Skype
Messenger
Viber
Contact form
As someone deeply ensconced in education, I keep an eagle eye on the various rankings that are promulgated around the world, whether they be for UK, US or Continental European universities. Recently, though, I have become utterly discombobulated, flummoxed even disheartened. My alma mater, Edinburgh University, for example, is ranked 20th while Surrey University, where I did my Masters, is ranked 4th in the 2016 University league tables as per the revered Guardian newspaper.
Now with all due respect, Edinburgh University at 20th and Surrey University at 4th… hmmm. And sandwiched between them are new contenders on the block, such as Coventry at 15th and Kent at 16th. Now when I was at university in the late 1980s, Kent, Coventry and even Surrey were nowhere near the top end; Heriot-Watt was Edinburgh’s second university. That is not to say that universities cannot climb the rankings, or indeed be more highly ranked in specific subjects, granted, for very cogent and justified reasons; the fact is that the very reasons they have zoomed up the rankings of some agencies beggars belief. Let’s have a look at the rankings of the same universities from a global perspective, as per the most respected en ce moment ranking service, the QS World Rankings. In these rankings Edinburgh comes in at 19th, while Surrey University is a little further behind, at 261st position, and Coventry is just mentioned as being ranked in the top 700 universities in the world.
Just how do we square that veritable circle then? How in the creator’s name are there such discrepancies between rankings of so-called reliable ranking services? Well, to address these questions we have to dig a little deeper below the surface. As with many statistics today (woe betide a sweeping statement) there is much that is fudged, dare I utter, utterly fake. Now let’s get real. When someone is looking to go to university the primary objective, I hope and assume, as in bygone ages, is to acquire an education (one of those elusive, slippery words that many cannot quite define when push comes to shove). Did I just write education? Indeedy, I did! Education, something, woefully all too few, still hanker for. That is what universities are there for: to gain knowledge, to interact with other likeminded individuals, to be intellectually challenged, to evolve as a mature, civilised, politic person ready to integrate and contribute to the world, whether that be via industry or academia; or as the etymology of the word university (Latin universitas) implies: the whole, the aggregate. Perhaps I am being a tad wishy-washy, nay utopian. Anyway, those were my expectations and general summation of my experiences at university. Fast forward to today and we find that universities are not necessarily ranked according to the quality of the education they deliver, nor the research that is conducted within. No, no, no. There are far more significant criteria to appraise, such as en suite bathrooms, parking spaces, variety and quality of cuisine, billiard tables and other such important accoutrements. Rankings, and the methodology thereof, ought to be based on criteria directly related to education not to superfluities. And you think I am jesting. According to some recent press releases, the primary criterion for the ranking of universities will be student satisfaction. Of such import is the whole matter that it warranted debate in parliament, see this for example, from the Telegraph. And this in the conclusion from a piece of serious [sic] research Rankings and the Reshaping of Higher Education: the Battle for World Wide Excellence.
Ultimately, governments and institutions use rankings to guide restructuring of higher education because societies which are attractive to investment in research and innovation and highly skilled mobile talent will be more successful globally. Finally, rankings amplify the growing gap between elite and mass education, heightening the value of key ‘positional goods’ essential for global competitiveness, and intensifying the attractiveness of ‘winners’ with consequential implications for social equity and other institutions and countries.
Well Pareto’s Hypothesis has been stretched to the limit in many domains, education not excepted, so we should see some serious whiplash in the not so distant future in the education industry, not only in the metrics of the rankings of universities but also, and arguably more poignant, what is taught at universities, how effectively it is delivered, and the tangible, concomitant results. We need to (re)view education not only as a granted exclusive right but also, and more essentially, a privilege.
