The Shanghai Global Ranking of Academic Subjects: Room for improvement

Autores/as

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2021.jul.08

Palabras clave:

ARWU, Shanghai Ranking, Academic subjects, Categories, WoS, JCR, Topics, Issues, Disciplines, Rankings, Classifications, Universities, Higher Education, Institutions, Bibliometrics, Research performance, Research evaluation, Critical perspective, Flaws, Indicators, Global South

Resumen

Global university rankings have achieved public popularity as they are portrayed as an objective measure of the quality of higher education institutions. One of the latest rankings is the Shanghai Global Ranking of Academic Subjects, which classifies institutions according to five fields –Engineering, Life Sciences, Medical Sciences, Natural Sciences and Social Sciences– which are divided into 54 subjects. Despite being introduced in 2017, no study has analyzed the methodology applied by this ranking. The results of our analysis show that the methodology currently used by the Shanghai Global Ranking of Academic Subjects presents several issues, which negatively affect a large proportion of universities around the world. Needless to say, if the Shanghai Global Ranking of Academic Subjects is meant to be global, it needs to expand its surveys to countries located in the Global South.

 

Citas

Billaut, Jean-Charles; Bouyssou, Denis; Vincke, Philippe (2010). “Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking? An MCDM view”. Scientometrics, v. 84, n. 1, pp. 237-263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0115-x

DORA (2015). San Francisco declaration on research assessment. https://sfdora.org/read

Fauzi, Muhammad-Ashraf; Tan, Christine-Nya-Ling; Daud, Mahyuddin; Awalludin, Muhammad-Mukhtar-Noor (2020). “University rankings: A review of methodological flaws”. Issues in educational research, v. 30, n. 1, pp. 79-96. http://www.iier.org.au/iier30/fauzi.pdf

Fernández-Cano, Antonio; Curiel-Marín, Elvira; Torralbo-Rodríguez, Manuel; Vallejo-Ruiz, Mónica (2018). “Questioning the Shanghai Ranking methodology as a tool for the evaluation of universities: an integrative review”. Scientometrics, v. 116, n. 3, pp. 2069-2083. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2814-7

Fernández-Tuesta, Esteban; García-Zorita, Carlos; Romera-Ayllón, Rosario; Sanz-Casado, Elías (2019). “Does a country/region’s economic status affect its universities presence in international rankings?”. Journal of data and information science, v. 4, n. 2, pp. 56-78. https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2019-0009

Florian, Razvan V. (2007). “Irreproducibility of the results of the Shanghai academic ranking of world universities”. Scientometrics, v. 72, n. 1, pp. 25-32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1712-1

González-Riaño, María-Guadalupe; Repiso, Rafael; Delgado-López-Cózar, Emilio (2014). “Repercusión de los rankings universitarios en la prensa española”. Revista española de documentación científica, v. 37, n. 3, e055. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2014.3.1128

Kabeer, Naila (2005). “Gender equality and women’s empowerment: A critical analysis of the third millennium development goal”. Gender and development, v. 13, n. 1, pp. 13-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552070512331332273

Kehm, Barbara M. (2014). “Global university rankings. Impacts and unintended side effects”. European journal of education, v. 49, n. 1, pp. 102-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12064

Krauskopf, Erwin (2011). “The unforeseen impact of meeting abstracts on cancer research”. Annals of oncology, v. 22, n. 10, 2342. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdr406

Krauskopf, Erwin (2013). “Standardization of the institutional address”. Scientometrics, v. 94, pp. 1313-1315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0852-0

Marginson, Simon (2014). “University rankings and social science”. European journal of education, v. 49, n. 1, pp. 45-59. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12061

Marginson, Simon; Van-der-Wende, Marijk (2007) “To rank or to be ranked: The impact of global rankings in higher education”. Journal of studies in international education, v. 11, n. 3/4, pp. 306-329. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315307303544

