At their launch in September 2018, the 15th annual edition of the THE World University Rankings attracted almost 5,000 news reports across the worldâs mainstream media â and many, many more social media posts. This gave the rankings launch a global audience well into the billions.
The release of the world rankings each year has the sort of media impact one would expect of a World Cup, or from the Olympics, and beyond the theatre and the brief media frenzy of the annual launch, tens of millions of unique internet browsers pore over the rankings data and related university profiles on www.timeshighereducation.com across the year.
But despite their huge reach and influence in shaping how universities are perceived globally, and in informing the educational choices of millions of students, there is one glaring limitation of the global university rankings: they are heavily focused (some exclusively focused), on research performance, not on the teaching and learning that many would argue is the raison dâetre of universities.
The first, and one of the most popular global rankings, Shanghaiâs Academic Ranking of World Universities, is based entirely on metrics for research â rewarding scholars for publishing their discoveries in the prestigious science journals, Nature and Science, for example, and giving credit to universities for nurturing Nobel Prize winners. The well-known âLeiden Rankingâ from Leiden Universityâs Centre for Science and Technology Studies, is based exclusively on an analysis of research publications.
Even THEâs World University Rankings â the most comprehensive and balanced of the global rankings, with 13 separate performance indicators including five covering the âteaching environmentâ â is still heavily weighted towards an analysis of research performance, through publication and citation analysis and a reputation survey.
The global rankings organisations must accept their part in contributing to a global HE system that rewards good research much more than good teaching, and risks incentivising university leaders and policy makers to prioritise research over the vital teaching mission. Academic careers and promotions tend to be driven by research: personal reputations are built on research discoveries, and, in part, fuelled by global rankings; institutional reputations â universitiesâ place in the global pecking order â is largely determined by research activity.
But recent developments in global rankings could shake this up and give teaching its rightful place, enjoying parity of esteem within a universityâs missions, alongside research.
The global rankingsâ traditional focus on research is partly by design â they serve not just as a student consumer tool, but as benchmarks for university leaders and increasingly as geo-political indicators for the knowledge economy. But this focus is also partly by default: while research quality is easy to capture across borders with established and widely understood data sources, it is extremely difficult to capture teaching excellence, even more so when you seek to compare teaching across different countries.
But in September 2016, the publisher of the worldâs most influential university ranking since 2004, made a crucial breakthrough: it published for the ...