On the Efficacy of Raising Your University’s Rankings

Morphew, Christopher C.; Swanson, Christopher B.

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-1116-7_10

Cited by 30 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the institutional ranking data, this study used the annual rankings of America's Best Graduate Schools published by the U.S. News and World Report (USNWR) from 2000 to 2010. This study defined a prestigious doctoral program as an institution ranked on the top 25 lists by the USNWR, as Morphew and Swanson (2011) referred to them as an ''elite group'' in academic fields (p. 190). This study tested whether the foreign doctorate recipients graduating from the prestigious doctoral programs are more likely to stay in the United States (1 = top 25 ranked program, 0 = outside top 25).…”

Section: Data and Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

What predicts whether foreign doctorate recipients from U.S. institutions stay in the United States: foreign doctorate recipients in science and engineering fields from 2000 to 2010

Roh

2014

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using data from the Survey of Earned Doctorates by the National Science Foundation, this study examines factors influencing foreign doctorate recipients' decisions to stay in the United States after they complete their degrees. This study expands the existing literature on human capital theory on migration decision by exploring the variables that appear to be associated with one's migration decision, which takes into account the prestige of degrees and the home country context. The findings suggest that the foreign doctorate recipients with a prestigious doctoral degree were less likely to stay in the United States. The home country's economic conditions relative to those of the United States also significantly influenced one's migration decision. The foreign doctorate recipients' odds of staying in the United States increased when the unemployment rate gap between the home country and the United States widened. Lastly, the country of origin was important in predicting migration decisions for foreign doctorate recipients.Keywords Foreign doctorate recipients Á Mobility of highly skilled workers Á Stay and return decision Á Human capital theory on migration decision

show abstract

Section: Data and Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

What predicts whether foreign doctorate recipients from U.S. institutions stay in the United States: foreign doctorate recipients in science and engineering fields from 2000 to 2010

Roh

2014

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the book University Rankings (Shin et al 2011) the Preface includes a statement that policymakers and the media criticise universities due to their rankings, and that university leaders use rankings as a benchmark in their strategic plans. In the same book Morphew and Swanson (2011) say that the use of rankings as a measure of university quality is ubiquitous, and cite the examples of Texas Tech University, University of Melbourne and UKZN as universities that explicitly refer to rankings in official documents and webpages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…As mentioned by Morphew and Swanson (2011) one South African university that expresses an aspiration to rise in world rankings is the University of KwaZulu-Natal, which states in its Strategic Plan 2007-2016 (UKZN 2011): ''UKZN aspires to be the top-ranked African university by 2016, as measured by recognized international higher education rankings.'' The University of Cape Town raises the question of improving its ranking in its Strategic Plan 2010-2014 (UCT 2011): ''Various measuring instruments identify UCT as the top research university in Africa.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

South African universities in world rankings

Matthews

2012

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

South Africa has 23 universities, of which five are placed in one or more of the 2011 Shanghai Jiao Tong, Times Higher Education, and Quacquarelli Symonds world university rankings. The five are: Cape Town, Witwatersrand, KwaZulu-Natal, Stellenbosch and Pretoria. They are ranked above the other 18 universities, with Cape Town in top position, mainly because they have significantly higher publication and citation counts. In the Shanghai Jiao Tong ranking Cape Town's Nobel Prize alumni and highly-cited researchers give it an additional lead over second-placed Witwatersrand, which has Nobel Prize alumni but no highly-cited researchers. KwaZulu-Natal, in third place, has no Nobel Prize alumni but one highly-cited researcher, which places it ahead of Stellenbosch and Pretoria despite the latter two having higher publication output. However, in the Times Higher Education ranking, which places Cape Town first and Witwatersrand second, Stellenbosch is ranked but not KwaZulu-Natal, presumably because the publication and citation counts of Stellenbosch are higher. The other 18 universities are ranked by the SCImago and Webometrics rankings in an order consistent with bibliometric indicators, and consistent with approximate simulations of the Shanghai Jiao Tong and Times Higher Education methods. If a South African university aspires to rise in the rankings, it needs to increase publications, citations, staff-student ratio, and proportions of postgraduate students, international students and international staff.

show abstract

“…Those universities which want to participate in the ranking game must ‘internalise and institutionalise’ the logic of the rankings (ibid.). Morphew and Swanson (, p. 188) have pointed out that ‘rankings determine and even codify which kinds of organisational behaviour and practices are legitimate’. Therefore the players know that they must be successful under the conditions of the measurements.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, universities use a number of gaming techniques in order to improve their ranking positions. Morphew and Swanson (, p. 190) provide further examples from US American universities: Adjunct instructors are not counted when reporting the percentage of full‐time faculty employed; Admission data are presented in such a way that they signal a high level of selectivity; Law Schools are spending large amounts of money on glossy brochures to influence reputation scores. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%