Abstract
World university rankings are regarded as an important tool to assess higher education quality. There are several media sources that publish world university rankings every year. These ranking results are mainly based on academic indicators, including research and teaching, with different weightings. However, some of these academic indicators are questionable, which affects the objectivity of the ranking results. In addition, conducting more medical-related studies could enhance the research impact scores. Some universities that devote themselves to enhancing these academic indicators lose sight of their original development goals and directions. To make the rankings more comprehensive, it is necessary to consider different viewpoints in the assessment. In other words, the research question of this paper is: whether considering different kinds of indicators can provide better ranking results? Therefore, in this paper, we introduce a novel ranking approach that combines academic, environmental, and resource indicators based on the Borda count method. The top 100 world universities from the Academic Ranking of World Universities, QS World University Rankings, Times Higher Education World Universities, and U.S. News & World Report are chosen for the analysis. The comparisons between the original and new rankings show that many universities improve in the rankings, while some universities from particular countries drop in the rankings due to the scores obtained from the environmental and resource indicators.
Funder
Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan
Chang Gung University
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou
Subject
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment,Geography, Planning and Development
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献