Cookie policy: This site uses cookies to simplify and improve your usage and experience of this website. Cookies are small text files stored on the device you are using to access this website. For more information on how we use and manage cookies please take a look at our privacy and cookie policies. Your privacy is important to us and our policy is to neither share or sell your personal information to any external organisation or party; nor to use behavioural analysis for advertising to you.

THE World University Rankings

I was disturbed by an email that dropped into my in-box late last month.

No, it was not another offer of cheap Viagra, or an announcement that I had won an overseas lottery. It was more unsettling than that.

"Dear academic," it began. The greeting alone was a surprise, given that I am a journalist with little more than a bachelor's degree by way of academic credentials.

But my unease grew with each line of the message. The email was from a major education information company inviting me to take part in an online survey that would be used to create a university ranking.

It said that my role as a leading educationalist combined with my subject focus made my opinion very important. It even offered to enter me into a prize draw if I passed on my great wisdom and spent 10 minutes filling in the form.

It would be amusing if the implications were not so serious. As the email claimed, the audience for the company's annual exercise is in the millions, and it is clear that university league tables in various forms have become a very big business with wide influence.

Any organisation, such as Times Higher Education, that seeks to create rankings must accept its responsibility to conduct thorough research and to employ sound data.

There is a responsibility on companies doing such surveys that academics are selected carefully by discipline, and by country and continent if appropriate. If compilers want universities and students to see their league table as robust the onus is on them to take a rigorous approach.

When rankings can make or break a university's reputation, or influence multimillion-pound strategic decisions, anything less will simply not do.

Readers' comments (1)

  • I also received this e-mail, despite the fact that I am not an academic (although I do work in H.E.), and share your concerns. However, I think it would have been more honest if you had stated outright that the sender of these e-mails is the organisation that until recently produced the annual international league table published in the Higher and acknowledged the implications this has for the credibility of the tables you chose to publish under your own banner.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Thanks Paul.
    We have been very frank and open in addressing the flaws and weaknesses of the world rankings that we accept responsibility for publishing between 2004 and 2009. See for example:
    http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=409595 or http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=411299&c=2
    We are happy to have an open debate about the rankings methodology we employed between 2004 and 2009, as we accept responsibility for that, and to explain clearly why we have decided on a new system with a new data provider, Thomson Reuters, for 2010 and beyond.
    Phil Baty, Editor, Times Higher Education World University Rankings

  • Print
  • Share
  • Save
  • Print
  • Share
  • Save
Jobs