HONG KONG - If I had a dollar every time I heard someone say that a university was ranked in the top something-or-other, I'd have a lot of dollars.
The rather grandiose statement is often followed by a certain fuzziness about the details. It's easy for prospective students (or their parents) to take a quick glance at a Web site that says a school is among the top 10, or 20, or 100 in the world. But according to whom? And by what measure?
There are scores of different rankings, some more reputable than others. Some are based on quantifiable measures like research output or admissions standards. Others try to gauge more the nebulous aspects of an institution, like “academic reputation.†Yet others look only at individual degrees or a specific criteria, like post-graduate employability.
Many students and parents will only consider schools that appea r in various top 400 or top 500 lists. (Pity the decent, but small, college that comes in at number 501.)
But the reality is that most people don't read the fine print: who publishes these listings, what they measure exactly, how their data are compiled, and whether they are trustworthy.
D.D. Guttenplan takes a closer look at the QS World University Rankings, one of the three major rating systems compiled outside the United States. (The other two are published by Times Higher Education and Shanghai Jiaotong University.)
He reports that QS has been charging universities to be assessed to receive a coveted star rating.
The Irish Examiner reported in 2011 that the cost of University College Cork's evaluation - which resulted in a top five-star QS ranking - came to "22,000, or almost $36,000. That is pocket change when one considers the international clout attached to QS, and the fact that that U.C.C.'s 3,000 international students bring in about "19 million a year.
It is a sweet deal for the university. But can prospective students trust rankings if some schools are paying for them and others are not?
Ben Sowter, head of the QS Intelligence Unit, said in an interview with D.D. that the fees had no influence on rankings or star ratings.
“Just because accreditation agencies charge the universities, that doesn't mean they are biased,†he said, adding that, “If people were buying stars we wouldn't have so many zero-, one- and two-star institutions that have been through the process.â€
Academics hav e long sniffed at university rankings, which they feel cannot encompass the complexities of higher education. That may be true. But the lists published in the mass media are the only practical, easy way for the general public to compare a large number of schools. Rankings are pored over by millions of prospective students and their parents. They have a huge impact on everything from where students apply, whether they get scholarships from foreign governments, or whether an employer recognizes a degree.
While academics may scoff, university publicity and recruitment offices know how important - and potentially lucrative - good rankings are. Movements up and down the ladders are watched as closely as Michelin stars are in fine dining.
Today's students are growing up with easy, online lists for top trends, top holiday destinations, etc. They will naturally want their education information packaged the same way. However, they are also aware that the Internet is fill ed with paid (and possibly biased) book reviews and online reviews.
Granted, the university rankings published by QS, T.H.E. and Shanghai Jiaotong are backed by far more legitimate research than your average online blogger review.
But still - do you trust university rankings? Do you use them in your decision-making? Are you disturbed that some rankings charge universities? Or do you think that is simply business as usual?
