Advertisement

Social Contexts and Systemic Consequence of University Rankings: A Meta-Analysis of the Ranking Literature

  • Ulrich Teichler
Chapter
Part of the The Changing Academy – The Changing Academic Profession in International Comparative Perspective book series (CHAC, volume 3)

Abstract

In the blurb of a recent book by two European higher education researchers on university rankings (Kehm and Stensaker 2009), we can read the following: “University rankings are a relatively new phenomenon in higher education. Although quite an established practice in the U.S., it is only within the last decade that attempts to analyse university performance have to the rest of the world, and that we also have seen global rankings appear – rankings attempting to measure university performance beyond national borders. No wonder that this trend is accompanied by a growing interest in studying rankings throughout the world …”

Keywords

High Education High Education Institution High Education System Vertical Difference High Education Policy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Altbach, P.G. (2006). The dilemmas of rankings. International Higher Education, No. 42, 1–2.Google Scholar
  2. Bowden, R. (2000). Fantasy higher education: University and college league tables. Quality in Higher Education, 6(1), 41–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Clarke, M. (2007). The impact of higher education rankings on student access, choice, and opportunity. Higher Education in Europe, 32(1), 59–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Deem, R., Lucas, L., & Mok, K. H. (2009). The world-class university in Europe and East Asia: Dynamics and consequences of global higher education reform. In B. M. Kehm & B. Stensaker (Eds.), University rankings, diversity and the landscape of higher education (pp. 117–134). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  5. Dill, D. D. (2009). Convergence and diversity: The role and influence of University rankings. In B. M. Kehm & B. Stensaker (Eds.), University rankings, diversity and the landscape of higher education (pp. 97–116). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  6. Dill, D., & Soo, M. (2005). Academic quality, league tables, and public policy: A cross-national analysis of university rankings. Higher Education, 49(4), 495–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hazelkorn, E. (2008). Learning to live with league tables and ranking: The experience of institutional leaders. Higher Education Policy, 21(2), 193–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hughes, R. (2008). International collaboration and the effect of rankings. Nottingham: University of Nottingham.Google Scholar
  9. Galtung, J. (1971). Social structure, education structure and life long education: The case of Japan. In Reviews of national policies for education: Japan (pp. 131–152). Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  10. Kehm, B. M., & Stensaker, B. (Eds.). (2009). University rankings, diversity and the landscape of higher education. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Marginson, S., & Van der Wende, M. (2007). To rank or to be ranked: The impact of global rankings in higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11, 3–4, 306–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Marginson, S. (2008). The new world order in higher education: Research rankings, outcome measures and institutional classifications. Victoria: University of Melbourne, Centre for the Study of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  13. Proulx, R. (2007). Higher education ranking and league tables: Lessons learned from benchmarking. Higher Education in Europe, 32(1), 71–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sadlak, J. (2007). Developments in higher education and how they stimulate the university rankings. In J. Sadlak & N. C. Liu (Eds.), The world-class university and ranking: Aiming beyond status (pp. 75–85). Cluj: Cluj University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Sadlak, J., & Liu, N. C. (Eds.). (2007). The world-class university and ranking: Aiming beyond status. Cluj: Cluj University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Salmi, J., & Sayoran, A. (2007). League tables as policy instruments: The political economy of accountability in tertiary education. In J. Sadlak & J. Tres (Eds.), Higher education in the world: Accreditation for quality assurance (pp. 79–90). Hamshire: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  17. Teichler, U. (1976). Das Dilemma der modernen Bildungsgesellschaft: Japans Hochschulen unter den Zwängen der Statuszuteilung. Stuttgart: Klett.Google Scholar
  18. Teichler, U. (1986). Strukturentwicklung des Hochschulwesens. In A. Neusel & U. Teichler (Eds.), Hochschulentwicklung seit den sechziger Jahren: Kontinuität – Umbrüche – Dynamik? (pp. 93–143). Weinheim: Beltz Verlag. Blickpunkt Hochschuldidaktik, Bd. 79.Google Scholar
  19. Teichler, U. (1991). Towards a highly educated society. Higher Education Policy, 4(4), 11–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Teichler, U. (2007a). Higher education systems: Conceptual frameworks, comparative perspectives, empirical findings. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Teichler, U. (2007b). Rankings: Do we need an anti-meritocratic, collectivistic and anti-dynamic higher education system? Higher Education Digest (Centre for Higher Education Research and Information, Open University), No. 59, Autumn 2007, Supplement, 7–8.Google Scholar
  22. Usher, A., & Savino, M. (2006). A world of difference: A global survey of university league tables. Toronto: Educational Policy Institute.Google Scholar
  23. Zhao, C. M. (2007). Building world-class universities: Some unintended impacts of university ranking. In J. Sadlak & N. C. Liu (Eds.), The world-class university and ranking: Aiming beyond status (pp. 321–331). Cluj: Cluj University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International Centre for Higher Education Research Kassel (INCHER-Kassel)University of KasselKasselGermany

Personalised recommendations