Abstract

Introduction. In assessing the quality of education, the author applies the rating approach. To date, a set of the most famous and authoritative ratings has been formed. The basic criteria are the provisions of the value approach, which determine the need to consider the problem of assessing the materiality of ratings. Methods. The author uses the comparative method. It is proved that educational ratings are based on a “reference approach” to credit rating, but other solutions are possible, including similar comparisons in the service sector. Analysis. It is established that the materiality of a rating is based on the admissibility of potential distortions of reliable ideas about the educational organization. It is clarified that the value of the comparison is based on the stability of the position in the rating to potentially possible distortions. It is shown that the QS ratings are the closest to the “pattern” comparison procedures in the investment sphere. The paper provides a historical overview of the emergence and formation of educational ratings. It is established that distortions in the rating, regardless of the reasons for their occurrence, can be eliminated by increasing the materiality not of the rating itself, but of the information placed by the university in open sources. At the same time, the comparison of positions in the rating of the actual achieved level of the criterion by the university itself allows to ensure the formation of a more reasonable public opinion about university’s capabilities. Results. It is concluded that the proposed approach to increase the materiality of the information placed in open sources and assess the relationship between the achievements of the university and the positions in the ranking allows to establish national and global educational trends, which can be used by actors of the global educational policy.

Highlights

  • In assessing the quality of education, the author applies the rating approach

  • The basic criteria are the provisions of the value approach

  • which determine the need to consider the problem of assessing the materiality of ratings

Read more

Summary

РЕЙТИНГИ УНИВЕРСИТЕТОВ В ГЛОБАЛЬНОМ ОБРАЗОВАТЕЛЬНОМ ПРОСТРАНСТВЕ

Екатерина Андреевна Антюхова Московский государственный институт международных отношений (Университет) Министерства иностранных дел Российской Федерации,г.

УНИВЕРСИТЕТЫ XXI ВЕКА
Год основания
Fitch AAA
Традиционный тип рейтинга
Гибридный тип рейтинга
Findings
СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.