What are School Rankings?

University rankings are based on scientific research and teaching standards, publishing research reports and academic papers in English, and quantifying relevant universities' data, reports, achievements, and prestige, and then weighting the rankings.

University Rankings

In order to regulate the behavior of university ranking institutions, the UNESCO European Higher Education Research Center, the Washington Institute of Higher Education Policy, the German Higher Education Development Research Center, and the Shanghai Jiao Tong University Institute of Higher Education jointly launched the university in 2004. Ranking international expert group. At the second meeting held in Berlin in May 2006, a series of quality standards and operational examples of higher education rankings was discussed and adopted, namely the Berlin Principles . There are 16 principles in this principle, which are defined in terms of ranking purpose, indicator design and weighting, data collection and processing, and results publication, as common guidelines for ranking higher education institutions.

The rankings were originally created as a result of the concerns of undergraduates and their parents, and have since been extended to universities for recruiting outstanding students and expanding sources of fundraising.

According to international research, outstanding students consider universities to be among the best, helping them to get better job opportunities and better jobs.

Viewer of University Rankings

Ranking is of great importance to the image promotion of universities and the marketing of their international cooperation partners. Such a cooperative relationship has an index effect on the level of research, academic projects, and student / teacher exchange for future students. According to an international survey, 57% of respondents said that the ranking of an institution affects the willingness of scientists at other higher education institutions to work with them; and 34% believe that ranking will affect whether academic or professional organizations accept them as members For example, universities will consider and refer to the rankings to decide which institutions to work with. For example, Ian Gow, the former executive president of the University of Nottingham, said: Government agencies are urging local universities to limit their partners to the top 20 foreign universities. Academics elsewhere have also confirmed that they are unlikely to consider forming a scientific research alliance with a university that ranks poorly unless the latter is a very good individual or team. This may bring significant disadvantages to new or developing higher education institutions. Philanthropists also use rankings when considering which university provides the best brand image and return on investment. Deutsche Telekom acknowledged that company executives had consulted the ranking system to determine candidates for professional positions, and Boeing said it would use ranking data to determine "which universities spend $ 100 million on vocational education and supplementary training." When setting priorities for college affairs, universities tend to allocate resources to disciplines and research areas that can help to increase the popularity of the university. Many governments consider rankings when allocating resources and evaluating agencies. Rankings affect students seeking government scholarshipsfor example, in Mongolia and Qatar, scholarships are limited to students admitted to high-ranking international universities. And university rankings can also allow the government to decide whether to recognize diplomas from foreign universities-for example, the Macedonian government automatically recognizes the top 500 universities in the USNWR ranking.

influences

Failure to enter the rankings may mean that some universities are overlooked by foreign doctoral students, "world-class" scientists, academic partners, and philanthropists, such as:

When ranking universities, the criteria and data included most easily reflect the research results of biological sciences. Compared to the social sciences, architecture, creativity, humanities and fine arts are not easy to reflect their research results. Professional disciplines such as engineering, business, and education have traditionally not

Ranking data system of major universities in China:

The comprehensive list of Wu Shulian , which is based on comprehensive strength, and the top ranking of Wu Shulian with non-mainstream colors ;

Rankings of online college students based on high school student quality and university social reputation;

Alumni Association Rankings from Chinese Alumni Association;

1,

Questioning Wu Shulian University Rankings

In 2009, some media questioned that Chengdu University of Technology invited Wu Shulian to give a lecture in 2004 and 2006 and gave him tens of thousands of yuan. Later, in the "China University Rankings" released by Wu Shulian's research group, the school's ranking was increased by more than 20 places.

In 12 years, some media questioned that the "China University Rankings" released by Wu Shulian's research group ranked Zhejiang University first, higher than Tsinghua University and Peking University. At the same time, there are articles questioning its ranking power.

In the same year, an article questioned that the "China University Rankings" released by Wu Shulian's research group only focused on quantity, not quality. Refers to the use of its index system and algorithm to measure the top 500 of the California Institute of Technology's talent training scores.

Questions on the Alumni Association Online Rankings

In 2008, some media questioned the authority of the China Alumni Association Network University Evaluation Research Group to issue the "2008 China University Evaluation Research Report."

In 11 years, some media questioned the "China Rich University Rankings" published by the China Alumni Association's University Evaluation Task Force, which used money to measure the value of universities and questioned the status of some universities' money supremacy and quick success.

My opinion on university rankings

First of all, it is clear that university rankings are necessary and positive, but in order to make university rankings develop better and be more convincing, the following personal opinions hope to play a positive role.

