50 social disciplines (economics, law, health care, pedagogy, psychology and others).

Other rating materials:

TOP-10: The best classical universities of Ukraine TOP-10: The best private universities of Ukraine TOP-10: The best Kiev universities TOP-10: The best universities of regions of Ukraine Information on drawing up of the consolidated rating The consolidated rating of universities of Ukraine is published

Ratings used in compiling the consolidated ranking of Ukrainian universities:

“TOP-200 Ukraine” – in the ranking the activity of higher education institutions is assessed using an aggregate indicator (integrated index), which is formed on the basis of indicators of direct measurement (80%), expert assessment of the quality of university graduates by employers and academia (15%), as well as using international scientometric and webmetric data (5%).

Scopus rating – the results of the ranking of higher education institutions are based on the indicators of the Scopus database, which is a tool for tracking the citation of scientific articles published by the educational institution or its employees in scientific journals. In the ranking table, Ukrainian universities are ranked according to the Hirsch index – a quantitative indicator that is based on the number of scientific publications and the number of citations of these publications.

International rating “Webometrics” – takes into account the number of search engine indexed pages of the university site, external links to it, the citation rate of the resource, as well as the number of files uploaded to the site (ie, content and information activity of the educational site). The Webometrics rating is published twice a year.

09/07/2015

Rating wars

Every time after the publication of a new world ranking of universities, the Ukrainian media persistently produce news about the positions of Ukrainian universities in these rankings, although they often write about their absence there. https://123helpme.me/narrative-essay-topics/ It is good if the media at least briefly presents the methodology of each of the ratings. However, even in this case, such materials do not explain in any way how the compilers of ratings select, collect and compile certain data, as well as for what purpose they do so. Without answers to these questions, it is difficult to understand what Ukrainian universities are striving to achieve so much, and what students and teachers will be able to gain if they succeed.

The Academic Ranking of World Universities – Academic ranking of world universities

The academic ranking of world universities was developed at Jiaotong University by order of the Chinese government in 2003. This university is located in Shanghai, so the rating is often called Shanghai. The idea of ​​creating a ranking of universities from around the world was dictated by the goal set before China’s higher education institutions in the early 2000s – to reach the same level as world leaders. Like post-Soviet universities, China’s universities have long been cut off from research, so the Chinese government has launched several nationwide programs to encourage research in universities, and second, to stimulate the dissemination of research in the international arena. … And the rating itself was created to measure the effectiveness of these government programs. So it is not surprising that 80% of his total assessment is the effectiveness of scientific activities of universities. Every year, the compilers of the Shanghai ranking evaluate more than a thousand universities from around the world and select the 500 best of them according to the following parameters:

Number of university graduates who are Nobel or Fields Prize winners (20%). The number of bachelors, masters and PhDs who graduated from this university and received the mentioned awards is counted. At the same time, bonuses received in different periods weigh differently: the most weighted for 2001-2010, the least for 1911-1920.

Number of university employees who are winners of the Nobel Prize (except for peace and literature) or the Fields Prize (20%). The points are awarded to the university where they worked when they received the award. The same gradation by periods applies to this parameter.

The number of so-called most quoted employees (20%). The Philadelphia Institute of Scientific Information, which indexed more than 16,000 periodicals in 2010, compiles a list of the most cited researchers each year. Data are calculated for the last 10 years in 21 fields of knowledge, which are divided into all journals: agricultural sciences, biology and biochemistry, geology, ecology and environment, economics, zoology and botany, immunology, engineering, clinical medicine, computer science, mathematics, space sciences, materials science, microbiology, molecular biology and genetics, neurology, psychiatry and psychology, social sciences, pharmacology and toxicology, physics, chemistry. The compilers of the rating count the number of the most cited scientists at each university.

Number of articles published in the journals Nature and Science for the last 5 years (20%). In the case of co-authorship, the evaluation is distributed among the authors in the order of precedence of these names in the publication. As these publications do not cover the humanities, social sciences, law and economics, for universities that specialize in such areas, this indicator does not count, and the interest for it is distributed among other parameters.

