Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings Research Articles

Competitiveness, quality education and universities: the shift to the post-pandemic world

PurposeThis article aims to investigate whether there is a relationship between education for the labor market in the post-pandemic stage and the educational quality of universities, taking as a sample a group of Latin American countries and their main trading partners. Reference is made to the Global Competitiveness Report 2020 of the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) index, which evaluates the quality of universities.Design/methodology/approachCorrelations, clusters and T-tests were generated to test for significant differences, resulting in two blocks of countries being identified with statistically significant differences in educational efforts to prepare their citizens for the labor market and the quality of their universities.FindingsIt is concluded that there are examples of Latin American countries that, although they are emerging economies, are updating their educational systems at an accelerated pace to meet the needs demanded by the labor market, such as Chile and Argentina. In addition, there are some particular cases of Latin American QS universities that although they are not at a high level in their overall educational quality as a university, compared to North American and Asian universities, their graduates do show a high employability index. This means that in the graduate profile, these universities are also accelerating efforts to position them at a high level of preparedness to respond to the jobs and markets of tomorrow, just as the universities in developed economies do.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough the sample size is a limitation of this work, since it is based on secondary information reported by the WEF (2020) and the QS World University Rankings (2021), it contributes value by analyzing specific cases. Despite its limitations, the study yields meaningful results that put the challenges of post-pandemic employment and the role that universities play in a comprehensible framework.Originality/valueThese results put special attention on the work of universities as a crucial entity to prepare citizens to develop the competencies needed for the post-pandemic labor market, especially in terms of critical thinking and digital skills. Human capital formation will drive the post-pandemic recovery process of leading countries and universities.

What are universities pursuing? A review of the Quacquarelli Symonds world university rankings of Taiwanese universities (2021–2023)

This study evaluated world university rankings in Taiwan. Media reports and the literature on world university rankings have focused on rankings, particularly in Taiwan. This study conducted a document analysis of the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings in Taiwan’s universities from 2021 to 2023, and explored two cases: National Taiwan University and Taipei Medical University, both of which are listed in the QS World University Rankings for sustainable development. First, the researchers analyzed the related topics of the world university rankings. Second, the researchers explored the position of Taiwan’s universities in relation to the top 500 universities in the QS World University Rankings from 2021 to 2023. Third, two case universities pursuing QS World University Rankings are discussed. Finally, this study found that both universities are improving their teaching, research, and internationalization based on the indicators of the QS World University Rankings and the development of school affairs. The universities employ international faculty, cooperate internationally on projects, developing cross-disciplinary research, strengthening innovation, and increasing internationalization and cooperation with research institutions, and attract foreign students for sustainable development. The findings may serve as a reference for improving QS World University Rankings and promote the sustainable development of Taiwan’s higher education system, and understand global competition among universities.

ІНСТРУМЕНТИ ВИМІРЮВАННЯ ЯКОСТІ ОСВІТНЬОЇ ДІЯЛЬНОСТІ У КОНТЕКСТІ ЗА БЕЗПЕЧЕННЯ ЇЇ ЕФЕКТИВНОСТІ В УМОВАХ ВОЄННОГО СТАНУ І ПІСЛЯВОЄННОГО ВІДНОВЛЕННЯ КРАЇНИ

Summary. This article the determined that there are various mechanisms for assessing the quality of educa-tional activity of higher education institutions: accredita-tion, framework and rating, but university ratings are the most optimal mechanism for measuring the quality of educational activity in the context of ensuring its effec-tiveness. The indicators for measuring the quality of edu-cational activity used in the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG), the European Teaching Rankings (THE Europe Teaching Rankings) were analyzed the Shanghai Aca-demic Ranking of World Universities (Shanghai Ranking, ARWU), the Times Higher Education World University Rankings and the QS (Quacquarelli Symonds Ltd) World University Rankings, QS), national rating "TОР-200". According to the criteria of dominance of objective or subjective and result or reputation components, the main international university rankings can be ranked in the following order: (Shanghai Ranking) – objective, result; THE World University Rankings – objective-subjective, result-reputational; QS World University Rankings –sub-jective-objective, reputation-resultative; reputational andadvertising.The use of this approach to ensure the quality of edu-cational activity will improve the reputation of national universities in the world educational space, and in the modern conditions of war and in the period of post-war reconstruction, it will provide an opportunity to update and update educational programs, increase the im-portance of universities as a leading component of the socio-economic recovery of the country.

