Rankings are getting to be extremely popular and even academics are jumping onto the bandwagon. Granted that ii is not uncommon for critics to lambast rankings for “being based on questionable data and flawed methodology” – they still serve a very useful purpose!
The attraction of these rankings is the sheer simplicity of the tables and their easy-to-understand presentation. To many of us who may not be well-versed about universities and their achievements, we will rely on rankings to provide the basis upon which we decide on whether a university is successful or otherwise. Notwithstanding our questions on the rankings systems’ validity, reliability, and fairness – we take these rankings with pride and joy if our institutions do well, or derision if they perform less well.
So when the QS World University Rankings were published on September 08, 2010 – it was with some disappointment that Malaysians noted that none of the local universities made the top 200 list. The best local university remained Universiti Malaya even though they have slipped from 180th place to 207th place. Although they weren’t rejoicing – Why should they? Dipping 27 places is not exactly a commendable achievement, izzit? – the ones that did rejoice were the lower-ranked local institutions that did improve on their rankings, even if they were way below in the less-noticed places! Kinda funny, don’t you think?
And then we have the Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings 2010-11 – announced on September 16, 2010 – and yet again, no Malaysian public universities made it to the top 200 listing (Sunday Star, September 19, 2010, p E3).
The attraction of these rankings is the sheer simplicity of the tables and their easy-to-understand presentation. To many of us who may not be well-versed about universities and their achievements, we will rely on rankings to provide the basis upon which we decide on whether a university is successful or otherwise. Notwithstanding our questions on the rankings systems’ validity, reliability, and fairness – we take these rankings with pride and joy if our institutions do well, or derision if they perform less well.
So when the QS World University Rankings were published on September 08, 2010 – it was with some disappointment that Malaysians noted that none of the local universities made the top 200 list. The best local university remained Universiti Malaya even though they have slipped from 180th place to 207th place. Although they weren’t rejoicing – Why should they? Dipping 27 places is not exactly a commendable achievement, izzit? – the ones that did rejoice were the lower-ranked local institutions that did improve on their rankings, even if they were way below in the less-noticed places! Kinda funny, don’t you think?
And then we have the Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings 2010-11 – announced on September 16, 2010 – and yet again, no Malaysian public universities made it to the top 200 listing (Sunday Star, September 19, 2010, p E3).
.
Understandably, the Malaysian response was silent. I scanned the pages of both Sunday Star and New Sunday Times today, but there was none. As I’ve said, if you do well – you’re likely to shout about it; if you don’t, it’s wise to just stay silent.
That explains why when the THE rankings pronounced Harvard as No. 1, of course, the university is naturally ecstatic about its standing. As Harvard spokesperson said in an emailed statement: “Harvard University is always honored to be recognized among such high-caliber institutions of higher learning”.
THE rankings supposedly looks at the top one percent of all the world’s universities. And of course, traditional strong nations in higher education, such as the US and the UK will still dominate ranking tables. This year’s THE table saw 72 US and 29 UK universities on the list of 200.
According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, the Times' list is unique in its attempt to rank institutions based on quantifiable, rather than subjective measures of value. Whatever the methodology, whichever the rankings that we refer to, whether we like them or not – rankings are here to stay.
Understandably, the Malaysian response was silent. I scanned the pages of both Sunday Star and New Sunday Times today, but there was none. As I’ve said, if you do well – you’re likely to shout about it; if you don’t, it’s wise to just stay silent.
That explains why when the THE rankings pronounced Harvard as No. 1, of course, the university is naturally ecstatic about its standing. As Harvard spokesperson said in an emailed statement: “Harvard University is always honored to be recognized among such high-caliber institutions of higher learning”.
THE rankings supposedly looks at the top one percent of all the world’s universities. And of course, traditional strong nations in higher education, such as the US and the UK will still dominate ranking tables. This year’s THE table saw 72 US and 29 UK universities on the list of 200.
According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, the Times' list is unique in its attempt to rank institutions based on quantifiable, rather than subjective measures of value. Whatever the methodology, whichever the rankings that we refer to, whether we like them or not – rankings are here to stay.
No comments:
Post a Comment