Skip to main content

Ranking of Private Turkish Universities: Proposal of New Indicators

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Digital Conversion on the Way to Industry 4.0 (ISPR 2020)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering ((LNME))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This study evaluates a total of 65 Turkish Private Universities considering their both academic and social benefits to the students. The principal aim of this paper is to provide a ranking for all Turkish Private Universities. Therefore, all universities can access their ranking since “University Ranking by Academic Performance” (URAP) only provides the ranking of 56 universities. Also, they can see their different impacts on several issues, such as environmental impacts, technological impacts, as well as academical impacts. The data for this study is obtained from open source reliable corporate sources such as Higher Education Institution of Turkey, Scopus and Univerlist web site. Univerlist is a university guide which provides informed-decision making support for students. It also supported this study. The findings indicate that the positions of private universities in the rankings of research, academic staff and opportunities do not vary much. However, their positions differ when the rankings for teaching, student choice and mobility indicators are considered. The findings of this paper could help students, administrators, and academicians to understand how the universities are performing in terms of many different perspectives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Hossain, M., Ahmed, S.M.Z.: Use of scholarly communication and citation-based metrics as a basis for university ranking in developing country perspective Glob. Knowl. Mem. Commun. ahead-of-p (2020). https://doi.org/10.1108/gkmc-09-2019-0112

  2. O'Meara, K., Meekins, M.: Inside rankings: Limitations and possibilities (Working Paper, 2012 Series, Issue No. 1). Boston, MA: New England Resource Center for Higher Education (2012). http://scholarworks.umb.edu/nerche_pubs/24/

  3. Mussard, M., James, A.P.: Engineering the global university rankings: gold standards, limitations and implications. IEEE Access 6, 6765–6776 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2789326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hou, Y.-W., Jacob, W.J.: What contributes more to the ranking of higher education institutions? A comparison of three world university rankings. Int. Educ. J. 16, 29–46 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Komotar, M.H.: Discourses on quality and quality assurance in higher education from the perspective of global university rankings. Qual. Assur. Educ. 28, 78–88 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1108/qae-05-2019-0055

  6. Hou, A.Y.C., Morse, R., Chiang, C.-L.: An analysis of mobility in global rankings: making institutional strategic plans and positioning for building world-class universities. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 31(6), 841–857 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2012.662631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Perez-Esparrells, C., Orduna-Malea, E.: Do the technical universities exhibit distinct behaviour in global university rankings? A times higher education (THE) case study. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 48, 97–108 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2018.04.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Reddy, K.S., Xie, E., Tang, Q.: Higher education, high-impact research, and world university rankings: a case of India and comparison with China. Pac. Sci. Rev. B Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2(1), 1–21 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psrb.2016.09.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jöns, H., Hoyler, M.: Global geographies of higher education: the perspective of world university rankings. Geoforum 46, 45–59 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.12.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dowsett, L.: Global university rankings and strategic planning: a case study of Australian institutional performance. J. High. Educ. Policy Manag. 1–17 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080x.2019.1701853

  11. Olcay, G.A., Bulu, M.: Is measuring the knowledge creation of universities possible?: A review of university rankings. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 123, 153–160 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Csató, L., Tóth, C.: University rankings from the revealed preferences of the applicants. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 286(1), 309–320 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2020.03.008

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Meseguer-Martinez, A., Ros-Galvez, A., Rosa-Garcia, A.: Linking YouTube and university rankings: research performance as predictor of online video impact. Telemat. Inform. 43, 101264 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.101264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kunsch, P.L., Ishizaka, A.: Multiple-criteria performance ranking based on profile distributions: an application to university research evaluations. Math. Comput. Simul. 154, 48–64 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2018.05.021