Diversity in medical PhD curricula: a call for harmonisation.

Globalisation has increased human movements around the world, spurring greater connectiveness and opportunities to collaborate. In an increasingly connected world, quality assurance among professionals is paramount, particularly in medical research where PhD (Doctor of Philosophy) degree holders are expected to be at the peak of their field and play advanced-level research, education and leadership roles. While some regional efforts have been made to ensure comparability in the standards of advanced degree training, no previous study has compared these standards for a PhD in medicine across the globe. To explore the structural diversity of medical PhD degrees and identify which aspects benefit from greater harmonisation. In 2021, the 10 best-ranked universities from each of the top five Western countries, and the top Asian country, were identified based on Quacquarelli Symonds World University Ranking. Data were collected for each university based on individual website information regarding the level of degree required to gain entry into a PhD programme in medicine and requirements for completion of coursework, journal publication and oral defence. Significant variations exist in the requirements for medical PhDs across the world in terms of prerequisite degree and inclusion of coursework. Oral defence is near universal, but a mandatory requirement for publication is largely absent. Harmonisation of medical PhD degrees through international standards should be considered to encourage quality improvement and benchmarking between institutions, as well as to facilitate greater ease of movement within the medical research community, improving international collaboration and individual career opportunities accordingly.

Teacher Training Doctoral Studies Basic Parameters and Development Vectors in Russia and in the World: The Results of the Global Study of Leading Universities

The article analyzes the main trends in the development of the scientific and pedagogical personnel training system in Russia and foreign countries. The main method of collecting empirical information is quantitative content analysis of the leading universities’ site content. The case selection is based on the QS (Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings – 2016 and 2020) – global university ranking (top 500). The selection of Russian universities has been carried out on the basis of the QS BRICS – 2016 and 2020 university ranking. Based on the results of the selection of the leading universities, 60 universities of North and Latin America, Russia, China, Europe, and Australia have been selected. The comparison criteria of higher education institutions are codified in the content analysis matrix. We compared the entry requirements, the content and organization of the doctoral studies, and the “exit” – the learning outcomes. The results of the research are the distinctive characteristics of the Russian teacher training doctoral programs and foreign doctoral programs EdD, EdLd, PhD in Education. It is revealed that foreign universities are characterized by an orientation to a variety of labor markets, differentiation of programs and career paths; studentoriented approach; flexible choice of learning formats; focus on the preparation of the author’s original research; close attention to the idea of the dissertation research, programs, scientific publications, dissertation text, multilevel assessment (program Manager, scientific consultant, elective teachers on the topic of the dissertation, the head of the postgraduate seminar, external experts); online learning; high quality of technical and informational environment. The characteristics of the Russian doctoral studies, which impede differentiation of the paths of dissertation preparation by doctoral students depending on the specifics of the scientific research area, limit the possibility of implementing the practical results of the dissertation and reduce the potential for professional growth of doctoral students.

Mission statements in universities: Readability and performance

The mission statement(s) (MS) is one of the most-used tools for planning and management. Universities worldwide have implemented MS in their knowledge planning and management processes since the 1980s. Research studies have extensively explored the content and readability of MS and its effect on performance in firms, but their effect on public or nonprofit institutions such as universities has not been scrutinized with the same intensity. This study used Gunning's Fog Index score to determine the readability of a sample of worldwide universities’ MS and two rankings, i.e., Quacquarelli Symonds World University Ranking and SCImago Institutions Rankings, to determine their effect on performance. No significant readability differences were identified in regions, size, focus, research type, age band, or status. Logistic regression (cumulative link model) results showed that variables, such as universities’ age, focus, and size, have more-significant explanatory power on performance than MS readability.

