Purpose:Building on Leydesdorff,Bornmann,and Mingers(2019),we elaborate the differences between Tsinghua and Zhejiang University as an empirical example.We address the question of whether differences are statistically...Purpose:Building on Leydesdorff,Bornmann,and Mingers(2019),we elaborate the differences between Tsinghua and Zhejiang University as an empirical example.We address the question of whether differences are statistically significant in the rankings of Chinese universities.We propose methods for measuring statistical significance among different universities within or among countries.Design/methodology/approach:Based on z-testing and overlapping confidence intervals,and using data about 205 Chinese universities included in the Leiden Rankings 2020,we argue that three main groups of Chinese research universities can be distinguished(low,middle,and high).Findings:When the sample of 205 Chinese universities is merged with the 197 US universities included in Leiden Rankings 2020,the results similarly indicate three main groups:low,middle,and high.Using this data(Leiden Rankings and Web of Science),the z-scores of the Chinese universities are significantly below those of the US universities albeit with some overlap.Research limitations:We show empirically that differences in ranking may be due to changes in the data,the models,or the modeling effects on the data.The scientometric groupings are not always stable when we use different methods.Practical implications:Differences among universities can be tested for their statistical significance.The statistics relativize the values of decimals in the rankings.One can operate with a scheme of low/middle/high in policy debates and leave the more fine-grained rankings of individual universities to operational management and local settings.Originality/value:In the discussion about the rankings of universities,the question of whether differences are statistically significant,has,in our opinion,insufficiently been addressed in research evaluations.展开更多
Purpose: Study how economic parameters affect positions in the Academic Ranking of World Universities' top 500 published by the Shanghai Jiao Tong University Graduate School of Education in countries/regions with ...Purpose: Study how economic parameters affect positions in the Academic Ranking of World Universities' top 500 published by the Shanghai Jiao Tong University Graduate School of Education in countries/regions with listed higher education institutions. Design/methodology/approach: The methodology used capitalises on the multi-variate characteristics of the data analysed. The multi-colinearity problem posed is solved by running principal components prior to regression analysis, using both classical(OLS) and robust(Huber and Tukey) methods. Findings: Our results revealed that countries/regions with long ranking traditions are highly competitive. Findings also showed that some countries/regions such as Germany, United Kingdom, Canada, and Italy, had a larger number of universities in the top positions than predicted by the regression model. In contrast, for Japan, a country where social and economic performance is high, the number of ARWU universities projected by the model was much larger than the actual figure. In much the same vein, countries/regions that invest heavily in education, such as Japan and Denmark, had lower than expected results.Research limitations: Using data from only one ranking is a limitation of this study, but the methodology used could be useful to other global rankings. Practical implications: The results provide good insights for policy makers. They indicate the existence of a relationship between research output and the number of universities per million inhabitants. Countries/regions, which have historically prioritised higher education, exhibited highest values for indicators that compose the rankings methodology; furthermore,minimum increase in welfare indicators could exhibited significant rises in the presence of their universities on the rankings.Originality/value: This study is well defined and the result answers important questions about characteristics of countries/regions and their higher education system.展开更多
This paper will discuss one topic in the current debate on higher education： How power is exercised between universities？ How do colleges determine what the best college is？ What are the differences in the excersis...This paper will discuss one topic in the current debate on higher education： How power is exercised between universities？ How do colleges determine what the best college is？ What are the differences in the excersise of power in the digital age？ The authors analyze one of the mechanisms of relationship and contact between different universities： the rankings. They will discuss the practices that allow certain values and organizations they are becoming central nodes between universities and the influences of the information and communication technologies in the measurement mechanisms. The authors seek to show the rankings serve as mechanisms to exercise power among universities. These measurements become a tool and justification in competition between universities for resources such as funding, prestige, and student demand. The analysis is based on the University of Mexico, the authors use the ranking of the best universities in Latin America and the best universities in Mexico.展开更多
On the basis of ESI data,all universities are ranked in 92 out of 105 world-class disciplines.There is no ESI data(either publications or citations)in the rest of 13 world-class disciplines.
On the basis of ESI data,all universities are ranked in 96 out of 108 world-class disciplines.There is no ESI data(either publications or citations)in the rest of 12 world-class disciplines.
On the basis of ESI data,all universities are ranked in 92 out of 105 world-class disciplines.There is no ESI data(either publications or citations)in the rest of 13 world-class disciplines.
