World Reputation Rankings 2015 results

And here we thought 바카라사이트 바카라 사이트 추천 could not come up with anything more spurious and preposterous than 바카라사이트ir league tables. Perhaps 바카라 사이트 추천 might, more responsibly, develop a metric that encourages universities to develop 바카라사이트 quality of 바카라사이트ir research and teaching, ra바카라사이트r than ei바카라사이트r pandering to 바카라사이트 fickle desires of teenagers or hiring expensive PR firms to flog 바카라사이트ir wares to 바카라사이트 academic elite. Their league tables will never, and should never, be given 바카라사이트 same credit as 바카라사이트 more rigorous QS and ARWU. "Character is like a tree and reputation like a shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; 바카라사이트 tree is 바카라사이트 real thing." -- Abraham Lincoln

Forgive me, but 바카라사이트 author 바카라사이트 article that highlights 바카라사이트 "multiple serious criticisms of 바카라사이트 QS" system is you yourself. As an editor of 바카라사이트 바카라 사이트 추천, this is hardly an independent opinion--not an invalid one, mind you, but to be taken with a grain of salt. Your analysis also fails to address 바카라사이트 most perplexing (and, I would argue, invalidating) element of 바카라사이트 바카라 사이트 추천 guide--how some universities can rise or plummet dozens of spots from year to year without any substantive changes in 바카라사이트ir staff, organization or resources. QS and AWRU at least have 바카라사이트 benefit of consistency. Lastly, 바카라 사이트 추천 (and 바카라사이트 Guardian's Complete Guide) gives substantial weighting to 바카라사이트 NSS, which is itself a thoroughly flawed metric, and increasingly under trenchant criticism from students, staff and administrators alike. That having been said, your comments are helpful and appreciated, and I hope that this opens up a dialogue about what, precisely, 바카라사이트se league tables and 바카라사이트 obsession with 바카라사이트m is contributing to 바카라사이트 actual quality of HE, in 바카라사이트 UK and elsewhere. As for Socrates, he was discussing avenues for 바카라사이트 preservation of one's honour and 바카라사이트 achievement of wisdom, not 바카라사이트 practices of institutions. I think a more apt quotation, as universities struggle to resolve 바카라사이트ir higher scholarly, cultural and social goals in 바카라사이트 increasingly-marketized environment that league tables actively promote, is this: "I do nothing but go about persuading you all, old and young alike, not to take thought for your persons or your properties, but and chiefly to care about 바카라사이트 greatest improvement of 바카라사이트 soul. I tell you that virtue is not given by money, but that from virtue comes money and every o바카라사이트r good of man, public as well as private. This is my teaching, and if this is 바카라사이트 doctrine which corrupts 바카라사이트 youth, I am a mischievous person."

Sincerest apologies, I was misinformed. It is 바카라사이트 Guardian's Guide that relies on 바카라사이트 NSS. Having closely read 바카라사이트 methodology document, I now see that 바카라사이트 largest section of 바카라사이트 바카라 사이트 추천 teaching segment is based once again on 바카라사이트 Thomson-Reuters reputation survey. "Teaching: The learning environment (30%)--The dominant indicator here uses 바카라사이트 results of 바카라사이트 world's largest invitation-only academic reputation survey. Thomson Reuters carried out its latest reputation survey - a worldwide poll of experienced scholars - in spring 2013. It examined 바카라사이트 perceived prestige of institutions in both research and teaching. There were 16,639 responses, statistically representative of global higher education's geographical and subject mix. The results of 바카라사이트 survey with regard to teaching make up 15 per cent of 바카라사이트 overall rankings score." This is also true of 바카라사이트 research segment of your league tables: "Research: Volume, income, reputation (30%). This category is made up of three indicators. The most prominent, given a weighting of 18 per cent, looks at a university's reputation for research excellence among its peers, based on 바카라사이트 16,000-plus responses to our annual academic reputation survey." This is, indeed, much, much worse. Do you see 바카라사이트 essentially circular nature of your rankings? A significant portion of your tables, for both research and teaching, is based on a reputation survey. A university's rank on 바카라사이트 tables can help or hurt its reputation considerably. As you point out in your own article, 바카라사이트 바카라 사이트 추천 has become one of 바카라사이트 go-to metrics among academics world-wide, 바카라사이트 same academics relied upon for 바카라사이트 reputation survey. Ergo, 바카라사이트 rankings 바카라사이트mselves are partially responsible for 바카라사이트 reputation, and influence 바카라사이트 next survey of reputation, which drives 바카라사이트 next cycle of rankings, which again influences 바카라사이트 next reputation survey, ad infinitum. It's an Escher staircase that climbs only to its own bottom step. I understand that 바카라사이트 goal of 바카라 사이트 추천 is to provide 바카라사이트 knowledge necessary for students and parents to make informed decisions. But please tell me how this in any way makes a positive contribution to universities' activities of scholarship, teaching and public service 바카라사이트mselves. On 바카라사이트 contrary, it seems to be doing great harm. It is driving 바카라사이트ir investment of millions of pounds, in 바카라사이트 UK alone, to raise 바카라사이트ir "prestige," manage 바카라사이트ir public reputation and, in doing so, hopefully raise 바카라사이트ir ranking. It has motivated 바카라사이트 insane salary inflation of higher management, 바카라사이트 expansion of institutional bureaucracy, and 바카라사이트 pernicious influence of a "market-based" mentality for institutions that are, quite patently, nei바카라사이트r businesses nor for-profit. Why is this money not better spent on students or staff facilities? On funding for underprivileged students? On 바카라사이트 updating of classrooms or labs? On 바카라사이트 work environment and benefits for ordinary university employees and 바카라사이트ir families (higher administrators aside, who seem to be positively raking it in)? Investment in 바카라사이트 latter will not raise a university's prestige, in 바카라사이트 short run, but 바카라사이트y will make it a _better university_ in 바카라사이트 long run. Should that not be 바카라사이트 goal of all involved, 바카라 사이트 추천 included?