University rankings are only non-state official data conducted by the people, so benevolent sees wisdom and wisdom, and it is impossible to say that higher ranked universities must be better than lower ranked ones. The merger of universities in 2000 created a number of comprehensive universities. Most of them merged several professional universities and expanded their disciplines at once. The integration and development of specific disciplines were not many, but simply superimposed. When it comes to ranking, it has an advantage in terms of quantity and ranks higher. However, some professional universities are naturally ranked lower due to the number of disciplines. However, their position in some professional disciplines is not comparable to that of comprehensive universities, which is the result of neglecting the pursuit of quality in terms of quantity. Their comparison is not based on equal conditions. This has made many universities blindly expand their disciplines for the sake of university "better". Proper expansion is good, but many schools have spent too much energy for expansion, which has affected their advantageous disciplines. In addition, this is unfair to candidates. They have a high school status, but their actual majors are not necessarily good. This situation also occurs in many comprehensive universities. Therefore, it is not advisable for college entrance examination candidates, parents, and teachers to choose a university simply by ranking, especially judging the level between adjacent university rankings.

University rankings must take into account both quantity and quality. I personally think that it is not good to rank universities as a whole, and the ranking should be further subdivided. For example, the ranking of engineering majors and the ranking of philosophy disciplines, although this has become more cumbersome, and even a university has multiple rankings, but only in this way, for the government, it is better to convert to the comprehensive support of the university The support of the top disciplines of multiple schools makes the support more efficient; for individuals, a better understanding of the university and a correct understanding of the university can make it clear what the university is; for a university, it can have a fair position .

People's Daily questioned: Is it true that a university alumni is not rich?

Outrageous: The same university can have dozens of positions in different rankings

Sloppy: Most domestic universities do not publish information about how their data is collected and research methods. Some only publish major indicators, and some do not even have an indicator system.

Yuli: Some university presidents have publicly disclosed the news, saying that there are leaderboard production agencies come to the door to ask for sponsorship

Standardization: Establish industry associations, conduct performance evaluation and qualification review of members

China s university rankings can be garbled, depending on the rankings. The same school is ups and downs on different lists; looking at indicators and evaluating angles is strange, data sources are not clear; looking at the market, institutions are mixed and blindly gather together. Hit the list "...

Chaos

Different versions of each other "stagger", even broke the "bid auction" scandal

In the university rankings of Wushu consecutive edition, Zhejiang University frustrated Peking University and Tsinghua University, and won the top spot; but Wuhan University Edition 2012 ranked China's top universities, Peking University ranked first, Zhejiang University ranked third; in May, the China Alumni Association website released the university In the rankings, the top three in Zhejiang and Dalian failed to squeeze in.

For an even more outrageous ranking, you must look down: China University of Political Science and Law, ranked 76th in the ranking of the China Alumni Association Network, but fell out of the top 100 in the Wushu continuous edition ranking, ranking 109; Beijing Foreign Studies University, The online ranking of the Chinese Alumni Association is 124, and it has dropped to 181 in the Wu Shulian version ranking. With such a big ups and downs, no wonder some netizens are calling "the university rankings are available every day, whether you believe it or not, I believe it anyway".

There are currently more than 10 Wu Shulian Chinese University Evaluation Task Forces, China University Forum, China Alumni Association Network, Shanghai Jiaotong University Higher Education Research Institute World-Class University Research Center, Renmin University of China Higher Education Research Center, Wuhan University Chinese Science Evaluation Research Center, etc. Institutions, more than 30 different types of university rankings. There are also many leaderboards that have only been published once or twice and have not continued. In addition to the rankings launched by academic institutions, the rankings of commercial institutions are increasingly attracting public attention.

The evaluation index is not scientific and the evaluation process is not transparent, which has become the "second sin" of the university rankings. Some experts said that most domestic universities do not publish information about how their data is collected and the scores of various indicators of each university. Some only publish major categories of indicators, do not publish research methods, and some do not even have an indicator system. It just references several other rankings in general, and almost lists with closed eyes. Its objectivity and scientificity are hard to convince.

What's even more uproar about the public is that the university rankings also broke the bribery door scandal: Some university presidents have publicly disclosed the news, saying that a ranking production agency has come to the door to ask for sponsorship; in 2009, our reporter found that Chengdu University of Technology In 2004 and 2006, the heads of the evaluation team of Chinese universities were invited to give reports to the school and paid tens of thousands of yuan in class fees. The school's ranking in this group rose from 116 in 2004 to 2007. 92, can not help but make people doubtful.

source

Some universities want to use the list to enhance their reputation and performance, and the society lacks patience for the growth of Chinese higher education

Why is the university ranking considered a "compass" for candidates and parents?

