Staff View: University rankings: A review of methodological flaws

University rankings: A review of methodological flaws

University rankings have gradually become an issue for concern in the academic community worldwide. Several mechanisms with different methodologies have been developed to rank the universities appropriately. However, some ranking tools have notable issues, especially with the indicators adopted. Som...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors:	Muhammad Ashraf, Fauzi, Tan, Christine Nya-Ling, Mahyuddin, Daud, Muhammad Mukhtar, Noor Awalludin
Format:	Article
Language:	English
Published:	Institutes for Educational Research 2020
Subjects:	L Education (General) LB2300 Higher Education
Online Access:	http://umpir.ump.edu.my/id/eprint/27941/1/2020-%20IIER-University%20rankings-%20A%20review%20of%20methodological%20flaws.pdf http://umpir.ump.edu.my/id/eprint/27941/ http://www.iier.org.au/iier30/fauzi-abs.html
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

id	my.ump.umpir.27941
record_format	eprints
spelling	my.ump.umpir.279412020-03-16T02:41:06Z http://umpir.ump.edu.my/id/eprint/27941/ University rankings: A review of methodological flaws Muhammad Ashraf, Fauzi Tan, Christine Nya-Ling Mahyuddin, Daud Muhammad Mukhtar, Noor Awalludin L Education (General) LB2300 Higher Education University rankings have gradually become an issue for concern in the academic community worldwide. Several mechanisms with different methodologies have been developed to rank the universities appropriately. However, some ranking tools have notable issues, especially with the indicators adopted. Some are based merely on research performance, whilst others have focused solely on specific fields, such as science and technology - which could have deprived those in the arts and social sciences. This paper uses a narrative review to highlight a number of inconsistencies in the methodologies applied to rank universities. Five main ranking tools commonly applied to the world's universities are reviewed, namely Quacquarelli Symonds (QS), Times Higher Education (THE), Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), Leiden University ranking and Webometrics ranking. We found that several flaws in the rankings caused inconsistencies in university placings in different rankings. Suggestions for integrating multiple criteria and indicators for better ranking exercises are proposed. Institutes for Educational Research 2020 Article PeerReviewed pdf en http://umpir.ump.edu.my/id/eprint/27941/1/2020-%20IIER-University%20rankings-%20A%20review%20of%20methodological%20flaws.pdf Muhammad Ashraf, Fauzi and Tan, Christine Nya-Ling and Mahyuddin, Daud and Muhammad Mukhtar, Noor Awalludin (2020) University rankings: A review of methodological flaws. Issues in Educational Research, 30 (1). pp. 79-96. ISSN 1837-6290 (Online) http://www.iier.org.au/iier30/fauzi-abs.html
institution	Universiti Malaysia Pahang
building	UMP Library
collection	Institutional Repository
continent	Asia
country	Malaysia
content_provider	Universiti Malaysia Pahang
content_source	UMP Institutional Repository
url_provider	http://umpir.ump.edu.my/
language	English
topic	L Education (General) LB2300 Higher Education
spellingShingle	L Education (General) LB2300 Higher Education Muhammad Ashraf, Fauzi Tan, Christine Nya-Ling Mahyuddin, Daud Muhammad Mukhtar, Noor Awalludin University rankings: A review of methodological flaws
description	University rankings have gradually become an issue for concern in the academic community worldwide. Several mechanisms with different methodologies have been developed to rank the universities appropriately. However, some ranking tools have notable issues, especially with the indicators adopted. Some are based merely on research performance, whilst others have focused solely on specific fields, such as science and technology - which could have deprived those in the arts and social sciences. This paper uses a narrative review to highlight a number of inconsistencies in the methodologies applied to rank universities. Five main ranking tools commonly applied to the world's universities are reviewed, namely Quacquarelli Symonds (QS), Times Higher Education (THE), Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), Leiden University ranking and Webometrics ranking. We found that several flaws in the rankings caused inconsistencies in university placings in different rankings. Suggestions for integrating multiple criteria and indicators for better ranking exercises are proposed.
format	Article
author	Muhammad Ashraf, Fauzi Tan, Christine Nya-Ling Mahyuddin, Daud Muhammad Mukhtar, Noor Awalludin
author_facet	Muhammad Ashraf, Fauzi Tan, Christine Nya-Ling Mahyuddin, Daud Muhammad Mukhtar, Noor Awalludin
author_sort	Muhammad Ashraf, Fauzi
title	University rankings: A review of methodological flaws
title_short	University rankings: A review of methodological flaws
title_full	University rankings: A review of methodological flaws
title_fullStr	University rankings: A review of methodological flaws
title_full_unstemmed	University rankings: A review of methodological flaws
title_sort	university rankings: a review of methodological flaws
publisher	Institutes for Educational Research
publishDate	2020
url	http://umpir.ump.edu.my/id/eprint/27941/1/2020-%20IIER-University%20rankings-%20A%20review%20of%20methodological%20flaws.pdf http://umpir.ump.edu.my/id/eprint/27941/ http://www.iier.org.au/iier30/fauzi-abs.html
_version_	1662754798461517824
score	13.211869

University rankings: A review of methodological flaws

Similar Items