Constructive Thoughts for the Day

Constructive Thoughts for the Day
Permalink : http://blog.nationmultimedia.com/kriengsak

Wednesday , April 16 , 2008

US universities oppose ranking

Posted by Kriengsak , Reader : 2629 , 23:19:40 | Category : Education

* Picture from- http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~usgenweb/in/wayne/postcards/ehall.jpg University ranking by the US media stimulates development in universities, with many universities also highlighting the results of ranking as a selling point in such reviews as ‘Business Week’s Top Business Schools,’ ‘Kiplinger’s Best Value in Public Colleges,’ ‘US News and World Report,’ and ‘America’s Best Colleges,’ amongst other publications. However, this ranking activity is also widely criticized as linked for the most part to business interests. The reasons for this are threefold: Deans will benefit from a top university ranking Deans usually practice one of two university management styles, which are the general university management style and the business executive style, where popular strategies are utilized in order to gain from customers or students. Top universities can build a lot of popularity for their institutions. Some university councils motivate their Deans by offering them money for their efforts to push their university into a top ranked position. Universities make no suitable improvements for the needs of quality education US universities that place weight on media ranking as important will try to improve themselves by the rules and standards used for ranking universities. For example, some universities may try to increase their major studies content and downsize classes, and some universities will try to increase the number of university applicants, but will not really focus on education quality. Universities will discriminate against students in order to gain ranking results A report from the Institute of Higher Education Policy, (IHEP), has identified that university ranking will push universities to focus only on students who have qualifications consistent with ranking regulations. Most students will use their SAT scores as a reference document when applying for universities. Thus, many universities establish scholarships for students who can achieve a high SAT score. This is to motivate them to study at a certain university. On the other hand, students who receive a lower SAT score, or poor students requiring financial support will be ignored. Consistencies and solutions for US university ranking In response to this situation, Deans from more than thirty US universities have started to oppose the popular media’s announcement of university ranking results. They intend not to highlight these results as university advantages. They also request other universities not to support this ranking. Mr. Lloyd Thacker, the founder of Education Conservancy an Educational Non Profit Organization claims that universities use their ranking results in order to destroy other universities and other people. It is therefore a cautionary point for him that the whole process of university ranking produces results aligned to business advantages. Dr Douglas Bennett, the Dean of Earlham College, has advised that the most important goal for universities to achieve is the development of education quality. However, universities should focus on development in a moral manner, rather than focusing merely on the results of the ranking exercise. Although some people agree with the ranking process, they feel that it needs to be handled very carefully. Mr Richard M Freeland, the Dean of Northeastern University says that though the ranking system is not perfect, it is also not useless. At least it motivates universities to build the road of educational quality. Moreover, The Commission on the Future of Higher Education, USA, has proposed that more factors should be used for this ranking. The ranking process should not depend on only such limited factors as the number of applicants to universities, etc. Other factors could include the knowledge gained by students during their study periods at university. University ranking in Thailand: The possibilities University ranking in Thailand was previously managed by Commission on Higher Education (MUA) Not only did MUA rank private and public universities, such as Rachabhat University, and the Rajamangala University of Technology, but it also assessed the major characteristics of study in those universities. For example, by considering the ratio between professors and students, the quantity of research study, the ratio of graduate work profiles related to their major studies, student satisfaction, and popularity (this was garnered from application forms and university admission scores). The objective of having this ranking was for universities to know their weaknesses and strengths and as a source for university development planning in the future. University ranking creates a sense of competition, and motivates the use of development plans by universities. However, due to many improprieties, the university ranking process simultaneously created a conflict between MUA and the universities. Thus, it became necessary for a regulation unopposed to the universities’ mission to focus on the quality of graduates. For example, it focused on the quality of class management, research, academic service and professionalism. By focusing on these factors, university management would be sure to cover all aspects of development over a long term period, making it also possible to compare events in the past with current events, and even future events. Thus, university development will be assisted in each different area. There will also be less conflict between the universities and organizations that conduct the university ranking process. The ranking process, and in particular, the university ranking process provides another way to push the autonomous development of universities in educational quality, and in efficiency. However, both feedback and comment are required by stake holders so that ranking factors can be collectively developed towards having the best system and regulations that can support and enhance high quality university development and that can receive sound cooperation from every department simultaneously.

