Dr Frank Ziegele, U-multirank: does it do what it says on the tin?

600 views

Published on

Presentation from session two: discussion groups

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
600
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
315
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Dr Frank Ziegele, U-multirank: does it do what it says on the tin?

  1. 1. U-Multirank – does it do what it says on the tin? “Europe at the Heart of Internationalisation”, London, 26 June 2013 Professor Dr. Frank Ziegele 1 @UMultirank /U-Multirank /U-Multirank
  2. 2. Why do we need U-Multirank?  There is a market for commercial rankings, but they are not able to sufficiently serve relevant needs • focus on research and reputation: only relevant for one “type” of university • not enough information about different profiles and for different needs of stakeholder groups (esp. students) • problematic effects of league tables on HE policies (latest example India) • easily measurable data, misleading composite scores  U-Multirank intends to avoid all this  But U-Multirank is definitely not made to let continental European universities look better or to become the “official” EU Ranking! 2
  3. 3. What are the distinctive features of U-Multirank?  Multidimensional ranking - Going beyond the traditional focus on research excellence • Five dimensions: teaching & learning, research, knowledge transfer, international orientation, regional engagement (up to around 40 indicators) • No composite indicators, no pre-defined weights on indicators, single ranking for each indicator  User-driven ranking • Personalised ranking allows users to rank by their own preferences and priorities on dimensions and indicators (“democratised” approach) • flexible web tool @UMultirank 3
  4. 4. What are the distinctive features of U-Multirank?  Comparing like with like • Link to mapping indicators allowing identification of institutions with similar institutional profiles  Multi-level ranking • Combining institutional ranking (whole institutions) and field-based rankings (start with: electrical and mechanical engineering, business studies, physics)  Stakeholder-oriented processes • Intensive inclusion of stakeholders in development and continuous refinement of U-Multirank  Independence • creation of a governance and funding model ideally ensuring independence from political agendas, interests of actors and market forces @UMultirank 4
  5. 5. Does it do what it says on the tin? 5 best way to answer this question is to give an impression of the web tool (this is a prototype, with the purpose to illustrate functionalities) @UMultirank
  6. 6. Is this still a ranking? • Would not be a ranking if you see the publication of a fixed league table as a feature of a ranking • EUA-report also says: “this is something very different” • It is an information system for informed choices, but it is still a vertical order (for each indicator) • We use the ranking terminology to explicitly question the traditional rankings • It is not a ranking, but rankings • Use and communication will make the differences clear 6 @UMultirank
  7. 7. Current activities 7 Final quality check and refinement of indicators • final stakeholders’ feedback • indicators dropped where doubts remained (e.g. interdisciplinarity of T&L programmes) • some new indicators inserted (e.g. research publications cited in patents) • refinement of definitions, ensuring comparability • methods to avoid “anything goes” rankings Refinement of data quality control processes • communication processes • various statistical checks and analyses • no publication of data failing in checks Data collection • starts this month, until the end of the year @UMultirank
  8. 8. Current activities 8 Bibliometric analysis of research intensive universities • analysis by CWTS has started • innovative bibliometric indicators Recruitment of institutions delivering full set of data • currently around 640 institutions have registered (target was 500) • more than 70 countries, 18 UK universities, research- intensive universities and other profiles are well represented, more than 100 non-European Start of pilot study on integration of RPI @UMultirank
  9. 9. The first ranking 2014 • First results to be published in 2014 • Institutional rankings, 2-3 pre-defined rankings, including “research intensiveness ranking” • And rankings for four academic fields (to be increased in following years) • Mechanical engineering • Electrical engineering/information technology • Business/management • Physics 9 @UMultirank

×