The number of articles for the previous year, which passed through two citation indices of the already mentioned Institute of Scientific Information (20%). The first – Science Citation Index – covers 8.5 thousand journals from more than 150 mostly technical and natural sciences. The second, the Social Sciences Citation Index, covers more than 3,000 journals in 50 social sciences (economics, law, health, pedagogy, psychology, and others).

The weighted sum of all previous parameters divided by the number of full-time university employees (10%).

The academic ranking of world universities has minimized the problem of collecting information. Virtually all the required indicators are either freely available or can be obtained by subscription. The criterion of the number of full-time employees is insignificant, and data on it come from ministries of education, state statistics bodies or university associations. However, the strength of the Shanghai ranking is also its Achilles heel. Experts rightly criticize the concentration of the rating on the results of scientific developments, and not so much on the actual scientific achievements, but on the level of their popularization. The rating bypasses the quality of teaching and many other parameters. In addition, the question is what the compilers consider to be a science, because the rating does not take into account some areas, in particular, the humanities.

Ukrainian universities have never been in the top 500 of the Shanghai rankings. The main barrier for those Ukrainian universities that are capable of this is the low level of the mentioned popularization of their own research, and the movement to enter it should mean an intensive increase in publications in indexed world journals. And although certain criteria for this ranking remain unattainable for Ukrainian universities, the fact that it includes 9 universities from the countries of the former socialist camp shows that this is not entirely impossible.

The QS World University Rankings is a world ranking of QS universities

The QS World University Rankings is compiled annually by the British company Quacquarelli Symonds (QS), which offers a wide range of advice for those wishing to study abroad. Working in the education market, QS has long been compiling various ratings of educational institutions. At first it was only about business schools, because creating the company, its founder Nunzio Quacquarelli (Nunzio Quacquarelli) completed his studies in the MBA program. Subsequently, cooperation was established with the Times Higher Education to form a world ranking of universities. Since 2010, Quacquarelli Symonds has published its own rating. Among the reasons for divorce is the unreliable methodology, namely the excessive weight of the survey of the academic community in the overall assessment. Because of this, the QS rating is sometimes called reputational. Annual criticism of the methodology did not force QS to change it. The developers decided to increase confidence in the rating, gradually increasing the number of respondents in their survey. It has now reached more than 62,000 academics and more than 25,000 employers.

Today, QS evaluates more than 2,000 institutions, of which it identifies the 800 best. The assessment of each university consists of the following parameters:

Survey of the academic community from around the world (40%). Each respondent should identify up to 10 domestic institutions and up to 30 foreign ones that he / she thinks are the best in the field in which the respondent is most knowledgeable. You cannot choose your institution. Moreover, the score of each university consists of 85% of the votes cast for it by foreign respondents and 15% – by domestic ones. This parameter causes the most complaints, primarily due to the uneven representation of respondents in different countries: the United States – 17.4% of all respondents, the United Kingdom – 6.6%, Brazil – 6.3%, Italy – 4.7%, Russia – 1.7% , Ukraine 0.5%. Under such conditions, US universities are “doomed” to receive the highest “domestic” scores, while their world fame will keep them at a fairly high level thanks to votes from foreign respondents. Uneven distribution of votes also affects the industries themselves, for example, 5.6% of respondents cast their votes in physics and astronomy, while only 2% in linguistics.

Survey of employers (over 25 thousand respondents) from around the world (10%). The data collection system is the same, but the distribution of domestic and foreign votes here is 70/30%. Accordingly, criticism of the uneven distribution of respondents by country and industry is justified here.

Teacher / student ratio (20%). Data on the number of full-time students and, accordingly, full-time teachers are provided by the universities themselves. Whether the compilers of the rating are able to check all the obtained indicators is a rhetorical question.