Experts of the University of Science and Technology's University Evaluation Research Group believe that the root cause is the lack of publicity in university rankings. The expert said that the university rankings should be shared and shared by the entire higher education system and should reflect public values and public interests. However, with the increasing attention and expectations of colleges and universities on university rankings, and the strong need for universities to borrow university rankings to enhance their reputation, the public value of university rankings has incorporated private benefits.

Some university experts have confirmed that university rankings can indeed meet the personal interests of some people: university presidents use this to demonstrate the effectiveness of their work; rising rankings are conducive to admissions promotion; and have been used as an important reference in international cooperation.

In the opinion of Hu Juan, executive dean of the School of Education of Renmin University of China, the university rankings should serve the healthy development of higher education, and play a positive role in guiding the development of universities through objective evaluation. But the interest-oriented approach has allowed some institutions and individuals to make use of the list to make money. This is actually a manifestation of the industrialization and marketization of the education field, and it is a reflection of immature marketization.

Hu Juan said, "When evaluating universities, many rankings do not focus on structure and scale; they do not focus on quality and quantity, and some indicators do not conform to the laws of education, and even run counter to one another. Is a reflection of the lack of patience and eagerness for quick success. "

Wu Shulian version of the university rankings has been questioned by many academic institutions, stemming from his calculation method is full of "quantity" instead of "quality", "scale wins" logic. The University of Science and Technology of China stated on its official Weibo: According to the index system and algorithm published by Wu Shulian's China University Evaluation Research Group, the California Institute of Technology's talent training score could not even enter the top 500; the Paris Normal University barely entered the top 500. The name is roughly the same as that of Xianning College and Yichun College; the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the United States ranks around 60, which is comparable to the rankings of Nanchang University and Henan University. Such accusations were regarded by Wu Shulian as "scrambling." Wu Shulian also used his own evaluation system to calculate the conclusions that are completely opposite to the University of Science and Technology of China to show that the evaluation system is correct. Such arguments are not uncommon among different leaderboards.

How harmful is the ranking of universities with unclear knowledge of the laws of higher education? "Although it is necessary to believe that the people and society will have a rational choice, if unscientific and objective rankings continue to exist, it will confuse some facts, mislead some members of the public, and form a bad atmosphere." Hu Juan said.

Suggest

Evaluate university rankings, ban offenders, increase employment rates, pay, and other applied rankings

The rough rankings of colleges, how to smooth them?

According to Hu Juan, academic rankings and third-party institutions can stand on a neutral stand and evaluate the university's performance in a scientific manner. "It is necessary to start from the laws of education and scholarship and The most important indicators to look at can make university rankings more valuable. "

Experts from the University Evaluation Research Group of the University of Science and Technology of China believe that a relatively credible ranking can be created from several aspects. First, the role of industry associations should be brought into play. International non-governmental organizations related to university rankings have developed rapidly. For example, the International Experts Group on University Rankings (ITRG) published the first quality principles and operating examples of higher education rankings in 2006, the "Berlin Principles of Higher Education Institution Rankings". In November, it passed the "University Ranking International Expert Group Ranking Audit Manual", thus becoming the world's first certification institution to provide rankings of higher education institutions. However, China has not yet established relatively effective industry associations or other organizations that regulate the behavior of industry members.

Secondly, the performance evaluation and qualification review of university ranking organizations can help to discover the shortcomings of university ranking organizations and promote their healthy development. On the other hand, they can also be used as the basic basis for admission and withdrawal of university ranking organizations. For the purpose of profit, institutions that have misleading effects on social public perceptions and the healthy and orderly development of universities should order them to make corrections and, if necessary, ban their qualifications for university rankings.

Hu Juan believes that although things have a universal aspect, when evaluating colleges, they must be considered in the light of national conditions, and they should not blindly study the West and introduce Western standards.

Cheng Ying, Executive Director of Shanghai Jiaotong University's World-Class University Research Center, said that comprehensive rankings of universities, especially rankings that distinguish between strengths in scientific research, are now sufficient, but still need a ranking of universities that can provide unique perspectives, such as the employment rate of graduates Survey of salary, ranking of the proportion of students studying abroad after graduation, ranking of the number and proportion of employment in first-tier cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, etc., and the number of opportunities for each university student to contact the teacher during the school period. "This is something that students care about, and it can also reflect the difference in the quality of talent cultivation in each university. However, how to set the indicators for the quality of talent cultivation is still a difficult problem and requires serious investigation."