By Frank Ziegele and Frans van Vught. In the paper International University Rankings: For good or ill?, published by the United Kingdom’s Higher Education Policy Institute or HEPI, Bahram Bekhradnia conducts a thorough and convincing critique of university rankings and highlights significant concerns. Read more...

By Phil Baty. We welcome scrutiny of all university rankings and can agree with some of the opinions put forward by Bahram Bekhradnia for discussion in the recent Higher Education Policy Institute or HEPI report, International University Rankings: For good or ill?. Read more...

By Ben Sowter. University rankings are not perfect. Indeed, for years I have found myself persistently drawing on a quote from United States statistician George Box: “Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful.” Read more...

By Bahram Bekhradnia. The problems with international university rankings essentially concern data – in particular the lack of it. National rankings don’t raise the same issues. There are no data available on the basis of which to reach any conclusions about comparative quality other than about research: pretty well all the data used in the QS, Times Higher Education or THE, and Academic Ranking of World Universities or ARWU world rankings are research-related. Read more...

By Philip G Altbach and Ellen Hazelkorn. We have one simple argument: universities around the world, many more than will ever publicly admit it, are currently obsessed with gaining status in one or more national or global ranking of universities. They should quit now. Read more...

By Brendan O’Malley – Managing Editor. In a Special Report examining the usefulness and accuracy of global university rankings, Philip G Altbach and Ellen Hazelkorn suggest that rankings are a losing game for most mid-range universities as they are not worth the resources required nor the changes in mission, while Bahram Bekhradnia of the Higher Education Policy Institute criticises rankings for being based on data which is unaudited and of doubtful quality and hopes that governments and potential students understand that they are essentially measures of research activity. Ranking experts counter these criticisms, including Ben Sowter of QS who says criticisms should be evidence-based and take the positive and negative into account, and Phil Baty of the Times Higher Education ranking who says the rankings provide useful analysis and are here to stay.
In our World Blog, Hans de Wit says there is still cause for optimism with regard to the internationalisation of higher education despite the political shocks of 2016 but this is likely to come from different regions than in the past.
In Features, Jens Jungblut says governments can always only reach two of three politically desirable goals in higher education – low public costs, low tuition fees and mass access – and this trilemma may see them cutting corners and sacrificing quality. Nic Mitchell reports on the European University Association’s call for the European Commission to simplify the Erasmus+ mobility programme and increase funding, following a recent survey.
In our Special Report on the Higher Education Research and Advocacy Network in Africa, or HERANA, meeting held in Franschhoek near Cape Town towards the end of 2016, Karen MacGregor reports on indications that Africa’s flagship universities are showing upward trends in a number of areas, and Robert Tijssen and Erika Kraemer-Mbula argue that African science “can and should take the concept of excellence more literally”. Read more...