Purpose： To get a better understanding of the way in which university rankings are used.Design/methodology/approach： Detailed analysis of the activities of visitors of the website of the CWTS Leiden Ranking.Findings...Purpose： To get a better understanding of the way in which university rankings are used.Design/methodology/approach： Detailed analysis of the activities of visitors of the website of the CWTS Leiden Ranking.Findings： Visitors of the Leiden Ranking website originate disproportionally from specific countries. They are more interested in impact indicators than in collaboration indicators, while they are about equally interested in size-dependent indicators and size-independent indicators. Many visitors do not seem to realize that they should decide themselves which criterion they consider most appropriate for ranking universities.Research limitations： The analysis is restricted to the website of a single university ranking. Moreover, the analysis does not provide any detailed insights into the motivations of visitors of university ranking websites.Practical implications： The Leiden Ranking website may need to be improved in order to make more clear to visitors that they should decide themselves which criterion they want to use for ranking universities.Originality/value： This is the first analysis of the activities of visitors of a university ranking website.展开更多
The article interested in the universities in the global market. Author briefly describes the situation of the many universities of the point of view of education, research, orientation, system of financing and manage...The article interested in the universities in the global market. Author briefly describes the situation of the many universities of the point of view of education, research, orientation, system of financing and management of the universities. The whole article is based on the author＇s practical experiences. The research objective was to determine how the professional community is looking at private universities and state universities. It was based on the opinion of the quality of graduates and the number of academic staff who are working at state universities These academics have mostly negative view of private universities as well as the knowledge of graduates of these private schools. However, the opinion ofstaffin practice, especially managers in manufacturing companies, trading companies, companies selling services, as well as senior officials in government, are not so negative. By contrast in certain areas such as marketing, business, management, Information and Communication Technology etc., was rather neutral or positive. The politicians were interested about these information with regard to educational reform （reform of universities is still not actual--note the author） and the expected necessary cuts of spending to higher education from the state budget. Unfortunately, the research project due to political changes in 2009 was not completed and obtained only partial results. Despite of this fact the author decided to process the article below Opinions on the topic of public vs. private univeristies were mainly obtained informally from experts from academic area （both public and private）, managers, various specialists, but also from the students themselves. In conclusion man can say that the demand for people who are able to quickly demonstrate their knowledge in practice is still stronger. The title becomes second-rate （unfortunately not quite in the public and state administration）. Very strong demand is the active practice of communication in English （it fulfilles especially private universities） Graduates of technical universities in the classical fields are sought less in the labor market. Very high pressure is developed by state universities to private. This implies a lack of professors and associate professors who can work in full time at private universities which are more flexible and better adapt to labor market requirements. Stronger position have private universities that are in any way connected with foreign partners from developed countries展开更多
基金the National Natural Science Foundation of China(Grant No.71974150,71573085)。
文摘Purpose:Building on Leydesdorff,Bornmann,and Mingers(2019),we elaborate the differences between Tsinghua and Zhejiang University as an empirical example.We address the question of whether differences are statistically significant in the rankings of Chinese universities.We propose methods for measuring statistical significance among different universities within or among countries.Design/methodology/approach:Based on z-testing and overlapping confidence intervals,and using data about 205 Chinese universities included in the Leiden Rankings 2020,we argue that three main groups of Chinese research universities can be distinguished(low,middle,and high).Findings:When the sample of 205 Chinese universities is merged with the 197 US universities included in Leiden Rankings 2020,the results similarly indicate three main groups:low,middle,and high.Using this data(Leiden Rankings and Web of Science),the z-scores of the Chinese universities are significantly below those of the US universities albeit with some overlap.Research limitations:We show empirically that differences in ranking may be due to changes in the data,the models,or the modeling effects on the data.The scientometric groupings are not always stable when we use different methods.Practical implications:Differences among universities can be tested for their statistical significance.The statistics relativize the values of decimals in the rankings.One can operate with a scheme of low/middle/high in policy debates and leave the more fine-grained rankings of individual universities to operational management and local settings.Originality/value:In the discussion about the rankings of universities,the question of whether differences are statistically significant,has,in our opinion,insufficiently been addressed in research evaluations.
基金funded by CAPES (Coordinacao de Aperfeicoamento do Ensino) grant N. BEX 8354/13-8 awarded to Esteban Fernández Tuesta
文摘Purpose: Study how economic parameters affect positions in the Academic Ranking of World Universities' top 500 published by the Shanghai Jiao Tong University Graduate School of Education in countries/regions with listed higher education institutions. Design/methodology/approach: The methodology used capitalises on the multi-variate characteristics of the data analysed. The multi-colinearity problem posed is solved by running principal components prior to regression analysis, using both classical(OLS) and robust(Huber and Tukey) methods. Findings: Our results revealed that countries/regions with long ranking traditions are highly competitive. Findings also showed that some countries/regions such as Germany, United Kingdom, Canada, and Italy, had a larger number of universities in the top positions than predicted by the regression model. In contrast, for Japan, a country where social and economic performance is high, the number of ARWU universities projected by the model was much larger than the actual figure. In much the same vein, countries/regions that invest heavily in education, such as Japan and Denmark, had lower than expected results.Research limitations: Using data from only one ranking is a limitation of this study, but the methodology used could be useful to other global rankings. Practical implications: The results provide good insights for policy makers. They indicate the existence of a relationship between research output and the number of universities per million inhabitants. Countries/regions, which have historically prioritised higher education, exhibited highest values for indicators that compose the rankings methodology; furthermore,minimum increase in welfare indicators could exhibited significant rises in the presence of their universities on the rankings.Originality/value: This study is well defined and the result answers important questions about characteristics of countries/regions and their higher education system.
文摘This paper will discuss one topic in the current debate on higher education： How power is exercised between universities？ How do colleges determine what the best college is？ What are the differences in the excersise of power in the digital age？ The authors analyze one of the mechanisms of relationship and contact between different universities： the rankings. They will discuss the practices that allow certain values and organizations they are becoming central nodes between universities and the influences of the information and communication technologies in the measurement mechanisms. The authors seek to show the rankings serve as mechanisms to exercise power among universities. These measurements become a tool and justification in competition between universities for resources such as funding, prestige, and student demand. The analysis is based on the University of Mexico, the authors use the ranking of the best universities in Latin America and the best universities in Mexico.
文摘On the basis of ESI data,all universities are ranked in 92 out of 105 world-class disciplines.There is no ESI data(either publications or citations)in the rest of 13 world-class disciplines.
文摘On the basis of ESI data,all universities are ranked in 96 out of 108 world-class disciplines.There is no ESI data(either publications or citations)in the rest of 12 world-class disciplines.
文摘On the basis of ESI data,all universities are ranked in 92 out of 105 world-class disciplines.There is no ESI data(either publications or citations)in the rest of 13 world-class disciplines.
文摘Purpose： To get a better understanding of the way in which university rankings are used.Design/methodology/approach： Detailed analysis of the activities of visitors of the website of the CWTS Leiden Ranking.Findings： Visitors of the Leiden Ranking website originate disproportionally from specific countries. They are more interested in impact indicators than in collaboration indicators, while they are about equally interested in size-dependent indicators and size-independent indicators. Many visitors do not seem to realize that they should decide themselves which criterion they consider most appropriate for ranking universities.Research limitations： The analysis is restricted to the website of a single university ranking. Moreover, the analysis does not provide any detailed insights into the motivations of visitors of university ranking websites.Practical implications： The Leiden Ranking website may need to be improved in order to make more clear to visitors that they should decide themselves which criterion they want to use for ranking universities.Originality/value： This is the first analysis of the activities of visitors of a university ranking website.
文摘The article interested in the universities in the global market. Author briefly describes the situation of the many universities of the point of view of education, research, orientation, system of financing and management of the universities. The whole article is based on the author＇s practical experiences. The research objective was to determine how the professional community is looking at private universities and state universities. It was based on the opinion of the quality of graduates and the number of academic staff who are working at state universities These academics have mostly negative view of private universities as well as the knowledge of graduates of these private schools. However, the opinion ofstaffin practice, especially managers in manufacturing companies, trading companies, companies selling services, as well as senior officials in government, are not so negative. By contrast in certain areas such as marketing, business, management, Information and Communication Technology etc., was rather neutral or positive. The politicians were interested about these information with regard to educational reform （reform of universities is still not actual--note the author） and the expected necessary cuts of spending to higher education from the state budget. Unfortunately, the research project due to political changes in 2009 was not completed and obtained only partial results. Despite of this fact the author decided to process the article below Opinions on the topic of public vs. private univeristies were mainly obtained informally from experts from academic area （both public and private）, managers, various specialists, but also from the students themselves. In conclusion man can say that the demand for people who are able to quickly demonstrate their knowledge in practice is still stronger. The title becomes second-rate （unfortunately not quite in the public and state administration）. Very strong demand is the active practice of communication in English （it fulfilles especially private universities） Graduates of technical universities in the classical fields are sought less in the labor market. Very high pressure is developed by state universities to private. This implies a lack of professors and associate professors who can work in full time at private universities which are more flexible and better adapt to labor market requirements. Stronger position have private universities that are in any way connected with foreign partners from developed countries
