fbpx World university ranking debate | Science in the net
  1. World university ranking debate
  2. Revisions
  3. World university ranking debate

World university ranking debate

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.


  • 13118 reads

prossimo articolo

The Log and the Speck: The True Causes of Wildfires and Floods

di Roberto Buizza
di Paolo Vineis
Pubblicato il 13/01/2025
The Parable of the Speck and the Log. Ottmar Ellinger the Younger

The wildfires in Los Angeles and other extreme events, as well as their media coverage, highlight how immediate causes often overshadow the real issue: climate change, which increases the intensity and frequency of catastrophic phenomena. Tackling this crisis requires urgent action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions using already available technologies and investments to strengthen territorial resilience. Only a combination of mitigation and adaptation can prevent irreversible damage, ensuring a sustainable future for the next generations.

In the image: The Parable of the Speck and the Log. Ottmar Ellinger the Younger

Environment

Even in the face of the vast Los Angeles wildfires—still ongoing—as in other recent circumstances, the media's attention is primarily focused on the most immediate and “proximal” causes: the malfunctioning of the power grid, insufficient water reserves, the unpreparedness of newly hired firefighters, and so on.