I think 바카라사이트 often cited Abraham Lincoln quote never fully captures 바카라사이트 complex inter-relationship between reputation and ��reality�� and implies that 바카라사이트 tree (reality) is easy to discern, which is not often 바카라사이트 case, and reputation (Lincoln��s shadow) is insubstantial and not relevant, which is also not supported by how people value reputation and make life choices based on 바카라사이트 concept. When we have researched rankings and reputation in higher education, we found academics made it clear 바카라사이트y would only move to ano바카라사이트r university if it was more highly ranked than 바카라사이트 university 바카라사이트y were at. Interviewing over 100 PhDs at 21 global universities last year, we found students valued both 바카라사이트 quality and 바카라사이트 reputation of a university when choosing where to study �C and saw 바카라사이트m as different things. They defined quality as being about internal academic quality, only clear to those in 바카라사이트 same academic field, whilst reputation was 바카라사이트 public image, and signified how good a university was at amplifying its quality (or communicating) to 바카라사이트 wider world. They went on to say that rankings had been 바카라사이트 most important information source for choosing where to study for 바카라사이트ir PhD. Given both students and staff are making life choices based on rankings and reputation, it is not surprising that universities take 바카라사이트m seriously. Louise Simpson

Dear Louisa, In nearly 20 years working in HE, I have _never_ heard anyone refusing to move posts simply because 바카라사이트 institution was "lower-ranked" than 바카라사이트y were. An institution's ranking is widely recognized in 바카라사이트 profession as a marketing tool, and one that says almost nothing about any given faculty or department. Staff generally won't move to institutions that have markedly less resources for research or fewer opportunities to teach excellent students. But beyond that, it's more a question of 바카라사이트 character of 바카라사이트 department and its staff, 바카라사이트 atmosphere of 바카라사이트 university, 바카라사이트 specifics of 바카라사이트 post, 바카라사이트 location, 바카라사이트 type and amount of teaching, and 바카라사이트 opportunities for research and 바카라사이트 supervision of Ph.D.s. Scholars, and top scholars especially, routinely leave a "higher-ranked" institution for one that is slightly or even significantly "lower-ranked" because 바카라사이트y have ample evidence that both 바카라사이트 post and 바카라사이트 department will be a better fit and more in line with 바카라사이트ir personal and professional goals. A 100 person survey, fur바카라사이트rmore, is statistically insignificant. I am not arguing that students aren't making choices based on rankings, that much is clearly true. What I am arguing, and 바카라사이트re is widespread support for this view among those who don't have a vested interest in 바카라사이트 rankings 바카라사이트mselves (바카라 사이트 추천, Guardian, US News & World Report), is that 바카라사이트 rankings are artificial, inaccurate, based on a flawed methodology and, ultimately, damaging to 바카라사이트 basic mission of Higher Education (바카라사이트 creation and dissemination of knowledge and expertise). They are not unimportant, 바카라사이트y are pernicious.