* Picture from- http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~usgenweb/in/wayne/postcards/ehall.jpg

University ranking by the US media stimulates development in universities, with many universities also highlighting the results of ranking as a selling point in such reviews as ‘Business Week’s Top Business Schools,’ ‘Kiplinger’s Best Value in Public Colleges,’ ‘US News and World Report,’ and ‘America’s Best Colleges,’ amongst other publications.

However, this ranking activity is also widely criticized as linked for the most part to business interests. The reasons for this are threefold:

Deans will benefit from a top university ranking

Deans usually practice one of two university management styles, which are the general university management style and the business executive style, where popular strategies are utilized in order to gain from customers or students. Top universities can build a lot of popularity for their institutions. Some university councils motivate their Deans by offering them money for their efforts to push their university into a top ranked position.

Universities make no suitable improvements for the needs of quality education

US universities that place weight on media ranking as important will try to improve themselves by the rules and standards used for ranking universities. For example, some universities may try to increase their major studies content and downsize classes, and some universities will try to increase the number of university applicants, but will not really focus on education quality.

Universities will discriminate against students in order to gain ranking results

A report from the Institute of Higher Education Policy, (IHEP), has identified that university ranking will push universities to focus only on students who have qualifications consistent with ranking regulations. Most students will use their SAT scores as a reference document when applying for universities. Thus, many universities establish scholarships for students who can achieve a high SAT score. This is to motivate them to study at a certain university. On the other hand, students who receive a lower SAT score, or poor students requiring financial support will be ignored.

Consistencies and solutions for US university ranking

In response to this situation, Deans from more than thirty US universities have started to oppose the popular media’s announcement of university ranking results. They intend not to highlight these results as university advantages. They also request other universities not to support this ranking. Mr. Lloyd Thacker, the founder of Education Conservancy an Educational Non Profit Organization claims that universities use their ranking results in order to destroy other universities and other people. It is therefore a cautionary point for him that the whole process of university ranking produces results aligned to business advantages.

Dr Douglas Bennett, the Dean of Earlham College, has advised that the most important goal for universities to achieve is the development of education quality. However, universities should focus on development in a moral manner, rather than focusing merely on the results of the ranking exercise.

Although some people agree with the ranking process, they feel that it needs to be handled very carefully. Mr Richard M Freeland, the Dean of Northeastern University says that though the ranking system is not perfect, it is also not useless. At least it motivates universities to build the road of educational quality. Moreover, The Commission on the Future of Higher Education, USA, has proposed that more factors should be used for this ranking. The ranking process should not depend on only such limited factors as the number of applicants to universities, etc. Other factors could include the knowledge gained by students during their study periods at university.

University ranking in Thailand: The possibilities

University ranking in Thailand was previously managed by Commission on Higher Education (MUA) Not only did MUA rank private and public universities, such as Rachabhat University, and the Rajamangala University of Technology, but it also assessed the major characteristics of study in those universities. For example, by considering the ratio between professors and students, the quantity of research study, the ratio of graduate work profiles related to their major studies, student satisfaction, and popularity (this was garnered from application forms and university admission scores). The objective of having this ranking was for universities to know their weaknesses and strengths and as a source for university development planning in the future.

University ranking creates a sense of competition, and motivates the use of development plans by universities. However, due to many improprieties, the university ranking process simultaneously created a conflict between MUA and the universities. Thus, it became necessary for a regulation unopposed to the universities’ mission to focus on the quality of graduates. For example, it focused on the quality of class management, research, academic service and professionalism. By focusing on these factors, university management would be sure to cover all aspects of development over a long term period, making it also possible to compare events in the past with current events, and even future events. Thus, university development will be assisted in each different area. There will also be less conflict between the universities and organizations that conduct the university ranking process.

The ranking process, and in particular, the university ranking process provides another way to push the autonomous development of universities in educational quality, and in efficiency. However, both feedback and comment are required by stake holders so that ranking factors can be collectively developed towards having the best system and regulations that can support and enhance high quality university development and that can receive sound cooperation from every department simultaneously.

Post comment | send mail to friend

Read comment

comment 2
Kriengsak date : 24/04/2008 time : 14.07
http://blog.nationmultimedia.com/kriengsak

Thank you.

comment 1
MJDP date : 18/04/2008 time : 20.38
http://blog.nationmultimedia.com/globtrotting
MJDP

My uni ranks world top 3 , year 2007 but only me and another person make it cut in professonal industry!!!

Comment

"If you are not member, please register to comment.
It take only a few steps."

member sign in | member register

name :
email :
website :
comment :

		back top

<<	April 2008					>>
s	m	t	w	t	f	s
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30