Measuring world-class universities

While on the ranking issue, let me share with you one good article on 'To Be or Not to Be-- A World- CLass University?' by Jamil Salmi for International Higher Education, Number 80: Spring 2015 (www.bc.edu/cihe) na ka.

The author mentions that more systematic ways of identifying world-class universities have appeared since 2003 and that many governments have tried to boost their top univeristies to make substantial progress.

He argues that measuring the effectiveness of excellence initatives isn't easy because the efforts to upgrade a university take time and that  in-depth analysis of case studies is needed to 'establish elements of causality'.

In addition, he points out that 'the overemphasis on research sends the wrong signal that the quality of teaching and learning is not important.', 'the focus on world-class universities is likely to further promote elitism', and 'it hinders the ability of social scientists to conduct scientific inquiries on issues politically sensitive in countries like China, Russia, etc.

After all, the governments shouldn't focus exclusively on building world-class universities but develop more balanced higher education system that addresses learning needs of a diverse student population.

In Thailand, we've been discussing a lot about world-class universities (and high schools) with huge funding support. I'm sure many questions have been raised and may need to be repeated:

 

How long would the policy last? Are we really on the right track and are we leaving quite a number of institutions behind when they should be able to rise with heightened quality if only some more resources and technical support are given? Do we really care for student learning or our university name/country on the world-class lists?

 

Many more questions are to be challenged for more balanced and practical actions.

Enough for ranking?

Swasdee ka, I'm back with an article that I picked up to read right away and would like to share with you today ka.

The title is, 'Rank Delusions' by John Quiggin from the Chronicle of Higher Education, February 20, 2015.

The author says every year, senior leaders and faculty will 'scan the lists of evidence of small movements up or down.' while the top names will be more or less the same.

One very interesting finding by Keiran Healy, Duke sociologist, is that back in 1911, there was a four-tier classifciation of leading universities and when compared it to the most recent U.S. News ranking of the top 20 universities, 16 were ranked top in 1911 ka. This shows that there are only modest shifts.

However, when reviewing Dow Jones companies for 1911, only General Electric is still included ka. The comparison shows that 'universities almost never die and rarely merge.' In addition, they are 'single-plant firms'. Growth basically is from the opening of new ones or the upgrading of exisiting schools/colleges. Accordingly, the only way their ranking can be changed is through 'the (perceived) quality of their research and teaching'.

The author mentions that 'there is not much point in worrying about university rankings'. Rather, 'the big question is whether the stable hierachy is beneficial or harmful to the teaching and research mission of the university system as a whole.' What should be done is 'a shift in public-financing priorities' to allocate it on the basis of need' over 'historical advantage'.

After having read it, I was thinking hard ka.

- Should we hold tight to the ranking tables and keep fighting to climb up or to be on the list(s)? Does it really help improve the quality of our universities? Or does it lean more toward 'face', 'fame', and 'finance'? If there're advantages, what are they? and could those happen without entering the ranking games?

- Even when universities seem to die hard, in our Thai context, should we allow some to die? Should we stop establishing more while trying to merge several? Is it time for us to admit the facts that some may not be able to survive generating the 'genuine' benefits to the society? Thailand may need to be the very first to do more of 'M&A' of some public universities/ colleges in a friendly way?

- Do the university community members really care for their core missions of  universities and importance of existence?

If we do care, we need to do it right ka!