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Ivančević, V., Luković, I.: National university rankings based on open data: a case study from Serbia. Procedia Comput. Sci. 126, 1516–1525 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.08.124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Alma, B., Coşkun, E., Övendireli, E.: University ranking systems and proposal of a theoretical framework for ranking of turkish universities: a case of management departments. Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci. 235, 128–138 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.11.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kosztyán, Z.T., Orbán-Mihálykó, É., Mihálykó, C., Csányi, V.V., Telcs, A.: Analyzing and clustering students’ application preferences in higher education. J. Appl. Stat. 1–23 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/02664763.2019.1709052

  18. Lukman, R., Krajnc, D., Glavič, P.: University ranking using research, educational and environmental indicators. J. Clean. Prod. 18(7), 619–628 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.09.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ragazzi, M., Ghidini, F.: Environmental sustainability of universities: critical analysis of a green ranking. Energy Procedia 119, 111–120 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.07.054

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Torres-Samuel, M., Vásquez, C.L., Cardozo, M.L., Bucci, N., Viloria, A., Cabrera, D.: Clustering of top 50 Latin American universities in SIR, QS, ARWU, and webometrics rankings. Procedia Comput. Sci. 160, 467–472 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.11.063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Aguillo, I.F., Bar-Ilan, J., Levene, M., Ortega, J.L.: Comparing university rankings. Scientometrics 85(1), 243–256 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0190-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Millot, B.: International rankings: universities vs. higher education systems. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 40, 156–165 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2014.10.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. UniverList: University guidance platform (2020). https://univerlist.com/. Accessed 12 June 2020

  24. ARWU: Ranking methodology of academic ranking of world universities (2019). www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU-Methodology-2019.html. Accessed 11 June 2020

  25. QS World University Rankings: QS world university rankings: top universities – methodology (2019). www.topuniversities.com/qs-world-university-rankings/methodology. Accessed 11 June 2020

  26. Times higher education world university rankings: world university rankings 2019: methodology (2019). https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/world-university-rankings-2019-methodology. Accessed 11 June 2020

  27. Webometrics ranking of world universities: ranking web of universities (2019). http://www.webometrics.info/en/current_edition. Accessed 11 June 2020

  28. NTU Ranking: Performance ranking of scientific papers for world universities (2019). http://nturanking.lis.ntu.edu.tw/methodoloyg/indicators. Accessed 20 June 2011

  29. SCImago Institutions Rankings: SCImago institutions ranking: SIR methodology. https://www.scimagoir.com/methodology.php. Accessed 11 June 2020

  30. URAP: University ranking by academic performance: national methodology (2019). http://tr.urapcenter.org/2019/2019.php. Accessed 11 June 2020

  31. URAP: University ranking by academic performance: international methodology (2019). https://www.urapcenter.org/Methodology. Accessed 11 June 2020

  32. Van Raan, A.F.J.: Fatal attraction: conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics 62(1), 133–143 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0008-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Billaut, J.-C., Bouyssou, D., Vincke, P.: Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking? Scientometrics 84(1), 237–263 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0115-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Huang, M.-H.: Opening the black box of QS world university rankings. Res. Eval. 21(1), 71–78 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvr003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Basu, A., Banshal, S.K., Singhal, K., Singh, V.K.: Designing a composite index for research performance evaluation at the national or regional level: ranking central universities in India. Scientometrics 107(3), 1171–1193 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1935-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. YOK: Higher education management information system (2020). https://istatistik.yok.gov.tr/. Accessed 07 June 2020

  37. TUMA: Turkish university satisfaction survey (2019). https://www.uniar.net/tuma. Accessed 07 June 2020

Download references

Acknowledgment

This study was supported by Univerlist, which is a platform of the universities, in the data collection and analysis steps.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Damla Kızılay .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Kızılay, D., Ödemiş, M. (2021). Ranking of Private Turkish Universities: Proposal of New Indicators. In: Durakbasa, N.M., Gençyılmaz, M.G. (eds) Digital Conversion on the Way to Industry 4.0. ISPR 2020. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62784-3_83

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62784-3_83

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-62783-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-62784-3

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics