IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ksa/szemle/1861.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Felsőoktatási ligák, parciális rangsorok képzése biklaszterezési eljárásokkal
[How to rate higher education systems partial rankings using bi-clustering methods]

Author

Listed:
  • Telcs, András
  • Kosztyán, Zsolt Tibor
  • Banász, Zsuzsanna
  • Csányi, Vivien Valéria

Abstract

Napjainkban számtalan felsőoktatási rangsor, illetve különböző szakterületekre, régiókra vonatkozó részrangsor létezik. Az azonban továbbra is nyitott kérdés, hogy mely egyetemeket vagy mely országok felsőoktatási rendszerét lehet, és melyeket érdemes összehasonlítani. Tanulmányunk erre a kérdéskörre keres választ. Olyan módszereket javaslunk, amelyek a társadalomtudomány területén még újszerűek, kevésbé alkalmazottak, ugyanakkor segítségükkel lehetőség nyílik az úgynevezett ligák meghatározására. A ligákat értelmezésünkben olyan egyetemek/országok/entitások alkotják, amelyek bizonyos indikátorok alapján összehasonlíthatók. A feladat tehát kettős: egyszerre kell az egyetemeket/országokat és azokat az indikátorokat kiválasztani, amelyek alapján az intézmények vagy az országok felsőoktatási rendszere összehasonlítható.* Journal of Economic Literature (JEL) kód: C1, I2.

