gaps in school readiness and high school graduation, for example. But disparities widened in advanced-level scores for state math exams in third, fifth and eighth grades. There were mixed results in two categories.”
' “We still rank as one of the top spenders nationally in education, and then to lose ground is extremely concerning,” said Council Vice President Craig Rice (D-Upcounty), who called for more urgency. “It just boggles my mind that this can be so far below the radar.” '
But evidently the preferred solution is more money.
Montgomery Superintendent Joshua P. Starr said he agrees with most of the analysis. He wrote,
“much of the $10 million the school system is seeking above mandatory funding levels in its budget proposal would help address achievement disparities, including 30 “focus” teachers to reduce class sizes in English and math at middle and high schools where students are struggling."
Anyway, here are some extracts from the report from Montgomery County itself.
“This report finds that since 2008 MCPS has made progress, but significant achievement gaps remain, particularly among measures of at-risk academic performance. Over the same period, MCPS also lost ground in narrowing the achievement gap among several measures of above grade level performance that align with MCPS’ Seven Keys initiative and the Common Core State Standards.”
and
“MCPS narrowed the achievement gap across five measures: school readiness, MSA proficiency, suspensions, academic ineligibility, and graduation rates. These gaps narrowed by increasing the performance of most subgroups while accelerating the performance of the lowest performing subgroups."
and
“MCPS achieved mixed or no progress in narrowing the gap on two measures: dropout rates and completion of USM or CTE program requirements among graduates. For these two measures, MCPS tended to narrow the gap by race and ethnicity, but did not achieve the same progress among service groups. “and
“MCPS’ achievement gap widened across four measures: MSA advanced scores, Algebra 1 completion by Grade 8 with C or higher, AP/IB performance, and SAT/ACT performance. Among these four measures of above grade level performance that align with MCPS’ Seven Keys, high performing subgroups made greater gains on these benchmarks than low performing subgroups, thus widening the gap. More specifically: • The MSA Advanced Gaps in Grade 3 narrowed across most subgroups for reading by 2-7% but widened for math by 5-33% from 2007 to 2012; the Grade 5 gaps narrowed across most subgroups for reading by 2-16% but widened for math by 3-37%, and the Grade 8 gaps widened for both reading and math by 9-56%. • The Algebra 1 by Grade 8 with C or Higher Gap widened by 7-19% by race, ethnicity, special education, and FARMS status from 2010 to 2012, but narrowed by 7% by ESOL status. • The AP/IB Performance Gap among graduates widened by 6-37% by race, ethnicity, and service group status from 2007 to 2012. • The SAT/ACT Performance Gap among graduates held constant by special education and ESOL status from 2010 to 2012, but increased by race, ethnicity, and income by 3-6%."
So. Montgomery County reduced the gap for grade 5 reading for most subgroups but it widened for math. By Grade 8 it widened for reading and math, as did the AP/IB performance gap and the SAT/ACT gap for most groups.
When we get to the Center for Equitable growth and the New York Times, only the grade 5 reading improvement remains and the failures in other areas have disappeared. How very careless of them.
When we get to the Center for Equitable growth and the New York Times, only the grade 5 reading improvement remains and the failures in other areas have disappeared. How very careless of them.
Monday, February 02, 2015
Quality and Bias in University Rankings
I have just finished reading a very interesting unpublished paper, 'Measuring University Quality' by Christopher Claassen of the University of Essex.
He finds that all the major international rankings tap to some extent an underlying unidimensional trait of university quality and that this is measured more accurately by the US News Best Global Universities, the Center for World University Rankings (Jeddah) and the Academic Ranking of World Universities (Shanghai).
He also finds that these rankings are not biased towards their home countries, in contrast to the Times Higher Education, QS and Webometrics rankings.
He finds that all the major international rankings tap to some extent an underlying unidimensional trait of university quality and that this is measured more accurately by the US News Best Global Universities, the Center for World University Rankings (Jeddah) and the Academic Ranking of World Universities (Shanghai).
He also finds that these rankings are not biased towards their home countries, in contrast to the Times Higher Education, QS and Webometrics rankings.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)