Коммуникационный аспект оценки репутации вуза (на примере Российского университета дружбы народов)

This article is concerned with the communicative study of the issue of assessing the reputation of universities. The article presents the concept of "reputation" and its characteristics such as a long-term period of creation, the multiple nature of reputation, the relationship with the values that the audience gives to the company etc. Reputation is seen as the result of communicative interaction with the audience, which allows to create trust and inspire confidence in stakeholders. The authors review the characteristics of the three leading world university rankings: Times Higher Education World University Rankings; Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings; The Academic Ranking of World Universities. And also, the article describes the criteria by which these rankings are built. It either observes the indicators that are taken into account in the compilation of reputational ratings for companies and brands. It turns out during the comparing of the criteria for assessing the ratings of universities and the ratings of companies and brands, that emotional components are completely dismissed from the ratings of universities. While compilers of the company’s reputation rankings RepTrak ™ Pulse and the brand’s reputation rankings Interbrand always include them. The article presents the data from a study of the reputation of RUDN University, which the authors conducted by methods of survey and interview in November 2019. They show that an emotional assessment of a university's reputation is more important for an internal audience than a rational one.

Leadership gender disparity in the fifty highest ranking North American universities: Thematic analysis under a theoretical lens

BackgroundDespite changes in the discourse around gender distributions within academic leadership, women continue to be under-represented in academia. Our study aims to identify the extent of gender disparity in the...

Perceived quality factors in higher education

ABSTRACT What does it mean to be ‘excellent’, particularly for the higher education institution? Without a definitive answer to that question, university rankings have become a proxy for quality and excellence. As such, higher education institutions are continually seeking ways to improve their rankings, with the implication being that these rankings measure which universities are most excellent. Upper administrators from public four-year higher education institutions in the United States were surveyed regarding their perceptions of factors they considered most important when assessing quality in the higher education institution. Respondents rated graduation and retention as the most important indicator of quality. Survey results were further compared to methodologies of the US News and World Report rankings, Times Higher Education World University Rankings and Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings and found that the perceived quality factors identified by survey respondents did not align with methodologies for any of these three rankings.

An international study of technology enhanced learning-related strategies from the perspective of disruptive innovation

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to analyse institutional strategy documents relating to technology-enhanced learning.Design/methodology/approachIn total, 84 documents were sampled from 71 leading higher education institutions (HEIs), identified through the Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings 2018. Qualitative content analysis with a directed approach was used to analyse the strategy documents. The specific theory used was disruptive innovation. The use of “innovation”, or variants thereof, was counted in each document. Ten case studies from the sample were used for content analysis.FindingsTechnology-enhanced learning-related strategy documents are conservative, advocating the more efficient use of existing technologies, or the incremental enhancement of existing technologies, but not transformation through technology.Originality/valueBy evaluating the extent to which selected institutional strategies engage with innovation in technology-enhanced learning, this study argues HEIs advocate sustaining innovation or efficiency innovation to a greater extent than disruptive innovation.

A longitudinal analysis of university rankings

Pressured by globalization and demand for public organizations to be accountable, efficient, and transparent, university rankings have become an important tool for assessing the quality of higher education institutions. It is therefore important to assess exactly what these rankings measure. Here, the three major global university rankings—the Academic Ranking of World Universities, the Times Higher Education ranking and the Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings—are studied. After a description of the ranking methodologies, it is shown that university rankings are stable over time but that there is variation between the three rankings. Furthermore, using principal component analysis and exploratory factor analysis, we demonstrate that the variables used to construct the rankings primarily measure two underlying factors: a university’s reputation and its research performance. By correlating these factors and plotting regional aggregates of universities on the two factors, differences between the rankings are made visible. Last, we elaborate how the results from these analysis can be viewed in light of often-voiced critiques of the ranking process. This indicates that the variables used by the rankings might not capture the concepts they claim to measure. The study provides evidence of the ambiguous nature of university rankings quantification of university performance.

