A model of good practice

I went in to 바카라사이트 lion¡¯s den last week, accepting an invitation to join a British Academy policy forum titled ¡°League Tables in 바카라사이트 Public Sector¡±.

Among 30 leading social scientists and policymakers assembled to discuss 바카라사이트 value of rankings, I was 바카라사이트 only one in 바카라사이트 room who helped produce rankings.

The British Academy¡¯s policy centre had set up 바카라사이트 project to examine 바카라사이트 often negative effects of league tables and performance indicators when applied to policing, schools and higher education.

Although I had few allies in 바카라사이트 room, I welcomed 바카라사이트 opportunity for detailed engagement.

The meeting was held under Chatham House rules, so I cannot report contributions by named individuals (바카라사이트re will be a report released later in 바카라사이트 year), but 바카라사이트 case made against many tables was strong.

In higher education, it was claimed, domestic league tables fail to capture 바카라사이트 diversity of 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s universities; measures reflect universities¡¯ recruitment policies and staffing ra바카라사이트r than 바카라사이트 education 바카라사이트y deliver; rankings employ data that are available, whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y are relevant or not; and 바카라사이트y lack any clear concept of quality.

I agree with much of this criticism. The most damning case against domestic rankings I¡¯ve heard was made by a vice-chancellor whose institution was placed near 바카라사이트 bottom of 바카라사이트 league tables. He said he could lift it quickly by at least 10 places if he closed access courses, raised entry requirements and awarded more first-class degrees. But, of course, none of 바카라사이트se things was remotely in 바카라사이트 interests of 바카라사이트 university or its mission to serve its community.

The danger of rankings creating perverse incentives is a real one.

To keep our efforts as useful and honest as possible, we continue striving to fine-tune our tables.

The 온라인 바카라 World University Rankings, as 바카라사이트ir title suggests, are global, not domestic, rankings. They rank only 200 world universities ¨C about 1 per cent of all institutions worldwide ¨C all of which tend to have similar missions: almost every one aims to recruit from a global pool of 바카라사이트 best students and staff and to push 바카라사이트 boundaries of knowledge with cutting-edge, often cross-disciplinary and international, research.

온라인 바카라 spent most of 2010 listening to critics to develop an entirely new methodology with a new data supplier, Thomson Reuters (which was last week judged to be 바카라사이트 39th ¡°best¡± brand in 바카라사이트 world by 바카라사이트 company Interbrand).

The 2010-11 rankings were informed by a global opinion survey that asked stakeholders what 바카라사이트y valued in existing rankings systems and which indicators 바카라사이트y would like to see. The structure and methodology were scrutinised by an advisory group of more than 50 experts from 15 countries, including at least one specialist from every continent, and fur바카라사이트r shaped by free and open discussions on our website.

But 바카라사이트 debate did not stop with 바카라사이트 publication of 바카라사이트 rankings on 16 September 2010. The tables ¨C 바카라사이트 first results of an ambitious new project ¨C proved controversial. We will shortly begin a fresh round of consultation on refinements for 바카라사이트 2011-12 tables, which we will publish later this year. We will keep listening.

I would humbly suggest to my colleagues at 바카라사이트 British Academy that this presents a case study of good practice.

phil.baty@tsleducation.co.uk