fbpx World university ranking debate | Science in the net

World university ranking debate

Primary tabs

di Marco Milano
Pubblicato il 11/09/2013Read time: 2 mins
Research evaluation
Scientific research policy

Just as happened in Italy after the VQR report has released, a counter-assessment was also given to the Jiao Tong University ranking, concerning the best universities in a global scenario, published on august 2013. "That ranking does not reflect our academic system" were the words of Genvieve Fioraso, French Minister of Higher Education and research. It seems that Fioraso did not intend to contest the French universities rank - which, indeed, earn position with respect to the latest rankings - but rather the criteria used to analize an academic system different than countries for what concer internal organization. The Shanghai ranking is based on four criteria: quality of teaching (ie how many faculty of a university have received a Nobel Prize or Fields Medal); quality of the academic staff (based on the rankings highly cited) scientific production (impact factor ), productivity (the first three criteria in relation to the total number of teachers). Doubts about the reliability of the Shanghai's ranking became more strong when compared with other three major rankings concerning the quality of universities around the world. Those are in disagreement, for example, even for the top positions.



(click on the image above to open the graph)


Consulting the data, the most obvious differences are about the percentage of presence of individual countries in the rankings, the top positions (MIT QS, Harvard for the other three, as well as Johns Hopkins is ranked second only to the Taiwan Ranking). According to observers, those scenarios are so different beacause of the approaches to assessment variables based on different parameters used for individual methods. 
The Asian rankings, for example, are guilty of favoring studies in English and those with impact factor related to a small group of scientific journals.


Scienza in rete è un giornale senza pubblicità e aperto a tutti per garantire l’indipendenza dell’informazione e il diritto universale alla cittadinanza scientifica. Contribuisci a dar voce alla ricerca sostenendo Scienza in rete. In questo modo, potrai entrare a far parte della nostra comunità e condividere il nostro percorso. Clicca sul pulsante e scegli liberamente quanto donare! Anche una piccola somma è importante. Se vuoi fare una donazione ricorrente, ci consenti di programmare meglio il nostro lavoro e resti comunque libero di interromperla quando credi.


  • 9090 reads

prossimo articolo

Nature Restoration Law: We Approve the Law for the Future of European Nature

di Laura Scillitani
Pubblicato il 09/07/2023
fenicotteri

On the upcoming July 12, the European Parliament will decide the fate of one of the most ambitious initiatives in support of European nature, the Nature Restoration Law, a legislative proposal aimed at restoring European natural habitats. Now more than ever, it is crucial to defend this law and push for its approval.

In Italy, the Manifesto for the Nature Restoration Law has been published, an initiative that has so far received the support of over 150 associations, 4,000 scientists, dozens of large companies, and over one million signatures from individual citizens (here is the registration form).

Image credits: JD design - Unsplash

Ambiente

Making the protection of nature and the restoration of habitats a legal obligation: this is the purpose of the new European regulation proposal, the Nature Restoration Law. An ambitious proposal, but crucial for making the European Green Deal something concrete.