Analysis of the Presence of Most Best-Ranked Universities on Social Networking Sites

Universities are becoming aware of the importance of social networking sites for the reinforcement of their institutional brands. This study was conducted to analyze the extent to which best-ranked universities use social networking sites. A quantitative methodology and digital methods were used to measure the social media presence of the first 400 universities listed in the QS (Quacquarelli Symonds) World University Ranking 2018. The results reveal a high degree of involvement of those universities on social media; some factors that are associated with significant differences in the adoption of social networking sites include the public versus private management model, the level of academic prestige, and the region of origin.

A Contrast Pattern-Based Scientometric Study of the QS World University Ranking

Despite the shortcomings and criticisms of world university rankings, such metrics are widely used by students and parents to select institutions and by educational institutions to attract talented students and researchers, as well as funding. This article introduces the first contrast pattern-based scientometric study of world university rankings. Specifically, this study collects a database containing 34 features, which describe the essential research indicators for the top 200 universities in the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) ranking. The use of 18 state-of-the-art classifiers in this database shows that the top 100 universities in the QS World University Rankings are separable from the remaining compared universities, achieving an average accuracy of 71%. Additionally, using a contrast pattern mining algorithm, a set of patterns describing the top 100 universities is extracted based on scientometric features. Additionally, this study proposes an approach for visualizing the extracted patterns to facilitate the decision-makers, such as senior university managers, in formulating and evaluating their research (ranking) strategies.

АНАЛІЗ ОСНОВНИХ ХОЛДИНГІВ ДЛЯ ФОРМУВАННЯ СВІТОВИХ РЕЙТИНГІВ ПРОВІДНИХ УНІВЕРСИТЕТІВ

At the present stage of development of society, institutions of higher education (HEI) strive to occupy stable ranking positions among competitors at the national and global levels. Increasing competition in the field of education has led to the creation of mechanisms for assessing the activities of educational institutions. The assessment of the activities of the HEI should be carried out both at the state level and by independent expert institutions, taking into account the index of academic integrity, the index of the academic reputation of the HEI, the index of employers' satisfaction with university graduates, the achievements of the educational institution, the wishes of students, scientific, scientific and pedagogical workers. Such monitoring is carried out to assure students, administration and the state that the given HEI has a high level of expert assessment. In world practice, independent organizations are engaged in the development and implementation of methods for independent assessment of the quality of education, in particular the ratings of educational institutions, using the results of international comparative research in the field of education. For example, such information holdings, with the help of which world university rankings are formed: THE World University Rankings (an annual publication of university rankings according to the Times Higher Education magazine), QS World University Rankings (a global study and the accompanying ranking of the best higher educational institutions of world significance in terms of their achievements in the field of education and science Calculated according to the methodology of the British consulting company Quacquarelli Symonds (QS), The Academic Ranking of World Universities (affiliated with the Institute of Higher Education, Shanghai Jiaotong University). The indicator of high competitiveness of the HEI is confirmed by joining the international ranking and occupying positions close to the world's leading universities. The methodology for ranking holdings consists in calculating a rating by indicators that assess key criteria. Each indicator has its own percentage of the total score. These rating systems make a significant contribution to the quality of education in countries. With the help of these information holdings, the university can show its strengths in order to have a high rate of competitiveness among the HEIs and attract the attention of prospective students, their parents, scientific and pedagogical workers, teachers and employers.

