A General Perspective about Institutional Rankings, Ranking Framework, Benefits of Rankings and Ranking Methodological Flaws
Ranking scales is an important tool which serves learning outcomes. Accuracy of Ranking depends upon how accurately & honestly the data is submitted according to the ranking methodology, how accurately Peers are giving their responses and how efficiently the ranking agencies are validating and evaluating the submitted data. However, giving more emphasis on pedagogy, teaching & learning environment, periodic curriculum review, strengthening the existing infrastructure resource, graduate outcome in minimum stipulated time, employability including entrepreneurship and higher studies, regular evaluation & assessments, research & outcomes, collaborations and new course offering according to the market demand, Ranking will improve, International outlook will also improve accordingly. Ranking is essential for strategic planning and enhancement of institutional transparency and stimulating the quality culture in education. Rankings also influence national and international partnerships and collaborations. Rankings are a manifestation of global competition and are used as a policy instrument. Rankings are provoking an important debate about the quality and performance of HEIs. We can also say one of the manifestations of Rankings is to build a competitive institutional competence of world class universities. In this paper, I have discussed mainly on general perspective about institutional rankings, ranking framework, benefits of rankings and flaws in the ranking methodology.
Keywords:
Higher Education, Rankings, University Rankings, NIRF India Rankings, College Rankings, Institution Rankings, QS World University Rankings Time Higher Education World University Rankings,
___
- OECD international forum (2007), Programme on Institutional Management in Higher Education.
- NIRF INDIA RANKINGS (2021), Natıonal Instıtutıonal Rankıng Framework, Methodology For Ranking of Academic Institutions İn India, Rankıng Metrıcs for Overall,9-10.
- Craig O (2021), QS World University Rankings – Methodology.
- The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2022: methodology (2021).
- Brendan O Malley (2016), Global university rankings data are flawed’ – HEPI.
- The Irish Times, Why university rankings are flawed (2016).
- Muhammad Ashraf Fauzi et.al (2020), University rankings: A review of methodological flaws.
- Wikipedia, QS World University Rankings (2021).
- Mustafa Kayyali (2020), Pros and Cons of University Rankings.
- Luke Myers and Jonathan Robe (2009), College Rankings, History, Criticism and Reform.
- Zoljargal Dembereldorj (2018), Review on the Impact of World Higher Education Rankings: Institutional Competitive Competence and Institutional Competence.
- Mu-Hsuan Huang (2012), Opening the black box of QS World University Rankings.
- Elizabeth Gadd (2020), University rankings need a rethink, World view.
- Igor Chirikov (2021), Does Conflıct of Interest Dıstort Global Unıversıty Rankıngs?
- F.J. Anthony van Raan (2005), Challenges in Ranking of Universities.
- Shohib Muhammed Wildan (2018), Hıgher Educatıon Rankıng and Qualıty Assurance: Issues and Crıtıcal Assessment (General Problem).
- Luke Myers and Jonathan Robe (2009), College Rankings, History, Criticism and Reform.
- Marope P.T.M., Wells P.J. and Hazelkorn E. (eds) (2013), United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, Rankings and Accountability in Higher Education: Uses and Misuses
- Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 4 Sayı
- Başlangıç: 2016
- Yayıncı: Sakarya Üniversitesi