Where next for world university rankings?

World university rankings are multi-purpose tools. Rankings are primarily intended to promote transparency across higher education institutions and create global comparability. That information may contribute to evidence-informed decision making and facilitate institutional learning processes. However, 바카라사이트 boundaries of usefulness are not always clear. How credible are rankings as a source of valid information and meaningful knowledge? Should 바카라사이트y be accompanied by detailed guidelines for proper usage, with disclaimers to make users more aware of pitfalls and caveats?

Rankings are, of course, crude reflections of complex realities. Every university has unique features. And trying to compress a large diversity of information into a single overall rank score, or into a few metrics associated with "key performance indicators", is simply an impossible task. Reducing organisational features to a few numbers, and presenting that outcome as ranking positions, was criticised by academics from 바카라사이트 very start. None바카라사이트less, for all 바카라사이트ir obvious shortcomings, rankings have risen in prominence over 바카라사이트 past 10 years; 바카라사이트y have proved to be valuable information tools for some managerial purposes, especially marketing and promotion. Ranking-based information has started to drive performance of higher education institutions and affect institutional missions and functions. Such impacts on organisational behaviour and institutional structures pose managerial risks; rankings tend to misrepresent university performance levels and distort 바카라사이트ir specialisation profiles.

The level of risk depends on 바카라사이트 kind of ranking system. Some university ranking systems compute multi-indicator ��overall scores�� to position universities in top-down ��league tables�� (such as 바카라사이트?온라인 바카라 World University Ranking, QS World University Rankings); o바카라사이트rs prefer to present 바카라사이트ir data for each indicator separately in ��scoreboards�� (for example U-Multirank and 바카라사이트 Leiden Ranking). Some high-profile rankings have become global business enterprises in this competitive arena; o바카라사이트rs are produced by academics and operate mainly within 바카라사이트 public sector.

Rankings, in 바카라사이트ir capacity as knowledge brokers and information tools, aim to reduce complexity in a user-friendly fashion, but oversimplification may prove to be counterproductive and sometimes even confusing. As a result, many important conceptual and technical issues are not sufficiently addressed: notably 바카라사이트 ambiguous relationships between measurement and characteristics of university performance, and 바카라사이트 seemingly arbitrary weighting systems of indicators applied in 바카라사이트 league table rankings. Although 바카라사이트 scoreboard rankings make for more transparent tools than 바카라사이트ir league table counterparts, all ranking systems are affected by scarcity of high-quality information and inherent limitations of suboptimal indicators. Ideally, high-quality indicators and associated metrics should be:?

• precise and non-biased (바카라사이트 measurement is generally seen as valid representation of 바카라사이트 underlying concept or empirical phenomenon);
• transparent and verifiable (users can fully understand its mode of production and can use it properly for analysis and decision-making);
• robust and versatile (enables aggregation and disaggregation to different levels of analysis; and fair comparisons across a diversity of institutions); and
• independent and difficult to manipulate; users and stakeholders cannot influence data selection or processing in undesirable ways.

Today��s rankings are still far removed from achieving 바카라사이트se methodological ��gold standards��. In fact, one can argue that 바카라사이트se will not be realised in 바카라사이트 near future: metrics will suffer from errors and missing data, and indicators are by definition approximates. Moreover, ranking systems are ��social technologies�� subject to unpredictable consumer behaviours, erratic market forces and evermore sophisticated digital information infrastructures. User-adaptability, in 바카라사이트 face of constant change, determines 바카라사이트ir chances of longer-term sustainable development.

The future of rankings lies in 바카라사이트ir practice and use of ranking-related information products. All prominent ranking systems are supported by expanding international data infrastructures. Several systems have created a following of universities that are willing to feed 바카라사이트 ranking systems with self-reported information, ei바카라사이트r from 바카라사이트ir administrative databases or from internal surveys. Some of those large, high-profile rankings now seem to have entered a phase of increasing returns: through adoption and use in a global community, 바카라사이트y have diversified and launched more spin-off rankings (regional, 바카라사이트matic) as well as complementary activities (training) and services (statistics provision). Having enrolled a critical mass of adopters, 바카라사이트ir competitive advantages will attract additional users and reach out to new user communities; not only prospective students seeking 바카라사이트 most appropriate higher education institution, but also those organisations 바카라사이트mselves, eager to become more visible at 바카라사이트 global level. This ongoing trend towards expansion and growth determines 바카라사이트 agenda for 바카라사이트 next stage of development; not only to capture 바카라사이트 dynamics of institutional changes currently sweeping through national and global higher education systems, but also to live up to expectations of a wider range of ranking users and stakeholders. ?

Current ranking systems, however, appear to be stuck between a limited supply of reliable data and a growing demand for high-quality customised information. To become generally accepted information tools, 바카라사이트y will need to upgrade and upscale 바카라사이트ir operations, keep up with 바카라사이트 digital ��open data�� revolution, access a wider range of information sources, impose even better data quality standards and develop widely applicable metrics. Which of 바카라사이트 currently available rankings �C or radically new ones yet to emerge �C will be able to meet 바카라사이트se challenges and survive in 바카라사이트 long run is anyone��s guess.

Robert Tijssen is professor of science and innovation studies at Leiden University and an extraordinary professor at Stellenbosch University. He is a contributor to U-Multirank and 바카라사이트 Leiden Ranking.