A Longitudinal Analysis of University Rankings

Pressured by globalization and the increasing demand for public organisations to be accountable, efficient and transparent, university rankings have become an important tool for assessing the quality of higher education institutions. It is therefore important to carefully assess exactly what these rankings measure. In this paper, the three major global university rankings, The Academic Ranking of World Universities, The Times Higher Education and the Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings, are studied. After a description of the ranking methodologies, it is shown that university rankings are stable over time but that there is variation between the three rankings. Furthermore, using Principal Component Analysis and Exploratory Factor Analysis, we show that the variables used to construct the rankings primarily measure two underlying factors: a universities reputation and its research performance. By correlating these factors and plotting regional aggregates of universities on the two factors, differences between the rankings are made visible. Last, we elaborate how the results from these analysis can be viewed in light of often voiced critiques of the ranking process. This indicates that the variables used by the rankings might not capture the concepts they claim to measure. Doing so the study provides evidence of the ambiguous nature of university ranking's quantification of university performance.

Sustainability and Indicators of Newly Formed World-Class Universities (NFWCUs) between 2010 and 2018: Empirical Analysis from the Rankings of ARWU, QSWUR and THEWUR

In the 21st century, sustainability and indicators of world-class universities have come within the scope of an academic cottage industry. The complex problem of university sustainability implies a big challenge for countries and educators to implement important strategies in an integrated and comprehensive way. This paper highlights and analyzes the sustainability indicators of universities included as newly formed world-class universities (NFWCUs) in the top 100 from 2010 and 2018. The integration of three global ranking scales—the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), the Quacquarelli–Symonds World University Ranking (QS) and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THEs)—allows us to minimize the impact of the methodology used. This study integrates regression analysis by using statistical grouping, case studies and normative analysis. Our principal findings are as follows: among the commonly ranked top 100 universities in 2018, the ARWU, QS and THE counted 57, compared with 47 in 2010. Thus, comparing 2010 and 2018 shows that 44 of the universities appeared simultaneously in ARWU, QS and THE rankings and maintained a sustainable position in any ranking system in the family of top 100 groups. Three lower-ranked NFWCUs in the hybrid list for 2010 lost their ranking and did not appear in the group of top 100 universities in 2018, which are covered by some catch-up and young universities. The NFWCUs were from US, Australia, China, Singapore, Germany and Belgium. By systematic comparison, the US and UK continued to dominate the stability of NFWCUs in 2010 and 2018. The key sustainability indicators include a high concentration of talent, abundant resources to offer a rich learning environment and conduct advanced research. Generally, the factors were negatively associated with ranking suggesting that a higher score result in top ranking and vice versa. Teaching, research, citation and international outlook were negatively correlated with THE ranking in 2018. Similarly, Alumni and PUB were negatively associated with ARWU ranking in 2018. All factors except international student ratio were significantly correlated in QS ranking either in 2010 or 2018, where negative association was observed. The significant contribution of our study is to highlight that for the sustainability of universities, it is necessary to have an increasing emphasis on the effectiveness and efficiency of government-supported research, stability of investments and more approaches to employ international initiatives. The results also confirm the appropriate governance, developing global students and place emphasis on science and technology as additional factors in the approaches of pathways to NFWCUs, with delivery of outstanding educational programs and comprehensive internationalization as a key indicator for performance improvement and global university ranking systems.

Exploring Readiness Oof Iraqi Universities To Achieve The Quality Of Sustainable Education According To (Quacquarelli Symonds) QS Standards

This study sought to address a vital issue for Iraqi universities regarding their readiness to implement QS (Quacquarelli Symonds) standards to enhance the quality of sustainable education by focusing Iraqi universities on issues that increase their readiness to improve their educational quality indicators and QS World University Rankings ®). These criteria cover six main areas: academic reputation, employer review, teaching citations, faculty ratio compared to students, international students, and international professors. The researchers conducted a series of structured interviews for a number of faculty members, senior leaders and committees formed at the University of Al-qadissiyah and Al-Muthanna University for the purpose of determining the critical criteria for QS ranking, in which the ranking of the two universities can be improved according to the above standard. The current research found a set of conclusions and recommendations, in order to support its initiative to achieve outstanding levels of educational quality according to the QS ranking, the human resource in Iraqi universities, represented by the professors and teaching staff of the university, needs training and academic improvement in the field of global publishing as well as improving the English language. The most important recommendations were the establishment of training courses and workshops to promote the global academic publication and improving professors and teaching staff's English language as they affect 60% of the degree of the QS academic reputation and the citations.