Mongeon, Philippe; Paul-Hus, Adèle (2015). “The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis”. Scientometrics, v. 106, pp. 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5

Olcay, Gokcen-Arkali; Bulu, Melih (2017). “Is measuring the knowledge creation of universities possible? A review of university rankings”. Technological forecasting & social change, v. 123, pp. 153-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.029

Ordóñez-Matamoros, Gonzalo; Vernot-López, Michelle; Moreno-Mattar, Ornella; Orozco, Luis-Antonio (2020). “Exploring the effects of North-South and South-South research collaboration in emerging economies, the Colombian case”. Review of policy research, v. 37, n. 2, pp. 174-200. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12378

Pandiella-Dominique, Andrés; Moreno-Lorente, Luis; García-Zorita, José-Carlos; Sanz-Casado, Elías (2018). “Modelo de estimación de los indicadores del Academic Ranking of World Universities (Shanghai Ranking) scores”. Revista española de documentación científica, v. 41, n. 2, e204. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2018.2.1462

Pusser, Brian; Marginson, Simon (2013). “University rankings in critical perspective”. The journal of higher education, v. 84, n. 4, pp. 544-568. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2013.0022

Ridgeway, Cecilia L. (2011). Framed by gender: How gender inequality persists in the modern world. United Kingdom. Oxford University Online. ISBN: 978 0 199755783

Rochmyaningsih, Dyna (2018). “Showcase scientists from the Global South”. Nature, v. 553, 251. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-00662-w

Sauder, Michael; Espeland, Wendy-Nelson (2009). “The discipline of rankings: tight coupling and organization change”. American sociological review, v. 74, n. 1, pp. 63-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240907400104

Snowball, Jen D.; Shackleton, Charlie M. (2018). “Factors enabling and constraining research in a small research-intensive South African university”. Research evaluation, v. 27, n. 2, pp. 119-131. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvy002

Stoet, Gijsbert; Geary, David C. (2018). “The gender-equality paradox in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education”. Psychological science, v. 29, n. 4, pp. 581-593. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617741719

Van-der-Stocken, Tom; Hugé, Jean; Deboelpaep, Evelien; Vanhove, Maarten P. M.; Janssens-de-Bisthoven, Luc; Koedam, Nico (2016). “Academic capacity building: holding up the mirror”. Scientometrics, v. 106, n. 3, pp. 1277-1280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1811-3

Van-der-Wende, Marijk; Westerheijden, Don (2009). “Rankings and classifications: the need for a multidimensional approach”. In: Van-Vught, Frans (ed.). Mapping the higher education landscape. Towards a European classification of higher education. The Netherlands: Springer, pp. 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2249-3_5

Van-Leeuwen, Thed; Costas, Rodrigo; Calero-Medina, Clara; Visser, Martijn S. (2013). “The role of editorial material in bibliometric performance assessments”. Scientometrics, v. 95, pp. 817-828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0904-5

Van-Leeuwen, Thed N.; Moed, Henk F.; Tijseen, Robert J. W.; Visser, Martijn S.; Van-Raan, Anthony F. J. (2001). “Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequences for international comparisons of national research performance”. Scientometrics, v. 51, pp. 335-346. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010549719484

Van-Rann, Anthony F. J (2005). “Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods”. Scientometrics, v. 62, pp. 133-143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0008-6

Wiesmann, Urs; Dayer, Océane 2019. “Research for Sustainable development goals”. GAIA, v. 28, n. 2, pp. 88-89. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.28.2.4

Williams, Ross; Van-Dyke, Nina 2008. “Reputation and reality: Ranking major disciplines in Australian universities”. Higher education, v. 56, n. 1, pp. 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-007-9086-0

Descargas

Publicado

2021-07-08

Cómo citar

Krauskopf, E. (2021). The Shanghai Global Ranking of Academic Subjects: Room for improvement. Profesional De La Información, 30(4). https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2021.jul.08

Descargas

La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.