UNIVERSITY RANKINGS

Over the past two decades, global university ranking systems have become paramount in the realm of higher education worldwide. Countries such as China, Japan, and Russia have invested significant resources into enhancing the prestige of their universities to attain "world-class" status according to these rankings. This pursuit not only carries academic significance but also political weight. Despite this fervour, some universities have opted out of participating in rankings due to concerns regarding the inherent incentives and their alignment with institutional goals.

Amidst these debates, two critical issues regarding the conduct of the companies behind these ranking systems often remain overshadowed: conflicts of interest and data rights.

• The primary objective of ranking systems is to assess and compare higher education institutions based on their achievements across various domains such as teaching quality, research output, reputation, industry engagement, and collaborative initiatives.
• Notably, ranking systems like Times Higher Education (THE), Quacquarelli Symonds (QS), Academic Ranking of World Universities (commonly known as the 'Shanghai Ranking'), and U.S. News & World Report hold significant influence globally, shaping educational policies and priorities in numerous countries.
• Ranking systems employ complex methodologies to evaluate institutions, considering diverse factors. These include teaching excellence, research productivity, institutional reputation, industry partnerships, and collaborative endeavours.
• Despite the intricacies of each aspect, ranking systems condense institutional performance into composite indicators, which are then aggregated to generate a comprehensive score.

3. Imperfections of Ranking Systems

• Despite their widespread use and influence, ranking systems are not without flaws. Various criticisms have been raised, highlighting the limitations and shortcomings of these methodologies.
• Similar to the critique of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as the sole measure of a country's prosperity, Elizabeth Gadd of Loughborough University equates the pursuit of higher rankings by universities to the flawed reliance on GDP. She argues that like GDP, ranking systems oversimplify the multifaceted roles that universities play in society, reducing them to a single, unidimensional score.
• Studies have indicated that top-ranked universities tend to be old, large, wealthy, research-intensive, science-focused, English-speaking, and located in the Global North. This bias towards certain characteristics may overlook the diverse contributions and strengths of institutions worldwide.
• Ranking systems often heavily weigh factors such as citations and reputation in assessing research excellence. However, the reliance on citations, which can be influenced by individual researchers or even manipulated, may distort an institution's overall performance.
• For instance, the significant jump in rankings for Bielefeld University in 2020 was attributed to the prolific output of a single scholar, highlighting the disproportionate impact of individual contributions.
• Reports have surfaced suggesting instances of manipulation and bias in ranking outcomes. Cases such as Saveetha Dental College allegedly manipulating citations to improve their ranking position raise concerns about the integrity and reliability of these systems.
• Furthermore, analyses by experts like Richard Holmes have pointed out potential biases in regional rankings, indicating that certain universities may benefit from hosting influential ranking-related events or through adjustments in citation counting methodologies.

5. Data Security Concerns

Participating in ranking exercises raises significant data security concerns for universities and institutes, as they provide ranking agencies with unrestricted access to their sensitive data.

Terms and Conditions

For instance, in order to utilize THE platform and related services, universities must agree to additional terms and conditions. These terms grant THE extensive rights over the data provided by universities. Specifically, universities grant THE a perpetual, irrevocable, and non-exclusive license to use, reproduce, modify, and distribute their data worldwide without seeking further permission. This includes details of institutional finances, industry partnerships, research incomes, and patents. Such broad grants of rights raise alarms, particularly for public universities, as they relinquish control over their data without adequate safeguards.

UN University's Statement

The UN University has raised concerns about the negative consequences of global university rankings, noting that while they may spur improvements in some areas, they also incentivize harmful behaviours and yield systemic long-term negative effects. This highlights the broader implications of data security compromises associated with participation in ranking exercises.