Software Nonparametric Combination Global Ranking

2017 ◽  
pp. 117-130
Author(s):  
Corain Livio ◽  
Arboretti Rosa ◽  
Bonnini Stefano
Keyword(s):  
Global Ranking ◽  
Nonparametric Combination

Accreditation and ranking of higher education institutions (HEIs): review, observations and recommendations for the Indian higher education system

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerald Ozee Fernandes ◽  
Balgopal Singh
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Education System ◽  
Higher Education Institutions ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Academic Quality ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Global Ranking ◽  
Higher Education System ◽  
The World ◽  
Indian Higher Education

PurposeThe higher education system has been entrusted globally to provide quality education, especially to the youth, and equip them with required skills and capabilities. The visionaries and policymakers of the countries around the world have been working relentlessly to improve the standard of the higher education system by establishing national and global accreditation and ranking bodies and expecting measuring performance through setting up accreditation and ranking parameters. This paper focuses on the review of Indian university accreditation and ranking system and determining its efficacy in improving academic quality for achieving good position in global quality accreditation and ranking.Design/methodology/approachThe study employed exploratory research approach to know about the accreditation and ranking issues of Indian higher education institutions to overcome the challenges for being globally competitive. The accreditation and ranking parameters and score of leading Indian universities was collected from secondary data sources. Similarly, the global ranking parameters and scores of these Indian universities with top global universities was explored. The performance gaps of Indian university in global academic quality parameter is assessed by comparing it with scores of global top universities. Further, each domestic and global accreditation and ranking parameters have been taken up for discussion.FindingsThe study identified teaching and learning, research and industry collaboration as common parameter in the accreditation and ranking by Indian and global accreditation and ranking body. Furthermore, the study revealed that Indian accreditation and ranking body assess leniently on parameters and award high scores as compared to rigorous global accreditation and ranking practice. The study revealed that “research” and “citations” are important parameters for securing prestigious position in global ranking, this is the reason Indian universities are trailing. The study exposed that Indian academic fraternity lack prominence in research, publication and citations as per need of global accreditation and ranking standards.Research limitations/implicationsThe limitation of this study is that it focused only on few Indian and global accreditation and ranking bodies. The future implication of this study will be the use of methodology designed in this study for comparing accreditation and ranking bodies’ parameters of different continents and countries in different economic development stages i.e. emerging and developed economies to know the disparity and shortcomings in their higher education system.Practical implicationsThe article is a review and comparison of national and global accreditation and ranking parameters. The article explored the important criteria and key indicators of accreditation and ranking that would provide an important and meaningful insight to academic institutions of the emerging economies of the world to develop its competitiveness. The study contributed to the literature on identifying benchmark for improving academic and higher education institution quality. This study would be further helpful in fostering new ideas toward setting up of contemporary globally viable and acceptable academic quality standard.Originality/valueThis is possibly the first study conducted with novel methodology of comparing the Indian and global accreditation and ranking parameters to identify the academic quality performance gap and suggesting ways to attain academic benchmark through continuous improvement activity and process for global competitiveness.

scholarly journals Global Ranking of Universities by Reputation: The Hidden Criterion

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (1-3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor F. Peretomode
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Internationalization Of Higher Education ◽  
University Rankings ◽  
Important Criterion ◽  
Global Ranking ◽  
Ranking Systems ◽  
Salient Factor ◽  
Is Value

ABSTRACT The ranking of World Universities is a fairly recent phenomenon. It is one of the products of internationalization of higher education. Many of the indices used by the ranking systems are now familiar to readers and writers. The age of an institution is one salient factor often not considered in rankings. The objective of this study is to critically discuss the relevance of age in relation to the metrics used and to determine whether or not age can be shown to have a place in university rankings .The analysis of data shows the average age of the top 50 institutions by reputation to be 206 years and the median 162. A look at the rankings will not reveal this important criterion except each of these ranked universities is linked with the year it was founded. It concludes that there is value in age and should be factored into university rankings.

Global ranking of knowledge management and intellectual capital academic journals: 2017 update

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 675-692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Serenko ◽  
Nick Bontis
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Management ◽  
Intellectual Capital ◽  
Process Management ◽  
Citation Impact ◽  
Academic Journals ◽  
Expert Survey ◽  
Ranking List ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Global Ranking ◽  
Practice Knowledge

Purpose The purpose of this study is to update a global ranking of 27 knowledge management and intellectual capital (KM/IC) academic journals. Design/methodology/approach The ranking was developed based on a combination of results from a survey of 482 active KM/IC researchers and journal citation impact indices. Findings The ranking list includes 27 currently active KM/IC journals. The A+ journals are the Journal of Knowledge Management and the Journal of Intellectual Capital. The A journals are the Learning Organization, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Knowledge and Process Management, VINE: The Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems and International Journal of Knowledge Management. A majority of recently launched journals did not fare well in the ranking. Whereas a journal’s longevity is important, it is not the only factor affecting its ranking position. Expert survey and citation impact measures are relatively consistent, but expert survey ranking scores change faster. Practical implications KM/IC discipline stakeholders, including practitioners, editors, publishers, reviewers, researchers, students, administrators and librarians, may consult the developed ranking list for various purposes. Compared to 2008, more researchers indicated KM/IC as their primary area of concentration, which is a positive indicator of discipline development. Originality/value This is the most recent ranking list of KM/IC academic journals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document