Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking?
AbstractThis paper proposes a critical analysis of the "Academic Ranking of World Universities", published every year by the Institute of Higher Education of the Jiao Tong University in Shanghai and more commonly known as the Shanghai ranking. After having recalled how the ranking is built, we first discuss the relevance of the criteria and then analyze the proposed aggregation method. Our analysis uses tools and concepts from Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). Our main conclusions are that the criteria that are used are not relevant, that the aggregation methodology is plagued by a number of major problems and that the whole exercise suffers from an insufficient attention paid to fundamental structuring issues. Hence, our view is that the Shanghai ranking, in spite of the media coverage it receives, does not qualify as a useful and pertinent tool to discuss the "quality" of academic institutions, let alone to guide the choice of students and family or to promote reforms of higher education systems. We outline the type of work that should be undertaken to oer sound alternatives to the Shanghai ranking.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by HAL in its series Post-Print with number hal-00388319.
Date of creation: 02 Nov 2010
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published, Scientometrics, 2010, 84, 1, 237-263
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00388319/en/
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/
Shanghai ranking; multiple criteria decision analysis; evaluation models; higher education.;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- R. D. Banker & A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper, 1984. "Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(9), pages 1078-1092, September.
- Eden, Colin, 1988. "Cognitive mapping," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 1-13, July.
- Bana e Costa, Carlos A. & Ensslin, Leonardo & Correa, Emerson C. & Vansnick, Jean-Claude, 1999. "Decision Support Systems in action: Integrated application in a multicriteria decision aid process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 315-335, March.
- Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
- Bell,David E. & Raiffa,Howard & Tversky,Amos (ed.), 1989. "Decision Making," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521368513.
- Laurens Cherchye & Wim Moesen & Nicky Rogge & Tom Van Puyenbroeck & Michaela Saisana & A. Saltelli & R. Liska & S. Tarantola, 2006.
"Creating Composite Indicators with DEA and Robustness Analysis: the case of the Technology Achievement Index,"
Public Economics Working Paper Series
ces0613, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën, Working Group Public Economics.
- Cherchye, Laurens & Moesen, Willem & Rogge, Nicky & Van Puyenbroeck, Tom & Saisana, M & Saltelli, A & Liska, R & Tarantola, S, 2006. "Creating composite indicators with DEA and robustness analysis: The case of the technology achievement index," Open Access publications from Katholieke Universiteit Leuven urn:hdl:123456789/119295, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.
- Jill Johnes, 2006. "Measuring Efficiency: A Comparison of Multilevel Modelling and Data Envelopment Analysis in the Context of Higher Education," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 75-104, 04.
- Sen, Amartya, 1993. "Internal Consistency of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 495-521, May.
- Hutchel, Armand & Molet, Hughues, 1986. "Rational modelling in understanding and aiding human decision-making: About two case studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 178-186, January.
- Caterina Cruciani & Silvio Giove & Mehmet Pinar & Matteo Sostero, 2012.
"Constructing the FEEM Sustainability Index: A Choquet-Integral Application,"
2012.50, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- Caterina Cruciani & Silvio Giove & Mehmet Pinar & Matteo Sostero, 2013. "Constructing the FEEM Sustainability Index: A Choquet-integral Application," Working Papers 2013.16, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- 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.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CCSD).
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.