WURS: a simulation software for university rankings—software review

Siniksaran, Enis; Satman, Mehmet Hakan

doi:10.1007/s11192-019-03269-8

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One reason is that it is impossible to measure "a university's quality" by employing only some relevant data, methodologies, and indicators [47]. As we have previously seen, GURs use indicators [4][5][6][7]36,38,48,49] that center mainly on research performance [3,50] and tend to rely on internationally accessible bibliometric databases and reputation surveys [50]. It is necessary to bear other different measures in mind, such as qualitative evaluations (pairwise) that must be done by experts in a given field [47].…”

Section: Ranking Web Of Universities or Webometrics Ranking Of World Universitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Analysis between Global University Rankings and Environmental Sustainability of Universities

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global University Rankings (GURs) intend to measure the performance of universities worldwide. Other rankings have recently appeared that evaluate the creation of environmental policies in universities, e.g., the Universitas Indonesia (UI) GreenMetric. This work aims to analyze the interaction between the Top 500 of such rankings by considering the geographical location of universities and their typologies. A descriptive analysis and a statistical logistical regression analysis were carried out. The former demonstrated that European and North American universities predominated the Top 500 of GURs, while Asian universities did so in the Top 500 of the UI GreenMetric ranking, followed by European universities. Older universities predominated the Top 500 of GURs, while younger ones did so in the Top 500 of the UI GreenMetric ranking. The second analysis demonstrated that although Latin American universities were barely present in the Top 500 of GURs, the probability of them appearing in the Top 500 of the UI GreenMetric ranking was 5-fold. We conclude that a low association exists between universities’ academic performance and their commitment to the natural environment in the heart of their institutions. It would be advisable for GURs to include environmental indicators to promote sustainability at universities and to contribute to climate change.

show abstract

Section: Ranking Web Of Universities or Webometrics Ranking Of World Universitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Analysis between Global University Rankings and Environmental Sustainability of Universities

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specifically, lacking compliance due to the fact that the rankings do not comply with the good practices stated in the Berlin Principles for methodology. The most surprising observation to emerge from the methodology dimension is that RUR shows the highest level of congruence with the criteria in terms of methodological soundness even if it is not mentioned among the most renowned and influential ranking systems in the literature (Safón, 2019; Sarwar et al, 2021; Siniksaran & Satman, 2020; Tuesta et al, 2019). This result has further strengthened our conviction that the more stable the methodology used, the more a ranking complies with the Berlin Principles.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Defining standards for rankings: An investigation of global university rankings according to the Berlin Principles

Belenkuyu

Karadağ

2023

Euro J of Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of universities as the engines of knowledge‐based economies drives global internationalisation of higher education. This contributes to a competitive environment where higher education rankings indicate market value. Even though rankings are influential and are used a lot, ranking systems have been heavily critiqued. One of the problems is that there are few if any external checks on how rankings are created. The purpose of the study on which this article reports was to evaluate ranking systems. Within the scope of the study, we have sought to reveal to what extent current ranking systems comply with the Berlin Principles—prepared to create certain rules for rankings, and to ensure that rankings represent quality. A document analysis of publicly available documents online was carried out together with a review of printed and electronic publications on ranking systems. An evaluation form was prepared and used in this study for field experts to fill in. Findings show that ranking systems comply with the Berlin Principles in terms of methodology, transparency, and acceptability at a level that ranges from moderate to low. Overall, rankings do not consider differences in higher education and are not transparent about the processes by which rankings are developed. Rankings should for this reason be interpreted carefully and methodological weaknesses of rankings that can lead to false inferences should be recognised.

show abstract

“…On a different note, Torabian (2019) suggests alteration of performance indicators in order to facilitate the implementation of sustainable development goals. Apart from these theoretical models proposing changes in performance indicators, there are studies suggesting new methodologies of ranking HEIs based on the revealed preferences of applicants (Csat o and T oth, 2020), metrics obtained from activities on web, specifically social media (McCoy et al, 2018) and using specific software to collect and analyse data to approximate rankings (Siniksaran and Satman, 2019). There are also studies that suggest alternative rankings based on different groupings of HEIs by proposing a fivecluster solution (Poole et al, 2017) and ranking institutions by reference groups (Koszty an et al, 2019).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A practical framework for ranking universities by their competitive advantages: a mixed methods study on foundation universities in Turkey

Ayhan

ÖZDEMİR

2022

TQM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this research is to determine the competitive advantages of higher education institutions (HEIs) and create a new methodology to rank universities according to the competitive advantages.Design/methodology/approachThe research determines the competitive advantages of HEIs by analysing expert opinions through a semi-structured interview form, matches codes and themes to performance indicators using Saldana's two-cycle coding methods, evaluates content validity through Lawshe and reveals the item weights of the ranking with analytical hierarchy process (AHP). Simple additive weighting (SAW) and Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity (TOPSIS) methods were used for ranking universities.FindingsSeven dimensions stand out in regard to what should be considered while ranking HEIs: research and publication, education, management, infrastructure, financial resources, human resources and social and economic contribution. Under the 7 dimensions, 69 indicators were determined.Practical implicationsThe research provides a scientific reference point where HEIs can compare themselves with other HEIs regarding where they are in the sector, especially in terms of competitive advantages.Originality/valueAlthough there are many different ranking methods that rank universities in the national and international literature, almost all these methods are largely based on the outputs of the university such as the number of publications, the number of patents, the number of projects, etc. A framework which ranks universities by considering different aspects of the institution, such as management, human resources and financial resources, has not been developed yet. In this respect, this research aims to fill this gap in the literature.

show abstract

WURS: a simulation software for university rankings—software review

Cited by 8 publications

References 16 publications

A Comparative Analysis between Global University Rankings and Environmental Sustainability of Universities

A Comparative Analysis between Global University Rankings and Environmental Sustainability of Universities

Defining standards for rankings: An investigation of global university rankings according to the Berlin Principles

A practical framework for ranking universities by their competitive advantages: a mixed methods study on foundation universities in Turkey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About