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:
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!
Institution: Universiti Malaysia Pahang
Language: English
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