Türk Üniversiteleri Sıralama Göstergelerinin Ağırlıklandırılması: University Ranking by Academic Performance (URAP) Türkiye Genel Sıralaması Örneği

Özbaşı, Durmuş; Uslu, Barış

doi:10.32329/uad.414967

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bulgular, üniversitelerin genel akademik performansını elde etmek için alternatif sıralama yaklaşımının uygulanabileceğini göstermiştir. Özbaşı & Uslu (2018), Türk üniversitelerinin sıralaması için URAP tarafından kullanılan beş göstergeyi ele alarak bir regresyon modeli aracılığıyla göstergelerin ağırlıklarını belirlemeye çalışmıştır. Çalışmada bağımsız değişkenler makale, toplam atıf, toplam bilimsel doküman, doktora mezun öğrenci sayısı ve öğretim üyesi/öğrenci puanları olmak üzere beş göstergedir.…”

Section: üNiversite Sıralama Sistemleriunclassified

Ranking of universities ranking indicators by fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (ahp)

Tosunoğlu¹,

Apaydin²

2020

HIG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: üNiversite Sıralama Sistemleriunclassified

Ranking of universities ranking indicators by fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (ahp)

Tosunoğlu¹,

Apaydin²

2020

HIG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Looking Inside the Strategic Plans: Strengths and Weaknesses of Turkish Higher Education Institutions

Selvitopu

Kaya

2020

QRE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As strengths and weaknesses are regarded as internal features of an organization, the present study focused on strengths and weaknesses of Turkish public universities by analyzing the SWOTs (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) of twenty higher education institutions. By applying qualitative content analytical tools, we tried to make some comparisons, twenty universities, ten ranked at the top and ten at the bottom of the URAP list, were chosen to analyze the strengths and weaknesses. Findings show that all universities top or bottom ones have internal strengths and weaknesses on their own. The strengths of universities differ according to their size, field of service, structure, history and geographical locations. Top universities which are in big size, have a deeply rooted history and situated in a better geographical location can enjoy the strengths as qualified faculty members, organizational culture, internationalization process, infrastructure and good alumni relations. On the other hand, bottom universities which have not got those advantages deal with other strengths such as young faculty members, organizational support and internal communication. As for the weaknesses, top universities need more budget and acceptable rate of faculty member and student. Bottom ones need more qualified faculty members, students and staff. As they are located in disadvantageous regions, they are in need of some promotions to attract faculties, staff, national and international students. In addition, they also should be aware of the contributions of good alumni relations. ResumenEl presente estudio se centró canalizar las fortalezas y debilidades de las universidades públicas turcas mediante el análisis de los DAFO (debilidades, amenazas, fortalezas, oportunidades) de veinte instituciones de educación superior. Al aplicar herramientas analíticas de contenido cualitativo, tratamos de hacer algunas comparaciones. Veinte universidades, diez clasificadas en la parte superior y diez en la parte inferior de la lista URAP, fueron elegidas para analizar las fortalezas y debilidades. Los resultados muestran que todas las universidades superiores o inferiores tienen sus propias fortalezas y debilidades internas. Las fortalezas de las universidades difieren según su tamaño, campo de servicio, estructura, historia y ubicaciones geográficas. Las mejores universidades disfrutan de las fortalezas como miembros calificados de la facultad, cultura organizacional, proceso de internacionalización, infraestructura y buenas relaciones con ex alumnos. Por otro lado, las universidades inferiores que no tienen esas ventajas se ocupan de otras fortalezas, como los jóvenes docentes, el apoyo organizacional y la comunicación interna. En cuanto a las debilidades, las mejores universidades necesitan más presupuesto y una tasa aceptable de profesores y estudiantes. Los de abajo necesitan miembros de la facultad, estudiantes y personal más cualificado. Como se encuentran en regiones desfavorecidas, necesitan algunas promociones para atraer a fac...

show abstract

Gini Katsayısı ile Türkiye’deki Üniversitelerin Araştırma Çıktıları Arasındaki Farkın Değerlendirilmesi

Yolsal¹,

Yorulmaz²

2019

Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Universities that provide significant contributions to economic and social progress of societies have been ranked according to various criteria such as education qualities, research outputs, international aspects and industrial connections each year. There are different systems to rank worldwide universities. This study is based on the calculation of Gini coefficients of Turkish universities and the evaluation of the differences between the universities for each of the years from 2010 to 2018 considering one of the aforementioned systems namely, URAP-TR. While calculating the Gini coefficients, universities with medical faculties, universities without medical faculties and all universities are evaluated separately. According to the findings of Gini coefficients and Lorenz curves, the highest inequality belongs to the criteria of the number of Ph D students for the term of 2010/2011. As for the number of articles and scientific publications criteria, the differences between universities are decreased over the years. Moreover, the gaps in universities with medical faculties and without medical faculties are almost zero. Nevertheless, the differences of research outputs between the universities with and without medical faculties are statistically significant.

show abstract

Türk Üniversiteleri Sıralama Göstergelerinin Ağırlıklandırılması: University Ranking by Academic Performance (URAP) Türkiye Genel Sıralaması Örneği

Cited by 6 publications

References 22 publications

Ranking of universities ranking indicators by fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (ahp)

Ranking of universities ranking indicators by fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (ahp)

Looking Inside the Strategic Plans: Strengths and Weaknesses of Turkish Higher Education Institutions

Gini Katsayısı ile Türkiye’deki Üniversitelerin Araştırma Çıktıları Arasındaki Farkın Değerlendirilmesi

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About