The Comparative Study of Ranking System of Islamic Countries Universities and National Ranking of Universities in Iran Using the Most Famous Ranking Systems in the World

This research is aiming at a comparative study of Islamic countries university`s ranking system and Iran`s universities` national ranking system with the most famous ranking system in the world which are as Academic Ranking of World University (ARWU), The Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE), The Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings (QS), The U.S. News rankings (USN), Center for World University Rankings (CWUR). In this research, the criteria and indicators of each of the five higher education ranking systems are described based on the two ranking systems of ISC and National Ranking of universities of Iran and using George Bradley's comparative analysis and considering the list of top universities in the last update of the Internet portal by the date 05/09/2017. In this research, it is revealed that there is not any similarity between QS ranking system and ISC ranking system. However, based on the results, Iran and ISC ranking systems are mostly compatible with THE, from among the globally most famous ranking systems. Combining THE and Iran`s ranking systems could offer a far more global system which is capable of covering all aspects of ranking and universities` universal status. THE and ARWU can be named as the most complete combined systems, from among the global and most famous ranking systems, which can be used as a substitution for Iran`s ranking system.

The Interacting Role of University Ranking and Globalization of Education

Background: Based on the plan of revolution and innovation in medical education that was issued by the Iranian Ministry of Health and Medical Education, and the extensive role of such programs in the qualitative promotion of universities, The academic ranking of world universities is of great importance, since the qualitative and quantitative implementation of academic ranking can influence the realization of the university’s goals. Hence, the current study aimed at collecting data about the academic ranking of world universities as well as its criteria and indices and their relationship with globalization. Methods: To gain access to reputable databases in university ranking, an extensive search was performed in Google Scholar. Thereafter, after getting access to reputable databases such as Shanghai Jiao Tong University (SJTU), Times higher education world University ranking (THE), Quacquarelli Symonds world University rankings (QS), Webometric, and Islamic world science citation center (ISC), data were collected and classified. Results: Based on the collected data, the history of university rankings and ranking systems, as well as criteria and indices pertaining to the academic ranking of world universities, was derived, and the specificities of the criteria and indices were discussed. Conclusions: University rankings are usually performed on a combination of performance-associated indices and criteria. Efforts to achieve a desirable position based on the criteria and indices of the ranking system play an important role in the promotion of educational quality and globalization. Keywords: International Ranking System, Universities, Index, Globalization

Multivariate approach to imposing additional constraints on the Benefit-of-the-Doubt model: The case of QS World University Rankings by Subject

Abstract Composite indexes have become a valuable asset for stakeholders as they provide ranks of entities and information upon which decisions are made. However, certain questions about their development procedure have been raised recently, especially regarding the weighting process. To tackle the observed issue, in this paper we propose a new multivariate approach for defining weights. Namely, the model based on the Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), the Benefit-of-the-Doubt (BoD) model, has been used with significant success in the process of composite index development. On the other hand, the Composite I-distance Indicator (CIDI) methodology stands out as an impartial method for assigning weights to indicators. By combining these two approaches, some of the limitations of the original BoD model could be overcome. As a result, new entity-specific weights which maximize the value of the composite index can be proposed. As a case study, we analysed the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings by Subject in the field of statistics and operational research. The obtained results, which are based on the data-driven weights, can provide new insights into the nature of the observed ranking. The approach presented here might provoke further research on the topic of composite index weights and on the university rankings by subject.