University rankings on architecture and built environment: The case of Turkey

Stakeholders of universities like students, faculty, administratives, prospective students and their parents; always looking at rankings of the universities to benchmark the different factors. Faculty, administrative staff and the existing students use rankings to search the quality and the status of the university and the programme, on the other hand prospective students and their parents trying to find out the best university and programme to suit their expects. This paper aim to explain the programme rankings in architecture and also architecture and built environment subjects in the case of Turkey. Istanbul Technical University and Middle East Technical University Architecture Programmes were in the first 100-150 ranks in QS Architecture and Built Environment ranking and also in the first 100 in URAP Architecture ranking in 2017 reports. The paper try to make comparision to the other architecture programmes with these two cases form Turkey on different parameters like age, academic reputation, research, number of students, country, city. The study also aims to consider a projection for the follow- ing years in Architecture programme rankings. The prospective schools of architecture which considered as new candidates for the following years also evaluated in this paper. The methodology of the paper is based on the bencharking by using different parameters. The main idea of the paper in conclusion show that these two cases from Turkey had a success story in architecture and built environment programme ranking in these two university ranking systems.

Kaynakça

Blanco-Ramírez G., Berger, J. B., (2014) Rankings, accreditation, and the international quest for quality: Organizing an approach to value in higher education; Quality Assurance in Education, 2014, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 88-104

Buela-Casal, G., Gutiérrez-Martínez, O., Bermúdez-Sánchez, M.P., Vadillo-Muñoz, O., (2007), Comparative study of international academic rankings of universities, Scientometrics pp.1-17

Davis, M., (2016) Can College Rank- ings be Believed?, She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economis and Innovation, Vol. 2, No 3, pp 215-230

Hacıhasanoğlu, I., O. Hacıhasanoğlu (2004), Accreditation and Assessment Studies of Architectural and Engineering Education in Turkey, International Conference on Engineering Education and Research “Progress Through Partnership” 2004 VŠB-TUO, Ostrava

Hacıhasanoğlu, O, (2017), Mimarlık Alanı için Üniversite Sıralamaları; İTÜ ve ODTÜ’nün Başarıları, Arkitera, 12 Temmuz 2017, http://www. arkitera.com/gorus/1058/mimar- lik-alani-icin-universite-siralama- lari--itu-ve-odtu-nun-basarilari

Hazelkorn, E., (2015), Rankings and the Reshaping of Higher Education: The Battle for World – Class Excel- lence, 2nd. (New York: Palgrave Mac- millan, 2015 pp.

QS World University Ranking Ar- chitecture and Built Environment, https://www.topuniversities.com/ university-rankings-articles/univer- sity-subject-rankings/top-architec- ture-schools-2017

Thompson-Whiteside, S., (2016) Zen and the Art of University Rankings in Art and Design; she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, Volume 2, Number 3, Autumn 2016 pp. 243-255,

URAP Dünya Alan Sıralaması Raporu (2017) t r. u r ap c e nt e r. or g / 2 0 1 6 /

URAP_2016-2017_DUNYA_ALAN_ SIRALAMASI_RAPORU_16_MAY- IS_2017.pdf

URL TÜMA 2017 https://docs. wixstatic.com/ugd/779fe1_df4b- c17412614459a0bc18222ca7e433.pdf

URL URAP: http://urapcenter. org/2016/Architecture.php

Wachter B., M. Kelo, Q. K.H. Lam, P. Effertz, C. Jost, S. Kottowski, (2015), University Quality Indicators: A Critical Assessment; Directorate-General for Internal Policies Policy Department and Cohesion Policies European Par- liament Report

Zilwa de Deanna (2010) Academic Units in a Complex Changing World: Adaptation and Resistance, Springer: Dordrecht, Heildelberg, london, New York.

Kaynak Göster