Perspective matters

Lists of university rankings should benefit users, not those who publish them

Users have different priorities and no one indicator can claim to be definitive. Photo: K. Pichumani

The QS World University Rankings have been viewed by an estimated 50,000,000 people since publication in September 2010.

The methodology uses a global academic reputation survey for 40 per cent of its overall weighting, amongst its six indicators, which also includes a global employer reputation survey. This listing has now come in for some debate.

Last year, Times Higher Education, a well known journal, attacked QS's methodology, which it said was based excessively on data from ‘subjective' surveys.

The journal's explanation of why it intended to produce its own new ranking, rather than rely on QS' proven methodology, was specifically to focus on ‘objective' university data rather than academic opinions.

But now it has launched a third world university ranking, based entirely on institutional reputation. Why? Is it for the benefit of certain institutions which did not appear in its original top 200, but now appearfairly high in the rankings?

As the research provider that devised and first implemented a global academic reputation survey, QS believes the views of academics are a key consideration for prospective students. QS published its own academic reputation survey – based on 15,000 responses worldwide — as a separate data column as part of its latest rankings in September 2010.

Based on the recognition that individual users have different priorities and no one indicator can claim to be definitive, QS encourages users to view its rankings as a collection of indicators, all of which are published simultaneously, which can be re-ordered interactively by the user. Anyone who wants to see which universities perform best in terms of QS' academic reputation survey may do so at a click on www.topuniversities.com.

Reputable world university rankings are here to stay.

To be reputable, the data making up different indicators in any ranking table must be transparent.

The emphasis must be on the user rather than the commercial interests of the publisher.

(The author is Editor of TopUniversities.com)