Towards a European Approach to Ranking

Transcription

1 Towards a European Approach to Ranking 3rd International Conference on World-Class Universities 2-4 November 2009 Shanghai Prof. Dr. Marijk van der Wende Amsterdam University College 1

2 Amsterdam University College Excellence and Diversity in a Global City 2

3 Rationale of the European Ranking Initiative There are not many ranking systems of universities of the type we are interested in. At present most rankings are typically mono-dimensional. But while they may have some merit, we are more interested in developing a ranking system that goes beyond the research performance of universities, to include elements such as teaching quality and community outreach. What we are looking at is multi-dimensional, because we want to take account of the rich diversity of our universities, so that potential students, researchers and staff can get a better picture about the respective university." (EC, December The CHERPA Consortium The Consortium for Higher Education and Research Performance Assessment is led by: Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS) of the Twente University (NL) Centrum für Hochschulentwicklung (CHE) in Germany Members: CWTS, Leiden University (NL) INCENTIM at the Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium OST, Paris Associated: European Federation of National Engineering Associations (FEANI) European Foundation for Management Development (EFMD) 3

4 Key Principles The envisaged new European ranking system should be: multi-dimensional: covering the various missions of institutions, such as education, research, innovation, internationalisation, community outreach and employability; independent: it should not be run by public authorities or universities; transparent: it should provide users with a clear understanding of all the factors used to measure performance and offer them the possibility to consult the ranking according to their needs; global: covering institutions inside and outside Europe (in particular those in the US, Asia and Australia) Meeting of European Ministers of Higher Education The transparency tools need to relate closely to the principles of the Bologna Process, in particular quality assurance and recognition, which will remain our priority, and should be based on comparable data and adequate indicators to describe the diverse profiles of higher education institutions and their programmes (Leuven Communiqué, 2009) 4

5 To Rank or to be Ranked As university rankings have established themselves at global level, European universities are subject to ranking, whether they like it or not. It cannot be left to others (only) to define the criteria against which performance is measured and the methods on which comparisons are based, and (thus) reputation is established. Especially not when the region s own institutions are rarely ranked in the top. Critical Stance Towards Existing Rankings Biases Little information / guidance to users (students) on the quality of teaching Methodological limitations One global status model: the large comprehensive research university. Jeopardizing the status of other activities and thus suffocating diversification 5

6 Diversity and Diversification In order for higher education systems to respond effectively to external demands, diversity is a favorable condition A lack of differentiation as one of the key problems of European higher education. Europe has too few centres of world-class excellence. The European university system must allow for more diversification within the system in order to broaden access on a more equitable basis and to reach out to increased excellence at the same time. Dimensions of Diversity Rankings tend to enhance in particular vertical diversity (or stratification), whereas more horizontal diversity would be more desired from the point of view of the functioning of the system as a whole. New instruments should strive to advance horizontal institutional diversity, they should stimulate and enable higher education institutions to excel in different missions and to develop distinct profiles. More sophisticated indicators need to be developed for measuring performance in areas other than basic research, such as undergraduate teaching, lifelong learning, knowledge transfer, innovation, regional development. The development of a good classification of institutions is needed, because rankings only make sense within defined groups of comparable institutions Classification is a prerequisite for sensible rankings (see U-MAP EU). 6

7 Diversity a Fact of Life 27(+) different HE systems It is a major challenge for Europe to make its high degree of linguistic, educational and cultural diversity, a unique source of open-mindedness and cross-fertilization. The Bologna process: strive for convergence In-built flexibility required for the new European ranking system Berlin principles: not all national systems share the same values and beliefs about what constitutes quality. European HE: a Young and Still Fragmented Reality Despite the Bologna Process and the Lisbon Agenda, one cannot really speak of a (one) European higher education system. Policy happens through incremental, non-rigid, bottom-up policy making processes backed up with substantive consultation rounds. Multi-faceted, multi-dimensional solutions are a sine qua non. The European ranking system can only be developed at European level, as only this is influential enough. 7

8 Implications for Institutional Development Patterns of cooperation and competition Different institutional missions and profiles Leagues and consortia Complementarity and compatibility HE systems: national effectiveness, European cooperation and global competitiveness How to achieve a balanced agenda and an effective division of labour? 8