Suggested Citation

  • Telcs, András & Kosztyán, Zsolt Tibor & Banász, Zsuzsanna & Csányi, Vivien Valéria, 2019. "Felsőoktatási ligák, parciális rangsorok képzése biklaszterezési eljárásokkal [How to rate higher education systems partial rankings using bi-clustering methods]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(9), pages 905-931.
    • Handle: RePEc:ksa:szemle:1861
    DOI: 10.18414/KSZ.2019.9.905
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.kszemle.hu/tartalom/letoltes.php?id=1861
    Download Restriction: Registration and subscription. 3-month embargo period to non-subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.18414/KSZ.2019.9.905?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Valentina Raponi & Francesca Martella & Antonello Maruotti, 2016. "A biclustering approach to university performances: an Italian case study," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 31-45, January.
    2. Cinzia Daraio & Andrea Bonaccorsi, 2017. "Beyond university rankings? Generating new indicators on universities by linking data in open platforms," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(2), pages 508-529, February.
    3. Olcay, Gokcen Arkali & Bulu, Melih, 2017. "Is measuring the knowledge creation of universities possible?: A review of university rankings," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 153-160.
    4. Jean-Charles Billaut & Denis Bouyssou & Philippe Vincke, 2010. "Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 237-263, July.
    5. Peer Ederer & Philipp Schuller & Stephan Willms, 2009. "University systems ranking: Citizens and society in the age of the knowledge," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 3, pages 169-202.
    6. Jean-Charles Billaut & Denis Bouyssou & Philippe Vincke, 2010. "Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(1), pages 237-263, July.
    7. Török, Ádám & Telcs, András & Kosztyán, Zsolt Tibor, 2013. "Hallgatói preferencia-sorrendek készítése az egyetemi jelentkezések alapján [Preparing student preference rankings based on applications for university]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(3), pages 290-317.
    8. repec:dau:papers:123456789/2947 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Saisana, Michaela & d'Hombres, Béatrice & Saltelli, Andrea, 2011. "Rickety numbers: Volatility of university rankings and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 165-177, February.
    10. Török, Ádám & Telcs, András & Kosztyán, Zsolt Tibor, 2013. "Reflexiók Csató László vitairatára [Reflections on the debate contribution of László Csató]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(12), pages 1354-1356.
    11. Hahsler, Michael & Hornik, Kurt & Buchta, Christian, 2008. "Getting Things in Order: An Introduction to the R Package seriation," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 25(i03).
    12. Alfonso Ibáñez & Pedro Larrañaga & Concha Bielza, 2013. "Cluster methods for assessing research performance: exploring Spanish computer science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(3), pages 571-600, December.
    13. Abankina, Irina & Aleskerov, Fuad & Belousova, Veronika & Gokhberg, Leonid & Kiselgof, Sofya & Petrushchenko, Vsevolod & Shvydun, Sergey & Zinkovsky, Kirill, 2016. "From equality to diversity: Classifying Russian universities in a performance oriented system," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 228-239.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Johan Lyhagen & Per Ahlgren, 2020. "Uncertainty and the ranking of economics journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2545-2560, December.
    2. Ludo Waltman & Clara Calero-Medina & Joost Kosten & Ed C.M. Noyons & Robert J.W. Tijssen & Nees Jan Eck & Thed N. Leeuwen & Anthony F.J. Raan & Martijn S. Visser & Paul Wouters, 2012. "The Leiden ranking 2011/2012: Data collection, indicators, and interpretation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(12), pages 2419-2432, December.
    3. Osmo Kivinen & Juha Hedman & Kalle Artukka, 2017. "Scientific publishing and global university rankings. How well are top publishing universities recognized?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 679-695, July.
    4. Berlemann, Michael & Haucap, Justus, 2015. "Which factors drive the decision to opt out of individual research rankings? An empirical study of academic resistance to change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1108-1115.
    5. Vicente Safón, 2013. "What do global university rankings really measure? The search for the X factor and the X entity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 97(2), pages 223-244, November.
    6. Jacek Pietrucha, 2018. "Country-specific determinants of world university rankings," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1129-1139, March.
    7. Sung-Shun Weng & Yang Liu & Yen-Ching Chuang, 2019. "Reform of Chinese Universities in the Context of Sustainable Development: Teacher Evaluation and Improvement Based on Hybrid Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-23, October.
    8. Alexandr Gedranovich & Mykhaylo Salnykov, 2012. "Productivity analysis of Belarusian higher education system," BEROC Working Paper Series 16, Belarusian Economic Research and Outreach Center (BEROC).
    9. El Gibari, Samira & Gómez, Trinidad & Ruiz, Francisco, 2018. "Evaluating university performance using reference point based composite indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1235-1250.
    10. Khatab Alqararah, 2023. "Assessing the robustness of composite indicators: the case of the Global Innovation Index," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, December.
    11. Franceschini, Fiorenzo & Maisano, Domenico, 2011. "Structured evaluation of the scientific output of academic research groups by recent h-based indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 64-74.
    12. Cinzia Daraio & Simone Di Leo & Loet Leydesdorff, 2022. "Using the Leiden Rankings as a Heuristics: Evidence from Italian universities in the European landscape," LEM Papers Series 2022/08, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    13. Csató, László & Tóth, Csaba, 2020. "University rankings from the revealed preferences of the applicants," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(1), pages 309-320.
    14. Zofio, Jose Luis & Aparicio, Juan & Barbero, Javier & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, Jon Mikel, 2023. "The influence of bottlenecks on innovation systems performance: Put the slowest climber first," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    15. D. Docampo & D. Egret & L. Cram, 2015. "The effect of university mergers on the Shanghai ranking," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(1), pages 175-191, July.
    16. Gul, Muhammet & Yucesan, Melih, 2022. "Performance evaluation of Turkish Universities by an integrated Bayesian BWM-TOPSIS model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    17. Hiran H. Lathabai & Abhirup Nandy & Vivek Kumar Singh, 2021. "x-index: Identifying core competency and thematic research strengths of institutions using an NLP and network based ranking framework," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9557-9583, December.
    18. Carayannis, Elias G. & Grigoroudis, Evangelos & Wurth, Bernd, 2022. "OR for entrepreneurial ecosystems: A problem-oriented review and agenda," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(3), pages 791-808.
    19. Salvatore Greco & Alessio Ishizaka & Menelaos Tasiou & Gianpiero Torrisi, 2019. "On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 61-94, January.
    20. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea, 2015. "Evaluating university research: Same performance indicator, different rankings," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 514-525.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General
    • I2 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ksa:szemle:1861. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Odon Sok (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.kszemle.hu .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.